JohnMc

I think a lot of our supporters may find it difficult to relate to the apparent dozens of genders and sexualities nowadays. Even as the cousin of a trans man, I find it very difficult to keep up myself with what's seen as the correct diversity term to use.

 

As such, I applaud the club for trying to open minds on this but it's going to take a while to educate everyone on what is a very tricky subject to navigate.

Serious question Frankie; what's tricky about it? Is it just the nomenclature?

In the post above Bill used the term "torrent of crap" which Gonzo seems to have agreed with. Perhaps Bill or Gonzo will expand on their concern(s) with this. Not knowing what the correct term is to describe someone seems to me a fairly low barrier to understanding the issues people face though. Perhaps Bill and Gonzo's response to this is exactly why the club should be getting involved.

Why does this topic upset people so much?

My issue with the statistics analysis in football is its inability to factor in the team aspect of football. In cricket or baseball you can measure the bowler and the batsman in isolation, they are less reliant on the other members of their team at that specific moment, although not totally unreliant.

Football is different. Take Tav, would he have better stats for example if he'd a player like Stevie Davis in front of him instead of Candeias? Yes, he would, but would that make him a better player?

In 2010 Kilmarnock sold Connor Sammon to Wigan for £600,000. Anyone who has seen Connor Sammon play would raise an eyebrow at that figure because to put it bluntly he's a pretty average journeyman striker. Sammon was in his third season at Killie having scored the grand total of 7 goals in 49 matches in the previous two seasons Sammon amazingly scored 18 goals from 27 appearances in his final season sealing his move south. So what happened, how did Sammon go from energetic dumpling to international player in one season? Well, Kilmarnock signed an alcoholic Finnish genius called Alexie Eremenko. Eremenko hates training, can't tackle and doesn't like running on the pitch, but he can turn like few players, has wonderful vision and can make a pass from almost any position on the pitch. With Eremenko playing Sammon in half a dozen times every game Sammon turned into a goal machine and Kilmarnock's bank manager had a smile on his face for the first time (and last) in years.

Connor Sammon scored a grand total of one goal in 43 appearances for Wigan. He's currently on loan at Partick Thistle where he mainly operates as a sub.

Now Sammon's stats were stunning for one season, but they didn't tell you the whole story.

I quite like stats and no doubt some of them are helpful, but they can be very misleading as well. Football is a team game and each player is very reliant on the players around him. One player's passing stats can be greatly improved if the players around him make themselves available to take a pass, but if he's forced to hoof it into the channels then his stats won't be as good, but that doesn't tell us if he's a better player or not. Likewise having someone who can get on the end of a cross greatly improves the likelihood of a full back or midfielder crossing the ball in the first place.

I think there are under-rated players out there, players who do a ton of work that's not always seen or appreciated by fans, and stats like distance covered and number passes can help with that. But the only way to judge a player is to see him play, in the flesh, against other players.

The money players go for between English clubs is completely irrelevant. There's no way a player playing poorly for us would go for £2m.

Well it's not completely irrelevant, but it's not exactly the same I accept that. That's why I'd have expected him to go for two thirds of Toral's value even though McKay had played twice as many first team games and has international experience unlike Toral.

What do you think he was worth? No player playing poorly in Scotland is ever going to be worth much, particularly playing for us.

From the perspective that he was clearly a wanted player by a manager who knew him well and a club in the fairly prosperous English Championship I'd have expected us to take at least double that amount. For all McKay was untested at that level clearly Warburton, Weir and McParland rated him and wanted him so we had a bit more leverage than was being suggested. Plus if Jon Toral is worth £3 million to a Championship club and ex-Motherwell keeper Darren Randolph is worth £5 million then McKay is worth at least £2 million and I think he was a better player than Toral.

It's your 'Moneyball' effect on football, innit. That works for baseball and with cricket too but I'm not sure it works as well with football, they're very different sports. I could be convinced Candeias is a more effective player than he sometimes looks, but anyone who watches Tav knows he goes to sleep at crosses when at the back post, no amount of pass completion/final third assists or whatever can measure that rather large defensive frailty he has.

I played for 2 junior and one senior team mate.

And my wife could've scored for Rangers with the team mates Boyd had around him.

Top scorer in the SPL or not, if you want to talk about GOOD strikers I could give you at least half a dozen who played for Rangers who were FAR better than Boyd.

This isn't about whether Boyd was the best striker of all time or not, it's about this belief some have that he's not qualified to comment on players playing in the same league as him, that's just bizarre. I'd have thought your opinion on some of the players you played with, and against, when in the Juniors would be better informed and accurate than your views on someone you'd never actually played against, don't you? If you were actually playing in the SPFL just now Boabie then your opinion on current SPFL players would carry more weight on here than most of the rest of us.

As an aside I rate Boyd more for what he did in his spells with Kilmarnock (and is still doing for them) , playing with poorer players and getting far fewer chances than at Rangers.

For me, Boyd is not just wrong, it has a, "I'm going to say stupid things to make my audience like me." feel about it.

 

To criticise Jack for 3 red cards when 2 are rescinded is just being deliberately and nefariously obtuse. There is no excuse.

 

Objectively Rangers are at least one of the top 3 or 4 clubs in Scotland, so if a new manager, in a meaningless friendly after crashing out of the WC, is trying some home based players, then surely an eligible guy who plays regularly for us, without being obviously crap, is worth a shout in the squad selection. At the moment the exact same goes for Aberdeen (who have three) - and seeing as that's where we got him from only a few months ago, and Hibs (who have two).

 

But then, didn't he slag Aberdeen off too? Pretty arrogant for an over-age player playing in a team fighting relegation.

Hasn't Jack had 4 red cards, didn't he get one in pre-season too? Jack deserves criticism for his red card against Kilmarnock, rescinded or not. He was incredibly naive to get involved with Broadfoot, if he's being out-smarted by big Kirk he's not ready for full international matches.

Is it arrogance to voice the opinion that someone might not be good enough for international football just because that person isn't anymore? Where does that leave you and me then!

I don't think Boyd is any more qualified than I am to comment on current players Mac. In my opinion he is a lazy selfish bastard who didn't even have the sense to keep himself onside in 8 out of 10 attacks he was involved in. I doubt he has the nous to know what's going on around him during a match. He goes into a coma until the ball is 6 inches from the opposition goal line.

Very few if any of the guys called up are worthy of a Scotland jersey but what's the alternative, keep playing old duds like Fletcher in any attempt to qualify for the next competition ?

So the top goal scorer in the history of the SPL isn't qualified to comment on the players he's faced this season on the park? Okay... Who'd you play for again Boabie?

Picking a local player for international friendlies being played in the provinces is a tried and tested way of generating interest and boosting the crowd dB, there maybe more than one reason why Germany do better than Scotland at international level!

Why is it our hackles go up whenever someone makes a mild criticism of a Rangers player? Surely no one believes Boyd now has an agenda against Rangers!

I don't know why people are so critical of Boyd, as someone who is actually playing against these guys he's better qualified to comment than pretty much every other pundit. Plus it's refreshing not to hear the usual platitudes and blandness players usually trot put on these occasions. Jack isn't good enough for international football and his record this season for red cards, whether rescinded or not is really poor. It's a fair criticism. Likewise Shinnie, Boyd's point about where will he play is bang on. One thing Scotland is blessed with currently is decent full backs, Shinnie isn't even the 5th best left back in Scotland, it's a nonsense.

I'm not convinced Jack should be in the Rangers side far less the Scotland side! I'm pleased for him that he was called up but surprised all the same.

As for Boyd's comments about Shinnie who can disagree with him? Boyd got pelters when he criticised the appointment of Cathro and yet was proved correct. Boyd might yet turn out to be one of the shrewder and braver pundits in our game.

Nationality is a funny thing. For some people it's black and white, if you were born in a particular country that's where your from that's the country you should feel everything for. But it's not that way for many people. Aside from those of us who simply don't have a great deal of 'national pride' in us there are people who have mixed backgrounds, a parent or grandparent from somewhere else can make a difference to how someone feels about that country. Then there's the pragmatic nationalist, perhaps like this lad, who maybe feels Ireland (Republic of or Northern Ireland, that article isn't clear?) offers a better route to full international football, a career in the game and more money and opportunities.

But, there probably isn't a story here if the boy didn't play for Rangers. That's the angle, isn't it? This lad should be staunch, hate Ireland and everything about it, that's the stereotype after all. Boo him and abuse him on social media so we can report that tomorrow.

Is he any good?

Just as well Dorrans wasnt selected for after-match drug testing then!

If Windass is as talented as Dorrans suggests, then he is the hide'n'seek champion of champions because he is hiding it brilliantly!

Many moons ago when Rangers used to train at Jordanhill College you could go along and watch them as it was basically a public park. When they played bounce games both Alexei Mikhailichenko and Pieter Huistra were unbelievable to watch. The others literally couldn't get the ball off them, it was incredible, I wouldn't have believed it if I hadn't seen it with my own eyes. Their close control and dribbling was like nothing I'd ever seen before, I saw Huistra nutmeg John Brown twice in the one move to roars from the rest of the players. But you know come Saturday John Brown started and Huistra and Alexei Mikhailichenko were on the bench. Trevor Steven was fantastic in those games too but at least he was pretty good on a Saturday as well.

There was rumours of Miller having problems with Pedro from a very early stage and it was even thought he was moving to Hibs. Then it died down for a while until the final explosion.

Pedro gave him a one year contract extension in April so you have to assume they were getting on okay then.

You know, even if Miller was completely to blame, and it's a big if, for what happened, that still doesn't prove there's a discipline problem at the club. It's one player clashing with the manager, not an endemic malady running through the club.

Interestingly....

There's an article in todays National which kinda goes over this thread. The sub header reads "Kenny Miller found himself in a power struggle".

That kinda sums up the situation....No player should EVER be in a power struggle with their manager....

I missed the National today. Was it written by that guy who writes in broad Scots or by the guy who's a dog?

The only bits I actually made up were the bits about going in the huff & talking to the media....All the other bits are indeed fact, unless you know otherwise.

 

As to KM's return....again, this may be completely untrue, but the board have just sacked the manager, the team needs some kind of stability...that stability may have come by reinstating KM to the starting 11 & allowing him to take the arm band. It may simply have been the easiest route to restore some harmony.

 

Here's something to consider...in an earlier post it was mentioned about PC being unhappy with Dorran's for giving KM the armband, yet Dorran's wasn't dropped or sent out with the youths following that allegedly major bust-up.....

Have you watched the incident where Dorrans gives Miller the armband? Does he look coerced or bullied into it?

Anyway, Miller was sent to the youths for allegedly speaking to the Record about the incident, not for the incident itself.

The chap who decides who gets the armband on the day is - AFAIK - the manager. I doubt there is much talk between the players or some democracy going on. Perhaps people may utter their comments, but I reckon the gaffer decides. Unless I am mistaken, Miller has coached the development sides alongside Murty since Warburton. Miller sure has bags of experience and Murty sure respects him. Will he know all about what went on between Miller and PC (did the two had a few talks "in private")? There is so much we don't know that saying who's correct and who isn't becomes rather spongy. A few "old bulls" will sure tell a young chap like Murty a few things and I reckon Murty will heed their advice, even if not 100%. And I also reckon that the "Scottish bulls'" words will have a greater impact too. That is almost natural and probably not too wrong. We have to wait and see though whether e.g. a Miller will keep his form of last week and if not, whether he still retains his place. If so, one actually MAY conclude that after what happened to Barton and now also PC, that there is a cabal of players who wield enough power to oust people, a cabal that does not take it well if they are told in no uncertain terms that they are not good enough. No doubt the latter idea will be ridiculed, and perhaps rightly so. But can anyone say for sure that this ain't the case? I think not.

 

We'll have to wait and see how Murty will handle the task at hand and may come to a better understanding of the problems thus far.

Does this cabal you just invented have a name dB? You really should give them one, and make it sound menacing or secretive that'll heighten the sense of threat they wield to anyone stupid enough to cross paths with them... Sorry, I'm ridiculing you, amn't I, and you predicted that too so maybe your secret powerful cabal isn't such a batshit crazy idea after all. Or is that what I'm meant to think? You've no idea how high this goes!

Honestly? What's with the allergy to facts on this thread? It's like a rejected storyline for Scooby Doo.

A lot of really good points have been made in this thread and I'm enjoying the debate.

 

There is however no question that we have a discipline problem. We have allowed a player to criticise the manager (via his agent) in the press and we have been perceived to back the player and not the manager. Equally however, PC should not have criticised MOH either in the press. He is a clever man and no doubt had his rationale for that, but it was wrong. These are absolutely fundamental problems in building a high performing team.

 

It's amazing to me that some football clubs like our own are so poor at team building and what that means. We spend millions on the players and manager and then undermine much of the good work by allowing certain behaviours to develop. PC should have been told that under no circumstances EVER should he criticise any players in public. Equally, Miller should have been shown the door at the same time as the manager. We had an opportunity to make a statement about keeping issues in the dressing room, but we made a mess of it, and this will only develop further into a wider problem.

 

This is where the board needs to step in and assert its authority. We can't allow this perception of players being allowed to criticise the manager in public (or vice versa) when they're upset. I think it was JohnMc that rightly mentioned the PLG era. He wasn't successful, but we also screwed up then by backing Ferguson and McGregor instead of the manager. The manager was (as PC is now) guilty of not getting results, but there was no excuse for the players undermining his authority.

 

This behaviour just disgusts me, and I find it hard (or impossible) to support a player who does that. It's like a cancer in the club and we need to offload him, and any other dissenters asap. Players will always have issues and in a club of 20+ seniors players, they won't all be happy. That's fine, but it's what they do about it that makes the difference. I'm sure many of the Celtic players are unhappy about not playing, but if they spoke out they'd be out. Someone (again I think JohnMc) said that if the manager had been successful he could have sent Miller packing without criticism. I think that's true, but I don't think it matters. If anyone underminded one of my leadership team members, even if that leader was underperforming, that person would be out immediately and I'd get more support for the under-performer. Under performing is something that can be addressed. Bad behaviour is like a cancer and just needs to be cut out.

 

I wonder what would have happened if Murty had left Miller out. Would Miller just keep quiet in the press, etc. Unlike many people (including his agent), I don't regard Miller as a model professional. Far from it.

Okay. Why do you think Murty didn't leave Miller out? Why do you think the Director of Football didn't instruct him to leave him out? Why do you think Stewart Robertson didn't instruct him to leave Miller out? Indeed why do you think he was given the captain's armband? You have to assume that was done with the full knowledge of everyone who matters at the club? Could it be that we're rotten from the top down, spineless and cowed by one player nearing the end of his career? Or do you think they actually thought Miller was badly treated and that Pedro was at fault?

Miller didn't speak out. Miller took his 'punishment' without comment. It took three weeks before his agent complained, whether with Miller's blessing or not we can only assume he did. But he made it clear he'd no issue with being dropped for poor form, but was unhappy at being banished for apparently speaking to the press.

If an experienced member of your team feels they are being unjustly treated by their manager, how long do you think they should keep quiet about it for, particularly if they feel they're being ignored when they do raise it?

so which parts do you know for a fact are totally false???

 

Krancjar is always injured & has struggled with fitness from day 1

Wallace is injured & John has been playing better

Miller was playing terribly

MOH has struggled to get a regular game since day 1

McKay couldn't agree a new contract

Hill's contract ended

Halliday is of a lower standard than Jack/Dorrans/Rossiter (when fit)/Holt, so unlikely to get many games

 

The only made up bit was the actions that I suggested they had taken....and the only info we have about ANY of the incidents has generally been through the media & "sources inside the club". Look at all the media attention surrounding the KM stuff - can you honestly say that didn't affect his situation at the club in a positive way??? PC is sacked & KM walks straight into the starting 11, wearing the captains armband....

I don't know what to say Darthter, you want me to provide evidence to refute stuff you made up! I don't know how to do that, should I make it up too?

What I'll say is this. The fact Miller was made captain last weekend suggests Murty, the first team coaches and the board of directors felt he deserved it. That suggests to me they believed his version of events or at least had sympathy for how he was treated. These people aren't stupid, if they were angry at Miller and held him culpable he'd never have got the armband. They're on the inside, they know what actually happened.

I agree, which is why I said you were more than entitled to do so!

 

 

 

I agree results were not good enough -- I stated so -- but results have nothing to do with the disciplinary problem, perceived or otherwise. It should be kept in-house, but surely the fact that it was not suggests there is a problem, or at least an issue worthy of discussion? Highlighting a perceived disciplinary issue in no way negates the fact that PC was a failure.

It's worthy of discussion, that's what we're doing. My contention is there isn't a discipline problem, there was a management problem. The OP stated pretty clearly he felt there was a discipline problem at Rangers in his opening post and why weren't players being punished.

I think it's quite common for a player out of contention to be sent to train (a) on their own, or (b) with the reserves/youths. I've seen several instances of it.

No, being sent to train with the youths or on your own is a punishment. A player being dropped for form reasons is kept in the 1st team squad. An assistant manager or coach is tasked with building the player back up, either through tough love or encouragement or one on one training. That's how it works at almost every club.

A quick google search suggests Miller has had issues in the past: he's asked to leave several clubs; he threatened to quit Them -- not too bad... --; he had a bust up with Dave Jones at Wolves because he wasn't playing; and there was a story about Miller being annoyed at being dropped by MW. Of course, that is contrasted with several glowing reviews about his professionalism and leadership. But, it's not "never".

 

Again, just because he was a "poor manager" doesn't mean there wasn't a disciplinary problem, or at least an issue. It's not specific to PC. The OP was suggesting a wider problem not specific to even Rangers.

 

I only responded because I felt you were trying to criticise PC again, when, IMO, he's not done too much wrong. The only criticism necessary is that results were not good enough. I would expect, and would demand, a manager to drop a player and removes them from the team if they are a disruptive influence. I don't want players that think they are bigger than the club.

Look at what actually happened with Miller. After another poor performance against Celtic there were reports in the media that the club had held a meeting with all the players and apparently PC had criticised the UK ones and given Dorrans in particular a hard time for giving Miller the captain's armband when he came on. Is that the kind of thing that should make its way into the papers? No, it shouldn't. At the same time is it the kind of thing the manager should have said after the Celtic game? It struck me as totally missing the issues the team had. He then dropped Miller and sent him with the youths to London. The clear insinuation was he blamed Miller for the story. He might even have been correct, who knows. So all of a sudden the support are blaming Miller for undermining the manager, for disrupting the dressing room and for the dark nights. But there is still no evidence that a. the story was wrong or b. that Miller was the source of it. It was a further 3 weeks before before Miller's agent expressed his anger that his client was being blamed for something he said he didn't do and being punished by the club for it. Is that ill-discipline or frustration at bad management?

Now if the incident with Miller was a one off it could be written off as a clash for which there can only be one winner; the manager. But it wasn't a one off, Pedro was falling out with players, the media and with opposition managers with incredible regularity.

There's no actual evidence we've a discipline problem.

Okay, it's posted in Rangers Chat, apologies in advance for normal mistakes regarding who is available and the spelling of names. I'm running a little late having misjudged how much I had to do this week!

Another opportunity for me to display my ignorance publicly on player availability and tactics! Here's your Rangers v Thistle match preview. (and apologies if the title gives you a Limahl earworm!)

The Never Ending Journey

The Inuit people have a word for it; shaktolik. It describes the feeling of going towards somewhere for so long it seems you’ll never get there. It describes us perfectly as once again we find ourselves regrouping following another set-back on the long road back to the top.

The departure of Pedro Caixinho last week wasn’t universally popular with every Rangers supporter but it had an air of inevitability about it by the time it happened. Our visitors on Saturday are part of the reason why. It’s only six weeks since we visited Firhill on a Friday evening and twice threw away the lead in infuriating fashion. At that time Thistle were bottom of the league, today they sit 10th, a point off 8th but only two from bottom. We find ourselves in fourth place, having been leapfrogged by Hibs in mid-week who have now played a game more than us. Neither the top two, Aberdeen and Celtic, are out of sight either, something that makes the two points we dropped against Thistle last time even more frustrating. I was speaking with Thistle supporters after the match, they were naturally ecstatic, but they underlined something that had already dawned on me; they were no longer scared of Rangers. Thistle will visit Ibrox filled with confidence on the back of two victories and a draw in their last three matches and believing they can get a result against us, remember they don’t fear us anymore. Thistle should start with in-form striker Miles Storey who summed up this current Rangers side in a recent interview “You don’t know what you will get from Rangers but I think we should have beaten them in one of the two games at home so we will go there confident after a good week”.

“You don’t know what you’ll get from Rangers”. Well you should know, you should get the hardest match of your season. You should be fearful of coming to Ibrox, you should be in awe of our players, their stamina, team spirit and ability, that’s what the end of this journey looks like.

As for Rangers, well, unfortunately, we also don’t know what we’ll get, even the composition of the side is hard to predict. The manner of last week’s victory over Hearts lifted our spirits, but then he who expects very little is seldom disappointed. Expectations are higher this weekend and every player who started could rightly expect to start against Thistle. But with Alves available after suspension and Dorrans fit both can expect to be in contention. The polarising Kenny Miller must surely start along with Morelos, who he seems to bring the best out of, and Jason Holt was man of the match for me last weekend. It’s at centre-half we might see changes, if Cardosa is fit both he and Alves might return, however that would be hard on Wilson and McRorie who both played well last week. I expect Windass will retain his place as will Candeias with Tav and John at full back.

That’s a side capable of winning, drawing or losing to Partick Thistle as all of us know. Rangers have struggled against physical, determined sides who close us down quickly and deny us space. We need to win the physical battles before we can play football; we’ve better players than Thistle, but have we a better team?

The other interesting factor is the man who’ll pick our side on Saturday; Graeme Murty. He’s in the almost unique position of having no pressure on him. As the very dark horse for the permanent manager’s job he gets to audition in real time whilst everyone else looks at Aberdeen or down south. Murty’s standing was boosted by the Hearts result and his pragmatic, creditable draw at Parkhead last season. Is he a serious candidate for the manager’s job? Well he’s certainly an outside bet, but he’s got the job just now and another performance like last week won’t do his reputation any harm.

The Inuit’s have another lovely saying; “If you are going to walk on thin ice, you might as well dance”. Murty has nothing to lose, an aggressive, committed performance that displays some remnants of team spirit and togetherness will easily impress our support, arguably more than beating Hamilton away might.

I’m looking forward to Saturday’s match, that’s not a feeling I’ve had before every game this season, or last. Yes, we’re starting again, but we’re starting from a different place. We’re further on even if it might not feel like it. I hope the player’s dance on Saturday, after all what have they got to lose.

I did, and said so. But the point being even though it was made up, it is not inconceivable or unbelievable.....

 

If someone could point out ANY bit that might NOT possibly be true....

None of it's true mate, you made it all up, that's the point.

Let me be clear here....I don't think this is an issue specific to Rangers or Pedro Caixhina. It is more of a reflection on modern society etc.

 

A manager is trying to enforce certain discipline, but as soon as someone ain't happy, the story is all over the press and putting managers a VERY difficult situation. If the manager caves in to the media pressure, he is weak and opens the door for more problems. If he sticks to his guns, he's a dictator, a bad man-manager & has "lost the dressing room".

 

The player's part in in it is virtually forgotten. They just sit back & let things play out in the public eye.

 

 

As for PC's comments on MOH....he didn't just randomly blurt these things out in conversation - he was asked specific questions & regularly pushed for answers. However, people seem to forget that MOH struggled to get a game under the previous manager - PC at least put him out on loan, rather than sitting in the stands every week, which would most likely lead to a transfer offer being made from somewhere.

Is it really a modern issue? I'm not convinced. Players have always fed titbits to favoured journalists, and ill-discipline is hardly a modern problem, imagine a current international got drunk, climbed into a boat and had to be rescued by the coastguard, bloody hell the internet would explode with indignation. Managers and clubs have less power today, that's a factor certainly. Transfer windows, Bosman and agents have certainly tilted the balance of power but good managers adapt to this. In the end we need a manager who can deal with modern problems, there's little to be gained to harking back to another era.

I certainly wasn't comparing PC to Sir Alex! They're not even in the same league! It was an analogy to show sometimes you need to remove the cause of the problem.

 

So, you are saying it is not a disciplinary problem, it's bad management because results were not good enough.

 

However, surely discipline is distinct from results. Even if you're winning there can still be disciplinary problems, therefore results are irrelevant. Whatever he did disciplinary-wise you'd be criticising because "results weren't good enough". If he kept Miller and MOH around and results are bad, it's poor management and weak; get rid of Miller and MOH and results are bad, it's poor management. He can't win here.

 

If a player is causing problems, then yes, you try to cajole them, but sometimes you get shot of them; sometimes there is no other way. What else could PC do, assuming they won't follow the manager's instructions? Keep around a disrupting influence? You sell them, or demote them. I don't think it's an unusual situation?

 

I do have a problem with player's thinking they are bigger, or more important than, the manager. The manager is the most authoritative figure at a club, in terms of the team. We can't have a situation where a player can choose whether a manager stays or not, or what tactics or players they choose -- why not just give Miller the manager's position? He doesn't have the skills or experience for that role, so he should've put up or shut up. A player being dropped is normal, but it should be kept in-house; as far as I'm aware it wasn't the manager that 'leaked it'.

 

You're more than welcome to bask in the glory of his sacking, but I don't quite see the need to twist every situation to prove that he was a bad manager. We're just flogging a dead horse. The OP was merely suggesting that we may have a disciplinary problem, as it's not the first time we've had players speaking out -- it's not specific to PC.

 

I'm more than willing to concede that he wasn't good enough; results weren't good enough; performances -- although good in parts -- were not good enough. I disagree he was directly at fault for the disciplinary problems.

I'm not basking in any glory Rousseau and I'm not saying anything I've not been saying for months.

My only criticism of Pedro is that results weren't good enough, had the side been winning every match he could have sent Kenny Miller to Timbuktu with the under 11s and no one would have complained. It's a results business, that's what he's judged on. In my opinion focussing on apparent discipline issues is to miss the point. Do we think there are no unhappy players at Celtic just now? Of course there are but because their side is winning regularly any complaints are ignored or better managed in-house. My point is some Rangers fans have already decided we do have a discipline problem despite there being no actual evidence of one. I assume it helps frame how Pedro was let down instead of simply grasping the nettle that Pedro was a poor manager of Rangers and should never have been appointed in the first place. Where is the evidence that any player thinks they bigger or more important than the manager, I hear this narrative but it's based on nothing but supposition.

A player being dropped is "normal" but making an example of them by sending them away with the youths is not. No other manager, in nearly 20 years as professional, has ever accused Miller of being a disruptive influence, indeed quite the contrary. I repeat Pedro was a poor manager of Rangers, he struggled to manage his players and he didn't manage to get results or even performances required. There is no more criticism of him required, that's more than enough.