Darthter

2nd competitive game....can't see any (unforced) changes happening. PC will want to get as much game time for his preferred starting 11 as possible. The only possible exception maybe being Miller on the bench & Morelos starting. I'd expect to see the likes of Pena come on at some stage to get some 1/2 decent game time.

I think an average rating of about 7 through-out the team seems fair....some a wee bit higher, some a bit lower.

https://rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/waghorn-joins-ipswich/

The BEEB as a whole are nothing more than a propaganda machine for the UK Govt. As such they have no idea of what constitutes fair & balanced reporting - throughout the UK.

IF Waggy's away, that should open an opportunity for the likes of Hardie or Dodoo. Given the cash that has been spent so far, I would be inclined to give either of them a shot. If they play & don't deliver the goods, move them on & bring in new in January. We current;y have Miller, Herrera, Morelos, Hardie & Dodoo....don't think we really need anyone else. I would actually like to see Dodoo in Miller's kinda roving role - give him a bit of freedom & we may well shine.

1st half we were all over them. Created some great chances. Thought Windass looked good - very keen to get on the ball & attack the opposing defence. Long may it continue. Dorrans looked industrious, keeping control of things in the middle. Thought Jack was quiet, but still effective without standing out. 1st half, I thought the defence looked solid. 'Well had a couple of chances, but in general the coped with everything. Thought Miller was generally quite & ineffective. Herrera was a bit better, but would prefer to see more shooting chances coming those two. Running about & annoying defenders is not their primary function. 2nd half, I though we let 'Well more into the came. I think they altered their tactics and nullified our play a bit more, allowing them to dictate the match more than we would have wanted. As others have said towards the end of the match, we were soaking up a lot of pressure from them. If we want to see out matches more comfortably, we need to retain the control that we showed in the 1st half. During that period, I wasn't really concerned when they attacked....in the 2nd half that changed. Even though their final ball etc wasn't always great, sometimes you just never know what might happen. If the opposition are allowed to attack, there is ALWAYS a threat of a goal. It's up to us to regain control of the tempo & play - if that means completely killing the flow etc of the game, then so be it, if it protects a lead. Overall, I thought it was a good performance, and pleasing to see the team starting to work together well.

Or....the BBC could just report things accurately in the 1st place??? So, if they are continuing to report on TFC, but without any direct contact.....how are they ensuring that their information is correct, and are they not bothered about getting information out there quickly - having to rely on external/3rd party sources to publish the information 1st??

Remember MOH is only out on loan.....wouldn't surprise me that if he impresses at StJ, that PC might bring him back for a 2nd chance.

1st & foremost....I expect a considerably higher degree of consistency throughout the team. Also, a notable decrease in defensive mistakes (probably the most consistent thing last year). I think cutting out those silly defensive errors that lead to goals, will significantly increase our points haul & keep us closer to them. We dropped FAR too many points due to simple, basic errors. When you look at last season table, we lost 9 games to Aberdeens 10. However, we drew 10 to their 4 - that's where 2nd place was won/lost. I'm sure if you were to analyse those draws, you'd find that a high number of opposition goals could probably have been avoided. As always, good runs in the cups, with a win would be very nice. European qualification place. Taking points off them in OF matches - wins would be a bonus, but even a couple of draws & close matches would suffice.

It's FAR too easy for papers to print a sensationalised story (that they probably know has either dubious or wrong content), then to publish a tiny wee apology somewhere buried deep in the pages, so that very few see it.

RFC should get their Lawyers straight onto this, with a legal letter being issued immediately stating intent to invoke legal action. As for the rest of it....he could have saved A LOT of typing by simple putting "Please kick RFC out of football"

Even just looking at his picture.....I'm scared of Bruno Alves!!!! Don't know how an opposing striker will feel.....

True....but while in the job, he deserves at least professional courtesy from those in the media. We know they crave headlines, but at least use them in the proper context. A headline saying "We've the best squad", isn't a lie - he did say that, but he also provided context to the statement which makes it a perfectly normal thing for a manager to say - of course he thinks they're the best - he's not gonna turn round & say "well...actually we're not bad, but Ceptic, Aberdeen & Kilmarnock have better players than us". It's all about sensationalism.

The BBC as a whole are as far from impartial as anyone could imagine, not just in Scotland but right across the UK. Classic example: UKIP regularly get represented on Question Time, even at times when they had ZERO MP's. they had no official voice or representation in the "corridors of power", yet were still given a platform to speak. The BBC are essentially the propaganda tool of the UK Government, and those with REAL power & influence.

I think when they refer to eligibility, it refers to player registration, suspensions etc ie. can the player "legally" play in the match. A player being injured does not effect his eligibility to play. My point is that is a player in genuinely injured, they would not play in that match anyway, therefore the Team does not suffer any penalty as a result. My thinking was spurred by the Griffiths thing, but it really is a lot more general. If we take Griffith as an example. If he picked up the injury during the Linfield game, suspension or not, he would have been out of the 1st leg, and Ceptic would have known that straight after the game before any UEFA reports had even been submitted. UEFA then had him a one match suspension, which applies while he's injured. My thinking is that the suspension should have been served once he was fit enough to play ie the 2nd leg. While I have mentioned Griffith above, this in no means applies only to him/them. I'm sure many teams over the years have preemptively announced a player injury prior to them receiving a suspension - means the team can report (genuinely) that the player is out through injury rather than suspension.

If the Walker deal gets over the line....how do folk think he'll fit into the team??? Roussou posted an excellent analysis of applying an asymmetric type 4-4-2, where there is no need for a dedicated "winger" on the left (in our case).

Are the BBC still banned from Ibrox & RFC press confs??? If they are you can't complain that they don't cover the club..

According to recent media reports, it would appear that Leigh Griffiths missed the 1st leg against Rosenborg through injury, rather than suspension for his behaviour against Linfield. Now, a suspension is supposed to be a punishment, but I would suggest if the player is truly injured for the period of the suspension....is it REALLY a punishment?? If the player actually is injured, they wouldn't play in the matches anyway, therefore the team haven't lost anything. In cases like this, should the suspension be carried over until the next game that the player is fit to play???

The last time Labour was in control in Scotland, they made a cod of it......Tories running Scotland would be devastating - the NHS in Scotland is performing considerably better than the rest of the UK because it is devolved. Since the Tories took over the UK Govt they have constantly shown contempt for Scotland - our many profitable resources are being used to fund England & ultimately keep it afloat. Our finishing industry will also be used as a bargaining chip in BREXIT negotiations, to ensure a better deal for England. Why would you rather have our country run by English based bosses??? the SNP is the ONLY active party in Scotland that is actually Scottish - there is no such thing as Scottish Labout/Tory...they don't exist as stand alone entities, with Davidson & Dugdale being puppets for their Wastemonster bosses. As for the "Majority don't like us"...it's similar to what the media feeds about RFC....I would suggest a very high percentage of English folk believe that England financially supports the Scots, when in actual fact it's the other way about - WE prop up the UK economy. Many down south probably don't even recognise that Scotland is a COUNTRY & not a northern english county. But we digress...Rant over, back on topic

The English think we hate them - period!!! Nothing to do with the SNP, Indy or anything else. Also a high percentage don't like us either - they believe we're a drain on English resources. Voting the SNP out will only harm Scotland, and do nothing to change English perception.

Conveniently overlooked by the media....his absence is always quoted as being due to injury. He was suspended due to his inability to behave.

I disagree....politics & sport shouldn't mix. It is the responsibility of the footballing authorities 1st & foremost to deal with the problem. If they are unsuccessful, it should then be down to the Police. UEFA should be approaching the SFA/SPFL and demanding that there are more proactive in dealing with clubs that have continuous issues. If nothing still happens, UEFA should be able to take action on the SFA/SPFL - if that were to happen it would obviously effect ALL clubs competing in Europe, and maybe make them a bit more vocal. What would happen if UEFA were to announce that ALL Scottish clubs were banned from all Euro competition next season, as a direct result of one teams continued breach of rules etc??? Would it make clubs like Aberdeen, St Johnstone etc stand up a bit more & speak out against that one club that's caused it??? Think of the potential revenue lost for those clubs that would have qualified for Europe.....There could be a justifiable case for compensation!!!

Right now, it's good to turn over ANY team.....

21 arrests according to the report in todays National....

I kinda think that supporters get too hung up on "formations". Football matches are very fluid - there are also another 11 players trying to impose their formation & tactics....but supporters like to "pigeon-hole" things. From hearing PC speak, I get the impression that he sees the fluidity & it's more about how quickly the team adapts to changes & getting them drilled in what to do with those changes, rather than sticking with a set formation/position. I had said during last season, that PC appeared a lot more Technical in his though process, and that possibly, the players that were there just couldn't handle what he was trying to do (again, too stuck in set formations etc). Hopefully the players that he has brought in will understand a lot more their specific roles and what they must do during these changes in a game. From what I've heard, that seems to be happening over the last couple of games. From a supporter point of view, the tactics/formations are great to talk about, but ultimately, it's about whether it works on the pitch. If we have the quality of player available to change their roles quickly & effectively, then that is something that should be exploited - keep the opposition on their toes. As Rousseau says, the opposition don't know who to mark/track as their movement is unpredictable. Onwards & upwards....