Who should be the new manager?

[Rousseau 11,990]

15 minutes ago, L72 said:

The football wasn't awful to watch, I don't know where this comes from, we played possession based dominant football, constantly got the better of celtic over those years, and then it eventually properly clicked at the right time to win arguably one of the most important titles in a long time.

 

Not just because it was finally winning the league again, but also because it stopped something that has yet to be done in Scottish Football and hopefully won't be any time soon.

 

We were unbeaten to celtic in 18 months, and in the season we won the league, were unbeaten by anybody.

 

Granted the return was poor, but this notion we played god awful football is wrong.

 

I can only speak for myself, but I was bored watching the majority of SG's games with us. 

 

It only really 'clicked' in extraordinary circumstances (The Great Timplosion and Covid), IMO.  

[ranger_syntax 4,869]

Covid?!

 

Hahaha, flipping heck, which forum is this?

[Gonzo79 15,410]

I think we need to accept that a lot of matches Rangers play in will be quite boring, regardless of who the manager is.  

 

It's very difficult to play exciting football when the opposition stick 10 or 11 men in defence.  

[Uilleam 6,523]

So no one hoves into view.

 

The bookmakers are all over the place. These markets are notoriously volatile, but this market has prices in and out like a fiddler's elbow, and, simultaneously, up and down like a whore's drawers. We remain no further forward. 

 

I wonder if there is -whisper it- a lack of consensus among the incoming shareholders re: this very important appointment. 

It seems to be suggested that the manager/head coach will be selected by Messrs Cavenaugh,  Stewart, and Thelwell, which does rather beg the question of where is the 49ers fitba' man, Steinsson? If this is the case, is it it a little, well, worrying? I mean why get in tow with a sports' business, with some experience in 'soccer', and not use its expertise? 

The decision, ultimately will lie with Mr Cavenaugh, who, as I  understand it, will own/control 50+% of the share acquisition vehicle (which itself will own/control 50+% of Rangers' shares). 

This is total speculation, of course, but it would not augur well if there was a strong divergence of opinion, on the most significant appointment, and that even before Day One. 

 

Maybe those charged with selection have not been able to tempt a suitable candidate. That is, perhaps,  an even worse scenario than the above!!

 

Of course, the investors, and the Club, may have identified, with unanimity, The Man, and agreed terms, conditions, support staff, etc , etc. and his contract will commence the day after the shares -finally- change hands. 

 

If they are merely taking time with filling the post, is this not a Good Thing, in itself?

 

Whatever is going on, they have kept it tighter than a crab's arse, to the discomfiture of the press and other media. Is this not, too, a Good Thing? 

 

I await developments. So should you. 

Percolated coffee beats instant -  Everywhere, anywhere. 

 

Mind you, and before @ranger_syntax pops his head up from his Whack-a-Mole table, nobody in this decision making process is a "Rangers' Man".  

Worrying? Or not?

 

 

 

[JohnMc 3,233]

My memory must be failing me because I thought we played decent football under Gerrard. I remember seeing us doing that short pass in the box from a by-kick thing for the first time under him and being amazed, I just thought teams like Barcelona could do that. Some of our passing football under Gerrard was excellent I thought. Which of the coaching team was responsible for it I don't know, but I enjoyed watching us then. There was a goal against Benfica (I think) where we passed it from our own by-line all the way up to their box playing right through their press. I mean there were disappointments too, but I thought on the whole we played decent football. 

[Sutton_blows_goats 6,347]

6 minutes ago, Uilleam said:

where is the 49ers fitba' man, Steinsson?

He will 100% be involved, he has been to a ton of games, going as far back as our trip to Old Trafford. He was seen with Marathe and Thelwell as they visited Ibrox 2 weeks ago. 

 

At a guess the process is well down the line, the club have a #1 option they want to get signed and sealed, but have another few options keeping open in the background.

[lenny3k 842]

2 minutes ago, Sutton_blows_goats said:

He will 100% be involved, he has been to a ton of games, going as far back as our trip to Old Trafford. He was seen with Marathe and Thelwell as they visited Ibrox 2 weeks ago. 

 

At a guess the process is well down the line, the club have a #1 option they want to get signed and sealed, but have another few options keeping open in the background.

Yup, I think this is the case too and, hopefully, Mr. Gerrard is posting on Social Media his 'legs by the pool' snaps because he is no longer in the process

[Sutton_blows_goats 6,347]

29 minutes ago, JohnMc said:

My memory must be failing me because I thought we played decent football under Gerrard. I remember seeing us doing that short pass in the box from a by-kick thing for the first time under him and being amazed, I just thought teams like Barcelona could do that. Some of our passing football under Gerrard was excellent I thought. Which of the coaching team was responsible for it I don't know, but I enjoyed watching us then. There was a goal against Benfica (I think) where we passed it from our own by-line all the way up to their box playing right through their press. I mean there were disappointments too, but I thought on the whole we played decent football. 

In Europe, we definitely did yes. Domestically I'm not sure we did, but take @Gonzo79's point about Scottish football and low blocks in general. Although I though we focused too much on possession based football versus the diddy teams, which can play into their hands.

 

And after watching the Livi v Ross Country game last night, I think its impossible to host a good game on those rancid plastic parks. Don't think I've ever seen one. So that's a pass for Gerrard on those games.

 

@Rousseau will be the expert here, and may have some xG stats squirrelled away somewhere which will prove me right, wrong or indifferent. But if I recall correctly, outside 55 our chance creation under Gerrard & co was very poor.

 

Edit - important note, I'm not saying good football is not conducive to success (see Walters second spell for reference).

 

 

Edited 6 hours ago by Sutton_blows_goats

[L72 361]

2 minutes ago, Gonzo79 said:

Gerrard wasn't the all conquering hero some make him out to be.  He also wasn't a failure.

 

He had good and bad points.  Mainly good, I'd say.  

 

I'd rather we looked forward with the new appointment.  

Effectively this is where I'm at. 

 

I'd rather someone new, I'm probably in the Ancelotti boat. 

[L72 361]

1 hour ago, Rousseau said:

I think @lenny3k hit the nail on the head above: whether we like it or not, the tactical nous came from Beale not SG, without which I don't see what SG brings to the table.

 

SG appointed Critchley as his assistant at Villa when Beale left, which didn't go well. Critchley has just been sacked by Hearts. 

 

 

We saw Beale, I do not believe for a second that he was the tactical genius behind it all.