JohnMc

Sycophant alert. Frankie has spent over 20 years promoting all things Rangers, particularly our support. He's been involved in books, thought pieces, organisations, committees as well as this website, message board and the podcast. Not only does he posses a deep knowledge regarding Rangers and has a unique understanding into the culture and views of our support, but his past also arms him with an insight into professional football that most of us will never have. He's also surprisingly tall in real life. All that said, we're considering him appearing on a national broadcaster here, where a potentially global audience awaits. That's why I must vote 'no'. For all Frankie's strengths he has one huge, over-riding handicap; his accent. Is it fair to subject the good people of Scotland to someone from Tranent? We must consider the reaction of the traveller on the lonely road from Ulan Bator to Almaty, tuning into hear how the Highland League climaxed and who might stop and think 'do all Rangers supporters sound like that?'. His inflections, clearly influenced by centuries of mingling with traders from the Low Countries, generations of inter-breeding and life times spent underground, will startle all right thinking people. I'm greatly concerned that at some point Frankie might ask for 'salt and sauce' and make us all a laughing stock. There is a reason why both the BBC and STV are based in Govan, and it's not because they were offered shedloads of public money to relocate there and it has the best internet and digital communications network in the country. No, it's because of it's proximity to how proper English should be spoken. It's how King Charles would speak if he'd been sent to Govan High instead of Gordonstoun. Perhaps a crowd funder to pay for elocution lessons could be arranged, for both Frankie and our head of state.

A bit like Stephen Kelly, Mayo looks capable of having a top flight career in Scotland but is not ready for Rangers first team. Mayo is 23 now, I expect a nominal sum transfer to Kilmarnock, or someone similar, with a big sell-on percentage will be the outcome.

Isn't that what's always happened in football? There's always someone who tells the manager if a player can be signed or not and if the club has accepted a bid for a player. The manager isn't always going to like that, but that's the reality of it. I suppose it used to be a director or CEO, today it's a combination of CEO and DoF. With managers rarely lasting more than a few seasons these days it makes sense that someone else takes responsibility for recruitment. Indeed even calling them managers is disingenuous, their job is coaching the first team, whoever is in it.

This century has seen Greece, Portugal, Italy, Spain (twice) and France win it. With Holland, Turkey, Czech Republic, Wales and Denmark all making the semis. England have never won it, Germany not since 96. In that same period only one club, Porto in 2004, outside of England, Germany, Italy and Spain has won the Champion's League, and that's played every season, not every 4 like the Euros. No Welsh, Danish, Greek, Turkish or Czech club side is getting to the semis of the Champion's League anytime soon. Italy's victory a year or so ago comes as Serie A is as weak as it's been in my lifetime. If you look at the World Cup then you have to accept that neither Brazil or Argentina have financially strong domestic leagues, certainly not compared to the wealthy European leagues. Yet both countries compete regularly at the top of international football. French league football, barring one artificially inflated club, can't compete with the English or Spanish leagues, yet France have been consistently one of the best international sides of the last 25 years. England haven't won a tournament in my lifetime, and I am not a young man. In the same period English club sides have won 13 European Cups/Champion's League titles, despite being banned from the competition for some of those years. More importantly is the last few years and the next few. The weaker domestic leagues are only going to fall further and further behind the big 3 or 4, but I'm fairly confident several of those countries with weak domestic leagues will at least reach the semis of a major international tournament. Rangers can barely lay a glove on Real Madrid or Barcelona currently, yet Scotland can beat Spain in a match that actually matters.

There are certainly quite a few examples of players who have never played professionally in their 'home' country. There are quite a few who come through the ranks at a club in their home country but leave very early in their careers for a much wealthier league too. I just like that say Norway can have Odegaard, a guy who joined Real Madrid as a 16 year old, and Haaland, arguably the most coveted forward in the world, playing alongside Strandberg a 32 year old centre half for Vålerenga a mid table Norwegian side. I'm not so naive that I don't think money plays a part in international football as well, but just not at the same level as club football.

I'm going against the grain, I find myself enjoying international football more these days than for a long time. When I started taking a serious interest in football going to watch Scotland was as normal as going to watch Rangers. I barely missed a Scotland home match from around 1982 to 1989 or so. Then, like a lot of Rangers supporters, my interest started to wane. Now I can't actually remember the last Scotland match I attended, certainly it wasn't this century. I'll still watch them if they're on TV, I still want them to win and they still have the power to elate or depress me depending how the performance goes. My expectations are different from Rangers. I almost expect Scotland to disappoint me in a way I don't expect from Rangers. I'll caveat all of that though, Rangers can elate or depress me on a scale Scotland simply can't, or haven't so far. Reaching the Europa League final last season was an incredible feeling, maybe if Scotland reached the latter stages of a finals competition it would feel the same. I'm not sure I'll ever find that out. Losing to Celtic puts me on a downer that so far no Scotland result ever has. Where my enjoyment of international football is coming from isn't directly connected to watching Scotland. I feel international football is simply more meritocratic than club football. The powerful club sides in the bigger leagues are on such different level financially now that frankly the sport is now rigged. It's impossible for a club with Rangers support and history to compete with any English side in their top flight. That gap only looks like it'll continue to grow in the coming seasons. Chelsea spent over £350 million in January, and no one bats an eyelid. When we do produce a decent young player he's taken from us, often before he's even made the first team squad far less played 50 matches for us. We can see this happen all across Europe now, a two tier system is firmly in place. It wasn't always like that. In my formative years clubs like Rangers could expect to compete in Europe against the very best. Clubs like Brugge, Malmo, PSV, Benfica and Porto all made the European Cup Final. They all now struggle to even qualify for the Champion's League. Which is where international football comes in. Spain are clearly lacking in a top striker currently, as they demonstrated on Wednesday night. Now, if it was Barca or Real they'd simply go out and buy the best striker in Brazil or Germany or wherever. Spain can't do that, they need to work with the players they have. That's why we see countries like Portugal, Croatia, Morocco, Belgium, Uruguay and Wales reach semi finals in recent years. The bigger countries will always have an inbuilt advantage simply through having more players to choose from, but smaller nations can compete, they can sometimes do more than compete when they get a handful of very good players at one time. International football is simply fairer. I love that Argentina can have the best player in the world in their side, but they might need to also play a couple of total journeymen in the same team. I miss the Rangers matches during international breaks, but I enjoy watching football that's not as corrupt or imbalanced as club football now is.

Fascinating. I had expected Hamilton's players to have had better careers than ours, but actually there's not too much in it.

We had a brief chat about this on Friday's podcast and someone got in touch to point out that Peter McCloy joined Rangers in 1970 and played at the end of the 85/86 season when Walter Smith was caretaker following Wallace's departure and before Souness had joined. So a nice goal-keeping symmetry, Peter McCloy to Allan McGregor linking Walter Smith from 1970 to at least last Wednesday evening.

My understanding is his only game under Struth was a benefit match for Bert Manderson. My very amateur checking suggested that match was in August and Struth took over in May. However, I could easily be wrong, I'm no expert.

Davie Cooper signed in 1977 and played under Souness while Walter Smith was his assistant. Barry Ferguson signed pro at Rangers in 1997 and played under Smith, he left Rangers (second time around) in July 2009, so a span of 32 years. Allan McGregor signed for Rangers a month after Smith left however he did play for him second time around, so if we include that then that's a span of nearly 46 years and counting. Derek Johnstone signed for Rangers in 1970 and left in 1986 (for the second time), being released by Souness and Walter Smith. He didn't play under them though.

Not sure if any of you heard the remarkable Arsene Wenger stat from the weekend. Apparently Arsenal's Saturday starting 11 was the first time since 1986 that a player who didn't feature in an Arsene Wenger managed Arsenal side didn't start. So 37 years give or take a few months. As you do I started to think of a Rangers equivalent. Best I've come up with is 59 years although I can't say a player started every match in that period. So here's my workings - Jimmy Gordon joined Rangers in 1907, played 315 times (won 10 Scotland caps) and left the club in 1920, the year Bill Struth became manager. Struth took over in May of 1920. I don't know what month Gordon left though. Fast forward to Eric Caldow. Caldow was signed by Struth in 1952 and played for Rangers until March 1966. An unbroken 59 year connection with Bill Struth (I think). Happy for someone to correct or improve this. BTW Reading about Jimmy Gordon he apparently played upfront, in midfield, in defence and in goal for the Rangers first during his career. Love that.

Beale is a new manager, in his career he's spent all of 9 months as the man in charge. That's not long and as such we have to accept he'll make mistakes. The midfield chosen for the cup final didn't perform. I can understand why he chose to go with the experience of Kamara and Lundstrum to balance the youth of Tilman. There is absolutely no guarantee that had he started Raskin and Cantwell the match would have finished any differently. Starting is different from coming on as a sub. What's important about Beale is learning from his mistakes. We play Celtic again in a few weeks, it'll be interesting to see what we do differently then. Beale is a gamble, we're gambling that someone recognised as a very good coach can become a very good manager. It's not going to happen instantly though, he'll need some time and support. Wether he'll get it is another matter. Pedro's big downfall was his inability to learn from his mistakes. Fingers crossed Beale is smarter, and luckier.

I stand corrected, I didn't realise McCulloch was already in the Hall Of Fame. I couldn't find a definitive list of who was in it. My internet skills are clearly as poor as my memory these days!

What I find interesting is two players, McGregor and Davis, are honoured despite both leaving the club when we went onto administration. Yet two international players who stayed, McCulloch and Wallace, are ignored. Now we can debate motivation, stage of career, earning potential and so on, but both could have played at a far higher level than the bottom divisions in Scotland at that time. As it happens I don't really blame Davis and McGregor, or any of the players who left. It's a short career, there was enormous uncertainty around the club, the new owner, Charles Green, even then didn't fill you with confidence. But, both Wallace and McCulloch made different choices and so provided experience and leadership at a time when we were looking like playing children in our first team. Whatever your views on their ability I find it surprising they've been overlooked when some of their contemporaries are being inducted.

I remember a number of years ago, ironically against Thistle again, Iain Ferguson being criticised for chasing the ball following a similar incident. Someone went down and the ball was put out, it was thrown back to Thistle by us, then Fergie chased their players not allowing them to dwell on it. The Thistle fans howled, their players remonstrated but as the game was tied and it felt like Thistle were wasting time Fergie wasn't for letting them pass it among themselves. At the time I fully supported him doing it, I felt Thistle were taking advantage of the unwritten rule, using it to their advantage, trying to slow the game down, stop our building momentum. So for me there isn't a line, I don't see this as club specific, I see it as circumstances specific. I'd have no problem supporting the manager and players doing the same thing, in the same circumstances, against any other side, even 'them'. In different circumstances though, I might take a very different view. As this thread has demonstrated, this isn't a black and white issue. We all see things differently and I suspect if this ever does happen again there will be disagreements, again. Interestingly I just watched the Leeds/Aston Villa incident from a few years back. It's slightly different but the outcome was the same, Leeds letting Villa walk in a goal. What I noticed though was the Leeds supporters booed and jeered it, they weren't happy about that decision, made by a very popular manager in Biesla. So maybe @Bluedell is onto something in his observation that those at the game and those watching on TV saw the incident differently.

That's fair, Bluedell.

Since we're reading so much into this let's consider for a moment what might have happened had Beale ignored Thistle's protests and said 'play on, tough'. He'd have certainly created an angry and highly motivated opponent for a start. I expect more than one Thistle player might have fancied some old-fashioned retribution on Tillman too. The referee had already shown himself to be lenient when it came to Thistle, so quite what protection Tillman would have got we can only speculate about, but not much isn't a wild guess. That's before we even consider the off field reaction. Pressure for a replay in the manner of Arsenal a few years ago would have been doing the rounds by now not to mention the demonisation of Tillman. The more you look at it not only was it the right decision for reasons of sportsmanship, it was the pragmatic decision all round.

Remind me of our results since Beale took over? Beale instructing our players to allow Thistle to score not only didn't affect the result of the match, it has literally no bearing at all on the next match, none whatsoever.

Yes, well you shouldn't have built one then.

West Ham would have won the Champion's League by now had Di Canio not caught that ball... Richard Gough once ordered our players not to score against Hearts after they'd been reduced to 8 men in a match at Ibrox. When does the petition to strip him of his place in the Hall Of Fame begin? I could understand the anger this seems to be generating if we'd lost yesterday.

Raskin could join this week, have a blinding next few months in our first team, so much so that someone offers us £5 million for him in the summer. Beale and Wilson would like geniuses then. I can understand the disquiet over buying someone who is 'free' in 6 months time, but a bird in the hand and all that, and I sincerely hope our players and management haven't given up on this league, far less the cups.

Changes are coming to European football, whether supporters want it or not. The question is will we be part of it. The imbalance in finance between the English league and the rest of Europe is stark, FIFA's report on transfer spending last year lays that out - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/64412215 This was largely behind the 'Super League' debacle last season, and while that has been shelved for now, the reasons for it haven't and it, or something very like it, will rise again and soon. I doubt we'll be invited into the elite league, but there's going to be a shuffling of the chairs in club football in the coming years and it will affect us. I mean no disrespect when I say that it's not right that we compete in a league with clubs most of who literally have a turnover that's a fraction of ours. Likewise when we go into the Champion's League we're the minnows, at least financially. The obvious next step is some sort of pan-European league. The Americanisation of sport in Europe is well underway, and while closed leagues are still unpalatable for most there's a chance of a pyramid and so clubs like ours have a pathway to the top. What form that league will be is anyone's guess. Rugby union in Europe has an English league, a French league and an 'all the rest' league. The English clubs aren't dominating like they used too, the 'all the rest' have sides that are very competitive as do the French. For me our current custodians job is to keep us solvent and competitive at the Europa League level, the second tier of European football, until the future becomes clearer. I suspect an 'all the rest' league isn't so far away. The fabled Atlantic League with Belgian, Dutch, Scandinavian, Swiss and maybe some eastern European sides as well as Scotland seems likely to me.

Morelos to Inter isn't as ridiculous as it first sounds. Italian club football isn't at the standard it once was, you could argue it's only the fifth strongest league in Europe now. Plus in recent years Scottish players have done relatively well in Serie A. Aaron Hickey and Liam Henderson both settled quickly and did well there, now Josh Doig and Lewis Ferguson have continued that trend. A fit, focussed Morelos would do well in that league and for a relatively small outlay he must be on a few Italian sides radar.

Depending on what his remit is I don't think its worst appointment the club has made. He's a former Holyrood politician and someone who has held various roles, some senior, at the BBC, he must have an intimate understanding of how both work. We've not enjoyed good relations with either of those institutions for a long time now, and whatever your views surely an improved relationship with both is beneficial for the club. I'm guessing, so there's every chance I'm wrong, but my take is Morrison has been brought in to try and create a better relationship between the club and the large public institutions that run and influence much of Scottish day-to-day life. That won't be easy, I wish him luck as I think he'll need it.

I don't catch Off The Ball often these days but I caught some of it on Saturday. They'd a couple of ex-refs on and I assume they'd hoped to further fuel the Ange bonfire that Scottish VAR and refereeing was being placed upon. Instead, at least while I was listening, the ex-refs laughed at the ridiculousness of these allegations of bias against the Celtic. One of them, (was his name Conroy?) explained he was a Celtic fan and once got pelters from his pals for chalking off a Celtic 'goal' against us. Both easily explained the 'hand ball' rule and expressed surprise that Ange and co didn't know it. Cosgrove sounded uncomfortable at this breaking out of common sense, Cowan, to his credit, mocked Celtic and their acolytes.