What is a sackable offence for a Rangers manager?

[biggordy 0]

For me the proposed sale of Kris Boyd spoke volumes for the Club's ambitions. He is arguably one of the best goalscorers we have ever had and yet the Club wishes to flog him half way through the season. He is possibly the main reason we are as high in the league at present. I thought we were aiming for Champions' league qualification with the associated rewards.

If we can't move on the dead wood then who was responsible for setting up their contracts, after all they didn't score 20 odd goals so far this season.

Boyd shouldn't be punted because of others mistakes.

 

Bearing this in mind, does everyone agree therefore, that the future looks rosy under the present regime ?

[gisabeer 409]

openly admitting that you played for a draw in the uefa cup final.

 

getting knocked out of the cl qualifiers by yet another pub team.

 

buying players who are not good enough/ cant get a game and then trying to sell your top stars to compensate for your bad judgement in the transfer market.

 

doing all of the above in the space of six months.

 

 

i consider all of these sackable offences.

[pete 2,499]

Walter inherited a position of tremendous strength in 1991 and, critically, three or four regulars who did as much to run things on the field as Walter did. He was also blessed with large sums of money to spend on matchwinners who, despite a large number of spectacular failures (Boli, Salenko, Guivarche, Prodan, etc, etc) were of sufficient influence to bail out his lack of tactical ability. When Walter left the club in 1998, it was in disarray. The players who had seen him through his six titles more or less all left and no succession had been put in place to secure the future.

 

But unless I've completely lost my memory, and I haven't, then Walter showed the same inability to develop young talent then as now. The same willingness to play people out of position and no tactical awareness or preparation whatsoever - a fact so eloquently described by Basile Boli who couldn't believe we could approach important European matches with absolutely no discussion of the opposition or tactics to be deployed. And of course you'll all remember Walters wonderful European achievements first time around - no, thought not. The only credit came was when the team that Souness built achieved that run in 1992-93.

 

I wouldn't cite those struggles against Dundee Utd and lowly QoS as evidence of Walter's genius, it would be just too embarrassing. As for Scotland, well nuff said, his legacy strides before him.

 

But in the end it comes down to this. If he's so fukking good, why is he making such an arse of it now. And 50,000 people can see that he is every second week.

 

Yep i have to agree totally with your post. Walter inherited a fantastic team and watched it slowly wither. He did add a few jewels but he was always running downhill. Against that, Celtic were almost broke and a very poor team. His loyalty to certain players and fear of change cost us 10 in a row.

[Zappa 0]

Finishing 5th is a obviously sackable offense.

 

I would say finishing 18pts behind Celtic in third place is a sackable offence.

 

I'd also say being 17 points behind in the league, halfway through the season, out of a cup to a lower division team, and the manager completely losing the dressing room is a sackable offence.

 

Now finishing 3pts behind, winning both cups and getting to the UEFA cup final - is that really in the same ballpark?

 

Five points behind with plenty to play for and still in both cups, is that a sackable offence?

 

Out of Europe at the first attempt is pretty bad but when it's a couple of months after a European final, surely it shouldn't bring the sack?

 

Now I think Walter completely buggered up in the summer, and I don't think he's a brilliant manager who will take us to great heights; but surely he's demonstrated he's a reasonably good manager?

 

He's 3pts in total behind Strachan in his second spell here which isn't the best but not exactly shite. He's won both cups he's entered got to the final of another which is the first time we've done that since 72.

 

You may not agree with his tactics, teamsheets or how we're playing but personal taste for these things by fans are surely irrelevant - a manager just cannot take that into account when he's trying to deliver trophies. He must be judged by results and while Walter hasn't quite delivered what we want - and I would say that's more to do with bad luck than anything else, I can't see how his report card can be an F with so many.

 

B- seems more appropriate. I really think no-one really has earned the right to say he should be sacked until we see what the table looks like at the end of the season.

 

He may not be the best manager around be he looks no worse than Strachan and far better than Le Guen and McLeish. It's no wonder he doesn't take his criticism seriously, would you if you were in his shoes?

 

I don't think the current crisis has to do with Walter's record bar the fact he spent strangely in the summer and that a poor result means the lack of CL football (which is not unusual for RFC) will lead to less cash in the bank.

 

I think the crisis now is about the way the club is being run, where we go from overspending on fringe players to selling off our first team which has a significant chance of negatively affecting our chances in the league and subsequently automatic qualification for the CL. It's financial suicide and incredibly bad running of the club.

 

If we want SDM to listen us we have to stop acting like headless chickens and yeah, get real.

 

Can't say I disagree with a single word in your post.

 

...and no... I'd say five points behind (could be less after tomorrow) with plenty to play for and still in both cups, is NOT a sacking offense or a situation that should cause the fans to suggest that ANY manager should step down from his position. Certainly not in my books, but I can see why the guys that just don't like Walter Smith FULL STOP, would be coming away with the drivel they are.

[UCF2008 0]

His loyalty to certain players and fear of change cost us 10 in a row.

 

Can't say I totally agree with that. It's true that his loyalty to one or two players saw them stay on past their sell by date, but I think the failure to win no.10 was more down to the wholesale changes WS had to make to the playing staff (especially the defence) over seasons 96/97 & 97/98.

 

Even at that, you could hardly condemn a manager who brought in players like Gattuso, Amoruso, Albertz & Negri over that period.

 

Likewise he was let down somewhat by Gazza & Laudrup in that last season. Those two players, at least in terms of age (30 & 29) shouldn't have been past it, but the simple fact was that they were.

[maineflyer 0]

It's true that his loyalty to one or two players saw them stay on past their sell by date, but I think the failure to win no.10 was more down to the wholesale changes WS had to make to the playing staff (especially the defence) over seasons 96/97 & 97/98.

 

You make it sound like someone else had been in charge and that Walter only arrived for those last two year. Who was responsible for reaching a situation where so many players were at the end of their careers at the same time and such wholesale changes had to be made? Let me think now ...... oh yes, it was Walter Smith.

 

The real reason we came to a standstill in 1998 was because over the space of seven years Walter Smith had been unable to replace the key players that Souness had left him. Fact.

 

If anyone cares to look beyond the Murray myth, Walter was a liability then and he's a liability now. That Murray would invite him back to the club shows clearly how much our chairman understands about running a football club. The sooner both of these gentlemen and their appointed underlings are away from Rangers, the better for the club.

[calscot 0]

openly admitting that you played for a draw in the uefa cup final.

 

getting knocked out of the cl qualifiers by yet another pub team.

 

buying players who are not good enough/ cant get a game and then trying to sell your top stars to compensate for your bad judgement in the transfer market.

 

doing all of the above in the space of six months.

 

 

i consider all of these sackable offences.

 

The first is not something punishable. Walter's tactics got us to the final so it's up to him how he plays it.

 

The second is a definite black mark but is compensated by the aforementioned UEFA cup run. His average over the two seasons is still ok. It's obviously not a sackable offence as Eck wasn't sacked after going out to Zhizkov. And besides, he went on to get us into the CL second round.

 

The third is poor but is only an offence if we badly lose the league. If we win then how can you sack him for it?

[Guest enigmablue]

Calscot, good argument and yes he'll get to the end of the season but here's the rub....

 

1) WS will go when it suits him given Murray's stated position on their special relationship. Even if we lose the next 3 games i'd doubt that SDM would sack him. This is very unhealthy.

2) WS has gained a decade's more experience since leaving Ibrox (Premiership at Everton, Asst Manager to THE best Manager in modern day football, Scotland manager) however his teams play with a overly defensive mindset (which in a 2 horse race is unforgivable), his signings are average at best, he's too loyal to certain established players, he rarely gives youth a chance and you can set your watch by his substitutions. In simple terms, we've seen it all before. We know his strengths (and he has many) but his weaknesses don't seem to have been worked on 2nd time around and frankly it boring to watch 95% of the time.

3) WS's attacks on the supporters are poor form.

 

Will a league win this season 'save' WS? Probably, but i'd guess we'd still have a new manager come next season.

[gisabeer 409]

The first is not something punishable. Walter's tactics got us to the final so it's up to him how he plays it.

 

for a manager of Rangers Football Club to openly admit that he didnt try to win in a major European final is a damned disgrace to everyone who forked out money to go and follow their team to Manchester. and to suggest that it was ok to to play those tactics is ludicrous.

 

The second is a definite black mark but is compensated by the aforementioned UEFA cup run. His average over the two seasons is still ok. It's obviously not a sackable offence as Eck wasn't sacked after going out to Zhizkov. And besides, he went on to get us into the CL second round.

 

Its Walter Smiths dealings in the transfer market thats left us skint and having to sell our best players. Its his ill judgement thats put us in the predicament were in Uefa cup run or not. dont even mention Mcleish in the same breath as Eck. The guy brought us two title with NO MONEY TO SPEND while the wayward walter has spent millions in his second term.

 

The third is poor but is only an offence if we badly lose the league. If we win then how can you sack him for it?

 

Wether we win the league or not it wont cover up the monumental mistakes made by Smith. We should have won the league by a country mile last season and well before the fixture congestion but his everlasting faith in the likes of Adam, Darcheville, McCulloch etc whilst the likes of Boyd and Novo were left to rot on the bench left a sour taste in my mouth.

 

his four five one formation was found out and you could see the team falling apart at the seams as far back as March but he persevered with his one track plan and lost the league to which is probably the most mediocre Septic team in decades.

 

As for his spending, i wouldnt send smith to the shops to get the messages as hed probably fuck that up too.

[Super_Ally 0]

Reading through some of the opinions here i'm left wondering what colour the sky is in your worlds.

 

You do not get to niar, a game away from the CL final and the UEFA final by being completely useless.

 

I'm not saying he is infallable but some respect for our most succesful manager ever please?