OlegKuznetsov 10,816 Posted June 17, 2008 Author Share Posted June 17, 2008 Think you got the McCoist-Boyd comparison wrong. Boyd doesnt run off the ball like McCoist did. Apart from that you may be right. Now we just need some players to get the ball to these guys. I responded to that with earlier remarks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OlegKuznetsov 10,816 Posted June 17, 2008 Author Share Posted June 17, 2008 Sorry but the Boyd / McCoist theory falls down because McCoist was far more than a poacher. The Hately /McCoist partnership worked because both had superb movement, watching their crossover runs will live with me forever. They both had excellent link up play and worked their socks off on the pitch and both knew where to make the runs that got them into goalscoring positions. Boyd, for all his striking ability, tends to hover in a position and hope for the ball to arrive, the reason he is known as "offside Boyd" in many circles. You raise a very good point. However, there is more that a little validity in this response. McCoist's play outside the box before Hateley arrived was comparable to Boyd's. It took Hateley's arrival to bring out that other side of his game. I would agree up to a point, it was when Souness arrived McCoists game changed and he started to use his previous experience in midfield to add more to his game outside the box. But my point was that McCoist in the greatest majority of his time with us was a far more harder working player than Boyd and always had better movement. As a side note,he was also prepared to try to improve his play, for instance, going to a sprinting coach to improve his reaction time and short distance speed. Yes, much of what you say is true, but I do think, like outlaw, that Boyd improved his work rate and outside the box play quite a bit recently. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottylad72 19 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 Sorry but the Boyd / McCoist theory falls down because McCoist was far more than a poacher. The Hately /McCoist partnership worked because both had superb movement, watching their crossover runs will live with me forever. They both had excellent link up play and worked their socks off on the pitch and both knew where to make the runs that got them into goalscoring positions. Boyd, for all his striking ability, tends to hover in a position and hope for the ball to arrive, the reason he is known as "offside Boyd" in many circles. You raise a very good point. However, there is more that a little validity in this response. McCoist's play outside the box before Hateley arrived was comparable to Boyd's. It took Hateley's arrival to bring out that other side of his game. Agree with that assesment, Coisty was still learning his trade up to and during Hateley joining us. Both players bonded really well, however remember that partnership was almost ended when a certain former celt signed for the Gers in August 1988. Maurice Johnston was much better than misser, but what if? Could we see Boyd remain on the bench? I'd put Novo=Durie before Misser as his first touch is poor. Durie was an excellant foil for the main striker in his time with us and I felt he was underated by many. Laudrup was a dream come true for the Gers, just why was he so good? The big handsome dane. ps am naw a gay boy but if I was I would say he is the most handsome Ranger ever......jesus that does sound a bit gay!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheFlyingPig 0 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 Sorry but the Boyd / McCoist theory falls down because McCoist was far more than a poacher. The Hately /McCoist partnership worked because both had superb movement, watching their crossover runs will live with me forever. They both had excellent link up play and worked their socks off on the pitch and both knew where to make the runs that got them into goalscoring positions. Boyd, for all his striking ability, tends to hover in a position and hope for the ball to arrive, the reason he is known as "offside Boyd" in many circles. You raise a very good point. However, there is more that a little validity in this response. McCoist's play outside the box before Hateley arrived was comparable to Boyd's. It took Hateley's arrival to bring out that other side of his game. I would agree up to a point, it was when Souness arrived McCoists game changed and he started to use his previous experience in midfield to add more to his game outside the box. But my point was that McCoist in the greatest majority of his time with us was a far more harder working player than Boyd and always had better movement. As a side note,he was also prepared to try to improve his play, for instance, going to a sprinting coach to improve his reaction time and short distance speed. Yes, much of what you say is true, but I do think, like outlaw, that Boyd improved his work rate and outside the box play quite a bit recently. I would say a bit with regards to Boyds performance outside the box rather than quite a bit. He also doesnt have the ability to lay the ball off and make unmarked runs into the 6 yard box to tap in the subsequent cross and Im of the opinion he will never be able to do that. I can see him getting another chance and if he doesnt meet Smiths requirements he will be for the off. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
outlaw69uk 123 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 I would say a bit with regards to Boyds performance outside the box rather than quite a bit. He also doesnt have the ability to lay the ball off and make unmarked runs into the 6 yard box to tap in the subsequent cross and Im of the opinion he will never be able to do that. I can see him getting another chance and if he doesnt meet Smiths requirements he will be for the off. He does tho! haha and gets slated for scoring those No, in all seriousness, in the SPL, every other team knows his danger, so, if you watch, he gets marked out the game a lot of the time, so, cant make those runs. Also, that is another technique which gets better with time/experience. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuvey 5 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Umm5BbzcAsE want to see more of this from Valicka Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
docspiderman 1,234 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 Sorry but the Boyd / McCoist theory falls down because McCoist was far more than a poacher. The Hately /McCoist partnership worked because both had superb movement, watching their crossover runs will live with me forever. They both had excellent link up play and worked their socks off on the pitch and both knew where to make the runs that got them into goalscoring positions. Boyd, for all his striking ability, tends to hover in a position and hope for the ball to arrive, the reason he is known as "offside Boyd" in many circles. You raise a very good point. However, there is more that a little validity in this response. McCoist's play outside the box before Hateley arrived was comparable to Boyd's. It took Hateley's arrival to bring out that other side of his game. I would agree up to a point, it was when Souness arrived McCoists game changed and he started to use his previous experience in midfield to add more to his game outside the box. But my point was that McCoist in the greatest majority of his time with us was a far more harder working player than Boyd and always had better movement. As a side note,he was also prepared to try to improve his play, for instance, going to a sprinting coach to improve his reaction time and short distance speed. Yes, much of what you say is true, but I do think, like outlaw, that Boyd improved his work rate and outside the box play quite a bit recently. I do agree as well, certainly in the last few weeks of the season, and especially in the cup final, he showed that he was willing and able to make runs wide freeing space in the centre and he has linked up far better than before. I hope that he will carry on learning and working to be a more rounded striker and add enough to his natural striking talent to force Walter to make him a fixture in the team and, in time, be able to be compared with Super Ally. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OlegKuznetsov 10,816 Posted June 17, 2008 Author Share Posted June 17, 2008 Sorry but the Boyd / McCoist theory falls down because McCoist was far more than a poacher. The Hately /McCoist partnership worked because both had superb movement, watching their crossover runs will live with me forever. They both had excellent link up play and worked their socks off on the pitch and both knew where to make the runs that got them into goalscoring positions. Boyd, for all his striking ability, tends to hover in a position and hope for the ball to arrive, the reason he is known as "offside Boyd" in many circles. You raise a very good point. However, there is more that a little validity in this response. McCoist's play outside the box before Hateley arrived was comparable to Boyd's. It took Hateley's arrival to bring out that other side of his game. Agree with that assesment, Coisty was still learning his trade up to and during Hateley joining us. Both players bonded really well, however remember that partnership was almost ended when a certain former celt signed for the Gers in August 1988. Maurice Johnston was much better than misser, but what if? Could we see Boyd remain on the bench? I'd put Novo=Durie before Misser as his first touch is poor. Durie was an excellant foil for the main striker in his time with us and I felt he was underated by many. Laudrup was a dream come true for the Gers, just why was he so good? The big handsome dane. ps am naw a gay boy but if I was I would say he is the most handsome Ranger ever......jesus that does sound a bit gay!! I am in pretty much full agreement with you. It does sound gay. MOJO was '89. Other than that, spot on. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheFlyingPig 0 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 He does tho! haha and gets slated for scoring those No, in all seriousness, in the SPL, every other team knows his danger, so, if you watch, he gets marked out the game a lot of the time, so, cant make those runs. Also, that is another technique which gets better with time/experience. Yeah know what you mean but McCoist was also heavily marked but was small and fast enough to get away from the markers into those positions. I dont think Boyd will ever be physically capable of pissing off his markers the way McCoist did. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_glasgow 2 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 fcuk off wae you optimism :harhar: haha kidden big man enjoyed reading that hopefulyl yir right Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
yellowcross 5 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 Robbie Neilson has stated in the Evening Times that Velicka will score 20+ goals per season and that he is very like Hateley in style. This set me thinking. Hateley= Velicka - target man who scores reasonably well. (Both £1m) McCoist=Boyd - the epitome of the poacher with excellent strike rate. (£185k - £400k) Durie = Miller- hard working pacy forward with limited skill who'll run all day, but may not score many. (£1.1m - £1.9m) Duncan Ferguson = Kyle Lafferty - young promising and towering striker who can play on the left. (Both potentially £3-4 m) Oleg, excellent post. Kind of amusing, and positive, and yet valid enough, all at the same time. I like your thinking. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
whytes3 254 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 seriously? Dure was 10 times the player Miller was Durie was a very unpopular alleged "headless chicken" who ran himself into the ground. He was constantly criticised for getting his head down and charging to the byline and putting in crosses of variable quality. Valid point re Durie - he won over the fans with his effort more than anything else. Big advantage over miller that will be very hard to swallow though is that he never played for the filth Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OlegKuznetsov 10,816 Posted June 17, 2008 Author Share Posted June 17, 2008 seriously? Dure was 10 times the player Miller was Durie was a very unpopular alleged "headless chicken" who ran himself into the ground. He was constantly criticised for getting his head down and charging to the byline and putting in crosses of variable quality. Valid point re Durie - he won over the fans with his effort more than anything else. Big advantage over miller that will be very hard to swallow though is that he never played for the filth True! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dummiesoot 16,009 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 I fucking hate cheery threads PS Velicka will be a good signing Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingOfTheWing 0 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 Robbie Neilson has stated in the Evening Times that Velicka will score 20+ goals per season and that he is very like Hateley in style. This set me thinking. Hateley= Velicka - target man who scores reasonably well. (Both £1m) McCoist=Boyd - the epitome of the poacher with excellent strike rate. (£185k - £400k) Durie = Miller- hard working pacy forward with limited skill who'll run all day, but may not score many. (£1.1m - £1.9m) Duncan Ferguson = Kyle Lafferty - young promising and towering striker who can play on the left. (Both potentially £3-4 m) All signed around the same ages aswell <_< Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OlegKuznetsov 10,816 Posted June 17, 2008 Author Share Posted June 17, 2008 I fucking hate cheery threads PS Velicka will be a good signingSorry dude! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimenez 1 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 I'll wait and see how they perform together before making comparisons. I just hope they get that chance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
roggy 9 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 Spot on..Window far from shut...Just waiting for THE big signing that will put the buzz back in the Bears...WATP.. Worlds apart from PLG!!.....Already! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cooper1989 0 Posted June 18, 2008 Share Posted June 18, 2008 I feel very very good about this signing... PLUS the fact he said 'It would be an honour to play for the Rangers...' Loving him already! MON THE ANDRIUS!!!!!!! WATP Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cooper1989 0 Posted June 18, 2008 Share Posted June 18, 2008 more of VELICKA Looks like he can finish like Boyd -- but is a far better all round player -- witness the shellick video posted already... This guy can play. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ulsterbear91 18 Posted June 18, 2008 Share Posted June 18, 2008 After watching the videos I have come to the conclusion that Velicka signing for us can only be a good thing. Nice post there Oleg, it is nice to see some positivity on these boards once in a while. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts