Big Jaws

I was just wondering to myself Rousseau if you had ever read anything relating to Boris Arkadyev or Yakushins time at Dynamo Moscow in particular the methods employed by the former and/or with regard to later peace-celebrating tour of the UK after World War II and how it was considered by the British media both before and after the tour. They played Rangers on that tour at Ibrox in front of 92,000 and there's also a Davie Meiklejohn piece in the Daily record archive that I found I think on microfilm in the Uni library many years ago (sorry no source).

To cut a long story short there are some parallels as Arkadyev would get the players to write critiques of each other after each game. There's not so much of a need for the written word these days when everything in and around Ibrox and Auchenhowie is filmed including the analysis and preparation stages. I believe from the Warburton interviews that this self critique is a common occurrence. The upshot is that players develop a better understanding of how each team member impacts the game, and with Warburtons emphasis on value to the squad, pitch geography, interchangeable forward lines, midfield etc etc etc this information can turn what is essentially decent players into an excellent and exciting team to watch play.

Well written and thought out article with clearly defined terms and concepts. The sort of article that's right up my street especially with regard to the modern athletes and their geo/tactical roles on the field of play. I rate this kid as a player but I do feel he needs to improve a couple of areas of his game, isn't that why he's here anyway?

He needs to work on his weight of pass as you rightly point out and he also needs to work on his protecting the ball too. It wont always be the case where he can avoid the opposition trackers/tackles so needs to perfect a more resolute defense of the ball. In his case I think he should concentrate on his body position, rather than upper body strength although that too needs a little work (Rangers have put a bit on him up top since his signing so they must be working on it), and drawing the tackle especially when he has his back to the opposition. Even when he's got all that right though there have been times where he got no help from the officials. On one occasion last night he was facing the left back and went to take him on the outside on the wing he was shoulder challenged. Now I'm not criticising shoulder charges as they are a part of the game and it can be an interesting contest between two guys shoulder to shoulder however when that shoulder challenge starts at about elbow height extends up wards lifting the player into the air then I have to draw the line. No matter how slight either player is that's a rugby tackle and needs the referees intervention.

Other than that I think he is doing reasonably well and has looked fairly comfortable in the last couple of games with a burley/no nonsense type Dom Ball 'destroyer' beside him.

Was meaning hope the club hasnt fucked up! I never fuck up! lol

 

I have no problem with being a realist i also try not to set my opinion on hopes or make believe. There is nothing to suggest we will spend more or be anymore successful in augusts window than we have been so far

 

Developing a direct rivals youth will never sit with me as a good move neither will failing to build

 

Again fiscal prudence would demand we make sure promotion is as close to definite as possible without spending more than we will recoup. We have not done that we have just been cheap.

 

 

It is obviously harder to attract players of higher calibre to lower leagues but not impossible. I fail to see how we cannot find a purchase within our budget who is better than forrester or a 6 month loan of a hearts youth player. Are you seriously saying we cannot attract a player in a better deal than the six month loan of a hearts player gives?

 

Every player gets the chance to prove himself, have yet to hear a player being booed as he walks onto the park for the first time. The stadium at game time is the time I show support not online discussing the appropriateness of signings or targets

 

This is condemnation of the standard of player MW thinks appropriate for rangers and the clubs failure to properly value targets with gives us an actual chance of signing them

 

again you mention our financial position. Can you share it? would love to know our transfer budget? Why if we cant afford talent better than that brought in did we refuse £500k from fans? We could afford better but failed. It is that simple. We are gambling on promotion without stacking the deck in our favour as far as we could with financial prudence still being met. We valued players ridiculously low, so low in fact we had zero chance of securing their services. That is not sensible or looking for value that is just getting it wrong. Plain and simple. Whoever evaluated the players expected cost was not working within the realms of reality

Only you're not being a realist mate.

Here's the reality we've just came through all the divisions up to the Championship in which we came third last year. We couldn't win a second play off tie against Motherwell home or away. During this time mostly all of our quality SPL players left the club when we started from the bottom. Any youth player who showed promise was sold off for relatively low transfer fees which a corrupt board filtered off to its place men.

It was only last year that the current board managed to gain control of the club and the direction it was moving in. Since then a number of things have happened. A whole new infrastructure has been put in place for future use. A new manager has been appointed and has implemented a three year plan to see the team playing in the SPL challenging for titles and European places etc etc etc.

However lets not pretend we are realists without acknowledging that we are playing in the Scottish second division right at this moment in time. Our only ambition right now is to win every tournament/competition we are involved in as such that is the Championship title, the Petrofac Cup and the Scottish Cup starting with Kilmarnock.

Talk of anything else is just wind n pish!

He has been banned from press conferences etc, which impacts his ability to do his job. I don't think it's too outrageous to say that there is a ban in place.

That's just semantics Bd.

He hasn't been banned blocked or prohibited from entering the stadium so can do his job reporting on the team during match days if he does as suggested above. Seems to me he's had a fair stab at messing up the 'doing his job' part of your reply on his own without Rangers input. I cant remember the last time he reported on a press conference at Ibrox instead favouring, indeed featuring predominantly, the lowest common denominator in most of his stunted myopia in opinion pieces. Let me state my own position for the record I am absolutely against censorship of any kind. As far as I'm concerned the press had a public duty to report the ins and outs of what was going on at all levels during the shenanigans a few years ago however there is a difference between that and what this person attempts to do.

Its a courtesy that was extended to him and others of the press from Rangers where he received hospitality and access that other mere mortals simply don't and that is the issue. He has abused his privilege and that courtesy has been removed. As I say it was a courtesy not a right so I don't see it as a ban. He doesn't require or even need access or hospitality to 'do his job' of reporting on football matches but then he rarely reported on football matches anyway so it wont be a great loss to him or Rangers for that matter. The BBC in what seems of late typical fashion is being sensational for its own ends and that is a bias.

For you to hear something coming out of your 'wireless' would be a complex and expensive business. On the other hand internet broadcasting isn't at all expensive a few quid a month for a dedicated streaming service is pretty much all it would take. You wouldn't need licenses from PRS or PPL if you're not broadcasting recorded music. If you are then you can get round it by creating the intro-outro music yourself.

What is this guff?

The very report of a ban is bias in itself. He wasn't banned last time and I'd bet money on it he hasn't been banned this time either. All Rangers have done is remove hospitality and media privileges while he's at Ibrox. He's still free to attend Ibrox, provided he buys a ticket and sits in the stand, whenever he likes he just wont be afforded any hospitality or privileges that the press normally receive. As far as I'm concerned the BBC Scotland sports service is disappearing up its own backside with this petty nonsense.

I'm fairly certain that during a competitive match a player has to obtain the referees permission when either leaving or entering the field of play otherwise it can be treated as unsportsmanlike or misconduct. In a case such as the above I'm not sure how the officials would handle it in practice.

Its been a great wee tea break read.

Yes and no Boabie the resolution of disputes also has to follow a set of procedures take this legislation that relates to Broadband providers and the key areas where disputes can arise as a sort of template.

 

Sale of Goods & Services Act: Under the Sale of Goods Act 1979 and The Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 retailers AND service providers must sell goods that are:

• Of satisfactory quality
  
• Are fit for purpose
  
• Service is delivered as described
  
• Provide services to a proper standard of workmanship.
  

How this relates to broadband in the Act is that a consumer can claim a full refund or compensation if they can prove that the service was not delivered as described, was not fit for purpose beforehand, or is not to a satisfactory level of quality or workmanship.

Using these points in an argument with your broadband provider may give you some credibility but you would still need to find proof in an ADR meeting or legal challenge against a broadband provider and this could prove tricky.The only way to argue the case for the Act is by looking at the terms of service within the broadband contract and seeing whether they have offered the service as advertised or referring to the “deadlock letter” and what the provider has done to resolve your problem. This may help you if you take the matter to an ADR or court.

 

 

Unfair Contract Terms Act: The original Unfair Contract Terms Act was in 1971, but has since been updated in 1995 to include a section on Consumer Contracts, (broadband providers contracts fall under this). What this means is that a consumer can submit a court action stating that they think their broadband contract is unfair and cite the Act.

The Act says that a consumer is not bound by a standard term in a contract with a seller or supplier if that term is unfair. This gives the Office of Fair Trading and others powers to stop the use of unfair standard terms, if necessary by obtaining a court injunction. Ultimately, only a court can decide whether a contract term is unfair, but in many cases broadband contracts are some of the most unfair terms of all, it’s useful to know that there is a legal precedent to protect consumers from poor contract terms.

 

To isolate the the scale in wifi traffic use this might be a handy reference on the 27 January 2015: Following Sunday’s nail biting FA Cup match between Brighton and Hove Albion and Arsenal the home team has reported record usage figures for the stadium’s free WiFi service, at The Amex Stadium. WiFi provider The Cloud saw over 13,000 devices connect to the network consuming a staggering 600,000 minutes of online time.

 

Understandably usage peaked; pre-match, at half time and after the match. The data shows a phenomenal amount of online activity before the match started with over 110,000 mbytes of data downloaded – nearly double the average data use at the stadium on a match day. With fans at Brighton & Hove Albion’s stadium being able to auto connect to The Cloud WiFi once registered, usage has soared. Supporters are now simply activating WiFi and accessing the internet to check live scores, use social media and stream content for free.

Dispute Resolution or Court Action

 

If you have reached the stage where you’ve exhausted all possible options in trying to resolve the matter directly with your broadband provider then at this point you may want to consider alternative dispute resolution or court action.In 2003 the communications regulator Ofcom drafted The Communications Act. The act sets out that all communication providers, (including broadband providers) need to subscribe to an Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) scheme that offers access to impartial and free arbitration. There are currently two such schemes and each of these provide lists of their members: Otelo – Office of the Telecoms Ombudsman, their job is sort out problems with communications providers and consumers – http://www.otelo.org.uk/membercompanies.php CISAS – Communications and Internet Service Adjudication Scheme, offers the same service except they work in a slightly different way - http://www.cisas.org.uk/Members.asp Technically you can still take your broadband provider to court after an ADR has looked at your case but most people tend to accept the decision of the ADR, especially since an ADR can force a broadband provider to pay compensation.Taking your broadband provider to court should not be taken lightly. Our advice is do not proceed with court action if you do not think you have a strong case against the broadband provider. At this stage you can lose your dispute against your provider in court and it may cost you money in fines and fees if you lose, (i.e. for claims less than £5,000).

 

 

We don't know if this dispute was taken to ADP or what its position on it is either. Nor do we know the terms or guarantees in the contract. The above case of Amex Stadiums WiFi appears to have been robust enough to handle 13k simultaneous users where as the quoted figure we have in the Rangers case is either 10k or 50k we have no idea which is the correct figure according to the contract as we've not seen it. Now without proof that the latter figure is in the contract we cant know if its fit for purpose or not. In saying that though recorded usage logs could be used if argued in the case that the service provided is substandard. I can see at least one other option if 50k was indeed one of the terms however I simply cant tell.

I won't copy BJ's very interesting piece but suffice to say that Rangers first played 4-2-4 with Ian McMillan as the deep lying inside right and Jim Baxter as the attacking left half back in the early 60's.

 

.

..

 

I would agree that at that time most Scottish teams and players played in a very attack minded expansive style meaning it would be natural for them to play that way with very little coaching. However in as much as I would like to believe the notion that managers in those times let the players decide how the game would be played, and in spite of the quoted reference, I simply cant.

Take the 72' game against Munich for example apart from Juventus in 78' it is for me the stand out victory in any competition that we've ever had because of who we were playing against Sepp Maier in goal, Schwarzenbeck, Beckenbauer, Breitner, Roth, Hoeness and Gerd Muller. When we went to Munich to play them they expected Rangers to play in a defensive 4-2-4 but as I'm sure you're well aware that's not how we played at all the result ending up 1-1. By all accounts the romantic version of the story is that Wallace returned from his spying/fact finding mission with the only information being that they were better than the previous team who beat us in the Fairs Cup the year before. I don't believe that for one second nor that Waddle just let the players decide how to play in that game. Incidentally my old man wouldn't let me travel abroad with him during that run of games though I was in my usual place on the Broomloan Rd terrace for the return leg and the atmosphere was something I'll never forget.

I should have been clearer Advocaat didn't play that defensive 4-4-2 style of football his was essentially 4-3-3 with various adaptations remember he was called 'the little general' because 'the general' title was already taken by his mentor Mickels. I was describing his style from my perspective as a 'moment of sunlight' in an otherwise dank, dull environment. It can seem crazy to talk about total football in a situation such as this but if you talk about Advocaat then you simply cant avoid it because he was Mickels protege.

You are absolutely correct that the formation Smith used was 4-1-4-1 with an interchangeable one of the mid 4 playing as a false #10. No matter how you slice it though it was a very defensive setup that has to rely on a powerful fast paced player such as Darcheville. Although on paper its the same formation it was nothing like the Spanish side of 2008 who used it very successfully. Credit where its due though it held out until 18 minutes till the end. However if you look at the match stats for the first and second half we were out played in every possible way in both.

I will concede that the '4-4-2' I suggested in my previous post was clumsy but was intended as a 'catch all' phrase to describe the negative play style that Scottish football had adapted since the 80's rather than go into detail, as I am about to, because its sort of boring to discuss if you're just wanting to see good football. With that said of course there are any number of permutations and combinations of numbers/formations that can be derived from it. Although strictly speaking its not 'Catenaccio' as that has a sweeper who sits just in front of the keeper such as 1–3–3–3, 1–4–3–2, 1–4–4–1 the latter of which as you can see is more or less Smiths 4-1-4-1 (the exception being your namesake in promoted position) where as the above Spanish 4-1-4-1 was more akin to 4-2-3-1 and although somewhat defensive it is also fluid giving 6 attackers when needed as opposed to the Smith variation giving only 5.

I think that'll do for now before we bore everyone to death with a page full of unromantic number systems.

Without a doubt there were very few signs of 'sporting integrity' in those decisions Boabie and who can say what a couple more days rest could have achieved. In terms of performance levels I personally don't think it made much of a difference to our lads to be honest with you I felt they played at an intensity that I expected for that level of a tournament with or without the rest days. I have no complaints about the effort our lads put in.

A bit unfair as that Ajax team had Johan Neeskins Arie Haan Gerrie Mühren with Johan Cruijff. Sjaak Swart and Piet Keizer in front of them. Not to forget Ruud Krol and Wim Suurbier as full backs That is a world team and not many teams could do what they did. I would love to have seen them against a modern day Barcelona.

I do take your point and to a certain extent I agree with it. However I wasn't really comparing like for like in terms of those phenomenal players. I was making a slightly different point. Here's an extract from a piece I had written regarding what the Scottish game has become in comparison to where it once was but never posted.

So we're really talking about a Rangers class and style more as an attitude, a philosophy, a way of playing, which is qualitative rather than any specific type quantitative data's (match stats are quantifiable and important in the modern game but you get the drift). The formation used at that time, apart from Whites two year spell 67-69', was more or less 2-3-5 or pyramid. Translated that's two covering full backs, three half backs and five forwards consisting of centre forward inside left, inside right, outside left and outside right. By the time it came to Waddells tenure he could adapt it frequently and by using two larger (modern built) centre half type players in the covering positions previously occupied by full backs would allow the now more athletic full backs to support with more width. At other times it was adapted to 4-2-4 or else otherwise akin to Chapman of Arsenals 'WM' and the Hungarian Bukovis 'WW' formations the latter of which was perfected by the Hungarians and the Brazilians of the 50's. In short it was a very fluid style and caught out many an unsuspecting opposition. However it isn't really the formations that we remember with fondness, it was more the players and their style/class.

 

 

 

That in its self is rather antithetical because without an expansive philosophy of play in 'the Rangers Style' then how could a player possibly be of 'Rangers Class'? More to the point without the expansive philosophy of play the players themselves would have been restricted both in growth of talent and what we now call tactical awareness therefore could not have gained the knowledge through experience to become the players that they became. This 4-3-3 of Mark Warburton is an adaptation of 4-2-4 which as I mentioned above is an adaptation of the 2-3-5 that I began with. Our game here and not just Rangers I might add has centred around the coaching of kids in the 4-4-2 method in variations of the Italian variety 'Catenaccio' ('door-bolt' or in other words defensive man marking with counter attacking) which eventually added a touch of the 'Zona Mista' ('mixed zones' or zonal marking). Throw in the uncultured hatcheting meted out by some teams for good measure and there you have what is now more or less the modern Scottish game. Its been like this in our leagues for the last 30+ years (I'd say going that way from about 5+ years before the Roxburgh era) and as far as I'm concerned has ruined our game almost completely... apart from the occasional brief moment of sunlight such as 'The Little General' there has been absolutely no attempt at any other philosophy and woe betide mentioning something as radical as total football or anything like it to counter this homogeneous brute force 4-4-2 system and philosophy.

 

 

Although always being hopeful it was absolutely no surprise to me that 'The little Generals' adapted 4-3-3 team took Wattys defensive 4-4-2 apart in our last Euro final. I'm sure I don't need to make the comparison to what teams are doing now against us being similar to the way we tried to play against Zenith. If most bears are honest with themselves we never really looked anything like scoring. It's all a far cry from being able to take our foot off the gas at 3-0 up 5 minutes into the second half of a Euro Cup final. That's more or less exactly what Mickels phenomenal Ajax side of the 70's playing adaptations of 4-3-3 did to Herrera's Inter Milan beating them 2-0 and further to that went on and thrashed Maldini's A.C. Milan 6–0 in the European Super Cup. A match in which the defensive Milan system was completely destroyed by Ajax.

 

 

Do not get me wrong I am not for one minute suggesting that the current Rangers squad is of the same calibre or quality as Ajax with Cruyff, Inter, Milan or even the current Bayern or Barcelona squads with the likes of Messi etc... not at all and far from it, besides the game has moved on a long way since then athletically speaking almost unrecognisably so. It is however essentially the same game and there is a limit to the distance and length of time athletes can go flat out for. So if we want to compete with the likes of those at today's elite or any other level we do need to begin somewhere. What I'm absolutely sure about is that if we stick with this same philosophy of the zonal/man marking, defensive 4-4-2, with its hyper defensive all about not losing, get rid of the ball, hoof it out the park, hawf him mentality then our young players are already having all their fitba coached out of them.

 

 

What Mark Warburton has done is introduce this expansive philosophy back again into all Rangers squads from kids to seniors. He's put in place a system where we coach them to be comfortable on the ball, in all positions during a game, even while under pressure defensively. Then through a combination of natural ability and the experience of previous mistakes, on the continent learned at a young age, we will most definitely see the rewards as the years progress. When this is what we consider normal again, as is on the continent, then these kids-to-men will be able to play in any system, in any league, should they chose to.

You're reading of our defensive shape is fairly accurate. However the shape isn't supposed to be a back three its supposed to be a back two who split either side of the 18 yard box with Wallace and Tav promoted further up on either side with Halliday as the pivot point in line with the pen spot in the middle of the park ( A horseshoe shape with Halliday as the point of a triangle between the two CH).

As it is... its not quite as fluid as Michels great Ajax side of the 70's. If it was total football type fluid then Holt and Zalelem would also be interchangeable with Halliday who is, as I already mentioned, supposed to be interchangeable with any of the back four.

That's what Halliday is supposed to do in this system whenever the defence is under pressure. He's also supposed to be interchangeable with any of the defensive four, should they be out of position, when we don't have the ball. It tends to be more often than not that we dominate possession up to as much as 80% so you don't see it as often as you might with a team having more possession. The rest of the midfield three are supposed to be moving/positioning laterally across the park at the same time.

Your not the only one confused by this. If we assume that the club are being truthful then I cannot see anything that they have done wrong. There is enough bad press and scaremongering by our media about the clubs finances that directors had to make plain that no loans were required at this time.

Why did RF go public with this? Only those in positions of governance in RF can answer, they don't owe me any explanation but their members who provide the funds certainly are due a explanation.

I completely agree with you with regards to RF members being fully informed as to what was going on. On the other hand from an emotional perspective you/we are thinking why turn down a 500k loan as it could be handy? However from a business perspective I'm thinking hostile attempt to arrest shares albeit veiled.

Attacking football, 2 backs bombing up the wings, centre half is always going to be exposed

In my spare time the other day I wrote a piece that includes what you're talking about CS but on reflection it turned out to be three pages long and rambled a bit so I've not bothered to publish it here.

I'm slightly confused by all of this. It doesn't appear to make sense to me. First of all lets be clear what a company secretary is. Its not somebody who does dictation and makes the tea as AS chairman Holt has tried to imply in his recent rantings (player registration and liaison with league and cup bodies is part of the secretaries remit). It is in actual fact probably the most important position within a companies structure. The secretary or the 'secretary office' deals with all legal aspects of the company's business including, most importantly, insuring board decisions are carried out and advice to the board/board members regarding legislation, law and lawful practice while doing so. Its also the secretary's job to register and communicate with shareholders. In this case its the fan initiative RF.

From my understanding RF have raised this money through its members in order to invest in shares should they become available whether through transfer/buyout or in any future IPO. What is confusing to me is why RF are, aggressively, attempting to create a share issue through this loan when no, shares have become available nor IPO been offered to raise capital? Could anyone shed any light on it for me?

Good evening Gersnet.

I've been a bit of a lurker here for the last 6 months or so and finally decided to get in aboot it.

I'll do that.

Gers could get Accrington pair in January after compensation row

 

Josh Windass of Accrington Stanley could be Ibrox-bound this month

 

Exclusive by Graeme Macpherson / 1 hour ago / Rangers

 

RANGERS could land Accrington Stanley pair Josh Windass and Matt Crooks this month rather than in the summer after the League Two club’s new owner expressed his frustration at the prospect of losing them for next to nothing come the end of the season. Andy Holt, who became Accrington’s majority shareholder at the end of last year, confirmed the Ibrox club have been in talks with striker Windass, the son of former Aberdeen forward Dean, and defensive midfielder Crooks with a view to the pair signing pre-contract arrangements. Accrington do not wish to sell either of the 21-year-olds in January as they push for promotion but, faced with the possibility of losing them in the summer for a reduced cross-border compensation fee, Holt revealed the club may have to rethink their stance and listen to offers this month.

 

“We are investing in young players so I don’t like the rule that says they can effectively move on for free if they go north of the border,” he said. “If you grow a tree and spend money on it then when it becomes a bigger tree you get more money for it. And that’s how it should be with football players too.

 

“It’s possible the two boys have had their heads turned but I wouldn’t have a problem with that if that were the case. I wouldn’t want to stand in their way of having a future as they are good lads, as are the rest of the squad. But I don’t think we as a club should lose out as a result after all our efforts in bringing them on.

 

“Our intention is to go for promotion this season so we want to keep our squad together this month if we can. But obviously these kind of things [the possibility of losing them for a reduced sum] you’ve got to bring into the mix. That’s something we might need to think about. Rangers haven’t been in touch with me personally about signing the players this month although I daresay that could yet change.

Promoted stories

 

Recommended by

 

“Compensation should be for the players who don’t succeed as well as for the ones who do. It’s to cover the costs of developing young players whether they make it or not. And so it doesn’t seem right to me that after you do that a Scottish club can come and take them for next to nothing. I haven’t given up hope on the two boys signing new deals here but I’ll respect whatever they decide to go. I did well in my life and so I wouldn’t want to stand in the way of others doing the same.”

Share article

 

Holt also expressed his disappointment at the way in which Rangers had communicated with Accrington that they would be opening talks with their players.

 

“The way Rangers have gone about things has annoyed me a bit,” he added. “Instead of coming through me or our manager John Coleman they just sent an email to our secretary and that’s not the norm. I thought they might have called one of us, or even our chairman Peter Marsden and told us their intentions. In normal circumstances a manager would ring his fellow manager to say what was going on so that was a bit disappointing.”

 

http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/sport/rangers/14181342.Gers_could_get_Accrington_pair_in_January_after_compensation_row/

Its an absolute outrage!

How dare the Rangers approach two young players during the transfer window and offer them an opportunity to move on to a bigger club when their contracts end its completely and utterly inappropriate.

What a load of nonsense and sour grapes that article contains. First of all read FIFA reg 18(5) Rangers don't actually need permission to speak to the lads as their contracts have less than 6 months to run. Yet they've courteously informed the club through the secretary (an executive and most important position) that they intend to speak to them. If the lads agreed and wanted to move before the contract is up Rangers would need to agree to a transfer fee to release their registration which would be much better for AS than getting nothing at all at the end of the season and contract.

Ha ha. Will do.

Welcome to Gersnet.

 

Do you not think we need an out and out striker and a better quality of CB than Kiernan?

Thanks Hemdani... in short no I don't. I think we need player/s who can score from anywhere not necessarily just a penalty box striker. I don't want a target man for knock downs and recycled second ball either but I would agree that at times against packed bunker defenses we've look a little shy with support numbers when our lads have turned or split defenders wide. Not everyone is a fan of Dean Shiels but he's used soft chip with lots of back spin to beat the bunker on a number of occasions this season. Clever players aware of what needs to be done against that bunker are more important for me as the squad is full of goal scorers already.

EDIT: I think Kiernan is left a little exposed at times because unlike Big Derek and Dave Smith in the 72' final he doesn't have Greig sitting in front of him clearing everything and everyone out. If we have someone to do that he can learn to clean up if anyone should slip through then he can worry about play style and distribution later.

For the style we're playing that role is vital in fact if you remember and what I consider our greatest ever victory other than Juventus in 78' Parlane stepped in for Greig in the game against Bayern and had Roth in his back pocket for the full game and scored a belter into the bargain.

Thanks Pete.

These short-term low-level signings have me perplexed.

 

Are they just squad thickeners to see us through this season? If so, what does that say about his previous comments about pathway to first team for our development and fringe players? Does it mean he thinks Bell & Kelly, and Templeton

& Oduwa (Miller too has been playing wide forward) are pish, and that we have no players to play a wide role coming from the development squad and so need this level of player, neither of which has any decent track record in the game, just to get us through another 20 games? Given both are only being handed 5 month contracts, that must be the assumption.

 

If the above is wrong, is this really the quality he believes is required to challenge the scum next season? It surely cannot be the case or we are in big trouble. The saving grace is again the length of contract indicates a short term fix. What this then does not do is continue the rebuilding of the squad with an eye on next season. We must add 6-8 players who are improvements on our current squad for next season, perhaps more when you consider the 3 loanees who will be leaving and some players running out of contract who won't be asked to stay on. If Warburton is to be taken at his word that he doesn't like doing that as it upsets the harmony, then he has to bring some of these in during this window so as not to have a huge disruption in pre-season. If he brings in 3-4 in January, then why are we also bringing in two very ordinary players who won't feature next season.

 

It is all very confusing as there appear to be contradictions all over the place from Warburtons earlier statements and his recent actions. Thoughts bears? Am I missing something?

My first post on Gersnet so I hope its no too controversial an introduction.

We need to get our head out of where it has been for the last couple of decades with sometimes extravagant, expensive flop fodder.

I think Warburton is using his experience from his previous field here and is cautiously speculating. You can sort of follow it through the carefully chosen language he uses in some of his interviews where he talks about transfers and the loan market for example. He says it gives us access to the type of player we simply cant afford. We're not in Kansas no more Toto, or more aptly 'the 90's'. Not that they are automatically better players than what we already have per se'. Just that the markets are shrinking. At the moment we're competing against both the SPFL and the English leagues for a smaller pool of available players and it is far too expensive, in more ways than one, to place your budget on what could potentially be a 10-100/1 shot.

I think he's being cute here, we need cover, not just for injury's and suspensions but for terrain also. In fact Scottish football has gotten to the stage, over the last 20 odd years, of breeding Barry Ferguson type players (physique wise) because of the heavy pitches in the months from October to Jan and again in the months from late Feb to early May where very few of the slighter built players perform well on heavy pitches. There are exceptions of course but I'm sure you've heard it yourself in your circles. He needs tae beef up a bit or he's powder puff, too lightweight. Zalalem for example is a lovely neat and tidy player but his slump in form seems to have coincidently begun as the rains did and he'll probably come back to a right good game as the pitches dry out from March onward.

If you seen the state of Dens park at all for that derby on Sat? Forrester is a wee stocky guy and by the looks of him could cover the ground as needed and would be excellent cover across 7, 8, 10, 11 especially in the type of boggy terrain (e.g. at Dens park), with no bounce, in the next couple of months. To my mind Warbs is taking a punt here but not just a guess type of punt. Its more calculated and pragmatic than that. What's the worst case scenario? We could get a player who cant quite cut it. That's OK we let him go in the next window as the limited contract allows. Not much of a loss over all. Or he does make an impression in which case we sign him on a more permanent basis or conversely move him on before his contact expires for a couple of hundred grand, in that tight market. 200k is nothing in the English market and if he was up to par for them many English clubs would bite the hand off you to take him for that type of money but for us, right now, its a healthy chunk of change.

There's a fair bit of business to be done in this window yet and I'm sure if Warburton can get what he thinks he needs then he will. Otherwise he'll wait. The only position I think we need is DM but I'm not Warburton so I don't know exactly how he feels about that position or whether he feels he already has someone to cover that role or not. I'll wait and see who and what he does before I become overly concerned.