If only King had left it at announcing the deal, accepted all the plaudits and just flown back to South Africa
Deeds, not words, are the measure of a man’s character. Deeds earn a man trust. Deeds earn a reputation.
If only Dave King had left it at deeds.
Then you’d have nodded, said fair play, and waited to see if this was truly Rangers’ fork in the road.
Released them from a awful deal most of us believed would strangle his tenure for its full seven years, just out of sheer badness on Mike Ashley’s part. More a miracle than a deed, to be fair, even if the details are in short supply.
Revived their commercial and retail potential overnight. Recruited a director of football with a decent rep and pedigree.
Backed their manager with enough funding for a heavyduty recruitment drive, acknowledging what he had inherited was substandard by a mile but without forcing him to get rid of the duds first.
Obviously only time and results will tell whether Pedro Caixinha’s judgment was worth the backing.
But after the season they just went through, discovering their enormous limitations, even their fiercest critic would have to acknowledge that they’ve addressed most, if not all of them.
Not by talking about them. By actually doing something. Deeds.
But the words? Dear oh dear, Dave, the words.
If only he had left it at announcing the deal, accepted the plaudits, and got back on a f light. He couldn’t resist though, could he?
Did he not learn his lesson from their “Going for 55” nonsense last summer? Has he never heard of hubris? In ancient Greece, the word originated with behaviour which upset the Gods, a foolish conceit, and in turn brought about that person’s nemesis, or downfall.
Swap Gods for Celtic and you’re pretty much there. Does he not remember the last time their over-exuberance wound their rivals up?
They hired Brendan Rodgers because of it. How did that work out for them?
Listen, from our point of view as newspapers, it’s great value. If he wants to say it out loud and for it to appear on our back pages, that’s his funeral. But he can’t expect what he says not to be analysed or criticised.
Two things. The first on the preposterous notion that Celtic are technically only at two in a row and not six.
That any title earned without Rangers being there is worth zero. That any number in a row is only a contest between their teams. It’s an insult, not just to Celtic but to the rest of the game as well, to suggest their efforts every season are only validated by Rangers’ presence.
Apart from the complete contradiction from when he took over in the first place and vowed to stop Celtic reaching 10, how does that stack up when, if they are there, they can’t even finish second?
If you take it further, back to their joint holy grails of nine in a row, when Rangers won theirs between 1989 and 1997, Celtic only finished second twice.
The Hoops were third four times, fourth twice, even fell as far as fifth in 1990.
Were seven of Rangers’ nine actually meaningless because it wasn’t Celtic who were making it a contest?
Do they not count because Hearts, Aberdeen, Motherwell, Hibs all finished above them? Likewise when Celtic won theirs between 1966 and 1974, Rangers failed to get the runners-up spot three times, falling as low as fourth at one point.
It’s hard to imagine King actually believes his own “We are the People” argument but if he does, what good does he think it’s going to do Pedro Caixinha by saying it out loud?
The second statement he made – that Celtic should be further ahead – is also completely f lawed. Celtic couldn’t have done any more than they did last season.
They won cups, earned tens of millions of pounds by getting into the Champions League, and lost to no one as they only dropped eight points in a record- breaking league campaign which saw them score 106 goals. He’s clearly confusing how far Rangers are behind with how far Celtic are ahead.
If the Hoops recruit well over the summer it’s possible they’ll maintain their superiority but inconceivable they can win the league by any more than that.
If ever they needed an incentive to have a crack at it, though, King’s trying hard to provide it. He and Stewart Robertson have moved heaven an earth to get Pedro what he wants this summer.
If they can get Graham Dorrans and Jamie Walker in, their intake will reach double figures, their starting line-up will be unrecognisable as we know it needed to be. And the manager can stand or fall on his judgment and ability to put a winning team on the park.
What he doesn’t need is his chairman providing their rivals’ team talks for him.
For an organisation that prides itself on strict liability, UEFA isn’t half bending over backwards to give Linfield leeway.
If a club can’t guarantee their opposition or fans won’t be persecuted for their perceived religion in the 21st century because of a ritual which belongs in the 17th, then that club should be nowhere near European competition.
Unfair on the club but that’s UEFA’s usual stance. Host it safely, or move it. It’s not a surprise Celtic have distanced themselves from the responsibility. The FA’s decision to bin the final three years of a £16million deal with Ladbrokes because it was morally incompatible with their stance on betting would be admirable but for the question of why they took it in the first place a year ago. What’s changed?
Meanwhile the SFA has no qualms with backing from bookies. No surprise, considering they’re the only source of sponsorship income for our three main competitions.
Must be great to be so well off that you can afford to have principles, eh?