Guest 5StarBear Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 What a load of nonsense Pete. Just because Ferguson is the common denominator doesnt make him the cause. Advocaat lost the dressing room because there was a split between the Dutch and non-Dutch (from what I remember). How does that mean it is Ferguson's fault ? Eck lost the dressing room because, quite simply, the players were crap and his tactics were questionable. Again, not necessarily Ferguson's fault. PLG. I supported PLG through that one but none of us know for sure who was to blame and to what extent. Most definitely Ferguson was one of the primary players though. Was it his fault ? Who knows. Smith - hasnt lost the dressing room in his 2nd sting has he ? Not to my knowledge - so does that mean that this is also thanks to Barry Ferguson as he is still the common denominator ? Smith also didnt lose the dressing room in his 1st stint and Ferguson was there during that time - so was it also thanks to BF that the dressing room wasnt lost ? Burley. Obviously BF is partly to blame as it stands, but seems that there were plenty others who were not blameless, so why is he scape-goated ? Just because someone is the common denominator does not make them the root cause of all problems. Ferguson is/was the bloody national team captain. If anyone is to blame, it's him. Burley is not his dad, he should be wise enough and responsible enough to be doing the 'right' thing in that situation. Again, a poor example to be setting. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,826 Posted April 1, 2009 Author Share Posted April 1, 2009 Ferguson is/was the bloody national team captain. If anyone is to blame, it's him. Burley is not his dad, he should be wise enough and responsible enough to be doing the 'right' thing in that situation. Again, a poor example to be setting. So you know what happened do you ? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,511 Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 What a load of nonsense Pete. Just because Ferguson is the common denominator doesnt make him the cause. Advocaat lost the dressing room because there was a split between the Dutch and non-Dutch (from what I remember). How does that mean it is Ferguson's fault ? Eck lost the dressing room because, quite simply, the players were crap and his tactics were questionable. Again, not necessarily Ferguson's fault. PLG. I supported PLG through that one but none of us know for sure who was to blame and to what extent. Most definitely Ferguson was one of the primary players though. Was it his fault ? Who knows. Smith - hasnt lost the dressing room in his 2nd sting has he ? Not to my knowledge - so does that mean that this is also thanks to Barry Ferguson as he is still the common denominator ? Smith also didnt lose the dressing room in his 1st stint and Ferguson was there during that time - so was it also thanks to BF that the dressing room wasnt lost ? Burley. Obviously BF is partly to blame as it stands, but seems that there were plenty others who were not blameless, so why is he scape-goated ? Just because someone is the common denominator does not make them the root cause of all problems. I am by no means saying he is blameless - but to suggest he is the only problem cause is highly unlikely Craig how can you say it is nonsense and then hit me with questions that leave the possibility that he was involved. If you know it to be nonsense then there are no questions only a statement saying he wasn't involved. Strange. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 Craig how can you say it is nonsense and then hit me with questions that leave the possibility that he was involved. If you know it to be nonsense then there are no questions only a statement saying he wasn't involved.Strange. Touche Pete. As there are questions to be answered you ALSO cant simply determine that as he is the "common denominator" he MUST be to blame. And that is what you said. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_Ally 0 Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 According to the radio Fletcher played well. But my point is over the Le Guen scenario I sided with Barry; this time I don't think we should back him unconditionally. His time at both Rangers and Scotland may be up.The other reason apart from Hutton we won tonight is Ross McCormack. Another one that got away methinks. Yep, you're quite correct. A lot of credit to McCormack tonight. My post was pointing out the differences between the last game and this one as I know our media and I know it wont be long before they're using the two games to demonstrate why we;'re "better off without Fergie". I should have had point 3, but it would have been directly related to my first point. McCormack was motm for us tonight, as opposed to merely one of the best of a bad bunch on Saturday. Against weaker opposition it was easier for him to shine. That's not to do him down. As I say, my motm. Hutton a close second and would not argue with anyone who reversed that. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,511 Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 Touche Pete. As there are questions to be answered you ALSO cant simply determine that as he is the "common denominator" he MUST be to blame. And that is what you said. Sorry Craig he is the common denominator as he has been the leader through all incidents. No i was not a fly on the wall but a jury can make a call on circumstantial evidence. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,511 Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 By the way he and McGregor made an arse of themselves tonight again by making gestures to the camera's and Ferguson refusing to warm up with the other Subs. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_Ally 0 Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 One wonders who would get the blame for PLG being incompetent if there wasn't the convenient excuse of Barry Ferguson? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,511 Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 One wonders who would get the blame for PLG being incompetent if there wasn't the convenient excuse of Barry Ferguson? Och Yes our wee Barry's a right wee angel. He is a twat and the sooner he leaves the club the better in my opinion. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted April 2, 2009 Share Posted April 2, 2009 Sorry Craig he is the common denominator as he has been the leader through all incidents. No i was not a fly on the wall but a jury can make a call on circumstantial evidence. But those juries are not necessarily right. So how come he was installed as Captain if he is so disruptive ? He also did not cause any upset in the Blackjburn dressing room and, in fact, was also made Captain there. So he has had at least 11 managers (5 with Scotland - Brown, Vogts, Smith, McCleish, Burley) (5 club managers - Smith, Advocaat, McCleish, Hughes, PLG, Smith). Of the international managers the ONLY one where there seems to have been a problem was with Burley. In fact, 4 of those managers, including Burley, made him Captain. Would you honestly do that if the player in question was disruptive ? Of the club managers the dressing room has seemed to have been lost 3 times (Advocaat, McCleish and PLG). It was widely suggested the split in Advocaat's time was due to the Dutch vs rest problem. With McCleish it could easily be suggested that it wasn't Ferguson's fault - why else would Eck install Ferguson as national team Captain when he took over from Smith ? Smith never lost the dressing room 1st time around and still hasnt, yet, this time. Likewise he never seemed to have split the dressing room under Hughes and, as I said, was even made Captain. PLG we know Ferguson was instrumental in that. So in 11 managers it would seem the dressing room has been lost or there has been an obvious split between management and playing staff on 4 occasiona and, of those 4, two (Advocaat & Eck) can be justified as not being Ferguson's fault. So heavy involvement in 2 dressing room splits in 11 managers - that hardly makes him the "common denominator" and therefore the culpable party and disruptive influence you make him out to be. Further, if a player plays under 40 different managers and the dressing room is lost on 1, 2 or 40 occasions - as you are looking at the player he will ALWAYS be the common denominator - doesn't mean he is the instigator or the reason for those dressing room splits. Sooooooo, 2 out of 11 and he is the problem ? I have attempted to put numbers to this but, as yet, all you have done is supposed that he must be the big, bad Barry because that is who you want him to be. I am not, by the way, trying to defend him and suggesting he isnt at fault here - but to ride roughshod over the facts and figures is unfair to him. Funny that he has been made both Club and Country Captain on so many occasions for being such a disruptive player. Why would any manager do that ? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.