Rousseau

I'm only judging PC from this season, like I did with Beale last season. It's a new team. It's a rebuild that needed to happen. And it's not finished. We've only really gotten rid of (most of) the deadwood and invested in the future, but we've not strengthened the first team enough. Finances have hampered us, there, though.

Is that the one that blooms once a year for a day? I don't like that comparison...

@CammyF - Clement polished the turd last season, extracting 19 wins from his first 20 games, then it reverted to type. It was a turd, after all. We are now turning that turd into fertiliser, from which shall grow a fragrant flower.

You're not reading my posts correctly, or I'm failing to explain myself properly. We're in a rebuilding phase now. It's nowhere near finished.

C o n t r a r i a n.

I wasn't including last season (I mentioned Hearts). Like I said, we're in a rebuilding phase with a new team. I don't think we can compare this team to last season's team. Like I also said, we - or the players, more specifically - shat it last season, which is why we need the rebuild. I've been pretty consistent, I think.

@CammyF started it.

We did throw it away, but you're omitting that fact that he clawed us into a title fight that we had no right to be in, being 7 points (?) behind. Over the long term it's performance that counts. We're now into a rebuild phase, which really needed to happen. I think there has been improvements: we were rubbish against Hearts, incrementally better in every subsequent game, then today we had a not unexpected set back. We're turning the turd into fertlizer.

Explains how he scored from 30 yards with a weak as piss effort...

Form (is that performance?), yes; results, no. Pretty much the opposite of Beale - and less so GvB as both his were poor. I'm much more content to stick with a manager who has poor results but decent performance and underlying stats, than the opposite. I've answered this question numerous times yet you still bring it up.

Pretty much what we've been talking about!

We usually do defend in a 4-4-2 - although not today.

I think he means 4-4-2 in attack, though.

What would be the benefit of those changes?

Igamane came on. That's great to see.

It's implied, surely? Otherwise why do you keep comparing him to Beale and GvB? Yes, pretty bad.

Maybe 30 years ago, but football has moved on.

You're not wrong, but we don't really need to adapt; we just need to do it better, stop them playing through.

You wanted Beale (and GvB? I don't remember, to be honest) to stay. What's the difference with Clement? Is it the fact you like to be... C o n t r a r i a n

Both those long range shots were weak as piss. I cannot compute how they go in. But then a better press prevents them from getting that space and time to shoot.

It's the execution of the approach, not the approach itself. For example - as I posted during the game - front and middle press, but the defence sit back leaving acres of space. The high press approach is fine, but the execution is piss poor.

There was a moment in the second half when he got robbed, fell to the floor, and then slowly gets up and jogs back. All the while they've swarmed past him on the attack. He's done - well, he'll be alright against the diddy teams.

I did, and that's partly my point: we were sh*t and yet the xG and actual attempts is that close. The lack of fight is the most annoying aspect. It must be a psychological issue, as @yuddie suggests.

TRAITORS! Correct Result (1 pt): r_s, BD and Franc. Correct Number of Rangers Goals (1pt): r_s FGS (2 pts): - Correct Score (3 pts): - Latest Standings: