Super_Ally

Had an option to sign a new contract after his loan but decided not to because he wanted first team football. That occurred either at the start of PLG's tenure of the following season I believe.

Mostly disappointing performances and four points dropped. But the results overall have been good. The only major disappointment here would be the Hearts result which allowed Celtic to immediately regain the points they dropped at home to Falkirk. However, that draw with Hearts was reasonable under the circumstances. Celtic's January record by contrast: They have dropped 7 points in 4 games. Just 5 points from a possible 12. They visit Hamilton on the final weekend of the month. Assuming we both win our games at the weekend (a dangerous assumption) we will have gained a further 3 points on them this month. In the OP I said it was important to really press home the advantage of such an impressive December. What is the use in a winning run against the toughest opposition in the league if we were to throw away the advantage against the so-called lesser teams? Whilst we may not have hit the same heights in performance this year that we did at the end of last year we have been picking up the results to maintain our march towards retaining the title. As I wrote the OP after the Hamilton match I had hoped for maximum points in the subsequent league games to really pile the pressure on Celtic. Unfortunately we did not qutie manage that with the draw at Hearts and Falkirk still to play but Celtic's defeat has shown that perhaps they didn't need much pressure applied for them to fold. If we do go on to retain the title, December will have been the pivotal month. But we need to continue to press home the avantage which that run of victories afforded us. :spl:

Lack of interest so far? I'll do more than 1 if needs be, though give others a shot first.

I'm sure his goal bonus tonight will cover it. Get it up those mhanky bastards.

So their O'Neil/Strachan game plan of diving all over the shop for freekicks not only didn't work for them, but backfired big time. Brilliant. :spl: Edit: Just watched their highlights on BBC website. The dive was pathetic. But that along with a disallowed goal and a kick out from Stokes will have the rabid ones foaming at the mouth. Phone ins should be hilarious next edition.

Generally you will only get a loan of a player unwanted at his parent club. Not a star man who can turn them a tidy wee profit. Ridiculous to even ask for a loan.

It's Duncan's best pal:

I'll take one.

Gav's desperate bid to retain his "funniest user" award suffers an horrendous setback.

Maybe more support was a poor choice of words. But I still fail to see why you give a guy who has done less than Thomson for Rangers more support than Thomson? You're every bit as guilty of choosing some over others, yet at least my decision makes some kind of logical sense.

Lafferty �£3.75 mil, Thomo �£2 mil. Maybe it wasn't clear that I did not mean that both Fleck and Thomo are all those descriptors I listed but if it helps you delfect from the issue which is you will defend Lafferty to the hilt but not players deserving of more support.

Agreed, Fleck was decent if unspectacular. Might be time to try a different partner for him though.

Mowbray has recently sold or is looking to sell (amongst others): Caldwell McManus Fox. That's 3/4 of their best back 4 is it not? They might not be upto much but surely that's better than: RB Loovens Thompson O'Dea

It's not about condemning anyone. It's about giving more time to an inferior player who cost more. If you were as charitable with other, better, cheaper, younger, less experienced players as you are with him there would be no problem. From my p.o.v. it appears you will make any concession for Lafferty but very little for players who are more deserving of your charitable view. Edit: Show the condemnation of Lafferty in the post you quoted. Happy hunting.

Yet again i'm struggling with your views. Try and be as generous with Thomson and Fleck as you are with Lafferty. Both of whom have shown at least as much as the forward and in Thomson's case I would say almost certainly more.

True, but they found room in the finances to accomodate his wages to allow us to make the loan signing so they are already accounted for. I guess it depends on whether they have re-evaluated their stance on this given the failure of the Rothen signing.

I never commented on whether or not he should be playing for us. I said we got a crap deal and those who overuse the phrase "bite their hand off" at any derogatory fee we receive were idiots. In addition to the positives posted about him earlier in the thread, he went on loan to Blackpool and became their POTY for many of their fans scoring some good goals in only half a season. Players in the Championship are regularly sold for several millions. So we have a player who showed himself to be class in the Championship, excel for Rangers and in Europe and become and international player. The fact we did not manage to get at least double the fee we did is a sad indictment of our negotiating ability. Would another Championship club have sold him for such a paltry figure had he the previous reputation and Championship form he displayed in his loan spell? The answer is emphatically no. Once again, i'm not saying he is better than what we have now or had then (we'd have been better keeping him than buying Lafferty though). I'm saying the fee was poor. I've been consistent in my opinion throughout. I said the same when we sold him. Go and check. And I am being proven right even if he doesn't go for �£5 mil. Craig is right, I was overly aggressive, but sometimes I can't be arsed to be diplomatic when people are examining the available evidence and coming up with a bizarre conclusion. I've said my peice and the figures being bandied about now justify my view. I don't need to and will unlikely add to this thread. The facts are clear for all to see on this one.

With the bank supposedly holding the purse strings so tightly I would be disappointed if we did not try and reinvest the Rothen wages elsewhere. It is the only room for manoeuvre (sp) we seem to have.

Hurry up and get it sorted.

Watching on a foreign feed whilst listening to the closer to real time Scottish commentary confused my viewing of the match tbh. Hard for me to pick a motm. Whilst we dominated the game and didn't deserve to lose, few players made a real impact. Fleck looked fairly decent and Little snatched a deserved point at the end and are probably in the running.

Craig and Gav are talking balls. �£500k looked like a crap fee for Adam then and looks even more foolish now. Regardless of whether or not his form had dipped, players are regularly at a decent fee for past exploits. A goalscoring midfielder who had done it in Europe. Nothing either of you can say will convince me I'm wrong and I'd be shocked if you have much support for your views.

Minimum.

Lol, fair play to them. Hopefully the "quintessential British club" get the heroes of the British army the right result.

Boogie scores in injury time to equalise for Algeria and keep them in it. Might have boosted his value, but might keep him in Africa longer.

Apaprently he'd be off anyway due to already being on a yellow, but the question is how Loovens didn't even get a card?