Rousseau

I don't think Luiz is an awful defender, but admit that he does have a mistake or two in him -- case in point the Monaco game. Apparently PSG were reluctant to let him go, but the manager stated that he'd be third-choice behind Silva and Marquinhos, who are younger and better. There is no doubt in my mind that he was not Conte's first-choice -- he'd prefer more disciplined defenders -- but surely the fact that a man such as Conte would give the green light suggests he would be a good addition to the squad? He knows the player's strengths and weaknesses. My main point was that he was a good buy simply because it gave the team more options: Conte can now play three at the back; it gives him another arrow in his quiver. I think he is the "type" of player we need. We need a CB that is quick, can read the game well (outwith those brain farts) and can pass a ball accurately and sharply -- he's very good in the air too. Ideally, we'd want that with a more disciplined player, but those are few and far between. My point was that we need a "Luiz" rather than a "Terry", as the former would suit our game better. I agree prices are rising, but so is income. There will always be a correlation. Prices were never going to stay the same as they were X number of years ago. If teams need to increase the price to get the player they want, then so be it, if they deem it necessary. I don't disagree that teams can pay high prices for "average" players -- even although I disagree with your example, as I think Slimani is a very good player -- but if that's the price that both agree with, then that's that. The market sets the price. There probably will be more Leeds and Portsmouth scenarios. Liverpool are just more pragmatic -- of course lack of CL plays its part -- as I don't think they are willing to pay higher fees. If more clubs act like that then the prices will decrease.

Erm... don't think they did. However, I agree that -- in theory, as I doubt we'll have a chance to see them play -- top Italian sides will role-over bottom EPL sides. Juventus thrashed West Ham in pre-season without really trying.

Surprised by Luiz, but it is a good bit of business. He's not a bad defender (He's the type we need!), and it now allows Chelsea to play a back-three (Conte's favourite) if required. Alonso is also a good signing; versatile, dynamic, good in the air and an excellent set-piece taker (although probably down the pecking order at Chelsea in that regard), I've been impressed with his performances for Fiorentina in what is a technically proficient side. Also more than surprised at Sissoko's fee! He'll not be first choice, so 30M for a squad player is crazy. I wasn't surprised when they initially pulled out. Slimani is a good acquisition for Leicester. He fits their profile, being very, very quick. He's been a stand-out in a Sporting side that narrowly missed out on a title last year. I always thought Wilshere would go to Bournemouth, out of the choices; it just fits. I think the commute is an issue, but someone said that it is probably easier to get to Bournemouth than the other side of London! I find it frustrating when people criticise teams for spending 'obscene' amounts on 'unknowns'. What that means is they're unknown to you. The money is ever increasing -- rightly or wrongly -- but teams will only spend what they think a player is worth. Slimani is a good player, and 29M seems about average for a good player nowadays. They've obviously got the money to through around, so I don't see the big deal. I'm disappointed Rangers are not able to play at that level, but there is nothing much we can do about it -- except join the set-up, I suppose.

It's not the Rangers twitter feed. Someone's having a right wee chuckle. I'm surprised you feel for it FS. To be fair there are quite a few going about at the moment, sometimes I have to look again to make sure.

Is this "journalism"? They make up a story that he's leaving, then make a counter-story that he's staying? There is no story there. He was never leaving in the first place,

The only way they can qualify is if the rest take points from each other, which is not unreasonable. However, they would then have to take points off the rest too, which is unlikely.

Well, that was the easiest -- and most disappointing -- set of points to tally-up! No CR or CS. compo and Mountain Bear get a point each for predicting the Correct Number of Rangers Goals. Whosthedado, onevision, BEARGER and StuGers gain 2 points for correctly predicting the FGS! The rest got zilch, nada, zero, nothing, zip, bugger all... Latest Standings: IFRAME Not Available. Direct Link to Spreadsheet. A week-by-week tally of scores can be found here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1-uQa9LP4du35rep3iUemqtj2NihPxHUuAGJFhz2WW0I

The first half was poor; far too slow and aimless. I think it's hilarious that the people that are -- rightly IMO -- moaning about the long balls we played last might were generally the same people demanding it last season. I don't think we were as bad defensively as it appeared. Apart from Boyd's sitter and his goal -- If Wilson is on the pitch, Boyd doesn't score as Wilson would be quicker at covering than Hill; not by much but he is quicker -- they were restricted to long range shots. Granted, some of the midfield shadowing was poor. Looking back we actually created a fair number of very good chances, but the decision-making and finishing (especially from Forrester and Miller) was abysmal. McKay was awful and just couldn't get into the game, but when he did he created some good openings. I thought Barton was better when he played the lone DM towards the end. And likewise, we looked better -- granted some of it was because we were a man up at the time -- when Halliday took up the role. We need more energy and creativity in midfield. I, like most on here, would prefer the 4-1-2-3, instead of the 4-2-3-1 we seem to be playing now. I did predict we may drift into this formation. Windass and Holt will be crucial to get back in the team. We need to play one of Barton and Rossiter in the DM. When both play we have a lack of energy and creativity in the midfield. As annoyed at Miller as I am, I think the lack of movement in midfield is failing to use his movement (which is still ok). I'd still prefer he doesn't play now, except as a super-sub. I was pleasantly surprised that Garner managed to get on the end of a couple of corners. He failed to hit the target but if he continues he should be a good threat from set-pieces. He did dive to win a penalty, but I really don't care if he did; it's about winning games at the end of the day. How many players in Europe 'draw the foul'? I'm really starting to think there is something wrong with me because I agreed with Sutton all night! Case in point: I thought Hill hand-balled it; not deliberately, it was more of an instinctual reaction, but it was a hand-ball. It should have been a penalty, but fortunately the Referee -- who was awful and completely bottled it for most of the game -- couldn't see it. I think he's more complementary to a Rangers player than I'd expect from a former Tim. He's still an obnoxious twat, but I seem to agree with him on most ocassions -- what does that say about me?! I never expected us to win the league, and never even expected us to challenge. All I wanted was top 3-4. For that to happen we need to beat bottom-half teams. This performance was not good enough. We've lost the spark we had last year. Like Craig said, we have no divine right to win leagues; it must come from hard graft and skill. I have no doubt we're grafting but we need to find that spark again.

Killie 0 - 2 Rangers FGS Forrester

Just waiting for the team... #PatientBear

Proving my own point, I don't mind match/prediction discussion on this thread. I would, however, prefer a definite FGS pick. But, ambiguity for today's game is acceptable because we have a new signing available and don't know whether he'll start or not.

I like the combined elements; works well. I'll need to get a copy of the .psd file when it's completed.

Bollocks... Good job I went with yours -- I was concentrating on the player images. I'll know in future.

Oh, I just seen yours Frankie... I've added your one to the main site publication. (I was quite proud of mine...)

Oh, wait a minute...

That's it published, Pete! (Apologies, but I'm not competent enough (yet!) to produce the team line-up graphic for you.)

I don't think Porto are what there were. The only reason they got past Roma was because they were 2 men up with an hour left to play (maybe not as long as that). Excellent draw for Leicester. But, it does depend how the teams respond to them. I can see Copenhagen and Brugge defending, which doesn't suit Leicester. I really can't see them getting any points whatsoever. Barca and City speak for themselves, but Monchengladbach are a very good side; really well organised in a compact 4-4-2 (one of the few sides that I admire playing the formation) and break with tremendous pace. Perhaps dB can enlighten us about the German side? Spurs have a very even group. I can see them both struggling and doing well.

Get your predictions in for Friday's game!

I read the OP as asking how far we are away from them in general. In that sense I believe we are still quite a bit behind. Their resources far exceed our own. If it's asking can we beat them next time we play, then yes, of course. In the same way any team can beat another in a one-off game.

If he can pass the ball I can see him in defense; like Javi Martinez at Bayern (DM converted to CB). Wherever he plays his physicality should be a big bonus.

Well, it's the principle of the thing, but yes, it cost me points!

Ironically, we probably have too many options in DM now!

I think the team selection was geared towards solidity, but was also somewhat hampered by the few attacking midfielders actually available! Holt and Windass change the dynamic instantly. Barton and Halliday don't have the necessary ability to receive the ball: they're Givers, not Takers...

The subs certainly made a difference. Kranjcar was willing -- and able -- to pass forward, which the others failed to do. Dodoo and MOH's movement and energy was vital towards the end. (I'm still annoyed at MOH shooting when a simple squared ball finishes the game...)

I must do better. I will do better.