calscot

Don't know, may be the same guy, but I'm talking about the guy who does the analysis for Every Other Saturday.

Are you able to explain why? (in the context of being a Scottish club in a shit league with little competition and not that much money). I don't want to bum Celtic up, but much as I enjoy hearing of thrashings by Barcelona, PSG, Bayern Munich et al, I can't see any OF manager doing much better against sides with single players costing the likes of €222m (Neymar), €180m (Mbappe), €82m (Suarez), €75m (De Bruyne), €58m (Stones), €52m (Mangala), €42m (Toiliso) etc Getting through the qualifiers and having the odd passable result against much more expensive sides is the best the champions of Scotland can hope for these days, IMHO. They got three draws out of Man City, Monchengladbach and a 3-0 win against Anderlecht (a team with a £76m income). I agree he's had his losses in single matches in the qualifiers, but in the end it's the tie that counts there and he's won them all. It's not fantastic but it's hardly deplorable when looked at in context. I want it to be deplorable, I don't want them to get the CL money, but wanting something and it actually happening are not the same thing. I think you have to at a European record in categories of teams with less money, teams with comparable and teams with more. Even Monchengladbach have a £174m turnover. Barcelona bring in £584m which is a tad more than Munich (£540m), and Man City are about £400m. PSG are at about £460m but are obviously spending way outside that.

While I still reserve my judgement on Murty from the last time due to a couple of bad results (which are difficult to judge under the circumstances), it will be interesting to see if he can take, what seem to be a better bunch of players this time, and turn them around in a few games, to being a lot more solid, together and motivated. If he can get a draw with Celtic with lesser players, what can he do with these? Is he the third man to manage Rangers on two occasions?

I think to be fair to Rodgers, Imps aside, his record isn't that bad for Scottish football. The one thing he does that make the rest of it almost irrelevant, is to get to the CL every year. It's not exactly the hardest route but then neither are the likes of Progres, Malmo, nor Kaunas. That they rake in the £30m+ and we don't is the most relevant part, and for that he is a success. I can't see any OF managers living with £200m+ teams theses days.

I quite like Ally Bain - he talks a good game anyway, but then so did Pedro...

I thought the rules are pretty clear and the referee's decision is final, it's called "dissent" and should be booked. If players are allowed to do that, games will start to take several hours. Football really needs an massive overhaul in refereeing and it's amazing in this day and age how much they could learn from rugby - in that sport, only the captain is allowed to talk to the referee, and he has to do it respectfully. He would be allowed to explain his grievance to the referee and if the referee overruled it, he would have to just get on with it. While you can't say if a player would score otherwise, it certainly doesn't seem fair to have all that going on for over five minutes before taking a spot kick. As for a player deliberately winding another professional up by continually stepping on his toes and then falling to the ground like a pansy when he's pushed away, I'm disgusted at him as a player and a person. He's simply a cheat. It's the kind of thing that deserves massively long bans in my opinion to "stamp" that kind of thing out of football. It should be what the CO is really about. It's also the kind of thing that should be vilified by any journalists who are interested in the good of the game, but because it's Rangers, Jack will get the flack.

Sometimes I wish people would just see it as it is (especially Scottish refs and COs). To be fair, Gonzo does seem to be mildly trolling with his sarcasm, and to be fair, it does look a bit strange when supporter who comes on to mock fellow supporters after a bad result - especially when whatever implications are used for the attempt at humour, are not even close to the mark - no-one has said "everything will be fine". If nothing else, it certainly doesn't help, and when you try to wind people up, how can you complain when they actually get a bit wound up with you? Maybe DB is expecting a bit more togetherness in bad times... As for Rangers_syntax, either Gonzo's sarcasm goes way over his head, or he is at it to add to the wind up - not a million miles away from trolling. None of it seemed to me to be anything to do with simple disagreement whatsoever.

I've taught a lot of foreigners not to do that... They usually don't have a clue about that one.

One thing I think we missed as a kind of revenge tactic is that we should have taken the Scottish bodies to courts over some of our treatment which would have resulted in all clubs being banned from Europe...

The SFA have a say over any games played in Scotland, you would have to have their blessing no matter how many leagues you went down - unless you moved the home games over the border.

Judging by how little 38k helped the team to a win on Sunday, it's not a compelling argument.

I'm no expert but I have read a book on accounts where I tried to learn about the Profit and Loss Account and the Balance Sheet, so I could read them and understand them a bit more. Could you explain specifically what part of the audited accounts you are worried about and why? I'm pretty sure there will be no speculative stuff on the balance sheet, unless you see accruals as speculative as they are not yet paid. Perhaps you could just highlight a bit of last years' published accounts that you're referring to?

I don't see why he "has" to support Rangers, surely it should be his choice? But it should be easy enough to explain that just "supporting" the best team at the time, neither shows character nor teaches you anything. My brother did that, started off with Kilmarnock because it was local and his mate supported them; however they weren't good and Alex Ferguson's Aberdeen were winning the most and so he switched. Then they faded and it was Rangers for a while but for once he stuck it, but when Rangers were overtaken by Celtic with Martin O'Neil, and Aberdeen were never going to get a look in, with a Tim girlfriend, he switched to them. Then when we came back to dominate with Walter, he switched to a dominant Man U. He still "supports" them but now, as they are not winning so much, he also supports Real Madrid. To me that's not really supporting anyone, and it's just vicariously stroking your own ego all the time. I think suffering is part of the package that teaches you how to cope with what life throws at you. If most fans didn't subscribe to that we'd have a situation that everyone for each league would only support the top couple of sides with a chance of winning. In Scotland it would mean we were all Bears during NIAR and now switched to all Tims. Maybe you can teach your son it's not all about being the best team all the time, it's about being a part of something and sticking with it through thick and thin. At the moment I'm more proud of the way fans turned up in the 45 thousands and more in the bottom tier than anything on the park. I think that's something bigger than just being at the top of the league at any one point.

Bend what? Maybe you need to start again and write more carefully and precisely what you mean as you don't seem to be making any sense to me. I was of the impression that a large proportion of any business income is speculative, I don't think you can have a business plan without it. I thought it was called a "forecast". The accounts will show the balance sheet which will not contain any income that was not realised so it's difficult to know what you are worried about.

I think he's implying the first one was a bit dodgy, maybe slightly reckless, but the second was ok as it was "just one of those footballing things", where he seems to be saying he one the header and then Cordoso's jump made his nose hit his elbow that was there legitimately. BTW I'm trying to interpret it, doesn't mean I agree with him.

I don't think anyone is suggesting that we would have won the game with better refereeing or that there isn't bad refereeing elsewhere, the problem for us is that, like Pedro losing or drawing games, it seems to happen too often and too blatantly to us. We can see that it is affecting the way teams play us as they can get away with it with impunity, and even say they are going to do it beforehand in the press. Now, when you are a team that is trying to play football in a modern way, to the modern rules, in choosing players and tactics appropriately, and setting up your gameplan, is it really fair that we end up getting opposition and a referee playing a completely different game that would not be allowed in other countries? Is it right to say that players should just get on with it and expect them to play just as well as they would under the circumstances, especially when they get sent off for a lot less and so have a very uneven playing field? How much do we hear from Celtic and English sides about how they went to South America for the World Club Championship, tried to play football and got kicked off the park, which meant they lost? It seems to me that one of the reasons over the years why the other clubs in Scotland have had some good results against us and then get slaughtered by low ranked teams in Europe is that they don't get away with the physical side from the referees, and therefore can't compete with their foreign peers who have developed football skills and tactics rather than trying to win by thuggery. What are we supposed to do, instead of trying to play a modern version of tactical and skillful football, should we instead bring in a basic manager who is more concerned about bring in big, strong, tough guys and training them to win the "battle" instead of winning by skill? Isn't that what McCoist ended up doing? In the end, even if it didn't make a difference to the result, the repercussions are pretty significant, where all we're going to see in Scotland are bruising, low skill encounters, with half our players out with bad injuries. But it's worth repeating, Rangers are not allowed the same freedom to use these tactics, either by the referee, the CO and in the eyes of most of the MSM. We are handicapped here, and no matter which manager we have, we cannot compete for the title and at the moment, for second place carrying that huge handicap. There still is more to it, as perhaps our players aren't psychologically up for it - and really what is wrong with them being and wanting to be footballer rather than brawlers? For me, as a football nation, I would rather we went the other way a bit and were overly strict on the physical side of the game, and encouraged development of skills and tactics. Even if it didn't help us in Europe and internationally (which I think it would) at least we'd have more a enjoyable product to watch when it's always going to be our staple diet, until the next generation all become fans of EPL teams. And it might just prevent that becoming an inevitability.

I don't know anything about them so I had to look it up, and found Campbell Dallas won the award for Scotland's premier large accountancy firm for 2017... http://www.insider.co.uk/events/campbell-dallas-alastair-couper-take-10625485 Apparently it's the third year in a row.

There's quite a lot of reasons that Rangers fans "wanted" to go to division 3. After being voted out by our peers and so-called friends, we wanted nothing to do with them for a while, hopefully punishing them financially quite a bit in the process. We also thought that if we're going to do this, we don't want any favours as we wanted to come back having served whatever time we were supposed to have and therefore have a clean slate with everyone - what a mistaken idea that was. We were also in a financial nightmare and didn't want to be back in the SPL having the indignity of fighting for a mid-table place for a season or two while we rebuilt. We also wanted to make new friends and help all the teams in the lower leagues with blue pound. There are many other reasons too.

Pretty sure the guy is ex-gersnet. Personally I found his writing to be not well written, lacking in knowledge and insight, and being very subjectively one-sided, and so always avoid. However, I do think he's incredibly adept at creating a very tempting, click-bait headline.

One thing about Peña's goals is that both times he benefited from losing his marker due to them double teaming on Morelos as he's probably seen as the biggest threat. If Carlos starts scoring a lot then that would change and make him less effective, but also give more space to the Buffalo. So it's swings and roundabouts but means that Peña could start to look less of a player. I do think he needs to cut out the schoolboy errors though. A better team will really punish us for those.

As I said, they are winning because they are zealots (it's almost unbelievable how many of them have so much appetite for it). I'm not like that so I probably won't actually do much. But what I won't do is discourage others from highlighting things, or for calling out lies and malevolent misrepresentation when it arises. I will encourage it and be thankful for it. Hopefully others will have that attitude and so the supporters clubs and the club itself will raise the issues in a way that is pertinent and not embarrassing, as well as others feeling supported when they can do some good. I don't buy any papers either, and try to avoid the links to the usual suspects, and especially avoid the BBC sports pages. I do think, however, that we have an opportunity to educate the outside world, and hopefully many will view it the way most of us view the Spanish police attacks on Catalans.

It's definitely not just about the guy at work, the problem is that when you have a lot of people so determined to get you at all costs to themselves, then just laughing at it can put you in a lot of trouble. It's kind of like cackling at those that say you're a witch and spread that rumour during the witch hunting era... I think our problem is that we just can't win here - you have to have a lot of passion to continuously put great efforts into lying, twisting and spreading mistruths. Even to the extent of worming your way into influential positions and then abuse that influence with no regard for professionalism or integrity. I just don't think there aren't enough Rangers fans who are sad and weird enough to do that, it's like a religious war where we're the atheists - but then there are plenty of them that suffered and still do, at the hands of the zealots. I don't think we have anywhere near the will to fight them at their own game, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't be a wee bit vigilant and keep the rest of the world informed of the truth.

For me, a long time ago I wanted all Scottish teams to do well, on two provisos. Firstly that they didn't do better than Rangers and secondly, they didn't get to a semi-final. I thought it was good for Scotland and Scottish football as a whole, and for a time indirectly good for us in the revamped coefficient system. If our teams did well, it would also keep the normally huge amount of supercilious disparagement of Scottish football in general and Rangers in particular (as by far the most successful club at the time), from English footie fans to a more tolerable level. However, now I want them all to be thrashed and put out at the first attempt and indeed if any of them went bust like Gretna and Third Lanark, I would probably enjoy a good dose of schadenfreude.

Important enough people believe the lies and propaganda about us to be forced down three divisions (when it should have been something like a 20 point penalty in the SPL), fined, lost prize money, had illegal transfer embargos, had threats to our trophies, had TV deals structured so that we got next to nothing, were made toxic enough to be taken over by charletons who bled us dry, which all left us financially disabled and also the focus of all the hate in Scotland which is still affecting our results via influenced referees and compliance officers. It also leaves the fans without any form of reasonable media coverage of the club. But I suppose if you laugh at it, it doesn't really matter...

I agree. One thing that I think is different about our current manager and making him difficult to judge is that his tactics are pretty complex and even if you can explain them to players whose brains tend to be in their feet, they still have to work out how to adhere to them in the flow of the game where all situations have their differences even if just in the nuances. I think the time is gone when a manager can come in, choose a 4-4-2 formation, then go out and get some quality players who are used to that formation and their position in it, and have instant success. It might still work if you have many times the financial resources to the rest and you can bring in high quality players but we're not really there anymore, and with Celtic we now have a lot less. But in today's Scotland, even with plenty of foreigners, I think it will take a while before the players will feel completely at home in this system, and gain "unconscious competence" for much of it, where they start to become instinctive and not think about it so much. So, I think there are some players who look like they are starting to get it and develop into it, which is why we're looking better and better as time goes on, and others who just aren't, and Windass seems to me to be one of the latter (along with KM, no matter how professional and intelligent he professes to be).