JohnMc

It's a poor excuse from the club, or its insurers, whoever is actually defending the action. We should do the right thing here because it's the right thing to do.

The big question though is why were we wearing red socks? That's us a goal down before we even start as everyone knows.

It's annoying anyone in our support asks his opinion, it only increases his credibility as a spokesperson on this issue. If they really wanted political input there's another 300 politicians they could have asked. We really don't box clever. It's disingenuous nonsense to suggest the term 'Hun' doesn't mean Protestant. They can claim all they want that it isn't what they mean but it sure as hell is what I hear when they use it. It reminds me of when people claim they use the word 'Fen1an' only to describe 19th century Irish republicans. That may indeed be the case but today people hear 'Roman Catholic'. The meaning of words changes. I see the meme going round that shows Jock Stein and Neil McCann as if this somehow shows the word has no religious connotations. I wonder if a similar meme showing Neil McCann and Jock Stein where the word 'Hun' was replaced with the word 'Fenian' would appease Mr Dornan. We already know the answer. All of that before we even get to the use of the word 'scum'. I mean how do the club and police allow that?

Of course Cathro's arrival was actually greeted by good press from journalists and cynicism from players and ex-players. The media bought into Cathro being some kind of new super-coach despite the lack of evidence to back that up. With Gerrard the media has been largely negative and dismissive however players and ex-players have been largely positive and open to him. Now that might be because players and ex-players stick together and didn't fancy someone with Cathro's background getting one of 'their' jobs, or it might be because they know and understand the workings of a team and dressing room better than journalists.

Pena is 28 years old. If he's not 'wised up' by now he never will. The reason he joined Rangers was clubs in Mexico had lost faith in him, only the Caixinho connection got him a gig at Cruz Azul, now that's bombed no one will touch him. I'd be astonished if he ever plays for Rangers again. He'll surely be told he needs to report to training everyday, but he won't be considered for the 1st team and he won't be getting any win or appearance bonuses, or else he can find another club or rip up his contract and walk away. I expect a similar conversation has/will take place with Herrera. I think we'll keep Morelos though I don't expect us to sign Cummings permanently.

A Larkhall bluenose. Surely we can get him on a pre-contract in a couple of seasons.

When club's tell a young player they are releasing him because he's 'too small' they aren't telling the truth. It's a kind way of saying 'we don't think you're good enough'. It leaves the player with some hope, they are able to contextualise the rejection and deal with it differently that way. A player can't do anything about his size, so the rejection doesn't hurt as much. I mean you only have to go and look at the players parents to get a fairly accurate idea of what height and build they'll have, even that's not beyond our youth coaches surely. There is a good argument that clubs the size of Rangers shouldn't have a youth set-up. A young player needs to be so exceptional to make our first team that the odds are simply stacked against them. Morgan is a perfect example. Let St Mirren develop him, make his mistakes there and learn the game, then if he's good enough he joins us. Docherty is another example. Would he have made it at Rangers if he'd joined us from school? He certainly wouldn't have played nearly 100 first team games by the age of 20 if he had. He got that chance at Hamilton where there is less pressure and less scrutiny. Perhaps we should invest our resources in helping a couple of smaller sides develop young players instead, with us taking first refusal on them.

With respect dB Gersnet was full of posters saying quite clearly that Pedro was a bizarre appointment minutes after he was made. There is no revisionism or hindsight required there, there were plenty who could see how Pedro's reign was going to turn out without the need for a crystal ball. Unfortunately none of those people were on our board. This board deserve credit for what they've done right but they also deserve criticised for what they've done wrong. Well they've handled our managerial position, arguably the most important position at the club, very poorly since they took control. As for why Gerrard "the person" isn't of the same calibre as Souness let me try and answer that. For one Souness played for four senior sides before joining Rangers,. He had experience of different clubs, different dressing rooms and different footballing cultures. Gerrard played for one club almost his entire career, a retirement party in LA being his only experience of life away from Anfield. He's never had to walk into a new dressing room and adapt or change it. Secondly Gerrard has some very iffy friendships. His connections to organised crime in Liverpool is well documented, a simple Google search will fill you in on that. As far as I know Souness never provided a character reference in court for gangster. Neither did Souness beat someone up in a bar because he didn't like the music he was playing. Lastly, for football reasons alone, I don't think we don't need another inexperienced coach. We need someone who knows how to galvanise a side, create a team spirit and some tactical awareness. There are managers out there who we know possess this, no one knows if Gerrard does.

We should bring Windass on...

That defence, well, I guess we're not going to be sitting back trying to hit them on the break then.

I think the term you're looking for is mass hysteria, it's incredible and baffling in equal measure. If Rangers were appointing the under 18 coach from Spurs or Southampton there would be nothing like the excitement this seems to be generating. Yet both those clubs have a far better record of producing young players than Liverpool do suggesting their under 18 coaches might be quite good. I mean if we feel the way forward is to find a young, ambitious, but untried at first team level, coach then Mikel Arteta for example would make much more sense. This is a hell of a gamble. I find it surprising because we're genuinely not that far away from competing for this league. The side needs more belief and back bone and some leadership, we need a stronger back line, but we're the highest scorers in the league despite another tumultuous season off the park. We need stability, nous and experience in my opinion. People have compared this to the Souness appointment, wrongly I think. Rangers were fifth that season on goal difference, only one goal better off than sixth placed Dundee. The season before we were fourth, 21 points behind the champions. We need a catalyst for radical change, we were a long way behind Celtic, Aberdeen and Dundee Utd at that time. We're not now, we're just poorly managed. The fact Gerrard was a very good player means nothing. We'll be asking him to coach players who aren't as good as he was and not capable of doing what he could. It might interesting to look over the city for a moment. Rodgers was reserve coach at Chelsea for a few seasons. Well thought of he was offered the managers job at Watford. Taking over when they were in danger of relegation he kept them up. He left shortly after to take theReading job, a club he'd been at before. Reading didn't work out well and he left after 6 months with them fourth bottom. Rodgers made mistakes at both clubs. As neither is in much spotlight outside of their own towns this largely passed unnoticed. He was able to learn and when he landed the job at Swansea, a club well run with a clear structure in place he flourished. You don't get to make mistakes at Rangers, the spotlight is always on, shining very brightly. So far this mass hysteria has passed me by. Who knows though, it's clearly contagious so I might succumb soon.

Warnock was interviewed a couple of years ago and claimed then he'd never manage in the EPL again. He explained that the type of players required to play at that level don't respond to his type of management. It was a remarkably honest interview. He said he's an organiser and a motivator and that works at Championship level and below. So if he does get Cardiff promoted he might become available, and if doesn't he might stay there for another season. I suspect the lure of possible European football might be quite appealing for him although he apparently lives in Cornwall and commutes!

To be fair he is the last guy that stopped Brendan Rogers winning the league.

Ken Dodd assisted by Cilla Black is preferable.

You'd love to be a fly on the wall at one of our board meetings. 'Okay, what are we looking for in the person next to manage Scotland's largest and most successful club?', 'well Dave we need someone with no previous managerial experience, someone who has never played in the league we compete in, someone who has never coached in our league, someone with no connection either professionally or emotionally to our club, someone with links to organised crime and someone who'll command a significant salary from day one'. 'Sounds good, right pass the criteria onto that director of football fellow I've the red eye to Cape Town to catch.'

If it's someone already out of work surely they'd just start now? And if for some reason they didn't want too surely their name would have been leaked to quell our growing unrest? So it's either someone already in employment elsewhere or someone so underwhelming we'll bin our season ticket renewals. Or both.

Dornan neatly encapsulates almost everything that's wrong with politics in this city. He's got a 10,000 vote majority so I've little expectation he'll be voted out anytime soon. The good people of Glasgow Cathcart need to have a long, hard look at themselves, they voted in Mike 'Firestarter' Watson before.

Taking Rangers first. Advocaat was welcomed and feted until the wheels came off, even then he gets very little criticism. For the most part his sides were a joy to watch, until the weren't. PLG was welcomed like a conquering hero, indeed with hindsight part of his problem was one of expectation. Too many of us expected Rangers to be playing like the great Arsenal sides. But things only turned sour for him when results and performances were poor. Lastly Pedro. What can you say, right up to the end he had has supporters willing him to succeed and pleading to give him more time. I wasn't one of them but that's not because I'm a xenophobe it's because I didn't think he was a very good manager. If we have a fault as a support it's a lack of patience, but we're hardly alone in that. If a Rangers manager wants to keep his job his side needs to win. I think that's the same at the biggest club in any league. There's hardly a side in Scotland who hasn't tried a 'foreign' manager, mainly without much success. That can't be just down to us all being small minded, closet racists and more likely down to the quality of player we produce and the type of football they're suited too. Mark Wotte was warmly welcomed when he was appointed Performance director at the SFA. On this site the name of Preud'homme seems to be many's favourite to take us on. If he got the job will he be hunted if we lost to Falkirk in the League Cup and Celtic in the league, probably. But so would a 'British' manager. There's a debate to be had around why a football mad country like Scotland can't get it's act together collectively or individually. But to right it off as xenophobia doesn't help that debate in the slightest.

There was an interesting interlude at half time around Naismith being booed for, and I paraphrase "the crime of putting his family and his career first" as Richard Gordon put it. Now, I don't hold any antipathy towards Naismith and don't blame him for leaving, but if Gordon doesn't realise he's booed for his comments following his departure rather than the departure itself then he's really not doing his job very well. Considering how much time they spend talking about Rangers you'd think they might invite someone on who understands us. Of course no other club's supporters have ever booed an ex-player when they've returned to play them. Ever. Confession time. In a previous life I knew Annie McGuire, she was actually all right.

Yes, we were better, and the changes Murty made largely worked, so credit there. However, considering the experience that Hearts side had (every single Hearts player yesterday was either a full international or an under 21 international with the exception of Randall who is on loan from Liverpool) I was amazed how poor they were. They sat off us and seemed unable to string more than three passes together. We were better, it would have been hard to be worse, but a better side than Hearts would have caused us a lot more problems. Every side we've to play for the rest of this season is better than Hearts.

Yeah, I agree, the hope for the weekend must be that player pride will motivate them to fight as if their lives depend upon it. Preventing them winning the league, if even for only a week, would feel like some kind of moral victory.

Put me in the 'don't read too much into that performance' camp. Hearts were abject, yet were still only the width of the post away from a draw. We showed a bit of spirit and energy and dominated possession for long spells but were toothless in the first half and profligate in the second. Murphy, Candieas, Holt and Dorrans showed up and took control which was pleasing. Am I the only one concerned about McCrorie at centre-half? He clearly has talent but I'm not convinced that's his position and a better more attack minded team would have caused us more problems today. Him and Martin together don't look solid to me, their goal yesterday was an unchallenged header.

I'm genuinely not seeing vitriol. I read far more vitriol towards players, directors and other fans from other Rangers supporters frankly.

Other than his 'entitlement, we are the people' dig what is it you disagree with? I mean it's not going to win a Pulitzer and the Record/Mail's issue with King remains to the fore but I'm not sure I disagree with his article. The club remains a mess.

I know, just imagine how much better everything would be if they'd only adapted to Caixinha's "new methods"...