And that's why WS should leave!

[Zappa 0]

Don't treat me like a 4 year old. Don't talk down to me.

 

Says the 4 year old in the poliss outfit. :fish:

[calscot 0]

Don't treat me like a 4 year old. Don't talk down to me.

 

Dailly hasn't played in his "natrual position" since he was 22. What age is he now? It's been a few seasons since he last played that role.

 

I class Dailly as a defender, like 99.9% of all Rangers fans. You're the exception. If we asked Dailly what his "natural position" was I bet he wouldn't say a striker.

 

I wasn't talking down to you - telling me I'm talking "bullshit" when you clearly have totally missed my point deserves a bit of a rebut.

 

The logic is easy, and as you're not a 4 year old I shouldn't really have to explain it three times.

 

So here we go again:

 

1. You complain Davis is not playing in his natural position at the age of 22.

 

2. Dailly changed from striker to defender at age 22.

 

3. At that time fans could use the same logic to say Dailly was not playing in his natural position.

 

4. 10 years later you see him as a natural defender and playing out of position as a striker.

 

5. How about if Davis plays right wing for the next 10 years - what is his natural position? Will you complain if the manager shoves him on as a substitute as a central midfielder?

 

To me it's ironic as you are one of the ones who bangs on about natural position. But at the end of the day, Dailly can obviously play there and if the the proof of the pudding is in the eating, it has to be said that he didn't do that bad a job.

 

I think I've shown your complaint is at best, very inconsistent. I also think it shows that this "natural position" argument is totally subjective.

 

Anyway, I'll bet if you asked Dailly if he could play striker, he'd say, "Sure, no problem".

[calscot 0]

PS What would you call the natural position of the most capped U21 striker in the history of international football?

[Gazza_8 233]

I wasn't talking down to you - telling me I'm talking "bullshit" when you clearly have totally missed my point deserves a bit of a rebut.

 

The logic is easy, and as you're not a 4 year old I shouldn't really have to explain it three times.

 

So here we go again:

 

1. You complain Davis is not playing in his natural position at the age of 22.

 

2. Dailly changed from striker to defender at age 22.

 

3. At that time fans could use the same logic to say Dailly was not playing in his natural position.

 

4. 10 years later you see him as a natural defender and playing out of position as a striker.

 

5. How about if Davis plays right wing for the next 10 years - what is his natural position? Will you complain if the manager shoves him on as a substitute as a central midfielder?

 

To me it's ironic as you are one of the ones who bangs on about natural position. But at the end of the day, Dailly can obviously play there and if the the proof of the pudding is in the eating, it has to be said that he didn't do that bad a job.

 

I think I've shown your complaint is at best, very inconsistent. I also think it shows that this "natural position" argument is totally subjective.

 

Anyway, I'll bet if you asked Dailly if he could play striker, he'd say, "Sure, no problem".

 

Inconsistent my hoop.

 

If you ask me to play GK, defender, midfielder or striker I'd say "sure, no problem." It doesn't make me or Dailly a good striker. Rangers fans around me were laughing and in utter shock when Dailly came on and trotted along the halfway line to take up his position as the lone striker.

 

I do understand what you're saying, I did the first time you explained your point to me. I don't agree with that though. There was no need for you waste your time and effort on explaining it to me a second and third time.

 

Calscot, ask anyone if they regard Dailly as a striker. They'll laugh at you and tell you he's defender. We never had Dailly as a 22 year old therefore it was another manager who re-trained him as a defender. WS had the perfect opportunity to slide Davis into central midfield on Saturday yet he went and played another player out of position in there along with Ferguson. Are you now going to tell me that McCulloch played CM for his under 8s side therefore making him a central midfielder?

 

Again, everyone knows Davis is a CM, it's you who seems to think otherwise.

 

[Gazza_8 233]

PS By the time Dailly was too old to continue playing at this level, he had received 34 caps, a world record for appearances at under-21 level.

 

It doesn't mention he played all 34 games as a striker. Maybe all the 34 caps he won were as a striker however, I doubt it!

[bmck 117]

for me, if the concept of 'natural' is to be of any use at all, your natural position is the one you've played most often and at the highest level. you wouldn't say cricketing was andy goram's natural position.

[calscot 0]

PS By the time Dailly was too old to continue playing at this level, he had received 34 caps, a world record for appearances at under-21 level.

 

It doesn't mention he played all 34 games as a striker. Maybe all the 34 caps he won were as a striker however, I doubt it!

 

He didn't become a defender till he was 22 so I would be surprised if he didn't play every game as a striker.

[calscot 0]

for me, if the concept of 'natural' is to be of any use at all, your natural position is the one you've played most often and at the highest level. you wouldn't say cricketing was andy goram's natural position.

 

And as many players don't settle into their main position till their early 20's, it's hard to say which is their best position till they are a lot older.

 

It's also still a matter of opinion. Whittaker's main position so far is as left back, but I see his best future as more of a right winger. Many will disagree.

[bmck 117]

And as many players don't settle into their main position till their early 20's, it's hard to say which is their best position till they are a lot older.

 

It's also still a matter of opinion. Whittaker's main position so far is as left back, but I see his best future as more of a right winger. Many will disagree.

 

so a striker isn't daily's natural position then? and people who criticise smith for playing him there aren't being inconsistent?

[calscot 0]

I don't really believe in fixed natural positions at all and Dailly is a case in point. He can play many positions, including breezing a short sub stint as a striker. One natural position to me is a myth and I won't complain if Whittaker plays as a right back, left back or left midfield as long as he does a half decent job most of the time.

 

I think the inconsistency is entirely obvious and I've explained ad nauseum - making arguments about set in stone natural position for 21's and under when Dailly changed at 22 and then saying he's not playing in his natural position.

 

I'm sure you must get it by now...