Bougherra out of Old Firm clash

[Cotter 0]

I agree re Wilson. Reckon we should play Boogy baws and Wilson. DW is a great pro and I have enormous respect for the guy, but I seriously think his lack of pace and the subsequent deep lying midfield could be the source of much of our problems. We don'y need a 40 yr old CB just because he "reads the game well" or is a "positive influnce" on the team. Good CBs like Wilson and Boogy don't need a heid maister telling them where to stand.

[wabashcannonball 0]

Ach piss off. He dropped the guy, our best player for several crucial games. Open season on WS I know but don't question his "man management skills" or his integrity and dignity. Quite simply put, I think you've made an arse of yourself waba.

 

What man management skills, the ones that have had a myriad of Rangers players in the news for all the wrong reasons. I was lucky enough to see Souness showing some real man management skills outside of the old Chimmy Chungas on Great Western road one dark night, I think AMc. will attest to that stookie and all.

[Zappa 0]

What man management skills, the ones that have had a myriad of Rangers players in the news for all the wrong reasons. I was lucky enough to see Souness showing some real man management skills outside of the old Chimmy Chungas on Great Western road one dark night, I think AMc. will attest to that stookie and all.

.

This doesn't make any sense. Players in the news for the wrong reasons isn't Walter's fault, he's just got to try & deal with whatever is thrown at him which as a Rangers manager is generally a lot of shit. He's coping with it all admirably tbh.

[wabashcannonball 0]

In simple terms, Souness's mantra was as it should be, you cross the manager of Rangers once, you don't get a second chance.

Smith has a different approach, we saw how well that worked with Gascoigne and others of that ilk.

You may think Smith is a legend, I just don't happen to think he is very good, in what was very often a one horse race John Barnes would have succeeded (but there again),Smiths throwing away of the legendary 10th title encapsulates his total failure in any way to be proactive to situations, on and off the field. Whatever happens the future is at most uncertain, anything else does not bear thinking about.

[maineflyer 0]

In simple terms, Souness's mantra was as it should be, you cross the manager of Rangers once, you don't get a second chance.

Smith has a different approach, we saw how well that worked with Gascoigne and others of that ilk.

You may think Smith is a legend, I just don't happen to think he is very good, in what was very often a one horse race John Barnes would have succeeded (but there again),Smiths throwing away of the legendary 10th title encapsulates his total failure in any way to be proactive to situations, on and off the field. Whatever happens the future is at most uncertain, anything else does not bear thinking about.

 

I've always regarded Smith as one of the luckiest managers in the business. Lucky to have lived off the Souness signings for most of his first term. Lucky to have had players for so long who could virtually manage their own onfield performances. Lucky to have been up against a hugely ineffectual celtic for so long. Lucky to have had unbelievable funding to cover his inadequacies. Lucky to have arrived back after the debacle of PLG at a time when fans had finally been persuaded to lower their sights. Lucky to still have a job really.

 

He's good Rangers man but, frankly, as a manager he's nothing special, probably second rate would be an appropriate description. When you think that Scot Symon got the bullet for one bad game against Berwick, it's unbelievable that Smith has survived for so long and barely credible that there are still fans going out of their way to back him.

[calscot 0]

I've always regarded Smith as one of the luckiest managers in the business. Lucky to have lived off the Souness signings for most of his first term. Lucky to have had players for so long who could virtually manage their own onfield performances. Lucky to have been up against a hugely ineffectual celtic for so long. Lucky to have had unbelievable funding to cover his inadequacies. Lucky to have arrived back after the debacle of PLG at a time when fans had finally been persuaded to lower their sights. Lucky to still have a job really.

 

He's good Rangers man but, frankly, as a manager he's nothing special, probably second rate would be an appropriate description. When you think that Scot Symon got the bullet for one bad game against Berwick, it's unbelievable that Smith has survived for so long and barely credible that there are still fans going out of their way to back him.

 

I agree somewhat with what you're saying but as Gary Player once said, "The more I practice the luckier I get." The point is that you have to be good enough in the first place for luck to count over a reasonable amount of time against the best opposition around be it 72 holes of multiple major golf tournaments or a multiple full seasons of the SPL.

 

I think that really shows a lot about where Rangers are. For example on the UEFA final run we were good enough to compete enough for any luck to count towards the win or draw we needed rather than a luck consolation goal or an odd lucky result that only gets you through one round.

 

Another example is this year in the CL where we were just about good enough to get somewhere had a bit of luck come our way - in fact we could have easily qualified had Walter had a bit more of the luck you talk about. Instead we were not good enough to nullify any of the horrendous luck we had and had terrible results that didn't reflect the play at all.

 

I think that puts us in the position of an ok team. Not good enough to overcome bad luck but good enough to take advantage of good luck.

 

It reflects WS as a manager - he's ok, not bad, reasonably good, but not anything overly special.

 

I'd give him a 7 out of 10 at Rangers. However, the problem many people have, and the reason they defend him, is that people are slagging him by implying he's a 3 out of 10 manager. That just seems ridiculous considering he has probably the best record in Rangers history. You can be lucky but you can't be absolute crap and yet THAT lucky. You won't convince intelligent people with that kind of disingenuous character assassination - and so people will call you bluff.

 

You just have to look at the spectacular failure of PLG - the worst manager in our history, to see it's not that easy to ride your luck. PLG had some amazing pedigree, yet even without any dramatic bad luck made Walter look like a genius in comparison. Yet funnily enough, many people who attack Walter defend the Frenchman - now where is the logic in that?

 

If you don't want people to jump to Walter's defence then don't treat them like some kind of idiots who will swallow a load of obvious unfounded vitriol about him.

 

Keep it real and you'll have an amicable debate on your hand, use the slightest excuse to have a go and people will jump to his defence if even just to make a point that their intelligence should not be so insulted.

 

I'm sorry but trying to say Walter has won 8 titles, had one disgracefully robbed from him where he finished second by only 3 points, losing one other by 2pts after he'd already said he was leaving, winning more than his fair share of cups and giving us 2 of our top 6 European runs, all due 100% to luck, just sounds a bit silly.

 

Yes he's had luck, but he's needed to be half decent to have it enhance his success rather than completely make it. This is real life not a fantasy film, with some lamp to rub.

 

Like I say he's a 7 out of 10 manager (and I'm sure you'll want to mark him down), the trouble is we want a 10 out of 10 manager and probably be happy with a 9. How we can get one of those with out ending up with someone who doesn't turn into a 4 overnight (like PLG) is the multimillion quid question.

 

Is it better to stick with a solid blackjack 17 or 18, or risk a twist that could bust us?

 

In the end I still contend that as an employer, why would you sack someone doing the job, and how could you justify it? I think those calling for Walter's head should take a break and at least wait until the end of the season or when we have new owners - whichever comes first. And even with the latter, it might be a better transition in the summer.

 

The exception is if he falls 12 or more points behind or the league starts to look impossible. Sacking him then would probably still be harsh with the double still in the trophy cabinet, but a lot more understandable and justifiable.

 

My best hope is that he stays till the end of the season, wins at least the double again (the SPL with league cup as a start), retires with dignity and a new ownership pumps a load of money in to pay off the debt and then brings a talented manager with enough money to build a team that is sustainable within our income in the future.

[wabashcannonball 0]

I think I have heard it all now, it is insulting peoples intelligence if you don't agree with the Walter myth.

Does "Walter" or rather has "Walter" and his staff been offered new contracts, as for insulting intelligence, don't insult mine by suggesting that this is because any new owner may not fancy retaining their services, if a new owner doesn't have the money to pay them off if required, they certainly are not the mega investor we are looking for. It looks very much like the present board incumbents are not racing to support "Walter" either.

[Gribz 846]

Lucky to have had players for so long who could virtually manage their own onfield performances. Lucky to have been up against a hugely ineffectual celtic for so long. Lucky to have had unbelievable funding to cover his inadequacies. Lucky to have arrived back after the debacle of PLG at a time when fans had finally been persuaded to lower their sights. Lucky to still have a job really.

 

.

 

I see what your saying but would look at the other side of the coin on a few points. WS brought his own team in around 91-92 by signing Goram, Robertson, McCall, Mikhailichencko to name a few and the following year was his team that was 1 goal away from the CL final - there was no luck there he just got it right that season and showed no fear.

 

Celtic were dire until 1994 but in the 95-96 season Celtic went the full season only losing 1 league game yet we still won the league.

 

I dont agree with the PLG comment as I give credit to WS for steadying the ship. This was right after he had done the same for Scotland after Vogts leaving the national team in a mess, so to say he was lucky twice doesnt wash for me.

[maineflyer 0]

I see what your saying but would look at the other side of the coin on a few points. WS brought his own team in around 91-92 by signing Goram, Robertson, McCall, Mikhailichencko to name a few and the following year was his team that was 1 goal away from the CL final - there was no luck there he just got it right that season and showed no fear.

 

Celtic were dire until 1994 but in the 95-96 season Celtic went the full season only losing 1 league game yet we still won the league.

 

I dont agree with the PLG comment as I give credit to WS for steadying the ship. This was right after he had done the same for Scotland after Vogts leaving the national team in a mess, so to say he was lucky twice doesnt wash for me.

 

Fair enough Gribz, he isn't all bad. Maybe Calscot is right and Walter is an OK 7 out of 10 manager. Hell, even I thought it was a relief to see old Walt being interviewed as Rangers manager after the PLG debacle and the inexperience of Eck. Believe it or not I really like Walter Smith, always have done. He is what he is and is a stout and loyal Rangers man. But he does have some consistent weaknesses and those can't be ignored either.

 

My grievance isn't actually a personal one with Smith. It's a much more general complaint that standards we once held to be part of the fabric at Rangers have been let slip almost completely. I watched celtic beat us 7 times on the trot and hardly a whisper came from the board, let alone any threat to the management. Winning just seems to be less essential than it once was.

 

BTW, the PLG comment simply meant that if he had followed better managers, the impact of what Water did with both Scotland and Rangers wouldn't have been half as big a deal. He got a lot of credit for that but you and I could have done better than Vogts or PLG. Nevertheless, he did steady the ship and in the process established a new urban myth.

[Gribz 846]

Fair enough Gribz, he isn't all bad. Maybe Calscot is right and Walter is an OK 7 out of 10 manager. Hell, even I thought it was a relief to see old Walt being interviewed as Rangers manager after the PLG debacle and the inexperience of Eck. Believe it or not I really like Walter Smith, always have done. He is what he is and is a stout and loyal Rangers man. But he does have some consistent weaknesses and those can't be ignored either.

.

 

Agreed. I dont think he is near a world class manager but I dont think he is poor. Id say he has a typical Scottish style and opts for a 'safety first' or 'no lose' mentality first which can be quite depressing when RFC should be wiping the floor with at least 8 SPL teams. He can get it right in certain games then comes out with some baffling choices.

 

He passed step 1 back in 2007 by making the team hard to beat again and bringing back some steel and pride, that was job done. He then had to advance that to the next stage by making us challendge for the title and winning domestic trophies - job done albeit it in some bizarre fashion in odd games. Next was to advance that and make us the top side again and do something in Europe but this is where he has went backwards and we are a worse side this season than the last 2 years.

 

With hindsight maybe people think he should have left with his head held high last season with the title in the bag, but when you are in WS shoes and to think that his Rangers days would be over again - that would be tough to take for someone like him so I cant blame him to have desire to stay on, I just wish he would get a few more basics right.