Muff 245 Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 He's been in a huff for a lot of games recently - celtc, St. Johnstone, Falkirk, Inverness, Dundee United and now last night. That attitude would not happen under a lot of managers and it's certainly not the attitude I want to see from my players. He only has himself to blame, no wonder he get's it tight from some sections of the supporters. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
disgruntled_bear 157 Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 Talking of stony faces, Boyd stomped off in 66 minutes with his like fizz. Given that he had been almost entirely snuffed out of the game by 37-year-old journeyman Tod, this seemed a bit rich. It was only Miller's movement that had caused Tod and sidekick Stephen Tulloch any discomfort and, after a quick chat with Smith, McCoist sent on Kyle Lafferty. He's getting it tight in the Media as well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muff 245 Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 Pretty embarrassing when Boyd is getting snuffed out by Andy Tod, a striker for the majority of his career, who can now barely run. He was one of the least mobile players in Scottish football back in the days when he was with Dunfermline. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
theweebarra 0 Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 I wouldn't say he stormed off in a huff.....any player that is substituted and is happy about it then you would have a problem. I am sure he is a bit pissed of not playing against Celtic on Sunday, but should have been butsting a gut last night, a bit unlucky getting his goal chalked off. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingtom28 8 Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 not good enough Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gronaldo 38 Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 Scapegoat, that is all Boyd is, he played shit tonight, but people come on here and criticise him whatever happens. Muff said if it was another player they'd get slaughtered, apart from McCulloch, Whittaker and Ferguson no on gets slaughtered at all (Adam has now gone so he doesn't count), no one gets slaughtered as regularly as Boyd. Boyd ius basically damned if you do, damned if you don't. For example there was a clamour for Lafferty v Sellik, he played shite but frankly his service was crap, but he, on the whole gets away with it, when it is Boyd and the service is crap, he gets slated for not working hard enough. It is Watty's fault that players look shit because he does fuck all to make them look good, plays them out of position, plays them with no support and worst of all, plays not to lose matches then the strikers get the blame for not scoring from the one or two chances created. Yes Boyd can be at times shit, but so can everyone else, yet no one gets the flack Boyd gets for being off form. It's quite simple with Boyd: he's easily one of the worst players in our first team (excepting the real wasters who should never be anywhere near the starting 11) when it comes to work rate, holding the ball up and his general touch/passing, so he simply has to score goals or he'll have people on his back. It's not some personal vendetta people have against him, it's just a function of the type of player he is. The guy has people on his back even when he does score, thats when the "it was only Calley Thistle" comment's start, there are just some fans out there who will never leave the guy alone. I mean take last nights game for example, Miller got two goals that will add to his end of season tally but if there was ever a discussion about what Miller has contributed this season I doubt anyone will say "he can only score against Forfar"... There are always a select 10% of fans who will criticise him regardless of what he does and there are always a select 10% who'll back him regardless of how he plays, but for the majority he lives and dies by his goalscoring. That's the sort of player he is - when he's scoring goals the majority support keeping him in the team, when he's not scoring goals the majority want him left on the bench. This idea that, for literally no reason other than personal spite, our fanbase hates him is a non-starter. It was a non-starter when it was said about PLG hating him, it was a non-starter when it was said about McLeish, it was a non-starter when it was said about Smith, it was a non-starter when it was said about Burley and it's still a non-starter now. Like it or not, his flaws do exist - the whole world doesn't just hate him for no reason. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neeskens 0 Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 Scapegoat, that is all Boyd is, he played shit tonight, but people come on here and criticise him whatever happens. Muff said if it was another player they'd get slaughtered, apart from McCulloch, Whittaker and Ferguson no on gets slaughtered at all (Adam has now gone so he doesn't count), no one gets slaughtered as regularly as Boyd. Boyd ius basically damned if you do, damned if you don't. For example there was a clamour for Lafferty v Sellik, he played shite but frankly his service was crap, but he, on the whole gets away with it, when it is Boyd and the service is crap, he gets slated for not working hard enough. It is Watty's fault that players look shit because he does fuck all to make them look good, plays them out of position, plays them with no support and worst of all, plays not to lose matches then the strikers get the blame for not scoring from the one or two chances created. Yes Boyd can be at times shit, but so can everyone else, yet no one gets the flack Boyd gets for being off form. It's quite simple with Boyd: he's easily one of the worst players in our first team (excepting the real wasters who should never be anywhere near the starting 11) when it comes to work rate, holding the ball up and his general touch/passing, so he simply has to score goals or he'll have people on his back. It's not some personal vendetta people have against him, it's just a function of the type of player he is. The guy has people on his back even when he does score, thats when the "it was only Calley Thistle" comment's start, there are just some fans out there who will never leave the guy alone. I mean take last nights game for example, Miller got two goals that will add to his end of season tally but if there was ever a discussion about what Miller has contributed this season I doubt anyone will say "he can only score against Forfar"... There are always a select 10% of fans who will criticise him regardless of what he does and there are always a select 10% who'll back him regardless of how he plays, but for the majority he lives and dies by his goalscoring. That's the sort of player he is - when he's scoring goals the majority support keeping him in the team, when he's not scoring goals the majority want him left on the bench. This idea that, for literally no reason other than personal spite, our fanbase hates him is a non-starter. It was a non-starter when it was said about PLG hating him, it was a non-starter when it was said about McLeish, it was a non-starter when it was said about Smith, it was a non-starter when it was said about Burley and it's still a non-starter now. Like it or not, his flaws do exist - the whole world doesn't just hate him for no reason. The majority of the support (and i mean the people who actually attend games) want Boyd to play. You only have to listen to the reactions in the stands when he's playing. Or even when he's not and he comes out to warm up. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
papaguy51 912 Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 Scapegoat, that is all Boyd is, he played shit tonight, but people come on here and criticise him whatever happens. Muff said if it was another player they'd get slaughtered, apart from McCulloch, Whittaker and Ferguson no on gets slaughtered at all (Adam has now gone so he doesn't count), no one gets slaughtered as regularly as Boyd. Boyd ius basically damned if you do, damned if you don't. For example there was a clamour for Lafferty v Sellik, he played shite but frankly his service was crap, but he, on the whole gets away with it, when it is Boyd and the service is crap, he gets slated for not working hard enough. It is Watty's fault that players look shit because he does fuck all to make them look good, plays them out of position, plays them with no support and worst of all, plays not to lose matches then the strikers get the blame for not scoring from the one or two chances created. Yes Boyd can be at times shit, but so can everyone else, yet no one gets the flack Boyd gets for being off form. It's quite simple with Boyd: he's easily one of the worst players in our first team (excepting the real wasters who should never be anywhere near the starting 11) when it comes to work rate, holding the ball up and his general touch/passing, so he simply has to score goals or he'll have people on his back. It's not some personal vendetta people have against him, it's just a function of the type of player he is. The guy has people on his back even when he does score, thats when the "it was only Calley Thistle" comment's start, there are just some fans out there who will never leave the guy alone. I mean take last nights game for example, Miller got two goals that will add to his end of season tally but if there was ever a discussion about what Miller has contributed this season I doubt anyone will say "he can only score against Forfar"... There are always a select 10% of fans who will criticise him regardless of what he does and there are always a select 10% who'll back him regardless of how he plays, but for the majority he lives and dies by his goalscoring. That's the sort of player he is - when he's scoring goals the majority support keeping him in the team, when he's not scoring goals the majority want him left on the bench. This idea that, for literally no reason other than personal spite, our fanbase hates him is a non-starter. It was a non-starter when it was said about PLG hating him, it was a non-starter when it was said about McLeish, it was a non-starter when it was said about Smith, it was a non-starter when it was said about Burley and it's still a non-starter now. Like it or not, his flaws do exist - the whole world doesn't just hate him for no reason. The majority of the support (and i mean the people who actually attend games) want Boyd to play. You only have to listen to the reactions in the stands when he's playing. Or even when he's not and he comes out to warm up. When I question Smith's tactics, I'm always being told that it doesn't matter what the support want because they know nothing when compared to the manager. Surely the same should apply here? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neeskens 0 Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 Scapegoat, that is all Boyd is, he played shit tonight, but people come on here and criticise him whatever happens. Muff said if it was another player they'd get slaughtered, apart from McCulloch, Whittaker and Ferguson no on gets slaughtered at all (Adam has now gone so he doesn't count), no one gets slaughtered as regularly as Boyd. Boyd ius basically damned if you do, damned if you don't. For example there was a clamour for Lafferty v Sellik, he played shite but frankly his service was crap, but he, on the whole gets away with it, when it is Boyd and the service is crap, he gets slated for not working hard enough. It is Watty's fault that players look shit because he does fuck all to make them look good, plays them out of position, plays them with no support and worst of all, plays not to lose matches then the strikers get the blame for not scoring from the one or two chances created. Yes Boyd can be at times shit, but so can everyone else, yet no one gets the flack Boyd gets for being off form. It's quite simple with Boyd: he's easily one of the worst players in our first team (excepting the real wasters who should never be anywhere near the starting 11) when it comes to work rate, holding the ball up and his general touch/passing, so he simply has to score goals or he'll have people on his back. It's not some personal vendetta people have against him, it's just a function of the type of player he is. The guy has people on his back even when he does score, thats when the "it was only Calley Thistle" comment's start, there are just some fans out there who will never leave the guy alone. I mean take last nights game for example, Miller got two goals that will add to his end of season tally but if there was ever a discussion about what Miller has contributed this season I doubt anyone will say "he can only score against Forfar"... There are always a select 10% of fans who will criticise him regardless of what he does and there are always a select 10% who'll back him regardless of how he plays, but for the majority he lives and dies by his goalscoring. That's the sort of player he is - when he's scoring goals the majority support keeping him in the team, when he's not scoring goals the majority want him left on the bench. This idea that, for literally no reason other than personal spite, our fanbase hates him is a non-starter. It was a non-starter when it was said about PLG hating him, it was a non-starter when it was said about McLeish, it was a non-starter when it was said about Smith, it was a non-starter when it was said about Burley and it's still a non-starter now. Like it or not, his flaws do exist - the whole world doesn't just hate him for no reason. The majority of the support (and i mean the people who actually attend games) want Boyd to play. You only have to listen to the reactions in the stands when he's playing. Or even when he's not and he comes out to warm up. When I question Smith's tactics, I'm always being told that it doesn't matter what the support want because they know nothing when compared to the manager. Surely the same should apply here? I'm not saying the fans should pick the team. Even though most would probably do a better job. I'm just saying that most want Boyd to play. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharpy 0 Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 Kris boyds league goals this season: 6 - penaltys 4 - Inverness [2 away] 3 - Hamilton [1 away] 2 - kilmarnock [1 away] 1 - Dundee utd 1 away 1 - Hibs 1 - Aberdeen 1 - St mirren 1 - Falkirk Kenny miller: 2 - celtic away 2- Hibs away 1- kilmarnock away 1- hamilton 1- Inverness Add six penalys gives 13. Scored more important away goals than boyd and his goals have dried up only when he partners boyd [because he has to play wider]. partnered with cousin he played more through the middle, hence more goals. I think miller and lafferty should get there chance for a run in the team, to show what they can do. Take away boyds penaltys and goals against the bottom two doesn't leave many!?! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 11,453 Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 Boyd deserves criticism for the way he plays at times and his idle style of play, but 'take away penalties' and 'he scores most goals against this and that' is the kind of argument i just can't take seriously. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davy 68 Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 I don't like the way people say he should start tomorrow 'cause of his record against Killie. He probably will start, and he most likely will score, but him getting a game should be based on current form and current attitude meaning he is well down the pecking list. Past form should not guarantee him a place in the first team. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neeskens 0 Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 Kris boyds league goals this season: 6 - penaltys 4 - Inverness [2 away] 3 - Hamilton [1 away] 2 - kilmarnock [1 away] 1 - Dundee utd 1 away 1 - Hibs 1 - Aberdeen 1 - St mirren 1 - Falkirk Kenny miller: 2 - celtic away 2- Hibs away 1- kilmarnock away 1- hamilton 1- Inverness Add six penalys gives 13. Scored more important away goals than boyd and his goals have dried up only when he partners boyd [because he has to play wider]. partnered with cousin he played more through the middle, hence more goals. I think miller and lafferty should get there chance for a run in the team, to show what they can do. Take away boyds penaltys and goals against the bottom two doesn't leave many!?! It just shows how bad misser really is when you have to add another strikers goals to try and make his record look half decent. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neeskens 0 Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 I don't like the way people say he should start tomorrow 'cause of his record against Killie. He probably will start, and he most likely will score, but him getting a game should be based on current form and current attitude meaning he is well down the pecking list. Past form should not guarantee him a place in the first team. So who would you start then? If you say it's on current form, which I don't disagree with. Surely misser wouldn't be picked? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOMAHONERS 0 Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 Rangers mgmt. and Boyd haters alike are comfortable with 2nd place I guess. Celtic game was a must win if they want to finish 1st. Top scorer in the league dosen't get on the pitch, absurd. Bringing in Boyd when Lafferty limped off would have been the smart move, smarter would have been starting Naismith to tire the Celtic defenders out then bring Boyd in to capitalize on the momentum Rangers had built. Lafferty made one decent play for his day, not any more though. If you are happy with 2nd place though, they played a great game. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JRodgA2k8 542 Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 Rangers mgmt. and Boyd haters alike are comfortable with 2nd place I guess. Celtic game was a must win if they want to finish 1st. Top scorer in the league dosen't get on the pitch, absurd. Bringing in Boyd when Lafferty limped off would have been the smart move, smarter would have been starting Naismith to tire the Celtic defenders out then bring Boyd in to capitalize on the momentum Rangers had built. Lafferty made one decent play for his day, not any more though. If you are happy with 2nd place though, they played a great game. OK dont give me this argument thats been doing the rounds for season after season recently! Boyd has been our top goalscorer for the last few seasons and is right now also....have we won the league with those goals? We have not! I'm never happy with second place but Boyd is definitely not going thru a good spell at the moment and his confidence looks to have taken a hit. I like everyone else expect him to score a bucketload against Forfar on Wednesday night but he was totally marked out the game and offered little throughout. Miller was dropped because of bad form and his goals the other night should definitely help him in terms of confidence. I suspect Boyd will play on Saturday against Killie but he had a bad game and Smith came down and told Ally he should probably hook him and I cant say that was the bad decision! Lafferty came on and set up two goals. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOMAHONERS 0 Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 He was also the league leading scorer when he played for killie, with far fewer skilled players around him. Every sport has players with bad attitudes, poor fitness but if they produce, they play. Goals win games. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny 9 Posted February 21, 2009 Share Posted February 21, 2009 Another goal, but otherwise atrocious display. And a yellow for diving. Boyd is a player who doesn't fit into any team on earth such is his inability to contribute other than with goals. Don't get me wrong, sticking them away is the name of the game, and he always will, but his absolutely useless presence on a pitch outwith that is so frustrating. If he could play the game as well as doing the scoring part, he would be absolutely awesome. As it is, he will be an enigma for the rest of his career. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Williamson. 82,235 Posted February 21, 2009 Share Posted February 21, 2009 He doesnt do moving Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 11,453 Posted February 21, 2009 Share Posted February 21, 2009 Scored in the first half and did OK, could have been forgiven for forgetting he was playing in the second half. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ace 3,556 Posted February 21, 2009 Share Posted February 21, 2009 I am not justifying his lack of overall contribution to the team but ... Isn't every team, the world over, trying to cultivate or find or buy a natural goalscorer, someone who finds the net with supposed ease ? Here we have a guy who is probably the most proficient finisher in the game since ... well, since McCoist yet half of the fans want him punted or dropped because he doesn't contribute to the "TEAM", except for his goals. We are currently +10 goal difference over Celtic (or so i believe), Boyd's goals count against the entire league i.e. Hamilton, St. Mirren etc etc ..just becasue he doesn't scpre against Celtic doesn't mean his goals count any less, the 3 points he helps to gain are the same as any 2 points we gain in ant game. Can someone explain why we should punt a player who most teams (& fans) would covet? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny 9 Posted February 21, 2009 Share Posted February 21, 2009 I am not justifying his lack of overall contribution to the team but ... Isn't every team, the world over, trying to cultivate or find or buy a natural goalscorer, someone who finds the net with supposed ease ? Here we have a guy who is probably the most proficient finisher in the game since ... well, since McCoist yet half of the fans want him punted or dropped because he doesn't contribute to the "TEAM", except for his goals. We are currently +10 goal difference over Celtic (or so i believe), Boyd's goals count against the entire league i.e. Hamilton, St. Mirren etc etc ..just becasue he doesn't scpre against Celtic doesn't mean his goals count any less, the 3 points he helps to gain are the same as any 2 points we gain in ant game. Can someone explain why we should punt a player who most teams (& fans) would covet? I didn't say we should punt him. If you've seen my posts in the past I support what he does give to the team, and I too have pointed out it's the 40+ points he wins us against the diddy sides which accumulate the majority of our points. I'm just saying he's an enigma. The never ending discussions among us fans about his merits confirm that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 11,453 Posted February 21, 2009 Share Posted February 21, 2009 He didn't play so badly in the first half, and actually got an assist too. Like i say anonymous in the second half but the whole team seemed so flat in the second half for some reason. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperRangers 2 Posted February 21, 2009 Share Posted February 21, 2009 I heard on the radio today that Boyd has scored more goals than Samaras, Mcdonald and castlemilk combined. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOLUWDC 1 Posted February 21, 2009 Share Posted February 21, 2009 He did his job today...that's all that matters Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts