Four Point Plan For David Murray's Rangers Redemption

Sir David Murray and the current management are taking some flak at the moment. The main issue being that that the fans hate to be seen as second best to Celtic and we, as a club, seem to be in that position at the moment.

As supporters we can take not doing well in Europe (in small doses) but losing the league to Celtic more often than not, winning it twice in the last eight years, is not enough for us. We feel aggrieved. In the past we have focused that attention on the managers but now fingers are wagging at Sir David. Is this justified?

Even Sir David admits to many mistakes, so yes, some criticism must be levelled at him, he is the undisputed owner and figurehead of our club. But should we as fans wish to see the back of him?

In times of turmoil it is easy to call for regime change, at the very least it gives the illusion of progress, but all to often in the football world that means we have to "wait" while the new regime gets up-to speed, changes the team or whatever the vision is.

I think that fans calling for Sir David to leave should take a good long hard look at the man himself and ask themselves this question, "Could we really have better leadership?"

Sir David has continually supported the club financially. There is some credence in saying at times he was reckless as we were at one point sitting with a £72m overdraft but to his credit he also fixed this. I do not remember any complaints at the time as he spent the money looking for European glory.

Our debt is now increasing again, and losing to Kaunas earlier in the season disastrous financially—no European money for us and an increased payout for Celtic. However Sir David has proved himself to be a fighter and has become one of the richest men in Scotland through his own endeavours and no one gets to that position without qualities of financial acumen, a nose for a deal, strong leadership, an aggressive will to win and, of course, some luck.

He has not lost these traits and if he says he is going to make and keep us strong then the attributes he already has are the ones we would be looking for in any regime change.

There are no complaints against a chairman when things are going well. However is there anything constructive that Sir David can do to bring the supporters closer to him?

I believe that a four point plan, openly acknowledged and implemented could be a constructive path forward:

"1. Open up Rangers to a meaningful share issue, such as the policy set up by Fergus McCann when Glasgow Celtic found them-selves in a much worse situation. Where all fans can easily buy shares and so that those with the odd Million can contribute.

This would have three meaningful benefits:

a. If SDM owned less that 50% of the shares and the board was a lot more responsible to the share holders and communication would to improve as would accountability.

b. The share issue would reduce the debt and release funds.

c. Sir David could remain as largest shareholder and Chairman and keep providing his experience and leadership to the club

(Note in the last share issue he underwrote and bought himself—but a 100,000 fans with £500 each is £50m.)

2. As a club set a income to players wage cap (UEFA were proposing 60%) (Working within our means is the ONLY way to long term stability that is in the fans hands). Sir David has muted other long term plans, specifically the Rangers Village to secure our future, but until that is a reality (and even then) debt is not the long term answer, but increased revenue and profitability will strengthen the team and that is the heart of the matter.

3. Call on the club, as policy, to set a first team max pool size of (say) 22 players so we never end up with the situation again of carrying players wages when they have no realistic chance of being used (i.e. force the management to sell before buying if max size is reached) It would not surprise me if that is what Sir David is doing now, but please let the supporters know this.

4. Call for a policy where in cup games we play at least 3 (perhaps 4) under 21 players (even at the risk of losing) so that we use these games to 'blood' the younger players and let's see if they can step up to the mark. I have a lot of sympathy for Walter Smith not using them as we are expected to win every game, no matter what, but let’s prioritise the league and support youth in the cups. The supporters would need to step up-to the mark and support this win or lose!
"

Some criticism is levelled at having Walter Smith back for a second time, but given what we did last season that criticism is premature, but in football, to quote Walter, "At Rangers you are never more than two losses away from disaster.”

It’s impossible to have a policy of "We must win the league" but as Rangers we have a history (with the notable exception of PLG) of having long term managers.

I think Sir David needs to keep his faith with Walter Smith. Any new manager needs three years to build a team to win the league, some are lucky and do it quicker and then build but usually on the back of someone else setting a structure.

If they prove to be winners they should be supported for the long term. The continual chopping and changing of management, as displayed by other clubs, leads to failure.

I don’t think it is any wonder that with the exception of Chelsea, the top six teams in England all have long term managers. As fans we should back Smith to see where we are at the end of this season before any judgement is passed on Walter Smith.

Even then there may be a good case for another season but even if the manager goes the one person who should stay at Ibrox is our Chairman, Sir David Murray.