kumnio Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 Its quite surely implied. Spending money on training ground, stadiums, legal fees or whatever wont close the gap on Celtic, only players would do that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dalgety Bay TA Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 16 minutes ago, macy37 said: Not one for backing Huns but you need to point me in the direction of where it states players alone? What else would get Rangers promotion, challenging for second, Europe and then challenging for the title if it wasn't players signing and wages? It wouldn't be fixing the roof at Ibrox? Points 2 and 3 talk about signing players to achieve these goals. I take the fact that he mentions nothing other than the teams 3 season objectives and then the sum it will cost as the sign he plans to spend £30m on those objectives. I would have thought if he had only planned to spend £15m on players he would have said £15m on players and £15m on other costs. The fact he makes no mention of any other requirements bar those for the team suggests it's all going on that, to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
euan2020 Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 7 minutes ago, Dalgety Bay TA said: What else would get Rangers promotion, challenging for second, Europe and then challenging for the title if it wasn't players signing and wages? It wouldn't be fixing the roof at Ibrox? Points 2 and 3 talk about signing players to achieve these goals. I take the fact that he mentions nothing other than the teams 3 season objectives and then the sum it will cost as the sign he plans to spend £30m on those objectives. I would have thought if he had only planned to spend £15m on players he would have said £15m on players and £15m on other costs. The fact he makes no mention of any other requirements bar those for the team suggests it's all going on that, to me. I guess its fluid - possible they did not know 2 years ago some of these costs would be due - stadium etc The language that was used was "investment" - nothing about spending GBP 30M on players I can see his point of view when communicating this my only question on "investment" is that these are recorded as loans, which if they decide to throw toys out of pram could become repayable like Ashley's I would imagine 2 years ago, they thought they could negotiate out of the sports top contract on the cost side fluid, and only thing fixed is cash inflow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macy37 Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 10 minutes ago, Dalgety Bay TA said: What else would get Rangers promotion, challenging for second, Europe and then challenging for the title if it wasn't players signing and wages? It wouldn't be fixing the roof at Ibrox? Points 2 and 3 talk about signing players to achieve these goals. I take the fact that he mentions nothing other than the teams 3 season objectives and then the sum it will cost as the sign he plans to spend £30m on those objectives. I would have thought if he had only planned to spend £15m on players he would have said £15m on players and £15m on other costs. The fact he makes no mention of any other requirements bar those for the team suggests it's all going on that, to me. That's your summary. It would be foolish to think once taking over that money on infrastructure be that roofs, training facilities or scouting networks and key staff wouldn't be part of the budget. Fire on though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RenfrewBlue Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 1 hour ago, Dalgety Bay TA said: Ehhh?? Absolutely nowhere does it say he will spend £30m on anything BUT improving the team. That's not an opinion, that's facts and being able to read a 4 point statement where he only talks about improving the team to meet the teams goals. Where do you think in those points he talks about anything other than the playing side? Ive seen many blinkered OF fans on here over the years but you just about beat the lot if you are trying to spin those points as anything other than spending on the playing squad. To be totally clear I'm not trying to spin anything. I don't trust Dave King at all. However Because of that I can see through the double speak he uses. He's not quite a Trump but he isn't bothered by letting folk infer stuff, as he can then come back with the "well I didn't actually say that" line. He hasn't stated there the money is for players alone. You have assumed that's his meaning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RenfrewBlue Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 23 minutes ago, Dalgety Bay TA said: What else would get Rangers promotion, challenging for second, Europe and then challenging for the title if it wasn't players signing and wages? It wouldn't be fixing the roof at Ibrox? Points 2 and 3 talk about signing players to achieve these goals. I take the fact that he mentions nothing other than the teams 3 season objectives and then the sum it will cost as the sign he plans to spend £30m on those objectives. I would have thought if he had only planned to spend £15m on players he would have said £15m on players and £15m on other costs. The fact he makes no mention of any other requirements bar those for the team suggests it's all going on that, to me. So you're happy to trust Dave King without the statement being clear and unequivocal? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pool Q Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 (edited) Fair points above. You'd have thought that someone, a journalist for example, might approach the club for clarification. I'd be fascinated to get a breakdown of this £18m investment that has apparently already been made for example. Edited February 12, 2017 by Pool Q Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dalgety Bay TA Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 29 minutes ago, euan2020 said: I guess its fluid - possible they did not know 2 years ago some of these costs would be due - stadium etc 28 minutes ago, macy37 said: That's your summary. It would be foolish to think once taking over that money on infrastructure be that roofs, training facilities or scouting networks and key staff wouldn't be part of the budget. Fire on though. That statement was made yesterday, not 2 years ago. He makes no mention of other costs in the rest of the statement either. Again you would think if he had budgeted £30m to achieve the teams objectives and had also spent on other costs he would have said so? 20 minutes ago, RenfrewBlue said: To be totally clear I'm not trying to spin anything. I don't trust Dave King at all. However Because of that I can see through the double speak he uses. He's not quite a Trump but he isn't bothered by letting folk infer stuff, as he can then come back with the "well I didn't actually say that" line. He hasn't stated there the money is for players alone. You have assumed that's his meaning. 15 minutes ago, RenfrewBlue said: So you're happy to trust Dave King without the statement being clear and unequivocal? Fair points in King tbh. Although I actually thought that was one of his clearer statements! But I suppose the debate above confirms otherwise!! 2 minutes ago, Pool Q said: Fair points above. You'd have thought that someone, a journalist for example, might approach the club for clarification. I'd be fascinated to get a breakdown of this £18m investment that has apparently already Been made for example. That was one of my original questions - what has £18m been spent on because it surely can't just be new players fees and wages - which if the case sort of defeats my subsequent arguments! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest faircity Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 I heard Warburton resigned in protest at some crazy rumour that Rangers were to be drawn away from home in a cup tie just to make it look like it hasnt been a total stitch up for the past few years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larky Masher Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 28 minutes ago, faircity said: I heard Warburton resigned in protest at some crazy rumour that Rangers were to be drawn away from home in a cup tie just to make it look like it hasnt been a total stitch up for the past few years. Good to see the hot ball in action today again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neil r Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 Time for the 'We deserve better' gear to get dusted off methinks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RenfrewBlue Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 43 minutes ago, Dalgety Bay TA said: That statement was made yesterday, not 2 years ago. He makes no mention of other costs in the rest of the statement either. Again you would think if he had budgeted £30m to achieve the teams objectives and had also spent on other costs he would have said so? Fair points in King tbh. Although I actually thought that was one of his clearer statements! But I suppose the debate above confirms otherwise!! That was one of my original questions - what has £18m been spent on because it surely can't just be new players fees and wages - which if the case sort of defeats my subsequent arguments! I think King gave a list of stuff the 18m was spent on, although not a breakdown, and it included players, wages, Ibrox repairs, Auchenhowie repairs and covering the clubs monthly losses. I'm not looking to spin this to make Kenya no or Rangers look good. I just don't trust Dave King. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RenfrewBlue Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 38 minutes ago, faircity said: I heard Warburton resigned in protest at some crazy rumour that Rangers were to be drawn away from home in a cup tie just to make it look like it hasnt been a total stitch up for the past few years. He'd never have believed such an obviously bullshit rumour as that one. ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larky Masher Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 9 minutes ago, neil r said: Time for the 'We deserve better' gear to get dusted off methinks. Why? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langtonian Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 Anyone who believes anything kings says is needing sectioned is this 18 mill he talks about his own money or inclusive of the numerous soft loans he's accepted from others? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EddardStark Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 (edited) Eck should be brought in to the end of the season in my opinion. We don't have many other options. Though I should add that at the end of Eck's last stint a sizeable element of the Rangers support really took at passionate dislike of Eck which expressed itself if some pretty nasty comments etc. Edited February 13, 2017 by EddardStark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reevesy Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 21 hours ago, thewolf_1980 said: Yes but he beats up women therefore his opinion isn't worth a shite. So do Rangers fans after they lose football matches according to one of their former managers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neil r Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 14 hours ago, Larky Masher said: Why? Because they deserve better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larky Masher Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 5 minutes ago, neil r said: Because they deserve better. If all you're going to do is state the obvious why bother? As "the people" we obviously deserve better and why the UN haven't intervened to address this terrible injustice is a mystery to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neil r Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 Are the UN not on 'the list'? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BlueGaz Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 Next Permanent Manager Caretaker and interim managers completing at least 10 competitive games will be deemed the permanent manager Alex McLeish 4/7 Billy Davies 13/8 Derek McInnes 15/2 Frank De Boer 16/1 Zlatko Kranjcar 20/1 Alan Pardew 20/1 Walter Smith 22/1 Steve Kean 22/1 Neil Warnock 22/1 Graeme Murty 22/1 Tommy Wright 22/1 Graeme Souness 22/1 Barry Ferguson 22/1 Gennaro Gattuso 25/1 Giovanni Van Bronckhorst 25/1 Gary Rowett 25/1 John Brown 28/1 Steve Clarke 28/1 Dick Advocaat 28/1 Terry Butcher 28/1 Brian Laudrup 33/1 Ronald De Boer 33/1 Alex Neil 33/1 Frank Lampard 40/1 Neil McCann 40/1 Michael O'Neill 40/1 Nigel Adkins 40/1 Kenny Miller 40/1 Robbie Neilson 40/1 Stuart McCall 40/1 Nigel Pearson 40/1 Tim Sherwood 50/1 Ryan Giggs 50/1 Harry Redknapp 50/1 Nevio Scala 50/1 – Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larky Masher Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 5 minutes ago, neil r said: Are the UN not on 'the list'? That's a secret. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larky Masher Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 4 minutes ago, BlueGaz said: Next Permanent Manager Caretaker and interim managers completing at least 10 competitive games will be deemed the permanent manager Alex McLeish 4/7 Billy Davies 13/8 Derek McInnes 15/2 Frank De Boer 16/1 Zlatko Kranjcar 20/1 Alan Pardew 20/1 Walter Smith 22/1 Steve Kean 22/1 Neil Warnock 22/1 Graeme Murty 22/1 Tommy Wright 22/1 Graeme Souness 22/1 Barry Ferguson 22/1 Gennaro Gattuso 25/1 Giovanni Van Bronckhorst 25/1 Gary Rowett 25/1 John Brown 28/1 Steve Clarke 28/1 Dick Advocaat 28/1 Terry Butcher 28/1 Brian Laudrup 33/1 Ronald De Boer 33/1 Alex Neil 33/1 Frank Lampard 40/1 Neil McCann 40/1 Michael O'Neill 40/1 Nigel Adkins 40/1 Kenny Miller 40/1 Robbie Neilson 40/1 Stuart McCall 40/1 Nigel Pearson 40/1 Tim Sherwood 50/1 Ryan Giggs 50/1 Harry Redknapp 50/1 Nevio Scala 50/1 – That's a mixture of the unacceptable, the undesirable and the unachievable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neil r Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 Please be John Brown, please be John Brown... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larky Masher Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 1 minute ago, neil r said: Please be John Brown, please be John Brown... The one who's body in mouldering in the grave would be a better option than the one from Blantyre. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.