Match Thread [FT] Rangers 2 (Kent 47; Tavernier pen 52) - 2 Celtic

[craig 5,199]

14 hours ago, Gonzo79 said:

Disappointing to only take a draw from the match today, as we should have won.  

Some sloppy passing and slack defending cost us.  

 

At least Beale will be getting a good understanding of who should stay and who should go and hopefully we have the funds to bring in a couple of players in January.   

Not just that but surely we can also all see that Beale is getting more from these players after a month than what Gio had got from them in 6 months.  Someo f those we have said need to go..... may just have been needing a new boss - sad as that sounds.

 

I had it on fairly good authority that the players absolutely hated Gio's training sessions - many said they were boring.

 

Beale needs time and his own recruitments.

[MacK1950 2,243]

1 hour ago, craig said:

the players absolutely hated Gio's training sessions - many said they were boring

I had a short interview with Glasgow Times outside megastore when Gio ended and said that watching Gio's team had become a chore and now under Beale I am beginning to enjoy the games again.

[Blue Moon 1,117]

8 hours ago, CammyF said:

But bringing Sands on didn't cost us the victory. It wasn't Sands fault for the equaliser and it wasn't Sands who missed a chance at 2-1 to kill the game.

 

It also wasn't Sands who failed to hit the target with two headers at the end of the 1st half. 

 

No matter who MB brought on, we had less than 10mins to see the game out.

 

As for Arfiled, if what I heard yesterday is correct, he was injured whilst playing football at home with his kids. 

 

As MB has said since the day he arrived back at the club the fitness levels are shockingly bad and we have to play players who are carrying injuries. This minimises who we can start and who we can bring on to influence games. 

 

A worrying trend this season is the opposition seem to score with their only shots on target and this continued yesterday with Celtic having only 2 shots on target. 

I never said Sands cost us the goal.  I meant bringing on a defensive player to replace Tillman when Arfield was on the bench.

[CammyF 6,879]

19 minutes ago, Blue Moon said:

I never said Sands cost us the goal.  I meant bringing on a defensive player to replace Tillman when Arfield was on the bench.

Posted earlier, I heard Arfield sustained an injury whilst playing with his kids at home New Year's Day. 

 

No matter who came on, we should have seen the game out. If we had, no one would be questioning MBs subs. 

[Blue Moon 1,117]

24 minutes ago, CammyF said:

Posted earlier, I heard Arfield sustained an injury whilst playing with his kids at home New Year's Day. 

 

No matter who came on, we should have seen the game out. If we had, no one would be questioning MBs subs. 

Agreed.

[RANGERRAB 3,293]

After watching the Goldson penalty incident again, is it 100% certain it actually hits his hand(s) ?

The yahoos are still banging on about this but it went to VAR & wasn’t taken any further by the VAR ref. 

[CammyF 6,879]

1 hour ago, RANGERRAB said:

After watching the Goldson penalty incident again, is it 100% certain it actually hits his hand(s) ?

The yahoos are still banging on about this but it went to VAR & wasn’t taken any further by the VAR ref. 

Even if it did hit has hand the rules state it wasn't a penalty. Not that the rules will ever pacify them.

 

In the flip side, before yesterday's game, when was the last time we got a pen against them in the league? 

[buster. 4,808]

11 hours ago, CammyF said:

Posted earlier, I heard Arfield sustained an injury whilst playing with his kids at home New Year's Day. 

 

No matter who came on, we should have seen the game out. If we had, no one would be questioning MBs subs. 

If that were the case, our bench was more like a queue to get seen in the treatment room rather than decent options to call upon.

 

[buster. 4,808]

9 hours ago, RANGERRAB said:

After watching the Goldson penalty incident again, is it 100% certain it actually hits his hand(s) ?

The yahoos are still banging on about this but it went to VAR & wasn’t taken any further by the VAR ref. 

Yes, it did hit his hands and had it happened at the other end, we'd be screaming for a penalty (at least I would).

 

The issue around defensive handballs in the penalty box is that I don't think anyone knows the rules anymore and that officials (onfield & VAR) are inconsistent in their decisions.

[Tannochsidebear 2,316]

10 hours ago, RANGERRAB said:

After watching the Goldson penalty incident again, is it 100% certain it actually hits his hand(s) ?

The yahoos are still banging on about this but it went to VAR & wasn’t taken any further by the VAR ref. 

I haven't seen an angle which shows it hitting his hands clearly. There are 2 angles I have seen, from front on and from the side and neither are conclusive. The ball doesnt seem to change its trajectory as it goes past Goldson from what i've seen. On that basis no VAR official can overturn the original decision as there is no clear and obvious error. Perhaps there is another angle which shows it hitting him. Just because Andy Walker says it definitely hits his hand doesn't make it so!