Hilly86

A manager's review that resembled what we actually watched on the park and not in some kind of personal brain bubble. Just for not trying to pretend that those players are anything more than a bunch of cowardly, shitehawk losers gets him some credit from me. Not so much the stand-with-hands-in-pockets routine, or the refusal to stop them pissing about on the ball while going nowhere.

Sufficiently brainwashed by the 'hospital passes at all times' mantra, or just brainless.

...and the lack of basic intelligence...how physically weak, small and lightweight they are...

Not a hope - imagine it coming down to a must-win game. We can see the spines melting already.

Resorted to similar thoughts watching yet another Tavernier-Halliday-Miller episode in making them look good - this is as good as it gets for the rest. We won't have to put up with players worse than theirs forever.

Imagine that shower of shite somehow, in an alternative universe, found the testicles to finish second - I can hear the revisionism already, the list of those who can stay next season growing. Worse than Aberdeen, on a par with a bunch of SPFL dross - they need to go.

Nope!

An ambiguity test, success defined at the start of this season: "a good second" , a young and improving squad greater than the sum of its parts, may lose occasionally but is more commonly putting away SPFL dross with relative ease, never overrun or bullied, pleasing to watch as a bonus. I guess I just don't feel that general entitled clamour to win the league among the support, given the current constraints and where we've come from; quite the opposite in fact. We'll have to agree to disagree about criticisms of Warburton being to do with the lack of a challenge this year. If your prediction about next year comes to pass, I promise I'll be here defending de Boer!

I think we only disagree on the extent to which MW is culpable for being in the position where he has this particular squad given his finances and his 4-3-3. Ignoring how bad Halliday is in the role he's asked to fill, why is he ever the only option available for such an important role? Maybe that 'Rossiter is 7-10 days away' thing was really believed and he was caught short, but still... I do agree with you on the lack of quality available - we're not awful because of MW alone - and how difficult it is to see simple changes as being effective right now. Trying to think up lineups is an exercise in putting square pegs in round holes.

Fair enough, but I've yet to meet anyone (cranks excluded) who defined success this season as a challenge for the title, let alone demanded it. Next season - any season - and the next manager should be allowed the same leeway when allowing for a budget understandably less than septic, significantly more than the rest. Success measured in progression.

The Academy stuff might well be the most positive thing he did and I can't believe that the importance of it will be lessened now. The 'poison pill' stuff is a definite risk for us and just an extension of the situation for players, where we can't compete with clubs who come with money. Is that fixable? It still puzzles me that wanting to be at Rangers doesn't seem to persuade a few more players to swap prestige for cash, but I would say that...

That depends on your opinion of what doing 'well' in this league might be, whether the squad he chose to be left with after injuries is no better than Aberdeen or Hearts because of resources alone. Even foregoing the usual comparison of finances, he still made seemingly bizarre choices with the money available to him. Again - a budget inadequate for what end? Who are the full internationalists playing for Aberdeen, Hearts and all the other teams we struggle so badly against? It's quite the opposite of what you suggest in my case - my judgement of him certainly takes into account the money available to him and what could reasonably be expected to follow from it.

Would you allow the 'all subsequent matches' argument from someone who never suggested that he doesn't know football or is out of his league (if that's even possible in Scotland)? If the semi-final is an example to counter the 'loser' description, fine, but it carries very little relevance for what we see now. And who didn't know that he would need more money to compete for the title this year? That's the very reason he wasn't asked to do so and given more modest and reasonable expectations to meet.

Indeed, and something we'll have to get much better at getting used to!

Even after his lack of fortune with new signings, that's still one of the most damning points - he assembled that squad. If you wanted to play a 4-3-3 come hell or high water, would you repeatedly choose to have Andy Halliday as your defensive midfielder or would you adapt?

Garner's signing and the rather bold punt on Barton not being a knob aside, I can't disagree that he was unlucky with important players. I still can't excuse him for not being better with what he chose to be left with.

Apologies, I wasn't suggesting that at all. Instead, it was more to do with the possibility that he could see what we all see every week, how dysfunctional the team is in so many ways, and didn't know how to change it. That has to be demoralising and exhausting. To me it's a more sensible, and generous, explanation as to why he was so dogmatic. The whys and wherefores aside, I can see the sense in MW no longer being our manager.

All true - and all sober heads managed their expectations and judgements to allow for the money available to him. When was he last time a vast majority of Rangers fans were so understanding of the the aim for a second-place finish? It just seems reasonable to judge him on not being significantly better than the rest.

Is somebody trying to suggest that the Forest job was the first, sudden temptation that led to his head being turned? All manager's wanting more financial backing being a given, I doubt even Warburton really believed some of the things he said about the players and the team. We all know how exhausting it has been watching this for the longest time, he won't have been immune to it.

A very good description of the impression he gave me a lot of the time. Even worse than not studying an opposition at all is the probability that he never gave our own players any specific instructions or criticisms either.

Sounds like common sense to me - Warburton's reluctance to do the same despite the evidence in front of him was his undoing. Still convinced too many of them are properly shit for a change of formation to do much good, but worth a try.

You're right, of course, and apart from the more bizarre inventions it's understandable why he aims for a positive spin. It's the stuff he doesn't do/keeps doing that's more of a worry.

I had assumed Wilson wasn't fit, haven't heard any positive update. It would make a back three choice a bit easier if he was available too. Completely agree with his hopelessness in the air, but he doesn't look as lost as Kiernan does all the time.

I agree that it seems like MW manages to some preconceived notion of a one-size-fits-all way to play football, but I don't know about the 'Scottish game' thing. For all that we're struggling to look better than the rest for now, we all know that any team finishing above us will, as in every other season, get hammered by some modest European team in a preliminary round next season - battle-hardened or not. Totally agree with the "weak" observation about us. It's still shocking to us being bullied regularly, not even able to land tackles or make opponents think twice about taking a second touch. The number of times we've watched that defence allow strikers to walk off them and pull down long balls without a hint of a challenge is criminal. So much about him, transfers included, just seems so muddled and the things he seems clear about don't make sense to me.

All better than the status quo - something, anything that doesn't reek of square pegs and round holes.