calscot

Usual pathetic reply with no ability to make a cohesive point. I'm inferring you think Rangers eventually breaking even and winning trophies is mad, and you are unable to name 11 players from the 2011 Rangers squad who could have potentially sold for at least 1m? Presumably you think that that valuation is mad too? Not surprising given your antipathy towards most Rangers players.

I can't see how it's sniff sniff, it's pointing out that someone who purports to be a Rangers fan is highly twisting the facts to make Celtic look much better than Rangers.It's so weird it really needs to be commented on, but if nothing else it needs to be pointed out the nonsense of it. The question is not if he's a Tim, it's why in hell would he do that?

You seem to be the one applying extreme, Celtic minded spin. We have not been able to sell players for large sums so much in your last 5 year period largely because of what has happened to Rangers over the last 4 years. Rangers fans know the story, you seem to be deliberately ignoring it to make Celtic look better. I really can't see your relevance given the mitigating circumstances. I shouldn't have to point it out on this forum but you seem in ignorance - we lost quite a lot of valuable players for nothing during the insolvency event, and since then have been struggling to get back on our feet while being completely mismanaged and having our money siphoned off by charlatans, and notwithstanding playing in the lower Scottish leagues. A comparison of sales during this time without some qualification is meaningless. I think you must be the only one on here not to get that and I wouldn't be surprised if you start comparing SPL titles in the last 5 years next. Or UEFA coefficients, or whatever.

I'd rather Rangers didn't make a profit. I rather we broke even and won loads of trophies. If we develop low cost players to be worth millions, I hope we keep them. Yes, can't you? I'm sure you're a lot better than me at naming the Celtic ones...

At the beginning of the 2011-12 season, I reckon we had 11 or 12 players worth more than £1m in the squad. The fact we didn't realise all the fees was not the manager's fault, and with most of them walking away for nothing, it completely twists any comparison to Celtic vastly in their favour. Now why would anyone do that? However, in a pissing contest about who is the more the selling club, it's not one I'd really want to boast about winning, even though the financial advantages are obvious. Celtic are always twisting their figures in a way that ends up making them look a bit crap. They put their attendances down to save tax, making them look less popular, they put them up to look like the more popular team, only to look stupid with a half empty stadium that's supposed to be full, and they put their player fees up to look like they can spot a player and end up looking like a League One feeder club. That's just a dip in the ocean of their lies and propaganda. They will never be a club I will admire or would like us to emulate.

Some of this comes across to me like people who are used to going to KFC, then go to a decent restaurant and then start causing a fuss because their main course has taken more than 5 minutes to come out... They don't get that just because others have approved of the starter, and are happy to wait a reasonable time for the main, it doesn't mean they are not discerning. They may even be willing to wait an extra bit of time if the meal is complex, or the place busy, and will even forgive a bit of lateness if the course is exceptional. But that doesn't mean they won't complain if it's takes an hour and is relatively mediocre. What some people don't do is complain before there is anything to actually complain about. People that do that, tend to spoil the meal.

No? The point is that you'd normally have to be a jingoistic insider to like something so biased for that group - as an outsider, your greater objectivity lets you see it's a bit too pompous and conceited. It's not as if they are good rousing tunes.

It was PLG who didn't rate McCormack and let him go? We already had Novo, Prso, Boyd and Buffel, and in addition PLG brought in Sebo, Stanger and Loy. Can't see where Mac would have had a look in...

The way I see it, if two hearings say it's legal and it takes a third to say it isn't, how can your REALLY be guilty. All it says is that the rules were too ambiguous, so all you can do is call an amnesty, tighten up and disambiguate the rules and start again. I can't see how you can be punished when even two tribunals can't tell you broke the rules. At best is seems like entrapment, at worst it's just complete stupidity which makes our tax system a laughing stock. Either the rules are clear or they are unenforceable.

Scotland is more befitting as the "home" of international football and Hampden one of the most historical international stadiums in the world. Wembley is a whipper snapper by comparison, becoming a proper international stadium when Hampden was about 50 years old. England songs generally tend to be arrogant, jingoistic bullshit, and even the English have started to realise it and cringe at the songs of the past. We might have done that with Ally's Army but most of ours at least have a self-deprecating humour and a touch of modesty. And the fans added to that tradition by changing the word's of Ally's Army to "And we'll really shake 'em up, when we nick the World Cup, 'cause that's the only we we'll get it hame..." I really can't imagine why any non-Englishman would think their cringe-worthy efforts are the best songs ever...

PS Reading your comment again, I can't even see where it makes the slightest sense in respect to my post... It's a bit of a non-sequitur...

Ah, another one who can't just have a debate without trying to win by irrelevant geography rather than a cohesive and compelling argument. You obviously don't listen to a word as I never said any such thing and I find it pretty sad that you think I did - and that you actually think that one dimensionally. I expected a bit more sophistication. But I really find it strange that that debate is still buzzing around your head like an angry wasp. Other people don't always agree with you, let it go...

The level of debate here is once again becoming so childish and cringe-worthy. We've got too many internet fakes who come on and mostly slag Rangers off, say they're not buying season tickets because they don't actually enjoy watching Rangers, then put people with Rangers in their hearts down because they live too far away to get to many games. These people know nothing of what Rangers is or was about and they really pollute this site. I doubt they've ever been to a game at Ibrox themselves and it's all about lying to try to score points over people. It's piss easy to pretend you go to a load of games on an anonymous internet site, but it's much harder to pretend you have affection for the club and its fans, the reality shows through.

Your dad is probably bigger than his too. For fucks sake grow up; this isn't school. Any brain-dead moron can go to a game, it doesn't mean they understand anything whatsoever.

I know people are alluding to the Streisand effect but I think a difference is that we have nothing to hide.

I doubt there will be massive differences in fitness training, and any improved fitness will be down to higher motivation and focus of players not having the crap that surrounded the club for the past 4 years. For the first time since the sale of the club, the board are genuinely interested in allowing the manager to build a side. That means we're going to be recruiting players that actually want to play for the club (something emphasised by Warburton too) and we're no longer recruiting mercenaries looking for an easy fortune in the lower divisions. All that will make a difference on the pitch where players will be busting a gut rather than going through the motions.

I knew someone would come out with an incredibly sanctimonious and completely illogical reply. First, no-one is lecturing you, second, I do go to games - and when I go to games because I LIKE going, and the logistics are conducive. If you're offended by me, as my whole point is aimed that those who DON'T LIKE going, it seems YOU don't like going. My own personal reason for not going to many games (which even those with the slightest of observation skills should be able to work out) is because I live 450 miles away, NOT because I live near enough and don't ENJOY watching the game. And now I'm being sanctimoniously attacked by someone who I assume by his reply who chooses not to attend games but DOESN'T have have that distance problem. What ARE you on about? It seems, unlike you, I would rather GO to the games - what bit of that don't you understand? Weirdly I get slagged of by a couple of strange people on here because I don't watch the shit, illegal streams... There's always some whack-job who wants a pissing contest no matter what. This is so irrelevant to my post, I don't know where to start. My point again, which is there for you to read once you calm down and get off your high horse - you can choose from many reasons not to go to Ibrox, but the basic one that doesn't wash for a "supporter" is - "I'm not going because I don't LIKE watching Rangers. I don't ENJOY it". Get it yet? Not many predicted it, and in fact I was one that warned that there's a lot more gone on that manager can easily overcome, and that it also wouldn't be as easy as some thought to be massively better than McCoist. I recall you pretty much argued the opposite at the time so don't get your "predictable". As for "lazy", I think that shows a glib understanding of the situation. They are relevant to the effort that these directors are having to put in rather than just being a keyboard warrior. They are relevant to some of the delay that makes a restless support impatient. You would really need to elaborate that point. I would question both the motivation I believe the expectations of miracles will be more likely to come from some sections of fans rather than the board. I also believe the resources available will be criticised for being to much by some and too little by others, but will probably be about right for the combination of income and ambition, with the knowledge that some level of overspending now, could mean greater rewards in the future. For you maybe. I agree but it only adds to my points.

There are always fluctuations in any series of random events, over time, with large numbers of events, it all evens out to close to the expected probability distribution. If there is bias in the system, that will also eventually show, but with the lottery, they have put a lot of effort into keeping it pretty much a flat distribution and so I doubt there will be more than slight perturbations in the long term. I've written a load of statistical simulations which show this. In fair throws of a coin you could get 20 heads in a row but over say a hundred thousand, it will get very even. Do it often enough and you could get a thousand in a row, but over the whole series, it will still come out pretty even. The fluctuations you see will on average peak at the square rood of the number of samples.

This will be the first season for 4 years where there should be no huge off the park shenanigans. I think that is a bigger factor that any change in management and playing staff. The black thunder-cloud has been lifted and that should change the attitude and motivation for everyone involved. People may return if the football is better and that is up to them, but it is in acute contrast with our traditional motto's of "We are the people", "Follow follow" and "Something Something Loyal". There are many good and respectful reasons to not go to a game, even trivial ones, but just "the football isn't nice enough", while fine for neutral or a customer, is pretty weak for someone who sees themselves as a loyal supporter.

To rely on anything for the future, you have to have some level of faith, but that doesn't make it blind. It's really hard to see what DK is doing wrong. King co have bought shares, then got enough other shareholders on their side and ousted an incredibly toxic board that were sucking us dry. Even for that they deserve something. They then immediately loan the club to keep it ticking over so that there is no draw down of Mike Ashley's dangerous loan. They quickly go on to sign a temporary manager who was a reasonable choice in the circumstances. King and Murray go through all the FAP test nonsense and pass. They clear out the players in the squad whose contracts are ending that most of the fans don't want renewed. They successfully appoint a management team that appears to possess most of the qualities the fans are looking for. The noises are all about attacking play and getting back to the top. They allow reasonably interesting signings to happen which are in keeping with where we are and where we want to go. They lend more money to keep the club going. They re-engage with fan groups. Just where is the beef? The irony is that without King co doing anything that looks like harming the club, if you don't buy into the revolution, then the only person you can criticise is yourself. King Co are doing their part and putting their money in and a lot of effort. I can't see what position people are in to criticise. You could have been a season ticket holder all your life but thinking you're a top supporter doesn't wash when you pull the plug just as the club need you most to help it on the to be successful again. It's up to people how they spend their money, but how can you criticise others that are doing far, far more for the cause than you are? You can criticise malevolence or sheer incompetence but criticising commitment is the height of hypocrisy.

I don't get it. He offered 20m for Rangers and was rejected and then paid 40m for who? Even with the crap of our previous board, from a Rangers point of view, I can't see how Sarver comes out of this other than badly. At the end of the day we're surely worth a hell of a lot more than what's his new team again?

Who cares? The club will earn far more, if we don't buy ANYTHING, and Ashley gives in and gives us a workable deal. The club earn so little it's like arguing to someone not to by a raffle ticket for 10p as that 10p in your pocket is better than what you have minus 10p. It's so little who cares? And if it's a 3-1 chance you might win something worth a tenner then which is the better gamble? Gambling that you will win, or gambling you will lose (ie not buying the ticket)? If you are that worried about the pittance the club lose, then don't buy a shirt and donate 10p to the club instead. Job done.

I don't think people get it. He's talking about high intensity sessions and working hard to make progress rather than length of time on the training field. I really don't see the problem with a round of golf after all the necessary work has been done. It's low intensity exercise that could promote recovery, burns calories, focuses the mind, and keeps you competitive. I do think that with the time they have, they could do more work in the briefing room and watching and discussing videos of other teams as well as of our own team. But fitness is not a simple "more volume" thing.

To be a good manager with new/different ideas, you have to also be good at change management and have a bit of commitment tot he task with a bit of backbone too. Otherwise you just end up being crap. Like Le Guen.

Wasn't very impressed with him as a manager although he did seem to hold some of the values of the club together at times and too many forget the unimaginable circumstances under which he worked. His record against that of McCall shows he wasn't as bad as some like to think, but in the end he did his best, but it wasn't good enough. IMHO, to be useful to us he had to overcome the difficulties just enough to at least shade the Championship title. He's still a legend as I player, but I find the continual taking of a wage after the old board have gone, very hard to stomach, or find any justification. Three months severance should have been way more than enough for someone who's been made very wealthy from the fans' hard earned wage packets, in good times and bad.