maineflyer

I made and still make no claims on ultimate effectiveness but I think unilaterally denying credibility is over the top and, to be fair, entirely subjective. To leverage a result is an obvious strategy - there are only two questions, do we understand the objectives and will the strategy deliver them? I believe the answer is yes, therefore the strategy is certainly credible. Bluedell doesn't believe it will work so for him the strategy isn't credible.

Ham and egg syndrome? Same fatal outcome?

There are too many successful examples of first time managers to argue that it can't happen. There are all too many examples of first time managers failing to recommend it. There are also way too many experienced managers who both fail and succeed to argue that experience is really a useful basis for prediction. How much money does Mancini or Ancelotti need in order to prove that money doesn't always make a successful manager. Surely what matters is that you only judge the winners at the finishing line and that there simply are no guarantees .... oh, and that the opinion of supporters is seldom either useful or noticed. Also that the convergence of man, opportunity and a network of circumstances too complex to describe or understand is the real and only recipe for success. On that basis we can pontificate all we like in the make-believe world of forums but not a single poster here or anywhere else has a scooby how McCoist will turn out - if we could accept that then our views might seem a whole lot less conceited, especially mine!

Bain says Walter is the most successful manager in the history of the club. Fuxxake, even if he believes it he should have enough judgement not to make such an arse of himself. ....... there again I suppose he has the qualifying distinction of actually BEING an arse.

I just saw it on the tv news. Talk about low key, it looked like they'd squeezed into the cleaners cupboard.

That's more of a reason to change things now. The alternative will be two managers, neither having real authority.

So why not appoint McCoist right away?

Can't agree with you. There have been people putting forward a strategy to buy into for several seasons, the problem is the unwillingness of so many people to do the buying, preferring instead to soldier on under the guise of self-interest, loyalty, the Rangers Way, or whatever. I refer to routine calls to boycott ST sales, protests inside and outside Ibrox, and so on. I've posted for years that ST sales are the only practical way of levering the owner and executive. No one needs to buy in but what you can't say is there nothing to buy into.

Well, I think the club has missed it's chance to find a new direction but the unresolved ownership probably means it's as well not to waste new blood at this time. In the meantime there seems to be no alternative but to suck it up yet again and wish Ally McCoist the very best of luck in his new role. Why do I keep thinking this is the club's way of preparing us for news that there will be no Craig Whyte takeover? Why make this announcement at this particular time? Do they think we believe we saw the end of our season last Sunday and need to do something to raise hopes for next season if ST sales are not to collapse entirely ... that would certainly be the Rangers way, to snow the fans rather than engage honestly with us.

I remember a commentator saying Diouf had a free role. Immediately thought, bollocks, he hasn't been given any instructions.

Mon the boors!

I accept this well-directed accolade and return the compliment by agreeing with your earlier comment on the significance of this news for the takeover.

Nah, it was just a pedantic prick and some boorish bastards having a go at each other. Oh and there was some name-calling as well for a while. Of course I stayed right out of it.

There goes our hopes of a fresh start. I've got all the time in the world for Ally McCoist and I'm pleased for him ... but I put Rangers first and I cannot believe this is the best move for the club. Easiest yes but not the best. So so disappointing, I'm sure this just locks in the status quo.

More than a moment in the case of said moron ... and by his father by all accounts ... and, by all those accounts and then some, he may have more to fret over than the police knocking on his door.

There's no doubt in my mind that you're correct. I think we're also seeing the obvious truth that there is only ever one manager. We might see McCoist in a special light but in the dressing room there will only be one manager, Walter Smith, and the negative effect his leaving announcement will never be shored up by anything McCoist does to boost morale. The fact that Smith chose to repeat what I think everyone else saw as a huge error of judgement in 1997/98 tells us much about him as a manager. It's very disappointing when your heroes show their flaws.

Can you imagine being in McCoist's position inches from being the manager of Rangers? How could you do anything that might jeopardize that outcome? The closer you get the less you'll do anything to rock the boat. Then it begins to dawn on you that the season is actually going down the toilet and you're part of the failure? Close but possibly not close enough ... and he's seen it all before. He must be shitting himself.

Steve Clarke is too much of a Celtic man more like. Kenny Miller I could just about take but a Celtic supporter in the Rangers managers office, no thanks.

Why bother? You'd only dismiss them as having no fight.

Bobby Shearer used to do the same and he was made of fight. So did Tam Forsyth. You don't need your mouth to be committed.

It was your handbag ... and you know it. The fact I was caught with it and your credit card had a few interesting extras charged to it is no need to start throwing your weight around here mate. Fucking admin mafia.

Ha ha, have you never seen an argument then. Bmck and I have no argument with each other - he's too smart and I'm too busy.

He's a good player and one of our few real assets .... but he's also the type of player who needs a break from the action every now and then. He's not a player who can sustain form throughout an unbroken season and that's not insight, just simple observation. I've called him a lazy bastard on occasion but I doubt that's true. He'll turn out every week without complaint but his form will always dip unless rested from time to time. Just how he is.

Leaving aside the issue of resources and money to spend, the new manager is as much about change and momentum as it is about being a football guru. We need a manager every bit as much as we need a tactical genius. Souness taught us that and PLG confirmed it. It needs to be about energising the staff, the dressing room and the support. McCoist cannot do it, regardless of what any of us think of him, because as the manager-in-waiting his appointment will always be low-impact. Personally, I wouldn't hesitate to appoint Gough as manager and Ian Ferguson as his assistant. The counter-argument will be that Gough has little or no management experience but he's a leader, a football man, a Rangers man and has the character for the job. That would do for me and I have no doubt whatsoever that the appointment would electrify the support. However, if we don't have a new owner by the summer it won't matter if we appoint Mickey mouse to the managers office. Murray will never allow Gough to be appointed anyway, which is the best recommendation anyone could have.

:grin::smile::yawn: