maineflyer

Sorry, it's not personal but it looks like more work than I can be arsed with to read all this. My post simply doesn't justify the time you've taken to reply. But since you're not real you obviously won't read this either.

You know your Walter alright. That midfield will guarantee another defeat.

Wasn't questioning the decision, merely interested in the timing. There was no complaint involved. Remember, the short-termism you refer to was set in train by the same people (presumably) who took the recent McCoist decision so it's not as if it was down to a blinding realisation that we were running out of time. There's also the possibility I suppose that it was always the plan to make the announcement now .... but somehow that doesn't ring true since there are all sorts of reasons why it would have made more sense to confirm McCoist's appointment at just about any other time.

Me neither, Jelavic and Healy could be the ticket tomorrow.

I keep wondering about the timing of this announcement. Sure, the OF result, the season tickets, blah, blah. But McCoist's appointment was surely never in real doubt unless the club was sold (an how we'll celebrate as the squadron of pigs soars overhead, trailing red blue and white smoke from their arses) so why make an announcement that simply had to have been cooking for a few weeks at least - contracts don't get concluded overnight at this level. Could it be that McCoist wasn't prepared to turn his back on Sky without some security that the expected Rangers job was a reality. I don't doubt that Rangers would always come before Sky for McCoist but in the current climate at Rangers he couldn't have assumed too much and the Sky job was a one-off too. I fancy he (or at least his agent) politely twisted a couple of arms and said put up or shut up. Where would the season tickets have been sold to then?

This should be a standard expectation at all times. Players do their thing on the park, period.

It's better but the problem with that is it still leaves a weak Whittaker on the right and while Foster can get forward, he's not the best defender. He is however a solid improvement on Whittaker. As we saw a week ago, the threat from celtic comes mainly down our right flank and if we give them as easy a time again I fear the result will be no different. I'd be tempted to play Bougherra at right back with Foster in front of him and SDOW and Bartley at CB.

Christ, can you imagine that scrote at the BBC?

Our fullbacks are the problem against celtic. Can't get forward, can't handle their wide play. Whittaker is a liability most games, against celtic he was a self-destruct button. Papac was simply an out ball for Weir and a punt up the park. If you can solve this weakness and you can get our fullbacks to attack you'll stem much of their play going forward. I can't see how we do it without different personnel.

That looks like a reasonable shout - I could agree with that.

So many words, so little achieved.

We're still very vulnerable and the only question for me is whether they can be so ill-prepared twice in a row. The margin between the teams on the 20th was so wide that you have to remain pessimistic it can easily be closed. Of course we can win it but, on the actual evidence available, only wishful thinking could predict a Rangers win.

..... and most have not, which is the case with the vast majority of footy forum users. It's not a club, it's just an excuse to express opinion without the need for personal contact. These forums are real to the extent they exist but when judging user conduct we need to remember it's not 'really real' It's petty I know but how do you judge Totti without knowing if he's male or female, British or foreign, an english speaker or not, tall or short, intellectually able or otherwise, smiling or scowling when he types, etc. You don't, none of us do. If we say Totti caused offence it's is probably taking offence beyond the sense it was intended. I guess the most that could be said is he/she broke certain forum rules. I've no more than a mild passing interest in this to be honest. It just happens to be the only thing worth commenting on at the moment.

Real people? Surely this is just a discussion between faceless usernames who never meet except in the ether of Gersnet. Real people meeting face to face would never have the same exchanges. But I love it when you insist "we're" all real, it shows real commitment to the cyber cause. What got banned here is a username called Totti who, for all anyone knows, could still be posting here under another username, displaying altogether different characteristics. There is no reality here, only degrees of pretense .... like "winning" the debate. Are there prizes?:)

It's a pity. Not that he was banned if he deserved it but because his contribution was refreshingly different from the mainstream dullness usally on offer. Too many people seem to believe this is about discussion with real people rather than anonymous usernames and try to win approval by boring us to death and desperately agreeing with anyone who will click the Thanks button. Totti could be too aggressive in his language but nevertheless contributed more genuine opinion than half a dozen of our fellow members with literally tens of thousands of posts between them. Which is probably why they were only too keen to criticize his every post.

Does anyone here actually bank with Lloyds?

I haven't been near FF in about three years, the mediocrity was overwhelming. RM is fast approaching the same dreadful standard. VB is a completely different kind of forum and bears no resemblance to these other two tragedies.

I'm just surprised they managed to spell 'director' properly. Well done bluedell.

Fucking BBC bastards. Could there be a more bent pro-Celtic/catholic/oirish/republican shitehouse?

The general recognition of Weir's contribution is so typical of Rangers fans. Despite some of the nonsense posted on forums by people intent on pursuing one agenda or another, in my experience Rangers fans always appreciate the real thing. The fact there has been so much negative comment in recent years is because there has been so much to comment negatively about. If the reaction to our captain appears to buck the trend it's because our captain himself has bucked the growing trend of mediocrity that is sweeping over the club. Almost alone in the current squad, SDOW shows the character of a Rangers player. The goal for Rangers is to have more of the same on the park at the same time. We'll have mended most of Murray's damage if that happens.

I don't think the link between grand announcements and winning games is the real issue. We've done plenty of winning in Murray's time but clubs like Rangers are morethan a collection of results. It's not overstating the truth to say we have a culture and a belief system, an ethos, a self-image .... and this is where the bullshit of the Murray era has done it's greatest damage. We were grand long before Murray but it was in our hearts and heads. I felt the backcloth to yesterday's announcement looked cheap, and it did, but it was cheap only in relation to the veneer of Murray's new age.

Agree, we don't need this if we're going to have any hope of stopping the rot.

Whoever should have made the announcement, the affair looked cheap and thrown together. It doesn't particularly bother me but it was interesting to see how we've gone from grand to ground floor. Maybe it's as well to keep this low key.

Sporting 2 - 1 Rangers

Whittaker is too poor a player to blame on only one other - I don't see how Davis could singlehandedly account for the dreadful performances routinely turned in by Mr Shaky. There must be other contributors and you should name them.