Fernando Ricksen

[Briton 394]

Start->Programs->Accessories->Calculator

Doesn't matter anyway as Smith's overall European record is evidence that he is not a great manager and certainly not the best British manager in history (or even in Rangers history).

UEFA Cup and effective Champions' League semi-finalists.

Any recent Scottish managers managed that in recent years with "lowly" Scottish clubs, or just the guys with big big Premiership money.

You do realise there was another round of games to go don't you? Also it was two points for a win, and one for a draw. If we had won in Marsailles but lost at Ibrox to CSKA we could still have been eliminated because goal difference was used in those days. Yes, we almost certainly would have qualified, but that is not the same thing. You also keep ignoring the point that Walter Smith over saw many European debacles.

I do not see Rangers as a lowly Scottish club and that is another case of moving the goal posts. There are teams smaller than Rangers that have finished runners-up in the UEFA Cup.

[OlegKuznetsov 10,816]

Start->Programs->Accessories->Calculator

Doesn't matter anyway as Smith's overall European record is evidence that he is not a great manager and certainly not the best British manager in history (or even in Rangers history).

UEFA Cup and effective Champions' League semi-finalists.

Any recent Scottish managers managed that in recent years with "lowly" Scottish clubs, or just the guys with big big Premiership money.

You do realise there was another round of games to go don't you? Also it was two points for a win, and one for a draw. If we had won in Marsailles but lost at Ibrox to CSKA we could still have been eliminated because goal difference was used in those days. Yes, we almost certainly would have qualified, but that is not the same thing. You also keep ignoring the point that Walter Smith over saw many European debacles.

I do not see Rangers as a lowly Scottish club and that is another case of moving the goal posts. There are teams smaller than Rangers that have finished runners-up in the UEFA Cup.

Use a calculator.

Your point is wrong as it was yesterday.

Do the Math, as they say in the States.

[Briton 394]

Start->Programs->Accessories->Calculator

Doesn't matter anyway as Smith's overall European record is evidence that he is not a great manager and certainly not the best British manager in history (or even in Rangers history).

UEFA Cup and effective Champions' League semi-finalists.

Any recent Scottish managers managed that in recent years with "lowly" Scottish clubs, or just the guys with big big Premiership money.

You do realise there was another round of games to go don't you? Also it was two points for a win, and one for a draw. If we had won in Marsailles but lost at Ibrox to CSKA we could still have been eliminated because goal difference was used in those days. Yes, we almost certainly would have qualified, but that is not the same thing. You also keep ignoring the point that Walter Smith over saw many European debacles.

I do not see Rangers as a lowly Scottish club and that is another case of moving the goal posts. There are teams smaller than Rangers that have finished runners-up in the UEFA Cup.

Use a calculator.

Your point is wrong as it was yesterday.

Do the Math, as they say in the States.

I have although I don't need a calculator. If we won in France, but lost to CSKA in our final group game, we'd have finished on eight points. If Marsailles won in Bruge in their final game, they'd also have finished on eight points. We would have been eliminated on goal difference.

[OlegKuznetsov 10,816]

Start->Programs->Accessories->Calculator

Doesn't matter anyway as Smith's overall European record is evidence that he is not a great manager and certainly not the best British manager in history (or even in Rangers history).

UEFA Cup and effective Champions' League semi-finalists.

Any recent Scottish managers managed that in recent years with "lowly" Scottish clubs, or just the guys with big big Premiership money.

You do realise there was another round of games to go don't you? Also it was two points for a win, and one for a draw. If we had won in Marsailles but lost at Ibrox to CSKA we could still have been eliminated because goal difference was used in those days. Yes, we almost certainly would have qualified, but that is not the same thing. You also keep ignoring the point that Walter Smith over saw many European debacles.

I do not see Rangers as a lowly Scottish club and that is another case of moving the goal posts. There are teams smaller than Rangers that have finished runners-up in the UEFA Cup.If Marsailles won in Bruge in their final game, they'd also have finished on eight points.

Use a calculator.

Your point is wrong as it was yesterday.

Do the Math, as they say in the States.

I have although I don't need a calculator. If we won in France, but lost to CSKA in our final group game, we'd have finished on eight points. If Marsailles won in Bruge in their final game, they'd also have finished on eight points. We would have been eliminated on goal difference.

But we didn't lose to CSKA. Why would it have gone any differently?

Matchday Six

Club Brugge 0–1 Marseille

Team Pld W D L GF GA GD Pts

Flag of France Marseille 6 3 3 0 14 4 +10 9

Flag of Scotland Rangers 6 2 4 0 7 5 +2 8

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UEFA_Champions_League_1992-93

Care to admit you were wrong?

Or do you still need a calculator?

[Jimenez 1]

I loved old crazy eyes. I'd have him back in an instance.

[Cumbria_blue 51]

A. Smith had to get a few points when he took over with four games to go, but yes, technically he won it.

B. Souness was the manager. What you say is meaningless.

Get a dictionary if you're struggling. Gough, McCoist et al seem pretty convinced, as was SDM.

C. Great run but using the 'one goal from the final' over statement is pointless. I take it you mean if we won in Marseille we would have been in the final? Not so. There was another round of games after that. Actually we failed to beat CSKA at Ibrox, and if Marsailles hadn't won in Bruge, that would have cost us a place in the final. Like I say, great run but many European debacles followed under Smith.

You've worded that really badly, but you've got your facts wrong.

Team Pld W D L GF GA GD Pts

Flag of France Marseille 6 3 3 0 14 4 +10 9

Flag of Scotland Rangers 6 2 4 0 7 5 +2 8

D. Really? Moyes did when he replaced Smith. Fact is Smith was OK at best in England but did nothing to suggest he's a great manager.

I am using more than his record in England, which I would say proved him to be good at the very least.

E. So now it's not 70-80 places?...you did exaggerate.

No. I'm just not certain, but think it was 80+. If it's something like 69, I suspect you'll say, "ha ha, I told you so", which would only be embarrassing for yourself.

No...all I said was you exaggerated and now you admit you did. Leave it at that.

As for the 92/93 issue. I did not get my facts wrong. Even a win in Marsailles would not have guarenteed a place in the final as that was before the head to head system. We probably would have, only needing a point at home to CSKA in the final group game, but that is not the same thing. The other point I was making that we still had a chance of getting to the final but we failed to beat CSKA. Didn't matter as it turned out as Marsailles won in Bruge. The statement that we were 'one goal away from the final' is false.

How old are you BTW...do you remember the 92/93 CL?

Now you're just compounding your errors.

Start->Programs->Accessories->Calculator

Doesn't matter anyway as Smith's overall European record is evidence that he is not a great manager and certainly not the best British manager in history (or even in Rangers history).

UEFA Cup and effective Champions' League semi-finalists.

Any recent Scottish managers managed that in recent years with "lowly" Scottish clubs, or just the guys with big big Premiership money.

What happened the season after 92/93?

Then Kaunas this season?

Walter has also overseen our worst run in the champions league when we went 12 games without a win I think it was. With the players at his disposal he should have done far better.

Add to that the fact that he missed the chance to achieve our best ever run in europe by losing in Israel to Tel Aviv.

I agree with a lot of what you say. In 93 we were basically semi finalists. I don't know why Briton seems convinced that if we had beaten Marseille, we would then somehow lose to CSKA. That game was a draw, which would have taken us through

But while Smith's 2 good seasons in europe were exceptional. There is the other side to the coin.

[OlegKuznetsov 10,816]

What happened the season after 92/93?

Then Kaunas this season?

Walter has also overseen our worst run in the champions league when we went 12 games without a win I think it was. With the players at his disposal he should have done far better.

Add to that the fact that he missed the chance to achieve our best ever run in europe by losing in Israel to Tel Aviv.

I agree with a lot of what you say. In 93 we were basically semi finalists. I don't know why Briton seems convinced that if we had beaten Marseille, we would then somehow lose to CSKA. That game was a draw, which would have taken us through

But while Smith's 2 good seasons in europe were exceptional. There is the other side to the coin.

Yep, there have been many disappointments, but I think that was due to the freedom allowed to Gazza and Laudrup. 92-93 was more like the current team. However, very few teams get to the end points of Europe, particularly from small teams.

The two exceptions average out against the failures to somewhat average, but there was some bad luck in drawing the like of Ajax Juve and Dortmund who were all Champions around those years.

As for CSKA, we may have been more relaxed and actually won, making it a two point gap. I see no reason why it would have went worse.

[Gaffbear 4,096]

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Cumbria_blue 51]

What happened the season after 92/93?

Then Kaunas this season?

Walter has also overseen our worst run in the champions league when we went 12 games without a win I think it was. With the players at his disposal he should have done far better.

Add to that the fact that he missed the chance to achieve our best ever run in europe by losing in Israel to Tel Aviv.

I agree with a lot of what you say. In 93 we were basically semi finalists. I don't know why Briton seems convinced that if we had beaten Marseille, we would then somehow lose to CSKA. That game was a draw, which would have taken us through

But while Smith's 2 good seasons in europe were exceptional. There is the other side to the coin.

Yep, there have been many disappointments, but I think that was due to the freedom allowed to Gazza and Laudrup. 92-93 was more like the current team. However, very few teams get to the end points of Europe, particularly from small teams.

The two exceptions average out against the failures to somewhat average, but there was some bad luck in drawing the like of Ajax Juve and Dortmund who were all Champions around those years.

As for CSKA, we may have been more relaxed and actually won, making it a two point gap. I see no reason why it would have went worse.

Well unlucky or not, we were absolutely thrashed by Ajax and Juve, home and away. Then there was the defeats to teams like Grasshopper Zurich and AEK Athens. Also the campaigns before and after 92/93 when we lost in the early rounds to Slavia Prague and Levski Sofia respectively.

And as for the disastorous 97/98 campaign...

My point is just that I believe the failuers in Europe outwiegh the good achievements. Im not saying that other manager have been flawless. Ferguson and Wenger are both considered as geniuses, though both have had shocking seasons in Europe, and domestically, in the past.

I think that in Europe Wattie will be remembered as a failure imo. He can't really be considered the greatest British manager of all time imo. Ourselves as rangers fans, know all about his failings especially with regards to team selection, tactics and judgement on signings.

I think he's a great motivator and man-manager though.

But I think now is the wrong time to judge him. Wait about 10 years till we can look back and judge his career, not now when we're all pissed off at being 4 points behind, out of Europe and Charlie Adam playing on the left wing

[OlegKuznetsov 10,816]

Fair does.!

[Cumbria_blue 51]

BTW I don't think we should bring Ricksen back. He is not the answer, certainly not at right back.

[OlegKuznetsov 10,816]

Can we also remove the countless dohs? They're a pain in the arse.

[Cumbria_blue 51]

[Champions2008 0]

I always rated Ricksen as a top player, would love to see him back here with us.

[NachoHughes 0]

I always rated Ricksen as a top player, would love to see him back here with us.

No! we dont need Rickson we need we should be looking to the future and not backwards!

[StunnedGuy 0]

I think he would be great to have back in the team and i think he would fill the right back void quite well.

We can obviously see youngsters will not get a chance so why not briing Ricksen back in January.

We could probably get him cheap as he doesnt get a game much!

Thoughts?

Our survey says ...

X

[delparlane 5,692]

Ricksen has proven himself a total prat since he left us (and by some of his actions before he left). No way would I welcome him back - good riddance to bad rubbish.

[Briton 394]

Start->Programs->Accessories->Calculator

Doesn't matter anyway as Smith's overall European record is evidence that he is not a great manager and certainly not the best British manager in history (or even in Rangers history).

UEFA Cup and effective Champions' League semi-finalists.

Any recent Scottish managers managed that in recent years with "lowly" Scottish clubs, or just the guys with big big Premiership money.

You do realise there was another round of games to go don't you? Also it was two points for a win, and one for a draw. If we had won in Marsailles but lost at Ibrox to CSKA we could still have been eliminated because goal difference was used in those days. Yes, we almost certainly would have qualified, but that is not the same thing. You also keep ignoring the point that Walter Smith over saw many European debacles.

I do not see Rangers as a lowly Scottish club and that is another case of moving the goal posts. There are teams smaller than Rangers that have finished runners-up in the UEFA Cup.If Marseilles won in Brugge in their final game, they'd also have finished on eight points.

Use a calculator.

Your point is wrong as it was yesterday.

Do the Math, as they say in the States.

I have although I don't need a calculator. If we won in France, but lost to CSKA in our final group game, we'd have finished on eight points. If Marsailles won in Bruge in their final game, they'd also have finished on eight points. We would have been eliminated on goal difference.

But we didn't lose to CSKA. Why would it have gone any differently?

Matchday Six

Club Brugge 0–1 Marseille

Team Pld W D L GF GA GD Pts

Flag of France Marseille 6 3 3 0 14 4 +10 9

Flag of Scotland Rangers 6 2 4 0 7 5 +2 8

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UEFA_Champions_League_1992-93

Care to admit you were wrong?

Or do you still need a calculator?

FFS. Winning in Marseilles would not have guaranteed us a place in the final...that is a fact. At last you finally admit that with the silly question 'But we didn't lose to CSKA. Why would it have gone any differently?'. Thank you.

[D4RNL 0]

My fondest memories of Ricksen were in midfield rather than defence, so it'll be a NO from me!

[OlegKuznetsov 10,816]

Start->Programs->Accessories->Calculator

Doesn't matter anyway as Smith's overall European record is evidence that he is not a great manager and certainly not the best British manager in history (or even in Rangers history).

UEFA Cup and effective Champions' League semi-finalists.

Any recent Scottish managers managed that in recent years with "lowly" Scottish clubs, or just the guys with big big Premiership money.

You do realise there was another round of games to go don't you? Also it was two points for a win, and one for a draw. If we had won in Marsailles but lost at Ibrox to CSKA we could still have been eliminated because goal difference was used in those days. Yes, we almost certainly would have qualified, but that is not the same thing. You also keep ignoring the point that Walter Smith over saw many European debacles.

I do not see Rangers as a lowly Scottish club and that is another case of moving the goal posts. There are teams smaller than Rangers that have finished runners-up in the UEFA Cup.If Marseilles won in Brugge in their final game, they'd also have finished on eight points.

Use a calculator.

Your point is wrong as it was yesterday.

Do the Math, as they say in the States.

I have although I don't need a calculator. If we won in France, but lost to CSKA in our final group game, we'd have finished on eight points. If Marsailles won in Bruge in their final game, they'd also have finished on eight points. We would have been eliminated on goal difference.

But we didn't lose to CSKA. Why would it have gone any differently?

Matchday Six

Club Brugge 0–1 Marseille

Team Pld W D L GF GA GD Pts

Flag of France Marseille 6 3 3 0 14 4 +10 9

Flag of Scotland Rangers 6 2 4 0 7 5 +2 8

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UEFA_Champions_League_1992-93

Care to admit you were wrong?

Or do you still need a calculator?

FFS. Winning in Marseilles would not have guaranteed us a place in the final...that is a fact. At last you finally admit that with the silly question 'But we didn't lose to CSKA. Why would it have gone any differently?'. Thank you.

So you can't admit you were wrong and want to pretend that I have accepted something I haven't.

I think people will draw their own conclusions.

[RangersKenny 0]

There appears to be 2 totally completely different threads going on within this thread!!!

[BlueSuedeSambas 53,917]

This is probably your worst suggestion since you suggested Miranda of St Mirren.

[Briton 394]

So you can't admit you were wrong and want to pretend that I have accepted something I haven't.

I think people will draw their own conclusions.

I will admit I'm wrong when I am. I have shown you with the facts that you are wrong and a win in France would not have guaranteed a place in the final but you still carry on with this. Fuck knows why. You do admit it with your 'But we didn't lose to CSKA. Why would it have gone any differently?' question. I'll say again, that game came after the away game to Marseille, and we would still have needed a point to make sure we were in the final.

[OlegKuznetsov 10,816]

So you can't admit you were wrong and want to pretend that I have accepted something I haven't.

I think people will draw their own conclusions.

I will admit I'm wrong when I am. I have shown you with the facts that you are wrong and a win in France would not have guaranteed a place in the final but you still carry on with this. Fuck knows why. You do admit it with your 'But we didn't lose to CSKA. Why would it have gone any differently?' question. I'll say again, that game came after the away game to Marseille, and we would still have needed a point to make sure we were in the final.

I never used the word "guarantee". The point remains that had we scored one more goal against Marseilles, then we'd have one more point and they'd have one less and we would have been in the final. The other fact is, we did get the point against CSKA and would probably have won it without the pressures, since Moscow hardly attacked that night.

[Briton 394]

So you can't admit you were wrong and want to pretend that I have accepted something I haven't.

I think people will draw their own conclusions.

I will admit I'm wrong when I am. I have shown you with the facts that you are wrong and a win in France would not have guaranteed a place in the final but you still carry on with this. Fuck knows why. You do admit it with your 'But we didn't lose to CSKA. Why would it have gone any differently?' question. I'll say again, that game came after the away game to Marseille, and we would still have needed a point to make sure we were in the final.

I never used the word "guarantee". The point remains that had we scored one more goal against Marseilles, then we'd have one more point and they'd have one less and we would have been in the final. The other fact is, we did get the point against CSKA and would probably have won it without the pressures, since Moscow hardly attacked that night.

LMFAO...can't belive this. Fact is if we had won in France we would not have been in the final until we got the point we needed against CSKA (if Marseille still won in Bruge).

Yes we did get a point against CSKA and we would almost certainly have got it had we won in France. That's why we were all looking at that match as a *virtual* semi-final. Of course it never was a *real* semi-final as there was still a round of games to be played. Indeed....Marseilles still needed their result in Brugge, and we could still have got there with a win (or even a point) against the Russians, had they failed. We were never at any point 'one goal away from the final' during the 92/93 Champions League.