Zelalem

[Bakbear 3,586]

2 minutes ago, The Dude said:

There's much more to it with loan players than that. Say next season we want someone on loan from Arsenal, do you think we'd get him if the last guy spent the whole season spent his loan spell sat on his arse in the dugout? 

So we should weaken our current team in order to please the big EPL club? MW clearly sees something I don't as he extended the loan deal, i don't believe for  second that he is playing Zelalem so Arsenal won't throw a huff and not loan us future players. 

[West_Side 1,571]

Thought he played quite well today actually.

[Prso is King 64]

He was pretty good today. Halliday had a poorer game - don't think he suits the more forward of the central midfield positions.

[GrandSuckMaster 1,775]

He isn't good enough. As a team player, he is shockin, never tracks back. Folk are just scared to say it because they thought he was world class 2 months ago.

[The Dude 20,026]

6 minutes ago, Bakbear said:

So we should weaken our current team in order to please the big EPL club? MW clearly sees something I don't as he extended the loan deal, i don't believe for  second that he is playing Zelalem so Arsenal won't throw a huff and not loan us future players. 

Where are we weakening our team? By not playing Law? Gies peace. 6 months ago this board was crying out for us to get him to fuck. 

 

Do you think Arsenal would send us another player in loan if the last one spent the season sat on his hole not playing? Why do you think we ended Oduwa's loan deal when he wasn't getting games? 

[Bakbear 3,586]

I thought he was shite today, although my internet was buffering a fair bit. Halliday was shite too, completely anonymous, the best I can say for Zelalem is that at least he was on the ball regularly whereas Halliday was nowhere to be seen in that first half.

As I said in the match thread, I believe our best Midfield 3 is Law, Halliday and Holt and I think when that was fielded today we looked the most likely.

We really missed Law when he was out injured, we really missed Holt too. Our team look far more direct and play a much higher tempo when Zelalem is not on the field. 

As others have said, all the massive potential that Zelalem has means nothing if he is not "adding value" for us on the park as MW always says....

[kaiser1041 9,088]

He was better today than he has been latley.

[Bakbear 3,586]

8 minutes ago, The Dude said:

Where are we weakening our team? By not playing Law? Gies peace. 6 months ago this board was crying out for us to get him to fuck. 

 

Do you think Arsenal would send us another player in loan if the last one spent the season sat on his hole not playing? Why do you think we ended Oduwa's loan deal when he wasn't getting games? 

Sorry was posting as this went up. As I said, I believe we weaken our team by playing Zelalem. Thats my opinion and its based on our performances with him in the team versus him not in the team. 

You make the assumption that "this board" has a unified opinion. Thats absurd, there are plenty who think Law should never be in a Rangers shirt again, there are those that think Law deserved a clean slate and on that basis has earned a new contract and there are those that feel he was our top scoring midfielder last season and that he got an overly hard time last season in a team of under performers. 

 

To your last point, I don't think whether or not Arsenal lend us future players should be a selection criteria this season, but then I have already stated that MW must see something that I don't as he extended his loan and continues to select him when he did the opposite with oduwa

[The Dude 20,026]

4 minutes ago, Bakbear said:

Sorry was posting as this went up. As I said, I believe we weaken our team by playing Zelalem. Thats my opinion and its based on our performances with him in the team versus him not in the team. 

You make the assumption that "this board" has a unified opinion. Thats absurd, there are plenty who think Law should never be in a Rangers shirt again, there are those that think Law deserved a clean slate and on that basis has earned a new contract and there are those that feel he was our top scoring midfielder last season and that he got an overly hard time last season in a team of under performers. 

 

To your last point, I don't think whether or not Arsenal lend us future players or not should be a selection criteria this season, but then I have already stated that MW must see something that I don't as he extended his loan and continues to select him when he did the opposite with oduwa

Nothing to do with a unified opinion. The majority of posters on here wanted rid and very, very few thought he should be kept. 

 

Both players have made 20 apps this season before today. Law has won 19 and lost 1, Zelalem 17 wins, 2 draws and one loss. In our worst performance so far imo, Falkirk defeat away, one played and one never. Who do you think it was? Not to mention one is a senior pro while the other is a kid playing his first full season of regular football.

If Zelalem was a MP product folk would be wanking themselves into a coma at the boys performances. Just like they did with Jordan McMillan, Andy Mitchell and countless duds before. 

[Bakbear 3,586]

3 minutes ago, The Dude said:

Nothing to do with a unified opinion. The majority of posters on here wanted rid and very, very few thought he should be kept. 

 

Both players have made 20 apps this season before today. Law has won 19 and lost 1, Zelalem 17 wins, 2 draws and one loss. In our worst performance so far imo, Falkirk defeat away, one played and one never. Who do you think it was? Not to mention one is a senior pro while the other is a kid playing his first full season of regular football.

If Zelalem was a MP product folk would be wanking themselves into a coma at the boys performances. Just like they did with Jordan McMillan, Andy Mitchell and countless duds before. 

This bit in bold is probably the bit that I am trying, obviously unsuccessfully, to suggest is irrelevant. It shouldn't matter what their status is. The main concern should be who is the most effective for the team today?

anyway, I don't really have any more to say on the subject that I haven't already said.  It's all about opinions. 

[Blumhoilann 6,712]

All in the eye of the beholder but for me Zelalem had a very good 1st half today,much improved on recent performances.

[The Dude 20,026]

3 minutes ago, Bakbear said:

This bit in bold is probably the bit that I am trying, obviously unsuccessfully, to suggest is irrelevant. It shouldn't matter what their status is. The main concern should be who is the most effective for the team today?

anyway, I don't really have any more to say on the subject that I haven't already said.  It's all about opinions. 

I think it speaks volumes that 10 year pro Law is struggling to get in ahead of a relatively untested kid. Young players are inconsistent. There's few come into a side at 17/18/19 and consistently turn in good performances. 

[BlueSuedeSambas 53,781]

3 minutes ago, GrandSuckMaster said:

He isn't good enough. As a team player, he is shockin, never tracks back. Folk are just scared to say it because they thought he was world class 2 months ago.

People have been slating him for months.

I'd actually say the people who defend him are in a minority.

[ThatNightInFlorence 696]

No way does Zelalem deserve criticism after today's game. He played really well and contributed more than Andy Halliday today. 

 

The crowds reaction when he's on the ball is starting to annoy me as well. 

[GrandSuckMaster 1,775]

On ‎06‎/‎02‎/‎2016 at 0:51 PM, DBBTB said:

People have been slating him for months.

I'd actually say the people who defend him are in a minority.

Even the folk who slate him are nice about it. Work hard or don't play, simple as that, he has a terrible attitude. Oduwa was frustrating, but he almost always tracked back when he lost the ball.

[bluenoz 30,835]

Zelalem is good but we are a very better team with Law in the side. I don't like a midfield with both Ball & Halliday in it at the same time.

[Drunk and disorderly. 14,418]

People who think that players have clauses in their contracts stating they have to play if fit also believe the moon landings were faked.

Imagine players and their agents determining a teams' line up. Do they pick the tactics and formations too? Why waste money on a manager ffs? Football agents clearly run the game. 

[Briton 394]

1 hour ago, The Dude said:

There's much more to it with loan players than that. Say next season we want someone on loan from Arsenal, do you think we'd get him if the last guy spent the whole season spent his loan spell sat on his arse in the dugout? 

So we play a player, not because he's worth his place in the team, but to appease Arsenal so they might deem to loan us another player in the future? (who may or may not be worth his place). 

[Clemdog 39,389]

At least he attempted to impose himself on the game, unlike Halliday.

 

[Briton 394]

1 hour ago, The Dude said:

Better quality player at lower wages than he's command if bought, higher standard of player available to us on loan further down the line, who knows there might be a point down the line where Zelalem (for example) could get let go by Arsenal and due to his experience here on loan is much more open to a move here than he perhap would be had we never had him on loan.

We need to be picking a team to win games, not to impress Arsenal or anybody else.  I'm all for loaning quality players but they must improve the team now.  

[DavieMacRFC 850]

11 minutes ago, Drunk and disorderly. said:

People who think that players have clauses in their contracts stating they have to play if fit also believe the moon landings were faked.

Imagine players and their agents determining a teams' line up. Do they pick the tactics and formations too? Why waste money on a manager ffs? Football agents clearly run the game. 

Fuck sake Buzz Aldrin and Neil Armstrong never set foot on the moon? 

Next you will be telling me that aliens ain't real and the Bible is a fairytale. 

 

Don't be naive mate, this shit goes on all the time and I was present when they walked the moon in the film studio??

[The Dude 20,026]

13 minutes ago, bluenoz said:

Zelalem is good but we are a very better team with Law in the side. I don't like a midfield with both Ball & Halliday in it at the same time.

Are we though? The manager doesn't seem to think so.

[The Dude 20,026]

10 minutes ago, Briton said:

We need to be picking a team to win games, not to impress Arsenal or anybody else.  I'm all for loaning quality players but they must improve the team now.  

Dom Ball has played in as many games we've not won as Zelalem. Funny folk don't jump on him as quickly. The biggest problem with Zelalem is fans were expecting a superstar when he reality is he's a kid just making his first steps in the game. He's a far better player than Law is, even at 19, and contributes more (8 assists compared to two assists from Law)

[siddiqi_drinker 14,635]

Thought he had a decent game today and showed nice touches, but like our other players was unable to make a decent final pass.

Halliday was very poor today and I cannot understand how McKay got the MOTM award?  

It's very frustrating that we seem to struggle so much in the final third, though in fairness we hit the woodwork twice and Waghorn missed a sitter.  

 

[Inigo 32,526]

As impatient and unforgiving as Rangers fans can be sometimes, I never thought I'd see an 18 year old become a whipping boy. And it does feel like we're heading there. It's one thing to disagree with loans, or think he shouldn't be playing, but the crowd's reaction towards him sometimes is way over the top.

He's about 3 years younger that when Alan Hutton started to show anything, 2 years younger than when McKay showed anything, 2 years younger than when Ferguson showed anything. He's decent in this league atm, the hope is that next year he'll be up a level. Maybe we'll get him back, because presumably the idea is that next year we'll be looking to get young players that bit more developed. Zelalem is only here at 18 because of the league we're in. 

18 is very, very young for most lads. The Dude is right. At 18, if this was a permanently signed Rangers youth, he'd be receiving far more backing and his positives would be given more weight and his negatives less weight.