Tannochsidebear

Who wrote that ET article please Ian? It actually makes a lot of sense!

I find your use of cricketing analogies fascinating, and fully accurate as well, and like the way you have used that to make your point about some of our young players and how we have a fixed mindset about coaching. Both football and cricket are in danger of being over-coached. Both are pretty simple games that the use of coaches for every position is trying to over-complicate. A generation ago football clubs had a manager (who coached also), an assistant (sometimes referred to as the trainer) and that was about it. Now we have usually a first team coaching staff of at least 4, with the manager, two assistants and a specialist GK coach. In cricket you had one coach and a captain who chose the team and tactics. Now when you see the balcony there is a whole host of coaches, backroom staff, computers and all sorts. And yet it seems, for all the coaches in the world and all the in-depth data available and tactics, formations, etc, simple mistakes keep coming in what seems like ever-increasing numbers. On Saturday our coaching staff somehow thought putting Jig into a game where we were winning comfortably (and our opponents had pretty much given up and were awaiting their medals and presentation party) was a good idea and make a few positional and tactical changes that only worked negatively for our team, allowed our opponents back into the match and ultimately cost us victory. In cricket, England decided not to pick the recognised spinner in the squad for a pitch where it was certain to turn, were spun out in the second innings, couldn't bowl out the Windies second time around and were beaten from a winning position. Again. An incoming coach like McCall should be able to look at the players he has at his disposal and find the formation that suits them best to express themselves in their best position. It seems we look at the CV of our players and try to play the most well known ones into a fixed formation without much thought of if they are the best pick for that position and proposed style of play, and that of our opponents. It shouldn't matter if they are Captain, if they are under-performing they are out. Simple. Anyone can wear an armband and call "heads", not anyone can play centre half, or opening batsman.

I would have said 20 different opinions myself!!

Given that this thread has been hi-jacked into something absolutely nothing to do with our club, can it please be shut down/moved to another board? Don't come on here to read pro-SNP propaganda thanks.

Heard a rumour recently (completely unsubstantiated so huge pinch of salt required) that in amongst the "secret" tv deal Lawwell & Doncaster done with Sky when we went down to the 4th tier was an absolute certainty that Rangers would be back in the top league for 15-16, even if it meant league reconstruction, and that the Sky deal and financial payments depended on it. Can't see them, as stupid as they are, making a promise they simply could not keep, but they were very desperate at the time. Time will tell if results don'gt go our way over the next 4 weeks.

If McCulloch wants to help our promotion bid then he should sign a one game contract with Hearts for tomorrow, a two game contract for QotS, before moving on to Hibs and then Motherwell. If Jig played at CH in these games AGAINST Rangers, we would win comfortably.

Both players can claim to have been absolutely first class up until they both got injured early into their Rangers careers. What they might have done had they avoided those injuries (and I agree you can add Durrant to that list) is just painful to think about. That turn Mols perfected that defenders knew was coming but still could not do anything about it was simply breathtaking, while Negri's penalty box instinct and accuracy of shooting was sensational. Both (again you can add Durrant in) were nothing like the same player when they returned, and while Mols continued to play for a few years for us was nothing like as good as before. In fact his final year seen him go over a year without a goal outside of Glasgow (only away goal was at Firhill) and was a meer shadow of the player we signed. Were they both a flash in the pan at the absolute peak of their game in the short time we seen them pre-injury, or would they have went on to become greats, who knows?

Having been at all of the European matches you mention from 7 years ago, and also been too many times to the three domestic grounds that will potentially see us visit before the end of May, I can say with some certainty that there is no contest as far as excitement and quality goes! Absolutely nothing beats an away European trip to see The Rangers, and the trips that season were absolutely first class. I was at 9 of our 10 away European games that season (missed Zeta as was still on family hols), and it really was a fabulous season for a Rangers fan right up to kick off in Manchester. I can say with some degree of certainty that I am not looking foward to matches against QotS, Hibs or Motherwell with even 1% of the anticipation of any of the 9 Euro trips from 2007-08. It just cant be compared.

One rule in football I would change is that no player should miss a Cup Final due to suspension. Any suspension for either a red card in the SF, or a totting up of Yellows, should be carried forward to the next season/games. I think it is grossly unfair for a player to miss a World Cup Final, or even a domestic cup final, due to suspension. Most players may play all their career without the chance of playing in a cup final, and therefore shouldnt be denied a cup final place, that they will remember for the rest of their life long after they have retired. Also, from the fans/spectators POV they have paid out a lot of money for tickets to a cup final (or tv subscription for armchair viewers), and should not be denied the spectacle of the two teams being at full strength and putting on a show. Yes, you can argue the what ifs surrounding last man tackles in the last minute of the SF etc and those players dont deserve to be in the final, which of course has some merit, but my argument I believe is stronger that the players deserve the chance to play, the clubs deserve the chance to be at full strength, and the fans deserve to see the best players those two teams have to offer. By all means double the suspension instead, but have a moritorium for the final.

I agree with Zappa in so much as I really dont see it in Allan. I havent been impressed with Hibs in any of our meetings with them, and he hasn't stuck out as a player from what I saw. 4 games is not a lot to judge someone on granted, but from what is written about him he should stick out head and shoulders above the rest like Lewis McLeod done with us, and I dont think he has.

Strong line up with 2 of the Ashley 5 as well as Gasparatto, Hutton, Aird, Gallagher, and Temps. Hopefully can get a good win here with some good performances from those mentioned above.

Now i didnt watch the game but I did watch the post match plus the SSN clips and while you couldn't argue it was a handball and red card, it really is laughable that we are not hearing anything about swings and roundabouts, evens itself out etc, given the amount of breaks the bheasts have had this season. Do they forget that they would have probably been papped out of Europe entirely if Legia had been rightly fined instead of expelled, instead of getting about £10M of income from the EL groups and a Milan match? Do they forget the decisions from the previous round that went in their favour? Do they forget that in the same ICT match yesterday, ICT were also denied a stonewall penalty (haven't even seen this but am assured it was) and also Brown should have been ordered off for a (yet another!) terrible challenge on an ICT player having already been booked. Stevie McLean is no friend of ours, and is rarely able to get through 90 minutes without a few dodgy decisions that go against us. But he is about to find out that his career is now ruined in Scottish football because he is solely to blame for denying the bheasts their shoe-in treble that they have now managed to completely feck up 3 years running. Not the terrible passback from Matthews leaving Gordon in no-mans land for the penalty, not Van Dick being absolutely nowhere near his man at the ICT first goal, and not their mis-firing strikers who couldnt convert some of their numerous (according to Delia) easy chances. And certainly not Delia's fault for not being tactically outdone by Yogi Hughes, as Yogi so excellently summarised in his post-match interview that they came with their game plan, knew celtic wouldnt have guessed their system and they stuck to it brilliantly. Nope, it is all McLean's fault. I can see his officiating in the lower leagues for the forseeable, and hope that means he wont get our games also. And of course it is not a bad decision, it is blatant cheating on sectarian grounds according to the bheasts. I haven't had this much of a laugh since the last time.

Spot on we are BH, and again I would say it will do us no good. Our diplomatic silence, a major failing of the Murray era, looks to be rearing it's very ugly head again.

I have, a classless buffoon of the highest order. Spineless, petulant, childish, arrogant are some adjectives that spring to mind. That he was not master of his own destiny was absolutely clear. Doncaster while incompetent was at least honest and respectful and could debate fairly. Regan was just an utter buffoon. Of course it could be that he knew he was on the wrong side of the argument and couldn't possibly win with us, but his behaviour was outrageously unprofessional. In my profession I have, like you BH, met an awful lot of professional and not so professional people, but just about everybody you meet professionally can converse properly and discuss matters in a manner befitting the occasion. Regan was just about the least professional person I have ever met in 25 years around business people. I would genuinely have him at the bottom of my list, and the list runs into hundreds, probably thousands of business meetings. I can give him no lower possible ranking, he was really that totally unprofessional. In fact I would go so far as to say you are the only person I have met who has met SR and thought him professional.

So just about every club has had a say in this with one glaring omission. Is there anybody there to fight our fans corner or even add to our fellow clubs derision of officialdom, or are we all still stuck up to our knees in onerous contracts and fit and proper paperwork?

Another belter from the 07-08 season was where we were not allowed to play a rearranged game for an International weekend because the Scotland squad had a get-together (no game) and were not allowing us to play.

I know playing with Jig and Miller is like playing with nine men, but to leave them out and not replace them is taking it too far Frankie!!!

I am not sure what games you are referring to Rousseau, but we have been playing with a midfield three for the last few games with Murdoch, Shiels and Law all playing in there. We have been playing without width and that has been a big part of the problem as QotS and Livvy both crammed the midfield and played very deep, giving us no space to work with. They hunted in packs and closed down very well, and in Livvy's case the terrible bumpy pitch helped them in this regard as it took a couple of touches to control the bobbling ball and by that time two players were on top of us. The difference in shape has come from what defenders we are playing, along with who the fourth midfield player is and where they play. Jig/Zaliukas are both negative CB and therefore we dont get the ball moved quickly enough from the back, and neither can pass forward with any accuracy. Mohsni for all his defensive faults likes to play quickly and bring the ball into midfield giving us an extra man in there at times when we have possession, which has helped free Wallace and others find space. When we have played Temps he has been stuck wide and has been denied any real support and is usually closely marked as opponents know he is our out ball to create and mark accordingly, and in all honesty he has not played very well either, usually not helped by being put six foot in the air on a regular basis with the referee offering no protection.

There were flares at the start of the match, and several fireworks that were thrown from the stand out onto the trackside towards where the Police were stood filming/watching them. The fireworks were very loud bangs and I jumped out my skin a few times when they went off!!! The stupid wee boys were hiding behind a Union Bears banner and probably thought they would be safe within the crowd. Clearly the Police just waited until the game was done and nicked them on the way out. UB have been warned many times over about this and continue to allow it from within their group of school-age children who are either members or groupies. I am happy that anyone setting off flares and fireworks will, if convicted, get football banning orders until they grow up. That should be enough punishment.

It is hard to think back to that second season squad of DA's and not cry when you see where we are now. That was the last season the football we played was worthy of our gallant pioneers.

Forgot about him Ian. He looks a good young player as well and I would be happy to see him get some game time also.

dB, it was Hibs we played the 5 man defence with Jig/Mohsni and it worked well as we had two central defenders to cover for Jig. I like the look of most of your selection as well, and think Temps would be much better in a free number 10 role behind the strikers than as a winger, he just doesnt have the tricks/pace to play out there IMO but he is a good clever player and I think the more space centrally would do him good. Unfortunately I also think this is where Vickic is best suited, so we have to pick between the two. In fact you could add Shiels to the argument for the number 10 role as he has done very well in central midfield and could be even more creative further forward. I agree with giving Hardie a chance up front, and would play him alongside Clark, dropping the abysmal Miller who has contributed nothing. Bell McGregor Mohsni Zaliukas Walsh Shiels Murdoch Wallace Vuckic Hardie Clark Dropping the trio of failure that has been McCulloch/Law/Miller right through the spine of our team is something I have wanted for a long time now that we have finally realised that Black/Boyd/Daly have all failed, and thankfully injuries to Foster/Smith have curtailed their attempts to weaken our team still further. Law still has something about him that you can see there is a decent player in there, but his lack of desire and inconsistency means you cannot rely on him to put in a shift every week. Perhaps a couple of games on the bench would make him realise what he is missing and get him to up his game to a more acceptable level.

I should also have said that I agree with you Frankie in that we have actually been playing a midfield three for the last few games and haven't seen any Dortmund like football, making me think it might just be all about the quality of player we use in those positions more than the formation itself that may be at fault. Interesting to note that this season Dortmund have been dreadful, and were in the bottom three well into the season before climbing to current mid-table mediocrity. Not sure how that could have happened if Klopp (and his three man midfield) was all he/they is/are made out to be, but as I dont take the slightest bit of interest in German football, I will defer to the OP's seemingly well-founded knowledge of the game there.

Fixed that for you mate

I find it staggeringly incompetent that Regan has come out with this interview in the middle of the process. Like BH, I have also had the opportunity to meet with Regan on official football business, but found him to be the very opposite of what BH thought of him. Evasive, dishonest, disrespectful. Fit and proper for his position? Not a chance. Regan is clearly out of his depth in the role and brings nothing to the party, a fact we have seen born out whenever he gets involved. From the lack of sponsorship, the debacle in sacking Levein as Scotland manager, his handling of our administration crisis, reconstruction. That is just for starters off the top of my head. An absolute failure in everything he has touched. But for him to do a prejudicial interview in an ongoing case of such importance to the country's most famous and successful club is so ill-advised it should be a sacking offence. Another one. Another Teflon Tim. Ultimately he will do what is good for celtic once Peter tells him what that is, and fudge the facts to suit his answer, just as he has done many times before. That may actually be that he approves King, as celtic cannot afford another season of dropping ST sales, broadcasting income, etc. Interest from their fans has been declining at a faster rate than ever before and they actually need us back in the top flight and seen as back to being a potential rival to generate any sort of meaningful attendances at CP for next season and beyond. As we know only too well, it is all about the Rangers for ra poops. That one sole fact may be the single biggest influence in whether King is allowed to take up our Chairmanship or not, irrespective of arguments about SA courts, oldco board seats etc. Our game is sadly just that corrupt.