Anchorman

Check out the big man in this clip - his bottle went (so would mine I think). It's a good giggle. However filmed it kept their nerve though! (If the link doesnt work search for 'Bolt for the blues on Youtube')

If you mean signings then yes I agree. Tactically I would slightly disagree. I think quite often a defence can be continually exposed because a team plays in a lazy manner i.e not defending from the front, or not being fit enough or willing enough to work as a unit (like last year) and to allow a higher back line. The arguement against that tactic is the ball over the top to expose a slow back line. The arguement for it is that if you are fit enough to close the playmakers down who will pick out accurate passes over the top then you mitigate the risk. That is why any decent manager will tell his back line "if anyone in the middle of the park is getting too much time on the ball dont try to play the offside trap as he will pick his pass". This time around Ally seems to believe his team is fit enough to defend from the front with a high line and I dont think it's in any small part to the new fitness coach Jim Henry.

I have to say that after last season I was a bit nervous about any pre-season tour we might take on. I feared we would face a drubbing or two outside of Scotland. I'm not overly concerned about the lack of goals just yet as confidence comes from front to back I think i.e. if your back line don't leak easy goals the rest takes care of itself more often than not. It's just about the right partnership and also frontmen like wee Clark getting a couple of goals to get the confidence going. On the potential downside is that if we dont keep Mohsni then we are pretty much back to square one in my eyes as he has been the main stay throughout the pre-season games (I know he didn't feature tonight until later, but we lost the goal tonight when he wasn't on). Overall I'm in a better place (hope wise) than I was a couple of months ago.

Call me a skeptic or pessimist but I think we are being decidedly unclever as far as Mohsni is concerned. Either we cant meet his terms or he is waiting for the best bidder (hence him applying himself to he degree he has - its no longer just to impress us). Get it done or get him out - full stop!! Are we going to piss around with a central back pairing and then lose the main one? All these shut-outs and we are really un-decided? - Bollocks! Ally then goes into the season with someone else and "our new central defender didn't have a close season with us that is why we're struggling at the back".

They could just put 'Adams' up in front of it when they are here.

Is it just me? Do we really need 'Family Stand' emblazoned in such a prime position? Is anybody over the other side really going to look over and say "Oh fuck kids we are in the wrong stand". C'mon Rangers lets get it looking classy with a legend's name up there or at least something a bit imaginative. Any thoughts?

Right I'm out of here before this all starts again

Don't do that - I thought you meant Dave (after shares movement today), but good read all the same.

And what an absolute gent. My brother was at a dinner with him recently and told me he was one of these real down to earth blokes, and also very interesting. He said he could have listened to him forever. He was sacked when we were at the top of the league by 2 points if I'm correct. True story - I remember as a wee kid my dad draw up outside the main door at Ibrox just after we had been beaten 3-1 by a very good Gornik Zabre side (Polish). I asked my dad what we were waiting on and he said "we are giving a lift home to Brian Heron (the Rangers left back that night. Can you imagine a player getting a lift home now?)". I was so excited, but then Brain came out close to tears and said "I'm finished I think" (he had been torn apart by Labanski or Lato I think) "but I think poor Davie is too". Somebody knew that night for some reason and of course it ended up true. Should have been remembered more by the Club I believe - not many managers got sacked in those days when top of their league. RIP Davie.

Stewarty, where was this taken from?

Two of the main things that come out of playing a very high pressing game are: Positive - you don't need pace in your front line so much if you are winning the back back in high areas of the park frequently Negative (possible for us) - your whole back line need to have genuine pace as the most favoured tactic for teams facing a high line are balls over the top into the space behind. Have we got that? How pacy is the Tunisian guy?

Ah, who thought it was another 'faith' thread to drive people insane? My understanding from reading Nicky Law etc is that Ally has been true to his word so far (even in the searing heat today) in that he wants to play a high line at all times with this players fit enough (the Jim Henry affect) to keep up the pressing game for 90 mins. So far it appears to be working. If we draw one of the 'bigger' sides in a cup is he likely to be brave enough to stick with it? Do we have the players to? Will it be our salvation and see a return to the mighty Rangers? Maybe our tactics against Sheff Wed will give us a clue. Personally I would love us to stick with it.

Anyone know what size of support we took today and overall crowd?

Utter rubbish!

Now I remember why I stopped going to church

If you even bothered to read posts 4, 8 and 13 you will see that I articulated by thoughts and views as best I could. I also followed with the statement that I agreed that this was a football forum and that I personally would not posting any more on the 'faith' side. Calscot decided on posts 14 and 15 to be a smart arsed tosser and ridicule those with a personal belief (despite the fact that I showed Einstein was also one such person) with comments about the 'Force' and 'Jedi'. And you think I owe him an explanation?. Despite me taking time to put some thought behind my posts 4. 8 and 13, what followed was the usual lazy, crass one liners from Gunslinger, Calscot etc (who chose not to even attempt to deal with any of my comments e.g. about Luther etc not belonging to any church for long periods). "You don't go to church you are not a Protestant", If you are religious, then you must surely believe in........(despite being told that I have a personal 'faith', not dogmatic religion, and like many of my forefathers I still protest against the 'very questionable and often downright ugly' teachings of the Catholic church having any place of power in my land)". No attempt to answer any of my previous points. Yet I'm being told I should answer to them. Anyway Barca72 responded sublimely on my behalf, and in a far more articulate way than I could.

You are not alone mate, not by a long shot, but that little band over there on that moral high ground will preach to you that this is forbidden.

What a load of complete and utter claptrap

Absolutely spot on!

Someone just sold me a whistle down the market which I couldn't resist buying. It said above the stall 'Attract Fanny - The Easy Way - Just one blow of this magic whistle' I took it home at 10:45 and blew as hard as I could, and sat back and waited ...You'll never guess what happened next!!!

Like Einstein did? People with an inner private faith these days do not believe in a male type figure in the sky with a long beard, who is out to punish you for sins. Most modern day private 'faith' is not dogmatic. It is in a belief that the billions upon billions of 'coincidences' that hold our solar systems from top to bottom in perfect symmetry didn't happen by accident. They don't really care what form this Energy\God takes. Einstein himself had a little model version of the main planets\moons in one of his offices, all weighted to revolve around each other in perfect time to replicate a tiny piece of our solar system. One of his peers came into his office and was completely blown away by the little piece of brilliance. He said to Einstein "whoever made this is a genius". Einstein said "Really? You think? Then think about a version billions of times the size of this and tell me now that there was no genius behind it". I always find the cheap 'hocus pocus man in the sky' a bit insulting to those who have the faith that Einstein alluded to. It is also the same ''hocus pocus'' attitude that humans have had for centuries because of the limitations of the tiny human mind. If we cant touch it or see it - "Ach hocus pocus" - that is until scientists discover it, and then...we move on the next 'hocus pocus' to ridicule. As people have rightly pointed out this is a football forum, so this is my last post on 'faith' on this thread. But it would be nice if people were a bit more open minded prior to 'hocus pocus' type comments.

GS - another figure plucked out of your earhole. Don't bother reading the posts. Just get yourself another mark on the post count. Tell me where you have ever seen a church with the word Protestant in its name (read my last post as I cant be arsed posting it again). After Luther pinned his 50 odd anti-Rome comments against the door or wall (whatever it was) and he spent many years between churches, was he a non-Protestant in those periods? I had no idea that there was a timeline put on being a protestant against Rome unless you had a church to call your own. When was this cut off point? "Luther, you can continue to protest against Rome, but you and your future generations have until 22nd November 1725 to align yourself to a non-Catholic church, and by the way it's 13:00 as its half day shutting. If you don't join one of the other churches you cant 'protest' against Rome any more. You can be 'agnostic' or 'atheist', baptist, C of E, C of S, even Rangers Chat forum member. But not Protestant! We don't want that word around. It sounds too harsh. Oh and by the way if you decide you don't like the church you are in and you want to join another one we will let you be Protestant between memberships for 2 weeks, unless you are ill, on holiday, have a doctors line, and then you can have 6 weeks between churches. But one day more and you cant call yourself the P word - get it?"

Wow - but what does it actually mean other than a throw away comment based on zilch? Define Protestantism.

You have no more right to that statement than the man has to his post as you have no evidence to back the statement up. If you don't agree with his post just let it go as it's not offensive. I still personally 'protest' against the teachings of the Catholic church and the hideousness of the Vatican etc (protestant?), which I think are downright dangerous. I have a personal faith but I'm not a practicing Baptist, Anglican, Presbyterian etc as I think most of the churches these days are full of hypocrites, and they are more like cliquish golf clubs than practitioners of the word of Jesus. I've been around a while but I haven't seen any churches with Protestant in their name so I'm not sure what the definition of a practicing Protestant is (other than still protesting against Rome).

Lay off the sherbert dips at this time of night