Gaffer

You can't take goals conceded in isolation though. We've scored just as many goals as Celtic so by your rationale, we could easily be 1st. The team is heavily weighted towards attacking play and that means we gamble on scoring more than the opposition. Having said that, our defence is horrendous and requires some serious focus during the summer. As I've said on here many times though, we don't need a new defence, we just need a strong central partnership and some protection from the midfield (assuming we kept the same or similar system). If we had a strong and settled central partnership I am certain next season will be very different, even if we didn't add anyone else. I like us using wingbacks and Tav/John are pretty effective at it. I'd hope we'd continue to use them next season. Gerrard has tried various systems, including a flexible 3-4-3 (or 3-4-1-2) and if he thinks that's the best route for us it'll be interesting to see who he prefers in those wide roles. If he prefers the defensive duties to be the focus, he may well stick with Tav and John. If however he expects a more creative threat he may opt for Murphy and Candeias instead. The simple fact about our performance this season isn't that we've been poor at home and we have to consider why that is. There's nothing tactically that I can identify a specific problem that occurs at home, which is why I think it's more about how our players handle the pressure of playing in front of our own fans. That's what Gerrard has to fix. Whether we play fullbacks or wingbacks is secondary to him fixing our team's mentality. That's what I think is broken.

They wouldn't be rejected because of that, and in fact they are unlikely to be declined for any financial reason. I'm thinking it must be something they couldn't submit, or something in terms of their stadium or other facilities. Obviously it doesn't matter to them so they probably won't spend the money to achieve compliance if it has no consequence.

I explained the process in the other thread and this was never in any doubt, even if a breach of FFP criteria was identified. It's unbelievable how people will believe anything when they really want to, and those that are funding some of those bloggers really need to take a good hard look at themselves. I did get one thing wrong. I thought that UEFA would have us on their monitoring (again, it's explained in the other thread) but they haven't. I can only assume that our submission was compelling enough without it. I say that because Silver isn't allocated as a rating to clubs on the monitoring list. That's what the bronze rating is for. I expect that our youth costs and stadium improvements costs were taken out as I had expected and thereby lowering us below the threshold of losses. That's a good sign. I'm a little surprised at Hamilton being rejected because that's unusual. I can only imagine that is nothing to do with financials and must have some other reason. Anyway, that's their problem and not ours. p.s. What is also funny about twitter is that some of the bloggers are claiming that the SFA is involved in a conspiracy. The SFA only submits our plans and receives the outcomes. That's the extent of their involvement, but again these so called experts seem to think differently.

What does that mean though bill? Do we pay him off? Either way we are paying him, so as Pete says we might as well try to get him fit and available for selection. It may be futile, but Gerrard will be aware of him and might think it's worth investing in him. Gerrard is a confident chap so maybe he'll enjoy that challenge .... as if the rest isn't challenge enough.

We only have three options: 1. Pay him enough to accept terminati on of his contract 2. Find another club willing to take him on loan or permanently 3. Give him an opportunity to play his way into the team. Option 2 is unlikely, so that only leaves 1 and 3. Either way, we will be paying him so the only logical option is 3, unless he proves to be a disruptive influence. He has a golden opportunity with Gerrard. I hope he takes it because Pena is a class player, and certainly much better (if playing at his best) than anything we have or are likely to have. He's allowed his highly promising career to be derailed by alcohol and it's sad to see it happen to players (or anyone for that matter). I'd love him to turn it around because we could really do with a player of his quality. I've watched him for many years and I know what he's capable of. It's now time to show everyone.

I'm not worried about our midfield for the Hibs game. Docherty, Goss and Holt will do a job there. My concern is that Morelos isn't playing. I like Cummings but not in the system we play so I just can't see where our goals will come from. I know Morelos hasn't been scoring of late, but he creates so much for us and we will miss him.

I just thought it might be useful to look at the facts surrounding this. Many of the figures being referred to are accurate, but the application of them is not. I could explain how it works in detail but again that's missing the point of the regulations. The point is to ensure that clubs do not spend beyond their means. Every club submits a financial plan to UEFA. This plan covers every aspect of the balance sheet and anticipated funding for the club in forthcoming season. This will for us include how the directors will fund the club in the 2018/19 season. It's an estimate but it has to be sensible and is open to challenge from UEFA's review body. If the club was to be found to have failed on any of the criteria, UEFA would put the club on a monitoring programme and could potentially take action, ranging from a reprimand through to banning from the competitions. I know that UEFA does not plan to ban any club unless they fail to complete the actions they've committed to whilst being monitored. That's why PSG, Man City, etc have been penalised, because they failed to stick to the actions they agreed to. It wasn't because they breached the criteria. Stories of banning are just there to create impact and hysteria amongst their readers. However, going back to our own club. Our plan will be submitted and UEFA will either accept it, or challenge it. I'll be very surprised if they don't challenge it, given the losses. At that point, it will be up to the directors to demonstrate that the funding is there to cover losses. It should be noted that another nuance missed by some commentators is that youth programmes and infrastructure costs are not included in the assessment of losses. What is then likely is that there will be ongoing monitoring to ensure that the actions are completed as planned. Under that circumstance I'd expect the club to be removed from monitoring. Like most of these Celtic bloggers' stories, there's a mountain being created from a molehill. That's what I'd expect from these obsessive clowns, but it's just not how regulators work and clearly they don't have the experience or brains to understand that. What is interesting however is that Dave King's "house of cards" point is a good one. If Celtic do fail to qualify for the group stages, and especially if they do not qualify for the CL each season, they will find themselves being monitored too (due to their certain losses in that circumstance). They will then be required to take actions as we will be. What will be interesting is how they do that. Will their shareholders be willing to finance the club and covert debt to equity? Will they be willing and able to slash their wage bill? They would have a much bigger problem than us to achieve that, given their current wage outgoings. Celtic are quite rightly funding their team to guarantee CL qualification each season because they know they can't afford not to now. It will be interesting to see how far they're willing to go on this gamble. Can you imagine the timplosion by their supporters if we win 55? Well I can tell you that it'd be nothing compared to the timplosion going on in their boardroom if that were to happen. However that's their gamble and their problem. Our challenge is simple. We need to win our next game, get into European competition and then challenge for the league again. There's nothing else we need to be worried about.

I hate to see that, but it looks like we are going to have to beat 12 men to win tonight. What a shocking decision by the ref there. If you look at his body language, he just couldn't wait for an excuse to give it. He looked pleased with himself. Come on Rangers, get stuck right in to this mob!

Ok, who would your gamble have been? Just interested.

What do you mean? Any manager is a gamble, and I think we all know this is a gamble too. Don't you think this one is an exciting one to take? Would you be happy to accept this gamble? I think that 99% of gers fans will be behind this one. It might turn out badly, but it's surely worth taking this risk. Wouldn't you agree?

Brilliant podcast. I really enjoyed it. I have to say that Pete is funny, even when he's not meaning to be. Really great contribution from the panel and for me 45 minutes isn't long enough. Keep them coming!!!

Cheers, but I still don't understand what his specific point is. DK does plenty of things that people don't agree with, but I'm still struggling to find out why for some people this is still news, or interesting, or worthy of being obtuse about. I'd love someone to explain why I should be interested, because at the moment I'm not in the slightest. And since no one has yet managed to explain why it's important, I then get suspicious about the motives of some posters on here.

There's a respectful way to challenge your manager. All of the best teams create an environment to challenge decisions, but when the manager then decides, you get behind it no matter what. I'm sure we all know by now that what happened was way beyond what is acceptable, and I would be surprised if anyone (including those players) condoned their behaviour. Gerrard has enough to deal with without having to manage this when he arrives. I'm hoping the decision is taken before he arrives (and fully expect it) so he hits the ground running with the players that will still be here next season. Neither of these players will be!

What's your point caller? I can honestly say I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Can you make your point simply, and clearly please? Thanks.

Apparently Paul was for personal reasons and Barry was because had too many other interests.

I'm pleased with the announcement. I was expecting something along these lines and I'm surprised at anyone who thinks we will attract (or want) rich 'investors'. I've said it many times beforehand, that we should be wary of non supporters bringing in their money because we should then be suspicious as to their motives. A football club is a small time business and not one that would encourage a real investor. We got into serious trouble by spending more than we had in the past. I don't ever want us to risk the club by doing that again. These funds will help us bring in the 4 or 5 players we need. I'm quite sure that Gerrard has enough confidence in himself to know that he can improve the players we have, and in particular their characters.

Do you say things like that because you really believe it, or it just banter to get a reaction? If it's the latter, well done, you got a reaction out of me. If it's the former, ......... dear oh dear, there's nothing anyone can do to help you. If you think we need 15 or 16 new players, I think you should find something else to do for the next few seasons because that's how long it will take to bring in that many new players.

I've got very little interest in Scottish football so maybe that's why I don't know who he is, but I appreciate you filling me in. My only interest is in Rangers.

With opinions like that, you should easily get a job as a pundit for the BBC. Or are you that guy in the BT sport clip above?

Who was that idiot suggesting we need to buy 15 or 16 players?!? How can someone be a pundit with utter nonsense like that?!?

I meant to aim my response at Bluedell, but it did seem like I was saying it to you because I quoted you. cheers

We disagree on a few points there, but that's just one of a few reasons why football is so great. We all have very different opinions. In my opinion, the players had a loss of confidence after the 3-2 game against Celtic. There then appeared to be a dressing room issue shortly afterwards. That appears to have been resolved to some degree and the players now just needed to get their confidence back. The win against Kilmarnock will have done that but now we I fully expect the team to go into these games with confidence and get all six points. Football is about small margins so it wouldn't surprise me if we lost either or both games, but it would be against the odds and I always go with the strongest probability, which is that we will win.

? Come on. I didn't think we'd get someone like Gerrard so I can't blame others for thinking the same. There was nothing in his tweet at all and now I feel you're just looking for something to throw rocks at. I don't like Humza, but this is just not something that is anything other than banter.

We have better players than they do. We have beaten Aberdeen every other game. That's why I expect us to win. I expect us to beat all teams, other than Celtic at the moment.

I fully expect us to win the last two games, and comfortably. If we play our better players like Goss, we should do it. My on,y reservation is that our interim manager, JN, doesn't appear to know that McCrorie can play in midfield!!!! Really!?! I've never heard such a bizarre comment and I'm honestly utterly bewildered at how he has been able to provide Murty with any support if he doesn't even know the players. The players will want to show SG that they want to be he next season. The last two games is a brilliant weeding opportunity because it'll be obvious who should be be shown the door.