Zappa 0 Posted June 30, 2011 Share Posted June 30, 2011 I still disagree Zappa. You agree with my basic point which is that I don't want Davie to be one of our two regular first choice central defenders in the coming season. It is a short career in football Weir's been a professional footballer for almost 20 years and he could easily get an excellent coaching job with a very high salary right now, possibly leading on to management in a few years. If he goes into coaching then management he could easily have a longer career than most people. In his 19/20 year playing career alone he'll have earned more money than most people earn in their whole life. and the people that matter most in determining a players career length is the player themselves and the manager who needs to pick them, or not. Can't argue with that mate. If Weir wants to keep playing and Ally McCoist wants him to keep playing for Rangers, then that's exactly what will happen. I just dont see why we are getting so hung up on the age thing. It shouldnt matter. Much the same way as if a player is "good enough then they are old enough" it should be "if they are good enough then age doesnt matter" That logic doesn't make sense to me at all because there has to be a cut-off point. What if Weir plays another full season and is even better than last season? Will it be cool with you for us to sign him up again and have a 42 year old central defender? Say that happened and kept happening until Weir is over 45, what then? Seriously, what if he's better at 45 than he was at 40? Are you going to be saying the same thing then? "This 45 year old defender is easily good enough to play for Rangers". Sorry Craig, but I'm not buying your 'age doesn't matter' logic at all. Like I say, there needs to be a cut-off point. You mentioned Maldini before, but Maldini was a complete footballing legend and one of the greatest ever defenders. He retired at the age of 40 and it was probably a season too far. Weir isn't Maldini though and maybe he can play until he's 42 or more, who knows. Maybe he can even get in the Guiness Book of Records? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted June 30, 2011 Share Posted June 30, 2011 Facccccccckkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk - I had a lengthy response Zapps, and hit a key which lost the whole fucking thing. Bugger! I sometimes forget to select my reply and hit CTRL+C, enter the post and find out my Gersnet session has timed out. No way to retrieve the data. It can be VERY annoying. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny 0 Posted June 30, 2011 Author Share Posted June 30, 2011 Facccccccckkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk - I had a lengthy response Zapps, and hit a key which lost the whole fucking thing. Dammit !! Later ! Suffice to say for now I still disagree sorry to laugh at your clear misfortune 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted June 30, 2011 Share Posted June 30, 2011 sorry to laugh at your clear misfortune Got to admit that I was smiling when I started typing a sympathetic response. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,195 Posted June 30, 2011 Share Posted June 30, 2011 cnuts the both of ye 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,195 Posted June 30, 2011 Share Posted June 30, 2011 You agree with my basic point which is that I don't want Davie to be one of our two regular first choice central defenders in the coming season. You are twisting the debate now Zappa. I said I disagree with you about age and Giggs etc, you know that. I didnt say that I wanted Weir to be one of our two regular first choice CB's next season.... BUT.... if he continues playing the way he finished last season then YES I would. Because even a 41 yr old Weir is one of, if not THE, best CB in the SPL. Weir's been a professional footballer for almost 20 years and he could easily get an excellent coaching job with a very high salary right now, possibly leading on to management in a few years. If he goes into coaching then management he could easily have a longer career than most people. In his 19/20 year playing career alone he'll have earned more money than most people earn in their whole life. But the length of their career should NOT be the determining factor in whether a younger player gets game time. The ability of said younger player should. And you nor I are in a position to adequately judge that. Only the manager is, and if AM is offering Weir a new contract then one would have to assume that he is still considered one of, if not the, best CB at the club. The amount he earns is irrelevant - he is entitled to continue to earn so long as he, and his manager, see that he has a contribution to provide. Which, IMO, Weir does. It is also quite possible that one thing we are forgetting is the influence that Weir can have on his fellow defenders in terms of positioning and talking them through games. Danny Wilson undoubtedly benefitted from this and I also think that both Cuellar and Bougherra have too. Can't argue with that mate. If Weir wants to keep playing and Ally McCoist wants him to keep playing for Rangers, then that's exactly what will happen. Yep, that is all that matters and, it seems, AM likes the idea of Weir staying. One thing we shouldnt forget is that Weir himself said that "I dont think I will be playing every week" so he himself believes it would be a less active role in the team. That logic doesn't make sense to me at all because there has to be a cut-off point. What if Weir plays another full season and is even better than last season? Will it be cool with you for us to sign him up again and have a 42 year old central defender? Say that happened and kept happening until Weir is over 45, what then? Seriously, what if he's better at 45 than he was at 40? Are you going to be saying the same thing then? "This 45 year old defender is easily good enough to play for Rangers". Sorry Craig, but I'm not buying your 'age doesn't matter' logic at all. Like I say, there needs to be a cut-off point. You mentioned Maldini before, but Maldini was a complete footballing legend and one of the greatest ever defenders. He retired at the age of 40 and it was probably a season too far. Weir isn't Maldini though and maybe he can play until he's 42 or more, who knows. Maybe he can even get in the Guiness Book of Records? The cut off point though, surely, should come when the player has proven for all to see (or at least for the manager to see) that he can no longer cut it. Do you think Weir is at that point ? If you do, can you please suggest what gets you to that conclusion ? Because, in my opinion, in the last 9 games of the season Weir was probably our most consistent performer, at a consistently HIGH level, and was an absolute ROCK in ensuring that we regained OUR title. So whilst, yes, there IS a cut-off point but, again just IMHO, that cut-off point shouldnt be related to AGE. It should be related to performances. So you know my answer to the next part of this question. YES, I would be cool if Weir signed on for us at age 42 IF he was still performing at a consistently HIGH level. And, in fact, I would ALSO be happy if he was signing for us at age 45 IF he was performing at a consistently high level. I am firmly of the opinion that age should be irrelevant. Performances matter most and if Weir is producing the goods at 45 yrs old then I am fine with him still being at Rangers. If his performances drop in quality then yes it is time to say thank you Sir David and let him ride off into the sunset. As of yet though his performances have NOT diminished. Maldini also played in a league which has a far higher quality of striker than the SPL. So whilst he was undoubtedly a better player than Weir he also played against far better players, which to an extent mitigates the difference in quality between Weir & Maldini. I dont think that it was a season too far for Maldini necessarily - that whole team aged at about the same time and it hurt them. Maldini still oozed class. Maybe Weir CAN get in the record books. Wouldnt be an issue for me if he is a Rangers player at the time SO LONG AS he is performing to the high standards expected of a Rangers player. I am not for a minute suggesting that Davie Weir will come back this season as good as he has been for the last 4 seasons. I also am not suggesting that we should play him no matter what. What I AM saying is that until his performances drop in quality then I think he should be allowed to continue to perform for us. Performance, not age, are what matter to me. And Weir is STILL proving he can play. That could change in the 1st game of the season.... but he should be playing in that 1st game of the season. In fact, based on last season's appearances, and assuming Bougherra is still at Ibrox for the season opener, it should be Bougherra who is worried about being replaced in central defence, not Davie Weir. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny 0 Posted June 30, 2011 Author Share Posted June 30, 2011 You're right Craig, that was a lengthy reply. Did it capture the spirit of the original copy do you think? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,195 Posted June 30, 2011 Share Posted June 30, 2011 You're right Craig, that was a lengthy reply. Did it capture the spirit of the original copy do you think? Ya facetious bassa Not even close. The original was better and more argumentative 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted July 1, 2011 Share Posted July 1, 2011 You are twisting the debate now Zappa I learned that from you, Bluedell and bmck... I think we maybe just need to agree to disagree. PMSL at the idea of a 45 year old central defender! What about a 50 year old? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gribz 743 Posted July 1, 2011 Share Posted July 1, 2011 Its no coincidence IMO that the likes of Wilson, Bougherra and even Whittaker played well at centre half while next to Weir. He is an absolute mentor. However can he with stand another full season which is coming up? It makes sense to keep him on board and if he plays well then why not!! But if we see a lapse lke last season for afew weeks he needs to be taken out straight away. His contract should have included a coaching role of some sort, although being on the training ground he probably does this anyway. It would be interesting if we got Cuellar back and kept Bougherra to see how they would play together and who would be first choice partnership. Im also forgetting the possibility of Bartley here. 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.