Ser Barristan Selmy

A team could score 100 goals against a crap team, then fail to score in the rest of the games, and finish as the top scorers. 

The best attack last season was Celtic, the league champions, who embarrassed us repeatedly.

Those of us who watched the games last season are more than aware of how painful we were to watch with our pedestrian, lacklustre forward play.

Lol GS you actually go to the games too right? You honestly watched that shit last season and thought we were anything other than completely hopeless in attack last season? Jesus man. 

5 hours ago, the gunslinger said:

I think We were top scoreres in the league. If so that means we were the best in attack.

As frankie says hard to take you seriously.

Best in attack yet finished third. Yeah, hard to take you seriously. 

9 hours ago, Uilleam said:

A poor, and at times, too often to mention,  pusillanimous defence ensured that. 

At the end of the day, we were atrocious all over the park last season.

1 hour ago, Gonzo79 said:

I wouldn't be expecting many crushing wins this season.  Especially against a side that a top 8 EPL side couldn't beat over 90 mins.

I'm not sure I would read anything into that. Aberdeen are still pish and Burnley are a mediocre side, regardless of last year's EPL position. If Aberdeen played any half decent foreign side last night, they would have been dealt with swiftly. 

4 hours ago, compo said:

A wins a win and we move on to the next round but some of our defending still leaves a lot to be desired Tav  might be decent bombing forward but a mediocre defender. 

Really? It's the other end of the park I'm concerned about. We now have a good keeper and a solid CB partnership. In attack we're still really poor. 

On 31/07/2018 at 14:36, Waltersgotstyle said:

He was banging on about how we have only really improved the defence. 

 

So let me see....

 

We were the highest scorers in the league last year... and now we have improved the defence...

 

Hmmm I wonder how that will work out for us this season 

To be honest, it is only the defence that has improved significantly. Going forward we are still massively lacking in quality. And regardless of what the stats say, we were extremely poor going forward last season. A good attacking Rangers side does not finish below Aberdeen in the league. 

28 minutes ago, der Berliner said:

... or we pray that Morelos and Sadiq won't suffer an injury ... or else we may need to throw Rudden into the fray, or play Murphy, Windass or Kent up front.  Lafferty had a goal average of 1 goal per 2 games last season, at Hearts! Including three against the Scum and one against us. Is the same age as Hateley was when we got him, knows the Premiership and its defenders inside out and how to play them.

 

Lafferty would sure not be on the top of my list of future Rangers strikers, but as a back up for a long season at a decent fee, he sure is on that list and not too far from the top either.

He scored 12 league goals last season so let's not get carried away with how well he performed. We also know full well by now that scoring goals for non old firm teams is a completely different kettle of fish.

We had four years to assess him and he proved he wasn't good enough. 

13 hours ago, Gogso said:

Appreciating that Lafferty evokes mixed opinions I would highlight that when I saw him at tynecastle Vs the sheep late last season he was unplayable. 

He can do a job for us for sure. 

How many times have we been stung by this? Players at diddy Scottish sides who look like world beaters, then are beyond dreadful when we sign him? We signed Lafferty for £4m, he played for us for four years and scored 38 goals. He's nowhere near good enough and he never will be. 

I could maybe understand this if we were awash with decent strikers and he was going to be 4th or 5th choice AND if he was free. But this isn't the case.

We're barking mad to be wasting any more money on Lafferty. Was £4 million not enough? Since leaving us 6 years ago he's scored a grand total of 44 goals. 

We badly need a 25-30 goal a season striker and Lafferty isn't that.

3 minutes ago, buster. said:

Excellent result !

Rode our luck a little but we deserve some in Europe, for a change.

 

Now we have to finish the job at Ibrox. We are in a very good position but the tie is still alive.

 

 

Whisper it, but that chink of light towards the group stages just got a little brighter.

I watched the last half hour of the Maribor tie and saw nothig out of the ordinary.

It’s not excellent. We should be beating dead beats like this by cricket scores, no matter how pish we are. 

I knew we would win tonight. Not because I think we’re any good, but because it would be impossible not to against such trash opposition. 

I’m saying that, and I’m sorry, but what an absolutely garbage XI we have there.

Updated my prediction to an away win...if we can’t beat utter shite like this we should chuck it

Craig - as you know I will defend an argument until the cows come home. But I have just moved country, I'm not sober and you're actually one of my favourite posters on here. 

In short, I don't really care anymore. 

God Bless.

I think this is the first time I have ever walked away from an argument. 

I don't find his articles very insightful. We've been murder going forward for years.

37 minutes ago, craig said:

Nah, the opposite actually.  I could explain why but I suspect you already know and just have an unwillingness to accept when you are wrong, and worse when called out on it.

I am 100% correct here ?.

On 19/07/2018 at 13:10, craig said:

Nah, your response made zero sense. Glad you continue to deflect and deny even when proven to be wrong.

Nope, you're wrong. Cheers.

2 minutes ago, craig said:

They will be in an even bigger mess if Abramovich gets bored - and given their lack of success recently, plus his UK Visa issues, it is something which you think increases in likelihood.

If he goes another billionaire will quickly snap them up. 

My concern isn't his age, just his lack of success at such an age. An elite club like Chelsea should be challenging for the title and CL every season. To appoint an experienced manager with no trophies seems a bit odd. 

That said, I don't necessarily think it's a poor appointment. He plays the type of football I like which is a good start. 

He won't be around very long so it seems pointless going into much detail about him. After all the managerial changes it's a bit odd Chelsea have ended up with an almost 60 year old who has never won a trophy. 

I think above all else, Chelsea finished 5th last season because they have the 5th best squad. Take Hazard out the side and you're looking at a pretty mediocre team. The side was poor defensively last season, lacked quality in the middle of the park and offers little in the final third aside from Hazard.

Chelsea need to be looking longer term and building something. They're a mess.

Shows just how piss poor this league is that a first team starter for the second top side couldn't get a better move than the National League. 

22 minutes ago, buster. said:

It makes for an interesting debate..............

 

A more settled and clearly improving side on the park would certainly help some of the other issues.

eg. players doing well = less pay offs and potential profit on player trading, increased European revenue, etc.

 

There is an argument that suggest that this is the current approach, opposed to 'top down', which in some areas is proving very difficult.

 

If so, it's a big gamble.

At the moment we're seeing much of the same issues we've previously been blighted with:

Extremely poor football with no discernible style. 

Embarrassing results and final league position.

Lack of any clear vision or direction. Hopefully this is changing now. 

A squad worth peanuts with a lack of noticeable player development

Poor signings often needing paid off - no profit made. A revolving door usually resulting in constant losses.

Lack of youth players being integrated into first team

And what exactly is the debt at now? 

2 hours ago, der Berliner said:

His - IMHO - is a story of quite a few attackers at Rangers these last 1.5 years. We trialled a non-workable 4-3-3 for ages, but essentially used the same players over and over again, be that Wgahron, Windass, or Miller, who IMHO failed to deliver ... because the system hardly suited them. Likewise, it kept people with a certain promise (at the time) off the field, so they ended up with cameo appearances late on or when games needed "action"  ... but with hardly a chance to really make their mark. Forrester, Dodoo, O'Halloran, Herrera and Cummings all fall into that category, even Garner. It is - when it becomes clear that it ain't work with this personell - utterly bizarre to shoe-horn people into a system that simply ain't for them nor working in the Scottish league environment. What use is it to assemble and have a squad when you don't utilize the strengths that certain players have. That stubbornness cost three managers their job and us tons of points.

I don't remember you saying this after each game in the last 2 seasons where you would blame referee conspiracies and bad luck for all the points we kept dropping. 

13 hours ago, JFK-1 said:

I believe him but saying it like that troubles me a shade. I would rather he didn't talk about that unless he can provide names and details. Otherwise it just sounds like conspiracy theory.

 

And so say all of us.

Finishing below Aberdeen in the league is complete failure.