JohnMc

As we said on the podcast on Friday, this had potential banana skin written all over it. As it was we controlled the match, should have scored more than we did, created a decent number of chances and were only occasionally troubled by a St Johnstone side who are significantly better than last season and in good form. On top of that we were able to get some minutes into the legs of a few players who haven't played much recently. The downside is another couple of injuries, the extent of which is still unknown. We've had worse afternoons at Hampden in recent times. A regular criticism recently has been the lack of a style of play, I don't think you can make that claim yesterday. It was clear what we were trying to do and for the most part it worked. Jefte and Matondo linked up well, Tav and Cerny had moments but were less effective. Diomande supported Danilo and then Dessers and was as advanced as I recall seeing him. Danilo linked up well, his hold up play and lay offs are better than Dessers, but I'm still unsure if he's as good a finisher, he didn't look it yesterday. In fairness he'll need a month or so of regular games before we'll know just what Danilo offers, but at least having the option again was pleasing. Sterling played in bursts, then seemed to disappear. I suppose a player whose game is based around power will need a few matches to get back to match sharpness. Tav still looks a yard slow, I'm not sure if that's a match sharpness thing or simply his body ageing. He was again caught out more than once yesterday. Tav never hides, he's rarely injured and provides experience in a team still finding it's feet. I do wonder if there was another option at right back if he'd be playing as much as he is though. Baron, Davies, Dessers and McCausland all played well when they came on. Baron is already a first choice in midfield and looks to have been an excellent signing. Dessers scored, again. Whatever his failings, and he demonstrated some of them yesterday, he also never hides, gets into good positions and took his chance well, showing composure where previously other players hadn't when presented with chances. We need other players to contribute more goals, relying on Dessers solely to score is unfair and unrealistic, other players need to contribute, and that's still lacking from this squad. Overall more positives than negatives. We're a work in progress, but yesterday did at least feel like progress. We've got a week before we play again, Ross County at home, and then another week before the Tims away. I don't think we're as bad as some are making out, but we're still quite a distance from being as good as we'll need to be.

Not for me. They were great games, and we've played them a few times since, but I don't feel the same way towards them as I do the others. Marseille at home remains one of my favourite ever nights at Ibrox. For all our moans we've been treated to some great European nights over the years.

At that time, for many people in the 'west', the Soviet Union and Russia were inter-changeable terms. The idea of Ukraine, Kazakstan or Georgia etc being separate countries wasn't a concept many here were aware of. I'd read that Stalin was a Georgian, but I thought that was a bit like being Cornish or from Yorkshire, I'd no idea it was a different country with its own culture and language. We played Dynamo Kiev a couple of years after this game in a friendly. The Soviet Union was breaking up at this point and Rangers gifted them new yellow and blue strips, the colours of Ukraine, as everyone knows now. The history of Dynamo Kiev is fascinating. What their players went through in WW2, to becoming one of the most important institutions in the Soviet Union and used as a conduit for spies, to Lobanovskyi's coaching methods to being a symbol of Ukrainian independence. I think of Dynamo Kiev in a similar way I do Eintracht Frankfurt, St Etienne and Moscow Dynamo, clubs with important historical links to our history.

It's worth pointing out that Celtic have reportedly spent over £15 million this summer to have the exact same squad as last season. The Irish forward and the Portuguese midfielder(?) were both there last season. That's a lot of money to stand still. They might well sign more players before the window shuts of course, but currently they're a changed veteran goalie away from the same team as last season. They weren't much better than us last season, they had more upfront and a stronger midfield, but a defence that wasn't anything special and a support ready to turn on an unpopular manager and board. I don't think we're stronger than last season, I can't yet tell if we've stood still or slipped back a bit. Tonight will tell us some more, and we can't judge the squad until the end of the window. Dessers has done enough to be our first choice no. 9, with better supporting players around him and some decent alternative(s) on the bench we might yet be chanting his name this season.

His finishing aside it was his overall play that frustrated me most last season. He didn't hold the ball up well, he was slow in a sprint and didn't win his fair share of headers. This season, albeit it's early, I think his overall game has improved. With hindsight I also think the fact that, Tav aside, no one else was scoring regularly last season meant more focus fell on Desssers. If our other attacking players and midfielders had chipped in with more goals Desser's might have been appreciated more.

I feel the people responsible know exactly what it is. Well said 26th of Foot.

Jon Daly was Dundee Utd's when we bought him.

I mentioned his background simply to illustrate what he'd achieved in his chosen field. The role of a Chairman is to focus and lead the board. From the outside it feels like he's done that quite well. Important decisions have been made, the previous leaks and briefings seem to have stopped, the board seem to be in agreement on direction. That might sound straightforward but it often isn't. Reading above it sounds like you're judging him on his stand-in role as acting CEO following Bisgrove's departure. I don't think that's a job he wants full-time, I understand he's stepping in until someone new is appointed. You're correct, he's not what we need as CEO, but I think he fully agrees with you on that. I'm not sure how much blame can be laid at his door over the Copland stand problems, but as Chair he must take his fair share of the blame.

What! This is the Rangers Chairman, of course we care about what school he went to!!

We do, that's fair, whatever he achieved before doesn't really matter now. As the Chairman I'm not sure how much day to day decision making he was involved in before becoming our acting CEO in June. I assume he was involved in the big decisions. So sacking Beale, I assume he was in agreement on. That was a big call, there must have been some voices saying 'give him the season'. I personally think that was the correct decision. Time will tell if Clement is the correct appointment. Ironically the work on the Copland Road stand. It must have been instigated by the board, when it must have been tempting to palm off our wheelchair support, again, and earmark that money for something else. Obviously the project management has been poor, but the project itself is something we as a support should be proud of, I think. I wasn't in favour of the museum. I didn't think it would work, but I was wrong, it's excellent. Sticking our ground over away tickets for Celtic might have seemed an easy decision to fans, but I imagine there was a lot of pressure at a high level being applied. Previous boards would have caved I think. Overall though I like that the board seems calm and focussed now. In the recent past it felt like we were only ever a few weeks away from someone suing us, or public fall-outs as well as high profile PR people making things worse rather than better. My sense is that's not what we have now, there seems to be some stability, with grown-ups making decisions.

How do you know he's not the man to get things done? I don't know John Bennett, but I can see he has a pretty impressive business record. He's a guy from Knightswood who rose to the top of his chosen profession. He must have something about him to have achieved that. Finance, particularly in the City Of London, is dominated by people who went to very expensive schools and had every advantage in life. To scale the heights he has against his background at least suggests he has significant drive and ability.

If John Bennett hadn't done the interview personally, and instead had left it to a more polished presenter, there would be a 10 page thread on here, and Lord knows what elsewhere, criticising him for hiding from the support and not speaking directly to us. He was damned if did and damned if he didn't. With respect the Forces is a very different animal to a football club director. I accept the point you make, but I think it would have been a mistake if Bennett hadn't fronted up. I don't know John Bennett, I've never met or even spoken to him so I don't what he's like. I agree he seems uncomfortable in front of a camera, however, most people are like that. That doesn't mean he doesn't know what he's doing. In my working life I've seen a number of highly capable, successful people, great communicators in their working day, turn to wood the moment a camera was put in front of them. It's not a skill that everyone possesses. It can be coached and improved, but if someone simply doesn't enjoy that it rarely comes across naturally. Sir David Murray loved a camera, he was a natural, he could ad-lib, change topic and sound like he was in complete control. We all know how that worked out. It's ironic but we increasingly live in a time where presentation matters more than substance. Where communication skills are valued over actual ability, where soundbites seem to be all that matters. The substance of what John Bennett said is worth analysis. Clearly all is not well at the club, that's very clear. That lies at the feet of the directors, no one else is responsible for that. To me the most important things he said was 'no matter what happens on the pitch, Clement is here for the season'. That'a bold statement for a Chairman to make. We've had three seasons in a row where our manager has changed in the Autumn. That's a failing of the Directors, I suspect if our form isn't what we all hope for there will be a lot of people shouting for change, it's a brave board that don't give the supporter's what they want.

Well, it's temporary, he's covering the position while we recruit a replacement. It's also quite normal for directors to 'work' on behalf of their clubs, even non-execs. For someone like Bennett, an already wealthy man, this isn't a job in the normal sense. Being a director of a football club you've supported your entire life is very different from being a director of a standard commercial organisation. I think it's fair to question Bennett's ability, it's a far from ideal scenario, but under the circumstances I'm not sure there was a better option. Questioning his dedication is unfair I feel. If he's still doing the job in a few months time then questions need asked.

Is he one of these left-footed right-wingers? I know nothing about him but if he's a Czech international he must have something about him, surely.

When hearing the name 'Hannibal' it's interesting to see whose first thought is elephants and Alps and who thinks of cannibalism and Jodie Foster. A true cultural divide! Recent loanees have done ok, Tillman and Sima were successes I'd say. There's some incentive for this lad with his contract nearly up and it being unlikely he's going to make it at Man Utd. I saw him against us on Saturday. He caught the eye however I'm not sure if that's because of his unusual name and impressive hair or because of his ability. We need some bodies in, this doesn't seem like the worst business we could do.

That was as poor a half of football as I can recall, we were woeful. It's worth remembering Birmingham are in the English third tier. I know it's a friendly and perhaps the players have been getting run mercilessly for 2 weeks with an eye on a long season or something, but I'd still expect us to put up a better showing than that. The fact I was actually pleased when Wright and Dessers came on depresses me. I'm starting to wonder if so many senior players leaving, or trying to leave, is causing issues behind the scenes. We didn't look like a team last night, or at the weekend. I fully accept a couple of good signings could change everything, so I hope they happen soon. As an aside I liked the look of the Birmingham right back in the first half. Laird I think was his name. Obviously he was given the freedom of the wing and our tactics of not running or tackling and passing to Birmingham players might have enhanced his performance.

Celtic weren't substantially better than us last season and so far all they've done is replace their keeper. At best they've stood still, so far. Have we regressed a bit, or stood still also? Losing Lundstram and Barasic weakens the squad, time will tell if Baron and Jefte are adequate replacements. Sima is the biggest loss to our squad and he's not been replaced. It would be astonishing if we don't sign at least a couple of forward players before the window closes. I expect we'll strengthen elsewhere too as other players leave. It's frustrating we don't have more players in so they can get to know their team mates and Clement's demands, but it's still only July. You have to assume things are going on, talks are taking place. There tends to be a domino effect, someone in the chain needs to sell or buy and that triggers a raft of moves. I think we will need to get used to Rangers playing younger home grown players this season too. Not first choice, but when injuries and suspensions happen I think Clement will have to play the youth. In my experience Rangers supporters are all for this until it actually happens, we're not the most patient support.

He's clearly not part of Clement's plans, that's why he's with the B team. I understand it's mutual, Lammers wants to leave, for whatever reasons he didn't settle in Scotland or at Rangers. It's best for everyone that he moves on. He might need to accept a drop in salary for that too happen, so a lot will depend on the player himself. I suspect this will drag on until the last minute as interested clubs wait to see if we blink and agree to cover some of his salary and we wait and see if the clubs who want him blink and agree to pay him closer to what he's on with us. Whatever stats might say he's been a really poor signing for us. Not every player is capable of playing for Rangers, often that's not to do with footballing ability. Lammers falls into this category.

Andy Webster? The Andy Webster who we went to all sorts of hassle to sign and then never played, that Andy Webster? Hope lad takes after his mother. Last I heard Webster was involved in the Hearts youth academy.

Steve Carson is a Belfast 'Prod'. It should be noted that the BBC version of Rebus made him a Jambo instead of a Hibee. He was never a Hibs fan in the books but was on the STV dramatisation. 26th of Foot has as much chance of getting the BBC Scotland controller position than any of Kevin McKenna, Chris McLaughlin, Angela Haggerty, Gerry Braiden. Cosgrove is an outside chance, but I think it's unlikely, he's closer to Biden in age than Carson. But I'd agree that whoever it is that gets the job they're unlikely to be openly sympathetic to their close Govan neighbours or those who follow them. Keep up the good work, 26th, I always look forward to a new post on this thread.

I really don't know. I was surprised he that was offered a new deal and that he signed it. He's been overlooked by a succession of managers, on the little i've seen of him I didn't think he was up to the standard we need (not that I'm any kind of judge) and I assumed he'd leave this summer and begin his career in earnest at a side in the Scottish Championship. He's 21 now, same age as McCausland, so maybe that's now the realistic age to be coming into our first team. I wouldn't have given McCausland much hope of making an impact on our first team this time last year. I think he'll get an opportunity though. With Barasic gone and Yilmaz's injury record I think left back will be available for someone to step in. Yilmaz will be first choice, but after that Fraser has a better chance than most.

Lewis Ferguson was of course at Rangers as a youth but he's the perfect example of a player who needed time to develop then patience to play. Ironically he only made it into the Hamilton side because we signed Greg Docherty. It's not hindsight to say Ferguson would have done well had he signed for us when he left Aberdeen. He scored 16 goals in his final season for Aberdeen, I don't think we've had a midfielder with those kind of numbers since Albertz! For all my doom and gloom about youth the club are actively signing 20 year olds and surprised me by giving Robbie Fraser a 2 year deal, I was certain he'd be playing for Raith Rovers or Hamilton, someone like that, in the coming season. That suggests a change of strategy by the club, perhaps we will see a very young Rangers side this season. How the support will react to that will be interesting.

Yeah, forgot about that.

It's not the number of people watching that's the issue, it's the consequences. Liverpool aren't firing their manager is they finished second. Indeed no side in England is doing that, most are delighted if the finish fourth. Second for Rangers is being fired. If we're still second and trailing by say 6 points come the end of October there will be voices on here calling for Clement to go. That's not right but it is reality. I've pointed this out before. While we were visiting the fishing villages and market towns of the Scottish lower leagues Celtic had no challenge for the league. During that period they developed Callum MacGregor, James Forrest, Keiran Tierney, Ryan Christie and Charlie Mulgrew. They could do that because they could afford the mistakes young players make without worrying it would make a difference. Since we returned to the top flight they've developed no one of consequence. For the record, I'm not promoting ditching our youth set up, but there is an argument these days.

I'm not actually making the argument, merely pointing out that there is one. I'd prefer a youth policy that produced players we can use, currently it doesn't and part of the reason for that is demands on the club.