UCF2008

The product on the park isn't good enough. I know that. You know that. Ally knows that. Everyone does. I expected the football to be this bad given the cicumstances. Obviously a lot of fans didn't. The point is that Ally hasn't been given ANY opportunity to build a team. Giving him that opportunity is no more of a risk than bringing in a new manager. The difference is that he deserves to be given the opportunity.

Like I said - If you focus on the negatives.... If you looked at it as - Docked ten points and still comfortably win 2nd place in SPL despite the turmoil of administration and as a result having a team of players who were clearly desperate to leave. Be a central figure in holding the club and support together during it's darkest hours. Have no pre-season and have to build a whole team in less than a month with next to no transfer kitty and without being able to tell players what league they'd be playing in until mid July. Comfortably (at least in terms of points on the board) win the league title at first time of asking with aforementioned patch-up job of a squad. ...Doesn't look so bad then does it?

Good one Where's my wages Charles?

Of course it's not underhand since he's put it out there in a press statement for all to see and pass judgement.

The difference is that football's governing bodies are free to make these decisions. Member clubs don't have right to offer financial incentives or any other favors to influence voting. It's not to our benefit or liking that Liewell and his cronies have so much influence on our national sport at the moment, but that's the state of play unfortunately.

If you only focus on the negatives his track record is poor. The same could be said for any manager. If you only focus on the positives his track record is excellent. The same couldn't be said for any manager. If you look at it objectively his track record [might be] decent with room for improvement and I agree with the OP that Ally should be given time.

That's fair enough mate. The only reason I'm wary is that bribery isn't looked too kindly upon in any business nevermind sporting circles. We don't exactly need to be handing them a stick to beat us with these days either.

It's not promotion though if every other team in the league you win is 'promoted' along with you. There is no fair outcome if it's voted through in it's entirety for next season. The only fair solution would be to restructure the top two tiers and give a seasons notice for the bottom tier restructing.

Nice sentiment, but just like I was thinking when he claimed to have offered clubs compensation for their fans boycotting at the SPL share vote last season, could it not be regarded as a bribe?

What team did we play those tactics with at a leisurely pace? Did the pace of the likes of Beasley and Darcheville not make those tactics effective enough to take us to the UEFA cup final? Beyond that did we not see the same tactics of parking the bus and countering at pace used to good effect with Davis, Naismith, Miler, Jelavic and even Aluko? This season when we break out of defence we've usually got a free run to the halfway line before we hit a brick wall. We've seldom had any opportunity to hit teams on the counter. The whole point I've been making is that we haven't been using those tactics because they would be unacceptable against this level of opposition.

Was a 2-0 away win over Blackpool a sign we were on the right track or was that just 'papering over the craics'

Ammo for the Ally bashers. No more no less.

Funny how pre-season friendly results conveniently count for something when they go against us

Achieved with teams more than capable of doing so. He had an absolute nightmare of a time with Motherwell which might be an indicator of how he copes against the odds in Scottish football. He did well at Preston with the team he inherited from Craig Brown. He did achieve promotion with Derby via a 3rd place finish and playoff, a team who were a top flight side for six years through to 2002 and had reached the championship play-offs the year before Davies took over. Having won promotion he got 6 points from 14 games in the prem he left 'by mutual consent' in the November as they sat bottom. He reached the playoffs and failed twice with Forrest, a club with a rich and proud history. That they've gone back to a manager they sacked says more about the state they're in than anything else. Assistant Manager is a management position and whether you like it or not those achievements will sit proudly on Ally's CV and count towards his management track record.

Did you say Walter Smith or Graeme Souness had no track record during 9-in-a-row? McCoist does have a track record. He's been with us at management level for 3 SPL title wins, 2 Scottish Cups, 3 League Cups and a UEFA cup final. He led us to a comfortable 2nd place in the SPL last season despite the club being in turmoil and in spite of being docked ten points. He's on the verge of winning the first title on the way back at the first time of asking despite having to build a whole team within a month last summer. What has Billy Davies achieved in 15 years that compares?

Why? What has he done that's even remotely relevant to our current set of circumstances? What do you base that claim on?

It's got nothing to do with what is or isn't fair. You must have missed or chose to ignorer my comments regarding their choice of tactics so I'll spell it out for you... Fair play to them. They're using the best choice of tactics available to them. It spoils the game as a spectator sport most of the time when either team chooses to use those tactics, but it's the result that counts. For most of the teams we've played at this level it's worked at least to the extent of keeping the scoreline respectable and at most taking a share or all of the points. For them it's only common sense. For us it's frustrating for the players, coaching staff and fans alike. Do you think when we nulified far better teams than us in Europe using the same tactics that it was a joy to watch? Sometimes it was ...on the odd occassion, but most of the time it was nerve-racking for some and like watching paint dry for the rest. It was the endeavour and achievement of results that made it worthwhile. How did the teams we played those tactics against react though. Some took it on the chin, but even some of the best of them threw the dummy out. Why? Because there's no easy solution to overcome them other than putting the ball in the back of the net. That's why.

I disagree. At times they've taken their chances better. I'll concede that much. We don't have our problems to seek.That much is obvious, but I believe that if the opposition were to be playing a more open game there wouldn't be as many complaints about the quality of football on show. Not that I'm blaming them. Afterall, what do you expect them to do to try and get a result against us? I do think it needs to be taken under consideration though when all the flak is being directed at Ally and the players.

Like I've said before. If we played the same type of football, we'd be criticised. It would be called anti-football. It's OK for them to use those tactics against us because it gets results and they deserve praise for effort and comittment required for it to work. It doesn't make it pleasing on the eye.

I don't see the relevance, but generally speaking I agree that compared to our performances our opposition have been able to raise their game against us very well indeed. I'm sure their fans are proud.

Where are they getting these other figures from? The SFL website posted an attendance of 49,463. The Record claim Strathclyde Police say the actual figure was 34,481. However what you've posted here FS seems to suggest they have no idea what figure they were given and are just making a number up off the top of their heads each time it's requested. Or am I reading it wrong?

Younger? Smarter? Skillful? Fit to play?

Rangers release Kevin Kyle by mutual consent Published on Saturday 16 March 2013 17:41 RANGERS manager Ally McCoist has confirmed that Kevin Kyle has left Rangers “by mutual consent”. The injury-plagued forward signed for Rangers last summer on a one-year contract, and scored three goals in 13 appearances. However, the former Sunderland and Hearts player saw injuries interrupt his season once again, and McCoist confirmed the 31-year-old had played his last game for the Ibrox outfit. “Kevin has left the club by mutual consent and his contract has been terminated. “He goes with our best wishes for the future. He obviously got an injury at a very bad time for him and the club as he was just getting back in the team and scoring one or two goals. “He’ll certainly be fit for the start of next season at a new club. I sat down with Kevin and told him that next season the club would be going in a different direction and we thanked him and wished him well. “He was absolutely fine. The big fella has been in the game for long enough to understand and he’s a great lad. “I’ve got no doubt Kevin Kyle will be playing football somewhere next season and scoring goals.”

Aye, big honest Kev. Just like when we signed him and he's telling reporters stone faced that his friends and family are excited for him but to him it's just another job.

Simetimes when player is struggling for confidence it's worth persisting. Maybe a goal or two will come for them and make all the difference. Maybe the player will look at a rest as being dopped which won't exactly do wonders for their lack of confidence.