craig

One other thing to note is that WS has openly admitted that one thing we lacked last year was creativity. Given we have not signed a creative/flair player one can only assume that this type of player is still someone that we are looking for. There will, no doubt, be more signings ahead - don't forget that the official transfer window hasn't even opened yet !

Surely the debate can be broken down into a couple of questions ? 1. Is Boyd our most prolific goalscorer ? YES. 2. Is he a good forward Re team play ? NO. It then just comes down to what you want from him. Do you want 25 goals a season where some of them will be hat-tricks against smaller teams but when he struggles badly against the better teams ? He didnt play against Celtic last season but in his first season and a half he did and struggled to score. I think that is the main thing his detractors have against him is that he will produce goals when sometimes they aren't needed but doesn't come up with those crucial game-winning goals. Yes he showed predatory instincts to win us the CIS and he scored two againsty QoS but I reckon we would have won that game with other forwards anyway. I said on another thread that he needs a partner up front to do the donkey work for him. If we find that player (perhaps it is Miller) then Boyd will bang in goals - but the proof will be in whether he gets them when under proper pressure, not when we are 2 or 3-0 up on St Mirren.

Johnny, being pedantic I know but did we not beat Hibs 2-1 at Easter Road ?

Yeah but can we really attract the "top players" to our club anymore ? If not then, as a finisher, Boyd is the best we could hope for. His all-round game is poor but if he has a Kenny Miller type beside him to do the donkey work then he will score a load of goals against the SPL teams and it is the SPL that is most important to us. Sure, in Europe that may not be enough, but he doesnt suit our 4-5-1 in Europe anyway.

Surely Kris Boyd should be in the poll as our best midfielder Jon :fish: After all, his first touch is so bad that his second touch is usually made in midfield Just jesting Jon......

This one for me is cut and dried in that it is easy to see where the value in signing him is, or is not. 1. If played wide right.... dont buy him, waste of money 2. If played through the middle he is a fair shout but is he worth 4 mill ? 3. If played through the middle who does he dislodge from BF or KT ? If neither then don't buy him, 4 mill for a bench warmer is a LOT of money 4. If played in the hole behind a lone striker then buy him. Personally I think that we could get better for 4 mill - the question becomes whether or not we could attract that person to the SPL.

The only problem being that they are all central midfielders so would be competing for places - not a bad position to be in IF they were all on form and IF they had the heart to play for the jersey

I can honestly say that I havent been happier to see a team get put out of a major tournament - they were an embarassment the way they played. I am actually glad it went to penalties - they wanted penalties from the off, got them and got put out. Good enough for them. BTW - my coat is in for dry cleaning, been wearing it far too often this year. Got fooking sunburnt this weekend with the weather being so hot.

Aside from Greece, Italy have probably been themost defensive team in the tournament. No loss to see them go home

I guess in that case we will have to agree to disagree Jon. Being the underdog and coming clsoe doesn't make you any more deserving than the two teams who made it. Don't get me wrong, I wish it WAS the case but we didn't do enough against the other teams (including Italy...) whilst the French and Italians did. I agree.... we disagree.

I think Miller had a chance in the away game to put us 1 up did he not ? Regardless though, being unlucky doesnt equate to being more deserving ! Yes, the free-kick DID get them the winning goal, I never disputed that and I didn't dispute that it shouldn't have been given - it was obviously a foul on Hutton. However, if you took that goal away from them they STILL would have had more points than us ! OK, so just WHY do you think we deserved to qualify ahead of France and Italy considering they BOTH ended up with more points than us ??? Sorry, but I just don't get it Jon. How can we be more deserving given we finished behind both of them ? Because we beat France twice ? Because we lost to Italy twice ? Because we were the underdogs and came so close ? gisabeer...... the "utter pish" statement was meant in jest - apologies if offended

Utter pish. They beat us in Italy, simple. At Hampden it was never a free-kick, I agree - never disputed it. However, even if they didnt get the goal from that free kick and the game ended in a draw then they still beat us by 2 points. Jon, Post of the day should be when someone talks sense, not simply because they agree with your flawed logic.

Ditto. By a distance !

Good to see Eck still doing us some favours !! McFadden woudl be a hit at either OF team !

Being Scottish doesnt automatically mean we deserve to be in the finals Hurlock. My point is not about nationality or patriotism - I wanted us to be at Euro 2008 as much as anyone. My point though was as to why (or otherwise) the Italians didn't desevre to be there - they got more points than us, so DID deserve to be there in my opinion. Nothing to do with nationality.

WHY did we deserve to go through ? Some of our other results ? You mean losing twice to Italy means we deserved to go through ahead of them ? Course you are entitled to your opinion, whoever daid you werent ? But the facts showed that Italy didnt even need to beat us at Hampden to go through, therefore that free-kick became irrelevant (although it might not have from a French perspective !). Sometimes top teams do just enough and sometimes that is good enough. Just because they SHOULD play better doesnt mean they dont deserve to qualify though. I am happy they are out too by the way.

Jon, if you think that the "free kick that never was" was the sole reason that the Italians never deserved to go through then that is, quite simply, flawed logic. Italy finished with 29 points to our 24. Had they not been given that free kick then they would have finished with 27 points and we would have 25. Still more than us. The whole point of qualifying is having more points than your opponents - Italy and France had more than we did and therefore deserved to go through. Or are you saying that the Italians didnt deserve to go through despite beating us home and away ? Again, flawed logic. If we should be disappointed about any team beating us to Euro 2008 it should have been the French after we took 6 points from them - but, again, you don't go through by only beating your strongest opponents - you have to do the goods against the other teams too and it seems we didnt.

They deserved to be there more than we did, and more than France did. Did they finish above us in the group ? Yep, which means they deserved it more than us. But since they DID get there they have been pretty poor !

Glad Spain went through, not because I dislike Italy but because Spain were the only team who actually tried to win the game.

Not wanting to be pedantic here but when you project into the future you CANNOT state it as fact - is is impossible to do so. But, if you see my previous post about this, I would be inclined to agree with you, at least in terms of Rangers and the SPL. It is amazing that for the last 6 or 7 years we, the Rangers fans, have been screaming out that we need to find a new McCoist, someone to give s 20+ goals a season. Now that we have him (I doubt he will ever be as good as McCoist was, but he does have time on his side if he shows a desire to improve) we are looking at ways to get rid of him and he is subjected to the largest criticism of most, if not all, current Rangers players. He scored 25 goals last season and most of them were coming off the bench, yet he still took pelters. For a comparison, I remember watching the Falkirk v Rangers game and Gers pulled Cousin off after about 80 mins. Boyd replaced him. Boyd did more running, more hassling, more tracking back AND he stuck the ball in the back of the net..... he did more in 10 mins than Cousin had done in 80. Yet Cousin doesn't suffer as much criticism as Boyd does (at least not until he showed his true desire to NOT be at Ibrox).

completely agree Juff - the injury thing is being used as an excuse. If he is injured then 1) He should tell the management he is injured and shouldn't play OR 2) The management should know from the medics that he shouldn't play AND 3) He should be replaced with a player who is fit and can give everything If he can't be replaced then the management team are not doing their job in ensuring each player has a suitable replacement.

Decent game and the Russians have played really well. Can see Pavlyuchenko moving to the EPL, Serie A or La Liga this season, although there is lots of money in Russia too these days. But does anyone know if that decision by the ref on not sending Kolodin off was the correct one. I know that he changed his mind that the ball had gone out for a goal-kick but does that mean the player shouldn't be booked ? Logic would say that in effect the foul never took place as the ball was out of place but I am sure we could think of instances where a change in the decision would not result in a reversal of a yellow or red card. EDIT : To be fair, even if it were a foul, I don't think it was a yellow card, not much in it.

Regardless of whether he has as many fluffs as he has goals, the lad obviously knows where to be and when to be there. He gets into the proper position at the proper time and that is a difficult thing to teach. With the proper partner up front he will score a shed load of goals for us. And that is, for me, where the debate is at its best. If WS is going to persist in a 4-5-1 next season then he, quite simply, should sell Boyd. Boyd is not effective in a 4-5-1 and he hasn't shown this season that he can 1) play in that lone striker position or 2) improve to be able to do so. However, if we go to a 4-4-2 then I think with the proper player beside him then he could be the difference between us winning the league and not. He is being slated as being pish/gash/useless but the simple truth is that he has scored 70 goals for our club in 2.5 seasons and you know what the even more impressive statistic is ? He has done it in a pretty poor Rangers team and one which we all agree is badly lacking in creativity and chance creation. The mind boggles as to how many this lad could score if he played with a team that was strong on creativity and 2) he was a but more professional in dealing with his own body and fitness.

They helped my Germany bet that is for sure. The odds on Germany to win the tournament tumbled last night after Turkey won - came in to 9/5. Took my 40 quid bet off the table and have guaranteed myself 30 quid profit regardless of who wins Euro 2008. Wimbledon is another tournament that offers some great value trading bets (bet a player to win, then when he wins a couple of games lay him back at lower odds giving yourself a risk-free bet or even guaranteed profit). Outside of Federer, Nadal and Djokovic you can get 32/1 on any player - so if you can find the one other player who makes the semi-final (assuming the above 3 do) and you have backed him at 32/1 then his odds will tumble, you can then bet against him and guarantee a profit !

7 resignations from the RST Board and rumblings of in-house fighting.