calscot

I think what people seem to forget that the SPL may be "dross" compared to the likes of the super rich EPL, but we're also in that league and constrained by the same parameters that the non-OF clubs are, albeit with greater advantages. The cream can only rise to the top of the height of whatever portion of milk is available. They may be dross compared to the richest European teams but we've become European minnows. Hearts losing badly to Spurs (ironically by playing attacking football and taking the game to them) is probably a similar difference in finances to Gretna vs AC Milan ten years ago. It's hardly a fair measurement. The only way the OF compete at all in Europe as reasonably large and successful clubs is due to usurping about a third of Scottish meagre resources each. Other small countries have dominant clubs but not to the same extreme degree. That is what makes us special.

Advocaat (for a season and a half) and PLG were humbled excessively and repeatedly by so called SPL dross but weren't known for Wattie type tactics... With Advocaat we had the most expensive Attacking duo in Scottish history who cost about as much as our entire current squad. Those results were honking.

I'm ambivalent with Celtic in Europe. For the greater good of Scotland and Rangers, I think I want them to do well - however, that's as long as they are out at least one more round earlier than us... I also admit to taking some small pleasure when they lose or are booted out.

We could do with some modern songs in our repertoire.

I found the actual collective meltdown embarrassing...

Haven't Arsenal been "building for the future" with young players for the last five years? Maybe we should follow their lead so we can be as successful as them... :fish:

I think the problem is that the keeper made it too easy for the ref to give a penalty. Stokes did cheat by making the most of it and engineering the trip, as he knew his lob had missed - but football is a sport where cheating is accepted, condoned and often encouraged - "It's all part of the modern game."

I think it's still too early for a report card - who got one after a few weeks at school? It's been a mixed bag and with the mitigation of being a new manager and trying to put a team together, there is not much you can conclude so far. Can't believe the word "blame" is coming out already and I think it says more about those spouting it than anything to do with the team or manager. I think the ironic thing is that we seem to have dropped the Wattenacio and are trying to play the attacking football a lot of people have been asking for - and it's certainly not working in Europe. Last night, at 1-0 up, Wattie would have pissed the fans off by locking up shop. However, we'd have probably come home with an away win. McCoist seems to be pandering to the fans when he should be remembering the teachings of Obi Walt Kenobi. Domestically the team seems solid enough and doing a reasonable job on that front and I can't see any cause for complaint there. An early draw to the third best team is hardly a disaster. I don't think we can really judge Ally in Europe this season, and plenty of Rangers managers have done badly there. However, if he does do badly, he needs to make up for it next season. For the first domestic report card, I think we need to wait till 11 league games have been played - and certainly until quite a few weeks after the transfer window closes.

I think it's a bit much to say a player is passed it at 32. That may have been the case 30 years ago but times have changed. Weir is about 41 and although he's probably exceptional, he's 9 years older than a 32 year old. So if the guy can last just a third of that amount it still gives him 3 years at the top - the length of his contract. Diet, training, medicine, sports science, health and safety and just general living standards have improved dramatically and 32 is hardly old these days. Footballers don't smoke any more and tend to booze a lot less and generally look after themselves a lot more. Chris Hoy won three medals at 32 in a sport where fitness is everything and where skill and experience are less valuable than something like football. Goalkeepers and defenders tend to last longer in football and there are loads of examples of players playing at the highest level in their mid thirties - and we're not exactly the highest level. Instead of the "wrong side of 30", we should really now be thinking the "wrong side of 35".

Any idea how much? I can imagine we may have upped the offer again as we're having a bit of an injury and suspension crisis already and need the bods.

The ebay analogy was used as you don't seem to grasp the concept of the lower bid, and so sometimes a more familiar setting can help people understand. Unfortunately it IS rubbish as you still can't understand the concept. The thing is, you may disagree ,and that's fine, but at the moment, it just comes across like you don't understand...

No, he's just a very naughty boy! Crucifixion?

I agree that it doesn't quite seem like it's really kicked off but when you've been at the business end of the season, the new one is a bit of an anticlimax. However, that's usually mitigated by a long summer where you miss it and can't wait for it to start again... I think the fact that the transfer window is still open and we don't seem to have concluded our business also gives the break an unfinished feel about it.

The Cuellar deal off seems like common sense. The guy is still not fit and won't be match fit for a couple of months - so if we wait till January, we can again, drop our bid to say �£1.2M, save the wages as well, and bring in a fit player who can go straight into the team. For Cuellar, it means he can pick up his higher wage for 4 months while he get's back to fitness - and might just get a higher signing on fee. The only losers are Villa, but they don't have a choice.

Maybe since the anecdote has being picked up, I should add another related one. A year ago I actually won an auction for a bike but afterwards noticed the wheels in the picture were not the one's listed - they were Mavic Aksiums rather than Ksyriums and you have to look closely to tell. Aksiums are solid reliable but heavy and cheap. Ksyriums are a couple of notches above. I pointed this out to the guy and he said he copied and pasted the spec from a website and didn't see the difference; he offered me �£200 off. So I could have had a lower offer accepted. However, upgrading the wheels would cost more than �£200 so I declined and pulled out of the sale due to inaccurate description. That worked out well for me as a few days later I was in hospital with a broken leg and wrist and wasn't able to cycle for seven months. However, I think it's incredibly obvious that Bedoya's value is dropping by the week. Or should we wait till December and offer �£1M? It's like the price of the iPad 3 will start off high for those that want it early and go down as general release becomes available. But in this case the Swedes are selling something that is actually worthless. The only thing they are selling is giving us something earlier than they have to. The less early that is, the less it is worth. After that, I feel like the minister of the bleedin' obvious.

You can always take analogies to extremes, and due to freedom of contract, Bedoya doesn't quite fit - we've got him for free in January - who else would want to buy him in the meantime, and there's no way he'd go anyway. If you already have future ownership of something, why would you bid more when the clock is ticking? But you're still wrong. On ebay you may lose the auction but the person who wins doesn't pay up for some reason. The option is there for a "second chance". Now if you are less desperate to get the item, you may negotiate with them for a lower bid than your original one, and if they are desperate enough as they don't want to wait for another auction, they might just take it. The Bedoya case is more akin to "Price drop TV". So the question is, why would bid more?

Bit of a no-brainer...

But what about the Malmo player that kicked a Rangers player in retaliation? He was only booked and no ban at all. For me being kicked is 10 times worse than being hit by a ball. Being banned for 3 games for throwing a ball at someone is ridiculous considering what other players get away with. Punishments need to be proportional and consistent. In this case, UEFA look like a bunch of idiots - as usual.

Maybe, but how many times have you tried to buy something got to about your fourth or fifth choice, and then been really happy with your purchase and glad you didn't buy something else? I must be as pathetic as Rangers as I tried to buy about 5 carbon road bikes on ebay and looked at dozens more. I kept getting sniped at the last minute. I ended up buying Boardman from Halfords which was last year's model, for not much more than they were going for on ebay, but with a computer and bottle cage worth 90 quid thrown in plus a 10 quid voucher. I'm really pleased with my purchase as I know it's brand new, so won't need any replacement parts for a while, and was able to use some of the money I saved to upgrade the wheels, tyres, seat and peddles and now have a really good bike which weighs about 7.5 kilos including the peddles for less than I was bidding on ebay (and I have a decent spare set of wheels). It might be my Z chioice but I'm pretty happy with it overall. This happens to me all the time, including houses, cars, motorbikes, TV's - and my girlfriend. Sometimes your Z choice is a pretty good choice. And that's the point. Who cares how many choices we try as long as the guys we get in are a success?

It's been that way for what seems like over a decade - it's not about whether you get the ball any more, it's the potential dangerousness of the tackle. We've lost out to the same rules time and again and the pundits explain this at the time - so why does their understanding change when it affects our opposition?

Anyone see the Peep Show epsiode where Mark is "raped" by Jez's-mum's-boyfriend's-daughter"? Very funny but makes you think...

I have little doubt it was for "dramatic effect". They know that the doors of Ibrox are closely watched. They could easily have avoided the "drama" and achieved the actual task in question if they had any desire to conduct their business discreetly.

I can't see any decent teams coming in for him. He's not played enough games for Rangers yet to really make an impression, and besides, Rangers' stock has dropped in that department - just because you get a few games for us, doesn't mean you're EPL material these days. His best bet would be a championship club, but even that's stretching it for a decent pay offer as he's still "potential" more than anything.

By the accounts, it seems they sent them in even though talks were at an advanced stage for some kind of publicity power play. I've no time for tax cheats but the way the HMC work sometimes is diabolical.

Are you saying he went because John Henry is a bigger magnate than David Murray? :fish: