Showing posts with label Parkhead. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Parkhead. Show all posts

Wednesday, 13 September 2017

Celtic: form is temporary, class is permanent

Before I start this article, let me first assert that like all Rangers fans, I know there is a long way to go before we catch Celtic. Their squad was assembled at far higher sums than ours, and this Rangers is merely fledgling under Pedro Caixinha. Furthermore, there is a very high chance the gulf between the two will be exposed again when Rodgers’ under 12’s visit Ibrox later this month.

However, that all said, there is just a little simmering sense of something right now. From Celtic dropping points at Parkhead inside four matches to St Johnstone following going nearly the entire season last term before succumbing to Ross County, to last night’s absolute mollication by PSG, there is just a sense that while a sea of change has not quite opened up yet for Rangers or anyone else, Celtic seem more vulnerable than they have at any time.

Friday, 16 June 2017

Rangers sign Celtic player. Yes, really...

It is as rare as they come, but it is understood Rangers are to sign a Celtic player directly from the Parkhead Club for the first time since…ever?

Admittedly it is at the youth ranks, but nevertheless these are transactions rarer than diamonds, and in this instance it sees young goalkeeper Aidan McAdams switch from Parkhead to Ibrox at the U19s level, being 18 himself.

Tuesday, 18 April 2017

Celtic clash: these are the five big tests for Pedro

With Sunday’s Old Firm semifinal getting ever closer, Rangers could barely be going into the clash in better form. With only two goals conceded in our past seven matches and 17 dispatched, Rangers look a different prospect since the Loaf left, as new boss Pedro Caixinha impresses his philosophies on a previously beleaguered squad.

However, beating an admittedly solid Partick side at Ibrox is a slightly different prospect to overcoming the green and whites from the other side of the Clyde, and a number of key personnel and tactical issues surround Ped the Ted as he mulls over the XI he is set to send out onto the Hampden turf.

Sunday, 12 March 2017

Old Firm: 8 things new Rangers boss Pedro Caixinha learned at Parkhead

After today’s pulsating Old Firm epic, Rangers earned their way to a well-deserved point in interim coach Graeme Murty’s final stand before returning to his conventional duties in charge of the U20s.

But watching from the Parkhead seats, his successor Pedro Caixinha was an interested spectator, assessing his charges in person before he takes his place in the Ibrox hotseat tomorrow, and there was a huge amount for the new man to ponder as he begins the monumental task of trying to reverse Rangers’ ailing fortunes of late.

With that said, Ibrox Noise gives you a few things our new manager would surely have learned about his squad from this epic encounter at Parkhead.

Old Firm: three reasons for a Rangers win...

Today is the day. In only a few hours, Rangers take the venomous turf at Parkhead for the last time under Graeme Murty, with anything less than three points accrued seeing Celtic’s direct lead over them remain at 33 points, or, worryingly, extend to 36. With the gap between the two already smashing all historical records, certainly post-war, Rangers do not want it any bigger, and this clash today sees every squad member given a ‘tabula rasa’.

Pedro Caixinha will be at Celtic Park to witness his new squad for the first time in the flesh, and the new manager’s advantage is a fresh pair of eyes and a new perspective with which to run the rule over the personnel at his disposal.

Saturday, 17 September 2016

Progressive Rangers but same old outcome

Few would deny today’s performance at Ibrox was a higher-intensity, more energetic endeavour than has mostly been seen this season. While the play on offer was far from the very best we saw Warbs’ Rangers produce last season, it was probably the best display his men have put in this competitive season.

And yet, the same old outcome undermined any progress anyone might think had been made since the debacle at Parkhead.

Monday, 12 September 2016

Video - where it all went wrong for Rangers

With Rangers’ dreadful loss at the hands of bitter rivals Celtic still hurting two days afterwards, this brilliant video from Twitter user Dougie Wright goes further than most in explaining what Rangers got wrong.

If Mark Warburton was in any doubt as to where his team failed, his tactics crumpled and his defensive unit broke up, this exceptional piece of analysis by Dougie is set to dispel it.

Sunday, 11 September 2016

Celtic 'fans' mock suicide - press not interested

While the press is filled with the poor conduct of a number of Rangers fans who disgraced themselves and the club by destroying the toilets at Parkhead, less prominent is the morally debasing sight of what home fans were up to ‘in the spirit of football’ yesterday.

As you will see from the photos, the banter went a little beyond the normal bounds of acceptability and into the realm of genuine bad taste.

Saturday, 10 September 2016

Dreadful Rangers dismally destroyed

We cannot say the signs were not there. Rangers had not truly kicked a ball in anger since mid April, that being the Old Firm semi, and indeed the form had gone from underwhelming to downright poor.

Fleeting glimpses of decency against mediocre opposition gave supporters a superiority complex, making us feel we were better than we were, just because we were comfortable against East Stirling or destroyed Linfield.

But the truth is Mark Warburton’s Rangers have gone completely off the rails with the plunge now totalling three plus months of frankly disappointing at best football with extremely patchy results.

Friday, 9 September 2016

Who starts for Rangers?

Talk of Twitter, Facebook and pubs right now among Bears is Rangers’ starting XI tomorrow for the first league Old Firm encounter since 2012.

The hype around this match has reached fever pitch and rarely has an Old Firm clash been this eagerly anticipated, but one thing fans rarely seem to be able to agree on is who should don the Light Blue at Parkhead.

Tuesday, 6 September 2016

Fan vote; who will win? Rangers or Celtic?

As anyone who is not under a rock knows, and a few who are, Rangers travel to Parkhead for the first time since 2012 seeking to pick up a massive three points that would instill confidence and momentum and the crucial belief this Ibrox side can do something in the SPL following a shaky start to life back in the country’s top tier.

But just how many fans believe it? How many supporters believe Rangers can take a giant leap on the journey back towards being the rightful champions of Scotland by dispatching Celtic on their own turf?

Forget Joey Barton; this is about Rangers

All the hype over the past few months has centred on Joey Barton’s stunning transfer to Rangers. The English Championship’s player of the year was a truly left-field signing and captured the imagination of absolutely everyone in Scottish football, whether it was Rangers fans lauding it, or Celtic (and everyone else) fans hating on him.

However, much of that hype was generated by the player himself, in particular by goading Celtic’s Scott Brown over Twitter and mouthing off in general via that platform (and others).

But, while pleasing to the galleries up to a point for sure, it is absolutely critical to ignore it. This weekend is not about Joey Barton v Scott Brown. It is not about any one thing or player in particular.

Thursday, 9 June 2016

Rangers' fan poll: to boycott away matches next season or not?

 Richard Fillingham

I try to make my articles both interesting and informative, however this next topic really does split opinion in our loyal support. So much so that a poll to find out the true percentage of the fans feelings would probably help everybody to decide the way forward - and what is best in the long term for our beloved club. I would like to address the outstanding question for a lot of the Rangers supporters for the forthcoming season.

Should Rangers fans boycott away grounds? At the end of the day, we are all individuals and we support our team in so many different ways.

Wednesday, 9 March 2016

Rangers, Celtic, Scott Allan & Karma

It was with a great deal amusement that news broke recently regarding former Rangers fan and club target Scott Allan’s link with a move out of Parkhead. Information received over a month ago by this site (but which elected to remain unpublished due to relative unimportance) was that he had expressed his desire to leave Celtic due to lack of playing time.

With Derby, Nottingham Forest & Bolton all reportedly interested in the playmaker, it highlights just how bad a decision he made to leave Hibs for Celtic rather than just waiting a few months to sign a pre-contract with Rangers, his supposed ‘boyhood club’.

Monday, 7 October 2013

What They Don't Want You to Know About Rangers' Accounts

When it comes to boardroom shenanigans at Ibrox, the most hyped aspect behind the scenes is money. In Rangers' case, in particular, how much our directors get.

With accounts released recently, the numbers have finally been published in black and white, after much feverish anticipation that the release of these figures would finally explain, reveal and explore Rangers' full fiscal standing in the world today along with aforementioned salaries.

The big 'scandal' is the amount our executives get - that is Craig Mather, CEO, and Finance Director Brian Stockbridge. In recent months it has emerged that Mather receives £300,000 at a salary of around £30,000 per month. Stockbridge has supposedly earned, in 13 months, £410,000.

This has attracted ridicule and feverish outrage from Rangers fans aghast that our two head men receive such salubrious income. However, there are aspects which put both these numbers into some sort of context.

Fans outraged to hear Mather receives £300,000 may be curious to know his counterpart at Celtic Park, Peter Lawwell, receives around £700,000. Before anyone makes the argument that the two clubs cannot currently be compared financially, I am afraid they can. Despite Rangers' incoming revenue going significantly down, the club's size and stature has not, nor has its outgoing costs (enough).

Any Rangers fan disagreeing with this therefore by logical conclusion considers Rangers a smaller club than Celtic. If the clubs cannot be compared financially in terms of outgoing costs, it is presumably because Rangers are smaller in stature. And as we know, that is not the case.

Consequently the fact the CEO of Rangers makes less than half the CEO of Celtic's clearly shows cost-cutting has taken place and his wage is far less than either Lawwell's or indeed Rangers' predecessor Martin Bain's.

Bain earned around £700,000 as well. It is a myth to suggest Craig Mather is being overpaid.

Saying it himself:

            “Through the history of Rangers, I would be the lowest-paid CEO for a long time"

Moving onto Stockbridge, he has received £209,000 so far in 13 months, his basic salary being £180,000. His counterpart, Eric J Riley, at Celtic Park, receives £140,000. The difference of course is the bonus stated in the accounts with Stockbridge allocated £200,000 while Riley's is only £27,000.

However, Craig Mather stated on 1st October that this bonus was waived:

            "If you look at my pay, there was talk about £500,000 but the actual amount I agreed to in the end was £300,000. Brian Stockbridge was on £200,000 plus a contractual bonus. Again, quite openly he’s agreed to waive that contractual bonus of his own accord.”

Then we have the non-executives. So far we've established outgoing salaries of the executive directors to be wages of around £500,000 if Stockbridge waived the bonus (700k if he did not and Mather is lying). So how much are the non-executives getting? Well, the answer is 0. Yes folks, did you not know non-executive directors only get their costs/expenses paid? Walter Smith got £50,000 in 13 months, while Ian Hart, Phil Cartmell and Bryan Smart all got under £30,000. Again, in expenses. None of the departed or existing non-execs receive any salary at all. Only their costs.

So, a grand total, in wages, still of £500,000 in an entire 13 months. Rangers' entire outgoing board wage is around the same as Celtic's sole CEO receives.

If you add the expenses it is a 'vile' sum of £640,000. A year. So the entire board, who are to be 'sacked' by the way, earn, 'allegedly', altogether, less than Lee McCulloch alone. They, in total, earn less than Ally McCoist did alone before his self-imposed wage cut.

When you actually scrutinise these sums and ignore the press hysteria along with fan-outrage, the only number that confuses is the £200k bonus for Stockbridge stated in the accounts but publicly addressed by Mather as being unissued. Presumably audited accounts include contractual obligations, even if they were not fulfilled, given the paperwork (including contracts) is what auditors examine, not individuals' actual bank accounts.

Because, and here is the killer point: Ally McCoist took his wage cut because he is employed by the club, otherwise known as the 'sporting' side of the business which is formally called "The Rangers Football Club Ltd" (this also 'employs' the Easdale brothers - non-exec).

Stockbridge and Mather (and Hart and Smart) and are on the board of the company called "Rangers International Football Club PLC". That is the parent company of RFC Ltd.

This is not to detail whether these director fellows are any good or bad at their jobs - that is a debate for another day. It is just pointing out they work for a PLC company which has a board of directors. They are not employed by the sporting side of the company and do not require to take paycuts to keep the club afloat. Horrible as it is to say, their loyalty is not with the club, nor the company particularly as it happens - the company is just their employer and they expect the going rate for the position they hold. CEOs and Finance Directors are not cheap.

Even then, they still do not receive as much as their counterparts at Parkhead.

So any paycut is on the onus of those loyal to the club. If the current players had the same inclination and loyalty to the club Ally McCoist does, they too would take wage cuts to help its costs. Not even universally 50% like he, but enough to help. There are other ways the club (and company) is losing cash (we know it is bleeding millions through lost income) but to employ a CEO and Finance Director and expect them to take considerably less than they would receive elsewhere - chances are they would quit (or simply not accept the job in the first place) and the company would have to find someone else. And no CEO or FD would accept the kind of salary we would like them to. This is the real world. However the players could accept aforementioned reduction like their manager has.

The board, as mentioned, work for the company. And that is a separate entity.

Because here is the ultimate catch 22:

Anyone yelling 'sack the board' and demanding they show loyalty to Rangers FC  with gestures like paycuts (or outright departure) - it is a contradiction because us Rangers fans (and most reasonable football fans) consider the company to be quite separate from the club. The old company was liquidated as well we know, but the club lived on.

Consequently if you are considering the board as part of the club then it forces that you consider the company employing them equally entwined. But that company is only 18 months old.

What I am saying is fans cannot have their cake here. To consider the board part of the club contradicts the very fact Rangers fans do not consider their club just over a year old.

Do they really also believe Rangers could employ a new CEO at less than £300,000 to 'save costs' who would also be effective enough at his job to stop the company bleeding money too? Where is this incredibly good (well he just 'magicked' millions out of thin air after all) and economically viable (apparently he is willing to work that magic for about £50,000) alternative? Do they really believe the likes of Paul Murray, Scott Murdoch, Frank Blin or Alex Wilson would achieve all this (get paid so much less and stem the financial losses while at it) in exactly the same circumstances the existing board suffer?

There is also the rather amusing further catch 22 that many fans forget; if they got their wish and the 'board got sacked', contractually the company would have to pay them off. It is called severance pay, and Charles Green was paid it - something supporters outraged about. Yet they want the rest to follow suit - overlooking that little problem that firing these directors will bleed the club/company yet more money in the process. So, to save the club cash, it will cost hundreds of thousands. Anyone else see the flaw here?

Many supporters also remain oblivious to the cash these existing directors (exec and non-exec) pump into the club out their own pockets, sums I will not go into. But they are far from freeloaders.

I am the first to confess I am not a financial manager, and stocks, shares, trade and NASDAQ are all double Dutch to me.

But I can do my sums and compare similar situations and it is abundantly clear that whether or not they are good at their positions, none of Rangers' PLC directors are overpaid. In fact it is quite plausible they are underpaid given how much Bain, Green, and Lawwell got/get. Green, by the way, only received around £200,000 more than Lawwell does. Unlike Lawwell to Celtic, Green brought investment into Rangers, and managed to form a new company which controls the sporting side, something Rangers fans were desperate to see happen, especially once the CVA was rejected. So did he not possibly 'earn' a little profit? I personally do not begrudge the man, and still consider he was harshly treated by the fans.

It is very easy to spin stats, but far less to spin genuine numbers.

Admittedly depending what the press headline and first paragraphs say I suppose.