Cumbria_blue
-
Posts
5,586 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Downloads
Posts posted by Cumbria_blue
-
-
1 hour ago, HuistraHairDo said:
Used to be a supporters club, border city loyal I used to go with my older brother on their bus, I was still at school so we’re talking 26 yr ago, don’t know if their still on the go or not.
the crown on botchergate used to be run by a guy called Mark, big lad from Ardrossan Rangers daft Same again tho over 20 yr ago.
aye the Milbourne was took over by a big Rangers fan, Rangers pics on the walls was meant to be bouncing after the OF game, I wasn’t there mind.
So far as I know, they stopped and a few years later another club was formed, who were just known as Carlisle loyal. They met in the Masonic club on Portland square. I actually went to a couple of their events about ten years ago.
I've asked around people I know and it turns out that I know the guy who owns the Milbourne, the building mind, he doesn't run the pub. He's a Rangers fan too, so is his son whom I went to school with. That'll explain why it's now a Rangers pub! I've been away from Carlisle for a while now, it's funny the things you miss.
And unfortunately the tarriers do have a slip house now. You remember the Golden Lion on London Road? It's now a tacky Irish Traveller dive called Gallagher's. Proper shithole, makes the Roadhouse look classy.
-
16 hours ago, Colin Traive said:
Couldn’t care less about where he was born, where he grew up or even whether he’s ever seen Glentoran. But I can tell you from listening to him for five minutes that he hates us with a passion. It oozes out of every comment.
He is a rabid Rangers hating cunt.
Yeah he definitely seems quite bitter against us at times for some reason. I can only think it's playing for Motherwell that's done it. The point I was making that given his background I'd be surprised if he really did hate us and it's not a bit "for show" for his media work.
-
4 hours ago, Siam69 said:
He's not a taig, and while don't know 100%, from judging where he grew up, l'm sure must've supported us as a kid.
He's spent his whole career playing in Scotland, obviously allegiances are elsewhere now, plus it's his job, and he's hardly overly for or against anyone.
I don't see him as a hater at all.
He is what he is, hard to listen to, but overly a Rangers hater, naw, not for me.
Reliably informed that he's a Glentoran fan. I'd be surprised if he hated us, but ten years of playing for Motherwell has maybe warped his mind!
-
On 07/02/2019 at 16:36, DBBTB said:
I think he would be a good Director of Football. IIRC that was his original job at Brentford and he only took over because Uwe Rosler jumped ship to manage Leeds in the middle of the season.
Yeah I think that's right. I often wondered what Davie Weir's role was in it all. Seemed like he didn't do a lot. I always kind of expected the defenders to improve under him, but they just didn't.
-
21 hours ago, HuistraHairDo said:
Wouldn’t say Carlisle is a big Rangers city but it does have a Rangers boozer callled the milbourne arms behind Dixon’s chimney don’t know of any tarrier slop houses in the city.
on the whole prob more Liverpool/ Man U fans than anything else.
Coach and horses in Kingstown used to be a pretty decent Rangers pub back in the day. Supporters buses used to pick up/drop off there. Haven't been in there for about ten years so no idea what it's like now. And I had no idea about the Milbourne!
-
Warburton is obviously a good coach, but probably never going to be a good manager. Someone you'd put in charge of the youths, or have as an assistant manager.
-
12 minutes ago, eejay the dj said:
What OF debut would that have been . Can't remember him being bad in an OF game ?
2-1 win in October 09, he started at right back as unbelievable as that sounds! Remember he miss-kicked the ball the only time it came to him and then he went off injured after ten minutes. Looked like a rabbit in headlights that day.
-
Has anyone called Aidan ever had a worthwhile opinion about Rangers?
-
A waste of a perfectly good EBT.
-
It's none of Lennon's business anyway.
-
15 hours ago, Turnberry18 said:
His emphasis on the Academy concerns me a little, in terms of players coming in. There is nothing to suggest he will be given a big enough budget, and that will be very disappointing if it is indeed the case. It sound's to me we will be told to look to the future blah blah. We need a team of winners now, and I hope those running the club appreciate that. if we don't compete for the title next season I can't see this manager lasting long in the job.
We're always going to have to have an eye on the academy from now on regardless of how many players we sign. We're ultimately going to be a selling club and developing our own talent to sell on to clubs in a bigger and better league is going to be a big part of our strategy going forward. I don't think it means that Pedro is not getting money to spend, or is not going to bring a good few players in to improve the squad to challenge for the title. It's just realism. We can't just think in the short term imo, it's the same thing we've always done.
-
5 hours ago, Inigo said:
Given the obvious similarity to the Diouf thing, it's strange that it hasn't been mentioned in any of the stories.
You're not allowed to draw parallels between incidents, apparently it's point-scoring...
-
Foderingham - 8
Hodson - 7
Hill - 8
Wilson - 6
Wallace - 6
Tavernier - 6
Holt - 5
Hyndman - 6
McKay - 4
Waghorn - 6
Miller - 7
-
It was a good performance, almost spoiled. We were much more direct and the interchanging between the front three was good. Emerson Hyndman was great. Our final ball and finishing let us down as per. Yet had we a defence we could rely on we would've won that comfortably. Even at 2-0 the game never felt safe due to our defence and sure enough they almost ruined it, though Toral is to blame at their first goal. We do deserve credit for pushing for a winner after Saints equalised, obviously it was exciting and a great way to win a game. I'd say this type of performance, doing basics, scoring two or three goals minus stupid defensive errors, should be default and the least we expect from a Rangers team. That's the level we need to be at every week at least. In fairness to the OP, it's a sign of how our season has gone that he felt last night was "almost brilliant."
Last night was a nice moment for Murty, but hopefully that is the last game he is in charge for.
-
3 hours ago, MacBoyd said:
Not quite sure what his point is. Without us gers would die but because of us we are struggling
I thought that as well. Damned for turning up, damned if we don't.
-
On 29 January 2017 at 10:20 PM, Corky True Legend said:
Apart from our two loan players, he would be better than the midfielders we have now.
You mean the midfielders he couldn't get in the team ahead of last season?
-
Not so much forgot him, but I was shocked that Billy Dodds was with us until 2003. Thought he'd left us years before that. Mind you, you'd never think he'd played for us if you listen to him now.
-
On 27 January 2017 at 7:28 AM, WeirFleckNRothen said:
There are better footballers in the junior ranks than Andy Little, believe me.
At best, as I said, he'll secure part-time work as a footballer in the lower leagues of Scotland. He'll be up against the same binmen, postmen and brickies that he done so well against in 2012, but he won't have Templeton, Shiels and Macleod giving him service, it'll be more binmen, postmen and brickies. Then, as he did with us, he'll struggle with the step-up to the Second Division.
Please elaborate on "patchy but notable appearances down south". This will be a laugh.
I would take the Northern Ireland caps with a pinch of salt. He was handed them before he had even made a dent our first team during a period when Northern Ireland were abysmal.
I don't want to see any ex-Bear out of work, but that was a horrible period for our club (The whole administration era) and it baffles me how such a blatantly poor footballer - emphasised by the fact that he cannot find a club - generates shock because he's on the scrapheap.
Agree with this. He was a decent finisher in the lower leagues but he had no all round game at all. His NI caps were based on the fact that he played for us and had potential. Fact he hasn't had a cap since 2013 speaks volumes. He's an Irish league standard player, he should get on the blower to David Healy and see if Linfield will take him.
-
I'd probably say no, but I'm sure he'll get in at some point. As for Weir, he's probably the only player of the last ten years I'd have no bother with including in the HOF. He captained us to three league titles. Guys a legend imo. Easily Smith's most important signing of his second spell.
-
Gael Bigirimana
-
31 minutes ago, Inigo said:
No, there's pedantry and there's reading the rules correctly. Pedantry
. He can't disallow the goal for him going off and coming on again. That's not pedantry, it's fundamental to whether the goal was correctly allowed or not. Semantics have nothing to do with it. The Hearts boy that put the ball in the net didn't leave the pitch for any other reason than momentum, after which he came straight back on. There was no intentional tactical effort to gain an advantage by going off the pitch. Ergo there was no reason to disallow the goal.
I don't doubt you've read the rules, but the referee has applied them differently to you in this case, and all I'm saying is I can see why he did. I just felt you were looking in to it all a bit further than the situation really called for. There is an argument to be made that in going off the pitch and coming back on, he's gained an unfair advantage accidentally through losing his marker in doing so. I think there were reasonable grounds to disallow the goal. There were reasonable grounds to allow it as you've highlighted, but in this case I guess we're lucky it went our way. The Dodoo offside goal was another one that depending on your interpretation of the offside rule and interfering with play, could easily have gone our way on a different day.
-
2 hours ago, Inigo said:
I disagree, gents.
According to page 28, the section immediately after the bit referring to defenders, the sporting advantage thing applies to an attacker as well. But with that the issue isn't what happens when the player rejoins, it's how and why the player left, because if he didn't leave intentionally, then the is OK coming back on straight away without being unsporting. As per page 28, it's only if the ref considers that the attacker 'left the field for tactical reasons', the player shall be cautioned. None of that is really relevant here anyway, though, because the Hearts boy didn't leave the pitch tactically. So...
... In the Ibrox case, the attacker is only offside when off the pitch is he was in a position at the time the ball was played in which, had he been considered on the pitch, he would have been in an offside position. The Hearts boy wasn't, because he wasn't off the pitch when the ball was played. Indeed he'd made it back beyond Wallace, so couldn't have been offside in ANY circumstance. He could ONLY have been judged to have acted in an unsportsmanlike manner (which he hadn't because he went off the pitch through momentum, not trying to gain advantage).
He would only have been offside if he had been off the pitch through momentum and then gained an advantage at the moment the ball was played forward whilst still at that point being ahead of the last defender. Because at that point he'd have been effectively considered as being on the pitch. An example being that he was 1 yard off the pitch, the ball is played across towards him and he runs back on the pitch (no real intent to deceive or anything, he just keeps playing having accidentally moved off the pitch) and collects the ball or shoots. That's offside. The Hearts boy in the case at Ibrox wasn't, because he'd made it back onside before the ball was played, as with any normal offside. To be offside, you have to be in an offside position when the ball is played (in relation to the last defender, as normal) whether you've just been off the pitch or not. Otherwise only the unsporting thing can apply (although it doesn't in this case, as explained).
There's pedantry and then there's that!
If the referee saw him go off the pitch and come back on, then there were reasonable grounds to disallow the goal under the rule highlighted above. We could argue about the semantics of it as you point out, was Cowie intentionally trying to gain an advantage by leaving the park? But I think it's understandable if the ref/linesman thought he did. It's not inconceivable you could say...
-
29 minutes ago, EastEnclosureBear said:
I think it's onside. Whether he left the field of play or not, he was on side before and after the ball was struck.
This is the ball now coming towards the goal.
Anyway it was called off and left the Hearts fans raging, and that is fucking hilarious. Set of cunts.
The point is, he went off the field so therefore should have been out of the game for that passage of play. It doesn't matter if he was inside or not, he wasn't allowed back on the pitch. Otherwise he was gaining an unfair advantage.
-
Danny Wilson and Kenny Miller might have a chance of being in the 09/10 double winning team...
. He can't disallow the goal for him going off and coming on again. That's not pedantry, it's fundamental to whether the goal was correctly allowed or not. 
Rangers players you never saw play for us, but for someone else
in Jimmy Bell's Kitroom
Posted
Sadly for me I only saw guys like McCoist, Durrant and Goram when they played for Kilmarnock and Motherwell.