match thread (image) [FT] Rangers 1 (Hagi 52) - 0 St Johnstone

[26th of foot 5,836]

59 minutes ago, CammyF said:

We've being doing it for years, list is endless. 1st one I can remember was Jim Denny who when asked why he warmed up in front of Celtic fans said "I get less stick off them".

 

If my failing memory is correct, I'm sure was was "shot" by a Celtic fan was a BB gun once at a reserve game? Or have I just made that up? ?

Indeed, Jim Denny was shot by the Yahoos during a reserve game at ra Piggery. I remember it was reported in the Rangers News.

 

Jim had a spectacular debut in the 1971 Scottish Cup final replay. He debutised for Sandy Jardine and played very well. He made another several dozen appearances over the next several years without reaching those heights. In the Rangers - Player by Player book, Jim's biog' describes him as, "a player of medium height, medium pace, and medium ability". I suspect even Jim would be embarrassed by such over reaching praise?

 

I would have happily shot Ally Scott.

[craig 5,199]

6 hours ago, der Berliner said:

.. no disrespect, but I stopped reading here. 

As is your prerogative.  Doesnt mean it isnt true though.

 

But from my perspective, that is exactly what Kent has become for you.  The current Kyle Hutton.  You harangued the guy and whilst he may never have been good enough for us, he never hid and always gave his best. 

[DMAA 3,603]

19 hours ago, craig said:

Using highlights to think that someone has a point, particularly someone who clearly has a dislike of Kent being used as often as he is, isn't the objective basis on which to support that person.

Even when I have seen the full game I often watch the extended highlights as they show you where our actual chances in the game came from. 

[the gunslinger 3,366]

even extended highlights are a poor basis for judgement. Kent did a lot of tracking back that would hardly make a highlights reel. 

 

 anyway it's a good sign depressing as it is that the boo boy has gone from Kyle Hutton to Ryan Kent. That is some shift up. 

 

 

[der Berliner 3,247]

7 hours ago, craig said:

As is your prerogative.  Doesnt mean it isnt true though.

 

But from my perspective, that is exactly what Kent has become for you.  The current Kyle Hutton.  You harangued the guy and whilst he may never have been good enough for us, he never hid and always gave his best. 

First ... and lets set this straight for good.

To the best of my knowledge, neither me nor any of my present and former relatives have peed into your garden, thrown a towel on your beach chair nor faced any of your relatives in the Wars, unless your relatives fought amongst the Soviet army. So if you want to pick on "a fight" with a German, do it elsewhere.

 

Second, you seem to have some strange need to throw Kyle Hutton*, prerogative and "Doesn't mean it isn't true." my way in every other debate about a player. Irrational to the core. I have no problem if others see it differently to me, yet you need to drag trash from 8 years ago up about a player who is diametrically opposite to Kent. It is quite strange that Jones, Barker and Co. get it in the neck every week, yet when someone questions the qualities or performances of Tav or Kent or Aribo in a given match or series of matches, the defenders jump top the fore and talk about "boo boys" and people see need to "see something "negative all the time". Heck, do you actually read what is written?  Apparently not.

 

 

* Told you previous discussion on him that while he might have given his best when picked (and we clearly saw it differently), he behaved like a nerd towards Rangers fans at the time and likewise played like an animal against us every time he faced up with us on the way through the leagues. At times, it put even Kirk Broadfoot to shame. Perhaps you deem that okay?

Edited February 5, 2021 by der Berliner

[Gonzo79 13,637]

Rangers could win 7-0 every week and some of us would still find something to moan about (me included).  I think it's a bit of a Scottish trait and although it seems entirely negative, continually looking to improve isn't a bad thing.

 

Kent does a lot of good work and when he's on form, he's terrific.  However, there are definitely areas where he could do better.

[der Berliner 3,247]

2 minutes ago, Gonzo79 said:

Rangers could win 7-0 every week and some of us would still find something to moan about (me included).  I think it's a bit of a Scottish trait and although it seems entirely negative, continually looking to improve isn't a bad thing.

 

Kent does a lot of good work and when he's on form, he's terrific.  However, there are definitely areas where he could do better.

 

I moan nearly every week that we have 5 subs nowadays and hardly use them. Results will always be held against that note and weaken the argument, but we usualy throw on more than one or two subs only when we are 3 or 4 up. Even if the machine is not running smoothly, we hardly ever do much more than replace like for like, striker with striker and CM with CM. That, BTW, is just a plain observation.

[onevision 1,447]

Like Gonzo says, we are a nation of moaning faced bastards but just sometimes it is with just cause.

[Bill 13,717]

5 hours ago, Gonzo79 said:

Rangers could win 7-0 every week and some of us would still find something to moan about (me included).  I think it's a bit of a Scottish trait and although it seems entirely negative, continually looking to improve isn't a bad thing.

 

Kent does a lot of good work and when he's on form, he's terrific.  However, there are definitely areas where he could do better.

You got that right Gonzo. There are however two sides to this. It's one thing to have a negative opinion of a player like Ryan Kent (although God knows why). It's another thing altogether to continually express that opinion for no practical purpose other than to indulge one's own ill-will towards the player. When this is done repeatedly, it goes beyond simply expressing an opinion, it becomes an exercise in trying to sell that opinion. As a supporter, that's wholly acceptable when it's a positive opinion. When the opinion is negative, it simply becomes destructive. Sometimes the denial of this is as good a guide as any to the truth of it.

 

Personally, I'm in footballing heaven right now. The journey has been hugely painful for me and these wonderful days are healing a lot of hurt. Why any Rangers supporter would prefer to wallow in negativity at this time is beyond me. 

Edited February 5, 2021 by Bill

[craig 5,199]

On 05/02/2021 at 05:58, der Berliner said:

First ... and lets set this straight for good.

To the best of my knowledge, neither me nor any of my present and former relatives have peed into your garden, thrown a towel on your beach chair nor faced any of your relatives in the Wars, unless your relatives fought amongst the Soviet army. So if you want to pick on "a fight" with a German, do it elsewhere.

 

Second, you seem to have some strange need to throw Kyle Hutton*, prerogative and "Doesn't mean it isn't true." my way in every other debate about a player. Irrational to the core. I have no problem if others see it differently to me, yet you need to drag trash from 8 years ago up about a player who is diametrically opposite to Kent. It is quite strange that Jones, Barker and Co. get it in the neck every week, yet when someone questions the qualities or performances of Tav or Kent or Aribo in a given match or series of matches, the defenders jump top the fore and talk about "boo boys" and people see need to "see something "negative all the time". Heck, do you actually read what is written?  Apparently not.

 

 

* Told you previous discussion on him that while he might have given his best when picked (and we clearly saw it differently), he behaved like a nerd towards Rangers fans at the time and likewise played like an animal against us every time he faced up with us on the way through the leagues. At times, it put even Kirk Broadfoot to shame. Perhaps you deem that okay?

I got through your first paragraph and almost gave up.  Complete drivel.  I couldnt care less what nationality you are.

 

I throw Kyle Hutton your way because you absolutely lambasted him when he was at Rangers, and then act all pious and bemoan others who have a go at other players for poor performances.  Nobody on here was as harsh on Hutton as you.  And you are one of the major defenders against slating players - if you can't see the hypocrisy in that then I can't help you.  Jones, Barker an co get it "in the neck every week" ?  Last I checked neither of them had played many game minutes all season, so that can't be true, can it ?  Are you now just making things up ?  Oh, I read what is written alright, whilst you on the other hand see what you want to see.

 

Yes, I find it completely acceptable for Kyle Hutton to give his all when playing against us (and he didnt play like an animal at all, again you are just making things up).  That is his job as a professional footballer.  He didnt behave like a nerd towards Rangers fans either - again, you are just making things up.  I recall being outside Ibrox with my young kid waiting for players to sign autographs and whilst the likes of Weiss literally ran away from fans (sneakily, after seeing fans waiting at one door he snuck out another one), Hutton stood and gave autographs for ages and even spent the time talking to the same fans you say he was acting like a dick towards..... not the actions of someone who doesnt appreciate the support, is it now ?  (Bougherra was the other one who would have spent all night signing autographs and chatting).

 

Kent has been fine this season.  Some of us see that his role isnt purely about scoring (which isnt even his role at all truth be told) or creating assists.  His role is to cause panic in the opposition, which he does.  His pace is such that it also prevents opposing fullbacks from getting forward as they know they wont get back to cover - this, in itself, means Barisic can get forward himself without worrying too much about getting caught out.  You talk about "black and white" and yet, here you are, believing that Kent's role is purely that.  It isnt.