Zappa 0 Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 I've not seen any sign from Fleck. I have from Lafferty, as fragile as he is now. . John Fleck has made approximately half the number of appearances in a Rangers shirt as Lafferty has over the same period of time & although I don't have the stats on hand, I'd be willing to bet that it equates to even less than half the amount of time on the pitch, so perhaps that's where there's a bit of a difference in terms of what we've 'seen' or not 'seen' from Fleck. Add to that the fact that Lafferty has 4 years more experience than Fleck due to the age difference and the fact that he played for one of the better Championship outfits.... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_Ally 0 Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 I hope you can see the absurdity and irony here in your own post. You're condemning Lafferty while telling me off for condemning 2 players. Yet you're telling me off for it... Is it ok when it's you doing it? 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. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,447 Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 FWIW,I thought Fleck did well on Saturday,without doing anything '' special '',and certainly looked better than Lafferty,in fact Fleck set up Lafferty for the easiest chance of the game but he blew it.Now I'm not having a go at Lafferty in this post,merely saying I thought Fleck played better than Lafferty,IMO. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whosthedado 1,519 Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 FWIW,I thought Fleck did well on Saturday,without doing anything '' special '',and certainly looked better than Lafferty,in fact Fleck set up Lafferty for the easiest chance of the game but he blew it.Now I'm not having a go at Lafferty in this post,merely saying I thought Fleck played better than Lafferty,IMO. I would agree with that. Fleck tried hard and most of our decent attacks were through him IMO 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_Ally 0 Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 Agreed, Fleck was decent if unspectacular. Might be time to try a different partner for him though. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny 0 Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 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. If you can first prove that Thomson is a younger, cheaper, better, less experienced player than Lafferty then we can continue this conversation. All I ever said about Fleck was he's yet to prove anything to me, not that he's incapable or can't. As you said, happy hunting 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_Ally 0 Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 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. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny 0 Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 .John Fleck has made approximately half the number of appearances in a Rangers shirt as Lafferty has over the same period of time & although I don't have the stats on hand, I'd be willing to bet that it equates to even less than half the amount of time on the pitch, so perhaps that's where there's a bit of a difference in terms of what we've 'seen' or not 'seen' from Fleck. Add to that the fact that Lafferty has 4 years more experience than Fleck due to the age difference and the fact that he played for one of the better Championship outfits.... Fleck has been billed, in the past, as a 'wunderkid'. The only thing I 'wunder' is why, because he seems an average Scottish attacking player with little potential. He could well be capable of doing more, but I've not seen any evidence. On the other hand I've seen quite a lot from Lafferty, if not this year. And this year he's become public enemy number one - fans who seemed to turn on him the moment he made an idiot of himself against Mulgrew. At least he had the dignity to say sorry for it, yet most fans have waited for slip ups for him, and frankly failed to support him. To sum it up, and tbh, this is about the last thing I want to say on the topic - Lafferty has done some silly things yes, but fans are supposed to support those who play in our colours and give them their backing off the pitch. Lafferty, for reasons I can't fathom, has not been a benefactor of this unlike the rest of our players. Even I, though I dislike Bougherra, support him as a Rangers player. I hope upon hope for form from Thomson and I hope to see Fleck Flying. If only Lafferty was given the same privilege from our fans. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny 0 Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 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. Why is Lafferty deserving of less support than Thomson and Fleck? I find such an assertion quite shocking. This is my bottom line problem. I would have thought all 3 deserved the same level of support. Yet you're picking and choosing some over others. And btw, I don't support Kyle more than others, I just defend him (and other Rangers players) when others berate him or them. What you see as blind support is rebuttal against what I deem unfair criticism. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_Ally 0 Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 Why is Lafferty deserving of less support than Thomson and Fleck? I find such an assertion quite shocking. This is my bottom line problem. I would have thought all 3 deserved the same level of support. Yet you're picking and choosing some over others. And btw, I don't support Kyle more than others, I just defend him (and other Rangers players) when others berate him or them. What you see as blind support is rebuttal against what I deem unfair criticism. 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. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.