Gaffer

This was always going to be the toughest of opening games but we've done really well so far. Jack, Davis and Aribo are in complete control here and when Morelos is in this sort of mood he is just brilliant to watch. This is why he needs to stay because on this form he's our best player and an absolute nightmare to play against.

He will have to deal with all sorts of abuse from our own support if he makes our first team so I think it should be good training for him ?

I don't understand this latest development. There was nothing in the judgement from the court case that suggests we needed to change the relationship with Hummel. Is this something that is being forced upon us, or a tactic from us. Either way the club will have to make some sort of announcement. I appreciate the tactics cannot be disclosed but in the absence of anything it will obviously cause some concern.

Well that's 45 minutes of my life I wish I had spent doing something else. This is barely a training session for us. I know Progres are packing the midfield but we could play through them quicker. We started to do that in the last 10 minutes. Before that I felt we hadn't even got into second gear.

You're right and I meant for all fans and not just Club 1872. It won't take off unless it's free to all, and there are all the Aberdeen, Celtic and Hibs fans who will want to hear it too so it should be available to anyone. I'd hope Club 1872 would take on projects for the greater good and not just the members. As a member I'd be delighted if the funds went towards this rather than buying shares.

If Club 1872 could take this on as a project, that could really be a lasting legacy and a real catalyst to changes with the BBC.

Thanks for that insight!!! Its useful to read the facts rather than rely on my own experience of it. A lot of that really surprised me. I've just asked the kids who are now in their twenties and they said that neither they nor their friends would ever listen to radio at all, but it just shows a lot of young people still are. You are right that the younger ones get everything they need through YouTube channels and similar. On your last point about a Rangers radio station for commentary, I wonder how possible/difficult that would be. I have RTV and it's transformed my enjoyment of watching our away games. If the commentary was available somehow free of charge via a radio station I am certain it would be successful. There is however one stage next year when I would want to tune in to the BBC football radio station whatever that is, and that's when we win 55. I just want to hear the pain in their voices.

I don't think it's smart for someone do put such a flag up, given the number of idiots out there. Having said that, what sort of country do we live in when you are told to take down the flag of our country? The country is being destroyed bit by bit every day.

Thanks for that @JohnMc and I know you've made this same point previously. I wonder though who these people are though and if they are significant. I understand the point by @Rick Roberts that if they manage to sway one potential customer or sponsor then it's too much, but how likely is that? In other words, what is the demographic of those that access the BBC these days? I thought I'd just ask to see if you knew. I don't know of any in the younger generation that would list the BBC as something they would ever consider accessing for information on anything, never mind football. They just don't go there and even my generation (70s child) I find are unlikely to go there either. There are just too many better sources and it leaves the BBC completely redundant for those in the digital age. That's obviously a very skewed view based on my own experience but I just wonder how many of Rangers' target audience really are impacted or influenced by the BBC. I am sure I will see the death of the BBC in my lifetime and it's the younger generation that will kill it off completely. It may happen sooner rather than later when inevitably the fee is scrapped.

That's a fair point but it only has an impact on those who consume the BBC propaganda. I think I'm right in saying that the only time I am exposed to the BBC is on this forum. I do spend a lot of time away from the UK, but I don't think I'm alone in having little to do with them. My kids and their friends (who are all UK based) never see anything that comes out of the BBC (except perhaps The Line of Duty), so I wonder if there is a stage when it really is an irrelevance. I can confirm that my life without the BBC is certainly a much more content one. More of you should try it. ?

I get your point Bill, but perhaps the other approach is just to ignore them. If we cut off the oxygen to these reporters, it would make our lives better and I'm yet to be convinced that they have any affect on us really anyway. The one thing we'd do need to address is the trial by sportscene issue which is evident.

That will always be the case if our own kids aren't good enough. They could have been given a chance through the banter years but none of them are even close enough to being good enough to displace Morelos or Defoe. It's only fair to make that clear and move them on for their own good as well as ours.

Picking the team is going to be tough, but especially the defence. We should just remind ourselves that last season we had Worral and McAuley. I'm not saying they were poor, but they certainly weren't our strongest. This season it could be argued (although I'm not necessarily claiming this to be the case) that we have now replaced our two weakest for the two strongest. Edmundson must have played his way into the starting eleven, and when Felip is fit I think he will be in there too. Having said that, I could equally feel comfortable with Goldson and Katic. That's the good problem to have. I think the more difficult problem to manage is the striker. Morelos is a nightmare for defenders and I think he's great, but in our system I think Defoe is more potent. I wonder how Gerrard will manage those two, especially against our tougher opponents. To use them best it would be great to get Morelos on to batter them for 60 minutes and then replace him with Defoe but will either be happy with that?

If it's not Kent (who I think is better centrally), then perhaps we can play Aribo there, allowing Davis, Kamara and Jack to play the midfield roles. In keeping with the purpose of the thread, I'm interested to see who we are yet to sign. Gerrard implied we have one or two more to arrive. I'm hoping it's someone for this left sided role. I don't think we need any other position covered.

I understand your point, but I think our young player of the year was better than average, and in my opinion we still have a problem with balance on that left side. I think Ojo, Arfield and Stewart are all strong in that advanced midfield role but all seem to prefer the right hand side. I'd prefer Kent to come back for that left side, but if it's not him it needs to be someone else. Of course i do agree that someone can grow into the role but that means we are off to a slower start. It's the only part of the first team that I'm not happy with. We all see things differently and in this occasion I really hope I'm wrong about this. p.s. I actually think the left side could be our strongest side. I think the balance of Halliday and Aribo is excellent. If we can nail that advanced role we could really do some damage.

The prices are high but I don't think many people would complain if it was actually decent. At one stage around 20 years ago our food was the best (in my opinion) in Scotland and now it may even be the worst. A pie is part of my football experience but I can't eat them anymore. There's actually nothing I buy from the shop anymore and choose instead to eat beforehand. Sort it out Rangers!

I can't stand the tension and you guys are now just teasing me with these reports. I'd love to get Kent back as you know, but there's no way we can afford him. If Club 1872 are happy to help fund it, I'm happy to increase my monthly subscription to help pay for him.

It'll come as no surprise that every day I start up my Gersnet forum just hoping that Stevie will post something suggesting that Kent is on his way back. I thoroughly enjoyed watching him last season anyway, but on the left of this new first eleven would be amazing for him, and would in my opinion complete the team that will win us 55. It's the only piece we are missing now and he'd be ideal. The next 10 days (i.e. the English window) are crucial for us. We need to keep our best players and get Kent (or similar) back.

That's why I said in an earlier post that it was a breach of the board members' fiduciary duties to accept that, and there would be zero defence for it. However these criminal cases take a long time and I can understand the current board's desire to move on.

The contract has a special clause which places a limit of £1m on 'damages'. The problem is that what constitutes 'damages' is also defined in the contract and SD appear to have made a good case to demonstrate that what they are claiming compensation for is not covered under the definition of damages, and hence that cap doesn't apply. They've got clever lawyers and they've done exactly what I'd want my legal team to do in these circumstances. Again though, note that the judge hasn't ruled on this. What's he's said is that he thinks they have a case as to why this claim may not be covered under the definition of damages, and therefore the limit may not apply, but that would require another hearing. It may not even be him that hears it. The newspapers are obviously using this to sensationalise the story, and the judge's throw away comments have given them the ammo. It is a threat, however it's not really going to cause much of a problem in this instance because even if that limit is removed, the compensation figure isn't likely to be that high. However what SD will be trying to do is to ensure that there is an acceptance that it may be possible in future to claim an unlimited amount of compensation. That then gives their side more weight when it comes to the final settlement and the contract being ripped up. Equally, Rangers will be trying to get their own mini wins. It's all a game to lawyers, and it's a game to King and MA too. It's little wonder the press are all over this because it gives them a story, but for us there's isn't a story yet. It only becomes of interest for us if SD can win that mini case (re the definitions) and then convince a judge that they are indeed owed millions. They've got some of the best lawyers around, but even they'll be hard pushed to put anything together that supports that claim, so I doubt they will. It'll be a mutually agreed settlement almost certainly. I'm pretty sure that SD owe us money from a previous settlement but each individual settlement won't ever get paid. It'll all just be netted off in the final settlement. I wish that would just get done soon but I doubt it. These two egos want to go a few rounds more before they call it a day. In other words, this noise and distraction will be around for a while yet.

I agree with your observations regarding the width, but that width should be provided in addition to the central three midfielders (or at least the two furthest advanced midfielders, which last night were Jack and Aribo), but Tav was constantly sitting so far forward that Jack was sitting in as the right back for at least 20 minutes in that game. That's surely not right. Tav needs to be selective in when he goes forward. His time to move forward is as the right attacking midfielder is receiving the ball, not when McGregor has it. I really don't want anyone to take this as anti Tavernier because nothing could be further from the way I feel. I really like the guy but he was ineffective last night and I had hoped this would have been obvious and therefore resulted in him being smarter about when he made forward runs, at least enough to allow Jack to get in the middle of the park and get forward. Jack was eliminated from the midfield because Tav sat forward. That's surely not being disputed, or is it? This then caused us to be weaker in the middle of the park, reducing how effective our central attack was, and allowing them more space to break.

You're right that the calculation for 'damages' will be in the contract, but if that clause isn't relevant (as the judge infers), it would not be used. In these circumstances it's normally the case where SD will put in a high figure, Rangers a low one and the judge will rule somewhere in the middle. On that basis I'd expect a settlement because unless it was millions it's just not worth either side paying the legal costs in court. So far I've seen nothing in this that's anything other than run of the mill contractual disputes. It'll run and run, possibly for years until both sides reach a settlement. Both sides know that's inevitable and are just trying to prepare the strongest defence/offence when that time comes. I'll be quite interested in it, but not overly concerned or excited either way. It's just two guys who won't back down. It's not about the money, it's about winning, which is why I think it'll end up reaching a point where both sides will claim a victory and the settlement will be peanuts. As I have said before, at least we've got good football to keep us entertained while this circus continues.

I didn't read Bill's post as 'knives being out' and mine certainly wasn't either. I also didn't think Tav was bad last night. I was just pointing out that his attacking flair isn't required as much as before and it seems a waste to have someone central (Jack) and attacking who is sacrificed to cover each time Tav goes forward. That last part was just a fact. If Tav limited his forward runs and crosses I'd be much happier, but that's my opinion. And I think I also said that I'd be happy if Tav stayed for 55. p.s. If you really want to see an example of Bill's knives, just get him on the topic of politics, but please just not on this thread. ?

It's funny you mention that because my brother suggested that to me the other day and I was much more aware of his effectiveness (or ineffectiveness) last night. At many stages in the second half, Jack was almost playing as a right back to cover for Tav who had gone forward. I'm really not a fan of crossing the ball and would much prefer that we cut the ball back in those positions. Tav's tendency is to cross the ball early and often which is not very effective. He's much better when he makes the runs and then cuts inside. I felt we lost our momentum and shape by allowing Tav to operate further forward at the expense of Jack. Jack is more of a threat than Tav now and I felt that was a tactical mistake last night. No doubt the instruction is for Jack to cover if and when Tav goes forward, but it's happening too often and I've got a real problem with that. Theres no doubt that Tav is a very good player for us but I don't think we rely on him the same now and because of that I'd also accept a decent offer for him if we got one. I'd imagine he wants 55 with us before he'd want to go though, and I'd be equally fine with that.

I agree it's easy. What I'm questioning is how it can be millions. The proportion they would benefit from can't be very much.