Bill

It has to be Goldson …. For doing his own job and half of Tavernier’s too.

So far I'd say without a doubt he is.

How good is it to have a goalkeeper who can come for high balls and command his six yard box?

It looks like we quietly replaced Rabbi Matondo during the summer with some bloke who can play a bit. Maybe we could do the same with Abdallah Sima. We got a lot closer to PSV than I thought possible.

With the way this game is going, Lammers is bound to score. Night of the Misfits

Dessers looks offside

I’m going to dust off the broken record again and highlight the number of times Tav has completely lost his man and been bailed out by Goldson and Butland. Tav is a defensive liability and it’s getting worse.

Come out after half time with Roofe and Danilo up front.

Sima. I fucking give up. I know nothing. He’s useless for 43 minutes then scores a worldy

The midfield 3 (4) are all doing their job but the front 2 have held on to nothing. Barisic doing well in defence so far. Goldson is a rock.

I’m sure the manager had a plan when he gave Sima a shirt tonight. I’m less clear on what it could have been though.

I hope to be proven wrong but playing Sima instead of Danilo and Dessers instead of Roofe seems implausible.

Could be all about our fullbacks tonight. At both ends of the pitch but especially in defence.

Get your oxymorons in early

I think it's important to say that I don't actually have an idea why Halsted has become a director. What I am saying is it's very unlikely to be just for the kudos of sitting at the Rangers board table. Any major changes will require a shareholder resolution so he doesn't need a directorship to protect his interests. My only conclusion therefore is he has come on board for his expertise, which is raising investment capital, specifically in the American sector.

A seat on the board won't give him that. How could it? He can't (won't) make a return on his investment buying Rangers shares unless he can control the club and, again, he can't do that simply by buying his current level of shareholding or anything like it. So you have to ask yourself, why is a major PE investor taking a seat on the Rangers board? It can't be to look after the interests of a few million shares, why would he bother? I've no idea what his further intentions might be but this does seem to be a strange move.

I think you mean what level of investment would be significant. That's probably irrelevant. Investment makes him a shareholder, he doesn't gain much by also being a director. My point is he wouldn't take a seat on the Rangers board for no good reason and a good reason for him is likely to be involve a change of ownership or control.

A guy like Halsted doesn’t join a board just because he’s investing a few grand. He’ll only get involved if he needs to make a strategic contribution

Quite a bizarre appointment, unless this signals a major transfer of ownership in the near future. To say he's merely being brought on board for his "strong business acumen" is tantamount to the current board admitting they don't already have this precious commodity .... which is the same as saying they lack confidence in where the club is heading. So that's clearly a complete crock. The other possibility is that a highly experienced private equity investor wants a seat on the board to provide assurance over a significant imminent investment. God willing this is indeed the case.

Cantrell didn’t play against Morton.

I've heard they were there for the taking for the whole of last season, while they marched off with every trophy going and we came up with zip. They won't be there for the taking until we do what's required to take them. It's always best to do our gloating after the event.

As opposed to those being selected ahead of Hagi, who become worse players the more they play.

It isn't about a particular allegiance to Hagi. It's the glaring reality that he's a better player than Lammers, Matondo, Sima or Dowell ... but still can't get a start, even against Morton.

Beale has painted himself into a corner. He's signed a bunch of new players, several of whom have yet to show anything to justify their recruitment. So he has a choice - persevere with his newbies and hope they start delivering - or admit he's made a complete custard of our much-vaunted rebuilding exercise and fall on his sword. I'm hoping he pulls this off but I'm prepared for disappointment. When a manager works with his players every day and is still capable of schoolboy misjudgements like we saw in the last LC final, it's difficult not to harbour certain suspicions.

We could do with more of it