JohnMc

Here and in general. If you're not seeing any cheerleading then maybe you've become inured to it. I don't think there is any comparison between the current board and SDM. Whatever failures they have they own them. I don't have the same hatred for our board that some seem to harbour. Whatever their faults I'm more comfortable with them than whatever venture capitalists we've got coming next. I know, i'm an inveterate loser who is happy finishing second every season.

We know what's going to happen. If the team is competing for the league, winning games we're expected to win and giving Celtic a challenge then the majority of fans will be happy. If we're 10 points behind them by November, our new players haven't bedded in and we've just dropped points at home to Falkirk then the pitch forks will be out. It'll be the manager who gets it first, but eventually Thelwell will come under fire and finally the board if nothing changes. Sacking a manager every autumn keeps the fans from outright revolt. A decent percentage of fans couldn't care less who owns the club and who runs the club, if we're winning the league. Look at the SDM years if you think I'm exaggerating. If we're finishing the league as Champions then our new owners could strip the oak panelling from the Main Stand and sell it for fire wood and many in our support would turn up and help them shift it. We're being sold to total strangers, people with no connection or affection for our club, people who's motives we can only guess at, and I'd say the majority of our support are welcoming them with open arms and a decent number are actively cheerleading them. There's little sense of nervousness, no worry or concern from an awful lot of people. Those who do have concerns are told they're happy settling for second and have no ambition. Like most of us I saw our club teeter on the very edge of oblivion not that long ago. It amazes me how many of our support are happy to gamble it all again. It was interesting learning about Athletic Bilbao again recently. A club with an identity, with a purpose, who know exactly who they are.

Yeah, I am a bit doom laden recently, that's fair. Still surprised he wants to leave Everton just as things are finally looking up.

The lowest form of wit, what can I say. I know nothing of this person. Everton strike me as a basket case of a club massively underperforming and really badly run. Now, perhaps our new man performed heroic work under really difficult circumstances or he was a large part of the problem. I don't know which. Seems surprising he's leaving just as some stability and investment arrive.

It would be amazing if he could bring to Rangers the success Everton have enjoyed over the last two decades.

Yeah, it's poorly named, I agree.

No, you're getting confused. It refers to this https://www.unibet.co.uk/zeromission It's on our shirts this season.

It's an interesting question and one none of us can answer. For me the real question that's still not been answered is why do they want to buy us? We've had 3 types of owners in 150 or so years. 1. Supporters of the club for who it is an emotional decision - Every owner we've ever had except a handful 2. For the prestige it will reflect on them, to inflate their ego, raise their profile - Sir David Murray 3. An effort to make money - Whyte, Green, Ashley We can remove '1' from their motivation. I think '2' is a stretch too, they aren't Russian oligarchs or Middle Eastern despots with reputations needing sports washed. Which leaves 3. They already own an English side with lot's of potential and that's where the money is, the real money. There's not much money in Scottish football, so their are only 3 ways I can see for them to make money from us. Qualify for the Champion's League, sell players for profits or reduce overheads. I think a lot of fans are hoping for the first option; Champion's League. To do that we'll need to win our league and then get through qualifying, or win the Europa League next season. There's not enough money in the Europa or Conference Leagues to make our owners a serious profit, so it's Champion's League or nothing. What kind of investment would it take to turn our club into Champions and strengthen again to qualify for the Champion's League? Including transfer fees and salaries? Gerrard spent in the region of £30 million on transfer fees to win the league, plus a decent number of free transfer signings. That side didn't qualify for the Champion's League. You add signing on fees, agent fees and of course salaries to that number and you get a big number, just to win the league. Now we might get lucky, our current squad is better than the one Gerrard inherited, and maybe we'll appoint a manager who can do something special with them and a couple of new signings. Plus maybe the wheels come off over the city. That would be a gamble though, money has to be invested in our squad, it's not good enough to win the league as it stands. It's a question of how much. Selling players for a profit is the more attractive option I'd have thought. If you've no emotional attachment, if it's purely about business and winning stuff is a bonus, then developing and selling players is the easiest way to make money. Particularly if you already own the buyer. I mean developing players for Leeds, who if they can get promoted and stay up, not a given for sure, will have access to hundreds of millions just by being in that league is surely the easiest way to make money. Leeds in the EPL will turnover £200 million right away. We'd need to win the Champion's League to make that. So which one of those 2 horses are you going to back? If you wonder how this dual ownership might work have a read about Strasbourg. Currently doing ok in the French League, but very much being used as a support club for Chelsea. Strasbourg are used to buy players not yet ready for Chelsea, then 'sold' onto Chelsea if they develop. It's not about success for Strasbourg, it's about maintaining Chelsea as a cash cow for their American owners. Option 3, cut overheads. After all we only need to finish second to guarantee a crack at European football, fill the stadium and sell our replica shirts. We've already demonstrated that for the last however many years. What if that could be maintained on lower overheads? I mean we might even breakeven this season, much lower salary bill and a decent Europa run. Just keep that going, take a million out a year in management fees, just keep finishing second, how hard can that be? Anyway, my money is on option 2, I'm not discounting 3, and I'm loving the optimism many have for option 1.

I lived just north of Belfast for a few years during the 1990s. I was there during the 'end' of the troubles and for the Good Friday Agreement, indeed I voted in favour of it. There were 322 people killed during the 1990s alone, 854 during the 80s and over 2,000 in the 1970s. Everyone in Northern Ireland was affected, directly or indirectly. As a Glaswegian I arrogantly thought I had a grasp of the place before I went, I didn't. Like so much in life Northern Ireland is far more nuanced and complicated than some like to portray it. The Good Friday (or Belfast) Agreement was a compromise. It was very difficult for some people to accept it, I knew people who couldn't. I understood why too. For me it came down to stopping the killing. Those numbers of dead above, that would have continued. There are people today alive who otherwise wouldn't be. It's that simple. No one got what they wanted. Republicans had to admit they weren't getting a 'united Ireland' through violence, the only way that was going to happen was through democratic means and that might take generations, if ever. Unionists had to accept that a 'united Ireland' was a legitimate aim as long as it was achieved through the ballot box. Everyone had to accept murderers, sociopaths, gangsters and monsters were not only going to get away with their crimes, but be allowed into civil society, take up important roles of state and have their past whitewashed. Northern Ireland is a better place to live in today than it was when I moved there. It's certainly not perfect, far from it, but police officers can now tell their neighbours what they do for a living, teenagers can work anywhere in the city without the genuine fear they could be abducted and murdered on their way home. That's progress, believe it or not. The price of this is accepting people who were responsible for a lot of the violence, anger and murder now have important roles, make decisions, and walk like statesmen and women. It's a bitter, bitter pill, but surely better than the alternative. I think so, at least.

The fact this isn't actually a story aside if an elected MP on a charity bike ride requests to stop at Ibrox to help raise publicity for it are Rangers expected to say 'no', we don't like the party you're in? I'm fully aware of who and what Maskey is, stands for and excuses, and I doubt there's many votes in a visit to Ibrox for him. Parts of the Shankhill and the Village are in his constituency, so while he literally doesn't represent most of those people he is their MP too. To criticise the club and the board for for allowing them to visit is unfair. Raising £25k for MND research isn't to be ignored either.

I think I lean more to Real Sociedad as my Basque club, it's the blue colours plus Arteta. Athletic Club are fascinating, I admire their signing policy and love how they built their new(ish) ground. I'm uncomfortable with some of the politics their fans bring (as I am with Rangers...). They'll love the St Etienne bike in our boardroom, cycle racing is more popular than football there.

Yeah, peak Morelos was so good at that. I think that's why others scored so much more then too, he occupied at least one, often 2 defenders, was still able to either hold it up, lay it off or draw a foul allowing Kent, Aribo, Arfield, Roofe etc to use the space he'd created. Igamane has shown moments that he might be able to do this, but he's not there yet.

Thanks, that's really helpful. So our XG goes up if we create 'better' chances, not if we change centre forward? But a more clinical centre forward should score more goals? I don't have a problem accepting both those statements as true. So when someone says that Dessers misses a lot of chances it's true, it's just that they're not considered 'easy' chances by whoever compiles this data. My main criticism of Dessers earlier in the season was his work outside the box. I felt his hold-up play and link-up play was poor and so if he wasn't scoring he wasn't contributing anything. That side of his game has improved, his all round contribution is better now.

See the stat above of 12.52 for Dessers. Is that based on studying Dessers performances/chances alone, or does it take in other centre forwards as a comparison or what? What I'm trying to understand is if another striker was our centre forward would their XG be different or is 12.52 XG what's expected of a Rangers number 9 based on our play/chances created etc?

Surely you'd expect a professional keeper to keep their first goal out? Maybe not hold it but certainly palm it away. He might have seen it late and it was well struck but I thought he was at fault for that goal.