calscot

Most newspapers seem to be jokes these days. Read the Guardian (which is probably the highest regarded) online recently and was pretty shocked at the standard of so-called journalism. I thought they might be the voice of reason or at least objectivity on the Assange affair but was well disabused of that notion.

It goes to http://www.gersnet.co.uk/vb/ which is a place saver page.

Like I said there is a place for criticism but a lot of what is happening is disparagement and ridicule which is just not enjoyable to constantly read even when it's about someone like Lennon, never mind your own manager. We're all concerned about the Berwick performance but only some of us want to start lobbing rocks at McCoist. Not only that, there is a lot of truth twisting in order to build up ammunition. You might have doubts about McCoists managerial ability but plenty on here have already made their conclusions after only a few games (in fact some made the conclusions before the season started). I hardly think that's fair. We need a decently sized and "clean" statistical sample with which to base our conclusions. Last year's samples were contaminated and so are unfit for use. Results should also be looked at objectively which is just not happening. All I'm saying is don't start whipping a guy until he's had time to get things sorted. After that then maybe he deserves it.

I'm not saying we should accept abject pish; however, surely the odd hiccup or bad performance at the beginning can be forgiven as long as it is acknowledged and improvement made reasonably soon? Maybe for me I don't get this "accept" attitude. I see Rangers a bit like a family member and so I'm somewhat forgiving. So thinking of family members, if you're son started in a new team and had a "pish" game or two but didn't throw the game away, how would you treat him? Like the board members on here - giving him derogatory remarks at every opportunity? Would you accept "abject pish" from him and if not, how would you deal with it? How much time would you give him? How would you talk to him and when would you give up on him and suggest he try another sport or hobby? I think the amount of "time" needed would be till about a month after the transfer window closes. For me there is a score that mounts up with a threshold and I don't go apoplectic before the threshold is met. If Ally had lost every game then I'd be far more likely to be putting up for questioning but he's so far unbeaten. While that does not constitute an A it also doesn't constitute an F- more like a C-, "must do better". But you have to be given time to do better and although none of us are going to be able to be the head master that calls Ally to account, it seems pretty obvious that he doesn't really need it as he can see it for himself. What good is there to rub it in further? People really have to ask themselves, what good is all this sniping doing - will it really change anything bar make you and others miserable? If it won't help your son improve, then why would it help the team? To be honest I don't pretend to have a clue how much they train or how much they should be training. I'm no expert in what is the optimal amount to train but as a qualified weightlifting instructor, I do know about over-training and that sometimes less is more. Rest is an important part of physical training and "active rest" (eg walking) is very beneficial. Jig is lambasted for playing golf, but that seems a good supplementary sport to me. It's not over doing it while walking for miles at a lowish intensity which is supposed to be very good for you physiologically in addition to high intensity training. Psychologically, golf when played well, is a pretty good game for teaching you sports psychology and how not to lose your nerve. It's all about staying in the moment and visualising your next move before doing it. Forget about past shots and how you're doing and play for the now. I think that could apply very well to a sport which seems to eschew that sort of thinking. Even rugby has adopted those principles when taking kicks but when do you see a penalty, freekick, corner taker relax his body and visualise the shot before taking it? Not even the top teams do this so how does our training compare to theirs? We seem to be assuming other teams like Everton train more than us but I've seen Rangers teams outplay Premiership teams in friendlies and what about our UEFA cup run? We didn't look 10 yards off the pace then. As I said, what do we do when we don't accept the performances that will stop the standard dropping. I can't see how snidy remark after snidy remark on a forum is going to help in the slightest. I doubt it would help your son if done to his face. Who is accepting it as the norm? I really don't know what you're suggesting we should be doing... I always think encouraging and supporting works much better than lambasting and ridiculing. For a manager, there is a time when enough is enough and maybe some people think circumstances don't matter and not winning by five goals every game is unacceptable, but I see that as extreme. So many said Eck and PLG needed more time when they didn't deserve it and had enough to show they were going nowhere. Nobody was telling them to go after a couple of bad draws in 6 games. There are some who think that he didn't do well enough last season but for me, a ten point deduction and administration and pay cuts gives a manager a get out of jail free card. There are at least 2 on here who have said that it is unacceptable that he didn't win the league and that's just ridiculous. He achieved a better league position than Eck's last season and the projected finish of PLG and yet even with his circumstances he gets far less leeway than those two. Why not? Just where are our expectations? We have to ground them somehow and sacking someone for not being ten times better than his peers with similar resources seems a bit unfair. The point is that we have to look around to see what is normal before we can put a level on what is acceptable. You seem to be throwing that out of the window because we've been at the top of the game for so long. Should Nottingham fans expect to win the Champions League every season? You have be somewhat realistic in how achievable your goals are under your circumstances at the time. I broke my leg two years ago but have started playing football again - should I lower my expectations of how I play? Should I give myself some time? Or give up after not being very good for the first six games? That looks like double standards to me. You are saying that the team Liverpool put out were of a similar level to Hearts? Shouldn't they have been of a much higher standard than Hearts. Our team looks like a bit of a reserve team, when does a level of difference count in your eyes? I think that's a very contradictory argument. Maybe you should tell me. Are you saying that Ally's had three strikes and should be sacked? How many is it? Are we less than that number? If so, shouldn't we wait till we reach that number? You're arguing against yourself here. Either Ally has had enough time and enough bad games or he hasn't. The time to judge him is when he has, not before. You seem to be using "part-timers" as a derogatory term here which is a bit disrespectful to those players in my opinion. Judging by the interviews I'm pretty sure that the team and manager are embarrassed by the way they played. So what is that you want to achieve? I don't really know. If you're son is embarrassed about how he played do you let him sort himself out or do you go out to truly demoralise him? That's the point, I really don't know what people here want to achieve bar sacking Ally now. I've seen prejudging with Walter, with certain players and even with the fans ("we'll be lucky to get 20k in div 3") and many have been proven wrong time and again. There is nothing wrong with discussing shortfalls in the performance but that is not what has been happening. I could easily join in all the vitriol towards Ally but that's not my style. I like to be reasonable in my judgements and I take time and mitigation into account. I wanted Advocaat sacked, Eck sacked and PLG sacked, but I at least gave them a fair crack of the whip first. In fact I was very supportive in the beginning for all them - the same as McCoist. To my shame I even wanted Walter to go after we lost 10 in a row, but I think I've learned from that.

I don't think there is anyone that doesn't want us to play well. However, it seems a bit much when you boo the conductor during the warmup... It's also ludicrous to think that as someone who has never played in an orchestra that you can do a far better job of conducting than a top violinist who is highly qualified for the job and served a pretty good apprenticeship. We may have far higher resources than our rivals, but I always thought the beauty of football is that with 11 men against 11, if the underdogs put the effort in, they can sometimes get a result. We've already been talking on here about Hearts lucky to beat Auchinleck Talbot, then an incredibly highly paid Liverpool team were extremely lucky to beat Hearts. We're not in some parallel universe to the rest of football where it only happens to us - it happens all the time. The problem is that many on here don't seem to acknowledge that. Just what is everyone comparing us to? Which manager in the SPL dispatches lower division teams in the cups in away games with ease and playing lovely football? In fact I think the last SPL manager to praised for good football was Yogi, and wasn't his team relegated? Falkirk are now known for good football so surely a game against them should produce something watchable? I'm of the belief that football just doesn't work that way. Should we be touting Yogi for manager?

PS Even since Advocaat, we've had less and less money to spend compare to the top clubs in Europe. Of course the standard of player is dropping. People say Walter had plenty of money to spend but it's a fraction of what a top Premiership club pays for one player. DA's £5m player is today's £25m player. Todays £5m player is DA's £1m player. Like I said, if it wasn't getting worse it would be a miracle.

Since when has it being getting worse then? This season? After losing 23 players, being relegated to the 3rd division and having to bring in lesser players than we have done since the early 80's? If it wasn't worse it would be a miracle.

Those that whinge and whinge - generic and not aimed at you.

If we get a decent offer of say a million or over, then we have to take it in our present financial state. Some of that can be reinvested in the youth system. I think a bigger problem is that McKay is only under contract till the end of the season and Everton are looking to pick him up for the out of contract, "training fee". However, at the moment we have to be like any other selling club when a richer fish comes along.

I've lost you. Doesn't the fact that a Premiership club are chasing one of our youngsters mean the youth policy is working? You're saying if richer clubs are looking enviously at our youngsters then we're FAILING in that department? You think we should only continue if NO clubs are interested in our youngsters? That's pretty strange logic to me.

When was the football actually good? It became shit under Advocaat, shit under Eck, shit under PLG (although some seem to have rose tinted specs about a side who rarely gave confidence in a win), shit under Walter Smith (despite completely dominating domestic football and getting to a European final) and now shit under McCoist. So when was it good? There are people who also complain that it was shit under Smith the first time around and under Souness we were called a bunch of hackers. Before that we had dire stuff under Wallace and Grieg. There may have been a purple patch in DA's first two years but that's the very spending that put us in the third division now and it's not as if we can ever go back to that model. Are we saying that we've been getting worse since Jock Wallace's first term? That ended 34 years ago. There are clubs - 40 of them in Scotland, that never reach the heights of Rangers or win much at all, yet they have loyal followings. Perhaps their followers are not so great in numbers but sometimes you have to wonder if our fans are real football fans or just spoilt brats. The comments are a bit like a kid in the depression, complaining at every mouthful that the food is shit while his father tries his best but struggles to bring home enough money to feed the family. Maybe that's a bit extreme and it's more like a kid complaining that his birthday presents are now crap after his father gets made redundant from a top job and has to take a more average one while still paying the big bills for the house etc. There are some people who see things are not perfect but they staunchly get through it, supporting and helping as much as they can. There are others that just whinge and whinge all the way while holding very low standards for themselves...

They didn't blow a 15point lead that's just making it up. You can't blow a lead when your opponents have games in hand. He may have lost a 9 point lead but then why wasn't Lennon sacked for losing the 9pt lead in the first place? The point is that in football you have good and bad runs. We had a good one and then a bad one. They had a bad one and then a good one. We weren't very far apart and in fact even after the bad run McCoist had a well above average points total. You can't play your rivals games and when they are chalking up win after win it's not simple just to match them. There were plenty of mitigating factors and to say the off-field problems didn't affect the players until administration is just naive. But the fact was our best player was badly injured from a much smaller squad than we normally have and smaller than our rivals and our second best player had an eye on the door and the EPL. At the same time Celtic were scraping wins and had a load of refereeing decisions to help them. Perhaps you think they were all fair and that Celtic didn't pressurise the referees over the last few years. Some of us think differently. But the fact remains that before administration, we were back to winning ways and were challenging for the title - which is really all you can ask of a Rangers manager. Advocaat didn't do it, Eck didn't do it and PLG didn't do, so all three deserved to go. Ally challenged until administration made it impossible. So that's enough to give him another go and really you have to think of last season as "game's a bogey". No-one can be judged in those circumstances. That's exactly how it comes across.

Funny thing is there's a game called football manager - it gives only a tiny fraction of what it is like to be a manager, but it still doesn't allow you to teach the players how to play, or give them motivational speeches. If that's all management is really about then why does the game sell a lot of copies?

You don't get on a guy's back with hard questions when he's hardly started the job - I think he's perfectly capable of doing that himself at this point, and the evidence is there that he has done so. It's not asking questions in any case, it's using every excuse to say we should get shot of him. The difference here is that those who criticise him have already made up their mind before seeing much evidence, there is NO-ONE who has made up his mind that Ally is the best. The sides are: "He's rubbish and I'll never change my mind no matter what he does and I will point out every negative I can think of while chiding those that disagree with me for being blind" and "he's in a difficult job, under difficult circumstances, give him a bit time before judging and if he's not good enough then, then he has to go". I was all for giving PLG time until the halfway point when we were 17 points behind, struggling for third place, making negative records and getting worse. If Ally does the same I will want him to go - actually Ally probably needs to at least win the league to get my approval whereas I just needed PLG to compete. People seem to think that just by bringing in a new manager, that will solve all our problems - well PLG showed that that is nowhere near guaranteed - as did Advocaat eventually. There are very few managers that have instantly turned around a club in dire straights without a load of money to spend. And if we judge subsequent managers the way McCoist has been judged and those detractors get their way, we'll be bringing in a new manager nearly every month.

I don't get this perception that a manager who has virtually a whole new team that he's not worked with before, is supposed to take professional footballers and "teach them the basics"... I'm sure you would have a bigger dressing room revolt than PLG if you patronised them that way. But you also have to wonder, why is it down to McCoist to teach them this - why not their previous managers and coaches? Are we saying all the players' previous managers are a lot worse than McCoist and it's up to him to teach them how to kick a ball? I really don't think that is the job of a manager. Also the motivational aspect - has anyone who has played football on here, really needed motivation to come from their manager or captain? Does the pre-team talk totally change how up for the game you are? It is up to a manager not to ruin motivation by the way he manages and to perhaps be somewhat inspiring, but if a team of professionals can't get themselves up for a game, what is the manager to do? This is not something that you can do a one day course on motivation and leadership and learn how to do it and I can't see evidence of many on here being an expert at this, me included. (I also still don't see how one unmotivated team is the manager's fault while an even less motivated team is a player's fault. The latter may be true to some extent but isn't that still a fault of the manager for not dealing with it? What about players in McCoists squad?) At best the manager can mould the players' thinking over time to match his own, get them playing as a team and the way he wants. But yes, that does take time. I'd imagine the better players you have the easier that is but that's not where we are right now. We're probably about a middling SPL level team and we all know the banana skins they slip on when facing lower division teams. The gap is not as great as some people think - it's still 11 men who know how to play football against another 11 and take into account home advantage on a tighter pitch and a defensive formation and it's difficult for any team. Just ask Man U and Barcelona. Liverpool were lucky with their win against Hearts so should the manager be sacked? I'm sorry, we're not going to get anywhere at this level by bringing in coaches who teach players how to kick a ball properly or making motivational speeches. There is a lot more subtlety to professional management than that.

The problem is that it's just snidy comments with no logic or reason. Some people have their managerial "favourites" and the ones they dislike and they post negative things about the ones they dislike when they have no facts or evidence and use mostly made up stuff. The thing that puts this into perspective is when you contrast the comments of the same people on McCoist and a "favourite" of theirs, PLG. There is absolutely no consistency at all. Players don't look motivated by McCoist = McCoist is atrocious. Players have total backlash against PLG = Barry Ferguson's fault. McCoist finishes second 21pts behind but well ahead of third after 10pts deduction and three losses in four after administration = McCoist is never a manager PLG is 17 points behind at the half point and struggling to stay in 2nd = needs more time McCoist out of cups early = can't manage PLG out of cups at first go including to first division team = players not playing for him, needs a clear out. McCoist puts in best start to a season in a long time but loses points when troubles begin = bottle merchant who can't manage. PLG has worst run in Rangers history = players not playing for him, needs more time. McCoist admits players embarrassing = can't manage or motivate. PLG says players playing fine even though they playing abysmally = great manager. McCoist devotes himself to Rangers = shouldn't be near the manager's job. PLG can't be bothered sorting out his mess and wants away = needs backing by board and more time. McCoist wins 5-1 = we played shit PLG draws 2-2 = we were brilliant Etc, etc. There is also the made up stuff like: We ALWAYS play the long ball. The game I saw we played the ball mostly on the ground but couldn't penetrate and so resorted to a long ball now and again. The ball was played on the ground the vast majority of the time and we lost it on the deck far too often. Although we did scrore from a long ball... Berwick were the dominant team and played better football - which game were people watching? Berwick had some chances but they were mostly on the break with Rangers pushing up - it happens all the time in an unmatched game but the self appointed experts don't seem to know about these basics of football. McCoist doesn't play kids enough - how many U21's have been playing? How well did they play? McCoist doesn't make substitutions - yes he does. McCoist doesn't shout at players, but I wasn't at the game - then how do you know? McCoist doesn't need a pre-season - then why do all other managers go on about the importance of them? We should be beating all the teams 10-0 - in what league does that ever happen? There is a load of this stuff spouted and very little of it is near the truth or reality and none of it seems reasonable. People are judging him on last season where no known manager could expect to win the title under the circumstances. Hell, you could have given PLG a 30pt addition and he still wouldn't have won. Give him a 10 point deduction and who knows where we would have finished - add in a 75% wage cut and it's clear we wouldn't have fulfilled the season with PLG and so would have a good chance of finishing last. We're in a totally new position with almost a whole new squad and no preseason and people are sniping every five minutes while he doesn't lose a game. Yes he could do better but let the guy warm up first. It's like signing a new player who hasn't played all summer and then criticising everything he does before five minutes are past, whether he's any good or not. There are no people who think Ally is untouchable but there are quite a few who would like to give him a proper go before making a judgement. A manager is rarely responsible for individual games, once the team are our there, there is not much he can do till the next game. That makes him responsible for the season as a whole or even each half season. That gives him enough time to have influence. Even those that play FM should know this. If management is a game of chess then each game is a move or two. But you don't judge a chess player on each move, you judge him on the match. A manager's match is the season.

Where's the sporting integrity in moving a game from your ground? You're going from home advantage to a neutral venue just to make more money from the opposition fans. With all the SI crap we've had this year, this is just wrong and shouldn't be allowed.

I think our side is now of far lower quality than would be normal for us at the top of the SPL when we had an income of £50m a year. Players like Broadfoot can have a place in a team of better players where they do one of the less glamorous jobs. But when you take away a very solid defence and then start to rely on him as one of the better, higher paid players, he just hasn't got it in his bag. He's an ok bit part player but on his wage in the current squad he'd now need to be a star player which he just isn't. Removing his inflated wage would certainly help to increase the paltry size of our squad.

I have yet to see one poster who says that Ally can do no wrong - so who exactly are you referring to? I'd say there IS a brigade who seem to think Ally can do no right though - expecting him to win the league with a 10 point penalty and 75% player wage cuts for a start and now getting slagged off after 4-0 and 5-1 wins which is highly unusual.

Funny how you don't explain your argument... Just who are these hand-wringers? Funny also how my argument is not a different side - I'm all for fighting back but think you need to do that from a position of strength. How come you missed that?

So instead of standing up for himself and fighting for what he believes in, he should turn the other cheek and do nothing? Are you a hand-wringer by chance?

I have no idea who you are talking about, I haven't seen anyone that thinks that. I think it's more unfortunate that we have a load of plastic prods who don't care about what misfortune their actions bring to the club and they have sold us down the river time and again, opening the gates and giving our enemies stick after stick to beat the club with while bleating the most immature and puerile line of, "I can do and say what I want". Without them we have ammunition to fight back incredibly strongly. With them we are incredibly weak, utterly defenseless and with no allies to our name.

There are plenty of SFL clubs who want to give him a vote of no-confidence however, they thought the timing was inappropriate and I'd assume that the SFA AGM would be the time to do it. But many clubs might have calmed down by then and lost the appetite. I think the leagues are too bloated as they are with clubs that would not be in the senior ranks of other countries. If we're gong to do that it should be more like the Conference in England with automatic promotion and relegation with regional leagues.

Reconstruction would HAVE to leave a 10 team third division - or how can Rangers get into the second tier? The 7th and 8th in div 2 would be above us in the rankings. So 16/16/10 seems to be the way to go. With only 30 natural games a season there would have to be a split or play offs for the title and relegation etc.

Yes, Murray paid for some of his mismanagement with £50m, and Craig Whyte was fined £200k and banned syne die from Scottish football. So should we apply those "punishments" to Regan?