Hildy
-
Posts
1,747 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by Hildy
-
I'm sorry to hear this. I'd like to pass on my condolences to Gordon's family and hope they find the strength to get through this difficult time. Well done to Gersnet for publishing a heartfelt and deserving tribute.
-
When McCoist goes, we need to find someone who we know will play attractive and adventurous football. We cannot continue with the ghastly template that Smith has almost embedded at the club. It will far healthier for us to select someone who has not been tarnished by Smith and McCoist's instinctive negativity. We need a good manager, but we also need a good manager who sets up his team to play the game in a way that will draw people back to Ibrox.
-
The easy solution for Rangers fans is too often to select a Rangers-minded manager from not too far away and put him in the frame. I believe McInnes finished third last year in a division with no Rangers in it after an unremarkable period in England, and his team was gubbed 3-0 at home last week by Dundee United - the same United that a recently humiliated Celtic took six off yesterday. This is a recommendation? For too much of the last twenty years Rangers has been managed by men who prefer safety-first football instead of coaching their sides to be constructive, hungry for possession, and deadly. Many of those who played under Smith should be kept at a safe distance in case they continue with his methods at Ibrox - just as Ally McCoist has done. Admittedly, Henning Berg looks like he could be an exception, but the point still stands. We need to remove Rangers from the 'drinks together wins together' gang and seek out new blood. It is too risky to bring in another Smith disciple. McCoist has already been one too many.
-
I didn't see this game but I'm glad Hearts won. I think it will be good for us if they go the distance and keep the pressure on. After two seasons competing in a pressure-free environment, it will be good for Rangers to be in a proper contest for promotion - as long as we come out on top of course.
-
Not Stuart McCall. Not Derek McInnes. Both are easy and lazy options. We need new blood, new ideas, fresh faces and a different approach. Anyone associated with Rangers in the last twenty years should automatically be blackballed. Can you imagine McCall getting the gig and Smith returning at some point as a director and giving him the benefit of his advice? We need the old ways incinerated and the usual suspects ignored. We need a strong figure who is his own man who believes in a brand of football that is worth paying good money to see. Ideally, he will never have been employed by Rangers before.
-
I remember McCoist doing television work and he tended to answer those rare specific questions with bland generalisations. It crossed my mind that he lacked insight but as he was clearly a bright guy, I gave him the benefit of the doubt. Unfortunately, he seems to bring nothing of himself to the job. He is a carbon copy of his teacher. At times it's almost as though Walter Smith never went away. If Smith was still here, I think the call for change would be just as loud. People are sick of awful football and Smith was the main architect of it. McCoist is merely continuing on that same road. A clean break is required and a fresh face is needed to deliver better football than we've seen in a long time. Sticking with current methods is no longer an option.
-
Those who have put their fondness for Ally as a club legend to one side have realised that he isn't the answer for Rangers in the dugout. Some worked it out a while ago and others are coming on board with every week that passes. Rangers will still likely labour their way to promotion, though, so he may still be Rangers manager next season when we face Celtic and the rest of the top tier opposition. What if Dave King takes over? The first thing he'll do is to publicly back Ally and tell us how no Rangers manager has had to face what McCoist has had to contend with. Only Charles Green is likely to do what has to be done, and if he is ever in a position to sack McCoist, the club will be in a very bad place. It is no wonder that Rangers fans are frustrated just now. Only a collapse this season will see the manager removed - but we can't afford to miss out on promotion. No matter how we look at it, the situation is grim.
-
A win's a win. Isn't that what they say after an unsatisfactory performance? It's a big win too because it gets us off the mark and takes the heat off Ally McCoist. It really is a dreadful experience watching Rangers and I can well understand people finding something else to do when we are playing at Ibrox - or even live on television. We labour our way through games and hope that a physical edge will tip the balance in our favour. It is unsophisticated and brutal to watch but when it delivers the points, the manager feels vindicated. I expect Rangers to have enough in the way of resources to win this division, but if we don't, it won't be a shock for thousands of Rangers fans. Everyone knows now how limited and ordinary we are.
-
Rangers nearly didn't appeal at all. One man persuaded the board to act in the best interests of the club and try to get a fairer penalty. The Rangers board at the time had the same attitude as you - authority has spoken - accept it. We have too often been our own worst enemies with our submissive attitude and (un)dignified silences.
-
I was speaking to a guy who was around at the time of Barcelona '72. He was telling me that when Rangers received a two-year ban from UEFA after crowd trouble on the pitch at the Nou Camp, the club's board of directors had no intention of appealing the decision. One guy persuaded them to put in an appeal - Willie Waddell - and of course the ban was halved. If you believe that you have been wronged, you sometimes have to fight to be proved right. Legia are doing that and I wish them well. I think most football fans do.
-
This is a current issue and is therefore being debated now. My indignation is not just reserved for this subject but perhaps you already know that. I note an attitude here that seems to be unquestioningly loyal to authority's rules and regulations. I would suggest, with all due respect, that a more questioning approach might occasionally be more useful. You see it simply - rules are rules and punishment should follow if they are broken. Others see a larger picture and wonder if there is an issue that needs further contemplation and consideration. If you ever find yourself in a position where the rules - or laws - have been unkind to you, I give you this advice freely: Appeal.
-
Rules are important. Laws are important too. Rules and laws created by corrupt organisations and dictatorial governments, however, should be more carefully scrutinised and most certainly challenged if they lead to injustice. Many believe that we have seen injustice in the Legia example. I do not believe in meek acceptance of the rulebook. I believe that it should be tested as and when the occasion permits - to find out if particular rules need to be amended or thrown out. This case has thrown up an example of the punishment not being appropriate for the 'crime'. Those who are asking questions about this case are right to do so. Those who repeat over and over again - 'rules are rules' - are more interested in punishment than in justice. As I said earlier, I would not want to count myself in their number.
-
If King does buy the club, and if he has tried to create the circumstances where the share price will fall, from a business perspective, we can see where he is coming from, but the longer this saga is drawn out, and especially if Admin 2 occurs, the long-term damage to Rangers could be greater than many imagine. Rangers has been reduced to a laughing stock right across the country. It may well be impossible for the club to recover to the kind of level that we would expect or even demand. The true cost of this episode has yet to be discovered, and it could end up being frighteningly high.
-
We have seen how different punishments can be applied when ineligible players are fielded. Ineligible is ineligible but the punishment seems to vary. Some cultures believe that cutting off a man's hand is an appropriate punishment for low level theft. Others recognise that it is an act of inexcusable barbarism. UEFA is wielding its disciplinary axe rashly in this instance and fair minds would like to see it act in a way consistent with its fair play ethos. Others, however, see the issue as being cut and dried and wholly appropriate because it is 'in the rules'. I certainly wouldn't want to belong to this group. Arguing for fairness and leniency is a better place to be than resignation and pushover submission to a flawed - some would say corrupt - organisation's rulebook.
-
Dunfermline fielded an ineligible player. They were thrown out the competition - and then reinstated. In a civilised environment, every effort is made to ensure that the punishment fits the 'crime'. Dunfermline received some leniency after an appeal and almost all of Scottish football nodded its approval. Legia have been given an extremely harsh sentence for a piece of maladministration. The cost in financial terms and in prestige is potentially colossal. It is a draconian punishment. UEFA can do whatever it wants with little or no comeback, and yet it has chosen to hammer one party for a red tape offence and reward another party's sporting inadequacy. If a member association can reinstate a club for fielding an ineligible player, there is a case to be made for the mother ship organisation to do exactly the same thing.
-
Read it and you'll see why they were in trouble. This was as recently as 2010. See my reply earlier about what UEFA should have done. This isn't a parliament - it is an organisation that challenges its own rulings when it feels inclined to do so. Basically, it is a law unto itself. It has given a ruling that is fairly widely perceived to be unjust. If it wanted to, it could change it. I don't expect it to, but if it did, Celtic and others could jump up and down for a while, but in the end they'd have to grit their teeth and accept it after all avenues of complaint had been exhausted.
-
We need to move a million miles away from the ghastly football that Walter Smith brought to Rangers which, regrettably, has continued under Ally McCoist. We need a good manager of course, but we need a good manager who likes to have his team playing in an attractive manner. We do not need another safety-first type who will continue the monotony even longer. We need a clean break from unwatchable football. I'm no expert on the English game, but from what I hear, Pullis is not what we need and not what we should be looking for.
-
Remember this? DAFC APPEAL UPHELD Thursday, 21st Jan 2010 SFA have allowed Dunfermline Athletic to be reinstated. A replay will be played at Stenhousemuir. Breaking News at 17.28* The SFA have allowed Dunfermline Athletic to be reinstated to the Active Nations Scottish Cup - as opposed to expulsion announced on Thursday 14th January.**The SFA have ordered a replay at Stenhousemuir and Dunfermline will have to pay out a £21,000 fine and forfeit*the award for this round. Statement from SFA The SFA's Appeals Board has upheld, in part, the appeal by Dunfermline Athletic Football Club in regard to their suspension from the Active Nation Scottish Cup. After appearing in front of the independent three-man panel, Dunfermline Athletic will now replay their fourth-round tie against Stenhousemuir, at Ochilview, at a date to be confirmed. They have been fined £20,000 for fielding a suspended player, Calum Woods, in the original tie against Stenhousemuir. In addition, they have also been fined £1000 for submitting an inaccurate team line and their appearance fee from the fourth-round tie has also been forfeited. Gordon Smith, chief executive of the Scottish FA, commented: "We are surprised at the outcome after what the Emergency Committee considered a number of serious infringements of the cup competition rules. "None the less, we respect the decision of the Appeals Board and hope that the situation involving Dunfermline Athletic Football Club, and the sanctions imposed on them tonight, will ensure all participating clubs are mindful of the cup competition rules in future." As I recall, most people were happy to see Dunfermline reinstated. Commonsense had won the day. A more fitting punishment had been awarded.
-
By challenging bad rules, as Legia have done here, the opportunity is created to amend or discard them in the future. If bad rules are accepted without protest, they will continue in place indefinitely. This meek acceptance that rules have been broken and punishment awarded is a slavish acceptance of a rulebook that may require a degree of revision. The rules may have been followed here but few would say that justice has been done. UEFA could have altered their punishment to a fine, allowing Legia to stay in the tournament, or it could have offered a replay as a solution and if one club had rejected what would generally have been seen as a fair offer, Legia would have been dismissed - and Celtic outed. This is an organisation that once appealed its own ruling. There is no moral code here. It does exactly what it wants to get its desired outcome.
-
You should apply. After evaluation, you could find yourself being one of the chosen ones. They might even create a new category for you!
-
I'm sure they have learned the lesson the hard way, but I have to say that I am distinctly unimpressed with the jobsworth mentality that comes to the fore on these occasions - they broke the rules - they have to pay. There is no sense of fairness or justice, just abject surrender to the rulebook. From now on, UEFA needs to find a way to prevent more of the same. It is administering a tournament where inferior football teams can advance despite being outplayed, out-thought and outgunned. Legia have paid a high price, but so too has UEFA, and maybe even Celtic. A more sporting solution could have been arrived at but Celtic seemed to be banking on Legia's disqualification, and some people will not easily forget this. And I hope they don't. 'Sporting integrity' anyone?
-
I wonder if hard scrutiny is the norm in these European ties or if it's just Celtic that examines every name on the teamsheet in minute detail. As things stand, the system is a farce and it makes UEFA's Fair Play initiative redundant. Two games in two countries can be played producing an emphatic result - which is then overturned due to an administrative shortcoming. This goes down very badly with football fans - as it should. By taking advantage of the situation, Celtic has gone against the spirit of good sportsmanship, which will lose them friends and tarnish their reputation. Of course, had it been us, I'm pretty sure we would too, which saddens me. The moral of the story? Make sure the red tape is in order for European ties - and double and triple check it for games against Celtic Football Club.
-
"The Nominations Committee – Reverend Stuart MacQuarrie, former Rangers Captain David Weir, international rugby star Alastair Kellock and supporters Tom Mowbray, Mhairi McKenzie, Melville Curry, Ross Hardie and Holly-Jade Johnston – will evaluate applications from a number of supporter categories with Club Members then asked to vote on the 12 candidates they feel will best look after their interests." Firstly, who nominated the nominations committee? Answer: the current Rangers board - the same one that thousands of Rangers fans don't endorse, respect or trust. Secondly, they will 'evaluate applications'. Question: how will they do that and what right do they have to do it? Thirdly, why should there be any category of supporter at all? Answer: to engineer the make-up of the board. Fourthly, why does there have to be an ex-player on the committee? Question: how many ex-players have said or done anything of any value during the recent years of crisis? John Brown spoke out, but that's about it. Has Derek Johnstone caught the mood of the support? Has Mark Hateley? This farce is taking over from where the rotten borough that was the Assembly MK1 left off.
-
I sometimes wonder if readers of this site, who perhaps don't post very much, are curious about why there is so much pessimism about Rangers matters, especially from some of the usual suspects, of which I am one. Sadly, my well of optimism about Rangers has run dry, and this latest membership farce is just one more reason why the club and I continue to drift apart. Democracy is a wonderful concept. It has imperfections and flaws but it entitles everyone to a say and gives people a choice about whether their opinion should count. A pretend democracy dressed up as a legitimate democracy, however, is beyond insulting. This is an attempt to legitimise decisions arrived at. It is an opportunity for the ownership/board to tell the world that their wisdom is our wisdom: that their instincts are our instincts and that their priorities are our priorities. When we think of the stages that had to be gone through before society arrived at a democratic process that most found acceptable, and watch as our club provides us with this abomination, it is not only hard to accept, it becomes increasingly difficult to actively support anyone that would foist such a thing upon us. I will find it hard to respect anyone who stands for this board.
-
You want sole ownership, but it has to be the right guy. I want a Ferrari but it has to be the right colour.