Big Spliff

Can't really comment on DF, although if we offered him a new deal it would seem we rated him? As for Adam; I'm afraid I'm still annoyed at his (supposed) new-found fitness and weight loss which he (supposedly) achieved during his loan spell. If true it raises questions I'm not comfortable with i.e. Rangers' fitness regime, Charlie's attitude etc. I think Adam is an OK player but he just looks so fooking slow and lazy sometimes, hence the link to the points above.

mf - you are depressing. Here's the extent of the back slapping (which if coming across as smug is certainly not my intenetion); people wrote stuff; it got put into a nice report and sent to RFC; Martin Bain read it and acknowledged it publicly; Rangers have agreed to meet with supporters groups to discuss it. You clearly think that amounts to nothing - I think it amounts to a small something. What's the point in standing on the sidelines pissing on it all? What else have you got to contribute?

Good points above from everybody (well, nearly everybody ). As Martin Bain implied in his response, it's not like some or most of the proposals in the report are like shots of lightening, suddenly appearing for the first time and that nobody has ever considered them before. We know Rangers think about marketing, youth policy, how to engage with supporters etc etc - its simply that the people addressing the individual issues feel these things could be executed better and are offering ideas. The very fact that this has been read inside Ibrox is great imo. And the fact that the club has agreed to discuss/debate it amongst fans groups is great too. It's now up to those who will be present to do their utmost to ensure that something tangible happens as a result. Even if that only means Rangers agreeing to work with a small group on prioritised topics to see how they can be taken forward. That's what I'd be asking for - an agreement to work together openly on prioritised topics. In my opinion it would be difficut for the club to say no to that (but the context must be there, as must goodwill on all sides and from within all sides). Yes, if you were being cynical you'd say there is a risk they could go through the motions and deliver nothing, but we cross that bridge when we come to it. At the end of the day this assertion obviously holds true; the collective talent, resources, energy and imagination at the disposal of the Rangers support is greater than the equivalent of those currently employed by the club in each area. It just stands to reason. If Rangers could just find a way of tapping into it, there'd be no stopping us.

Fair do's Krissy. Also underlines the motivation successful players need to maintain when they've achieved their ambitions when they're still young. Must be difficult for some kinds of people, despite all the rewards.

I've read it mate. I wrote a bit of it. What it will achieve is open to question. But to say it doesn't openly criticise Murray is absolutely not true. So you can have the benefit of the doubt and i'll say you must have missed bits. It's ok though, it's still possible for you to catch up.

maineflyer; you have not read the report so I don't know you can comment. EPIC FAIL (as they say these days).

My first and only thoughts too i'm afraid. If we only have 20 players then it's obvious kids are gonna get a chance, which is obviously good if they're ready. Doing something good because you're forced into it isn't the same as doing something good because you've planned to do it, want to and have he capability. Anyway, I hate to be so cynical, but we shall see.

OK OK OK i take it all back

No it's not, it's Chick Young. I know it is.

Always puzzled me this, since I joined here. "Chick Young" comes on and posts links to his own stories, generating publicity, hits and some discussion. Very good idea and an example of generating revenue using indirect new media. Very impressed. Having said that, "Chick" never 'gives anything back' by contributing to any discussion or whatever and I think that's a little unfair. I'd like to ask what "Chick" thinks of the Setting the Standard Report, and if he sees anybody at Rangers doing anything about anything that's in there?

That's part of the difficulty of the internet age isn't it? News of Rangers' response is released on-line and immediately people are looking for various organisations to respond on-line the same day. It's just not practical without forward planning for various scenarios, which is not usuallly practical in itself!

Good stuff. Hopefully the 'selected' channel for debate will bear fruit - is this realistic?

great bunch of stuff in there, as is becoming normal for Mr KT whe he speaks to the media. Superb!

totally smiled all the way through that really!

after reading bmck's excellent article previously where he pointed out the fact that the media has turned inside out regarding SDM and the public, I'm definitely voting for the clever post option.

Well done for posting on FF too mate. 78 people viewing! Great work frankie, it's a pleasure to contribute to something like this.

Heard on the radio last night that a sheepie had said he would rather MISS OUT on Europe in return for Rangers NOT winning the league. How fooking TWISTED is that

No way I'm getting into predictions this weekend!

kwality maaaan

A hat's no use mate, you need a BUNKER. I would say that Fergie's absence has proved one thing; that he is not really missed. And I say that as someone who defended him long after many had written him off. Sad but true.

Bit harsh to say the least.

Cheers mate, Saturday is going to be mental. A good start and it could be better than last weekend.

Take your point but don't really agree mate. By HT, the game was running away from us. NOTHING worked for 45 minutes, the team was all wrong for the occasion. S. Smith and Velicka contributed zero offensively, in a game we all agreed we HAD to win. Who thought they would? I am acutely aware of the players' limitations, but I still believe we put out the wrong team tonight.

Seldom has there been such a contrast. First half - no movement, didn't really look like a team on a mission once the game settled down, nothing at all on the RHS. Wrooooong team in my opinion, as I said on another thread. The dogs in the street know that we needed an up and at 'em kind of night, where our forwards stretched the game deep and wide with their movement. In the absence of Miller, then Lafferty or Novo were the options. Second half - played like we had to win the match to win the league. Unrealistic to play like that in the F/H, as we had probably too many forwards on to start any away match in that way, and the holes at the back were massive (if it wasn't for Hibs sitting so deep, we would never have gotten away with that for 90 minutes). Wee Nacho had a nightmare first 15 minutes so it was great to see him get the goal, but again, AGAIN..... too little too late. The ball was almost certainly over the line, so justice was done when we got a well-deserved goal. Let's hope we haven't blown it. It's not over yet in my opinion.

I would say the manager was to blame tonight. NO mobility in the forward line means very little creatively in the final 25 yeards. Lafferty for Velicka, Novo for Smith. From the start.