MD 20/20 full stop:2701268 said:
You went full on "grr Timmy" mode before
You actually agree with me
**** the SFA
- Thread starter Mind The Duck
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
You went full on "grr Timmy" mode before
You actually agree with me
You really do talk the biggest amount of s**te, I'd expect it from some young helmet but your old enough to know better.
Get a f**kin life!
Something occurred to me recently.
I hear a lot of pundits saying that Murray had the debt under control (lowered to £18m) and Lloyds had agreed to accept repayment of £1m each year to service the debt. Lloyds apparently started applying pressure to get Rangers to clear the debt. Why the sudden change in Lloyds attitude to the £18m debt? Why did they worry about the money when they had already agreed a payment plan?
There can only be one reason in my opinion (Ignoring Leggoesque paranoia) and that is that Lloyds knew about the upcoming EBT cases and suspected that this would crush Rangers to the extent that Lloyds would be no better off than Ticketus when it came to chasing their cash.
IF this is the case then Murray is doubly culpable for misleading the fans...again, and still accepting the undue credit for reducing the debt to £18m.
Sir David Murray is almost totally responsible for the shambles Rangers find themselves in. Whyte should take some blame but he would not have been there to do what he did were it not for Murray.
I hear a lot of pundits saying that Murray had the debt under control (lowered to £18m) and Lloyds had agreed to accept repayment of £1m each year to service the debt. Lloyds apparently started applying pressure to get Rangers to clear the debt. Why the sudden change in Lloyds attitude to the £18m debt? Why did they worry about the money when they had already agreed a payment plan?
There can only be one reason in my opinion (Ignoring Leggoesque paranoia) and that is that Lloyds knew about the upcoming EBT cases and suspected that this would crush Rangers to the extent that Lloyds would be no better off than Ticketus when it came to chasing their cash.
IF this is the case then Murray is doubly culpable for misleading the fans...again, and still accepting the undue credit for reducing the debt to £18m.
Sir David Murray is almost totally responsible for the shambles Rangers find themselves in. Whyte should take some blame but he would not have been there to do what he did were it not for Murray.
Just when you think muck had been slung in every direction possible...
The truth is NO ONE here or in journo land knows the truth although it is amusing and more then slightly pathetic watching "Celtic fans" getting their knickers wet trying to add 1+1 & getting heehaw except growing arms & legs which results in wetter knickers and ultimately outrage and cries of favouritism when it all doesn't pan out the way their fantasies have led them to believe it would.
Muck? What muck am I slinging, i'm giving an opinion which seems (to me) reasonable or I would not have suggested it. I'm not attempting to wind anyone up and having re-read what i've wrote I don't see why anyone would think i'm doing anything other than saying Sir David Murray should take the lion's share of the blame.
Also, i'm not getting anything "wet", least of all my underwear, perhaps you have adopted the attitude of having a go at anyone who dares venture an opinion on the culpability of Murray or anyone connected with Rangers.
Lesson learned, no point in attempting to engage in a debate.
Celtic fans have been on the ball , about your debt for the last 5 years , our only fault was underestimating the debt .We've enjoyed the administration ride so far , and expect it to get better , ending with a huge climax on June the 1st !!!
Dev - you're speculating on speculation! hence "mud slinging" or in laymens terms, talking s**t.
I'm all for opinions provided they're based on fact.
Vaginalhood - underestimated the debt? Please explain. As for the forecasting over the last five years, haha yeah, still waiting for this fire sale that has been predicted for every transfer window over the last five years whilst also winning 3iar...
Talk me through your debt situation...
Steps - All panning out nice is it? How's the jelly & ice cream, surely went mouldy by now or is it in the freezer again?...
I'm all for opinions provided they're based on fact.
Vaginalhood - underestimated the debt? Please explain. As for the forecasting over the last five years, haha yeah, still waiting for this fire sale that has been predicted for every transfer window over the last five years whilst also winning 3iar...
Talk me through your debt situation...
Steps - All panning out nice is it? How's the jelly & ice cream, surely went mouldy by now or is it in the freezer again?...
No your definition of mud slinging is way off, be honest, is this really the most ludicrous idea you have ever heard? Is Murray really above that sort of thing?
IF it were true, (my suggestion) would it be any worse than what he's already done?
I don't think so, so does it really matter why he was in such a hurry to sell Rangers to the first guy who appeared? He sold Rangers to Whyte after making a vow to sell only to someone with Rangers best interests at heart. Does Whyte really fit that criteria and if not do you seriously believe that Murray was "duped"?
Few opinions are based upon fact. I am of the opinion that Paul Weller is a ****er, I don't know him so I don't really know if it's a fact. It does not alter my opinion though.
Yes but you think that because of his attitude in interviews etc or his songs. Your opinion of the take over situation is based on someone else's opinion, speculating on speculation.
To blame Murray for what Whyte did (or didn't do) is ridiculous, he had no idea it would end up like this and I don't care what any half baked moron says now, they didn't know either.
I'm not sticking up for Murray, I don't think the sun shines out his arse but I can't help think that most of the negativity from Celtic fans stems from the fiver per tenner banter...
Much of the opinion from Celtic fans is based on evidence from sources such as RTC who have proven to be right
Therefore its opinion based on fact
If you don't believe me read the site
Therefore its opinion based on fact
If you don't believe me read the site
From an outsiders perspective it seems perfectly obvious that Murray knew the extent of Rangers troubles. He overspent and it's apparent that he involved the club in many dodging dealings including trying to avoid paying the tax on players wages.
What I find incredulous is that Whyte was stupid enough to take this millstone on, what were his credentials when he took Rangers on as it seems clear that he purchased a great big white elephant.
I feel empathy for Rangers fans as lets face it they are the victims in all this. Murray and Whyte have sold the supporters short but football these days is a big business and businesses have to sustain themselves. As huge a club as Rangers is it has obviously been living beyond it's means.
It's time for the club to cut it's cloth according to it's means and regroup. If that means the prospect of going into liquidation and starting again with a new management structure and playing the kids then thats how it has to be.
I am in no doubt however that this great club and it's huge and loyal fan base will recover, it may take five years but the end result will be a much stronger business and a club that can meet the demands of the modern game. It's going to be painful but you will get through this.
PS; a shame that your minority regularly let you down but we ALL have a minority!
What I find incredulous is that Whyte was stupid enough to take this millstone on, what were his credentials when he took Rangers on as it seems clear that he purchased a great big white elephant.
I feel empathy for Rangers fans as lets face it they are the victims in all this. Murray and Whyte have sold the supporters short but football these days is a big business and businesses have to sustain themselves. As huge a club as Rangers is it has obviously been living beyond it's means.
It's time for the club to cut it's cloth according to it's means and regroup. If that means the prospect of going into liquidation and starting again with a new management structure and playing the kids then thats how it has to be.
I am in no doubt however that this great club and it's huge and loyal fan base will recover, it may take five years but the end result will be a much stronger business and a club that can meet the demands of the modern game. It's going to be painful but you will get through this.
PS; a shame that your minority regularly let you down but we ALL have a minority!
Regarding the Murray selling to Whyte fiasco - Whyte was personally vouched for by one of the top businessmen in this country.
The chairman of Guinness.
At that time Murray was under pressure from LLoyds Bank to sell to Whyte so in the end he had very few options left.
I still believe that throughout his tenure at Rangers, Murray always did what he thought was best for RFC.
The chairman of Guinness.
At that time Murray was under pressure from LLoyds Bank to sell to Whyte so in the end he had very few options left.
I still believe that throughout his tenure at Rangers, Murray always did what he thought was best for RFC.
What else has he done that’s so bad? Are you serious?
Anyhoo, I can see I’m wasting my time even responding to you as your first instinct seems to be to go on the attack even if someone (in this case me) makes a wholly reasonable suggestion.
Your defence mechanism seems to be “Don’t let anyone talk about anyone involved with Rangers, even if it is the man who has shafted Rangers, David Murray”.
My opinion of the takeover is based on MY opinion, and speculation is clearly defined in the dictionary if you would bother to look.
Speculate
1. To meditate on a subject; reflect.
2. To engage in a course of reasoning often based on inconclusive evidence
Speculation is seldom (if ever) based on “fact”, and as I have already explained I never claimed my opinion was based upon facts anyway, the suggestion I made regarding Llloyds was based upon the evidence currently available.
As for MY negativity towards Murray, is your belief based upon FACT or are you now indulging in the “speculation “that you readily criticise others for?
So do you agree with Chapper's other point that Murray has not done anything wrong?