David Weir...

[calscot 0]

Aird won't make it at Rangers sad but a fact of life. Many, many fans were imploring McCoist to play youngsters.

 

And the fact is that McCoist played youngsters as much as most Rangers managers. But again, whether playing a load of youngster automatically makes them Rangers class is purely subjective and irrelevant to the point. He got pelters for the results at the beginning of his second season, when trying to use youth. I don't think it's a coincidence he changed direction while he could - while still playing some youngsters regularly. But you're just going off on a tangent.

 

It appears it was important enough to edit out though.

 

No, I just couldn't be bothered typing virtually quite a few times when it was virtually meaningless to the point.

 

Neither does popularity of opinion detract from its veracity.

 

I never said that. I think a lot more logically than that. I do, however, realise the power of the internet meme.

 

When you're crawling up the leagues the next season is as important as the one you are playing, something McCoist couldn't see. What was more important playing injured players to maintain an unbeaten record or fully preparing for promotion the following season?

 

Same tangent as before. Supposing McCoist played more youths who were obviously not good enough, and his results were worse, would you be praising him now? I think not.

 

 

Schumacher was fit for purpose McCoist and his merry band of overpaid under-performing journeymen clearly were not.

 

No-one is disputing that. But the fact is that despite being exceptionally handicapped, the journeymen did a minimal job. I leave you to misinterpret that or get it. Up to you.

 

It's a fact the team under McCoist, McCoist's team however you want to describe it was utter shite to watch and no attempt at rewriting history will alter that.

 

As I said before it's not relevant to the point - that other managers found him out. His football was just about effective enough until we went into meltdown 2.

 

Defaming the Club? Seriously get a f*&king life before you extrapolate yourself out of the universe.

 

I happen to think the Scotch Pies at Ibrox are utter shite too is that also an attack on the Club?

 

You need to read stuff and try and understand it. It's pretty logical and not too difficult. It wouldn't look like one of your posts with out a "f*&king" outburst. I didn't realise you don't know the difference between supporting a football team and buying a pie and I can't be bothered explaining something so obvious in detail - the pies are not the club, they are the catering company - and if they were fine then yes you would be attacking them.

 

Who gives a flying f*&k what Tims think of our style of play?

 

Another point missed.

 

Contentious, accusation, nah simply a statement of fact regarding what I witnessed week in week out.

 

I don't think actually going to the games makes me a bigger fan than anyone else never have, never will, but by the same token I don't take seriously someone telling me something is white when I seen it black with my own eyes.

 

So you're saying only your opinion counts? I'm not saying black is white - black and white seem to be the exclusive domain of your viewpoints. I see things in many shades of colour - and that's the point I'm making. As well as the fact that the league table does not lie, and does not have a subjective opinion.

[Bruno55 0]

It was murder last season trying to run a bus, for every text that said, "I'm not giving those bastards another penny" there were two saying "I'm not going to watch that pish".

 

I know it was forlan and I'm not slagging anyone not going but I've been a bear 60 years bro and just go to watch my team...

[buster. 4,808]

 

Schumacher might have been boring and had advantage of the best and most expensive car, and might have been keeping a younger driver out of a seat, but you can't just say that the other drivers had found him out, or that he was garbage. It's not quite the same as it could be argued that he had higher quality opposition but again that's subjective and does not detract from the point.

.

 

Using Schumachar as a comparison will see you on stage as a stand-up comedian.....

Edited November 16, 2015 by buster.

[forlanssister 3,050]

And the fact is that McCoist played youngsters as much as most Rangers managers. But again, whether playing a load of youngster automatically makes them Rangers class is purely subjective and irrelevant to the point. He got pelters for the results at the beginning of his second season, when trying to use youth. I don't think it's a coincidence he changed direction while he could - while still playing some youngsters regularly. But you're just going off on a tangent.

 

Changed direction? If only he actually had it was his reluctance to do that sealed his fate and that of his immediate successor.

 

 

No, I just couldn't be bothered typing virtually quite a few times when it was virtually meaningless to the point.

 

Aye, right.

 

 

I never said that. I think a lot more logically than that. I do, however, realise the power of the internet meme.

 

Perhaps it's just that I'm not in love with myself as much you are with yourself.

 

Same tangent as before. Supposing McCoist played more youths who were obviously not good enough, and his results were worse, would you be praising him now? I think not.

 

I have no problem giving McCoist praise where it's due but sadly his managerial career is much to my sorrow frankly a praise free zone or have I missed the posse of clubs chasing after his signature?

 

 

No-one is disputing that. But the fact is that despite being exceptionally handicapped, the journeymen did a minimal job. I leave you to misinterpret that or get it. Up to you.

 

Oh I get it, I got every minute bar the opening League game and the final 55 minutes of the Cup defeat to Dundee Utd where I concluded having gone 2 goals down McCoist was simply incapable of pulling that back so I rolled over to the RR Club to drown my sorrows.

 

 

As I said before it's not relevant to the point - that other managers found him out. His football was just about effective enough until we went into meltdown 2.

 

Just about simply wasn't good enough like the manager himself.

 

 

 

You need to read stuff and try and understand it. It's pretty logical and not too difficult. It wouldn't look like one of your posts with out a "f*&king" outburst. I didn't realise you don't know the difference between supporting a football team and buying a pie and I can't be bothered explaining something so obvious in detail - the pies are not the club, they are the catering company - and if they were fine then yes you would be attacking them.

 

By the same token the players are not the club they're the responsibility of the manager.

 

The Steak Pies are nicer this season though!

 

Another point missed.

 

By you yes, no Tims stayed away from Ibrox because of the utter shite football under McCoist's tenure.

 

So you're saying only your opinion counts?

 

Far from it that's your domain.

 

I'm not saying black is white - black and white seem to be the exclusive domain of your viewpoints. I see things in many shades of colour - and that's the point I'm making. As well as the fact that the league table does not lie, and does not have a subjective opinion.

 

Nobody is disputing the League table what's being disputed is the utter shite football and the managers culpability for it and the subsequent abject failure the following season.

[calscot 0]

Changed direction? If only he actually had it was his reluctance to do that sealed his fate and that of his immediate successor.

 

I think it's pretty obvious he changed direction - perhaps because he had a bit of a squad and had a tiny window of opportunity to bring more in, and if you want to use the "forced to play youth" thinking that's up to you. It doesn't mean the direction he took was a good one. However, you're drifting off the point again and McCoist really does seem to be your bogeyman. I think the fate of his successor had more to do with Ashley and chums than Ally. After all he must have had a reasonably large influence in how things went under Ally too.

 

Perhaps it's just that I'm not in love with myself as much you are with yourself.

 

I really have no idea why you came up with that, it's a sudden, weird ad hominem from out of the blue. Either make a decent point or just leave it, I have no desire to join you in some strange, Freudian pissing contest and have no interest whatsoever in your self-love. If you really can't help yourself, start a thread about it on another forum; however, I won't be joining in.

 

I have no problem giving McCoist praise where it's due but sadly his managerial career is much to my sorrow frankly a praise free zone or have I missed the posse of clubs chasing after his signature?

 

It's not even about praise, it's about the level of criticism which has gone beyond reason and disagrees with the facts. I am sure, even without all your obsessive self loving, that you would take umbrage about being told you were "found out" by those you continually beat in a competition.

 

Oh I get it, I got every minute bar the opening League game and the final 55 minutes of the Cup defeat to Dundee Utd where I concluded having gone 2 goals down McCoist was simply incapable of pulling that back so I rolled over to the RR Club to drown my sorrows.

 

No idea what that's about, but to me it's just football. Happens to every team. Happened to Warburton against St Johnstone, and that's without McCoists excessive handicaps. As I've said, when you look at the mitigation, the worse that you think McCoist is, the less impressive that MW is. To really gauge McCoist we needed to see him without his hands tied.

 

It seems the one year where things were a bit smoother and unencumbered for him was the the third tier, and when you still think about the tribulations to get to that point, comparing that league for McCoist to the Championship for a fully backed Warburton seems a somewhat fair comparison. However, it turns out both are out of the League cup, and McCoist is one win ahead of MW in the league. Now that doesn't make him better and I agree that the football is much better to watch now, but you'd think if he was as garbage as you say, and Warburton is a top gaffer, then there should be a noticeably huge gap in the comparison in favour of the incumbent.

 

The facts don't bear your opinion out, and while agree that McCoist wasn't a great manager, I see no need to turn it into an all or nothing thing. You think I argue black is white because that's how you seem to think yourself on this subject. You think black, I disagree and so you think I'm saying white. There are shades of grey and when you put other aspects in there are shades and hues and brightness of colour. The hue could be the type of football played and you think that was a horrible one but it's a different argument - and not one I've been arguing, except the point that again it's not black and white.

 

Just about simply wasn't good enough like the manager himself.

 

I've never agreed it was, but I did point out that it's hard to sack someone who is doing just enough, or for them quit, as they think they are doing a job and can improve from there.

 

 

By the same token the players are not the club they're the responsibility of the manager.

 

Only to a certain extent, but by the same token, the manager is the responsibility of the club. In the end it's the club that get the history of the results. As such, whether you think it was garbage will be irrelevant in 20 years time.

 

Far from it that's your domain.

 

As I said, make a point instead of diversion. It was the domain of your post, in black and white.

 

Nobody is disputing the League table what's being disputed is the utter shite football and the managers culpability for it and the subsequent abject failure the following season.

 

No, the dispute was managers who could not beat McCoist, "finding him out".

[calscot 0]

I missed the bit about no-one chasing McCoist which is a straw man argument. There are plenty of managers who have done far, far worse than McCoist and been given jobs for lower clubs than before.

 

You can't get someone's signature who doesn't want to sign. McCoist obviously doesn't want to start again with Clyde or whoever, and he's probably fed up with the whole management thing for now. But even to pander to you demonising him, he obviously likes his money and he'll earn far more in TV than for a lower league team.

 

That he's not being courted (in public), does not prove he's not wanted. Even being considered a success as an OF manager doesn't get you high class offers, just ask Neil Lennon.

[Scott7 5,137]

Lennon has other baggage does he not?

[calscot 0]

Lennon has other baggage does he not?

 

We know that, I'm not sure it's so well known down south. But I agree that it's all usually a bit complicated with many aspects to consider.

[forlanssister 3,050]

I think it's pretty obvious he changed direction - perhaps because he had a bit of a squad and had a tiny window of opportunity to bring more in, and if you want to use the "forced to play youth" thinking that's up to you. It doesn't mean the direction he took was a good one. However, you're drifting off the point again and McCoist really does seem to be your bogeyman. I think the fate of his successor had more to do with Ashley and chums than Ally. After all he must have had a reasonably large influence in how things went under Ally too.

 

He's not my bogeyman he was simply a totally inept manager of Rangers, you may find it hard to believe that's not a view that is exclusively mine.

 

It wasn't Ashley who declared that he wasn't going to change anything football wise though it was MacDowell himself.

 

I really have no idea why you came up with that, it's a sudden, weird ad hominem from out of the blue. Either make a decent point or just leave it, I have no desire to join you in some strange, Freudian pissing contest and have no interest whatsoever in your self-love. If you really can't help yourself, start a thread about it on another forum; however, I won't be joining in.

 

Aw diddums.

 

It's not even about praise, it's about the level of criticism which has gone beyond reason and disagrees with the facts. I am sure, even without all your obsessive self loving, that you would take umbrage about being told you were "found out" by those you continually beat in a competition.

 

The criticism is entirely valid again that's a view that isn't exclusively mine alone.

 

I'll leave the self loving to you as it's your forte.

 

No idea what that's about, but to me it's just football. Happens to every team. Happened to Warburton against St Johnstone, and that's without McCoists excessive handicaps. As I've said, when you look at the mitigation, the worse that you think McCoist is, the less impressive that MW is. To really gauge McCoist we needed to see him without his hands tied.

 

Who tied his hands in Malmo or Maribor et al? Who ignored the advice of his fitness staff to start pre-season earlier in order to be better equipped playing a team half way through their season? Who opted to stay in his villa in Portugal instead?

 

It seems the one year where things were a bit smoother and unencumbered for him was the the third tier, and when you still think about the tribulations to get to that point, comparing that league for McCoist to the Championship for a fully backed Warburton seems a somewhat fair comparison. However, it turns out both are out of the League cup, and McCoist is one win ahead of MW in the league. Now that doesn't make him better and I agree that the football is much better to watch now, but you'd think if he was as garbage as you say, and Warburton is a top gaffer, then there should be a noticeably huge gap in the comparison in favour of the incumbent.

 

The fully backed Warburton who has spent less in total for a Championship topping team than McCoist spunked on Templeton for the third division, but then Warburton does actually spend time on the training ground working with players as opposed to having them take pot shots at his arse. The gap in comparison isn't just huge it's out of sight.

 

The facts don't bear your opinion out, and while agree that McCoist wasn't a great manager, I see no need to turn it into an all or nothing thing. You think I argue black is white because that's how you seem to think yourself on this subject. You think black, I disagree and so you think I'm saying white. There are shades of grey and when you put other aspects in there are shades and hues and brightness of colour. The hue could be the type of football played and you think that was a horrible one but it's a different argument - and not one I've been arguing, except the point that again it's not black and white.

 

The facts as I witnessed them do bear my opinion out the football was utter shite virtually without exception.

 

You've done nothing but argue that the football was not in your words "horrible" or as I put it "utter shite".

 

Some things in life are simply black or white and the difference between the football last season and this one is one of them.

 

I've never agreed it was, but I did point out that it's hard to sack someone who is doing just enough, or for them quit, as they think they are doing a job and can improve from there.

 

It's clear he wasn't even doing just enough as if he was then we'd be in the top tier.

 

Only to a certain extent, but by the same token, the manager is the responsibility of the club. In the end it's the club that get the history of the results. As such, whether you think it was garbage will be irrelevant in 20 years time.

 

That history will show 2 years in the second tier of Scottish football due to McCoist's ineptitude will it not? It'll be a lot more relevant than a season unbeaten i the third tier.

 

As I said, make a point instead of diversion. It was the domain of your post, in black and white.

 

It was a point it's just that you're to narcissistic to see it.

 

No, the dispute was managers who could not beat McCoist, "finding him out".

 

Try reading back the thread, I never claimed any manager found him out as there simply wasn't anything there to find, the dispute is your umbrage with my view that MCoist's football was utter shite.

[chilledbear 16]

The football under McCoist was some of the worst I've seen from a Rangers team, and to make things worse, it was in the lowest Leagues in which we have played.