Leaderboard

Like you say you watched highlights which often don't give an accurate reflection of whole games. There's also a big difference between not 'doing much' or being a 'shadow' and actually doing what you're asked to do on a consistent basis game to game and for 90mins. That's why he's picked and that's why he's seen as one of the manager's key players. Kent should have scored for sure but was effective, as usual, in his contribution where he was the player usually asked to come a bit deeper and start moves from positions where those with a better touch/presence could then use the ball in and around the box from tighter areas. He did this a few times including, for example, where Tav should have scored from Hagi's cross. It's not all about direct assists in how we break down blocks and that's why all three 10s of Kent, Hagi and especially Aribo for me, for the first hour, all worked well together. It's all about moving the ball, finding space and finding the right pass and we did that quite well for the most part. Was Kent brilliant? Far from it but he enabled us to control the game for the first hour just as much as anyone else. It's worth noting that Roofe did struggle but, after he went off, Itten was just as poor (if not worse) and our attacking play decreased as Aribo initially dropped deeper to address Saints change of system. That's why Hagi and Kent both fell out of it after the hour mark but, once again, Kent's fitness and mobility enabled us to see the game out as he did the unselfish work off the ball for the whole match. Meanwhile, Hagi's goal was a thing of beauty and his shooting is a strength we're lucky to have when the interplay is resulting in poor finishing for whatever reason. He doesn't quite have the pace of Kent but he also works hard defensively as well, despite not having the engine to do so for 90mins. Do we criticise that or admire his other strengths? Do we complain at his occasional heavy touches or wait for the next good one? Should he have also scored just before he did last night? Perhaps but he kept knocking on the door which won us the game. As said last night, I don't get this bizarre need to find exaggerated fault in one player's performance. I appreciate Kent is seen as a creative, attacking player who some think should be contributing assists and goals every single game. Fair enough, I agree he could improve in such areas, but I also believe we have to acknowledge he actually does a bit more than that. There's a reason the manager trusts him every week and it's not based on him being a shadow, that's for sure. Let's criticise but let's be constructive...

When Kent was running teams ragged the other week and being our MOTM - where was the "that's the Kent we know we have" ? I didn't see it, and it is for this reason, when people only bring up players when they have had a bad game (in that person's eyes) that people are seen to be anti certain players. Hagi has been fine of late - but he was poor at the start of the season when playing. Aribo also went through a sticky patch too - very, very few players will consistently be 8/10 every week - what fans miss with Kent is what he brings to the team just by being on the pitch - he is often doubled up in the final third because opponents know they can crucify them with his trickery and pace - which opens up space for others to exploit. It is a team game and Ryan Kent plays his part well enough.

Kent was "just fine". Listen to coaching staff, every player has a specific role in the team and Kent is doing his job well. We are unbeaten in the league, 17 clean sheets, 23 points clear - if that doesn't show the players are doing "just fine", then nothing will. The thought that we should just turn up, play amazingly and win 5-0 every week as an illusion and never happens. The objective is to win the game, we're doing quite well at that this season. I'll take 1-0 wins every day of the week

Must be all that coffee...

A few really good performances last night but for me there was one stand out and that was STEVEN DAVIS.

Regards this I see that Roofe is being blamed for Davidson possibly missing cup final, which to me is nonsense.From what I seen is that Roofes tackle got his LEFT LEG/FOOT and when watching treatment later to Davidson showed him being treated for a RIGHT calf muscle problem,so if I am right yet another miss-reporting by the media.

Did anyone else notice the ridiculous offside given against Kent in the second half by assistant referee David Roome? He was never offside in a million years it was Roome, some may recall, who missed three offside Celtic players at the goal when they won the betred cup just over a year ago

Pretty bloody good mate. 1 goal conceded in 12 home league games, winning the lot of them. I suspect that’s never been done before, and we know if it was the bheasts on such a run, there would be reams of articles letting us know just how wonderful and record breaking the run is. All we get is an acknowledgment that the bheasts have imploded and blown “the 10” which is funny as I don’t recall them “winning” “the 9”. Must have missed that game, who scored the winner? There will soon be muttering about us going unbeaten throughout the campaign, which will be completely downplayed and we will be told it’s not a patch on Brenda’s team of superheros and that none of our current team would get into their team. What won’t be mentioned is that they had a £50M advantage over their opponents and started that season as 1/50 favourites. For us, I’m sure I’m just like most Bears in being so proud of this team, the quality of play most weeks, our credibility in Europe, and our class off the field with our management team leading us to glory.

Kent was absolutely fine tonight. Played well first half and him, Aribo and Hagi were all effective together until the last 20mins or so where we dropped a bit deeper as Saints went for it. Why do some fans always want a panto villain to have a go at? It's beyond me...

It's only from seeing the slow-motion replays that you think, 'Oh-- that's a red'. At full speed, I didn't see much in it. That movement, of protecting the ball, is seen all the time. I just think it's where the lad's leg is; it's an unfortunate placement. Nevertheless, yes; it should've perhaps been a red. I fully expect him to be pulled up for it.

Davis for me, he moves around the pitch like a 25 year old, his reading of the game is brilliant, top class player

McGregor for his save that in the end secured the full three points

My oh my! How I needed that. Pushed me 7 places up the table and away from the relegation dogfight! Not setting my hopes too high but maybe still a chance of a top 6 finish? ?

I'll be self-isolating for a couple of weeks after that!

Also check out pointsto55.com if you haven't seen it. My new favourite site.

Love this graph from Ambiorix on FF.

I agree. But I don’t think @der Berliner‘s comment was overly critical, just a comment that he wasn’t involved much and someone else should have been brought on earlier. I didn’t see the game, but from extended highlights on Sportscene it I just commented that it did seem he might have had a point in that regard. Kent’s best performances are in games where the game is a little bit more stretched. I made a point of praising his performances at Aberdeen and Hibs recently due to the fact I can be seen as being constantly critical of him which I amn’t. I would prefer more of a horses for courses approach at times, but we are cruising to the title so there really isn’t room for much criticism at the moment.

Defoe is currently injured. In terms of the Euro squad, we have Morelos, Roofe and Itten that, rightly or wrongly, are ahead of him so we need to balance out the rest of the players picked, especially give we struggle to satisfy the homegrown/club-trained numbers.

Gerrard's European record has been magnificent throughout his tenure. The league stats tell the story this season - excellent.

I'm not a stat man, but how good is this team so far? I can't remember a Rangers team racking up so many wins with clean sheets with more to come at home and in Europe!.

Indeed, Jim Denny was shot by the Yahoos during a reserve game at ra Piggery. I remember it was reported in the Rangers News. Jim had a spectacular debut in the 1971 Scottish Cup final replay. He debutised for Sandy Jardine and played very well. He made another several dozen appearances over the next several years without reaching those heights. In the Rangers - Player by Player book, Jim's biog' describes him as, "a player of medium height, medium pace, and medium ability". I suspect even Jim would be embarrassed by such over reaching praise? I would have happily shot Ally Scott.

I’ve often wondered that too

He's bringing a bit of scouse football to Rangers back in season 78/79 his former club liverpool won a 42 game league only conceding 18 goals .

Added to a phenomenal current league record, SGs European record is also worth noting. We have regained respect in Europe and are now a team clubs want to avoid. We will most likely drop a few more points between now and the end of the season, I just hope fans can put any dropped points into perspective.

7 goals conceded all season, amazing. The bheasts conceded their 7th almost four months ago when Goldson tapped the ball through Duffy's legs.?

it will only take a few bad results before we have fans wanting him out ?

You actually DO pick on players, whether for fun or not. You give certain players more leeway than you give Kent. Kent has become this team's version of your Kyle Hutton. You/we can lament performances all we like - but what we don't know is the role that is being asked of them from the management team - and I will give an example. I remember being at Ibrox a couple of seasons ago and Rangers were down to 10 men, they also were losing 2-1 (I think, might have been 3-1) and @Rousseau favorite player, Josh Windass was on the halfway line whilst the opponent (think it was Hibs) were attacking.... a few guys in front of me started screaming at Windass to get back and help out and calling him a lazy bastard (and that was one of the more pleasant terms)….. what they didn't notice (because they were ball-watching - I was watching more than just the ball at the time) was that Windass actually DID make a move to assist defensively.... and Caixinha shouted to him from the touchline to NOT go back and help out - Caixinha specifically told Windass to stay on the halfway line and wide, presumably for a quick break should the defence clear. But all those fans were adamant he was being a lazy bastard, which on that occasion was absolute nonsense. I have yet to see anyone on here who "sees no fault in Kent's performances". Jones sealed his own fate with stupidity (as well as other things which I have heard from impeccable sources), Middleton couldn't get in Hibs team so not sure how he would get into ours, and Barker doesn't offer what Kent does (in the management team's mind). I personally find it a bit churlish that any of us, me included, are complaining about players being kept on the pitch in a game in which we win, during a season in which we have won 100% of our home games in the league, in a season where we are undefeated in the league.... maybe it is just me, but I trust this management team to pick the players who will get the job done - and get the job done they have. What would you, or any of us, be saying had he brought Kent off and we conceded a late goal ? Am I the only one who remembers SG made a late sub at Motherwell a couple of years ago when we were winning 4-3 (or something such like) and the player he brought on gave away an equalizer ? We won the game last night which means team selection, tactics, formation worked. Not sure why we need to find a boo boy when we win and are sitting at the top of the league by miles.

I was one of those suggesting Davis was finished last season. Form is temporary, and all that...

Exactly the way I saw it.

That was my take on it from the initial viewing - however, unintentional as it may be, he is over the ball and high on the Saints player - it really should have been red.

Wise man - my reason for my vote too

BTW ... Amazon Prime Video Sport @primevideosport Steven Gerrard has reached 100 wins as @RangersFC manager https://twitter.com/primevideosport/status/1357081319566692352/

Killie are looking like the team that's heading for bother this season, if Hamilton pull of their usual escape act, even if not, i don't think Killie will fancy a play off against Raith, Dunfermline or Dundee.

if cetlc were ran at all passably all of that should have been true

I don't think taking him off would have been the best idea in such a tight game. Wright could have come on for his debut but that would have been a risk in terms of the industry Kent offers. Zungu could have come on but then we wouldn't have had any support for Itten who was struggling anyway. Like I say criticism is fine but D_B's comments were rather gratuitous and unfair in my view.

Hagi for his match-winning moment of genius.

Five matches. Five aways. What’s the odds?

I just saw that Liverpool lost again. I hope they don't need a new manager soon. C'mon TF Jurgen! ???

Really unfair on Defoe and I can’t quite get my head around it. Surely with the people leaving we have enough room for a quality striker who is unlike our other options there and whose experience could be useful should we get a few games in the comp.

Back to back home defeats,and a must win against Man City coming up. Can't say as a Rangers supporter that i'm not slightly concerned .

I still think 87 was better but this is a close second. Sadly I can’t see us getting into Ibrox this season, but hope at least to have access to a licensed premises and a helluva party by May.

We will win this before the split.

a win is a win. Pretty uninspiring and looked to miss Morelos again. If we win another 3 games we will have a points total celtc won't match.

Doesn’t matter, he goes right over the ball straight into the player. Dangerous play, stonewall red card. Delighted he got away with it, as it might have cost us the game.

A somewhat acerbic piece from Scottish Legal News, last year, is below. The bar is set incredibly high to prove 'malicious prosecution', yet, in this case, the Crown Office folded, almost immediately, with significant financial and reputational cost to the Scottish judicial system. It is quite clear that there should be an Inquiry, but there seem to be immediate problems, beyond the major obstacle of political will: a. who, in Scotland, could act, and be seen to act independently as convenor of such an investigation? b. in the light of the Salmond Inquiry, how can it be ensured that both evidence itself, and the giving of that evidence, are not optional? c. is it possible, or, indeed, advisable, to constrain the scope of any such Inquiry merely to the Malicious Prosecution, itself, or would it be necessary to establish, at least, a context, by examining pre-Administration history? https://www.scottishlegal.com/article/opinion-alistair-bonnington-on-scotland-s-malicious-prosecution-shame Opinion: Alistair Bonnington on Scotland’s malicious prosecution shame Published 22 October 2020 Alistair Bonnington An astonishing admission was made by Scotand’s Lord Advocate in the Court of Session at the end of August. He conceded that his predecessor’s 2012 prosecution of the two men called in as administrators of Rangers Football Club was malicious. This is a shameful milestone in the legal history of this nation. For as long as anyone can remember, every Scots law student was taught that there never has been, nor ever will be, a successful application to have a Scottish prosecution declared to be malicious. That’s because the test to prove malice is, in law, impossibly high; and in any event, those who hold the ancient Scots office of Lord Advocate would never misuse their constitutional power in that way. But sadly, all of that confidence in the good faith of our prosecution system has now gone. Why has this happened? There was a good deal of disquiet amongst lawyers when the Scotland Act placed the Lord Advocate alongside the Scottish Ministers in the new devolved constitutional setup. It was feared that the vital independence of the Lord Advocate could be compromised, both in fact and in public perception. After all, how can you say that you have an independent prosecution system when the head of it sits in the “Scottish Cabinet” with party politicians? To accord with international norms, the function of prosecution in a democratic state must be independent of politicians. To be blunt, contact with politicians is regarded as a potential form of contamination of the legal function. Given the quality of many of today’s politicians, that fear of contamination is surely justified. In my voting lifetime, politicians have degenerated from being (usually) well meaning people of some principle, to (far too often) self-seeking folk of no principles and limited brainpower. The self-seekers’ principal interest is in how they are perceived in the public eye – with a view to re-election. The truth doesn’t matter at all. They are happy to manipulate or conceal it to their own advantage. Now it would be good to believe that even such low-calibre folk have some morals, and would leave the prosection system alone. But I wonder, in today’s Scottish political landscape, can we be sure? In any case, we incurable romantics who still believe in democracy, must, I believe, occasionally investigate to ensure that our legal system is still uncorrupted by politics. I am concerned that since the SNP have become the government in our nation, a Stalinist approach has been taken to our public life. The state and all its functions are subservient to the interests of the Party. In such an outdated and dictatorial approach to government, subservience often includes the prosecution service. Stalin’s notorious “show trials” were the result in Russia. We now need to learn if the result in Scotland has been political interference with our independent prosecution system. The seeming undue closeness of certain holders of the office of Lord Advocate to SNP politicians has been questioned before by Scots legal commentators. There have been surprising approvals by Lords (correct) Advocate of SNP legislation, which almost any lawyer would say breaches the European Convention. All this raises important constitutional questions for Scotland. Why the then Lord Advocate, Frank Mulholland, (now a Senator of the College of Justice) acted as he did in 2012 I do not claim to know. But the admission that his prosecution of the two men from Duff and Phelps was malicious, is a watershed moment for the Scottish criminal legal system, which cannot be allowed to pass unexamined. To some degree, that exploration may occur within the current civil proceedings where the two wronged men are claiming many millions from the Lord Advocate (huge interim awards have already been made). But out of court settlement of these proceedings is highly likely. That would leave far too many stones unturned. Even looking only at the cost of this case, the public have a material interest in knowing why, yet again, large sums of taxpayers’ money has been lost in our courts, under the present government. The vital thing to learn now is why, to Scotland’s eternal disgrace, a malicious prosecution was mounted in the first place. Given the current pathetic spectacle of the Salmond Inquiry in Holyrood, it is plain that the Scottish Parliament couldn’t conduct such an inquiry. The only proper method of inquiry would be by a retired senior prosecutor whose independence is guaranteed. It’s sad to have to say so, but that means someone from outside Scotland. Alistair Bonnington former honorary professor (criminal procedure law) Glasgow University

Storm Alfredo. These last several years, the Meteorological Offices in the UK, Ireland, and the Netherlands have an agreement to use the same name for large scale cyclonic wind storms. It alternates between male and female names, utilising 21 letters of the alphabet. Apparently, the result is far more people in these countries now take greater interest in the mostly unpredictable life expectancy of storms. Often, they begin out at sea, gathering energy before hitting landfall, where the kinetic energy begins to discharge. In Scottish football these last few years, we have a perma-storm that has become most predictable. It begins on a Parks team coach driven by Jimmy Bell, and is discharged regularly at Scottish football grounds. Watching the energy dissipate has become a familiar choreography, and such familiarity has bred contempt. It doesn't matter the provocation, it doesn't matter the circumstance, and it doesn't matter the prevailing conditions. No mitigation can be accepted. The select grouping that is Scottish football storm watchers much prefer it this way. The contemptuous NEVER tell us, certainly NEVER highlight Porteous wiping out Morelos in the first minute, or Scott McKenna running his studs down his calf, or Scott Brown slapping the back of his neck. The Columbian being pelted by coins and scalding drinks to a backdrop of painted bedsheets in guttural Spanish proclaiming his Mother to be a whore, are quickly glossed over. The storm watchers are impatient to get to the end of every Storm Alfredo because they know it ends with another episode of fast track justice, resulting in another multi-game ban. In many ways, BBC Scotland's Michael Stewart is the epitome of such particular observation, "I'm sick and tired of Morelos and the Rangers manager defending his actions". Steven Gerrard is correct, the Buffalo's actions at Easter Road were indefensible, he has been handed a further three match suspension. Similarly, Gerrard was correct to highlight consistency. Remember Dundee United's Ryan Edward's straight legged studding of Morelos at Ibrox? It resulted in a ten pence size puncture wound on the Columbian's upper thigh, no card awarded, no foul awarded either, game restarted with a drop ball. Michael Stewart completely agreed with the Referee's actions. It's about posterity with Mikey, he is playing his part to ensure nothing remains of Morelos injustice. The storm watchers know Alfie is a free hit. Irvine Welsh has not lived in Scotland for quarter of a century. Dublin, New York, Chicago, ..... etc are his homes. He returns to Caledonia's craggy majesty for drug dealer's funerals and the occasional Hibee game. He was a guest on David Tanner Hosted Hibs TV and gave more energy to the storm, he wanted Alfie macheted into pieces and distributed to the corners of the globe. He also referred to Morelos as, "a sticky bun". Step forward Stuart Cosgrove, big mate of Irvine. DrStu' does not refer to the sticky bun remark, again posterity. However, he is consistent with his 'not getting Rangers supporters standing on the sidelines raging and beeling'. Irivine's machete comment was, "comedic exaggeration" and Rangers supporters complaining to OffCom are stupid(for posterity) because Hibs TV broadcasts via the world wide web. Today, Scott Brown's flying elbow into the face of Killie's Tshibola has been cited for further consideration. Has Gerrard sparked a storm of consistency? Michael Stewart was first in, on last night's Sportscene, he noted Tshibola had to lower his head to receive Brown's elbow and the reality was, "Scott was just fending him off". Remember, Mikey was not sure Brown was worthy of a red card at Livi' either. I hope this is the start of a Club attempt to cap this particular storm. Posterity is a long time.