Zander1
-
Posts
197 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Downloads
Posts posted by Zander1
-
-
Slightly off topic but on the subject of bringing back certain songs; what about getting this version belted out. I know this has been posted before, but it's truly spine-tingling.
-
McGregor seemed to save the unsavable. I haven't seen any evidence that Cammy Bell is of the same mould but I'd gladly be proved wrong. That said, I think he's a solid enough keeper.
-
I dont think he deserves any credit for winning the 3rd division nor any credit for winning this division. I honestly believe, and i genuinely do by the way, that you or I could have done it with the exact same set of players at our disposal.
As i have previously said though, if we win the SC this season, then i will most defo give him credit and i will lay off him completely next season and give him the time to prove me wrong.
Fair enough, all about opinions I suppose. I personally think it must be to hugely difficult to motivate players for these games and that, for all his flaws, Ally gets the guys playing for him. I agree to an extent that winning these two divisions is hardly top of our club's list of achievements, but going through ANY season undefeated is good going(I know we haven't done that yet) due to motivation and concentration.
-
The outspending of opponents is a massive red herring in your examples though. The other mhobs wage bill has never been lower than ours by a factor of 20 or 30 like every current team we are up against is. Plus a £20m wage bill v a £2m wage bill is a closer match than a £7m wage bill v a £200k wage bill. They are just not comparable.
That's a fair point to an extent. But practically, what difference does it really make? If you're outspending your closest opponent by a factor of 10 or by a factor of 30 either way you should be winning the league at a canter. But to do it undefeated dropping only 2 points is good going by any standards. Yet McCoist gets no credit for it at all from some. That's my point. Just out of interest, do you agree he should get some credit or do you think the standard of opponent total negates any achievement?
-
We won the league by 6 points that season. Arguably, it was a 3 team competition as Aberdeen were only 8 points behind us. If you think it in anyway compares to Allys situation, you are tuned to the moon, im afraid.
Think my original point is getting lost somewhere. I'm not saying the 2 situations are the same. Many on here have stated that Ally shouldn't get any credit for our league form because we have no real competition and massively outspend our opponents. My point is this has been the case before yet previous managers have always been given credit for winning leagues. And none of those managers have had to deal with so much off-field instability.
I'm struggling to see why some give Ally no credit at all.
-
1 season.
Yep, one season which was, arguably, easier than the two McCoist has just had, given all the off-field problems. Arguably. Not saying it definitely was, just saying that those claiming with utter certainty that no Rangers manager has ever had it easier need to realise that that statement is subjective. There have been other times when Rangers have majorly outspent their opponents and not had a strong challenge in the league...and have had stability off the park. Yet McCoist seems to get little or no credit from some.
As I've said before, I'm not a blind supported of Ally; he's made some decision I don't agree with and some performances this year have been woeful. But overall I think he's doing well and some of the abuse he gets on here is baffling.
-
Utter nonsense.
Walter Smith was always in a 2 team League Competition every year, irrespective of any financial differences in wages between us and them.
Celtic finished 4th in 94. Don't quite see how that makes it a 2 team competition...unless you mean Motherwell, who were 2nd?
-
In the interest of fairness in Walters second term, which included 3 titles in a row and a UEFA cup final, Celtics wage bill was at one point almost double ours.
Absolutely agree, I was just responding to some saying that no Rangers manager has had it easier than McCoist has it now. I was just making the point that it could be argued that Walter had it easier in the 93-94 season, yet he didn't get half as much stick as McCoist is getting.
-
Ally's only target was to win the league, that's it, Walter was expected to deliver in Europe and domestic cups as well.
No celt*c to contend with, and up against plumbers and lollypop men with a squad the wee teams can only dream off.
Stupid comparison IMO but folk are that keen to make excuses for Ally they're clutching at straws.
You've just said yourself, "Ally's only target was to win the league." Which he will. And,by contrast, Walter didn't "deliver in Europe". So by that reasoning Ally is meeting his expectations better that Walter did in his first stint. Yet some seem very reluctant to give him any credit.
I'm not for a minute stating McCoist is a world class manager, but he certainly is not "clueless" as some on here would have you believe.
-
Genuine question, do people think it's easier for:
A) Ally to win the lower leagues with a squad of youngsters and SPL journeyman, given the off-field turmoil
Or
B) Walter Smith to win several leagues whilst spending more than any other manager in Britain against a Celtic team that was a shambles and at one point hours away from obliteration.
I'm not trying to take anything away from Walter, and actually I don't believe it was as easy for him in his first stint as I've suggested above. However, it would be interesting to see the factor by which Walter was outspending the opposition in the mid 90s. If you include transfer fees as well as wages, would that factor be that much different to that by which Ally is outspending his opponents just now?
I don't have an answer to that btw, but I'm just making the point that I don't think it's quite as simple as saying "no Rangers manager has ever had it easier'.
Just my opinion.
-
GK:
LB: Davie Robertson
CB: Frank De Boer - maybe not overrated in the general sense of the word; every knows he was world class. But his time with us is rarely mentioned, maybe because of how amazing his brother was for us
CB: Henning Berg - Did a job at a difficult time.
RB: Alec Cleland
LM: Neil McCann - one of our best wingers in the last 20 years.
CM: Alex Rae - a better footballer than some give him credit for.
CM:Thomas Buffell
RM: Trevor Steven - Again, maybe not underrated by some, but I do think a large section of younger bears don't realise just how classy a player he was.
FW: Rod Wallace
FW: Kenny Miller - for obvious reasons some never got behind him. I totally understand that. This isn't a comment on him personally. I just think that for his last couple of seasons at the club he was totally outstanding.
-
Love the story super tells on his DVD. Him and Gazza decided to hide a fish in Gordon Durie's brand new car. Apparently Gazza hid it under the back seats. Ally says "that's a belter gaz" and turns to walk away. Gazza says "we're not finished yet" and puts another fish in the glove box. He says that way when Durie finds the fish in the glove box he thinks that's what's causing the smell and then stops looking. Apparently Durie was complaining for weeks that the smell was still lingering, saying he couldn't get rid of it, no realising there was still a fish in there. Poor Jukebox ended up getting rid of the car.
-
-
At the start of this season my dad and I started-up our own Sunday league team. We've been trying to raise funds because, as anyone who's started a team will know, there's a fair amount to be paid for.
Anyway, one of the guys in our team is mates with Neil Alexander. Neil very kindly got us a top signed by the current squad and also gave us a signed pair of goalie gloves. We were originally going to auction them at a fundraising night but I thought that putting them on this site might be a better way to reach a lot of bears.
So if anyone is willing to make a reasonable offer please do so here. If there's not enough interest I'll just auction it at the night out as originally planned.
Cheers guys.
-
I knew after I typed it I'd arsed up the Scottish Cup thing...but I stand by the sentiment. We will be more harshly punished for a less severe breach of rules...that's the gist of it. Admittedly the two cases aren't like for like but I have a strong suspicion that if the roles were reversed we'd still be looking at title stripping for Rangers and less stringent penalties for hearts. Of course we'll never know because Hearts will never win a title. But the bottom line is that the SPL dictate the punishment for breaches of their rules. To my knowledge, no club has ever been stripped of a title. I concede that that punishment could only affect one of two clubs, but I cant recall any other punishments that are comparable in terms of severity. Yet that's what they want to do here. Are they really suggesting that mis-registration of a contract (which has no impact on the players or outcome of games) is the worst offence a club has committed in the history of the SPL?
-
I meant a president has been set with regards to Hearts...this isn't the first item that they (or other clubs IIRC) have missed payments to players. You're of course right that in both the example you give the law has been broken...but the punishments would most certainly not be the same. If we have registered players incorrectly, I have no problem with us receiving an appropriate punishment.
My point is that the fact that the punishment is so disproportionate to what is effectively a victimless crime suggests a witch hunt. And the fact that other worse breaches (in my opinion) have received minimal punishment only supports my assertion.
If the roles were reverse do you think hearts would face the stripping of a Scottish Cup? Do you think the issue would even have made the papers if hearts had done what we're alleged to have done? And if we had missed payments, do you think it would receive the same low level of attention?
-
We don't have to wait to see what punishment they face... A precedent has been set. And I disagree with your first point too. To continue your analogy, doing 35 in a 30 zone is illegal, so is doing 150. I don't think they're as bad as each other. What's more, discretion is used all the time in law, with circumstances being taken into consideration. Surely the crime in which people have suffered (ie, non payment) should be more aggressively pursued than the victimless crime? That's not the case here. And I don't see that we do need to wait and see if Hearts are punished...they've done it before and not been punished.
All of this is of course based on the assumption that we did not correctly register players' payments, which is as yet still unconfirmed.
-
I absolutely can't. It has been suggested to me that that's the case, and I can think of no other reason. As I said in my post, if anyone has more info than me I'll bow to their knowledge.
The crux of my argument, however, is this. We are being punished (or at least they are tryin to) for (allegedly) not adhereing to rules regarding player payment. Surely not paying players at all is a worse breach of rules?
-
Hearts' recent non-payment to players got me thinking about the blinding hypocrisy withinScottish football. (Admittedly it's not exactly a revelation). As far as I'm aware, and someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but the reason that undisclosed payments are against the rules is to protect players.
For example, lets say a smaller club tells a player we'll put you on a contract of 100 quid a week but don't worry we'll top that up with an extra grand at the end of the month. If they then decide not to pay the extra fee, and the extra fee wasn't declared to the SPL, the player would have no means of getting what they were owed. As I understand it, that's why the rule exists.
Our enemies would happily have us believe its a tax issue, but tax is well outwith the remit of any footballing authority. Any tax liabilities we may or may not have are separate issues, even if they did arise for the same contracts.
So effectively the SPL are trying to punish us for allegedly breaking a rule that exists to protect payments to players, despite the fact that not one player is complaining. This is happening at the same time as another club are not paying their players, something that we never did even at our lowest financial ebb. Hearts have previous for this and receive little or no punishment.
Has it ever been more evident that this whole thing is a witch hunt?
As I say I know it's not surprising but I just thought I'd draw the parallel between the two situations.
-
17 of us going...it's my stag-do that weekend, been arranged for ages. When this game was announced, couldn't believe my luck. Off to see the legends then out to get plastered.
:beer1: We're all in the main stand, wearing stupid T-shirts with my face on them.
-
Hardly the most important thing right now, but just thought I'd post a wee heads-up. Tickets were supposed to be available to ST-holders as of today. Woman at the ticket centre said they are awaiting a decision on whether the game is going ahead. She advised me to keep an eye on the website for updates. That'll be ideal if you want to know about it a month after the match.
-
Next Sunday to season ticket holders I believe.
On a related topic, does anyone know the maximum number of tickets that one ST holder can buy. By co-incidence, it's my stag-do that night so wanted to get all the boys along to see the legends before going out for a good bevy. If we wanted 15 tickets in the same area, would that be possible for one guy to buy or is there a separate procedure for group bookings?
Any help appreciated, cheers.
-
My old man tells the story of his first trip to Ibrox with my Grandad, and the player he was most excited to see was the 'Penalty King'. Imagine his excitement when the bears were awarded a spot-kick...needless to say that was one of the three that was saved. The way my Dad tells it is, that was the first one he ever missed, although from what's written above I'm not sure if that's true.
-
The reason Mo Johnston was a 'High Profile Catholic' is simply that unless you play for the Old Firm no-one cares what religion you are. Therefore signing a Catholic from anyone but Celtic was never going to be as significant.
:beer1:
Campaign: Bring back the Anthem.
in Jimmy Bell's Kitroom
Posted
The 'Amazing Grace' version? I've never heard it sung like that. Don't get me wrong the other version can be awesome with 50,000 belting it out, but there's something about this version that makes the hair stand on end.