Darthter

2 minutes ago, buster. said:

Last season, Lafferty started 36 games (League and Cup) and scored 19 goals.

ie. he scores goals at this level, didn't have any significant injuries and you know what you are getting.

 

Those goals include 3 in the league against Celtic (one in a significant 4-0 win), which was more than we as a team scored against them in 5 matches.

 

I think that merits 500K if the manager wants the player. 

 

There is an argument regards age, lack of sell-on value and if we could source a younger 'better player' for a price we could afford then fair enough.

 

That's all well & good in a team with Hearts expectations.  However, we have seen time & time again, players who have been doing well, come into a Rangers team & fail miserably (for many reasons).

£200-300k is a good offer for a player like Lafferty, who is in his last years of contract, and playing for a team like Hearts.  They simply don't have the clout to demand more.

1 hour ago, buster. said:

Paper talk of a second 300K bid going in for Lafferty.

If true, it would be a waste of time, we'll get the same response.

 

If Gerrard wants him in, we'd be better to make an offer that at least has a chance, around 450-550K.

Lafferty was signed on a free transfer after being released by Norwich (??).....What makes him worth £450k+???

He wasn't particularly outstanding with out before, why should that be any different now??

3 minutes ago, Tannochsidebear said:

If they are not councillors, then they cannot stop us going ahead. Only council intervention can prevent us going ahead surely?

 

If your neighbour puts in an objection to your house extension, it is still up to the council to decide if it is a valid objection or not, it is not just accepted as gospel.

The council have to asses the basis of the objection....more often than not, they will reject a planning request & ask for a revised submission.  Probably the same in this case.

The club would need to address the community councils concerns, if they find a suitable compromise the council will most likely approve the plan.

Just now, Gonzo79 said:

Perhaps because of Dornan's comments.

 

"My concern is that these matches are controlled by the likes of Sky Sports. If you look at the football schedules the pitch would never be available for kids football ever again.

Rangers should be investing in youth football in the area. They shouldn’t be trying to replace it with burgers and booze."

 

Did any of the Labour or Green councillors issue such as statement?

Anyone who thinks the SNP are anything but enemies of Rangers FC is delusional.  That doesn't mean other politicians don't dislike us either, mind you.  

Were any of the ASKED???

These folk don't just blurt out these things for the sheer hell of it - They are asked specific questions, probably by the journalist in order to get a sound bite or quote that they can use to "dramatise" the story.  Happens all the time - how many times have Rangers managers, directors or players had the very same done to them - a "reporter" takes part of a comment & builds an entire story round it.

Remember as well, that the club are looking to utilise a COMMUNITY FACILITY.....It would be interesting to know exactly what bookings or activities it could potentially effect.

10 minutes ago, Tannochsidebear said:

I dont care which political party these cretins represent, they are purely using this as a way to vent their sectarian hatred for our club under the guise of doing something for the community.

 

The argument is a futile one, but it has of course gained traction in the MSM due to it being against Rangers. 

 

It is not the colour of their rosette that makes then anti-Rangers, it is their sectarian upbringing. Replace them with another of the same rosette if you like, as long as they have no hatred for our club if they are going to represent the ward that our club resides in.

my understanding of this, is that it's not the rosette-wearers that are the problem - the objection came from the Community Council, who are not ACTUAL councillors.

Rather than folk jumping on the media bandwagon & go after the City Councilors, engage with the Community Council, find out their objections & work towards a solution that all parties are happy with.

It's the same as a neighbour objecting to your new house extension, then blaming the council for rejecting planning permission. 

5 minutes ago, Bill said:

If that community council is representative of the people in the area then it will be unique. Community councils are unelected cliques of hand picked clones. They have a given right to lodge planning objections but the local planning committee is under no obligation to agree with them.

The point being that no-one it questioning the allegiances or motives of the entity that actually lodged the objection!!!!  Have the club approached the Community Council???  Get them involved in the Matchday stuff, in other ventures etc.  It would show that the club are actively working to help & enhance the local area. 

Instead it would appear to be open season on various councilors, who appear to be simply doing their jobs.....

I also notice that folk are immediately jumping on the SNP councillors....what about the Labour & Green councilors that are also responsible for the area????

I may be completely wrong here, but....

The objection came from the Community council - I'm assuming that is the Ibrox & Cessnock Community council (http://ibroxcessnockcc.weebly.com/)

According to that website, Clr Stephen Dornan (SNP) does not sit on the Community council - he represents the Govan Ward (along with Clr Richard Bell (SNP), Bailie John Kane (labour) & Clr Allan young (Greens) ) within the Glasgow city council (local Govt).  All of whom were democratically elected by the residents of the area to represent them)

Therefore, as a local Govt councilor, he is simply acting on the objection of a local community organisation, which does NOT have affiliation (as far as I'm aware) to ANY political party.  

If ANYONE questioning the actions of the Community Council, which I'm pretty certain is representative of the people who live in the Ibrox & Cessnock community, who were presumably asked about the proposals???

Really enjoyed watching the game.  There is a definite style of play coming through.  We are dominating the midfield completely, both when we have the ball & when we don't (something that was discussed in the commentary).  When we are in possession, we are moving the ball about with confidence, and not panicking when the opposition gets too close.  There are still a fair amount of passes going astray, but that's where the 2nd area of improvement come in....we are pressuring & closing down the opponent, causing them to make mistakes.  I honestly can't recall the last time I saw our midfield "nicking" so many balls from the other teams toes, without what you could call a tackle.  The opposition looks rattled on the ball and so busy trying to find a pass, that our guys can just dink it away from them.

Overall, I though good performances from everyone.  Middleton can be a wee bit wasteful at times, but that's to be expected...but he more than makes up for that with his energy and drive - I can see him being a regular this season.  Candieas also put in a good show - very reliable out on the right flank.

Jury's still out on Sadiq....very gangly, but I think his height will cause defenses problems - either from set pieces or simply as a distraction.

I think one of the most important things to take from games like this is that even with the number of changes....the team performance didn't notably drop.  There is also a definite consistency in play, regardless of who the opposition is the team know how SG wants them to play, they know their roles etc and they are carrying out that plan.

1 hour ago, buster. said:

Far from over,..........If they were to score the first goal then it's not only level but they have the opportunity to get a second away goal and make things really difficult.

 

I think we need to prioritise defence rather than going all out for goals because we are at home.

 

ie. Attack, yes but be very careful (and disciplined) not to leave the back door ajar as sometimes can be the case. 

I said similar over in the match threat...I get the impression that SG is setting up to be solid in Mid & Def - difficult & frustrating for the opposition, but with the ability to break quickly when the opportunity arises.

A good nights work - a very solid & professional performance.  Sure, it wasn't flashy, but they did what was needed.  As SG said, the tie couldn't be won last night, but it could have been lost - they team made sure the latter didn't happen.

Was impressed by Coulibally...looks a very physical presence & moved the ball pretty well.

Tav caused come scares - not his best game....but still supplied some good balls & the cross for the goal.

Shagger - great game.  totally unphased, and pulled off a couple of good saves.

Kent - Tended to be quite wasteful in possession, but was always active & keen to run at the opposition.  Could be a very exciting player.

Murphy - felt he was largely invisible.

Jack & Ejaria - Played well over all.

Flannigan - decent game

Fredo - His usual busy self.  Not too much to do in front of goal, but still got a goal.

Goldson & Katic - Solid pairing....think they are gonna work well together.  Not overly troubled, but cleared the lines well when they had to.  Kept Osijek to a few 1/2 chances.

The thing that has struck me over the last couple of games, is that we appear to be setting up "hard to beat" - content keeping the ball in defense/midfield then burst forward.  Tidy at the back & hopefully frustrate the opposition into making rash mistakes etc.  So far, it seems to be working.  Possible that SG is thinking that since we scored plenty goals last season, that's not much of a concern....but if we focus more on not shipping goals, we are more likely to still win 1 or 2 nil,

Passing was a bit loose at times, but shouldn't take much to bring that back into line.

Osijek had a few opportunities & probably had more shots at goal than us.....but most of them were 1/2 chances or split second, snap shots.  The defense in general wasn't particularly concerning - they did look a bit lost at one long throw-in where the bounce took out a couple, then a mistimed jump, resulted in a decent opportunity.

Roll on the next leg.....

1 hour ago, buster. said:

For a split second I thought we were going 3-2-4-1 

 

Should be a good test for the defensive set-up and an interesting 90 minutes to get a look at the new players.

 

Wouldn't expect a great deal in the way of cohesion with so many new players in but I'm hoping for individuals to show a little quality. Whether this effects us retaining possession, we'll see but if we can't keep a hold of the ball for times we'll get swamped.

 

 

 

3 new players to the starting lineup, and 2 of them have been with the squad for a few weeks now.  Not really that much of a gamble.  The biggest question is with Ryan Kent - only been with the squad for a couple of days.

What are the restrictions around loan players - are we not restricted to a certain number of loan registrations???

At the moment, we have 4...Ojaria, Kent, Coulibally &Sadiq

11 hours ago, pete said:

McGregor
Tavernier
Goldson
Katic
Flanagan
Jack
Murphy
Coulibally
Ejaria
Kent
Morelos

Is it a leak or an educated guess???

SG made it clear he wasn't happy with the performance up front - all changes are in more advanced areas, with the exception of the presumably Jack/McCrorie switch.  Therefore the changes all bit quite radical, do make sense.

16 hours ago, Scott7 said:

Do you not think both Mrs Trump and Mme Macron have an extra-terrestrial look about them? Tear off the plastic face masks and there are reptilian aliens underneath.

....and??

16 hours ago, RANGERRAB said:

Won’t SR then get the SFA position Liewell’s vacated?

most likely....I think the "agreement" is to have one from each club on either board.

Worth noting that people like Ozil are not just normal people....they are internationally recognised sportsmen, in many cases verging on celebrity status.

They also have various commitments that they HAVE to comply with for sponsors etc.  In this instance, did Ozil make a point of going to meet with Erdogan, or did they happen to meet at the same function???

16 hours ago, 917 said:

Still, this move can’t have been much of a shock to the board. If it was unexpected, there should be a statement soon.

There will be NO statement....it was 100% expected.  Liewell will serve his time, then be replaced by a RFC representative.

29 minutes ago, Bill said:

This isn't about whether he meets with whoever. That's his business. It's about his spineless whining over being criticised and throwing the toys out of his privileged pram by refusing to play for his "own country". Fundamentally, it's about allegiance and national identity.

 

What is does give us a useful insight into is the widespread tendency of immigrants to spend generations denying allegiance to the countries that now support them. You just have to look at the plastic O'Irish community in Scotland, still waving their tricolours at Parkhead in a show of defiance while drawing British benefits.

but, Ozil isn't flying the Turkish flag...he flies the German one & has worn the National strip proudly.

From my reading of it, it appear that the issue is personal towards Ozil, for whatever reason.

Arguably the issue that has frustrated me the most over the past couple of months has been the mistreatment from the DFB, and in particular the OPE President Reinhard Grindel.

What are the German authorities saying about it???

16 minutes ago, JFK-1 said:

That's diplomacy and happens all the time. It doesn't indicate support. What Ozil has done is not diplomacy.

and a footballer meeting with a world leader can't possibly be described as diplomacy???

11 minutes ago, JFK-1 said:

That's diplomacy and happens all the time. It doesn't indicate support. What Ozil has done is not diplomacy.

No-one seemed bothered on any of the previous occasions....which would imply that its more personal.

from 2016

from 2011

15 minutes ago, JFK-1 said:

This isn't about race, it's about him apparently supporting what is effectively a dictator in all but name. 

but this is OK???  Our PM, Forgeign Secretary & The Queen "apparently supporting what is effectively a dictator in all but name"

16 hours ago, RANGERRAB said:

Dornan is an embarrassment.

 

He typifies everything that is wrong with holyrood.

 

A devolved assembly(never a government) full of too many unimportant, underemployed  nobodies looking for something to do or say to justify their existence

 

 

He is a publicly elected official.....if you are one of his constituents, feel free to question his actions through the proper, official channels.  As with ALL MPs/MSPs, they are answerable to their voters.

20 minutes ago, cooponthewing said:

I genuinely don’t know anyone under 40 who buys a newspaper? Why would you?

I still get a paper in the morning (The National, surprise surprise).

I work with computers all day, staring at a screen....a paper gives me a break from that.

If we're looking to bring in a winger....can he please be (primarily) left footed.