Optimism

[bmck 117]

I think it's way over the score to ask me to offer an explanation for any poor performance or defeat. I'm not accountable, and when you look at the context, the first domestic defeat of the season at the end of November when we're 2 points behind the leaders with a game in hand, it's hardly something to be in the dock for.

 

Firstly, no-one asked you for an explanation. Secondly, given that you managed to put it in context in your second sentence there, it doesn't seem wildly over the score. You might've went for that instead going straight to the Rangers-haters comments. If we had went out and humped Aberdeen playing lovely football you would have been well entitled to a where-are-the-prophets-of-doom? post. You can hardly count the times you've argued that good results are ignored by the pessimists to fit their gloom.

Edited November 30, 2009 by bmck

[spanner 0]

Sort of blows the old "you get what you pay for" argument out of the water, and most definitely in our case, top class money for a third rate product, but as always with the proper direction things can and will improve. Unfortunately the musings of WS do not fill me with great hope, I fear he is about to return to his favoured one up front, as he apparently blames people who criticised that negativity for him changing "his" system and getting humped.

[UCF2008 0]

I wouldn't call it false optimism to believe we can still turn things around and have a successful season. Yes, we've been poor in far too many games so far this season. Our widely/wildly publicized financial troubles haven't helped the mood amongst the support and no doubt have in some ways contributed to performances on the park, but I for one still have faith in the coaching staff and believe we have a group of players who are more than capable of retaining the SPL title.

 

ALL HOPE IS NOT LOST

[Gazza_8 233]

Rangers fans used to get a ribbing by the Tims when the team lost, weird that we now get it from those who profess to follow the club. Yes, my team lost, go on enjoy yourself, rub it in...

 

My team lost too. Why would I want to rub it in? Your logic is baffling Calscot.

[Gazza_8 233]

I think it's way over the score to ask me to offer an explanation for any poor performance or defeat. I'm not accountable, and when you look at the context, the first domestic defeat of the season at the end of November when we're 2 points behind the leaders with a game in hand, it's hardly something to be in the dock for.

 

I hardly asked you or anyone to give me a review or explanation of WWII or the Lockerbie disaster Calscot.

 

Isn't the purpose of fans forums to debate and discuss your club? Therefore, why is it "over the score" to explain such a piss poor performance on Saturday? :confusing:

 

You seem to enjoy posting long and boring explanations on your bizarre thoughts on Walter Smith.

[calscot 0]

I've got no idea what Mk Dons have to do with it when you can buy a ticket to watch some of the EPL sides for about �£20. All that says to me is that the Dons are charging too much.

 

Again I find this a strange understanding of football economics. Firstly, there is such a thing as supply and demand, secondly, when your TV money totoally outweighs your gate money and you're not filling your stadium, it's easy enough to reduce your entrance fee.

 

However, when your gate money outweighs your TV money by more than 10:1, you're stadium is near full you're struggling to pay the wages of your players, your rivals have more money, the bank's closing in and you're considered a failure if you don't finish first, then you charge what you can get.

 

Sure we could reduce our prices, but as we're already making a loss what would the repercussions be? We'd have to reduce our wage bill further by getting rid of our best performing players who are in demand and either not replace them or do so with cheaper players. So our product would be even lesser quality and while our rivals spend more to boost their squad, we'd have a far poorer chance of winning the league.

 

Is that what people really want?

 

People will probably answer that we should have a better team for the money we spent, but that's an easy thing to say. As people are pointing out, Celtic are just as bad - but is that an anomaly? Or is it because it's difficult to put a decent team together - one that can play wonderful football and thrash SPL teams every week, when all the best players in the country and Europe, are playing in a far richer league?

 

Are Celtic coincidently crap under two different managers or are they suffering from the same problems as us?

 

When was the last time we had a consistently great product to watch? Advocaat had two good years and two shit ones, Eck was more painful to watch, especially when we were double figures behind our rivals, Le Guen was excruciating, Souness's brand of football was pretty scrappy, mostly about bullying and very stout defending without actually scoring many goals. The 80's before Souness is pretty much best forgotten completely. And that just leaves Smith's first term when we were one of the richest clubs in the UK due to most of the money coming from ticket sales.

 

All people are doing is having a go at the likes of me for the heinous crime of being "positive" but none are giving well thought out answers to these questions. All I see are snidy, one line put downs that actually get a bunch of thankyou's for being a useful post. Like I said before, you couldn't make it up.

 

People are going on about debate and discussion, and I think if you look back in thread, I'm attempting to do this but where is the other side of the debate? Really?

 

I'm making point after point that don't get addressed and then getting slagged off as boring! Do people find it more interesting when everyone tows the baying mob line?

 

I've also pointed out that I'm not actually that positive; I think Scottish football is in the crapper and that has more bearing on our current state than the name of the guy who picks our team. That point has not be acknowledged in the slightest. I put it to you that my critics are the one's who need to see how bad it is, that a change of manager is not going to be the simple answer to our woes.

 

I contend I'm being the realist where I've seen the risk that even bringing in the most sought after young manager in Europe can reveal itself.

 

I don't see the point in getting rid of a manager while he is competitive in domestic competition - the CL is way beyond our scope right now. I don't see the point in blaming him for all our ills. We are currently the most consistently competitive we've been since Walter Smith's first time around, so why do people ignore that fact?

 

Instead the usual Celtic are shit excuse is trotted out - without analysing why that might be the case. In my opinion, there are few managers around that could make a silk purse out of the pigs ears of the OF in today's financial situation and current state of the Scottish game.

 

So forgive me if I take a bit of offence at being the one who is pilloried when we lose one domestic game in four months - a match which is always tricky against a team who always raise their game against us. One of the complaints is that we have a more expensive team. That may be true, but where was that thinking against Stuttgart? The fact is the most expensive team doesn't always win, however they tend to win more than they lose and if you judge Rangers that way, then they're doing ok.

 

People are conveniently ignoring the fact I keep posting that I don't think Walter Smith is a brilliant manager, but I do think he's one that can do a job. He seems to continually get the job done in the end but in a no frills way. At the moment I can't see how we can risk throwing that away and I don't see why he deserves to be hated for it.

 

All the evidence is behind me in that assertion but people want to pontificate and sling mud anyway.

 

If we become say 12 points behind in the league, then I'll probably agree that Walter's magic has run it's course and it's time for him to go but I don't see why I have to defend my position while we could potentially go top of the league by winning a game in hand.

 

It's easy to be a prophet of doom every year in a low time for Scottish football and financial difficulty for us, while celebrating our successes when they keep coming around. Eventually you'll be right but that's the nature of time and not some great wisdom.

[maineflyer 0]

My team lost too. Why would I want to rub it in? Your logic is baffling Calscot.

 

It's called being holier than thou.

[calscot 0]

Firstly, no-one asked you for an explanation.

 

Sorry, that's the way I read your previous post. What instead was being asked of me?

 

Secondly, given that you managed to put it in context in your second sentence there, it doesn't seem wildly over the score.

 

I thought the context itself showed that the reaction was over the score.

 

 

You might've went for that instead going straight to the Rangers-haters comments.

 

I suppose I was being polemic there to point out the irony of belittling Ranger's achievements by conveniently slagging off the opposition. It's generally a poor argument and one that you'd expect an enemy to use rather than a friend. Could it be the same people should firstly analysing why Celtic are so bad? I would assert that since they are sitting ahead of the rest of the SPL teams they have certainly been worse in relative terms. Same goes for us. So there seems to be more than meets the simplistic eye.

 

If we had went out and humped Aberdeen playing lovely football you would have been well entitled to a where-are-the-prophets-of-doom? post. You can hardly count the times you've argued that good results are ignored by the pessimists to fit their gloom.

 

If that happened that wouldn't have been my argument. I would have been pleasantly surprised and probably treated it as a one off. I don't think Walter is capable of that any more than the next fan, the difference is that unless we win some sort of manager lottery by finding the next Sir Alex or something, then I don't think anyone is capable of turning Rangers into that kind of team any time soon. I've previously given plenty of analysis and reasoning behind it too.

[Frankie 8,179]

I don't think anyone is expecting miracles.

 

I do think we expect and deserve more than what is being served up.

 

Lack of commitment, motivation, quality, consistency and passion caused by a complete inability to do the basics correct are the mandate of the manager. While our league position may not tell the whole story, we are failing on all the above. A game in hand against Dundee Utd shouldn't change that very accurate and most valid conclusion.

 

Sure Walter Smith can't make his players play good football and win games. But if we're not doing this - and we're not - then he should be making changes. By not making those changes (and he isn't - see Whittaker, Davis, Naismith) then he is culpable so deserves criticism.

 

Of course such criticism should be reasoned but because these problems are nothing new, people are rightly frustrated and losing patience.

 

Smith complained of a lack of creativity in the team on Saturday? Who's fault is that?

[calscot 0]

It's called being holier than thou.

 

Oh come on, really! I've given a load of analysis and reasoning in this thread and this is what comes in return. Apart from being highly ironic even in isolation, would you care to dip your toe into the actual debate? Surely with a comment like that you now need to produce a well thought out rebuttal from a humble point of view?

 

Come on, use your great wisdom and intelligence to persuade me my thinking is flawed. Surely such a poor one line, put down is an insult to your intellect? Go on, make it balanced, well argued with great logic and reasoning, without being arrogant or holier than thou in a way that gives me an enlightening epiphany...

 

Should I be holding my breath?