BlackSocksRedTops

Canada currently showing how to use a dynamic 4-3-3. 

3 minutes ago, Gonzo79 said:

He's had it tough at Barcelona, Bayern Munich and Manchester City, right enough.  

 

He dresses like a ponce, spits non-stop and wears a wee separatist ribbon.  

Thanks. For a moment there, I thought someone was going to come back with a nonsensical answer...

Is Mick Beale an advocate of the 4-3-3 system? 

1 hour ago, Uilleam said:

I should not want that creep anywhere near Ibrox or Auchenhowie. 

I know I'll, regret this but why oh why would you not want a manager that has repeatedly succeeded in various top leagues around Europe. Whilst playing amazing football. Whilst breaking records. Whilst showing passion. 

I don't care WHO the next manager is tbh. As long as he can bring some fresh ideas and show progression with this under performing group of players, I'll be happy. 

First point to address on the agenda...can we end the current obsession with floaty corners? We have players that can deliver good dead balls but insist on diluting the potential impact of these by using these pointless out swinging dead balls. 

Oh...and win more games. Score more goals. Run more kms. Show more desire. Increase the tempo...etc. etc...

Whovever it is, please ensure that he is not an ex player. Let's look forward not back. 

Beale

Muscat

Knutsen

Great topic but can I throw this out there...is it necessary to do align a brand to a football team? We are obviously talking about Rangers here but can anyone actually define with any great clarity a "brand" associated with another football club. What is Celtic's brand? What is Liverpool's brand? And for that matter teams like Motherwell? It seems to me we are looking for answers to a question that cannot (and doesn't need to) be answered.

My love affair with football is already dwindling. The idea of Sean Dyche coming to the SPL to win ugly with Rangers would be the final nail in the coffin.

9 hours ago, JohnMc said:

Great question.

Separating the 'club' from the 'support' for a moment, although both are intrinsically linked in reality. Our claims to be the 'world's most successful club' might be factually accurate but don't really hold much value under serious scrutiny, I mean are we really claiming to be more successful than Real Madrid or Liverpool? I could check but I think Linfield have now won more domestic titles than Rangers and no one is claiming they are the world's most successful club. But domestic success is still clearly a part of our 'brand'. You ask any football supporter in Europe to name a Scottish football club and they'll know Rangers. When we reached the Europa League final last season the Chairman of Frankfurt welcomed our semi final victory by saying something like 'it's great the final is being contested by two traditional clubs'. This was partly a dig at RB Leipzig who are universally disliked in Germany, but also a nod to our history. There are not many organisations who reach 150 years old, we had a history with Frankfurt, having famously played them in the 1960s, and they knew this. Add this to Ibrox Stadium, again an organisation that has had the same home for over a century, and a home with a building as magnificent as our Main Stand, is impressive. So I'd venture that 'tradition' is part of our brand. We're not Man City, or PSG or Chelsea where everyone knows that success has been bought by oligarchs and sport-washing, and while success brings fame and adulation, none of those clubs have what we have now. So 'tradition' being a 'real' football club that exists purely for the love of the sport for me is key to the club's brand today. 

Now we're obviously not the only club who can claim that. but we should be careful about protecting it. 

 

Another term that's often used to describe Rangers is 'the quintessential British club'. I've never been entirely sure what that meant, as 'British' is such a difficult term to define. Undoubtedly a good percentage of our support embrace this, and while in recent times the club hasn't made any statements that were overtly political or about national identity, we do fly the Union flag and, famously, toast the monarch. So being 'British' however complicated that might be, is currently part of our brand. 

 

Is being 'Scottish' part of our brand? It was when I started following Rangers. As ridiculous as it might seem today the bulk of the Scotland support was made up of Rangers fans up. I went to every Scotland home match from the early 1980s to the early 90s. Something changed then. I don't know if it was the influx of English players under Souness, something that had never happened in Scotland before, or the start of the decline of the Scotland team as a force in international football, but something changed. I'd still watch the games but no longer attended, but I never missed a Rangers match. Gradually my interest has wained and I don't think I'm alone in that. I was barely aware we were even playing earlier this week. That's me, and I fully accept others will feel differently. But I don't think it's inaccurate to suggest a gulf lies between the Scotland side and many Rangers fans. Many of us don't feel an ownership of the national side, and we should, it's our side too. I lived in Belfast for a while and Linfield supporters see the Northern Ireland side as theirs, as do Glentoran and Crusader's fans, in a way that I don't think we do anymore. Indeed I'd say NI based Rangers supporters feel an ownership of their national side.

We can analyse the many cultural, footballing and political reasons for this and never solve it. But once you leave Scotland there is no doubt at all that the rest of the world see us as a Scottish side. Whatever our slightly complicated relationship might be, to a German or a Dutch football fan Rangers are Scottish, indeed often we're one of the few things they associate with Scotland. We're based in Scotland, most of our support is based in Scotland, we play in blue and have a lion rampant in our badge. So, Scotland is part of our brand.

 

Is Glasgow part of our brand, or even Govan? To an extent it is but it’s not something we make enough of I feel. But both are closely associated with us so it’s part of our brand.

 

Is Protestantism? It wasn't at the beginning, or indeed for the first 3 or so decades of our existence. But it would be mendacious to pretend it didn't become a defining tenet of who we are. But is it today? I'd venture that the club like to keep it at arm's length. That said we have a club chaplain from the Presbyterian tradition and whenever services are conducted around the Ibrox disaster for example they are normally officiated by the Church of Scotland. But today I don't think our club is any closer to reformed Christianity than say Hearts or Aberdeen are, both of who I suspect would also look to the main denomination for guidance when the need arose. 

In my opinion the support are a bit schizophrenic on this. While I'd say the majority of our support are at least culturally or traditionally 'Protestant, I suspect most don't darken the doors of their local Kirk very often. Religion plays a smaller and smaller part of most Scot's daily lives, I'd say most Rangers supporter's have no real religion if you pushed them on it. Yet, we're still seen by many people as being a 'Protestant' club, whatever that means. Clearly part of this is connected to our main rival's clear association with Catholicism. If they are one thing we must be the other. It's also true that some supporter's have an association with organisations like the Orange institutions and much of the trappings of that, such as songs, have become associated with Rangers too, and still are. Songs and chants with a strong Loyalist influence, largely from Ireland, are still popular with a large section of the support, as are some that can only be described as 'anti-Catholic'. 

 

For me I don't believe we're in really a 'Protestant' club anymore, but it would also be wrong to pretend others might disagree. It's part of our 'brand' in some shape or form. I worry being ‘anti-Catholic’ is also seen as part of our brand by some and I’ve personal experience of some who think we’re ‘anti-Irish’.

 

My biggest frustration is I don’t think we can genuinely associate any clear football related themes to our brand. We’re not Ajax for example and their association with producing their own players. We’re not Liverpool or Man Utd or Spurs where a particular type of attacking football is associated with them. If anything in modern times I think we’re seen as a club who buy success, who can outspend most of their rivals. We don’t have a reputation, at least in modern times, of producing our own players and our style of football changes with every new manager. I’d say that was different 100 or so years ago when we were the ‘speedy and light blues’ and viewed as one of the most attractive and progressive footballing sides of the time. I suppose in Scotland we’re still viewed as a side who ‘wins trophies’, even if it’s not so accurate in the last decade. But that’s a domestic brand and rather than an international one.

 

It’s a mixed bag. We could, and should, have some footballing themes to help define our brand. Certainly developing young players is something the board are actively pursuing but it takes a lot of successes and a while for that to become a reality.

 

As ever John, your post hits the nail directly on the head. Bravo sir.

8 minutes ago, Devil's advocaat said:

Just to cheer you all up, I have it on good authority we're looking at bringing Barrie McKay home. 🙈🙉

Is it to cut the players hair...?

Deliberately turned my phone off and took my kids out for the day. (Lunch + Black Panther 2). Got home and turned my phone on and I'm not surprised in the slightest. 

Not sure whats more depressing...how predictable we are or the fans leaving in their thousands with 10 minutes to go. 

My god...we are an exceedingly average football team. 

1 hour ago, forlanssister said:

20 corners 20 times just lump it into the box 0 variation. Quite bizarre and symptomatic of simply going through the motions, oh for a leader of men!

When we get a corner it doesn't even register with me as a potential opportunity to gain an advantage. Our dead balls are so unimaginative and predictable. Much like the team I suppose. 

34 minutes ago, Malangsob said:

Unfortunate loss.

 

We did not capitalize on opportunities.

 

 

Are you sure? We didn't actually create that much. 

I note with interest that Emery has already got a tune out of Villas under performing squad with a 3-1 home win over Man Utd...

Farewell Gio. Thanks for some truly amazing European memories but domestically we have been dreadful since you have taken the team on board. Oh well...

An all too familiar tale. Loads of the ball but doing nowt with it. Opposition score with their first shot on target. Typical.

Good to see Davies back. C'mon Rangers. Let's do this!!

10 hours ago, PoohBear said:

I'm still scratching my head at the Yilmaz signing. Not because I think he's a bad player, but did we really need to splash out so much on a LB that doesn't even get a game? There are so many other positions we could have strengthened with that money. It's bizarre.

I think Ridvan was bought as an potential investment. Possibly with a view to selling him on at a high price sometime in the near future as he was very highly regarded in Turkey. 

"Rewind back to the start of the season and the outlook was much brighter. Yes, we'd lost important players such as Bassey and Aribo to big money moves but we had strengthened the squad as well"

Did we actually strengthen in terms of quality? IMO we added more players without actually any great quality that would improve our starting XI. For example, is Matondo an improvement on Sakala? From what I've seen, he's an infererior version. 

Wait...they scored 4 goals, conceded 15 and finished with the lowest number of points ever for a Celtic team in the CL and they are wrapping this up as some kind of "victory"? We were rank but at least we are know it. 

If our players were more ruthless (and better quality) we could have entered double figures today with ease.

Rangers 2 Aberdeen 1

FGS Colak