calscot

He certainly did in the last OF game.

I find it hard to comprehend how, in the current footballing climate, anyone can have that much disappointment that Rangers lost 2-0 to Barcelona at Camp Nou - and to only one legit goal at that. I hope these people are as exacting of their own daily performance at work and play.

Rangers FC being a football club and not a religious order should mean that it is fundamentally secular. Therefore any connection to a religious persuasion has to have been (and to be) via shared philosophical viewpoints and principles; and maybe not least to having a sizable proportion of the fans from that religion. I myself, as a Rangers fan with an unspecified religious view, would probably feel alienated if Rangers instated official intrinsic values which could only be shared by those believing in one specific religion. I'm also can’t see how supporting Rangers is directly equivalent to Protestantism. I hope that most Rangers fans, and fans of any other club, are fans by choice and not as a direct result of whichever religion they were indoctrinated into, or of pressure to support a team chosen by their school. Celtic FC, to me, is the worst example of this, and I really hope Rangers become less like them, rather than follow their example. Maybe the truth is, I want to gloss over some of our history as I can't see how having a pro-Protestant (and pro-pseudo-Protestant) stance with an anti-Catholic (and anti-pseudo-Catholic) stance, is that admirable or something to be proud of and celebrate. Let Celtic fans do that, but for me, Rangers have been first and last a football club and I have never supported them for any other reason. I would like all people in this modern age, regardless of religion or whether they are even religious, to feel comfortable about choosing Rangers as a sporting club to support.

I agree with your sentiments and often defend our club and fans in that respect. Although I have no real feelings for the OO either way, I think one of the biggest issues that perpetuates the problem is that many Catholics and Cetlic fans are actively against them in way that crosses the boundaries of bigotry. Yet, this specific bigotry does not seem properly recognised by our society and somehow seems to be deemed, "acceptable," and preposterously, "justified." Not only that, it is somehow great to fly a flag from another country and sing their anthem but then deemed bigoted and wrong to fly the flag of your nation and sing your own anthem. I'm not fond of the latter actions or some people's sentiments behind it, but I am appalled by the injustice and double standards that cause people to find it unacceptable and to be able to display them without any objections. However, I find it a bit uncomforable on our high horse when we are not exactly guilt free ourselves.

Hear, hear. Great anylisis. How many of us have played in a Sunday League game against the top of the league or a higher division team in a cup game and just been completely out-played? In my experience on these occasions you can easily lose to the likes of a 6-0 scoreline. I think we could have played Barca on this form a hundred times with a permutation of personnel and tactics and probably lost at least 99 of them. However, how many would be restricted to a 2-0 scoreline with a touch of fortune for each goal? The first goal had nothing to do with tactics and may have been prevented but for a lack of concentration by one of our players. We gifted that one and the referee tied the bow. The rebound for the second one could have gone anywhere but as Frankie, says, it went straight to one of the best players in the world. Of course Barca looked like they deserved winners by virtue of their possession territory and sheer number of attacks. But when you think about it, they didn't have many clear goal scoring opportunities. We pretty much did nothing ourselves in the last third but that seems to me to be a result of a bunch of the best players in the world playing well against a good but lesser team who were playing quite well but not quite at their best.

Again, I never said to stop people singing The Sash. To me, it’s that we have to be very careful about what we discourage people to sing and what we encourage people to sing. We should only completely discourage or ban songs that are truly offensive or discriminatory, but at the same time we should only encourage songs that are completely honourable and valid. The Sash to me lies in between these extremes. In my opinion it should neither be actively discouraged nor actively encouraged. It's easy to say that we shouldn't second guess people's motives but how far does that extend? If Boruc is sticking his middle finger up to the fans should we give him the benefit of the doubt that he may be checking the stitching in that finger of his glove? Did Lennon deliberately spit on a Rangers scarf or was he just careless when getting rid of some flem? But sometimes you just have to take into account how we are perceived. I disaprove of the red hand salute as many people mistake this for a Nazi salute, and many songs and intentions can be misinterpreted the same way. Tradition is a funny thing, it's almost like a religion for the sake of it and tends to mostly end up restricting freedom of choice and thought. Like Christmas there are many things we do in the name of tradition which are only recent additions. Seems to me, that if you do something three times, it becomes a tradition. Therefore, just as some Rangers traditions have been invented recently, we can invent a new tradition any time and abandon others too. As Barry point out, the Protestant religion is fundamentally anti-tradition. It's has a radical philosophy which advocates freedom of thought, equality and progress. It actually preaches us to challenge traditions and to reject them if they are no longer valid. (Well that's what I learned from the recent telly programmes on the subject.) What I am concerned about it that if we start making our traditions official in some way, then we need to be very careful about what we promote. Is an older tradition more important than a recent one? Should we base our traditions on the sporting values of our founders in 1873, or the dignity and moral values of the great man, Bill Struth? Maybe we should go back to the 17th century and define what the Battle of the Boyne was all about, or should it just be based on the songs and actions of the support over the last ten or twenty years? I think if we're going to promote our traditions, we should be careful and choose the most honest and honourable ones and those most relevant to the club and the fans. If we are going to promote ourselves to be, "more than a club," and, "we are the people," then I hope it's going to be for very positive reasons. To me it should be underlying principles which don't change much with time, historical events or cultural evolution. It seems a pretty serious undertaking.

MacGregor was not bad but not great. No chance at the first goal but perhaps could have deflected the shot for the second shot sideways instead of forward, as he's done on other occasions. His flap later on was not confidence inspiring and could easily have been a goal. Hutton was very limited in possession and didn't link well with Beasley. He seemed to do better with Novo but at that point, Barcelona were 2-0 up and able to cruise which reduced our possession considerably. Solid defensively and didn't dive in which reduced their crosses from deep left. Weir put in some great tacles, won almost every header and even looked assured on the ball; read the game well but dived in a couple of times due to his lack of pace allowing him to go with a runner on the ball - those occasions were Barcelona's most dangerous attacks. Cuellar made a few mistakes, maybe nerves getting the better of him, but still put in a pretty good defensive display. Needs to work on his, "hoof" pass. Papac was solid at times and ironically better on the wing than usual. However, he doesn't quite embrace the whole left back role into his psyche and drifts into the middle of defence too often. Allowing a players to drift in at the back post while not marking anyone is very poor, especially when it is obvious that one of your team mates has pointed it out to you. Beasley just didn't have the strength or guile during this game to make any impact on the right. He also didn't make himself available enough to Hutton on the wing to allow him an easy line ball. Ferguson - now many will say he didn't do much wrong but he also hardly did much to add to the cause appart from a string of easy 10 yard passes. Supposed to stamp his authority on the midfield but instead was pretty much anonymous. Sat too deep too which seemed to hinder Hemdani and not allow the Algerian a option for a pass. We never look that good in big games when Fergie isn't playing a blinder. Hemdani had a great performance and looked like our one class player. Tackling well and then skillfully keeping possession, losing his marker and playing a decent pass. We can't afford to lose him at the moment, man of the match and should play every week if fit. Adam didn't to me have as bad a game as other seem to think. He did well for a young playing in such a rarified atmosphere and didn't look too fazed when on the ball against such a high quality team. His set piece deliveries were certainly a vast improvement from the recent attempts by Ferguson and Beasley. I think after a bad spell he's back on tract for developing into a very good player. McCulloch is someone I can't say much about as I hardly seen him do much at all. Very, very anonymous or was it just me who kept missing him? Seemed to notice him more defensively where he did a lot of shepherding and helped close down the left channel. Cousin never realy reached the level of performance of the Ibrox game even taking into account that his service was greatly reduced. Was chasing shadows most of the time and didn't seem to be able to hang on to the ball when it actually got to him. A wee bit to laconic for my liking. Still it was a difficult, thankless task. Darcheville found he had less service than Cousin as Barcelona were far more relaxed with their two goal cushion, however he held up the ball in a way that Cousin should have been before him. His strength meant he hardly lost the ball and usually won us a free kick in very strategic positions. Wish he had been fully fit and had started as I think he'd have made a big difference in the first half. Novo had a bit of a nervous start but still seemed to acheive more than Beasley's much longer shift. He looked like he could do something any minute and some of his passes in attack were very good, as well as linking up much better with Hutton. Fantastic strike at the end but the keeper was well positioned and did well. One has to wonder what would have happened had he had that strike instead of Cousin at Ibrox. I believe he would have scored and we'd have had a famous win. Was pleased for the guy that he did something to make his attending family very proud. Antoher player who could have possibly improved the team in the first hour. Naismith showed a lot of energy and enthusiasm, but was on a hiding to nothing. Hardly got a touch but harried the defenders well - considering he's a young lad who's only on for about 8 minutes then you'd be annoyed if he didn't. Can't say much about his performance except that he didn't really put a foot wrong and it was an admirable CL debut.

Frankie, in my opion, Derry's Walls is a different kettle of fish from The Sash. Unless the singers or their fathers are members of the OO then I cannot think of a valid reason for them singing the song bar to wind up Celtic fans - who seem very bigoted towards the OO, just as some Rangers fans are bigoted towards people crossing themselves. However, the sentiment of, "No surrender," is a very valid one for anyone in life, and applies extremely well to football. I realise there is nothing inherently wrong with singing The Sash, but then there is nothing inherently wrong with crossing yourself. What seems less that genuine to me, is when either of these is done in specifically to wind up people who find it offensive. Both deeds are guilty of exacerbating and perpetuating a divide we should actually be doing our best to reduce. So while it is hard to persuade people to stop singing songs which seem to serve no other value except to provoke and divide, I am dead against the encouragement of these type of songs due to some false and frankly dishonourable tradition. Society has enough problems so let's not use tradition as an excuse or vehicle to add to them. Celtic have many songs and traditions that are equally as distasteful and divisive but let's concentrate on Rangers just now. Like I said I can see some value in Derry's Walls, but with regards to the battle of the Boyne, you would have a greater case if most of the singers knew much at all about that battle and the ramifications you mention. I find it hard to believe those who glorify at doing so for other reasons that the fact the prods beat the micks, they happen to be a prod, and the micks hate it. Maybe if your case is correct then we should perhaps champion the positive consequences of the battle rather than the battle itself. One of which was supposed to be religious tolerance. So, while Boruc is a professional and can't get away with the same kind of insidious behavour as the lowest common denominator of the OF crowds, the Trust actually has more of responsibility in what it encourages the fans to do. They have to be careful about what aspects of our traditions that they encourage the crowds to follow. For me, The Sash, as well as other less genuine songs and traditions, should not be included.

PS From the 75 minutes I watched Celtic were by far the better team and deserved to win.

I actually missed the first 15 minutes but was told Celtic were lucky to survive that period intact with 5 good chances by Benfica. However, I heard Celtic also missed a sitter.

I think the voting is probably a more accurate representation: but I like dealing with round numbers� I really do think we can get a draw, but a loss would not be an embarrassment. Two teams have lost by at least 7 goals so if we can keep it respectable it won�t be too bad. Even a decent team like Real Betis were beaten by them 3-0, so if we lose by that kind of margin it�s no biggie. However, that could give us nothing to lose, meaning we go out and give them a good game- a highly defensive one of course�

Celtic were impressive but like the commentators said, don't look like they know how to close out a game. I think that's where Rangers have the edge. Walter has clearly learned from the heartbreak of his last tenure; Strachan is still showing signs of naivity.

Have you ever played one of those computer driving games where if you get to a check-point before your time runs out then you get 60 seconds or so added to your time and then have to get to the next checkpoint. Well, using that analogy, Sir Alex just made his first few check points with a second or so to spare but then continued to make them with plenty of time on the clock. Well Le Guen had a big, "GAME OVER" sign when the clock ticked to zero well short of his first checkpoint - partly due to a few crashes on the way and never being able to get the car into top gear. In fact he struggled to get it out of second.

Ferguson was given time as there was a glimpse of decent improvement. Le Guen was sacked because there was more than a glimpse that we were getting far worse.

Got to be said though: McGeady had a storming game last night. Saying that, it doesn't make him a world beater and I can't help but treat anything that Boruc says with complete contempt.

The probabilities are just my opinion and I do think we have pretty much a toss the coin chance of losing or drawing with a slim outside chance of snatching a win - like we almost did at Ibrox. Funny though, that these probabilities correlate quite well with the current voting - 1 for win, 7 for a draw, 7 for a loss. That's a bit like 6.67%, 46.67%, 46.67%. But like I said, I rather say a draw and we win or lose than to say a loss and then we draw or win. The latter scenario might show a bit of a lack of faith in our manager and team. If the team think they will lose then they probably will. They need to have faith that they can get a result and we need to back them. Predicting a draw is hardly blind faith when we achieved that last time and who predicted we'd lose to Lyon? Many people in Scotland predicted that we'd get 0 points in the group. The team have proved them to not know what their talking about, and I'm hoping they'll show many people they are wrong again tonight...

Objectively, "tradition" is strange concept which compels people to do things just because they have been done several times before. It can be a good thing, giving us rocks on which to build the daily fabric of our lives, as well as landmarks to which we can turn to orient ourselves. But all too often traditions are twisted with changes to suit agendas that were never imagined and their original intent is completely lost. You just have to look at Christmas and Halloween to understand what I mean. When we look at the traditions of Rangers FC, we really have to separate the wheat from the chaff and understand what the real values of our traditions are. Too often people use their traditions to negatively provoke others and end up only prostituting the concepts they are pretending to believe in. A good example of this, is Boruc crossing himself at the same time as making indecent gestures to provoke a crowd. He is prostituting his religion as he has no genuine feeling for the proper reason for religious gesture. That argument seems to also apply to songs which are sung by those who don't care about the sentiment behind the lyrics, and are sung only to provoke others. The Sash is a very good example. Rangers may have a "protestant" tradition but as far as I know, it's relation to the Orange order is very limited. Most of the people singing the sash are not members of the order, and probably have little knowledge or genuine sentiment for the sash in question. The OO constantly bemoan that the people who cause trouble and bring them into disrepute, are hangers on who have nothing to do with the order itself. So it seems to me that the hangers on in the Ibrox crowd are probably not endorsed by the OO, and I believe they wouldn't consider joining a lodge in any case. In fact I would even be surprised if many of them regularly attended church outside of weddings and funerals. So are they as guilty as Boruc of prostituting what they are disingenuously proud of? I think the irony of some of this (what I see as) false tradition is that when you listen to the crowd during historical footage, there seems to be far less prevalence of the more religious and political oriented songs, in the same way that historical portrayals of Christmas don't show houses to be covered in lights. Part of the tradition is now exaggerated and is far more superficial. I doubt many fans at games these days would impress the traditions of Bill Struth – even those who are considered well behaved. A fan dressed scruffily, hands in pockets and occasionally shouting obscenities would have his total disapproval - never mind the fact he probably drinks too much, doesn't show enough moral fibre or community spirit and rarely attends the Kirk. In my opinion, the real Rangers traditions are mostly as lost from Ibrox as they are from society and something less valuable is now in its place - just like our consumerist Christmas festival. I think if we are going to push aspects of our traditions, it should be the likes of upstanding citizenship, tolerance, equality, respect, good principles, moral values, standing for taking care of our families and contributing to the community. These are the Presbyterian traditions which can easily be taken and applied to a modern, inclusive, secular support without regard for race or religion. Not many of us can live up to these ideals, and I include myself there. As for singing The Sash, what traditional value is this really perpetuating?

Taking past results into account, I can see no reason why Rangers are not capable of a draw. I see the chances as something like: Win 10% Draw 45% Lose 45% Therefore my prediction would equally either be a draw or a loss. Personal optimism makes me lean towards the draw so that's my prediction. I would rather be optimistically wrong than pessimisticly wrong and as these attitudes can affect how you play, I hope the players feel the same.

Did anyone catch any of this game on Rangers TV last night? I wish I had recorded it as I only caught some of it. I was incredibly surprised at the fitness, pace and skill of the Rangers players as I usually base my comparisons of modern football with that of the early 80's. Most of those players would get in our team now if they were transported forward in time. It shows we've only moved on in defensive tactics. There wasn't even much need for the pass back rule as the tactic was rarely used in this very attacking game. The running, dribbling, tracking back and tackling were all superb. Long passes went unerringly to their man and the shots were pretty good. The tackles were huge and the commitment into them unbelievable - however Dinamo were a very attacking team who picked up the loose balls very quickly. Peter McCloys kicks were almost box to box and so high that the players had plenty of time to run to receive them after he had played the ball to keep on side. In fact they looked higher than the huge Nou Camp stadium. It was on late so I fell asleep at 3-0. Very, very impressed with that team as it's the first time I've seen it.

I like Hemdani too, but 3M seems like a good price, especially if he is unhappy in Glasgow. If we can get a younger player for his position of the same quality for 3M then it could be worth it for the future.

I think Charlie Adam is the one who practices the most. He admits to staying back at the end of training to practice.

Good to see that even as underdogs we still have some very impressive stats. Pity our fantastic run in the CL in '93 wasn't mentioned after Barcelona's win in '92.

Ferguson took over Man U when they hadn't won the league or anything for ages and were trying to break back into the top few challengers in England. He won their first trophy in ages to keep his job. Le Guen took over a team that had won the league two seasons before and the treble two seasons before that, not long before that, they won two leagues in a row including a treble and a couple of seasons before that had just won their 9th league in a row. Rangers were already one of the two main title challengers and had done well in Europe the previous season. Expectation was far higher and yet he broke many "negative" records at the club. Ferguson's job was akin to someone currently taking over the manager's post at the likes of Newcastle and trying to win the league or cups. Or even harder than trying to win the league with Liverpool. Ferguson improved the team and moved them forward when he arrived, Le Guen was going so fast backwards we had to sack him to limit the damage.

I think it would be too risky to play Buffel against the likes of Barcelona without first giving him a few games in the SPL to get to full match fitness. In fact I hope he plays every week for the reserves for a while before he gets a chance even there.

in the spl boyd is bound to score and usually does,