buster.

McInnes in the Ibrox dug-out and 3 points to Rangers ! What's not to like ?

It's the M.O. of a lot of newspapers+ to court controversy for their own commercial benefit. That means more often than not, centering attention on issues that concern us or them. Thereafter, people can judge if there is a consistency of a one-sided opinion/selection of issues to feature. eg. IMO, the DR and BBC Scotland go out of their way to show Rangers and certain individuals at the club in a bad light. ------------------------- What has happened in the last few years is that many of the 'diddy clubs' fans have become more anti-Rangers, opposed to previously view both big clubs with fairly equal disdain. This means that when newspapers think about (potential) customers that if they were to pick a side for commercial reasons, it wouldn't be us.

The McCrorie v Pena sprint was a one-sided contest ..... but Pena eventually arrived at the right time, so as to be able to recycle the ball and pass it to a blue shirt. That one incident illustrated that Pena will do a job IF others bust a gut. If a new manager has good man-management skills and can communicate with the Mexican and persuade Carlos to buy into a project, become fitter and want to be involved (Derek: I'm available for hire as translator/ very reasonable rates ) ,....then we have a Mexican Internationalist on our hands. Thereafter, the problem may switch to him having to take long flights to play for Mexico on International breaks..... ....mibbes thats a tad optimistic for a cycnical bastard like me.

When DK talked about "available candidates" he was referring to managers not currently in a job. He said that when initially looking at such a list, it was only when Mark Allen had discounted so many names because of them not matching the current criteria required that he saw it to be a list that wasn't as strong as he had at first envisaged it would be. ie. He wasn't referring to McInnes but somebody like McLeish can consider himself not to meet 'the criteria'. ---------------------------- Listen carefully to the interview (relevant section starts at 4 minutes 50 seconds) https://rangers.co.uk/news/rangers-tv/video-chairman-interview-4/

If the rest of the team work as hard as they did last night then you can afford to have Pena in the side and hope for him to do something in and around the box. If they don't, you can't. Could do with the team playing well and him getting games. The more match-fit he is, the less we should need 'to carry' him.

edit...................

A pointless fact from the League 2016/17 If you take Warburton's Home record and Pedros Away record, we only lost one league match.

When we score goals, we aren't shy and often get a few. In the league, we've scored 3 or more........ in 7 out of 15 matches (for celtic, it's 5 out of 14). Last season it was 1 out of the first 15 league games. Our problem has been 3 zeros and twice scoring 1 goal......In all five matches dropping points. Problem is inconsistency Other thing is a lack of clean sheets (4).....celtic (8)

IIRC Kevin Kyle said on radio shortbread that negotiations were literaly Rangers coming in with an offer way over what he was prepared to accept. # Bainesque

You'd have to have a very long memory as to when we last got value for money for the clubs players collective salaries/contracts. It's usually more a matter of mitigating the damage. ---------- That's why given circumstances and projections, a different approach isn't only to be talked about (as far as we usually get), but needs to be implemented.

Is that John Redwood sitting beside the winner of the female Andy Cameron lookalike contest ?

I know as much as the next man, nowt....but McInnes would be my preference from the viable options that I can see. But without knowing who is on the short-list, it's a moot point.

http://willievass.photoshelter.com/gallery-image/291117-Rangers-v-Aberdeen/G0000rCIQzxzBUPc/I0000WMvihMYVsjI/C0000fWuyiqqlKHM

One thing is the individual that is chosen to be our next manager. Another is managing the expectation levels in a realistic way that are is relative to projected timescales and levels of financial support. If the latter is allowed to mushroom into unrealistic territory, then we'll get plenty more practice at appointing managers.

We have to consider where we currently are as a club and to put it bluntly, it's that of a sometimes decent, sometimes awful, inconsistent diddy team. McInnes has been managing a team that has over a number of years, managed to achieve a relatively excellent level of consistency.

Don't agree at all. Since serious speculation started linking McInnes to Rangers, the sheep have struggled for results and have put in two of their worst performances in the DM time there. The win against Kilmarnock came on the back of McInnes and Milne coming out with 'holding statements' but within 2 or 3 days, McInnes was odd's-on, back at the top of the betting. If nothing else, I think the ongoing situation has actually worked in our favour wrt sheep dropping points. ------------ The 'body of evidence' regards McInnes by far outweighs a couple of results that may well be partly explained by current speculation.

His defence means that it was hardly likely he would go into detail re. the TOP question. A better one may have centered on if the board were prepared for any potential implications for club. Wrt to the current manager search, it was always going to be a general answer without much detail. Fans wanting names or exactly when an annoucement would be made were always onto plumbs. Answers wrt the Pedro Caxinha appt. and time at the club were unsatisfactory, as nearly everything that came with it were. Key point being....have they learnt their lessons and will that be reflected in the upcoming appointment, it's process and how it dovetails into a longerterm plan (Mark Allen seemed to touch upon).

What would Mr.Jackson say the Daily Record does with the Rangers support ?

IIRC, the accounts contained a line about projections being based on qualifying for at least the EL group stages in 3 of the next 5 years. If bookies were to offer a price on that happening, I'd think you'd get somewhere between 5/1 to 10/1. The importance on getting the next managerial appointment and subsequent recruitment right is immense.

I agree regards a place on the board. It surely corresponds with the growing shareholding C1872 has. Thinking out loud and prepared for being told I'm being stupid but if C1872 got a seat on the board, would that in some ways make it more difficult to be independent from the Rangers board ?

I'd place more importance on why our players being so fired up and motivated, rather than formation. The prospect of not having Morelos available would have meant some forced attention to how to set-up in advance.

On the face of it, the second largest shareholder group would have every right to request a seat at the boardroom table and get one. But as you point towards, it would mean looking for a way to make it work for all parties, not least the challenge and thickness of skin for the individual selected. Making it work and the perception of such may be two different things. There already seems to be a divide of sorts, where many of those sceptical of due impartiality between Rangers and C1872 won't be happy without a blow by blow account of what is going on upstairs. It would be sad if we couldn't make it work because a seat at the table is what IMO corresponds to a large shareholding and what is needed.

Excellent performance ! Formation worked but it was more down to the determined attitude and workrate. (Note that in 14 matches, celtic have now dropped as many points as they did in the whole 38 games of last season)

Three at the back No Morelos Miller up front Pena starts