JohnMc

These threads are fun, but they're always skewed by age. Some of the guys most of us never saw play must have been spectacular. Alex Smith played 406 times for Rangers, retiring in 1915, Sandy Archibald and Dave Meiklejohn both played well over 500 games at a time when medical treatment was considerably poorer than it is for professionals today. Guys like Alan Morton, who features in what I think is the most iconic photograph of any Rangers player, amassed 31 caps for Scotland in a period when we only played 3 matches a season. What a player he must have been. During the 1960s we had a side that made two European finals, we could genuinely say we had world class players. Baxter most people know about, but players like Willie Henderson, Ralph Brand and Bobby Shearer are largely overlooked these days. Even players who don't only appear in black and white, like Jardine, Derek Johnstone, the always underrated Willie Johnston, a man who scored 2 goals in a European final and was genuinely a player who would get you up off your seat when he got the ball, and Tommy McLean another player who we forget as a player only remember the crabit, negative manager now. Plus how can any Rangers select not feature John Greig? 755 appearances, captain of club and country, treble winner, European winner, a player who stayed with us for his entire career when players of his ability were in huge demand in England. Anyway, I realise it's about favourite players, not the best ones. Allan McGregor, that save in Germany, countless others too Hugh Burns, I loved Shug, at a time when we didn't have a lot to love... John McLelland, came to visit my BB when I was about 12 simply because someone asked him too, we all got our picture taken with him and Gregor Stevens and he donated a Northern Ireland strip he wore at the World Cup to raise funds. A proper Rangers captain. Gregor Stevens, see above. Ian Durant, pre injury simply the most exciting player I'd ever seen Rangers produce. That goal against Celtic from Copper's run and flick, the big hair when he first broke into the side, the performances in successive Skol Cup Finals, possibly my favourite ever Rangers player. Graeme Roberts, that game, the conducting, the sheer mentalness of it all. Souness, my formative years watching Rangers weren't littered with success, Souness arrived and suddenly stuff my Dad and older guys said made sense. What a player he was too. Laudrup, quite simply the finest footballer I've had the pleasure of watching in the flesh. Gattuso, I loved his industry, his work rate, his perpetual anger and aggression, he was the most Scottish Italian ever. McCoist, this shouldn't need explained. Derek Parlane, he left the club when I was 10, DJ was a much bigger name, but Parlane looked cooler, hair longer than Rangers players were normally allowed, even as child you knew he was a cool. Scored a ton of goals too which meant his name reverberated around my primary school playground. I doubt I ever saw him play in the flesh, yet somehow he epitomised my formative years getting into football. We'll do our most disliked 11 in another thread I hope...

Any player who signs for Rangers needs to understand that the minimum expected is winning the league. Obviously we won't always achieve it, but that's what the support expect. We're the best supported, most successful club in the country, I don't believe we have a divine right to win it, but we do have the resources to win it and that should always be our expectation at the start of the season. Now, we live in difficult times. The last 10 years or so have seen the balance of power swing east, they've currently got more money, better resources, more power and, frankly, a better squad. But, as I said above they've got a managerial change, and whoever is in charge next August is starting afresh. Some of their better players will take to the new manager and continue to play well, but some won't. I tend to agree with you about trying the same thing over and over, however I don't think we are. I fully expect us to go into the new season with Gerrard still in charge. He'll have had a full season managing us at SPFL level, something no Rangers manager has had since 2007. There will be a stability and continuance about the side for the first time in a decade. Now is exactly the time to add seasoned quality over potential in my opinion.

I think next season is our real opportunity to win the league. Realistically they've got more money and a better squad to start with, however they either go into next season with Lennon in charge or with a brand new manager, either way that will create some upset in their dressing room. Their players were signed by a different manager, one who largely got the best out of them. Their next manager might not. Either way there's a period of flux, settling in, and getting used to new rules, tactics and so on. When Gerrard joined Rangers really the only way was up, we were playing so poorly last season that as long as he showed progress he was going to get the backing of the support. It won't be like that across the city next season. They're a treble winning squad and they'll win at least the double this season, so any stumble or drop in that standard will bring criticism from the support, a drop in attendances and unrest. That's our chance. We've a season under our belts, an okay squad that needs strengthened, if we can get that right we can win the league next season. Their support will turn on their manager and their board if they stumble at all, for all their jubilation at the weekend I know a few who are far from happy with Lennon already. I'm not normally a 'short-termist', but this summer I am. If we can win the league we stop their Champion's League money and then they do have a problem, a serious problem. The playing field is level then.

It might be a controversial opinion but I think we need to be signing players who can improve our first team and command a starting place from day one. I understand the mid to long term logic of signing a Greg Docherty or a Hastie, but we need to be winning the league next season, is Hastie ready to help us do that? I haven't seen enough of him to know, but this window I'd be happier if we were signing experienced professionals rather than promising young players.

Wasn't Dirt Road only published last year? I read How Late It Was, How Late and never felt the need to read any of his books again, perhaps that's unfair of me.

I've got to be honest I wasn't looking forward to the pod last night, it was the last thing I felt like doing. But it was cathartic and the time flew in and as Pete says Stevie Clinton helped lighten the tone.

Gary Mackay-Steven??! You've got to be at the wind-up dB.

I agree Stensaas wasn't as good a player although I quite liked Vidmar. Maybe we'll do a podcast on that season and why we fell just short. For me the issues around Gascoigne, Laurdrup signing a pre-contract with Chelsea, key players like McCoist and McCall knowing they were leaving as well as John Brown retiring that summer were much bigger factors. The biggest issue was Smith basically being sacked half way through, no way that didn't affect him and the team. I also think losing Amo to injury for most of the season was key, for all his faults he'd have made a difference to our defence that season, Gough returned and did a job but he wasn't the same player. Of course if Negri had just kept scoring goals they could have played me at left back and won the league!

I think that's exactly why we signed Robertson. That's not to say he wasn't a decent player, he was fine, I just think he benefited from playing in an exceptional side. I certainly don't think selling him played any major part in us not winning the league.

Got to disagree with most of the posts. Robertson was an SPL quality full back who had the good fortune to have a magician playing in front of him for most of his time with us. I can't understand how anyone can favourably compare him to Numan, Numan was a much higher calibre player in my opinion. I liked Robertson, but he benefited from the '3 foreigner' rule.

For our continued survival it makes sense we're able to develop our own top class players. We can't buy top class ones anymore, so we'll need to create our own. Sure, they won't stay for long if they're genuinely good, but that's also a financial necessity these days. This is about more than someone's like or dislike for the Scottish national side. Rangers will always be a real pull for young Scottish players, so the better they are the better we'll be. Lifting the quality of player is in our short and long term interest.

There's no link to the original story in the opening post for me so I'm guessing the gist of it from the replies. Aside from any hyperbole or sensational nonsense he's spouted I actually do think that Rangers and Celtic, as well as the other leading sides in the league are largely to blame for the quality of player Scotland produces. We've been through this before on Gersnet over the years, but for some reason we're able to field highly competitive sides with some real standout individual players at youth level, yet for some reason these same players don't develop in the same way as they get older. We used to blame a 'booze and diet' culture but that's not it, sure some might but most young players are surprisingly focussed and aware of things like that. The issue is how we play football in this country and how young players are developed. We need to take our share of the blame for that. I remember a few seasons back Hamilton brought through MacArthur and McCarthy, both went onto to have international careers and play at the highest level in England. Hamilton were then relegated. This, for me, is part of the problem, any side that focuses on youth development will be punished in our current league. Our league is set up to reward managers who bring in journeymen from the English lower leagues who can fight, scrap and run all match, that keeps you in the league and keeps the manager in a job. In the end Rangers and especially Celtic are the most powerful and influential clubs in the country, until we demand changes this decline will continue. While following Scotland lost its appeal a long time ago, I still don't want to see us horsed by countries with fewer resources and little footballing culture. No disrespect to Kazakstan but we should be beating them. In the end Scotland hasn't produced a player of genuinely international ability in a long, long time, that should concern all of us.

Great show, well worth a listen, just the right amount of despair, frustration and realism with a little sprinkle of hope.

I've not heard much of them recently so it might not have been mentioned but where does Cosgrove sit with the up coming "The Rise and Fall of Anti-Catholicism in Scotland" by Professor Tom Devine? From the previews and interviews I've read it seems the eminent Professor is playing down 'sectarianism' and saying it's really not much of an issue anymore. Indeed the quote I read he said the issues at football aren't sectarianism but simply hooliganism. Seeing as he's widely recognised as the leading historian in the country just now he might even know what he's talking about. I can't imagine that's going to sit well with some.

Ah, now c'mon, Patrick Hamilton was a Glaswegian, when he went to the East coast you lot martyred him. Maybe he asked for vinegar on his chips? Now Gonzo, you know the one thing that unites east and west coast Scotland was the referendum, we all voted to remain in the EU, remember? ?

It must give you all heart to know that despite your funny voices and, I assume, many genetic problems, you can come west and not only survive but indeed thrive among normal people. I feel particularly proud this Friday afternoon.

Glasgow has always welcomed refugees into our bountiful arms, just don't speak...

"Bairns"? I demand all supporters go through a Govan elocution lesson! You'll be slipping 'ken' into articles soon if we don't intervene Frankie, this is for your own good... Great stuff, eastern patois apart, enjoyed it.

Finally got round to listening, good stuff guys and gal. Sorry to hear about Ross, hope everything is okay there.

This is on the BBC website today. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-47459485 "The safety of fans at Scottish football stadiums is to be highlighted as a key concern in a review on match policing, BBC Scotland has learned. The report, due to be published on Wednesday, says inconsistencies in stadium checks by local authorities could leave fans at risk." The authors and their chosen 'fans' contributor aside the pertinent point is alleged inconsistency from local authorities over stadium security. It's sort of relevant to the thread I thought.

Rudden's doing well in a poor Falkirk side it seems, that's a great goals to games return. All the academy players will benefit from playing first team football but is their much to be learned playing at Lowland League level? I really hoped Hardie would push on and become a first team regular at Livingston, but it doesn't seem to be happening. Shame.

They're hardly strawmen. The biggest problem "safe standing" has is the people who'll use it and the people charged with managing it. How's that a strawman? There are simply too many previous examples of the people in charge of football supporters not doing their jobs properly. If you've not experienced being treated like an animal by stewards, police or other clubs then you've been very fortunate.

It wasn't supposed to happen in terraces either, but it did. I understand that the design is different and the 'barrier' for every row is meant to reduce the possibility of surges, usually the most dangerous aspect of terraces, but my concern remains not so much with the design but with the humans who'll be managing and using it. As Pete says I think it's inevitable at some match somewhere more people than are meant to will get access. It's simply harder to police and to manage than seating is.

As I said above it's all safe until you cram too many people into it or you don't maintain it correctly. My experiences have led me to mistrust organisations charged with keeping football supporters safe.

Are you confusing engaging with agreeing?