The Ibrox Sultans of Spin: would honesty be too much to ask?

Last updated : 05 February 2009 By IAATP
Most of us on Follow Follow call a spade a spade. Sometimes you'll find the odd poster who calls it a sharp-edged digging implement primarily used in the outdoor landscaping and horticultural industry but for the most part it's a spade. Or occasionally a bloody shovel.

When somebody tells you that "If we did not take this action [accepting a bid for Boyd], it could have been bad" (E.Murray, The Guardian, 09/01/09) you're entitled to take it at face value. Especially if the person delivering the reality check happens to be your club chairman. We all know the story that unfolded on the pages of the national newspapers: Rangers accepted a bid for top scorer Kris Boyd and justified the decision by claiming that such steps were needed to avoid some imminent financial problem. Assistant manager Ally McCoist was brought in to put a more fan-friendly face to the bad news by saying "All I can ask the supporters is to look at the facts - we have to sell." (bbc.co.uk, 11/01/09) and "No matter who leaves we'll be doing everything we can to make sure we're successful on the park" (bbc.co.uk, 11/01/09). The reality of our money problems is driven home even more by our chairman claiming "We did not budget for losing to FBK Kaunas, we have a squad of 28 players and we simply cannot sustain the level of outgoings compared to what is coming in." (T. Jordan, Evening Times, 08/01/09)

The Rangers Supporters Trust released its 17-point criticism of Rangers' current situation on January 15th. Since then the big guns have come out blazing:

"Some of us have had to work hard to achieve a profile. They don't seem to need to work very hard for theirs" - Walter Smith on the criticisms levelled at the club by the Rangers Supporters Trust. (E.Grahame, Telegraph, 16/01/09)

"The people who are moaning and making most of the noise are not exactly captains of industry" - David Murray's criticism of fans expressing their concern at the way the club is run. (S.Halliday. Scotsman, 15/01/09)

"Rangers are not going to disappear because of the fact that we haven't sold one player," - Smith on the consequences of failing to bring money into the club in January. (Scotsman, 23/01/09)

"What we must not do is play into the hands of our competitors by scoring own goals in the media," and "This mischievous element that we have is only going to destroy the things that they supposedly care so passionately about."
David Murray's calls for unity in the face of growing media pressure. (G.McCafferty, Scotsman, 29/01/09)

So there you have it folks. On January 9th Murray justifies accepting a bid for the club's top scorer by claiming that we'd face some kind of consequence if we didn't raise money, but barely a week later and Murray enlists his friends in the media to tell the Rangers support that he knows best, that they don't have the industrial experience he has and that we should all stick together because criticism from within our own ranks is mischievous. This isn't a rant about our finances, the understanding of which seems to require in-depth knowledge of chaos theory over any tried and tested financial models, but rather about the way our club communicates with the support. We slip from two to four points behind the league leaders and McCulloch tells us that "the point may prove to be a big one eventually." (Sunday Mail, 25/01/09)

We suffer our most disastrous European result in living memory and, as the fans fears naturally turn bids for Carlos Cuellar, we're assured by Smith that "We don't want one and we are not seeking one. We don't have to offload players simply because of that situation." (bbc.co.uk, 08/08/08) Barely 4 days later when Cuellar moves to Aston Villa, Smith assures us that "This has come as a surprise and I am disappointed"(bbc.co.uk, 12/08/08) - the same day that The Scotsman tells us "Villa last night had a bid accepted, confirmed by Rangers as 10m Euros, which invoked the release clause in the Spaniard's contract." (Scotsman, 12/08/08). The club lose in Europe and reassure the fans that we don't need to sell our best defender - 4 days later he's sold, much to the surprise of our manager, but not presumably his bosses who would have known about the release clause in his contract.

I've often said that modern football fans are the most well-versed that the game has ever seen and I stand by that comment - it's a natural consequence of the information age. We have information about the world game beamed into our houses, sitting a mere push of the remote control or click of the computer mouse away. That the club honestly expected us to believe such nonsense is, quite frankly, insulting.

The world of politics is responsible for redefining the word "spin" from the act of rotating an object on its axis to the art of rotating the impact of an event for personal benefit. Just as the electorate are losing their taste for sexed-up dodgy dossiers so too must football fans demand more than cliched sound-bites lacking any substance. Our football pundits question our right to criticise those involved with the professional game whilst claiming that they don't know much about the (government backed) supporters trust movement but that they don't like it. The spin and misdirection surrounding football these days has taken on Malcolm Tucker proportions. Is it too much to ask for a football club which engages its supporters with meaningful dialogue? Find me another industry where businesses don't do exactly that by way of consumer research and structured focus groups. The idea of being misled can no longer sit well within football supporter communities and the bare minimum that a supporter should be entitled to is that their club chairman will not lie to protect his own interests and will engage in open and honest discourse to further those of the club.

And can't this be backed by some genuine football journalism? I have no doubts that some of our more esteemed daily newspapers employ writers with a grasp of both sport and journalism. Is it too much to ask for them to combine the two? Those of us who regularly read Gabriel Marcotti know what to expect. Those who don't are still astonished at the depth of knowledge possessed by Gab. That it comes as a shock that somebody paid to write about football does so with such honesty, integrity and knowledge should break the collective hearts of a nation built on the writings of Hugh McIlvanney, the broadcasts of Bob Crampsey and the traditions of the Saturday evening pink sports paper. As football supporters, especially in Scotland, sports journalism is part of our identity and just as spin destroys the bonds of trust between club and fan, so too should the continually falling standards of our football press cause us to grieve.

In the modern era the public demand honesty from those in power and integrity from those in the position to offer coverage or comment. How much longer can football continue to stumble around, blinded by the innocent, naive notion of loyalty, before we collectively demand better from our chairmen, our managers and those paid to pass comment? Having been told that we face serious consequences should we fail to bring in money and yet that we're in no imminent financial danger, I eagerly await the next gem from our very own sultans of spin.