craig

But it isn't a 5-4-1 gribz. It is a 4-5-1. Mcleish is going with 4 at the back, 4 in midfield, a player in the hole between midfield and up front and then a striker. That is a 4-5-1 or, more technically, a 4-4-1-1.

I have it on my laptop now Gribz - am in Ayrshire but the Sky box is in Edinburgh - watching the NI game. It isn't true that you get it on the corner of the screen. It is windows based so you can maximise, minimise and manually adjust the size of the screen. If you maximise it to full screen you do lose a bit of the picture quality but it is still decent enough if you miss watching UK TV programming.

Have only had one losing coupon so far out of 4, but no major profits. The horses on the other hand..... am up 3,000 quid this week alone. Had an unbelievable run, long may it continue.

None of our players up front (aside from Darcheville) beat players Gribz. Cousin right now offers more than Boyd from a team contribution standpoint - but Boyd still scores goals. This is all good debate though - because last year Boyd HAD to start as there were no other true options - this year, from this poll, you can see we have about a dozen different permutations.

Hearts have been awful -Motherwell should have beaten them the other night - Motherwell had 3 or 4 clear cut chances and I thought for long spells out played Hearts. A win is definitely achievable against Hearts.

I think he is more mobile but have to say I was impressed with Boyd's workrate last week - and right now Boyd looks more clinical, but time and games will tell if Cousin will be so clinical - once he is fit of course.....

Come on Cammy.... your first paragraph is using semantics at its best. If you had suffered at the hands of Torbett all those years ago would you be happy to hear football fans singing it and using it to taunt your rivals fans ? What relevance is it to Rangers fans ? NONE. Further, why is it that all of a sudden we are taking the moral high ground to highlight it happened ? If you think that this is being sung by Rangers fans to be moral and highlight social problems that existed at Celtic then I am sorry, but I just cannot agree with you - this is no more than points scoring by Rangers fans. If you believe that it isn't points scoring then good for you - but no-one will convince me it is no more than points scoring. But either way it doesn't belong at a Rangers game - what does it have to do with us ? NOTHING.

I voted Cousin and Darcheville too Gribz. The one partnership I don't see working is Boyd and Cousin - last week they looked far too similar and made runs into the same areas.

I told you to get the Slingbox !!

Is this one of those "mix the letters around but still can read the word" type posts Barry ? :fish:

Yep, don't see an awful lot wrong with this other than them trying to make it appear they dont have a problem - but everyone knows they do. Ours is being aired in public whilst they are privately going about their business - if we succeed in our efforts then airing it in public should be a major PR boost.

Oh I agree - because without discussion it could easily end up as yet another situation where Gers and their fans are berated and castigated because they know no better. And to be fair this topic is very contentious because there are a great many fans who believe that we should be able to highlight the failings of our rivals as freedom of speech - and I agree with that..... BUT.... I happen to think that as Gers fans we are well above that type of petty points scoring. When I heard the chants on Saturday and realised what they were I felt kind of sickened and disappointed at hearing it from my fellow Gers fans.

Unequivocally..... NO !!!!!!!!!! In my own personal opinion I find it very distasteful and also unbecoming of Gers and its fans. I don't believe we should stoop so low. If we had such a chequered past would you want their fans to bring it up to us ? And you say it is sung to taunt them Fraser - there are many, many of their fans who have no idea what you are singing about as they are too young - so just how much are you taunting them ?

I agree gisabeer. Fraser - look yourself in the mirror and ask yourself if you want the world to know BJK or if you want to points score over the Tims. I have a sneaking suspicion it is the latter - and if that is the case it is a very low place that you, and fellow fans that want to points score, have stooped. Why is it so relevant to let the world know NOW that BJK ? Let the man rest in peace FFS - and, more importantly, let those who were adversely affected by Torbett and his antics get on with their lives without us using it for pojnts scoring !

Fraser, You are failing to see that this manner of "oneupmanship" actually casts RANGERS FANS in a negative light because it is a very low form of trying to taunt opposing fans. Whether BJK or not, the man is long gone, the incident is so far in the past that you weren't even born and on top of that it is using a very raw, sensitive subject to try to gain the upper hand on Celtic. I have to say that sitting in amongst TBO on Saturday was great - but I was appalled when I heard the BJK chants. They serve no purpose of supporting Rangers as a club, quite the opposite IMO. And as br1ndy says, when the sheep sing about Durrant we are utterly appalled - yet we are hypocrites ourselves when it comes to the BJK chants. People in glass houses and all that......

Riordan is a ned. A well-paid ned but still a ned. He comes from Muirhouse in Edinburgh.... if the windows being cleaned were in Muirhouse they would have been using brasso instead of windex, given all the boarded up windows. Tosser !!

MON ? Are you a Tim in disguise ? :fish: I agree, it had to be either CC or Andy Webster for me. I just felt that for his first competitive game that Webster strolled the game and looked like he had been playing beside CC for years. I strongly think that CC and Webster will be our Cb pairing when Weir calls it quits - and I think it has the makings of a very solid partnership.

Cammy, the scoreline yesterday may have suggested an easy win but had it not been for a deflected free-kick we would have struggled - we were bereft of ideas prior to that deflected goal - I don't think it was as easy as it sounds - would have been interesting to see what would have happened had that free kick not gone in. We never looked in danger of losing a goal but our midfield toiled IMO. I agree in a sense about what you say in a 3-5-2 seeming more defensive - but both Whittaker and McCulloch have great engines to do the job of both attacking and defending, then you have able subs in Novo, Naismith, DMB. Agreed Re Hutton - easily the best RB in the country (can't be many better in the UK actually, the way he is playing), disagree Re Papac based on what I saw yesterday - thought he was terrible yesterday (poor distribution, offered little support to DMB, played some poor balls which could have caused trouble) - quicker Stevie Smith is back the better !! I couldnt agree more that WS is RIGHT in playing it safe with a new team and after the recent barren seasons ! The results cannot be argued against, tactics I am not so sure - which is strange to say when you have a 100% record after 5 games. One thing we CAN agree on is how amazing it is that we stand here with a 100% record and are still debating our best team and formation - this time last year there was no debate because the first 11 picked itself, and it was a very poor comparison to this season's. I am highly impressed with the spirit WS has instilled in his squad, they all WANT to play for the Gers and they are all pulling for each other - they seem to have that togetherness that the 9IAR team had. Long may it continue.

I just don't buy needing 4 defenders when playing at Ibrox though Cammy. Look at yesterday, Gretna played with one guy up front and never really made too much of an effort to get support to him - so you end up with 4 defenders marking one player - unneccessary IMO. When you add to that the engine that Whittaker and McCulloch seem to have then can play as wing-backs when we don't have the ball and midfielders when we do have the ball - and I think we also can utilise the additional man in midfield by having a creative player in there which is what we have been missing. The other thing you find in playing the 4-4-2 at Ibrox (except against better teams) is that the other team flood the midfield with 5 players - so with a 4-4-2 your midfield get very little time on the ball so you end up playing the ball back-to-front. All about opinions but I think playing 4 at the back against a team playing 4-5-1 and where their "5" aren't supporting the "1" is wasting a player at the back when he could be further forward. I have no doubts WS won't go with my formation, but I still think it would be more effective against teams who come to defend. I agree about the versatility - that is very pleasing and it actually makes our squad look a LOT bigger than it is (and it is big anyway) and means we should easily be able to cover injuries and suspensions. Also agree about the spirit in the squad - they want to play for the team, they know there is competition for places so want to play well all the time. I think right now we have a strong, if unspectacular, squad and if we can keep that together for a few years then the transfer funds available for the next couple of seasons can be spent on that little touch of quality with a better player who costs more. WS knew this pre-season needed a complete overhaul of the squad and therefore we needed quantity as much as quality - we can only be pleasantly surprised at how we seem to have also got a bit of quality with that quantity !

I would agree with that Frankie. The encouraging thing for us, at least defensively, is the average age of the starting defence (when Weir retires). McGregor - 25 Stevie Smith (hopefully) - 22 Webster - 24 Cuellar - 25 Hutton - 22 I am sure I am out with the ages by a little bit but not much. That is very encouraging - and should allow any funds for the next couple of seasons (if we can keep the same defence) to be spent on the midfield and forward line. And that is a very decent back-line too.

Not sure about the rest of it but I actually disagree about Killie being underhand. They may not have been professional but they weren't underhand - they were quite right to try to get as much as they possibly could out of Naismith but they did it the wrong way IMO. Another thing which would suggest that Killie don't do their business quite right - Jefferies said he had a player(s) in mind for a replacement but because the deal concluded so late he couldn't get them in - that would suggest bad management from Killie - they knew we wanted Naismith, they knew he wanted to come, so why not have their replacements lined up beforehand ?

Prior to yesterday I wouldn't have agreed with you Juff - but after watching Boyd and Cousin together, then watching the impact JCD had on the team, I felt that Boyd and Cousin played too similarly and that JCD, upon his arrival, immediately lifted the team and increased the tempo considerably. So in my team where I had JCD/Boyd I think I would now have Boyd/Cousin with JCD being the guaranteed starter. JCD and his directness really impressed me. One thing about the options we have that is impressive, at least to me, is that we can change the players without changing the tactics - eg being that we could go with a pairing of JCD and Boyd one game and then Novo and Cousin another - those pairings would be similar in style, which means tactics can remain the same.

Probably just as well it didn't happen as I ended up having to take the mother in law to the game - wife got the cold so couldn't go.

Was at the game today - fantastic to be back at the Brox. Was looking for Frankie and young Fraser as I was sitting right in front of the TBO - what an atmosphere they have in there - if I was living back home and had a season ticket then I would definitely be looking to get close to the TBO as they generate a great atmosphere. Sadly the performance wasn't up to much. Pass marks from me only really to Cuellar, Webster, Hutton and Ferguson, plus Darcheville when he came on (though McGregor should get pass marks too seeing as he had nothing to do) and possibly Thomson. I thought Papac was absolutely rotten. Caught out numerous times, poor distribution, never offered support to Beasley and basically, I felt, inept. Beasley was too light weight, couldn't beat his man and offered very little. Thomson I thought broke up play well but some of his distribution was poor - but he does do the dirty work well. Whittaker I thought didn't offer too much today either. I was probably most disappointed with the Cousin and Boyd partnership - I thought they both would work really well together but felt that far too often they found themselves in the same position. I watched one passage of play in the first half where the Gers were attacking and Boyd and Cousin were both waiting for the cross.... and they were no more than 3 yards away from each other. Obviously they should be forgiven for having come through the game on Tuesday night and there was always going to be a hangover - they just never really got going - but never looked in danger of losing a goal. It was funny to see that Thomson was the only player who was trying to get the team to pick up the tempo. And.... from watching Naismith for even 10 minutes I reckon we will have a very, very good addtion - he showed more willingness and, more importantly, more movement off the ball than ANY other player showed in 90 minutes. All in all though, four goals, a clean sheet, 3 points, no injuries, great atmosphere and great to be back at Ibrox !!!

Controversial I know.... although Gribz will possibly agree with me.... but right now I think with Stevie Smith out injured there is good reason to play a 3-5-2 (at least at Ibrox). I would go with the following team - with the 2 wide midfielders (Whittaker & McCulloch) obviously dropping as wing backs when we don't have the ball. The number of times Hutton gets pulled inside he may as well be playing CB anyway :fish: _________________McGregor_________________ _______Hutton______Cuellar______Weir________ Whittaker____Thomson____Ferguson____McCulloch __________________Naismith_________________ ____________JCD/Boyd________Cousin_________