Rousseau

The growing crowd outside Ibrox is reminiscent of Gascoigne, in terms of excitement anyway.

Steven Gerrard sits on a low-backed chair, electric lights beaming down from above, highlighting his furrowed brow and bearded chin. He is relaxed, leaning back in a tie-less suit, hands resting on his knees. In the enclosed studio, Gerrard is joined by Ian Wright, Glenn Hoddle and presenter Jake Humphrey, as Anfield looms in the background. Discussion turns to what it takes to be a Premier League player. "I was obsessed," said Gerrard straightforwardly. "You have to be obsessed." "Even though they're your teammates you have to be obsessed and move them out the way. And once your in, they're staying out the way and they're not coming back." "Do you get frustrated when you see brilliant talent that is not obsessed?" asks Humphrey. "The word talent frustrates me as well," said Gerrard, after a sigh. "I love talent, I love seeing it. The important thing for me is these players need to understand the other side of the game: fighting, winning, tackling; going where it hurts, letting your lungs burn, really digging deep." We've long debated what type of manager we'd like to see. Some have argued for the young, up-and-coming tactical coach; to implement a modern style on this stuttering Rangers team. Others, more realistically, have argued for a more pragmatic appointment; to get us back to the basics, winning football matches and putting in a shift. Steven Gerrard perhaps represents a middle-way. The man is young; he has no real experience, other than a season or so as Liverpool's academy coach. In that sense he is up-and-coming. He's also worked with some of the best coaches around at the moment, in Benitez and Klopp -- and that other one, who's doing OK across the city -- so hopefully he has some new ideas to impart on our, at times, clueless team. In another way, he is a pragmatist. His playing career was all about winning, even if he ultimately missed out on that much-desired PL crown. Going by his tactical approach as manager with the Liverpool youths, he began with the basics. He opted for a solid back-four in a 4-4-2 diamond, or a 4-2-3-1 in his early matches. Then, in the face of growing injuries to key players, Gerrard switched to a 3-4-3, ushering in a upturn in results. His tactics would change to suit the opposition, while retaining the basic structural set-up. To combat a long-ball team in a European game, he ordered his team to play a high-line. Liverpool won the game 1-4. While in another situation he sought a high pressing start, before dropping into a low block to hit on the counter. It shows a willingness to adapt. Going by his playing career, and his thoughts above, we can expect a team with fight and desire. "My teams will be physical," he said, expanding on that theme in another interview. The lack of fight has been evident for far too long. There is a mental fragility running through this Rangers side. Lapses in concentration have lead to sloppy goals conceded; there is a lack of desire and heart to deal with the physical side of the game; and no real anger after a defeat, just a hollow 'must do better'. This was summed up, perhaps, by sacked manager Graeme Murty's words leading up to the recent Old Firm game: "I'm just a man at the side of the pitch," said Murty with a shrug. It was no real surprise that Murty was given his marching orders. That attitude is inconceivable in a Rangers manager. A Rangers team must be wrestled, forever onward. Murty must be thanked for his services. He's been thrown into the deep end on two occasions now, giving us a brief flirtation with stability. But, he was not ready; admitting as much himself early on -- although, it was surprising to read that he was looking to get the job into next season too. His tenure was not successful, even if there was a good spell or two in there. For all his inexperience tactically, both understandable and expected, his main flaw was a lack of character and an inability to wrestle this team into submission. There is no doubt Gerrard's appointment is a risk, and caution is needed. He's inexperienced, with only a season or so as a youth manager. He seems to have a pragmatists head on his shoulders, going by his tactical approach and a stellar playing career. The qualities Gerrard should bring is character, fight, physicality, and an obsession to win; or, in his own words, "going where it hurts, letting your lungs burn, really digging deep." There's no way he doesn't command the respect of the dressing room. That's the sort man we need leading our club. We can only give him the time to implement it. Steven Gerrard is expected in Glasgow today to sign a Three-year contract as Rangers manager. If anyone says they're not excited, they're lying.

With regards to Rangers, or general managerial prep?

I still don't want to get my hopes-- Screw it:

When you see @der Berliner has posted the Summer Transfer Thread...

They are mentally weak, but I do believe we can get more out of this team -- which is based on hope rather than anything else. It's a difficult task (identifying who is mentally weak), mainly because it's quite subjective. I reckon two fans would create two different lists.

As bad a season as it's been, we're 'only' 10-15 points off them. It's went off the rails recently, but if we can just beat more of the diddy teams and at least avoid defeats against them, then we're not too far off them. Most of the dropped points were at Ibrox. I don't think we require wholesale changes.

I'm not so sure. I think a good manager would be able to get them very close, with the players they have; they do have very good players, albeit not quite world-class. It's not really about the individuals, though. One-off games don't count for much.

Nope. Not with Southgate. They have got very good players, but the whole is just not good enough.

Look at his wee face!

Is it weird that I'm excited? He's totally inexperienced. #GoingFor55

Gerrard just said on BT Sports that he's had talks, and they'll continue on Thursday. Linekar introduced him as "not a lone ranger..."

I couldn't like it fast enough...

Proves my "stand out" comment was wrong...

You're not wrong... Superb player, but all I meant was that he's not the first player I think of -- Koeman, Laudrup, Stoichkov come to mind first. It was a general point that the top managers are not often the star man. Will Messi be a top manager, or will it be someone that goes under the radar a wee bit, like Busquets? (You know I love Busquets, but for most, when you think of that Barca side, Messi, Xavi, Iniesta are always the first names on their list.)

"Stand out" was wrong, as I said, but I just meant he wasn't the first player you think of, at least I don't, looking from the outside.

There will not be much change, but I am content with the pairing.

Aye, OK. Calm down, FFS. "Stand-out" was the wrong phrase, but the point remains.

Exceptional player, and vital, but I wouldn't say he was the main man. When you think of that squad, you don't think of Guardiola. IMO.

It's interesting that in the Top Five/Six (I've lost sense of where Arsenal are...) of the EPL, those managers that did play to a high level as players, were defensive and tended to go under the radar: Guardiola was a DM, as was Conte; Pochettino was a CB; and none of them were stand-outs. Mourinho, Klopp, and Wenger barely played, if at all.

“I never realised that to be a jockey you had to be a horse first.” ~ Arrigo Sacchi

I can see the benefits -- maybe something to look for going forward -- but right now I just don't see how you can claim our DoF situation is a f*uck up. To be fair, it's not the technical aspect we're looking for, it's the implementation of the business model. We need someone with business experience to implement it for us. That's what Man City needed him for, before they snatched Barcelona's DoF. In the future, when the model is implemented, we can look at appointing someone based on their style and playing experience. Doing that now would be a mess. His role is just to make sure it's implemented and then running together. You've jumped to conclusions again, putting the cart before the horse.