buster.

The preview is still to be posted and that will probably concentrate on us, so a wee bit about the opposition. As far as recent months go, Aberdeen have been way more effective playing away from home than at Pittodrie. Gaffer has predicted his customary 5-0 win for us on Saturday but I had a glance at their away record and they've conceded 5 goals in their last 10 away league fixtures, including two clean sheets at Ibrox and the Brendanbeuless (that doesn't include the other clean sheet in the Cup-tie at Ibrox). Wed 05/12/18 PRE Rangers 0 - 1 Aberdeen View events More info Sat 15/12/18 PRE St. Mirren 1 - 2 Aberdeen View events More info Sat 29/12/18 PRE Livingston 1 - 2 Aberdeen View events More info Wed 23/01/19 PRE Hamilton Acade… 0 - 3 Aberdeen View events More info Sat 02/02/19 PRE Hibernian 1 - 2 Aberdeen View events More info Sat 23/02/19 PRE St. Johnstone 0 - 2 Aberdeen View events More info Sat 09/03/19 PRE Celtic 0 - 0 Aberdeen More info Sat 30/03/19 PRE Hearts 2 - 1 Aberdeen View events More info Sat 06/04/19 PRE Dundee 0 - 2 Aberdeen View events More info Sat 20/04/19 PRE Kilmarnock 0 - 1 Aberdeen I watched part of their first half against Kilmarnock last week and it was brutal. Next to no football, lot's of fouls and the ball hardly hit the plastic pitch....but Aberdeen (with a numerical advantage) were more comfortable with that type of game and predictably, a set-piece provided them with a winner. What we'll get tomorrow is more of the same. Last-time at Ibrox they received EIGHT yellow cards as they took turns at kicking us. I think SG would be well advised to highlight this prior to the game and start to put some pressure on the referee (D.Robertson) to do his job. SG&Co know exactly what is coming so I hope he has something different in mind to what has been tried before. Obviously the absence of Morelos tends to force his hand to a degree but it's still a big challenge to get it right. Can only hope the doubts, Tav and Defoe make it because their absence would be significant. They'll probably be missing a couple of important players (Shinnie and McGinn), which would help. The good results in the last couple of weeks need to be built upon with a solid home run against Aberdeen, Hibs and Celtic. So far this season we've played those three teams 12 times and won only 2 matches. We now have an opportunity to improve those numbers with three victories and help cement the recent good vibe that the new approach has brought.

That's actually a good illustration of what a section of the reaction was like, post-Whyte. Anyone can make mistakes but it's better to try and learn from them than wallowing in ignorance, then going onto to repeat the mistake.

Have never seen such long-odds for a team to win an EPL game as Huddersfield are tonight at Liverpool #40/1

Whilst the result may not mean a great deal in the wider scheme of things, it still feels important to me. Never has our future been so invested in our youth development.

This is the Rangers forum equivalent to a quietish pensioners club Any whippersnappers looking for the modern fastlife would be better going to the big city where there is much traffic and all sorts goes on !! ....

Some people desperately want to be right even when they are wrong One of the reasons why so many fell for Green so soon after they had been duped by Whyte was the refusal to take on board any lessons in the short window between them. Very few even wanted to discuss the subject when given circumstances, it was exactly the time they should have at least listened. Some would defend their ignorance by going on a verbal offensive. Well done for getting the A of D line in very apt ! I previously mentioned the real world, IMO I think the club have to operate commercially in that real world. That includes indirectly using one of the two most widely read daily Scottish newspapers when it can for what is effectively a free advert in what is the most important sale of the commercial year. The proverbial no-brainer. Regards the media, it's BBC Scotland where the the club have major issues with, not the DR. There may well arise problems within relationships with any media outlet but they can't be controlled by the club. I don't think it a good idea to confront and ban everything that moves as some would have us do. What that would do is further marginalise us at a complicated and difficult time. The more we are marginalised, the easier it becomes for others to kick us and commercially get way with it. Some say that in-house media at the club should be enough and we can ignore MSM outlets, not a good idea, IMO. However, the developing scene in fans podcasts give this angle a slightly different look and one that is developing. It's down to the individual fans out there as to what media they use (within their personal world view) However, the real world still points to a lot of our fans consuming the Daily Record and commercial/PR decisions have to be made on the back of that. The irony is that whilst Real World situations are sometimes built on a fabric of lies and such, various little known individuals/groups may actually be more accurate... ie. Real World situations are often built on varying degrees of bullshit but it's still Real World (eg. a lot of what underpins geopolitics).

Listened to the podcast of Monday night Sportsound and PQ solved the problem of a convincing Rangers win at Tynecastle by simply not mentioning it. They concentrated on the managers involved in the game with no football, Kilmarnock v Aberdeen and the match with no goals, Hibs v Celtic. When talking about Lennon, Michael Stewart was defending him saying that he did well to get the last minute win at Tynecastle because it is a difficult venue for away teams. Unfortunately, he didn't get the chance to ring our praises for such a good win at such a difficult venue

Respectfully don't think he did. It reads as a filler article/free advert for Season Ticket's. My guess is that someone at the club suggested it to PM/DR or perhapssimply DR/KJ to PM. I very much doubt PM started the ball rolling. Too many didn't want to listen to PM when he was pointing towards the spivs and now some seem to have a problem with a favourable article towards the club. Christ knows what they'll think of him if he does something wrong.

Said a while ago that we might be interested but the fee will be too rich for us, or at least won't represent value. I doubt he'll go 5M but I reckon they'll get in the region of 2.75 plus add-ons from an English Championship team.

Interesting list ! Thanks Not enough of those players went on to contribute in a significant way to our first team and we can only hope that in the future, the % increases. Two of few who would have a career that saw seven/eight figure transfer deals (McCormack and Adam) but the millions didn't go to Rangers.

Man Utd may yet sneak a CL spot the way this is going. Slightly behind but all the other teams involved will be playing European semi-finals soon.

IIRC it was more The Sun that was Irvine's go to rag but they also had Rangers to use as a conduit. Irvine/Green, whilst in and out of Rangers officially declared the Record as an enemy of the club. That went down well with too many of a baying support who were still following the pied piper. In the real world, newspapers don't tend to take sides for noble reasons, it's mainly about commercial motives. What I was highlighting was relationships form that include degrees of trust and that was clearly the case with Paul Murray and someone at the DR. For the bigger stories that indirectly came from 'good guys' they tended to be reasonably accurate and yesterdays article seems to have little in the way to get bothered about... (Forlan is the man who knows much more about this). In the real world, the DR is still read by many Rangers fans and effectively a free advert is a no-brainer. Your idea of a boycott by our players, officials, Directors or even ex-directors would be counter-productive. The boycott that hurts and is within the power of all, is simply not consume it. In the real world, the independent press won't always give you favourable coverage and sensationalist/clickbait publications taking things that bit further. Nor is it a particularly good idea for everyone to to always get their news about the club from the club.

double

Back in the spiv era, the DR effectively served as the good guys conduit to get information out there and during this time relationships formed and as tends to be the way, endure to varying degrees. Yes, there has been negative coverage (just as there has been many negative aspects to our clubs affairs) but ignoring the decent coverage or not even wanting it when it serves a positive purpose isn't a good or realistic way forward.

I think Woodward's 5 year plan went somewhat astray. If they bin him he might still be able to get a job as an advisor to the Tory cabinet on Brexit.

Like em or not, the press remain a significant conduit and need to be used for positive communication where possible. This article is effectively a free advert that hits the mark.

Scottish fitbaw is generally a low quality environment that is best at hating itself into insignificance and worse. The SFA made a bad appointment that had car crash written all over it. To compound it, their own past incompetence had forced them into a money-making end of season trip to Central and South America that no-one (including many of the players) was interested in. It put Eck on the general defensive from the off and squad harmony was at least partly torpeded before a competitive game. In terms of complete f**k-up, they couldn't have done it better had it been their actual aim. What it did do was give the unashamed Rangers haters like Cosgrove and Stewart something to opportunistically get their teeth into but IMO the biggest culprits in all of this are the SFA.

When McLeish was being mentioned in connection with the Rangers job last year, my own thoughts about this were please ABR (Anyone But Rangers). I didn't think he was up to it and when he did some punditry work at that time, he visibly didn't come accross as the same Eck as before. In other words, whilst such factions may well exist, I could well understand objections to him getting the job that had nothing to do with factions, more than someone seeing him the man for the job.

Makes sense that he is rated higher than Middleton, otherwise why sign him !?

They have a forward (Sanchez) who is appparently paid more than 2Million sterling a month and has scored one league goal this season in nearly 800 minutes. Sat on the bench for the whole 90 minutes yesterday. They signed Fred for over 50 Million sterling and he plays like Sol Bamba. Then there is Pogba...........

The unwritten and unofficial law of football sayeth that after a really bad result, a big club usually bounce backeth in the next game. OGS should at least drop those he thinks are not interested and bring in players that at least will try their best, eg. Pogba should be out of the squad. Still think City are too good and have too much in play to drop anything at Old Trafford, 1-3.

Hastie's physique gives him as a 20 year old, a head start and the potential for a larger sell-on value (logic: good big yin is worth more than a good wee yin) in for example, England. Getting lads like this is the way to go and now it's about improving everything about his game and more. I have high hopes for this lad. Not because of any particular insight, just something in my water !

What I was calling a force-fit was your comparison with the video/tweet you posted. The reason I asked you for a definition of the term "follower" as used in your post about tweet/comparison was to further understand argument regards responsibility. I'd agree with you that the politicians and pressure groups have the O.O. where they want them and are themselves force-fitting what seems as unreasonable criteria regards the responsibility for spectators (if that is what they are). That said, if a march or whatever event attracts unsavoury elements/criminal behaviour, then the authorities do have a duty to act/look to prevent repeat incidents. This in turn has to be balanced with civil rights. Is it reasonable to force through so much change for one spectator/follower spitting ? With the caveat of not knowing every detail about the episode, I'd say, probably no and that it follows a predictable pattern of a certain degree of abuse of power by politicians, together with one-sided pressure groups. As I mentioned previously, the best way to play it has already been put forward by a O.O. statement,..it was a suggestion, an offer to come together and stand against bigotry whilst on the march. It was an olive branch of sorts that didn't seem to be talked about or considered. IMO. this line should have been persevered with. A genuine attempt to go further towards a lasting solution that would make anyone refusing it look unreasonable. Whoever had that idea should be listened to more because I think a more confrontational approach will end up having a negative outcome for the O.O.

Sorry ! It's ok where I am so I imagine it's something to do with copyright and won't be available until a certain time.

Shoe-in prediction for coverage of our game Michael Stewart will say we weren't that good or that it was difficult to gauge level given how bad Hearts were and will proceed to spend his time laying into Craig Levein, saying he needs to go unless they win the Cup. #Bitter