JohnMc

C'mon, it's like a Victor Meldrew appreciation society meeting on this thread. Okay, we've got a third strip because it's no longer 1982, teams have three strips, sometimes four, that's how it works these days. They change every season, again, that's just how it is here in the 21st century. Why not purple? As long as our home strip has blue shirts, white shorts and red and black socks what does it matter the colour of our third strip? Rangers change strips don't have to be red, white or blue or a combination of the three, they just don't. We've had pin stripes, sashes, quarters, halves, broad stripes, hoops, collars and cuffs, chevrons, we've had all one colour, we've had four different colours at the same time, we've had white, red, light blue, dark blue, purple (imagine, the horror...) black, erm tangerine, aubergine we've had patterns on the sleeves, on the collars and in the fabric. We wore our first purple strip two decades ago, that makes it a traditional colour for us now because that's older than some of our players. Fashions change, colours are in then they're out. I'm looking forward to the day we introduce green to our third strip, British racing green or maybe a khaki shade, probably with navy piping. It'll fly off the shelves I tell you...

The irony is we actually started last season well and went into the St Johnstone match with confidence and were worthy winners in the end. With all that came later it's easy to forget that.

I've a book in the house written by a couple of professional American sport statisticians who analysed professional football. I found it fairly hard going to be honest but one of their insights was how ineffective corners are. They analysed literally thousands of them and their discovery was that you're far more likely to score from open play than from a corner set piece and that all corners should be taken short and used as a way to start a possession based move and not lobbed into the box looking for a header. It's all part of that 'moneyball' philosophy that's currently in vogue.

Time will tell and I'll reserve judgement until then. The expectation that McCoist should be forensic accountant has always bewildered me though, he's a fitba player. That he held the club together almost single-handedly for a time is undeniable though.

Oh I think he's made mistakes, I just think that in the passing of time we might look back and think we were actually very lucky to have a manager who was a strong character and had currency with both the media and the support that the directors didn't. His reputation has been tarnished, without a doubt, but in time I think we might view this period differently. It's terrifying to think what might have happened had our manager been someone Green or Ahmed appointed. It's not a perfect analogy but Churchill was a terrible politician and an even worse Prime Minister in peacetime, but we were lucky to have him during the WW2.

If ever I find myself doubting my convictions I stop and think 'what would Ser Barriston Selmy say on this' and as long as it's the opposite of me then I know I'm on firm ground. I don't expect you to understand, there's no room for shades of grey in the black and white world you seem to inhabit. You still ranting against our manager buying English players or have you moved on to some new level of wrongness yet?

Actually I think there's a very strong argument to be made that McCoist was the perfect person to manage us when he did and that history will judge him far more kindly than many supporters do today. The people who ran our club during his time as manager are currently facing charges of fraud and organised crime, just imagine what they might have done had they some patsy as manager instead of McCoist. Very few people will argue McCoist is a great football tactician and I doubt anyone would want to swap Warburton for him, but at that time it might be he was exactly the right person for the job.

Was that the match where we started singing 'you've lost that loving feeling' or something like that as it was played on the tannoy? I've this memory of being on the old open terrace at Tynecastle in horrendous weather and the entire Rangers end eventually starting to revel in it as the match went on.

Of more interest is that Rhys McCabe also featured as a trialist for Shrewsbury in the same reserve match Black did. When he broke into our side he looked like he could achieve great things, just goes to show you.

To be fair he was playing for Thistle, how is anyone expected to do that without taking drugs.

I'm not sure but that's a terrible slur on a knight of the realm... I'm not suggesting he shouldn't be punished, just that 2 years seems excessive. He already lost his job (Thistle sacked him) I'd have thought a 6 month ban with a further year suspended to be applied should he fall foul again is more appropriate. This is assuming he's not some sort of addict, in which case some sort of assistance might have been more beneficial.

Teams will sit deep against us, press the space in the final third to stop us passing through them and try to break up our flow with fouls and time-wasting. Livingston did that on Saturday and I expect every side we play for the rest of the season will do the same, relying on set-pieces and counter attacks. That being the case it's important our centre-halves can pass the ball because in many cases they'll be starting our moves. We'll face two banks of five sitting around our midfield and forward line. If our defenders can only punt the ball that tactic could be effective, but if they can make a pass, carry the ball and break forward themselves then it becomes harder to implement as midfielders drop back and defenders break forward. Or something like that.

Am I the only one who thinks a two year ban is a little harsh? It's not performance enhancing after all, at least not his football performance. I wonder if his off-field behaviour was the reason behind his release, at the time I was baffled why we didn't retain him, he left us to join a club two leagues higher.

Not favouring flag waving and abseiling doesn't mean I don't recognise their bravery Bluedell, it's not an either/or scenario. It's not about reminding the soldiers about the reality of war, I'm pretty sure they've got a fairly good handle on that already, it's about reminding the politicians and members of the public who are completely detached from it. Too often in the past this country has sent young men off to die for no good reason other than it was politically expedient. I'm against anything that makes that easier. The armed forces have already been sent to fight ISIS even though parliament voted against military intervention. I'm not sure if tomorrow's activities will embolden those politicians or not but I'd rather not take the chance.

I'm uncomfortable with the celebratory aspect of it, it's a personal thing and I'm not sure it's connected to my nationality. My father and my uncle were both in the Royal Marines, both my grandfathers were soldiers and I've a great uncle buried in a field in Belgium somewhere. For me it's not about being anti-army or anything like that, quite the opposite. I support the club honouring the armed forces, a minutes silence at the match nearest armistice day, a collection for Erskine and donating tickets to soldiers etc I can fully back. However it's the 'party' atmosphere I'm uncomfortable with, it's all got a bit of the 'Oh What A Lovely War' about it for me. I think it takes away from the reality of war and the eases the path with which politicians can send young men to their deaths and tabloids can whip up demands that we do so. I don't think it's just a Scottish thing either, many European countries are uncomfortable with this type of military celebration.

To be fair they're probably his second team. Nice preview and an enjoyable angle to take. I've always felt Livingston were a plastic side, stolen from Meadowbank Thistle and artificially created in West Lothian. It's interesting to read of second generation of their support now, for whom they're as legitimate a side as any other.

Yip, wise words. I've no idea what this is all about, if the club want to support the armed forces they could easily do it without turning it into a May Day Moscow parade.

I can remember in the not too distant past Sandy Jardine being lambasted on supporter message-boards. Some of the stuff written about him was incredibly harsh and some spoke about him in a way you wouldn't expect them to speak about a Celtic legend far less one our own. Needless to say you don't read that kind of comment about Jardine now. I think something similar will happen with McCoist, at some point in the future people will start to look at his entire career rather than just the last 12 months and McCoist will once again be recognised as arguably the greatest living Ranger. Thankfully it seems the people running our club have a more balanced view of McCoist than some of the posters on here and elsewhere.

When you've done this I can forgive most other transgressions.

To return to a favourite theme of mine at the level professional sportsmen operate at the differences in fitness are often psychological. The great Jock Wallace didn't make players run up and down sand dunes because it actually made them fitter, he did it because they thought it made them fitter. Thinking you are fitter can make a difference to how you play. Psychology is so important at top level sport, particularly with individual sports like golf and tennis but also with team sports. A player believing they are faster or stronger or simply better performs differently to one who doesn't.

There are no guarantees it improves the player's development but on balance I think it's better than playing under-age or reserve football. The issue isn't so much are loans good for a player though it's are they good for the sport, that's a different question. Take the example of Courtois, the Chelsea keeper. A lot of people would look at his case and say the loan system works, but I disagree. Chelsea bought him from Genk in Belgium and he played three seasons on loan at Athletico Madrid before rejoining Chelsea. Had he remained at Genk for those three years then the standard of Belgian football would have improved as it would have had better players in it. On top of that Madrid get a player without having to pay the going rate for him, giving them an advantage over their rivals. Lastly Chelsea get to take a punt, safe in the knowledge that he costs them very little in the grand scheme if things and he might work out. The reality is very, very few of those 30 odd Chelsea players out on loan will ever make their first team. That being the case I think they should be employed by and playing for a side where they can make the first team. That way their employer must invest both time and money into developing them safe in the knowledge that investment is worthwhile if the player improves. That's not the case with loan players, there is no long term planning with them, only short term gain and that's not really in anyone's interest. Football is a transient business at the best of times but loaning players out by the dozen simply exacerbates this. No one will convince me that Scott Allen or Islam Feruz's careers were improved by joining big English sides and being sent on loan for almost their entire time there. They'd both have been better off staying at their original clubs and moving when developed to a level where ready to take the next step. The players would have benefited from that, their developing clubs would have benefited and the club buying them would have benefited too. Money talks, I get that, but the balance in football is so skewed in the favour of a small number of very wealthy clubs already that allowing them to factory farm players on a percentages basis simply further diminishes competition and will ultimately disillusion supporters of clubs outside that elite.

I expect the UEFA will make a rule change soon to limit the number of players any club can have and then loan out. Chelsea had 30 players out on loan last season, that's farcical, in total there are close to 160 players registered to EPL sides out on loan in other countries this season. I expect this stockpiling of players to be outlawed by UEFA in the near future, it's both anti-competitive and holding back player development. No club should have more than half a dozen players out on loan at one time and no club should have any more than three loan players in their squad in my opinion.

Like everyone else it's difficult not to get carried away when you see the football we're playing, but it's important we don't. For a start we've not played anyone good yet, the second tier of Scottish football is not a high level. Secondly I'd like to see how this side reacts to a setback, that will tell us a lot about the team and spirit and resilience in it. We'll get a game where nothing goes right, as has been said up thread when the weather deteriorates it'll be harder to play our style and with a thin squad we'll inevitably have some issues with injuries as the season goes on. So with that in mind I think it's unrealistic to expect us to score five goals in every match we play, so I'll accept winning four trophies this season and being invited to represent our country at the Euro 16 finals as long as we make the semis. Anything less and I'll not be back.

That's hysterical, well done Raith. The shadowy hand of the establishment at work again clearly.

Apologies in advance to anyone looking for tactical insight or even the likely team. The Renaissance Men – Rangers v Raith Rovers The ironic thing about The Renaissance is it required the Dark Ages and the Bubonic Plague to create the circumstances for it to happen in the first place. Plague carrying fleas living on rats spread terror and death throughout the fourteenth century, the population of Florence literally halved during one year, the population of England reduced by 25%. As no one knew what caused the plague and how it was spread the traditional medicine men were impotent, people turned on each other, schisms appeared and minorities were persecuted, brutally at times. People were helpless, insanitary conditions encouraged its spread and everyone was affected; it was a living hell. Yet from that hell eventually came opportunity. Those who remained fit were sought after and this led to freedoms previously unheard of. People born in poverty were now able to command much more as the need for labour outstripped the supply. The price of food dropped, there were far fewer people to feed after all, and so diets improved for everyone else. More importantly people who had lived so closely with death on a daily basis began to embrace life like never before. From this pit of despair and horror the first shoots of what we now know as The Renaissance took root. The Renaissance was a cultural movement that had a profound affect on life both at the time and indeed right up to the present day. Starting in Italy, and spreading to the rest of Europe its influence was felt in literature, philosophy, art, music, politics, science, religion, it was a time of enlightenment, of opportunity and of advancement. The word renaissance comes from the French and it literally means to be born again; rebirth. It’s been a difficult few years for the Rangers support. Rats of a different kind brought a plague to our house and for a long time we knew of no antidote and weren’t sure there would be any survivors. The medicine men we’d previously loved and relied on were impotent in the face of such wanton destruction. Factions created, fault lines appeared and public schisms were the order of the day. The plague-like happenings off the field were matched by the malady on it. A Rangers team being trounced, twice, by an impoverished and very limited Motherwell side was a fitting end to a dark, dark period in our history. Yet here we are, some three or so months later, in a time of Renaissance. I don’t use the word renaissance simply because we’re winning matches again, it’s because of the way we’re winning these matches. Frankly watching Rangers this season is like watching a different club, you know, one of those good ones from somewhere else. But then we are literally a new side and, most importantly, we have a new leader. Whatever anyone thinks of our current board of directors the appointment of Mark Warburton already looks inspired. An Englishmen with no previous connection to the club or experience in Scotland, who has never played professional football and only actually became a manager two years ago should have been a divine comedy of a signing yet looks like being the smartest move we’ve made in a long time. On paper it’s an appointment that should have seen us remain in hell, yet suddenly our purgatory doesn’t seem so bad and the promise of a return to paradise, or at least the SPFL Premiership, looks a distinct possibility. Our support are once again embracing life, not only are we filling the dear old stadium but we’re looking forward to it again, no, better than that, we’re actually enjoying it. So we should be. After years of persecution from outside and what Police Scotland and the Procurator Fiscal currently view as criminality inside the club, we’d forgotten that this is meant to be fun. Those highly paid, pampered and feted athletes are supposed to thrill us, inspire us, and leave us wanting more. After a diet of Ian Black and Kevin bloody Kyle it’s no wonder I’m gorging myself on this current side. Ironically the pass and move, the possession game, the angles, the runs from deep, the overlaps and the work ethic when not in possession are disguising the fact that Rangers don’t currently have players of great quality. Seriously, Bradford didn’t deem Andy Halliday worthy of a new contract and James Tavernier couldn’t get into the Wigan side. Even more damning than that Barrie McKay couldn’t get into the Rangers one last season! Now those three and the rest have us on the edge of our seats as they link and move and drive and cover and score, oh do they score. Fourteen goals in four league matches, that’s double what the next best in the league has scored. Goals are coming from all over the pitch, fullbacks, deep-lying midfielders, wide players you’re never sure where the next goal is coming from, yet already you’re sure it’s coming. Our side on Saturday is unlikely to change from the one that comprehensively beat Queen of the South last Sunday. If Wallace is out I suspect Ball will start, but it could be Aird. Wallace would be a miss if he’s injured and as most of us still see our defence as our potential Achilles Heel losing anyone from it will stretch resources. Yet, frankly, if Warburton chose to play another forward instead of a left-back I’d cheer, out scoring our opponents is where it’s at right now, and I love it. Our visitors on Saturday are the never glamorous Raith Rovers. The Kirkcaldy side are unbeaten at home this season but have lost every match away since a narrow win in July against Cowdenbeath in the Challenge Cup. Indeed Raith Rovers haven’t even scored a goal away from home since then. The recent addition of Jon Daly to their attack isn’t likely to change that statistic if his performances last season are anything to go by. I’m being unfair on the big Irishman though, nobody should be judged on last season. If both sides play to their potential Rangers should win comfortably, we’re in form and full of confidence, it’s been a long, long time since I wrote that. Embrace life and enjoy the renaissance, you’ve earned the right.