Gandhi1872
-
Posts
584 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Downloads
Posts posted by Gandhi1872
-
-
I get people are angry at the board but for me these players are not getting enough blame.
If the new manager comes in and gets a reaction and they start playing well how is that acceptable? I know it's like this at every team now but why does it take a manager for them to play well?
Where is the professional pride? Where is the desire? They are being paid far more than those they were against tonight and last week. Forget what the manager says. When they go out on that pitch it's just 11v11. You versus the man in your position.
How can we just accept them turning it on whenever they feel like it. It's takes a new manager for them to be bothered to show a bit of desire? There are fans there who have taken time of work to go and watch them and they hardly look bothered. Like I said I know this is not just at Rangers but I find it disgraceful how if they start playing better with a new coach they think we'll just forget the fact they completely downed tools in the last few weeks.
-
Just posted this in another thread. Hate to say it but a better article from Ralston at the Record. Opposite from the Sun article and gives some good info on what they're looking for.
Rangers will ramp up the search for a new boss this week - and will definitely bolster their bench for the visit to Celtic.
The Ibrox board will appoint an interim manager to ease the pressure on under-20s coach Graeme Murty if the man they want on a permanent basis not available immediately.
Rangers have drawn up a list of half a dozen candidates for the roles of first team boss and director of football, with up to 60 serious applicants for the manager’s position alone.
Interviews will begin in earnest in the coming days after soundings were taken last week, with a spread of candidates from the UK and Europe emerging for both positions.
Rangers will not be rushed into making a knee jerk appointment in light of the 2-1 defeat at Dundee, which has taken their recent dismal run in the league to just one win in six.
If an outstanding candidate emerges in the coming days and is ready and willing to take up their post straight away, they will be appointed before the trip to Parkhead on March 12.
But if they are not available until the end of the season, Rangers will happily wait for the right man and put a senior figure alongside Murty for the remainder of the season - and maybe even before the trip to Inverness on Friday night
Murty is highly regarded at Ibrox, but the club hierarchy are mindful of piling the pressure on him for longer than is absolutely necessary and maybe even compromising his fledgling coaching career.
Ideally, Rangers will appoint a director of football first and involve him in the coaching recruitment process, but that isn’t cast in stone.
Rangers are keen to stress the role of director of football in the management structure they favour will have no direct influence on first team affairs.
He will be tasked with overseeing all football operations, which includes sports science, recruitment, youth development and scouting.
Rangers also aim to appoint a head of recruitment in the coming weeks, but that’s a role in which the new director of football will have a significant imput.
I know everyone might not agree with the DoF model but I think they're doing the right thing here and it all sounds good. They're taking their time to make what they think are the right appointments.
-
From the record. Hate to say it but a better article.
Rangers will ramp up the search for a new boss this week - and will definitely bolster their bench for the visit to Celtic.
The Ibrox board will appoint an interim manager to ease the pressure on under-20s coach Graeme Murty if the man they want on a permanent basis not available immediately.
Rangers have drawn up a list of half a dozen candidates for the roles of first team boss and director of football, with up to 60 serious applicants for the manager’s position alone.
Interviews will begin in earnest in the coming days after soundings were taken last week, with a spread of candidates from the UK and Europe emerging for both positions.
Rangers will not be rushed into making a knee jerk appointment in light of the 2-1 defeat at Dundee, which has taken their recent dismal run in the league to just one win in six.
If an outstanding candidate emerges in the coming days and is ready and willing to take up their post straight away, they will be appointed before the trip to Parkhead on March 12.
But if they are not available until the end of the season, Rangers will happily wait for the right man and put a senior figure alongside Murty for the remainder of the season - and maybe even before the trip to Inverness on Friday night
Murty is highly regarded at Ibrox, but the club hierarchy are mindful of piling the pressure on him for longer than is absolutely necessary and maybe even compromising his fledgling coaching career.
Ideally, Rangers will appoint a director of football first and involve him in the coaching recruitment process, but that isn’t cast in stone.
Rangers are keen to stress the role of director of football in the management structure they favour will have no direct influence on first team affairs.
He will be tasked with overseeing all football operations, which includes sports science, recruitment, youth development and scouting.
Rangers also aim to appoint a head of recruitment in the coming weeks, but that’s a role in which the new director of football will have a significant imput.
-
17 minutes ago, K.A.I said:
This director of football will be thrown to the lions too if next season goes tits up that's the only reason they're appointing him under the guise of a revolution when all it is is an attempt to keep heat off themselves
it's win win
if it's a success they can say they thought of and approved it - rightly so
if it's a flop (imo it will be) they can plead and say we put our trust in a highly recommended DOF who was in charge of the football side of things
it's so obvious
Totally disagree. The board will still take pelters if this DoF doesn't work out. Look at all the people already saying it's nonsense and there's no need for it. Plus it's not as if they would be in charge of the football side of things otherwise. They would still be employing people to fill those positions.
As an aside, I think they're going in the right direction with this appointment. It's an unfortunate situation with Murty but it sounds like they're going to appoint someone before the end of the season so no need for an interim appointment. Highly doubt someone better would take it for a few weeks. I'm glad they're taking their time to get who they think is the right man. Not ideal but it's just the way it is.
-
10 minutes ago, Rfc52 said:
According to the record pardew is quite high up the list
If you're referring to the article by Andy Newport I think it means the bookies odds rather than the feeling within the club.
-
12 minutes ago, Bearsden bear said:
Now i understand the whole Warburton wanted out so the Club took his resignation. I also think the Club seized the opportunity to let them go and avoid compensation- which will come back and haunt us again.
All that being said, surely to fuck we had somone in mind to take over quickly & not the under 20's coach??
If we dont get the right guy in this week, we will finish below hearts and St J. We cant afford to waste any more time. The board is an embarrassment and needs to get the finger out on this or else this season will die off and will kill next seasons tickets sale too.
Its important we get this sorted right away and finish this season strong before we can build again for next season.
9 minutes ago, jackrfc95 said:Nope
Yeah we wanted Mcleish until the end of the season but he wanted to be considered for manager or DoF permanently.
-
Wes
Hodson, Wilson, Hill, Wallace
Forrester, Toral, Hyndman
Waghorn, Garner, McKay
-
54 minutes ago, Smile said:
Two managers wrong already it's the only Treble we will get with this board in charge. We will watch a few being celebrated though.
Two?
-
Alex McLeish is favourite to take charge at Ibrox if the Rangers board decide on an interim manager until the end of the season, following the departure of Mark Warburton on Friday.
The Ibrox board has other managerial candidates to consider for the long-term, including Derek McInnes of Aberdeen, a former Rangers player, along with St Johnstone’s Tommy Wright and Michael O’Neill, manager of Northern Ireland.
The Sunday Telegraph can also reveal that possible candidates for a proposed post of director of football include Paul Mitchell, who is working his notice as head of recruitment at Spurs, Stuart Webber, head of football operations at Huddersfield Town and also John Park, the former chief scout at Celtic. Park was credited with having been instrumental in attracting players of the calibre of Victor Wanyama and Virgil van Dijk during his 10 years at Parkhead, before parting company with Rangers’ arch-foes in October.
No movement will occur before Monday, with under-20 coach Graeme Murty in charge for Sunday’s William Hill Scottish Cup fifth-round tie at home to Greenock Morton. McLeish declined to make any comment on the possibility of his return to Ibrox for a second spell in charge, having guided Rangers to two Scottish championships and five cup wins between 2001 and 2006.
Warburton, meanwhile, remains adamant that no agreement was reached between Rangers and his representative, Dave Lockwood, to the effect that he and his assistant, David Weir, and the club’s head of recruitment, Frank McParland, would resign.
The former Brentford boss also claims to have referred the matter to both his lawyers and the League Managers Association, although there has been no confirmation from the LMA of contact from Warburton over the issue.
However, Dave King, the Rangers chairman, issued a statement which accused Warburton of having reacted badly to a review by the Ibrox directors of his performance. King said: “Ahead of the board meeting at the end of January, I advised the manager that the board wished to review our recruitment plan and performance over the previous two windows.
“This was a routine request and was timely given the concerns that everyone at the club has with regard to the high level of wages we were paying relative to the performance on the pitch. In particular, a large portion of our wage bill was not even seeing regular playing time.
“Under normal circumstances such a review would remain confidential. However, in this instance, the board’s routine questioning of management was leaked to the media and conveyed as being a negative reflection of the board’s attitude to the manager and the recruitment department. It was confirmed to me that the leak did not come from a board member.
“Things moved quickly from that point. There were rumours that the management team (presumably their agent) was negotiating with English clubs and, in one instance, I was informally approached to ask if the club would waive compensation if the management team was to leave.
-
37 minutes ago, bornabear said:
just what I was thinking, when is immediate not immediate.
Add another question.
King says his plan was to invest in 5 or 6 players in the (last) summer, Warburton wanted more (and got them), so the board must have sanctioned these additions.
Then King contradicts himself by blaming MW for having too many players getting paid to do fuck all.
Something is not quite right here and I would love to hear MW's side of the story before I decide who is right or wrong.
Too many folk on here taking King's word as gospel and adding a bit of spin here and there.
Remember, there are always two sides to a story.
No he didn't say there were too many players. He said 'a large portion of the wage bill not seeing regular playing time' which I assume relates to the likes of Barton (when he was suspended), Kranjcar, Senderos, Rossiter and O'Halloran not playing regularly when they are our highest wage earners.
-
-
28 minutes ago, 55Bear said:
Apologies if this has been touched on, but I was thinking about it this morning and honestly can't think of any examples where we have created chances from a counter attack.
Counter attacking is a basic part of the game, and any team should have the ability to turn defence into attack, but do we ever do it??
My mind draws back to thinking of Wes loitering with the ball after gathering a corner, instead of distributing it quickly to catch opponents off guard - another fundamental flaw in Warburton's 'build from the back' style of play. Maybe Wes is scared he'd fuck it up, or maybe Mark's voice is niggling in the back of his head?
Even in general play with this team, there seems to be no urgency to play the decisive pass or attempt to penetrate. Too often when players get the ball between the lines or on the wing their first thought is to go back or sideways.
-
13 minutes ago, cr3_bear said:
It's shocking , even back at the 5-1 game at the piggery we had countless chances to hit them on the break when we were still in the game . First time I really noticed it and it has annoyed me more and more as the weeks have went on
Not exactly giving yourself the best chance of counter attacking in that game when you play 37 year old Kenny Miller on the right wing.
-
9 minutes ago, nelsonRFC82 said:
Easy said in theory but completely ignorant of issues such as pressure to perform in front of 50000 fans or fact we remain a cup final to opposition. Takes a shit load more than we pay over & above Aberdeen/Hearts to overcome these human factors!
Totally disagree. That's why we pay these players the amount they get. As for the cup final comment, this is a known issue therefore our players should be matching the opposition with the same intensity and aggression. There's pressure playing in front of 50,000 yes but if the team comes out and starts the game at a high tempo with energy and gives their all, the fans' encouragement can only help the players. Again, this is in theory but there's no reason it can't be a reality in practice.
-
27 minutes ago, THE_MIGHTY_BEARS said:
Is there a better manager out there who is willing to take on this job? Celtic have monopolised the Scottish game while we're expected to compete with no money to spend. How many managers who hold dear their reputation would accept this thankless task?
But the thing is, we only play Celtic three times a season before the split. That's 9 points but they are also one off games with one, possible two being at home. We are already spending more than 11/12 teams in this league and should be beating the vast majority pretty comfortably. Whilst it's highly unlikely we win every game outside the derby games, it's not an impossible task to keep it competitive and still be in with a good chance of winning by the time we get to the split.
-
1 hour ago, MasterD said:
I don't see any changes as he'll think this is a chance for the players to redeem themselves quickly.
MW always says it's about the squad and they must see a path to the first team.
If he was to stick with the same team, what does this say to the boys that were sitting on the bench midweek? They can play terribly and there's no need to worry about their place. What chance have they got of ever getting a game if they don't play after that horror show.
-
Wes
Kiernan, Hill, Wilson
Hodson, Toral, Hyndman, Wallace
Windass, McKay
Waghorn
-
1 hour ago, KingKirk said:
another player that was never ever gonna be good enough for us. MOH Forrester next to leave please Warburton
He's played one match in a game he should never have been thrown into. Not to mention the fact he'd just been out for six months, was behind everyone in terms of fitness and didn't get a full pre-season. I'd suggest the fact he has only gone out on loan means they still have hopes he'll come back and feature next season.
-
1 hour ago, K.A.I said:
Yeah I get what you are saying about the role of a defensive midfielder but if we are to have one of them to really work well for us I don't think it can be a young guy at 5,7 or whatever he is. If we are going down that route (again IMO) we need someone big and strong and will boss a midfield with the crunching tackles and win second balls with ease. Similar to a Wanyama for them in previous years and to a lesser extent what Armstrong has been doing in recent months for them. Hate using them as a benchmark but it's where we need to be.
Rossiter isn't that type of player that wee need for that role. Nice and neat and tidy but that's about it.
He's not big but he's aggressive in closing people down and is definitely not afraid to go in for a tackle. I think he is the type of player we have been missing. Rossiter and Barton both suffered at the start of the season because I don't think they could play together. It needed to be one or the other as the lone holding player.
-
5 minutes ago, Sportingintegritymyarse said:
Yeah but he's allowed to change his mind and shouldnt be held to account.
In line to achieve his set goal (2nd with European place), talk of him wanting more players from the pot that was allegedly held back for this window, and now in here the apparent lack of spending is justified by saying to hold back the money for the next manager.
4 minutes ago, Smile said:No one pulls him up it's like he brainwashes them.
Because I think people realise that the 30 million comment was a mistake and are willing to look past it because we don't have any money to spend. I don't think King and co are holding back excessive amounts. I just don't think they have it. In addition to the fact I don't think there is anyone out there at the moment that would want to buy the club and plough lots of money in. It's just where we are at the moment.
-
Extremely harsh. He's playing out of position becuase of the way things have turned out. We knew at the end of last season he wasn't a holding midfielder but he's still having to play there. Not helped by the fact he's constantly the only defensive presence in midfield. Last season we played our best against hibs, celtic and Dundee when we had Law and Ball also in midfield (as somebody with a bit more physicality). Most of the time Halliday had to play with the likes of Zelalem and Holt, neither of which can tackle. This is being replicated this season when he's had to play next to Holt, Kranjcar and Windass, leaving him to cover the pitch and do all the dirty work.
Not saying he's not culpable or he's been playing well but it's still not his best position and he's left with a lot of work to do.
-
2 minutes ago, Gandalf the Blue said:
I get that mate. You're right. If that's the point the other boy was making, then totally agree
No worries mate. That was the debate I was having earlier in the season. Dropping points to the likes of Ross County, Dundee etc seems like a Warburton problem because we have more money and better players. But today looks like a King problem because these players are not good enough and significant investment is required.
-
2 minutes ago, STEPPS BOY said:
He's had 3 transfer windows and the only player that he has signed that is required quality is Foderingham and potentially Windass..
He's not the man to lead is forward.
How much better do you think we could be with the budget he has had? Obviously these players are better than the likes of Hamilton, Dundee etc but today you could see they just don't have enough quality. How much could another manager achieve with these players if he set them up differently and got the best out of them?
Could we be challenging if all of his signings (Barton, Rossiter etc) had paid off or he bought better players with the same money? Or is it just that significant investment is required?
-
2 minutes ago, Gandalf the Blue said:
Would you rather we got results against County and St Johnstone but be sitting in their league position?
You're missing the point. We're not comparing ourselves to them. We are now 20 odd points behind but we've only played celtic twice. Too many points dropped against the likes of St Johnstone and Ross County when we are supposed to have better players and have spent more money than them.
***Manager/DOF rumours thread***
in Jimmy Bell's Kitroom
Posted
I think you're kidding yourself if you think the fans won't get on their backs if this doesn't work out. Whether, like you say, they think they're culpable is a different issue but it won't save them from any blame.