StuGers 477 Posted January 17, 2018 Author Share Posted January 17, 2018 https://mobile.twitter.com/BBCSport/status/951723282679681024 Rangers to be “beaten” to Naismith signing by hearts. How can we be beaten to a player we don’t want to sign? Did Real beat us to signing Ronaldo all those years ago? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,499 Posted January 17, 2018 Share Posted January 17, 2018 3 minutes ago, StuGers said: https://mobile.twitter.com/BBCSport/status/951723282679681024 Rangers to be “beaten” to Naismith signing by hearts. How can we be beaten to a player we don’t want to sign? Did Real beat us to signing Ronaldo all those years ago? To be honest i think we would have wanted to sign Ronaldo. We obviously didn't want Naismith. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
StuGers 477 Posted January 17, 2018 Author Share Posted January 17, 2018 6 minutes ago, pete said: To be honest i think we would have wanted to sign Ronaldo. We obviously didn't want Naismith. Very true! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
StuGers 477 Posted January 21, 2018 Author Share Posted January 21, 2018 https://mobile.twitter.com/WilloughbyKirk/status/954848232823246849 the sun just making up stories about Morelos going to Bristol City for £2m. Intriguing when you compare the Scottish Media’s treatment of Dembele. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,431 Posted January 22, 2018 Share Posted January 22, 2018 Sunderland are set to make a move for David Bates as Rangers risk losing their central defender on the cheap. (Daily Record) http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42771884 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uilleam 5,475 Posted January 22, 2018 Share Posted January 22, 2018 (edited) From Mick Grunt in today's Times: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/scotland/four-friendlies-await-michael-oneill-as-sfas-first-choice-edges-ever-closer-h7j3rktjp (Pay wall) Spotlight on McInnesAberdeen’s matches against Rangers can be fractious affairs at the best of times, but their league visit to Ibrox on Wednesday night will carry another, provocative dimension. It will be the first occasion on which Derek McInnes, their manager, has come come up against his former club since he rejected the chance to succeed Pedro Caixinha last month. Whatever his reasons for staying at Pittodrie — he earlier rejected a move to Sunderland — they will not have endeared the 46-year-old McInnes to the Rangers support, who were already divided on his prospective appointment. If he cannot prevent Aberdeen from slipping to a third consecutive defeat against their biggest rivals, many in the home stands will feel that their scepticism about their former player was justified. Well, really? I thought it was Dundee. Maybe for a period in the 1980s, possibly Dundee Hibs. For rivalry to exist in competitive sport, it has to be acknowledged and understood by both, or more, of the involved parties. A reciprocity is required, without which the term 'biggest rival', drifts towards wishful thinking. Do we acknowledge the dandies as our biggest rivals? I thought not. Mick, who claims to be an Aiberdeen fan, like, always appears to me as though he has a permanent hard on for fhilthfootballclub, and an intense dislike of Rangers. What he is suggesting, here, and none to subtly, is that the "biggest rivalry" in Scottish football no longer qualifies as such, because, we are left to infer, the objects of his affection are so far ahead in all matters, on and off the pitch, that the term is no longer applicable. Another part of the continuing process of denigration. Edited January 22, 2018 by Uilleam 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uilleam 5,475 Posted January 22, 2018 Share Posted January 22, 2018 Derek McInnes didn't reject Rangers, he rejected Dave King and the Ibrox board In today's Daily Rhabble, Keith Jackson, State Registered Trumpet, throws his playthings from the pram, once again. A question: who keeps returning or replacing these toys? It is curious that he is allowed to vent quite such clearly personal loathing in this way, in the pages of what purports to be a daily newspaper. Dave King and The Board are in no way beyond criticism, learning as they are, on the job, but one wonders if those responsible for editorial control at the rhedtopped cage liner would adopt quite such a laissez faire approach to splenetic attacks on, oh, say, a Board member of rasellik, or piggery "power broker", Dermot Desmond. McInnes, for me, keeched his breeks, and that is an end upon it. The only place at Ibrox he should ever be is in the visitors' dugout, where hopefully his bowels will loosen again. Derek McInnes didn't reject Rangers, he rejected Dave King and the Ibrox board Keith expects McInnes to get a frosty reception from Rangers fans on Wednesday night. By Keith Jackson 06:00, 22 JAN 2018 UPDATED06:55, 22 JAN 2018 The big thaw is supposed to be on its way at last but it won’t save Derek McInnes from tripping over penguins in the technical area at Ibrox on Wednesday night. When it comes to frosty receptions Aberdeen’s manager is likely to encounter his very own ice station zebra when he walks back into the very place he was supposed to be calling home by now. If his last visit at the end of November was a somewhat awkward affair - coming as it did at a time when he was to all intents and purposes the next Rangers manger in waiting - then this one promises to be a great deal more difficult and most probably a hostile affair. But before the home support vent their anger and resentment at McInnes for rejecting the invitation to ride to their club’s rescue they should consider one or two fairly fundamental questions. What if McInnes didn’t actually say no to Rangers? What if, as a matter of fact, he was actually saying no to Dave King? Granted, there will be a large rump of the Rangers core support for whom this is nothing more than semantics. For these die hards, as a former player, McInnes did the unthinkable and the unforgiveable when he turned down the chance to take over from Pedro Caixinha. As a result, he’ll be regarded by them for the rest of time as persona non grata. But, for the more discerning among them, the entire McInnes debacle remains a perplexing riddle. And it continues to throw up some serious questions about the leadership qualities of their absentee chairman. Some of them have never been able to get their heads around quite how their club managed to make such a botched job of what ought to have been the most straightforward appointment imaginable. How, between them, King and his executives - director of football Mark Allen and managing director Stewart Robertson - succeeded in talking a Rangers man out of accepting the one job he covets above all others. Yes, McInnes previously went public with his version of events and offered a rather generic explanation for his decision to stay put at Pittodrie. When he put it all down to the strength of the relationships he has forged at Aberdeen - and specifically his unbreakable bond with chairman Stewart Milne - he was without question telling the truth. But only a part of it. This was a heavily redacted account of what had unfolded behind the scenes during the rather chaotic four days which followed a second successive defeat from Graeme Murty’s Rangers at Pittodrie on December 3. It was in this Bermuda triangle that some of the most crucial detail has been lost. Whatever went on during this time it led to McInnes feeling unable or unwilling to make the move which had seemed like an inevitability to almost everyone else with the obvious exception of Milne himself. Aberdeen Chairman Stewart Milne with Director Dave Cormack (Image: SNS Group) When Aberdeen’s chairman allowed McInnes to take 48 hours leave in order to come to a decision he was taking a very calculated gamble. Having been singularly unimpressed by the disjointed working practises of King’s regime, Milne was tacitly allowing his manager to take a close look under the bonnet for himself. Effectively, he was taking a punt on two things; the unyielding professionalism of his manager and the inability of Rangers to satisfy those standards while operating under King’s dysfunctional control. As plans go, this one worked like a charm. So concerned was McInnes by the way in which King was handling Rangers’ internal affairs that he felt compelled to go against his every natural instinct. Having been given this glimpse of what should have been his dream job, he now had visions of it turning into some kind of nightmarish reality. And so, to the disbelief of King and his board, he opted to stay put at Pittodrie. A place which may be less than perfect, given the financial restrictions which limit his own ambitions, but somewhere where he is made to feel wanted and valued none-the-less. It’s really quite remarkable that - somewhere along the line in the process of actually offering him a job - King made him feel anything but. Seven weeks on, the worlds of McInnes and Rangers must now collide again and much has changed in this short space of time. Aberdeen have recovered completely from the dip in form which accompanied all the uncertainty surrounding their manager. In the seven games since McInnes announced he had turned Rangers down, they have claimed five wins - including a Scottish Cup routing of St Mirren on Saturday - and one draw. They head to Ibrox having rediscovered their old swagger. But Rangers too are in a better place with Murty bedding in to the manager’s office for the rest of the season and, along with Mark Allen, overseeing a reasonably impressive recruitment drive. This raft of loan deals may be a sticking plaster approach but it’s exactly what Rangers require for the time being. Largely because of the mess which King’s lack of leadership has created, there is no option but to focus purely on short term fixes to long term issues. Not only is Murty on trial until the end of the season but so too will be the likes of Jamie Murphy, Jason Cummings and Russell Martin and by recalling Andy Halliday and Michael O’Halloran, Murty and Allen have brought a Scottish core back to the dressing room. It’s likely that Rangers will rediscover a sense of spirit and identity because of it and they ought to be all the better for it. But the long term issues are no more clear now than they were when McInnes was being talked out of accepting the job. Which is one reason why this latest contest will be so fascinating. If McInnes was the single outstanding candidate for the position last month then it stands to reason his name will still be a central part of the discussions in the summer when a decision will be made on Murty’s terms of employment. Quite simply, if Murty fails to beat McInnes into second spot then he’s unlikely to land the job on a full time basis. What’s more, the credentials of McInnes will have been even further cemented. On the other hand, if Murty does a number on McInnes - having already beaten him in these back to back games at the end of November and beginning of December - then he will have to be taken seriously as a candidate despite his complete lack of experience and qualifications. And if he should leapfrog Aberdeen into a runners up finish then he will believe, with a great deal of justification, that he has earned a proper crack at the job. All will become clear on that front between now and May. In between times, it’s the position of King at the helm which threatens to become precarious. In this context, the potentially enormous ramifications from his ongoing feud with the Takeover Panel cannot be ignored. There is a distinct possibility that this dispute could effectively finish him off as chairman if he loses his appeal and then sticks to his guns by refusing to abide by the ruling. King was the right man at the right time for Rangers when he led the boardroom coup of 2015 like the wartime consigliere he likes to be. But the longer he hangs around the more damage he is inflicting on his club so perhaps his time of reckoning is approaching. One thing in all of this is certain. If King’s fate is about to be decided, Derek McInnes will be an interested observer. https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/derek-mcinnes-didnt-reject-rangers-11890895 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaffer 1,665 Posted January 22, 2018 Share Posted January 22, 2018 (edited) What an article from KJ there. He clearly has some major issues with DK, but this comes across as hysterical to me. My understanding is that we never got to the stage where we spoke with DM. Is that correct? That's certainly the statement I thought we had made. How can it have been anything DK or board said/did if we didn't even speak with him? Am I missing something here? Edited January 22, 2018 by Gaffer 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
StuGers 477 Posted January 22, 2018 Author Share Posted January 22, 2018 That is an impressive amount of pish from Jackson there. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uilleam 5,475 Posted January 22, 2018 Share Posted January 22, 2018 3 minutes ago, StuGers said: That is an impressive amount of pish from Jackson there. Indeed; one might say a completely incontinent piece, although the direction of flow is clear. 1 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.