polar bear 0 Posted September 2, 2007 Share Posted September 2, 2007 Every game Walter sticks Boyd in the team we are basically playing with ten men,if he's not off-side, he's hanging on to someones shirt and arguing with the ref when he gets caught,and did I mention he barely wins a ball in the air.Another lousy performance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricksen_da_best 2,034 Posted September 2, 2007 Share Posted September 2, 2007 he scored.. ive said it before and i'll say it again.. we cant ask anymore from boyd..he scores its the kind of striker he is, he isnt known for his pace, skill, hold up play..he is known for his goals! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
polar bear 0 Posted September 2, 2007 Author Share Posted September 2, 2007 he scored.. ive said it before and i'll say it again.. we cant ask anymore from boyd..he scores its the kind of striker he is, he isnt known for his pace, skill, hold up play..he is known for his goals! We can't ask anymore?wake up guy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueSuedeSambas 54,488 Posted September 2, 2007 Share Posted September 2, 2007 he scored.. ive said it before and i'll say it again.. we cant ask anymore from boyd..he scores its the kind of striker he is, he isnt known for his pace, skill, hold up play..he is known for his goals! He isn't scoring enough though. If he was scoring every week then yes keep him in the side, but two goals is not a good enough return for a striker who "scores goals" If Cuellar only made two tackles/blocks/won two headers over a period of five games we would want him dropped. Boyd is no different! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricksen_da_best 2,034 Posted September 2, 2007 Share Posted September 2, 2007 le guen was criticized for not playing boyd when he wasnt scoring.. but..when smith sticks with when hes not scoring you dont want him in the team Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bakbear 3,586 Posted September 2, 2007 Share Posted September 2, 2007 he scored.. ive said it before and i'll say it again.. we cant ask anymore from boyd..he scores its the kind of striker he is, he isnt known for his pace, skill, hold up play..he is known for his goals! He isn't scoring enough though. If he was scoring every week then yes keep him in the side, but two goals is not a good enough return for a striker who "scores goals" If Cuellar only made two tackles/blocks/won two headers over a period of five games we would want him dropped. Boyd is no different! I disagree, the game is about scoring goals, one is enough to win the game, we can't compare that with tackles/blocks... ok he has had a dry spell but he will come good again. However he should never be played upfront alone, he should always be played in a two man strike force Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emerson 2 Posted September 2, 2007 Share Posted September 2, 2007 We all know by now what to expect from Boydy. Goals. Pure and simple. Until the day he dries up completely, he is worth his weight in gold to the team and Walter and Ally obviously feel this as well. What do you expect for.... etc etc... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ace 3,556 Posted September 2, 2007 Share Posted September 2, 2007 A team can carry one player if that player contributes to the winning performance by scoring goals. If you asked the squad, i am sure they would much prefer to work that lkittle bit harder to cover for a player who can score against playing with a forward who brings in other players but doesn't really score. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueSuedeSambas 54,488 Posted September 2, 2007 Share Posted September 2, 2007 he scored.. ive said it before and i'll say it again.. we cant ask anymore from boyd..he scores its the kind of striker he is, he isnt known for his pace, skill, hold up play..he is known for his goals! He isn't scoring enough though. If he was scoring every week then yes keep him in the side, but two goals is not a good enough return for a striker who "scores goals" If Cuellar only made two tackles/blocks/won two headers over a period of five games we would want him dropped. Boyd is no different! I disagree, the game is about scoring goals, one is enough to win the game, we can't compare that with tackles/blocks... ok he has had a dry spell but he will come good again. However he should never be played upfront alone, he should always be played in a two man strike force But with players like Cousin, JCD, Naismith and McCulloch waiting in the wings why should we stick with Boyd in the hope that he comes good again? We have the squad to not have to pin our hopes on one player finding his touch again! I also hate this "he should always play in a two man strike force rubbish. We shouldn't in a million years be adopting our tactics/formation around Boyd, he doesn't have the quality to justify it. If he can't play upfront on his own, then we simply don't play him! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
justiston 91 Posted September 2, 2007 Share Posted September 2, 2007 Another poor preformance, Cousins look far more dangerous on the ball, pace, a bit of skill - JCD was very good when he came on, add to that Novo and McCulloch AND Naismith buzzing about - Boyd is facing a long spell on the bench imo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bakbear 3,586 Posted September 2, 2007 Share Posted September 2, 2007 he scored.. ive said it before and i'll say it again.. we cant ask anymore from boyd..he scores its the kind of striker he is, he isnt known for his pace, skill, hold up play..he is known for his goals! He isn't scoring enough though. If he was scoring every week then yes keep him in the side, but two goals is not a good enough return for a striker who "scores goals" If Cuellar only made two tackles/blocks/won two headers over a period of five games we would want him dropped. Boyd is no different! I disagree, the game is about scoring goals, one is enough to win the game, we can't compare that with tackles/blocks... ok he has had a dry spell but he will come good again. However he should never be played upfront alone, he should always be played in a two man strike force But with players like Cousin, JCD, Naismith and McCulloch waiting in the wings why should we stick with Boyd in the hope that he comes good again? We have the squad to not have to pin our hopes on one player finding his touch again! I also hate this "he should always play in a two man strike force rubbish. We shouldn't in a million years be adopting our tactics/formation around Boyd, he doesn't have the quality to justify it. If he can't play upfront on his own, then we simply don't play him! "If he can't play upfront on his own, then we simply don't play him!" - I agree with this, if we are playing one man upfront it shouldn't be boyd. but I stand by playing Boyd in a two man strike force the same as I would playing McCoist 10 years ago in a 2 man strike force. No-one, ever, in the history of football has scored every game. Boyd scored today. in fact he scored the first goal. Its not as if he nicked one at the end in a 4 goal rout. He opened the scoring. We didn't have to "stick" with Boyd very long before he ended his "drought" did we? Boyd would be the in my starting eleven every time, despite his failings Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nvager 498 Posted September 2, 2007 Share Posted September 2, 2007 WE have more choice now so Boyd better beware. I LIKE BOYD in a two man front, but can see that he is not indespensible any longer. I still think he carries a good goal threat all the same. I think though the reason why he may not be scoring as much is` that our midfield sucks at the moment. We are playing with 8 men as Whittaker, BF and Thomson are just not getting in the game!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueSuedeSambas 54,488 Posted September 2, 2007 Share Posted September 2, 2007 WE have more choice now so Boyd better beware. I LIKE BOYD in a two man front, but can see that he is not indespensible any longer. I still think he carries a good goal threat all the same. I think though the reason why he may not be scoring as much is` that our midfield sucks at the moment. We are playing with 8 men as Whittaker, BF and Thomson are just not getting in the game!! I strongly disagree with that and as stevanage bear said in the stronger squad thread, I think yoiu are being too criticial. If 3 out of 4 of our midfielders were not getting into the game as you suggest, we would not be sitting with 15 points from 5 games and a goal difference of +15 either. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nvager 498 Posted September 2, 2007 Share Posted September 2, 2007 WE have more choice now so Boyd better beware. I LIKE BOYD in a two man front, but can see that he is not indespensible any longer. I still think he carries a good goal threat all the same. I think though the reason why he may not be scoring as much is` that our midfield sucks at the moment. We are playing with 8 men as Whittaker, BF and Thomson are just not getting in the game!! I strongly disagree with that and as stevanage bear said in the stronger squad thread, I think yoiu are being too criticial. If 3 out of 4 of our midfielders were not getting into the game as you suggest, we would not be sitting with 15 points from 5 games and a goal difference of +15 either. Well you said yourself in an earlier thread that this problem of "not being in the 1st half of games could become a mental block. Can you say truthfully that any of them were good today or recently? Goals today all came from free Kicks or corners plus JCD little bit of inspiration - nothing to do with any great midfield. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laudo 31 Posted September 2, 2007 Share Posted September 2, 2007 What about Kevin Thomson. I just don't see the justification for paying £2million.He did nothing today.Every pass is sideways or backwards.Hemdani would have been more creative today. The gers give Hibs the money no probs but then put in a tiny bid to Killie for Naismith first time round. Embarrassing!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
superally07 387 Posted September 2, 2007 Share Posted September 2, 2007 Another poor preformance, Cousins look far more dangerous on the ball, pace, a bit of skill - JCD was very good when he came on, add to that Novo and McCulloch AND Naismith buzzing about - Boyd is facing a long spell on the bench imo. Cousins 'looked' more dangerous today however Boyd 'was' more dangerous as boyd scored and cousins didnt. Simple game looked very nervy and that first goal was really needed before half time imo, think whoever was at the game will agree? so well done boydy Can still improve tho obv Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the bears ba's 1 Posted September 2, 2007 Share Posted September 2, 2007 But with players like Cousin, JCD, Naismith and McCulloch waiting in the wings why should we stick with Boyd in the hope that he comes good again? We have the squad to not have to pin our hopes on one player finding his touch again! I also hate this "he should always play in a two man strike force rubbish. We shouldn't in a million years be adopting our tactics/formation around Boyd, he doesn't have the quality to justify it. If he can't play upfront on his own, then we simply don't play him! A very valid post, if Boyd had been the lone striker in Belgrade we might have been looking to UEFA cup to see our next European opposition. Mind you against teams like Gretna, i reckon we can afford to play him; after all i would be crying if we played 1 up front at Ibrox against SPL opposition. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stardog 11 Posted September 2, 2007 Share Posted September 2, 2007 Another poor preformance, Cousins look far more dangerous on the ball, pace, a bit of skill - JCD was very good when he came on, add to that Novo and McCulloch AND Naismith buzzing about - Boyd is facing a long spell on the bench imo. Cousins 'looked' more dangerous today however Boyd 'was' more dangerous as boyd scored and cousins didnt. Simple A freekick that would've been saved if it hadn't deflected in the opposite direction? The quicker Naismith takes Boyd's place the better. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
superally07 387 Posted September 2, 2007 Share Posted September 2, 2007 Another poor preformance, Cousins look far more dangerous on the ball, pace, a bit of skill - JCD was very good when he came on, add to that Novo and McCulloch AND Naismith buzzing about - Boyd is facing a long spell on the bench imo. Cousins 'looked' more dangerous today however Boyd 'was' more dangerous as boyd scored and cousins didnt. Simple A freekick that would've been saved if it hadn't deflected in the opposite direction? The quicker Naismith takes Boyd's place the better. yes the free kick that would of been saved if it hadn't of been defelected. Does it matter how there scored? Boyd Scored - if it deflected off 10 players and went in it didnt make that goal any less important as it was a much needed goal before half time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bakbear 3,586 Posted September 2, 2007 Share Posted September 2, 2007 I think this slating of Boyd is fairly endemic of the Rangers support, we always seem to value a hard working striker who can’t score over a goal machine who contributes little else. Salenko (goal every 2 games), Flo (Goal every 2 games), Erik Bo Andersen (goal average better than every 2 games), even the legend that is McCoist took a slating in his early days with the club because he “didn’t do enoughâ€. And perhaps most comically of all, there is the criticism that was aimed at Negri because he didn’t smile when he scored, didn’t celebrate enough ffs. When we signed him, Boyd was sarcastically likened to the new Steven Thompson by many of our own support and there was a thread dedicated to “will Boyd score 100 Goals for Rangers†on the BBC forum. People were ticking them off and counting down as he started working his way towards that target. He is very nearly half way there in only 54 starts, in fact he has scored more goals for Rangers than Steven Thompson has scored in his entire career. Boyd has his deficiencies, no doubt. But I simply don’t understand why he is not highly valued by the entire Rangers support as a young, Scottish, Rangers Supporting, Goal Machine who cost the club less than half a million pounds Does anyone doubt he will score 100 goals for Rangers now? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the bears ba's 1 Posted September 2, 2007 Share Posted September 2, 2007 I think this slating of Boyd is fairly endemic of the Rangers support, we always seem to value a hard working striker who can�€™t score over a goal machine who contributes little else. Salenko (goal every 2 games), Flo (Goal every 2 games), Erik Bo Andersen (goal average better than every 2 games), even the legend that is McCoist took a slating in his early days with the club because he �€œdidn�€™t do enough�€�. And perhaps most comically of all, there is the criticism that was aimed at Negri because he didn�€™t smile when he scored, didn�€™t celebrate enough ffs. When we signed him, Boyd was sarcastically likened to the new Steven Thompson by many of our own support and there was a thread dedicated to �€œwill Boyd score 100 Goals for Rangers�€� on the BBC forum. People were ticking them off and counting down as he started working his way towards that target. He is very nearly half way there in only 54 starts, in fact he has scored more goals for Rangers than Steven Thompson has scored in his entire career. Boyd has his deficiencies, no doubt. But I simply don�€™t understand why he is not highly valued by the entire Rangers support as a young, Scottish, Rangers Supporting, Goal Machine who cost the club less than half a million pounds Does anyone doubt he will score 100 goals for Rangers now? I appreciate Boyd's quality (scoring goals), however he has to realise he is not a 100% guaranteed starter in every game ( i mean would any of you start with him against Barca, Lyon & Stuttgart away?) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
superally07 387 Posted September 2, 2007 Share Posted September 2, 2007 I think this slating of Boyd is fairly endemic of the Rangers support, we always seem to value a hard working striker who can�€™t score over a goal machine who contributes little else. Salenko (goal every 2 games), Flo (Goal every 2 games), Erik Bo Andersen (goal average better than every 2 games), even the legend that is McCoist took a slating in his early days with the club because he �€œdidn�€™t do enough�€�. And perhaps most comically of all, there is the criticism that was aimed at Negri because he didn�€™t smile when he scored, didn�€™t celebrate enough ffs. When we signed him, Boyd was sarcastically likened to the new Steven Thompson by many of our own support and there was a thread dedicated to �€œwill Boyd score 100 Goals for Rangers�€� on the BBC forum. People were ticking them off and counting down as he started working his way towards that target. He is very nearly half way there in only 54 starts, in fact he has scored more goals for Rangers than Steven Thompson has scored in his entire career. Boyd has his deficiencies, no doubt. But I simply don�€™t understand why he is not highly valued by the entire Rangers support as a young, Scottish, Rangers Supporting, Goal Machine who cost the club less than half a million pounds Does anyone doubt he will score 100 goals for Rangers now? I appreciate Boyd's quality (scoring goals), however he has to realise he is not a 100% guaranteed starter in every game ( i mean would any of you start with him against Barca, Lyon & Stuttgart away?) not as a lone striker no, i cant remember any1 ever saying they would play him as a loan striker Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bakbear 3,586 Posted September 2, 2007 Share Posted September 2, 2007 I appreciate Boyd's quality (scoring goals), however he has to realise he is not a 100% guaranteed starter in every game ( i mean would any of you start with him against Barca, Lyon & Stuttgart away?) not as a lone striker no, i cant remember any1 ever saying they would play him as a loan striker Precisely, If we were playing 2 upfront then yes I would play Boyd even against Barca. However if, as is likely, we go for one up front then he would not get near the team. I think WS knows this and I think he knew this even while Manager of Scotland. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the bears ba's 1 Posted September 2, 2007 Share Posted September 2, 2007 I appreciate Boyd's quality (scoring goals), however he has to realise he is not a 100% guaranteed starter in every game ( i mean would any of you start with him against Barca, Lyon & Stuttgart away?) not as a lone striker no, i cant remember any1 ever saying they would play him as a loan striker Precisely, If we were playing 2 upfront then yes I would play Boyd even against Barca. However if, as is likely, we go for one up front then he would not get near the team. I think WS knows this and I think he knew this even while Manager of Scotland. (tu) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davy 68 Posted September 2, 2007 Share Posted September 2, 2007 Boyd was shit again today. Gave away possesion cheaply, rarely won a header, gave away fouls, etc. He scored, which I will continue to give him credit for, but I'm starting to think we have better options.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts