maineflyer

Unforgivable comment about Broadfoot. There can be no context in which such a comment should ever be uttered by an international team manager. George Burley would be as well packing it in now because he clearly isn't the man for the job. If Kirk walked away it would be nothing more than Burley deserved - he has been utterly compromised by yet another idiot Scotland manager. Bertie Mk II.

There is little doubt in my circles that the Lurgan bigot contributed to his own downfall. Drunk and agressive are two characteristics that can be expected to end in tears, especially considering what he does for a living and what had happened at Celtic park earlier in the day. The threats to Novo are just the last in a long, long line of bully boy tactics employed by the great unwashed. Every time these muppets gather together enough contrived victimisation, their automatic reaction is to threaten and attack. This has now become so ingrained in their community that it's a significant surprise when they don't lash out at someone. The Huddleboard should be closed permanently and the perpetrators castrated with two very blunt bricks. I'll even volunteer to do it although I couldn't promise not to need a few attempts to complete the job.

So if I understand your opening comments, what you're basically saying is that we should all be won over simply because he's there. Stunning logic indeed. And why so embarrassed about not liking him because he played for Celtic? I have no problem whatsoever admitting distaste for someone wearing the Rangers jersey after playing for that mob and "your kid" might just be a tad less inhibited about his feeling than his father.

The questions was "Has Miller won over the fans?" Obviously, those who had already been won over are now even more secure in their position. They have now moved on to discuss how well they think he played in one game, albeit an important one. But their views surely count for little in such a debate anyway. Since those who didn't want him back fell into two camps - those who didn't want soiled goods and those who just didn't rate him - these would appear to be the defining factors in any rehabilitation. I certainly consider him to be damaged goods. He played for Celtic. I'm a Rangers supporter and I don't welcome those who have played for our rival. It's an unreconstructed attitude but it's what I feel and I'm inclined to justify it to no one. That is a point of view that will not change, no matter he should scored a thousand goals. I also don't see much to rate him as a player. He's a striker and his goals ratio is pitiful, wherever he has played. That is a fact that bestrides his entire playing career and, as such, simply isn't open to question. He scored two goals against Celtic on Sunday and I was glad of them but that changed nothing more than the result in that particular game. He remains a low scoring forward with a dreadful first touch and mediocre distribution. His one discernible facet is the much-vaunted willingness to run all day and chase lost causes, a feature that, while admirable in itself, ranks fairly low in the traits of great strikers through the years. He adds energy but little else. So no, once the dust has settled I see little to change my mind that we could have signed a far better striker for the money we spent on Miller and Lafferty. There seems to be a tendency to jump on wagons where Miller is concerned, perhaps even circling those wagons at the same time. I have a notion it has become fashionable to display personal reasonableness by seeking to accommodate Miller. The new touchy feely inclusive New Rangers. Which is fair enough for those who feel the need. personally I'll always see him in those green and white hoops and he'd have to be a whole lot better player to overcome the emotions that raises for me - even then he struggle to gain acceptance.

Tough time to ask that question after he's scored two goals at Porkhead. The fact remains that those are the only two goals so far and one was a tap in - even given the importance of today's victory, it's little enough to write home about. Anyone who draws his plaudits by how much he runs around is always going to struggle for my vote. I've seen many good and some great players in a Rangers shirt over the years and I don't remember one of them having to rely on how much they could run around for their reputation. Van Basten was the best striker I ever saw and he never played headless chicken to stake his place in any team. Miller cost over �£2m, scores very few goals and has the first touch of a carthorse. I was jumping around like a madman when his goals went in today but that's a hell of a long way from thinking it was a good idea to sign him. I didn't rate him first time around and I wasn't alone, I don't rate him in a Scotland shirt and I certainly don't rate his performances so far in this Rangers side. Has Miller won over the fans? Leaving the emotions of today to one side for a moment - not this one, not yet, and not unless he actually earns it.

Nonsense. I was talking about what he thinks - not what I think. Please read before launching.

I think Cousin's attitude would have been a whole lot better if JCD hadn't got first shout most weeks. That might not be much of a justification but I'm sure he doesn't feel he's got the recognition he deserved from Smith.

You describe perfectly the reason I despise Murray. I regard him as he regards the ordinary Rangers fan, with contempt.

Frankie, your point about players attending supporters' function is spot on. Previous managers insisted on this. Jock Wallace in particular knew the value of it. But things have changed and the message from the very top is a very different one in New Rangers. I saw this point made in another forum and unashamedly offer it here as an astute example of what is wrong at Ibrox and the contempt in which we are held .... Compare and contrast Bheast FC Chairman waxing lyrical about his support and the ''Speshul Relayshunship'' they have with both Man Ure and Villearreal and how they are looking forward to the support getting on together. Rangers FC Chairman goes on National TV telling all that we,the support,are the reason he can't sell the club after the events of Manchester,even though he knows fine well the charges against us are a pack of lies.

It's a sad fact of life, but a fact nevertheless, that players never feel they owe fans. The great majority offer media-speak platitudes but I seriously doubt if there is a player who loses sleep over what fans think. They worry about what their agent is doing, they worry about their next contract, and they worry whether they're getting a game at the weekend. They worry about who their wife is shagging and they just might worry about their relationship with the rest of the squad but they do not worry about fans. And therein lies the problem for the average supporter. We are driven by an entirely different set of values from the players but we still delude ourselves into thinking it is otherwise. I think you're right, they do bloody owe us. But I also know that this is not a view shared among the players or the management. And that is one big reason why we were not in the CL draw today.

Wasting your time mate. What do they care about fans or their opinions?

I was kinda hoping we wouldn't have place in Sunday's team for a headless chicken like Kenny Misser. That way it would go easier on both Rangers and the waste of money.

I don't think it's entirely fair to say players suffer "at the hands of" supporters at this club. I've followed the team since the sixties and I think players mostly get the reaction from the support that they earn. Good performances attract adulation while poor performances are treated with disdain. Lack of effort is almost always treated with the contempt it deserves. Alan Hutton was a classic example of a player who reaped what he sowed. When he played like a dork he got pelters but when he played like a fullback he got universal praise. The others you mention did little enough to deflect any criticism. Football fans are not all the same and some will be more inclined to leap to decisions in either direction. Some will obviously judge players on different criteria and some will simply go along with what the guy sitting next to them is saying. However, on the whole, I think you'll struggle to find an example of a Rangers player who was treated badly by the fans while playing well.

Of course it's always possible that the current discontent has more to do with a sustained decline in standards and performance at the club we focus so much of our attention upon. There's a chance that attitudes are hardening because there is good cause. If the internet makes any contribution, it may be to accentuate and accellerate feelings in both directions, discontent and euphoria, simply because it is such an immediate and effective means of communication. However, it is interesting to think that while Rangers web forums have been variously condemning chairman and managers for years (and with some cause), there is still such a large body of opinion amongst our supporters that our leadership can do no wrong. On that basis, whatever your own brand of allegiance, it could easily be argued that, far from sending ripples across our pond, the internet has had the opposite effect. Perhaps the internet actually serves to provide an open but unobtrusive place for the expression of discontent. A bit like a padded cell - everyone knows there is someone in there screaming his head off and pounding the walls but you only see and hear what's going on if you choose to go there, so the majority remain blissfully unaware. Instead of the internet magnifying protest, it may actually diminish it by generally restricting debate to that specific arena, instead of among the wider support. People come on forums to express views and let off steam, whereas in days of yore they did it on the terraces. Of course, whatever we think the effect of the internet, underlying the whole schimozzle is still what we see with our own eyes. Some good but a lot more that is unacceptable for Rangers.

You might even be entitled to think Walter Smith would have some idea what his best team was going to be BEFORE he signed new players. Otherwise, on what basis is he signing them? Only Walter would be allowed to get away with this.

Maybe I missed it and if I did then fair enough, I'm wrong - but can you give one instance when Walter has actually said he got it wrong against the Lithuanians or, by implication, in his signing priorities before that game? When Walter says he thinks it's time to move on, I think he means that he thinks it's time to move on. I don't think he is saying anything about having got it wrong.

I refer you to the forum rules........ 1. Abuse/Insults: I will not stand for any Gersnet member being abused or insulted. 2. Unsubstantiated allegations about any subject: all subjects can be debated but unless you have proof, let's keep everything on the level. 3. Respect: The best thing about about this forum is that all opinions are found in all forums which creates interesting discussions on a wide variety of topics. That means you will disagree with others on a daily basis. Please accept opposing opinions will exist so take them in the good faith they are offered. .... and I suggest that throwing these oneliners around isn't exactly promoting showing profound analysis or respect for others, whose debate you've contributed almost nothing to. I think I make a reasonable effort on most occasions to make my case on any matter I participate in. However, when it is simply going to involve repeating what has already been said, I see little point in gilding the lily. But since you want to hurl abuse, I might take a moment to say that you could take a look at the motivation behind your own posts. In the short time I've posted on here I don't exactly remember you setting the heather on fire.

Who mentioned grovelling? Surely an acknowledgement that they got it wrong would have built a few bridges?

That pretty much sums up how I feel about it too. And now the dust has settled, neutral has been engaged again by the dynamic few who entrust the RST to their own keeping. It's a bad business.

That's all very well but I really wasn't fishing for a personal vindication. I know how committed you are and have been. What I wrote in my previous post was factual and no amount of contrary statements will change that. I did indeed make suggestions and ask questions - and I am still waiting for a response - except for the one single exception when the current chairman wrote to me to assure me that communication was the new priority and that we would see the results of this very soon. Now, Mr Smith is a decent chap and might even have believed what he wrote but the results over the last few months have clearly shown that in fact nothing at all has changed. This isn't good enough from the Rangers Trust. Apart from the fact that the previous board probably wouldn't have tolerated me and that I live much too far away to attend meetings, I would like nothing more than to have played a part. However, since the ridiculous attempt to sweep under the carpet the recent shenanigans and deny the ordinary member any credible facts about the aims and intentions of the Trust, even this wishful thinking has ebbed away. Rather like your own perhaps? Regarding the bannings, you know that my point was the mistake of allowing the overlap between FF and the RST. Why did this happen and why did the Trust not have a forum on its own website that could have been exclusive to Trust members and therefore the perfect platform for soliciting and receiving member opinion. At the moment, it looks like the Trust is some kind of subsect of Follow Follow and that is most inappropriate, with FF admin deciding what can or cannot be posted about an entirely separate and unrelated fans' organisation.

And I completely disagree with just about everything you have ever said about Gersave, here and elsewhere. There we'll have to leave it. I will only add that the outcome seems to be reinforcing my point of view, not yours.

Let's not talk about it any more. Aye Walter, as long as you're over it I suppose we'll have to be. You know, a simple apology for the gross mistakes the rest of us can see clearly would have been more welcome but the old fool just can't wait to sweep it under the carpet.

It must be selective memory Frankie. I was one of several RST members who volunteered suggestions to the Trust. When posted on the RST website these were generally ignored completely, leaving only that other chosen RST medium, the FF forum, as an option for communication. Of course, as you well know, in recent times even a mention of the RST on that forum invariably resulted in life bans. This happened to over forty long term FF members with more than 1000 posts, as well as many others. The RST removed itself from its membership, not he other way round. You also know that there is no way this is going to improve until and unless the Trust becomes a truly independent and democratic organisation. Or have I got it wrong?

Watch yer backside when you land then. In the early days I felt so positive about the RST that I couldn't wait to pay my �£100 to become a life member. I really thought the board members had the chance to speak for the fans and against the slide that's plagued us since Advocaat left. Then nothing happened, except certain individuals pursuing personal glory instead of acting in the interests of their members. Frankie knows this is true. The only thing I'm aware of disagreeing with him on was the Gersave escapade. Some saw it as a means of achieving influence, I saw it as a ball and chain to make sure we could never act freely and independently. I've never accused all RST board members of misrepresenting their responsibilities but enough of them did to render the exercise ineffective. BTW, it's not being negative to want something to work, or to point out when it doesn't. But that's only an opinion of course.

Yes, I could but for the moment I choose not to. There are good people involved who would like to keep their powder dry until preparations are more advanced. By the nature of the beast, it's best understood when it happens.