craig

The cries of derision were not aimed at Gow but at the management. And those cries were not unanimous - I actually recall plenty who felt Gow would be a decent addition to the squad - your recollection and mine are certainly differing in that regard. As Gav says, when Adam was having a "great season" it was in the first division and not in the top flight - whilst Adam was doing that Alan Gow was having the most goal assists in the SPL - no mean feat for a guy playing with a lesser team. My recollection of Adam wasnt one of genuine enthusiasm - maybe many others were - I wanted him to get a chance of course because there is nothing better than bringing your own talent through and watching them develop. I don't think he is making the grade either and he, too often, looks for the "hollywood ball" as someone put it, rather than taking the easy, preferred option. His tackling is also pretty appalling - the way he shapes to tackle a guy he gives the opponent options of where to play the ball. Do I think he CAN make the grade ? Yep. But he has a LOT of developing to do for that. He should be taking a note of what Boyd has been doing to show him how hard work and listening can improve him as a player. What is sadder as a Rangers fan though is that we have a plethora of left sided midfielders and they all are considerably under-whelming. I think it is a bit of a push to suggest that Adam "showed far more promise than Gow".

Zander Diamond's elbow was about 5 yards from the near-side linesman - the ball was still in the vicinity of him and Lafferty and it was OBVIOUS that he swung an arm. The linesman was a coward, simple. One of the penalty incidents was a penalty - the other one (Considine's) wasn't IMO - he tried to clear and the ball bounced up onto his arm so there was no intent (it was a shocking attempt at a clearance though.....). There was one other less important decision I recall too - Lafferty was pressuring their left full-back and the full back clearly played a back pass to Langfield and the ref waved play on. I know this has been debated on here before and how we shouldn't need "assistance" from the officials to win games - but when you look at the points that Celtic have gained from such dodgy officiating it makes it all the clearer just how difficult the task is of Rangers winning the league this year. I am not one for paranoia but the number of decisions going their way really does have you thinking there is something far more sinister than just piss-poor officiating ! I don't think that Celtic are assured of a win tonight either. It is a difficult decision for them - if they lose they are out, win and they are through and draw and it goes to the last game (where they would expect Aalborg to get beat by Man U whilst they would expect to get at least a draw at home to Villareal). I think they will play cautiously and that could have them come unstuck. Aalborg also are not the walkover they are made out to be - a draw at CP earlier in the group and a draw at home to Villareal too would suggest it wont be easy for the Tims.

Sorry calscot but I have to agree with Gav. What justification do you have that Adam has ever shown more promise than Gow ? Without justification your argument is nothing but supposition. Gow was a proven SPL player when he came to Rangers and it was widely accepted that Rangers were picking up a decent player. Charlie Adam has never been any better than that. IMO the best that could be said is that they had similar promise. Gow never got his chance but that doesnt mean he is a lesser player than Adam as we dont know why he never got his chance (though the management team were highly complimentary after his debut in LA....)

That is not the point you were making though.

Do you have any other suggestions ? Not being adversarial, just curious as to whether or not we have any other way of making SDM fight our corner or show some sign of leadership. From your above post it would appear that even Frankie's written efforts are futile. And if that is the case then is it merely that we wait until either a) SDM sells or b) the club dies, whichever comes first obviously. I hope for ALL our sakes that it is not b.

Tell that to people like Denis Kozlowski (of Tyco (in)fame) or Sir Fred of RBS or multiple AIG CEO's etc etc. There is plenty of stick and abuse aimed at other business "owners".

Not so in the case of Arsenal - Arsenal fans are not as demanding as we are - I used to attend Highbury every other week in the early 80's and they were never that demanding.

Credit Crunch ? What Credit Crunch ?

uh-oh..... just wait till Gribz is on.... it will be "force-fed" the news, not access to it ! :fish: You are right though Barry - there are plenty of people online who would put people like Spiers and his ilk to shame should they tread the journalism path. I always felt that telling the news in its simplest form is the way to go - Spiers tries to use eloquent language which gets lost and, in fact, it even dilutes the message it is attempting to convey !

Naismith is expected back in December pete.

In almost every paragraph he makes a statement which either contradicts what he is saying elsewhere or is just simply hyperbolic pish ! "intellectual and economic underclass that has attached itself to his club" - what a ridiculous statement. Intellect and, indeed, economic circumstance is nothing to do with the ills of a club. Geez, just look at the sport he is reporting on - people like Hartson, Boruc and we have had our fair share too - who prove that economic position doesnt mean you arent a tit. And funny Frankie - after reading it, your statement is the very first one I thought of myself. He revels in, and admires, Celtic for holding onto their "traditions" yet somehow we are cast as being stuck in the dark ages. His biased reporting knows no bounds. As for his statement of "sub-literate" ramblings..... I would love to see Spiers go up against yourself, bmck, calscot, Bluedell - because each and every one of you would hands-down provide far more structured, intelligible, balanced reporting than he could ever wish for. And for all his posturing as some literary genius his use of the Queen's English isnt that great - he does, however, do particularly well at using extended verbage to say something he could take half the time typing. Spiers is an egotistical, biased, bitter wee cretin (we all knew that anyway !!) of the highest order. But for some reason he still manages to get a job. He reminds me of Gerry McNee in that he recognises that by being outspoken it sells (so he is pimping his wares effectively) - the difference being, at least, that McNee was balanced in his babble whilst Spiers could never bring himself to call out Celtic for all their ills.

Jon, it was all part of the same foul though and, when that happens, the award is when the initial contact/foul took place. At no point did Vidic stop pulling him so it was all part of the same foul

What ? The initial contact was made OUTSIDE the box so it is a free kick. The fact that the free kick wasnt given and Vidic continued to commit the SAME foul doesnt make it a penalty. It wasnt a case of two different fouls, it was the same foul. Whether it was a red or not could be debated too. Could have been but likewise he was quite wide of goal from what I recall. Either way it certainly was NO penalty, in my opinion of course. I also agree with Gav - Wenger has to defend his players. In fact, he would be a shitty manager if he came out and said that his team were pish and should have been pumped by more. Given there is low morale in the team right now it would be suicide to then say they are mince ! It is very important to show solidarity in public - but you can bet that Wenger let the players have it in the dressing room after the game.

Jon, if the "penalty" in the Man U game you are talking about is when Vidic tackled Agbonlahor on the near side of the penalty area then it was NEVER a penalty. Vidic was pulling him back but that was outside the box. When he made the challenge he got the ball cleanly.

Or maybe Murray just needs to make the decision that if it is good enough for Celtic to cast stones at Rangers then it is good enough for us to do likewise - and we all know that there are more than enough skeletons in the Celtic closet to embarass them. I am glad that SDM mentioned the "poppy scandal" - what an abhorrent thing of them to do. At least SDM is "highlighting" it - and you can bet that Reid wasn't a happy camper that it happened !

Seems like he is damned if he does and damned if he doesnt. I may be missing something maineflyer (feel free to correct me) but your above statement suggests, to me, that initially you want SDM to act in the interests of the club but then belittle the statement he has recently made (which, on the face of it, looks like he is defending the club, to an extent). What am I missing ? I am not convinced Reid will eat him alive - Reid comes across as being aggressive and emotional - those types tend to hang themselves given enough rope and by prodding at them enough.

Reid last night dismissed Murray's comments, claiming that “when it comes to defending the welfare of Celtic, I will continue to comment without fear or favour.” I hope Reid does continue in this vein because he WILL trip over himself and make himself look like a tit. If SDM would listen to some of the observations made on here regarding the famine song he could VERY EASILY shoot Reid's comments about the subject down. I would like to see SDM truly go after Celtic for some of the stuff we know they do because much as though Reid has been successful in politics I think that SDM could beat him in debate, if he really wanted to. I do like the statement from SDM though because he suggests that there are things he could mention about Celtic but, out of respect or out of moral high ground, refuses to do so. Leaving it squarely on Reid to be the petty point scorer. That said, hopefully SDM still will find the time to defend the club and its fans rather than bury his head under the parapet again !

I have watched that over and over and over and over - piss myself laughing EVERY time

Who cares?

Shroomz, I understand what you are saying but the "emergence of obvious media bias" has been at play since long before John Reid stepped into the breach !

I could very well be wring but it looks to me like it is a gentle statement to let Reid know that SDM wont accept it anymore (or ate least people in glass houses....) ..... yes, wishful thinking more than anything !

All that does is show up the biased media reporting. If Celtic fansites can point it out as being McGeady who was to blame I am sure the rags can find that same information just as easily.

The thing about the Butcher v Maradona thing is boring. I dont ever see Butcher moaning about the WONDER goal that Maradona scored soon after the Hand of God. And that one would have been enough to win that game anyway. Sure, it was cheating and sure it gave them an advantage but there is no saying that Argentina wouldnt have won anyway. Aside from all that, Butcher allowed it to become a Butcher v Maradona thing with his statements - he is there as assistant coach to SCOTLAND and talk about the game - NOT talking about an ENGLAND game that took place twenty years ago !

Me too. I thought we played some of our best football when he and Burke played wide last season. That said, we seem to have reverted to a 4-4-2 and both those wide players worked well because we flooded the midfield. Might not have the same effect now. But he can play left and nobody else has stamped their authority on that position !

Correct and my opinion is the only one that counts...... in my opinion of course