Jump to content

Matt Gilks in Scottish Sun


K.A.I

Recommended Posts

57 minutes ago, gsa said:

It's embarrassing watching  and listening to Rangers fans get a hard on for an ex Celtic player who at his very best is still an average footballer. 

My point is that all his moaning and dropping deep to his own box isn't actually helping the team.

The dropping deep is a tactical instruction from the management. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 223
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

1 hour ago, gsa said:

It's embarrassing watching  and listening to Rangers fans get a hard on for an ex Celtic player who at his very best is still an average footballer. 

My point is that all his moaning and dropping deep to his own box isn't actually helping the team.

Kenny Miller-better than viagra.

Always pops up when you least expect it and rises to the occasion.

Our Kenny doesn't do stage-fright.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, loyalfollower said:

Don't see how they stood by and let it happen.  Barton tried to get his point across and was suspended.  The players will automatically keep schtum until a time comes where they can't be affected. It happens at every club on the world.  We could see from the first ross county game that these cunts had no fight in them and I got one would like the main culprits to be named and shamed.  But I suspect that won't happen

No one really knows what happened with Barton and I doubt we'll ever find out the exact truth. My view would be he was angry and demanded more from the squad but I'd guess, that IMO, he maybe went about it in the wrong way. I don't doubt he had valid points but it depends on how he put his points across. That is simply speculation on my part however. No one came out of it looking great though, not Barton, not Warburton and not the board IMO.

Regardless of what went on with Barton though that should have no impact on a lack of fight from any player. It simply shows to me that the majority of our squad are weak players but also weak men. It's pretty evident to me the majority of our squad lack fight. It's clear to see every match day. Many of them lack balls, heart and desire but that must also apply to the two ex goalkeepers in my opinion. To criticise something you have been a part of, where it would seem you have lacked the same fight you accuse others of, in my opinion is a tad pathetic. I agree with some of their content but they clearly didn't do enough to change anything.

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, graeme_4 said:

I don't disagree with much of it, other than that he'll become part of the 'stab Rangers in the back crowd'. 

He verbalised a lot of my thoughts very well. 

"In my opinion Miller has realised he has the backing of the Scottish football media (particularly the ex players) and he's playing up to it. All the over the top gesticulating, the dropping back to his own box, it's all a bit "look at me, I'm so hard done by in this team"."

?

Link to post
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Laudrup1984 said:

No one really knows what happened with Barton and I doubt we'll ever find out the exact truth. My view would be he was angry and demanded more from the squad but I'd guess, that IMO, he maybe went about it in the wrong way. I don't doubt he had valid points but it depends on how he put his points across. That is simply speculation on my part however. No one came out of it looking great though, not Barton, not Warburton and not the board IMO.

Regardless of what went on with Barton though that should have no impact on a lack of fight from any player. It simply shows to me that the majority of our squad are weak players but also weak men. It's pretty evident to me the majority of our squad lack fight. It's clear to see every match day. Many of them lack balls, heart and desire but that must also apply to the two ex goalkeepers in my opinion. To criticise something you have been a part of, where it would seem you have lacked the same fight you accuse others of, in my opinion is a tad pathetic. I agree with some of their content but they clearly didn't do enough to change anything.

The 2 goalies though never got a chance to show any balls or fight. They were just planked on the bench and judging by gilks. He couldn't wait to get away from that shower

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Mr Soprano said:

"In my opinion Miller has realised he has the backing of the Scottish football media (particularly the ex players) and he's playing up to it. All the over the top gesticulating, the dropping back to his own box, it's all a bit "look at me, I'm so hard done by in this team"."

?

I believe so.

He never used to do it, even at international level, and having your spearhead drop into left and right back or collect the ball from the CBs does us no favours. 

It feels like playing to the crowd, which some are lapping up to be fair. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, graeme_4 said:

I believe so.

He never used to do it, even at international level, and having your spearhead drop into left and right back or collect the ball from the CBs does us no favours. 

It feels like playing to the crowd, which some are lapping up to be fair. 

Sorry mate but I disagree here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, loyalfollower said:

The 2 goalies though never got a chance to show any balls or fight. They were just planked on the bench and judging by gilks. He couldn't wait to get away from that shower

Gilks more so than Bell definitely showed some talent, i mean he was the national team keeper at one point. Now Wes is a great keeper and has made some outstanding saves and damage controlled in some games but I'd say Gilks was definitely owed some league game time especially against lower side opposition like kilmarnock or Accies. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, RFCRobertson said:

Gilks more so than Bell definitely showed some talent, i mean he was the national team keeper at one point. Now Wes is a great keeper and has made some outstanding saves and damage controlled in some games but I'd say Gilks was definitely owed some league game time especially against lower side opposition like kilmarnock or Accies. 

Foderingham didn't deserve to be dropped, Gilks knew when he came he would be 2nd choice and Fod didn't give him a chance - just sounds like he's quite bitter tbh. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, WGOH said:

Foderingham didn't deserve to be dropped, Gilks knew when he came he would be 2nd choice and Fod didn't give him a chance - just sounds like he's quite bitter tbh. 

More squad rotation rather than dropping Wes and keeping a good reserve keeper happy with some game time. 

Although it's something Gilks should be used to, he spent two years at Burnley and only made 2 appearances but then that might be why he came to us expecting more game time and wasn't giving it so he went to wigan where he's made 3 appearances so far i think? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

:lol:

I can't help wondering (I know ... if yer Auntie had baws) ..... lets say the team were theoretically only 3 points adrift of first place ...... if the stories of these two would be a case of staying under the radar .... but I don't think so.

They would probably be boasting about how good the competition for places was at The Rangers .... and how hard they trying to break into the first team .... and how privileged they were to be a part of this glorious comeback ..... and were happy to stay and fight for there positions ...... bask ..... bask .... glory .... glory ..... bask ... bask.

Instead of heading straight for the lifeboats with a resounding ...... it wiznae ma fault .... honest it wiznae ..... blame ... blame ... blah .... blah .... blame ..... :p:

:UK:

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Bobby Hume said:

:lol:

I can't help wondering (I know ... if yer Auntie had baws) ..... lets say the team were theoretically only 3 points adrift of first place ...... if the stories of these two would be a case of staying under the radar .... but I don't think so.

They would probably be boasting about how good the competition for places was at The Rangers .... and how hard they trying to break into the first team .... and how privileged they were to be a part of this glorious comeback ..... and were happy to stay and fight for there positions ...... bask ..... bask .... glory .... glory ..... bask ... bask.

Instead of heading straight for the lifeboats with a resounding ...... it wiznae ma fault .... honest it wiznae ..... blame ... blame ... blah .... blah .... blame ..... :p:

:UK:

 

The main point of the article is lack of fight.. if we were 3 points behind we wouldn't have lack of fight and it would be a non story.

Link to post
Share on other sites

All of this reminds me of the story, of the Emperor's new clothes.

All thoses who were put to the sideline for whatever reason are now telling how naked he really was in terms of management ability. Did they wait now because he still had clout as Rangers manager and now he has not got clout and is exposed as not very good. I expect Barton to comeout with something in the next 6 months. I have the feeling Barton done a bit of shouting and confrontation, but he was put in his place by a PC happy place mind set and told he did not fit in. I suspect that several ex players read MW style of management and worked out that shouting the odds would just cause them trouble, so they just stayed quiet to avoid the bad feeling. This will not do MW reputation any good. The news papers love this kind of thing and will pay for ex players to give their opinions about MW and this time at Rangers as they know it sells.

I think we will see more explayer coming out with similar stories about MW.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, loyalfollower said:

The main point of the article is lack of fight.. if we were 3 points behind we wouldn't have lack of fight and it would be a non story.

:tu:

Thank you ..... your post proves my point mate .....   confirmation of the lack of fight is all too evident ..... we have all witnessed it first hand ... I personally do not feel it necessary to air our dirty laundry for all to see ... and this in my opinion is exactly what these two ex players have done .... and it's not what I would expect from anyone who pulls on a Rangers strip.

People have been of the opinion that they thought MW just did not get us .... and what it meant to be The Rangers manager .... well in my opinion both these ex goalies fall under this same category as players ..... and again in my opinion .... they are covering their own arses and using the ex management team and current players as an excuse to cover the fact they were just not good enough for our Club ..... yes they may be right about lack of fight, I'll give them that ... as they like us, as spectators, could all see this to be the case .... even more so from their view sitting on the bench ..... :p:

Many years ago one of the best players to ever pull on a Rangers jersey did something similar ..... when he publicly criticised the then manager's training regime at Ibrox ..... and he was in turn loudly condemned for his actions by the support at that time for going public .... do your talking in-house was the way it was done back then .... and what goes on inside Ibrox remains there ..... and this was when we were pretty successful and lack of fight was something unheard of at our Club.

I was of the opinion that Ralph Brand was wrong in going public then ..... the same way as these two goalies are now ..... and he was and still is a player who will remain in my memories for being one of the best I have ever seen in a Rangers team ..... sadly unlike these two goalies.

Ralph may have been right in his criticism .... but he should have stayed away from the newspapers .... as all it did then was give the press a nice juicy headline that grew arms and legs .... and it did nothing to resolve whatever may or may not have been the problem.

But for some reason quite a few feel the need to back these two up .... and applaud their bravery for going public?..... Why would you need them going public to confirm what we already know and can see for ourselves .... surely we are not that insecure in our own selves that we need it to be all over the back pages of a Rangers hating rag to confirm what we already know to be true?

:UK:

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Bobby Hume said:

:tu:

Thank you ..... your post proves my point mate .....   confirmation of the lack of fight is all too evident ..... we have all witnessed it first hand ... I personally do not feel it necessary to air our dirty laundry for all to see ... and this in my opinion is exactly what these two ex players have done .... and it's not what I would expect from anyone who pulls on a Rangers strip.

People have been of the opinion that they thought MW just did not get us .... and what it meant to be The Rangers manager .... well in my opinion both these ex goalies fall under this same category as players ..... and again in my opinion .... they are covering their own arses and using the ex management team and current players as an excuse to cover the fact they were just not good enough for our Club ..... yes they may be right about lack of fight, I'll give them that ... as they like us, as spectators, could all see this to be the case .... even more so from their view sitting on the bench ..... :p:

Many years ago one of the best players to ever pull on a Rangers jersey did something similar ..... when he publicly criticised the then manager's training regime at Ibrox ..... and he was in turn loudly condemned for his actions by the support at that time for going public .... do your talking in-house was the way it was done back then .... and what goes on inside Ibrox remains there ..... and this was when we were pretty successful and lack of fight was something unheard of at our Club.

I was of the opinion that Ralph Brand was wrong in going public then ..... the same way as these two goalies are now ..... and he was and still is a player who will remain in my memories for being one of the best I have ever seen in a Rangers team ..... sadly unlike these two goalies.

Ralph may have been right in his criticism .... but he should have stayed away from the newspapers .... as all it did then was give the press a nice juicy headline that grew arms and legs .... and it did nothing to resolve whatever may or may not have been the problem.

But for some reason quite a few feel the need to back these two up .... and applaud their bravery for going public?..... Why would you need them going public to confirm what we already know and can see for ourselves .... surely we are not that insecure in our own selves that we need it to be all over the back pages of a Rangers hating rag to confirm what we already know to be true?

:UK:

 

 

 

While you make some pertinent points this notion that it's not the 'Rangers way' rips my knitting. Bill Struth led a boardroom coup because he was on the brink of the sack. Here's the very man we credit for implementing much of those 'traditions' who took the hump at almost losing his job and went public.

Link to post
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, The Dude said:

While you make some pertinent points this notion that it's not the 'Rangers way' rips my knitting. Bill Struth led a boardroom coup because he was on the brink of the sack. Here's the very man we credit for implementing much of those 'traditions' who took the hump at almost losing his job and went public.

I have no doubt that what Bill Struth did was in the best interest of himself when he went public mate ..... the major difference being ..... when you look at what his successful action did and the subsequent historical legacy he left us .... there can be no question what he did was for the eternal benefit of our Club ......  and that just cannot be disputed ..... we owe him a massive debt of gratitude for his services to our Club.

Surely what this great man achieved whilst at the reins of our Club ..... can never, ever be compared to the insignificant efforts of these two ex-goalies who could not keep their own feelings and evident failings private ..... but sadly decided to go public with what really amounts to be of little importance and even less value ..... and in no way does it help to eradicate our present situation.

So forgive me if I decide to view what Bill Struth achieved at our Club, by introducing the standards we have come to appreciate as something positive and constructive ..... and what these two ex-goalies have done as polar opposites and of no consequence whatsoever in this debate ...... apples and bananas comes to mind .... oh! and so does oil and water.

PS:- sorry about your knitting ..... shit happens ..... :p:

:UK:

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Bobby Hume said:

I have no doubt that what Bill Struth did was in the best interest of himself when he went public mate ..... the major difference being ..... when you look at what his successful action did and the subsequent historical legacy he left us .... there can be no question what he did was for the eternal benefit of our Club ......  and that just cannot be disputed ..... we owe him a massive debt of gratitude for his services to our Club.

Surely what this great man achieved whilst at the reins of our Club ..... can never, ever be compared to the insignificant efforts of these two ex-goalies who could not keep their own feelings and evident failings private ..... but sadly decided to go public with what really amounts to be of little importance and even less value ..... and in no way does it help to eradicate our present situation.

So forgive me if I decide to view what Bill Struth achieved at our Club, by introducing the standards we have come to appreciate as something positive and constructive ..... and what these two ex-goalies have done as polar opposites and of no consequence whatsoever in this debate ...... apples and bananas comes to mind .... oh! and so does oil and water.

PS:- sorry about your knitting ..... shit happens ..... :p:

:UK:

 

 

 

 

What difference did he make to the club between his strop in 1947 and his retirement in '54? What was this eternal benefit that cannot be disputed when he was made a director? 

You think it's of little importance or value that we've had several members of the first team dressing room come out and say there's no fight in the players or management? 

Are these standards on applicable when it suits? Be successful and you can ignore them but otherwise you are bound by them even once you've left the club? That's mental. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bobby Hume said:

:tu:

Thank you ..... your post proves my point mate .....   confirmation of the lack of fight is all too evident ..... we have all witnessed it first hand ... I personally do not feel it necessary to air our dirty laundry for all to see ... and this in my opinion is exactly what these two ex players have done .... and it's not what I would expect from anyone who pulls on a Rangers strip.

People have been of the opinion that they thought MW just did not get us .... and what it meant to be The Rangers manager .... well in my opinion both these ex goalies fall under this same category as players ..... and again in my opinion .... they are covering their own arses and using the ex management team and current players as an excuse to cover the fact they were just not good enough for our Club ..... yes they may be right about lack of fight, I'll give them that ... as they like us, as spectators, could all see this to be the case .... even more so from their view sitting on the bench ..... :p:

Many years ago one of the best players to ever pull on a Rangers jersey did something similar ..... when he publicly criticised the then manager's training regime at Ibrox ..... and he was in turn loudly condemned for his actions by the support at that time for going public .... do your talking in-house was the way it was done back then .... and what goes on inside Ibrox remains there ..... and this was when we were pretty successful and lack of fight was something unheard of at our Club.

I was of the opinion that Ralph Brand was wrong in going public then ..... the same way as these two goalies are now ..... and he was and still is a player who will remain in my memories for being one of the best I have ever seen in a Rangers team ..... sadly unlike these two goalies.

Ralph may have been right in his criticism .... but he should have stayed away from the newspapers .... as all it did then was give the press a nice juicy headline that grew arms and legs .... and it did nothing to resolve whatever may or may not have been the problem.

But for some reason quite a few feel the need to back these two up .... and applaud their bravery for going public?..... Why would you need them going public to confirm what we already know and can see for ourselves .... surely we are not that insecure in our own selves that we need it to be all over the back pages of a Rangers hating rag to confirm what we already know to be true?

:UK:

 

 

 

I want it public to see what reaction we get from the players.  I'd like to hope they'll think " lets show what we can do and prove everyone wrong".  That's what I hope anyway.  Whereas keeping everything in house would still be giving the players a free ride.

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, The Dude said:

1- What difference did he make to the club between his strop in 1947 and his retirement in '54?

1a -What was this eternal benefit that cannot be disputed when he was made a director? 

2- You think it's of little importance or value that we've had several members of the first team dressing room come out and say there's no fight in the players or management? 

3- Are these standards on applicable when it suits? Be successful and you can ignore them but otherwise you are bound by them even once you've left the club? That's mental. 

You know that's not what I meant mate .....  and Bill Struth in my opinion should not even be brought into the equation ..... but anyway ....

1- The fact that Bill Struth had already clearly made all the difference as the manager ..... and had nothing else to prove ....  seems to have escaped you mate .... his actions ( you didn't really call it a strop did you?) in my opinion .... were justified, as his past efforts entitled him to being introduced onto the board.

1a - If you have a different opinion on what constitutes eternal benefit  ... when all the historical evidence is out there ..... then fine ...... but I would not expect him to be judged for his time on the board in the same way as his time as the manager ... the two positions require slightly different qualities .... but one that does sick out a mile was his undeniable ability to fight for what he believed in ... and more importantly win in the end.

2- To a point yes, very little ... but I have already explained (you probably missed it in your dash to reply) .....  that what they said is no more than we already know ourselves ... and that it was unnecessary for them to go to the papers with their version of events ..... as it basically has no end product or value that can be taken forward and solve the problems we are encountering ..... more especially when the management team responsible for the situation are no longer there to benefit from or put into effect their words of wisdom ..... :p:

3- Of course not ... but In the case of these two ex-goalies .... they have unequivocally never had any of the standards (that rip your knitting) ..... that Bill Struth introduced into our Club .... as both have never achieved any real degree of success .... so I suppose it's only understandable they also have no real grasp of this concept.

If they had they had had these  standards we would not be discussing it ..... so your question is moot.

:UK:

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Bobby Hume said:

You know that's not what I meant mate .....  and Bill Struth in my opinion should not even be brought into the equation ..... but anyway ....

1- The fact that Bill Struth had already clearly made all the difference as the manager ..... and had nothing else to prove ....  seems to have escaped you mate .... his actions ( you didn't really call it a strop did you?) in my opinion .... were justified, as his past efforts entitled him to being introduced onto the board.

1a - If you have a different opinion on what constitutes eternal benefit  ... when all the historical evidence is out there ..... then fine ...... but I would not expect him to be judged for his time on the board in the same way as his time as the manager ... the two positions require slightly different qualities .... but one that does sick out a mile was his undeniable ability to fight for what he believed in ... and more importantly win in the end.

2- To a point yes, very little ... but I have already explained (you probably missed it in your dash to reply) .....  that what they said is no more than we already know ourselves ... and that it was unnecessary for them to go to the papers with their version of events ..... as it basically has no end product or value that can be taken forward and solve the problems we are encountering ..... more especially when the management team responsible for the situation are no longer there to benefit from or put into effect their words of wisdom ..... :p:

3- Of course not ... but In the case of these two ex-goalies .... they have unequivocally never had any of the standards (that rip your knitting) ..... that Bill Struth introduced into our Club .... as both have never achieved any real degree of success .... so I suppose it's only understandable they also have no real grasp of this concept.

If they had they had had these  standards we would not be discussing it ..... so your question is moot.

:UK:

 

Totally disagree. Success in one role in no way entitles anyone to a totally different role at the club. Being a good manager doesn't make you a good director. Just look at Walter.

You say we 'know' what's going on in the dressing room. I need to correct that. We assume. Until someone who is actually IN the dressing room tells us then it's only rumour and speculation.

You simply make no sense on 3. Are these standards only enforced based on success? Why wouldn't these players be aware of them because they haven't been as successful? It's either a standard for all or none. Not this 'those who understand' pish. Football fans really need to stop talking in cringey cliches.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Dude said:

1- Totally disagree. Success in one role in no way entitles anyone to a totally different role at the club. Being a good manager doesn't make you a good director. Just look at Walter.

2- You say we 'know' what's going on in the dressing room. I need to correct that. We assume. Until someone who is actually IN the dressing room tells us then it's only rumour and speculation.

3- You simply make no sense on 3. Are these standards only enforced based on success? Why wouldn't these players be aware of them because they haven't been as successful? It's either a standard for all or none. Not this 'those who understand' pish. Football fans really need to stop talking in cringey cliches.

1- Totally different types of directorships .... totally different times .... totally different circumstances ..... Walter was invited onto the board as a token gesture by CG to try and get the support on board ... it was political showboating at it's rawest .... Walter was doing what he thought was going to help the Club .... but shortly after realising the PLC set up was a concept he could not get his head round  ..... he rightly decided the position was not for him and resigned.

Bill Struth's situation was a hostile grab for something he was intimately familiar with and felt he could do the job with little problem.

Do you have any details of how he performed his duties as a director ?... as you seem to be intimating that he somehow failed in his duties in the role ..... why did he retire then? .... for if he was inadequate in the role ....  surely he would have been removed and consequently this would be on record ..... This is a genuine request for you to throw light on the matter as if he had been lacking in his directorial duties .... surely the support at large should be informed of this important historic situation .... :p:

2 - I think you know that I was speaking in an assumptive fashion ... and attempting to win points for minor turns of phrase is not what I would expect from yourself ... but if you are cool with that ... OK .... but there is that old adage to consider .... "every story has two tellings" ... and it would be a foolish person to ignore this.

3 -  No .... but it certainly helps to build and boost character when the going gets tough ...... or don't you remember what Bill meant when he said ..... "We welcome the chase" ..... but yet again you seem to have missed the part where I said "Of course not" .... but never mind ..... let me cringingly foist upon you yet another old adage .... that being .... "you can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make it drink" ...... same sentiment applies to the two ex- goalies .... you either learn and grow or you stay as you are .... in their case I humbly suggest they both did not get what it meant to be a Rangers player ... again not surprisingly ...... well that's how the saying goes anyway .... :whistle:

:UK:

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, loyalfollower said:

I want it public to see what reaction we get from the players.  I'd like to hope they'll think " lets show what we can do and prove everyone wrong".  That's what I hope anyway.  Whereas keeping everything in house would still be giving the players a free ride.

Fair enough mate .... Opinions Eh?

:UK:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Upcoming Events

    • 30 March 2024 15:00 Until 17:00
      0  
      Rangers v Hibernian
      Ibrox Stadium
      Scottish Premiership

×
×
  • Create New...