Darthter

We're getting goals from more than Waggy. If Miller & Clark ensure we get more goals than the opposition, hibs can score as many as they want.

Hibs may have strengthened, but we haven't weakened. If we keep doing our thing & winning......whatever hibs do is irrelevant. Odds are that hibs will drop more points than we will - even with their strengthening.

Hibs can score all the goals they like....it means nothing if we keep winning!!!

McKay has put up with a helluva lot of bad tackles over the past few years..... When a player is fast/tricky, the easiest thing is for the opposing player to go in hard. this will more often than not stop the players run & get him off the ball. It may also effect his confidence etc. Oduwa never looked like he could handle the more physical side of things, where as McKay looks like he can.

If clubs are sniffing around Waggy....the club should take a leaf out of Ceptics book & slap a ridiculous price tag on him - £7m, £8m or £10m. If these clubs are serious about signing him, they will need to pay a premium. No way should we settle for a slight profit, when he is doing so well.

How would any guilty verdict effect the club??? Issues like the IPO etc.....I am assuming that the charges are against the specific individuals and will have no bearing on the club.

I don't care where any new player comes from, or how much they cost.....As long as they do the business on the park. Look at Ceptics last big signing - Sumonovic (??), was it not reported that he cost about £5m??? He's hardly been a massive revelation to the team (when he's actually played). We have wasted far too much cash over the years on over-rated & over-paid players. We MUST shop smarter and get a lot more "bang for our buck" - that means unearthing unknown players with potential. We develop them into better players then potentially sell them on for a handsome profit. That is the way it has to be - there simply isn't enough money in the Scottish game for it to be any different.

I actually think that the short-term deals make a lot of sense....providing there is some clause allowing it to be extended. We all know that there are very few "big name" moves in the Jan window. By offering initial 6-month deal, it gives MW time to give the players a right good going over. If they work out, a new longer term contract is offered & we're sorted. However, if they don't work out, their out the door at the end of the season, and not lurking around Auchinhowie claiming a wage for the next 2.5 years. It's working smart, and that's exactly what we need. We simply can't throw money at players, hoping that they do the job.

I think that is the market we will mostly be utilising. Bring in young talent/potential, develop then sell for profit. IMHO, this is by no means a bad thing.....I would rather bring in a youngster on a low wage who flops, than someone "experienced" on a much higher wage who also flops. By focusing on the younger talents, they can be moulded into the type of player MW wants.

Yeah...we have plenty of our own duds we can use!!!

Also, Rangers themselves tend to "work" on a saturday!!! Venue availability as well will play a big part.

I would argue that is exactly the type of player we DON'T need. This is a team game, not an individual one. I also feel that this has been a major problem in the past - we have put too much faith in individuals. I remember things going to pot a few years ago when Naismith got injured. Yes we require talented players, but they need to show that talent within the team structure....we don't need prima donnas who blow hot & cold from week-to-week.

I think Hibs challenge will drop away as the season progresses. Last season, Hearts managed to maintain their good performance for the whole season, but they didn't have anyone breathing down their neck. A close title fight is not something that Hibs are used to & I think the "pressure" will get to them. Between Hibs & us.....they are more likely to drop points.

Spare a thought for the dyslexic devil worshipper.....Sold his soul to Santa

to be honest....I'd rather not know who he is, unless he's pulling on a blue shirt on a Sat afternoon. To me this shows signs of a real move forward. I have to really think who is on the board now - a couple of years back, I could have rhymed the board off nae bother.

Looks very much like it....

so normal in fact that initially I had no idea who Stewart Robertson was....

The EBT years covered seasons 2001/02 to 2008/09 = 8 seasons. Over the course of those 8 seasons, I believe we won a total of 11 trophies (3 League, 4 Scot. Cup, 4 League Cup). That's 11 trophies out of a maximum of 24 (3 per season, 8 seasons). I believe Ceptic won a total of 10 trophies in the same period ( 5 League, 3 Scot Cup, 2 League Cup) According to many football fans out there, our use of EBT's gave us a massively unfair advantage within the domestic game - Yet the stats simply don't back this up. We all know that we operated in a 2 team league, supported by the fact that the majority of trophies over the period were won by either RFC or Ceptic. 3 trophies were won by other clubs. If we now look at the results from seasons 1993/94 to 2000/01 = 8 season preceding the EBT years, we see the following: RFC won a total of 12 trophies (6 League, 3 Scot Cup, 3 League Cup) to Ceptics 7 (2 league, 2 Scot cup, 3 League Cup). This, to me, shows a much stronger dominance (and no EBTs) Ultimately, my point is that we are hearing a lot about the trophies that we won, and how we had an unfair advantage in winning them......but we don't hear about all the trophies/matches etc that we lost - Obviously sporting advantage doesn't count when you get beaten.....

I actually believe that players like Zelalem & Oduwa bring focus back to individual players & away from The Team. At the start of the season, we were turning in fantastic TEAM performances, to the point it was difficult to single out any one player. Now, I see folk looking to individuals again & expecting them to be stand outs. I don't feel that Zelalem or Uduwa have really enhanced the team overall.

so why include the representations??? By doing so, it opens the subject up for external sources to continually beat us with.

Totally agree.....so why have St Geo flag & NI emblems so predominantly on a Rangers supporting flag??? Why not just have the club logo & the supporters club name, on a background which represents the club directly???

it is a flag representing a Paisley based supporters club - how does the St Geo flag or NI related images represent them or the club??? If it is to represent supporters in general, why only focus on Scottish, British, English & N. Irish supporters - what about any Welsh fans??? (If representing the Home nations...) IMHO, the flag has stronger support for certain ideologies, rather than football.

While the component parts appeal to you....certain parts don't apply to the location of the supports club. There are discussions about Scottish team/British flag, but I'll not go into that - both are not out of place. However, the St Georges flag (England) & the N. Ireland references have no connection with Paisley & I see no reason why a Paisley based club would feel the need to include them on a flag.

Also, has DK not publicly stated the he (& the others) will fund any shortfall...

Some would argue that the champions of each league, represent the best in Europe. On a realistic level, we all know that isn't the case, but a team finishing 4th in the EPL, is not a champion. A Champions league, should include EVERY top league champion as automatic entries.....if numbers are needed, then bring in 2nd place teams.