JohnMc

You'd love to be a fly on the wall at one of our board meetings. 'Okay, what are we looking for in the person next to manage Scotland's largest and most successful club?', 'well Dave we need someone with no previous managerial experience, someone who has never played in the league we compete in, someone who has never coached in our league, someone with no connection either professionally or emotionally to our club, someone with links to organised crime and someone who'll command a significant salary from day one'. 

'Sounds good, right pass the criteria onto that director of football fellow I've the red eye to Cape Town to catch.'

If it's someone already out of work surely they'd just start now? And if for some reason they didn't want too surely their name would have been leaked to quell our growing unrest? 

So it's either someone already in employment elsewhere or someone so underwhelming we'll bin our season ticket renewals. Or both. 

Dornan neatly encapsulates almost everything that's wrong with politics in this city. He's got a 10,000 vote majority so I've little expectation he'll be voted out anytime soon. The good people of Glasgow Cathcart need to have a long, hard look at themselves, they voted in Mike 'Firestarter' Watson before. 

3 hours ago, trublusince1982 said:

 

 

 yes as a support we are definitely xenophobic. Any changes and we start crying for the British way or the so called rangers way.

 

We can't build anything because to do so would take time. Most of our support decide if we have had a good day dependent on what "they" have or did do, not on progression. Far more fans interested in just being better than them than being all we can be. Pretty much every foreign manager has been chased and slagged off, all because we know better. Yet we are a terrible footballing nation.

 

We learn from nobody and it shows. We rate foreigners who take up our way not their own. We scoff at tactics, dietitians and pretty much any advancements in football. This year alone has seen constant calls for long balls and just winning. Most couldn't care less if our style or ways mean we will never amount to anything in Europe, just so long as we do better than them.

 

playing from the back sees boos and derision if we aren't 5 up in twenty minutes. Our support knows very little of tactics or talks about such, as is the Scottish approach. Phone-ins are just filled with idiots having a go at enemies with zero talk of football. Coverage of football here tells us all we need to know about those reading and paying for it

 

Do do we even have a plan as a club? Are you aware of any plan and milestones? Do you want any? Or is it just one goal?

 

The only thing we are doing is scrambling around trying to find a quick fix that will see us best them. Nobody seems to care past that one want. It's sad.

Taking Rangers first. Advocaat was welcomed and feted until the wheels came off, even then he gets very little criticism. For the most part his sides were a joy to watch, until the weren't. 

PLG was welcomed like a conquering hero, indeed with hindsight part of his problem was one of expectation. Too many of us expected Rangers to be playing like the great Arsenal sides. But things only turned sour for him when results and performances were  poor. 

Lastly Pedro. What can you say, right up to the end he had has supporters willing him to succeed and pleading to give him more time. I wasn't one of them but that's not because I'm a xenophobe it's because I didn't think he was a very good manager. 

If we have a fault as a support it's a lack of patience, but we're hardly alone in that. If a Rangers manager wants to keep his job his side needs to win. I think that's the same at the biggest club in any league. There's hardly a side in Scotland who hasn't tried a 'foreign' manager, mainly without much success. That can't be just down to us all being small minded, closet racists and more likely down to the quality of player we produce and the type of football they're suited too. 

Mark Wotte was warmly welcomed when he was appointed Performance director at the SFA. On this site the name of Preud'homme seems to be many's favourite to take us on. If he got the job will he be hunted if we lost to Falkirk in the League Cup and Celtic in the league, probably. But so would a 'British' manager.

There's a debate to be had around why a football mad country like Scotland can't get it's act together collectively or individually. But to right it off as xenophobia doesn't help that debate in the slightest. 

There was an interesting interlude at half time around Naismith being booed for, and I paraphrase "the crime of putting his family and his career first" as Richard Gordon put it. Now, I don't hold any antipathy towards Naismith and don't blame him for leaving, but if Gordon doesn't realise he's booed for his comments following his departure rather than the departure itself then he's really not doing his job very well. Considering how much time they spend talking about Rangers you'd think they might invite someone on who understands us. Of course no other club's supporters have ever booed an ex-player when they've returned to play them. Ever. 

Confession time. In a previous life I knew Annie McGuire, she was actually all right.  

3 hours ago, Frankie said:

Hearts were (for the second time this season at Ibrox) very, very poor but I was happy with the improved effort and attitude from our players and think they deserve some credit for doing the business.

 

Yes, we wasted far too many chances and were awful at their goal but I think the hard work we put into the midfield especially and the pressure we applied to Hearts in that regard was just as important as their poor play.

Yes, we were better, and the changes Murty made largely worked, so credit there. However, considering the experience that Hearts side had (every single Hearts player yesterday was either a full international or an under 21 international with the exception of Randall who is on loan from Liverpool) I was amazed how poor they were. They sat off us and seemed unable to string more than three passes together. We were better, it would have been hard to be worse, but a better side than Hearts would have caused us a lot more problems. Every side we've to play for the rest of this season is better than Hearts. 

4 hours ago, buster. said:

It was 3 important points and serves to switch attention away from the lows of last week.

 

I think Murty is now 'window dressing' and the players are pretty much motivating themselves. I'd imagine they'll want to show that they can compete this coming weekend and we'll at least be in their faces. 

 

We are fragile at the back, no doubt and that isn't going to be resolved in what is left of this season. We'll have to aim to score more goals than we concede.

Yeah, I agree, the hope for the weekend must be that player pride will motivate them to fight as if their lives depend upon it. Preventing them winning the league, if even for only a week, would feel like some kind of moral victory. 

Put me in the 'don't read too much into that performance' camp. Hearts were abject, yet were still only the width of the post away from a draw. 
We showed a bit of spirit and energy and dominated possession for long spells but were toothless in the first half and profligate in the second. Murphy, Candieas, Holt and Dorrans showed up and took control which was pleasing. Am I the only one concerned about McCrorie at centre-half? He clearly has talent but I'm not convinced that's his position and a better more attack minded team would have caused us more problems today. Him and Martin together don't look solid to me, their goal yesterday was an unchallenged header. 

I'm genuinely not seeing vitriol.

I read far more vitriol towards players, directors and other fans from other Rangers supporters frankly. 

Other than his 'entitlement, we are the people' dig what is it you disagree with? I mean it's not going to win a Pulitzer and the Record/Mail's issue with King remains to the fore but I'm not sure I disagree with his article. The club remains a mess.

I know, just imagine how much better everything would be if they'd only adapted to Caixinha's "new methods"...

57 minutes ago, craig said:

All that aside, the grim reality is that they still operate under Employment Law, the same as any other employee of any other company.  If Miller and Wallace were showing subordination then the Club had every right, almost an obligation actually, to take the action they did.

 

You are trying to defend their actions based on the specificity of how they got to where they are - there is nothing in Employment Law which says you can act in a subordinate manner just because you were scouted in primary school or get paid tons of money. 

 

The point Darthter is making, correctly, is that these two individuals, regardless of profession, wage, or standing - are employees of an entity which gives them both the protection and the obligation to operate under employment law, just like you, Darther or myself.

 

Debating how they got there is irrelevant - they are still employees governed by the same legislation as the rest of us.

What are you talking about Craig? What has this got to do with Miller and Wallace?? 

You're taking my reply to Darther and extrapolating it into completely different threads. At 13.03 yesterday Darther made a post directed at me that I felt was total nonsense. He suggested my work situation was similar to that of professional footballers when in the real world they're totally different. Anyone who thinks that Rangers players follow the same guidelines in their work as 'normal' people is delusional. Extra leeway in many areas, payments off the books, blind-eye turned to misbehaviour and a litany of other benefits are regularly bestowed on pro footballers in an attempt to keep them sweet if they are producing the goods on the park. Frankly, anyone who thinks pro-footballers have to live by the same rules as the rest of us has very little understanding of how the sport actually operates. Employment law is followed when it suits them. 

7 minutes ago, buster. said:

This morning Keith Jackson remains on the one-way verbal warpath batting onbehalf of his source.

 

No quotes, no numbers but says a significant amount of players will defend Miller and Wallace by giving testimony.

 

Doesn't mention that most probably, a larger number, won't.

What do you base that on Buster? Miller and Wallace are both very popular and respected by the players, Wallace is captain and operates as the players 'spokesman' internally. We all hear rumours and supposed 'in-the-know' stories and so far everything I've heard has said the players are with Miller and Wallace. 

I'm surprised the St Mirren manager isn't in the running. What he's achieved there is remarkable. Getting out of the Championship is not easy, as we well know, he did it at the first attempt with arguably the league's 4th highest budget and he did it with games to spare. 

He's got no experience at a 'big' club, and has never even managed in the SPFL, I accept that. But neither had Greig, McCoist, Warburton, Caixinho or Murty far less Struth, Wallace, Souness or Smith. 

Anyway, clearly our directors are looking elsewhere. 

10 minutes ago, der Berliner said:

Well, Bates was recruited more or less as a first team player from Raith Rovers less than 2 years ago. But I understand your point. The greatest problem many of these youngsters have to make their mark in the first team is probably based on our demands. Look at what people want. Managers see and know that and bring people in (well, they try to) who can live up to those demands. Murty started off testing and trialing his trusted youngsters, yet, when getting the chance, he splashed money on "veteran quality folk" (mostly in wages). It is frustrating to see people like Barjonas, Atakayi  or Hardie getting the odd minute, showing up reasonably, yet being supplanted as soon as a Goss, Cummings or Murphy become available. And in the end, as the Scottish market is as poor as it gets, these probably well-talented chaps end up at lesser clubs and stay at a mediocre level. Tom Walsh et al. What would do us and them well is having a feeder team or a Swifts side in the lower leagues, where all our youngsters are constantly tested at a competitive level. As it stands, you have to be extraordinary to make your mark in the Rangers first team, or you show up well in times of dire need.

I don't disagree with anything you've said. 

Really the only point I've been trying to make is that it seems negligent to keep losing the rare young players we bring through. Bates is just the latest example of a pattern. 

3 hours ago, craig said:

Gilmour had his head turned by more than just the bright lights... the rumoured 14k a week would have turned any 16 yr old's head too......

It would have turned this 47 year old's head! 

4 hours ago, Darthter said:

I disagree....Players are employees, doing a particular job - it just so happens that their job is playing football.  Don't try & turn it into something that it's not.

Are to simply bow down to player demands now, and offer them whatever contract terms they wish simply because they might turn out good????

 

McLeod, McKay etc....how are they developing???  They will be on much improved contracts that we could offer them, yet don't appear to be playing any better.....

 

In the normal workplace, if someone is doing well they may get rewarded with a small percentage increase in their wage.....the may get offered a much increased wage with another employer - exactly how does that differ from football???  The only difference the the overall value of the wage/increase.

Really Darther? C'mon, you simply can't compare professional football to 'normal' work no matter how hard you try. You can compare it to 'showbiz' or music maybe but not anything that you or I would recognise as 'work'. I don't know what you do for a living but I'm willing to bet no one scouted you to do it when you were still at primary school, you didn't have a succession of peers and adults telling you how fantastic you were going to be all through your early teens and no one offered you £100k a year plus to do it when you were 18. It is in no sense of the word a "normal workplace" and players asking to double, triple or multiply by ten their salary happens fairly regularly. It's a short career, it's ridiculously overpaid and far too much importance is placed on it, but it is what it is and that is most certainly not normal. 

3 minutes ago, Darthter said:

Here's a challenge for everyone:

Go & ask your boss to double your wages....your justification is that you've been working hard & performing quite well, but expect to get better at your job over the next 4 years.

 

Lets see how many are successful....

Darther, football isn't like 'normal' work, and you must know that. There is little point in making comparisons between professional footballers and call centre workers or joiners. 

8 minutes ago, Darthter said:

A team/manager has to put a realistic value on a player.  Martin, Alves, Murphy, Dorrans etc, were brought in as experienced players to bolster the team.  The club offered these players what they had deemed to be a suitable wage package.....other clubs deemed their value higher & offered more lucrative deals.  Those clubs will generally have a wage structure considerably higher than ours.

 

Was Bates good enough to warrant a 3-4x wage hike???  I can't remember the figures for the others mentioned, but I'd assume the figures are possibly similar wrt to wage increase.

Bates is just the latest, I was really highlighting the pattern of letting our better young players leave and the potential folly of that. I think we'd all agree that Martin and Alves haven't shown themselves to be considerably better than Bates and Wilson and neither offers much long term either, unlike the two we've allowed to leave for nothing. 

We seem to be able to produce about 1 player every couple of seasons currently, but so far all have left the club before they should have. It doesn't strike me as great business or football business. 

55 minutes ago, der Berliner said:

Well, Hamburg, while doomed for relegation this season - first time ever - is still a fine spot to learn his trade. Going by their salaries, he's probably getting somewhere between 6 to 8k a week plus bonuses et al, plays in a good football environment and if he makes his mark, his chances in the market are far superior playing in Germany (and having Rangers in his CV) than they would have been with us. That is the stark truth.

I understand all that, however surely his first choice was to stay and play for Rangers and if he's earning that kind of salary then a deal shouldn't have been beyond us I'd have thought. In the end he needs replaced, as does Wilson, and there's no guarantee those brought in will be better or cheaper. In the end there seems little point in having a youth system and scouting if we let half of them leave for nothing. 

10 minutes ago, Darthter said:

Unfortunately in most cases, money talks - we simply can't offer the cash incentives that other countries/teams can....and that applies to every team in Scotland.

To an extent I agree. However, Russell Martin isn't playing for nothing, neither is Murphy or Alves or Dorrans. If we'd taken some of their salaries and offered them to McKay, Wilson and Bates would be worse off today? Gilmour clearly had his head turned by the bright lights and yime will tell just how he develops, but the rest could have stayed I think. 

22 minutes ago, stewarty said:

Or, at the very least, they progress with us and we get a fee that reflects their potential/ performance.  Although given how the likes of Telfer and McKay have fared (so far) since leaving, you could argue we did that to some extent.

Telfer is a funny one, his move the Dundee Utd ultimately didn't work out. Utd though were clearly a basket-case club (ironic, I know) being run by an ego driven trust fund child who was more interested in pleasing the unhinged in his support and the media than in properly running his own club. Hence their current position. Had he stayed would things have been different, it's hard to know, but he seems to be finding the Dutch second tier a challenge now too. McKay might be an enigma but I'd love to have kept him, managed properly he's a good player. 

As an aside I stumbled across Rhys McCabe last week when on holiday. He's playing for Sligo Rovers, jeez there's a career that didn't fulfil it's potential. 

I was away last week when Bates to HSV was announced, and so much has happened since it's been forgotten about. One thing that struck me was our recent record in retaining home grown players (I know Bates came from Raith Rovers but he's still a young, Scottish player who developed at the club). 

If different decisions had been made our current squad could have Lewis MacLoed, Barry McKay, Danny Wilson, Billy Gilmour, Charlie Telfer and David Bates in it. We've never adequately replaced MacLoed or McKay and we're going to have to spend money replacing Wilson and Bates. Now each left for different reasons but you'd think we could create an environment at the club where promising home-grown players wouldn't want to leave, for any reason. 

36 minutes ago, Darthter said:

The bottom line in all of this is that Miller & Wallace over stepped a line, and as a result face disciplinary action.  Exactly the same as ANY other workplace.

Yes they are 2 long serving, Senior players but that doesn't give them free reign to do & say whatever they want.  Also, both have been previously linked to similar incidents in the past year.

 

I've seen a lot of posts over the past 24hrs, blindly supporting both players.  IMHO this is wrong.  The club cannot ignore a players behaviour simply because they have been there for a number of years, or because they stayed through the Admin period etc.  Also remember that neither player actually PLAYED in the game - Wallace wasn't even in the squad.  Also in recent month both players could only be classed as "Fringe" players - Miller is unable to hold down a regular spot (since his last suspension for over-stepping the mark), and Wallace has been injured since Sept, but has unable to get back into the team since his return to fitness.  On top of all this, we don't know exactly what went on.

 

It's also worth remembering that Employment law can be a right Royal pain in the backside, therefore any actions that are taken HAVE to be justified.  You can't simply just suspend an employee for the "fun" of it.  A case will have to be built via the investigation, that will get put in front of each player & their representatives (Union, Agent, Lawyer).  I would say it is rare that if an investigation isn't upheld, that the employee returns to their job & carries on as normal - it would make for a rather uncomfortable atmosphere.....yet Miller did just that only a few months ago!!!!  It's hard to believe that there wasn't some sort of ill feeling towards him (& Wallace possibly) within the dressing room.

I think you miss-read the dynamic of the dressing room. Miller and Wallace are not unpopular with the players, far from it, they speak for the players. 

This belief that you should keep your mouth shut if you disagree with something at work also puzzles me, particularly if you are in the right. If you are an experienced and able employee it is beholden on you to speak up when faced with management incompetence. There may well be consequences to face, but it doesn't change the fact it is the right thing to do. Whatever way we look at this the club and the team on the park aren't being managed well. The club captain in particular should be raising this and in the sanctity of the dressing room sounds like the perfect place to do it. 

Tam McManus was on Radio Scotland last night. He claimed to know what he was talking about and said the issue was around Murty refusing to discuss the game in the dressing room straight after the match. Both Wallace and Miller wanted to and started to, this led to a stand off and harsh words. Make of that what you will. 

McManus told another story about a Hibs dressing room following a drubbing from Hearts where actual physical fights broke out between players and between management. As he said that sometimes happen when passions are high and tempers lost, but in the manner of boys in the school playground by the next day it's all sorted and everyone gets back on with things. 

Professional football has its rituals and one of those is the dressing room post match where strong words are spoken, criticisms aired and accusations made. The more I hear of this affair the more I feel Wallace and Miller were doing what they thought best. Whatever we think of him Murty has clearly 'lost the dressing room' and dispatching Miller and Wallace won't change that. The manager of Rangers needs to be the strongest personality in the building, that's not the case currently and until it is we're going to see issues like this arise.