calscot

Ah FFS!

I agree. And if you think about it, there could be a scenario where you bid �£1M, they say 1.5, you say 1.25, they say 1.3 and you get a deal. Now imagine with that potential scenario you went straight in with �£2M?

Don't you just love muggles? (It's the separate schooling, you see...)

The thing that I find weird is that from the media portrayal, you'd think Scotland was a hotbed of religious motivated violence and discrimination on a huge scale, oh and combined with a fantastically violent hatred of the English... Apart from the odd stupid comment or song and a bit of winding up, I think I may have spent a lot my life in the wrong Scotland... Ayrshire must be an exception!

Still don't get where you need the word, "fail" - it's completely inappropriate. Or have you failed in convincing me that it is? And we can't complain about the BBC putting a negative tone on us all the time if we do it routinely ourselves. You could say we were successful in not being ripped off... However, we may fail at that if we up our offer. Success in this context is about getting something you want for a good price. In the bigger picture, success is building a league winning squad without breaking the bank. Whether you sign a specific player is irrelevant to the bigger picture. I'd rather we "failed" to give Dundee Utd �£2M for Goodwilly than go back to the days when we "succeeded" in buying the likes of Prodan for �£2.5M or worse, Flo for �£12M. And there are many, many other examples. Sorry, but I really don't see the point in dumbing down or slurring what seems to be rare business sense from the club we support, even if it's just glib or unintentional.

This is what happens in any type of haggling - it's just that it's not usual that every bid and rejection is publicly announced. Have you ever bought a house? Been to Turkey on holiday? Etc, etc, etc...

"Failed" - do you work for the BBC or something? I can't see how not paying over the odds is a failure - quite the opposite to me. Does that mean the Dragons fail in the Den when a pitcher turns down their offer? Or how about that "Four rooms" programme where four curio dealers all make bids on some thing that someone brings along. They put in a hard-nose offer, don't budge and then often get turned down. They "fail" several times an episode. Do they look bothered? Not a jot. Are they failures? Judging by their wealth, I don't think so. They are only interested in buying at a price that suits them - only the weak pay over the odds. I wouldn't like to go car hunting with many on this forum - "Hurry up; just pay the asking price!" :disgusted:

Yes, and can we have a unicorn, a yeti, a werewolf, a dodo and a hippogriff, please? :fish:

Yep, can't see past that pairing even if we make a mythical marquee signing... We need reliability tomorrow, rather than a shake up.

Part of the reason for turning it down may be that he's not interested in going there which makes sense. Why leave a club Rangers to go to an obscure league in a difficult country to live in, for a wee bit more money? We may not be the most attractive option these days, but surely it's the Premiership that Boogie wants to dump us for?

Yes, but it's not all about bamboozlement if that's a word. The point is that a winger can be effective on either wing even if he is very one footed like Cooper. On one side they tear down the edge of the pitch and try to put in a killer cross, on the other side they have the option of moving inside and having a shot on goal or putting in an in-swinging pass that's difficult for the defence and keeper. Plus a whole load of other options and permutations.

Wingers have always swapped wings from time to time - Cooper and Willie Johnston used to do so several times in the same game and confuse the hell out of the defence. I think this time was to accommodate Davis on the right as he's not a real winger but is able to play on the right.

I think the fact we've put in a bid for Goodwilly and then stuck with it when turned down, and the lack of outside interest is probably not a coincidence. Dundee Utd have over valued him and been over-optimistic at his attractiveness to clubs, considering his still raw talent but in particular his pending court case.

You could palpably sense the collective groaning when the news broke that the venerable David Weir had signed yet another one year contract with Rangers, at the ripe, old, pensionable age of 41. There may not have been any actual disgust considering his well received contribution to the amazing success in the trophy department from an underfunded Rangers team in the closing years of SDM's ownership: but you could feel the dread that this might be one year too far for the, up to now, rock-solid veteran, and the disappointment of not signing a younger replacement lingered as the obvious train of thought pulling out of the station and quickly gaining momentum. However, with the management having fingers in a few pies in the transfer market but taking a frustrating amount of time to bear any well cooked plums; and with the shaky look of the defence with the deputies we already possess; you've got to bet many Bears are looking forward to Weir (in Homer Simpson fashion) settling his bum into the perfectly matching, indented shape in the position he has made his own during an amazing 162 appearances for the Rangers defence, in a mere four and a half seasons. The thinking may now change to warmly welcome him to the team for the start of the season while we hammer out the details of transfer fees and wages, and wait on the decisions of others before someone (anyone?) signs for the centre half position - maybe (hopefully) while Cuellar works on coming back to fitness before possibly donning the Royal blue shirt in a second spell at the club. So if another year could be too far, how about another few months for the guy who only just nine weeks ago, stood on the Ibrox pitch, holding aloft the SPL trophy for the third time in a row, the 54th title - this time as a legendary captain of the world record holding club? With Bougherra still at the club, the familiar, well matched and reliable defensive duo will probably be a welcome sight to the tens of thousands in blue, when the Swedish champions, Malmo, come to grace, and be graced by, the freshly spruced up, five star, Ibrox stadium. It will give the defence a look of solidity it needs until some much needed business is hopefully completed well before the transfer window slams shut. The man dubbed "Sir David" by the fans, seems like an insurance policy that many will hope we won't have to call on too much after a new first choice partnership has gelled at the base of the traditional solid spine of a Rangers team. The prevailing opinion of the fans seems to be that a coaching role role would be the preferred primary task for the popular player who has defied the ravages of time and extended his career in top class football, way beyond what is traditionally considered possible. After that, his presence on the pitch will probably be most appreciated during the traditional, mid-season injury crises as fans await a new era of team rebuilding at the club - using players significantly younger, even if they turn out to be slightly the "wrong side" of thirty. If they can emulate the staying power of player they replace, it would mean they would still have another decade left in the peak of their career and when you consider that, a 31 year old would seem like a relative spring chicken. So let's hope the still current captain can continue his amazingly consistent form for the next couple of months while we try to build a solid start to the championship defence as well as negotiate the tricky qualifying rounds that bar our way to the riches of the Champion's League - a place where if Weir is allowed to play he will be the second oldest ever to grace the blue ribbon competition. At the moment he's like our bridging loan, but many hope he turns into an accruing investment, if he can effectively coach his amazing ability to read the game to our emerging young talent at Murray Park - and don't forget the insurance policy already mentioned. For all that, he seems well worth the premium we've paid for the annual renewal.

I'm going to be clich�© and say the guy needs more games before a definitive judgement is made. He may have had a mediocre game while McGowan could have been at his best. Maybe he needs time to gel or get to fitness or maybe will play a lot better on the right. I only seen the highlights and I thought he showed some promise at times being reasonably comfortable on the ball and picking out the odd decent pass. First impressions usually stick but as long as he didn't look completely shit, then we should give him a few games to show what he can do.

I think with numbers part of it is that players probably have to request the number but maybe there are quite a few who are not bothered at all about what number they get.

PS and no 3-5-2 either...

Like the look of Gribz's team.

What about the two amazing saves from him by the goalkeeper in the same game. had either gone in we'd have been through. Or if Seaman could keep his legs shut...

I think one of the most disappointing things is that the impression is that Cuellar DOES want to move to us and will be very handsomely paid, but he wants even more money and is prepared to mess everyone around to get it. There is more to life than money, especially when your are already pretty rich and have enough for you and your family to live comfortably, without working a jot for the rest of your life. Plenty of people on more modest wages pursue more important things than money and waive loads of cash they are supposedly entitled to. I still don't see how he's entitled to a pay-off anyway. He's entitled to say no to a move and run out his contract or agree to the move, but that's it. What he's doing is essentially a form of blackmail. I know clubs do that to, but it's wrong on both sides of the fence. If it was Man City and he was demanding money from their oil billionaires then it probably wouldn't bother me so much, but he's blackmailing for money out of the fans pockets, most of whom are earning less in a year than he does in a week for what is a dream job. Maybe the biggest difference is that he has an agent to do all the dirty work for him and the "industry" sees it as pure business and not personal. But I also don't like his hypocrisy after going on record that at this stage in his career, he reckons money isn't everything.

Yeah, he was good defensively but when he passed the ball, it didn't really look like he kicked it, more like almost tripped over it...

BedYoda? Is he a master jedi at seduction?

To be honest, I'm happy with the prudence we are showing. It may not be exciting or spectacular, but neither is selling our best players and not buying anyone for two years because we're suffering from overspending. I'm sure we'll reap the rewards in the long term with a good size squad of decent players on reasonable wages, and no overdraft.

Go to disagree with you. Miller is almost 32, coming to the end of his career and will have no sell on fee. Lee Wallace is 23 and can only get better and will command at least a similar fee, if not more, if he leaves. Miller has bugger all transfer value which is why, on the best form of his career, we got 400k for him. Ok, he only had 6 months on his contract, but now he's older, not so on form, and so I don't think it makes a difference. If Cardiff pay more than about 600k for him, then they are complete mugs.

I can't see how he's "entitled" to any pay-off; if he is why aren't Villa just paying it? Let's talk about entitlement... The fans are entitled to a lot more respect than they get from these players, but they rarely get it. You could could say the fans are "entitled" to a refund if their team plays shit so why aren't the players coughing up? You're "entitled" to ask everyone you give a lift to contribute to the petrol and running of your car. But do you hassle every friend who gets in your car for every penny you think you deserve and maybe a bit more? Do you stop half way there and threaten to kick them out if they don't pay? You may be entitled but every friend you have will soon see you as a bit of a money grabbing, miserable git - just as we should see these players in that way. We have a lot of entitlements of varying degrees, but I can't understand why someone ruthlessly demanding every last entitlement despite being treated exceptionally well is something some people think is somehow ok. In the end it's your money guys and it's a bit like Cuellar coming round and saying to you all, "Give me more of your money out of your wallet right now, I'm entitled to it to make me richer while I don't give a shit about you struggling to pay for a season ticket or Sky package on top of trying to give your kids a decent future." This DOES NOT happen often by the majority of good people on honest wages. Plenty of people take a pay cut for a year or more to move to a job that will be more rewarding in other ways - especially if they are already rich and the new wage makes immensely comfortable living. Greed is greed, no matter how you try to twist it. For those who are Protestants on here, doesn't the bible say that it is a deadly sin?