Furman weighs up new contract

[calscot 0]

Your calling quite a few posters on here naive then as many of them said he would have a huge impact.

 

I definitely think it's very naive to think an untried teenager would have a huge impact. It's just Roy of the Rovers type dreaming. Why didn't Walter start him every week if that was so obvious? Just what to the posters on here know that a successful Rangers manager doesn't? Remember, this Spaniard wasn't good enough or ready enough for his own club.

 

The most successful teenager we've had in modern times was actually spotted by WS and played by him and he went on to become captain of Italy. However, he still didn't exactly make a "huge" impact when he played for us - and in fact, Advocaat sold him soon after he arrived.

 

A lot of people thought a lot more of Fleck than Aaron and again he didn't exactly make a huge impact and was actually disappointing.

 

You've got to realise that at a club like Rangers, expectations are huge and teenagers who get a regular start will be few and far between. Anyone who is hoping it will be otherwise is sure to be disappointed, and yes, in my opinion is very naive.

 

So why sign him in the first place? Where you insulted when he signed?

 

Why would I be insulted? Strange question. I WOULD have been insulted if Valencia insisted we play him every week and if that was the case would have wanted the club to send him back quick smart.

 

I think it's obvious why we signed him - he looked a prospect for the FUTURE. There is ABSOLUTELY NO CHANCE he signed as a first choice player. What it did was give us a chance to look at him properly with a view to buying him if it all worked out.

 

Are you saying we shouldn't sign players with future potential? I think you're arguing against yourself there.

 

We did the same with Martin and Bardsley from Man U but they got games, so in respect if any of Europes elite (Valencia are up there for me - or they were 2 years ago) want to send their talented younger players to Ibrox to get first team experience I'll gladly take them in this day in age where we cant afford too many transfer fees.

 

Martin and Bardsley were for me, very poor and playing them so often was a mistake that contributed to us being 17 points behind Celtic in half a season. Neither of them enhanced our team. Our very own Hutton showed the latter how to play the right back role.

 

PLG turned out to be very naive himself when he came to Rangers and paid the price for it within 5 months - and will be remembered as the worst Rangers manager ever. He thought he could fill the team with "potential" talent and clearly demonstrated that it just doesn't work.

 

But you've helped my point - we regularly play two youngsters from Man U and go 17 points behind in half a season. We get rid of them, play our own young players and make up 9 points before the league is beyond us.

 

Then we DON'T play a Valencian youngster last season yet we win the League and cup double.

 

I know which thinking looks better to me...

[Gazza_8 233]

Furman should leave if he's looking for 1st team football. He's nowhere near getting a sniff at the 1st team. WS would prefer to play imposters such as McCulloch and Dailly out of position in the midfield before playing youth players in their natural position.

 

He seems to be well liked at Bradford therefore must have some talent. Agreed, the standard of League 2 football is poorer than that of the SPL but not by much. OF aside the majority of SPL sides would struggle in League 2.

 

The whole thing about playing players out of position in midfield ahead of young players whose natural position is midfield will always suffocate the youngsters chances of 1st team football while WS is in charge.

[Gazza_8 233]

Then we DON'T play a Valencian youngster last season yet we win the League and cup double.

 

I know which thinking looks better to me...

 

The same young Valencia player who was named in the Spanish U21 starting XI earlier in the year. Yip, he must be average if he gets a game in that team.

[Super_Ally 0]

Martin and Bardsley were for me, very poor and playing them so often was a mistake that contributed to us being 17 points behind Celtic in half a season. Neither of them enhanced our team. Our very own Hutton showed the latter how to play the right back role.

 

That still rankles with me. Hutton was clearly a better player than Bardsley and PLG playing the Man U youth (until they fell out in ridiculous circumstances) hindered Hutton's progress.

 

 

Not too fussed about Aaron. If he was that great Valencia wouldn't have let us have him permanently. If he's not, we don't want him.

 

Looked like he might have something for the future, so Valencia would just have took him back once he'd got first team football. However, Smith used him sparingly and we won the league. In this case the ends justify the means don't they.

[calscot 0]

The same young Valencia player who was named in the Spanish U21 starting XI earlier in the year. Yip, he must be average if he gets a game in that team.

 

Who said he was average?

 

He might even be world class in a few years time but that doesn't mean he was ready to play for a club like Rangers in such an important season at the tender age of 18. At a club like ours we need current full internationals, not teenagers being blooded for the U21 team.

 

Even if he does become world class it just means we wouldn't have been able to sign him or he'd be out of our price range.

 

Playing for an U21 national side is completely irrelevant in this context. If it was a first team player like Fabregas we were talking about you would have a point.

[calscot 0]

Furman should leave if he's looking for 1st team football. He's nowhere near getting a sniff at the 1st team. WS would prefer to play imposters such as McCulloch and Dailly out of position in the midfield before playing youth players in their natural position.

 

He seems to be well liked at Bradford therefore must have some talent. Agreed, the standard of League 2 football is poorer than that of the SPL but not by much. OF aside the majority of SPL sides would struggle in League 2.

 

The whole thing about playing players out of position in midfield ahead of young players whose natural position is midfield will always suffocate the youngsters chances of 1st team football while WS is in charge.

 

Yeah, MacGregor, Boyd, Hutton and of course Gattuso have really been suffocated by Walter. Why play Cuellar or Bougherra when you have a 17 year old Wilson you can throw on instead - or even play Papac and Broadfoot in their "natural" positions. Davis, Lafferty, Naismith, Thomson and Edu are ancient players and should be replaced by the U19's. Walter never played the youngest player ever in a Scottish cup final. Dailly should have been playing striker all his career as that's presumably his "natural" position. The fans were really heartbroken to see Burke and Adam leave and love it when Stevie Smith gets a game.

 

All nonsense of course.

[craig 5,199]

We will never know if Aaron was good enough or not as he never got the chance. We won the league so WS is justified with who he played and when.

 

But I dont agree with the argument that we need current full internationals. I would have played Aaron before McCulloch - and no-one can deny that at left midfield McCulloch was a non-entity. I would even argue the same in regards to Beasley. I think Aaron showed more in his fleeting glimpses than Beasley did as well. I would have placed Aaron in front of both of those two internationals (and yes, you could say McCulloch isnt a current international but he WOULD be if he wanted to be and, at the start of the season, he was).

 

We dont know what contribution Aaron would give us in the coming season but his wages would be far inferior to both McCulloch & Beasley and we could have let either one of those two go and freed up wages.

 

S_A, I am not convinced that your argument that Bardsley playing hindered Hutton's progress is necessarily accurate. By not playing it could very well have made Hutton hungrier and it also could have allowed him to see things he wouldn't on the pitch. You could, of course, be right but given how Hutton DID progress there isn't anything to suggest that he was hindered in that progress, other than mentally. If he were playing his progression may have been quicker but, likewise, it might not have been.

[Super_Ally 0]

S_A, I am not convinced that your argument that Bardsley playing hindered Hutton's progress is necessarily accurate. By not playing it could very well have made Hutton hungrier and it also could have allowed him to see things he wouldn't on the pitch. You could, of course, be right but given how Hutton DID progress there isn't anything to suggest that he was hindered in that progress, other than mentally. If he were playing his progression may have been quicker but, likewise, it might not have been.

 

Hutton doesn't strike me as the sort who needs adversity to stoke up his hunger for the game. It is a rarity to find a Scot in the game who is such an outstanding athlete, due to a lot of the negative social factors we find invovled in Scottish sport. Sure a lot of it is no doubt natural athleticism, but you still have to work to maintain and enhance that ability. Therefore I don't see how a stint on the sidelines whilst a clearly inferior players plays can be of benefit to Hutton.

 

Of course we can't say definitively what would and wouldn't happen. But part of being a fan is questioning every decision and choice made. We all do it every week with team selections. We can however use the evidence and educated opinion to make up our opinion on the situation.

 

Hutton stagnating on the sidelines whislt Bardsley played looked bad to me. He came in towards the end of PLG's tenure and then was first choice under Walter and a regular run of games turned him into a �£9million player. Looks like playing Bardsley hindered his progress to me.

 

Ps. No one questions fans who blindly believe PLG would've come good at Rangers with absolutely no evidence to support such a supposition. My suggestion he hindered Hutton is a lot less pie in the sky than that. :devil:

[Gazza_8 233]

Yeah, MacGregor, Boyd, Hutton and of course Gattuso have really been suffocated by Walter. Why play Cuellar or Bougherra when you have a 17 year old Wilson you can throw on instead - or even play Papac and Broadfoot in their "natural" positions. Davis, Lafferty, Naismith, Thomson and Edu are ancient players and should be replaced by the U19's. Walter never played the youngest player ever in a Scottish cup final. Dailly should have been playing striker all his career as that's presumably his "natural" position. The fans were really heartbroken to see Burke and Adam leave and love it when Stevie Smith gets a game.

 

All nonsense of course.

 

Your constant rants about Dailly being a striker is nonsense!

 

When did I say that I'd like Wilson to play ahead of Cuellar or Boogie?

 

Edu broke into the 1st team and got a good run of games there only when Ferguson spat the dummy. I like Edu but would he have gotten a game if Ferguson remained in the good books? I don't think so. McCulloch would probably have been given the nod ahead of Edu if he had been fit at the time.

 

Has Adam left?

 

Thomson was already a regular with Hibs. He hardly broke through the ranks at Rangers. The same goes for Lafferty, he was a regular with Burnley.

 

I think you need to take your nose out of Walters bum mate.

[craig 5,199]

Hutton doesn't strike me as the sort who needs adversity to stoke up his hunger for the game. It is a rarity to find a Scot in the game who is such an outstanding athlete, due to a lot of the negative social factors we find invovled in Scottish sport. Sure a lot of it is no doubt natural athleticism, but you still have to work to maintain and enhance that ability. Therefore I don't see how a stint on the sidelines whilst a clearly inferior players plays can be of benefit to Hutton.

 

Of course we can't say definitively what would and wouldn't happen. But part of being a fan is questioning every decision and choice made. We all do it every week with team selections. We can however use the evidence and educated opinion to make up our opinion on the situation.

 

Hutton stagnating on the sidelines whislt Bardsley played looked bad to me. He came in towards the end of PLG's tenure and then was first choice under Walter and a regular run of games turned him into a �£9million player. Looks like playing Bardsley hindered his progress to me.

 

Ps. No one questions fans who blindly believe PLG would've come good at Rangers with absolutely no evidence to support such a supposition. My suggestion he hindered Hutton is a lot less pie in the sky than that. :devil:

 

But sometimes players learn MORE by being up in the stand watching the game. I am not saying Hutton did but there are plenty of players who, whilst out injured, that comment that they have become better players because whilst sitting in the stands they see more of how their position needs to be played.

 

Given how Hutton turned out I don't really see how it hindered his progress. He has ended up an international (possibly world) class player. Would he have been a better player had he been playing instead of Bardsley ? None of us know. Lets not forget that when Hutton came back from his injury (pre-Bardsley) that he was one of the Ibrox boo-boys - and the fans have assisted in costing players of their Rangers careers in the past with the boo boy antics - perhaps the fans appreciated Hutton more when he came back into the team in part because they realised that he was a better player than Bardsley and perhaps in part because of that appreciation Hutton could play with a greater confidence than he had when being booed.