calscot

So Hemdani is worth his weight in gold? He's about 11st which works out close to 2500 ounces. Gold is about �£400 an ounce, which makes him worth about �£1M... Possibly about right; although I think we should hold out for a bit more if someone comes bidding for him.

I agree with each point. It sounds as though Celtic had a similar game against Kilmarnock as we had against Gretna and yet they get plaudits. The only difference seems to be that Gretna had more chances than Killie but on the other hand Celtic had to rely on an OG whereas we scored two and should have had at least two penalties. In contrast, the ICT game was genuinely dreadful and I was bored through most of it with my mind wandering elsewhere. However, Caley have had a good run recently by playing very organized, spoiling tactics of the type we used against Barcelona at Ibrox and the same as Scotland used against France. We know those kind of tactics can work so we have to learn to deal with them - but I don't think it's ever going to be pretty. In the end we scored two goals and yet again suffered from quite a few poor decisions. If we could use CGI on many of our games this season to change the strips to green and white hoops, and then show the games to Celtic fans, I'm sure they'd be frothing at the mouth about conspiracies. I'm glad we don't go down that road but I think there is much evidence that there is no conspiracy against Celtic, just very, very bad losers - and winners. However, with the way a lot of the decisions are going, sometimes I can't help but wonder if some of the referees are being unduly influenced by the Celtic hysteria, and we could be suffering from them trying too hard to look as fair as possible to Celtic. But in the end I think it's just down to poor refereeing and it feels like the use of TV replays could benefit us enormously - including in Europe. I also agree with Johnny that the criticism is a bit over the top after one game where we couldn't finish and another game where we played poorly, when in the run before Christmas, the team were playing some great football. It's unfortunate that the run was interrupted as we've lost all that momentum. Although there does seem a coincidence that we're not so good when we lack the services of Hutton and Thomson. Maybe keeping Hutton could make sure we have a season to celebrate. It's a bit of a shame in a way that Thomson didn't go for his operation after New Year as he be back a few weeks earlier and he hasn't played anyway. But the point is, Hutton will be back for the next game and if we could play well in December, surely we are capable of hitting those heights again pretty soon.

You'd rather he went out on a limb for players like Capucho, Emerson, Mladenovich and Ostenstaad? Or do you think he's learned to go for players he knows better?

I don't know. You can introduce young players in the easier, less crucial games. Fleck is due to play against East Stirlingshire at age 16. Naismith is getting a good run in the team at 20. Thomson and Whittaker both get a game at 22. He's continued with MacGregor, Hutton, Burke and Adam. Le Guen had a very young team and look where that took us. Young teams are always inconsistent - just look at the Hibs team. If you look at where many of their players are now they should have been able to take on the OF but didn't and in fact, 6 of their young players went on to play for the OF. What you need is a balance of youth and experience and I think Walter is achieving this.

Do you not think there is a kind of karma that goes to clubs who sack good managers and they struggle for years afterwards? Newcastle sacked Robson when he was doing pretty well and have never been the same since. Look at Aberdeen and Alex Smith... Airdrie sacked Alex MacDonald and then went out of business. Even Rangers had a poor spell after getting rid of Wallace - although he wasn't sacked, they paid him a pittance and he was offered twice as much at Leicester, an English 2nd division team, which they refused to match despite him winning the treble twice in three years. St Mirren were rubbish after they sacked Ferguson. A decision probably up there with the guy who turned down the Beatles. Arsenal went though a bad patch after sacking George Graham. And the list goes on.

I wouldn't mind him and a few others going to Birmingham and having a bit of a Scottish team in the Prem. I'd like to see Eck do well down there.

We have to look after ourselves but I can't help feeling sorry for him. Rangers are a bigger club - but first pick in the Premiership versus a place on the bench for a bigger club? The trouble usually is that a lot of players will choose the latter due to a higher wage and waste their talent.

Dailly can play anywhere can't he - including striker... I think he's just an insurance policy as we're short in cover for defensive midfielder with Thomson in for an operation. When it comes to a crunch UEFA cup tie, an OF game or a couple of cup finals, would you rather have a youth player playing or a highly experienced international? I doubt he'll play much or cost that much, but if we have an injury crisis he could be quite handy. Buying insurance has never been exciting and the money is always paid grudgingly...

Don't understand why as a fan you wouldn't celebrate any goal by Rangers, no matter who scored it. Would they celebrate an own goal by a Celtic player? A goal is a goal and if you don't like one of your own players it should dampen some of your criticism not increase it. If you don't like someone for doing something wrong then you can't dislike them for doing something right. It seems like petty dislikes are more important than the team winning. I thought that was the domain of the Tims. No wonder Boyd gets so much criticism.

Looks like we'll be putting in a new pitch every January. Is there not a more cost effective solution than this? Seems to me we should dramatically improve the drainage and get in those lights for the grass that Arsenal have. Other large stadiums have good pitches so what are we doing wrong? (Apart from maybe digging down too far...)

Is it just me that thinks that Rangers played not bad last night - in the first half anyway? We created a barrel-load of chances that had the finishing been "slightly" better or our luck been better then we'd have probably been about three up by the 20 minutes and cruising. But as things can happen against smaller teams, if you keep missing chances you don't have a cushion, they get into the game and are always a goal away from a draw, and as time ticks away, our players get a bit more anxious and the game starts to get scrappy and nervy. We eventually scored a good goal just before half time, but instead of being a good time to score, for us it allowed us to relax too much at the start of the second half, and some terrible defending let Gretna back into the game. Not surprisingly, that gave them a lift and put our guys on edge. Some stupid pundit said something about if Gretna taking their chances they could easily have had about three goals but forgot to mention that had Rangers taken all their chances the score could have been about 25-3. Rangers totally dominated the game, creating loads of chances, but as it always goes, if you don't put a few of them away, you struggle to get a result. Rangers also had about 5 claims for a penalty turned down with a few of them looking very convincing as well as other poor decisions against us. I think the team are playing ok and we can put the close call down to being a bit unlucky.

I would put him in the "worst Rangers player" of all time bracket. Played twice, hooked twice and quite rightly so.

I thought Naismith had a good game and looks great for the future. Burke had a great first half and with a slightly better finish could have had the goal of the season. However, he faded in the second half.

Find it difficult to get excited about the EPL never mind the FA Cup. Maybe when it gets to the semis...

100 teams from 53 associations will be members. I'm sure Rangers will be one of them.

lol! And seems to be too true...

http://www.rangers.premiumtv.co.uk/page/News/NewsDetail/0,,5~1216200,00.html http://www.uefa.com/uefa/keytopics/kind=64/newsid=646355.html No mention of Celtic at the meeting but amusing that after all their hoo-ha about being a full member of the G14 while we would be associate members, that pressure group is about to be dissolved...

It said somewhere that Eck said he would be prepared to go to 5.5M. I think that article was making it up as an intelligent person wouldn't show their hand till the biddings over.

I agree with you, Craig, and wasn't trying to argue with you, only to add a point. I fully agree that only the brick facade MUST be preserved due to that part being listed.

Funny to see Ashikodi get 1 appearance - it was about 3 seconds!

There are other parts I'm sure the club would like to preserve for example the Archibald Leitch designed criss-crossed steel balustrade built at the front of the original stand.

PS Of course the study might find that my option is actually more expensive than completely rebuilding those three stands... But I really can't see the main stand being rebuilt.

I can't see 70,000 being feasible unless we can fill it to about 65K most games. But I guess that's what the study will be testing. I even doubt it would be a complete rebuild. I think it would be more cost effective to take off the roofs of the 3 "older" stands and put a new tier in each, fill in the corners then put a new massive cantilevered roof on all three. A transparent roof would seem best for the already stressed out pitch.

If Hutton is worth 8.5M for his international performances then McFadden can't be too far behind in value - if not equal or ahead. He's scored some fantastic and very important goals for Scotland recently. Remember, he is still young.

I think that date is set aside for an Scotland international training session with whoever is the new manager. It's not too important that they can't do without the Old Firm guys for a day.