Rousseau

Is Roofe ... erm ... injured?

Oh - you're assuming we've been tracking them for a while. I blame GvB. And it's another reason why we need a more powerful DoF.

Auston Trusty. An American defender.

I get your point but it's a tad silly. Why would teams ever need to pay a fee? Just sign them when they are in nappies.

I'd prefer Panzo: his stats are comparable, but he's 3 years younger.

I liked the extra time added during the World Cup. It was a good change.

That's just what I remember reading; that it was inadequate information on our opponents. I don't recall where I read it.

I also believe that GvB's run was built upon the fitness work done by Gerrard's team. Once GvB implemented his own the following season, we were awful in that regard.

No spankings, though. It's not about being better or worse. I think that SG and MB can set up a team to defend and frustrate better opponents. I don't think GvB had that knack - even his great victories saw us concede goals. I believe it's fairly well-known that the players criticised GvB for not giving them instructions on the opponents. I can't remember where, though; it came out after GvB left. That criticism wouldn't be levelled at MB. I maintain that if MB was in charge for our CL run, we wouldn't have shipped 5, 6 or 7 goals. We still would have lost, though: it was a tough group.

You're correct, but in our case we only need a true high press in certain games. Domestically, the majority of teams let us have the ball so it's usually about beating a low block.

I said it at the time: Gerrard or Beale don't get pumped in the CL the way GvB did. That doesn't mean we would have won any games - it was a tough group - but I don't see 0-7 drubbings under SG or MB.

And yet it wasn't a problem before that when they pressed properly. It's their pressing that has dropped off; the defence has remained the same.

Difficult. Defending is a team exercise. There are stats out there but you have to pay, so I don't have access.

Take out the contribution of Tavernier (30), Morelos (19) and Colak (21), which is around 70 goal contributions. And then spread them between Lammers, Danilo, Dessers and Sima? Around 17 goal contributions each. It's doable, but they'd all need to have good seasons. And those four won't play every match - they can't; there's not enough places. (And Morelos was poor, and so was Colak in terms of assists.)

I'm sick of hearing about Tavernier's poor defensive capabilities. There's no right or wrong answer, though.

We have a tremendous asset in Tavernier: 30 goal contributions a season from FB is phenomenal. Is it worth removing that for a FB that can defend? Or do we compensate by defending differently? I'm in the latter camp.

How do you replace 30 goal contributions a season?

It's almost time for the next GPL season. I like to get everyone's thoughts on the state of the game. Are you all happy with it? Would you like to see any changes? There are times when I'd like to simplify the scoring, so everyone's bunched together more - a bit like the the Euros or World Cup games - but there is something to be said for having a lot of ways to score points. For example, I could remove the Correct Number of Rangers goals (1 pt), so it's just Correct Result (1 pt), Correct Score (3 pts) and First Rangers Goalscorer (2 pts). What are your thoughts?

'Useless' is harsh I'll admit, but I'm not wrong.

We can't pass out either, to be fair. Pass out, lose the ball; play it long, lose the ball. Useless.

We've done that every time during pre-season. That's the problem. We can't keep the ball.

Well we can definitely match the Hoffenheim B team.

I was just going to post that Butland has had a not bad game - you can't blame him for the goals - but he's just misjudged a couple of long balls as he comes out of goal.

@compo was ahead of us all along!

What was that from wee donner? A wee one-two was easier and safer that whatever he was trying there.