Seven ways I disagree with Warburton's footballing philosophy

[BrahimHemdani 1]

I wasn't suggesting you, I was talking about BH and his assertion that you had mentioned our Academy players - you technically didn't.

 

Yes he did, Craig; see OP (7) quoted at #80.

[calscot 0]

That was only one mistake. Super never bought him never made him captain of the u19. Simply not his department.

 

So do you have evidence he wasn't captain that we can be privy to or are you just making it up to be contrary or for point scoring?

 

Also do you have evidence Ally wasn't involved in the transfer or are you making it up?

 

The problem here is that you are asserting to categorically know stuff as fact, but judging by your posts it's all pretend.

 

I at least admit stuff I say could be wrong as it's based on memory and stuff I've read. Don't want to be rude but unless you have evidence your over-assertive claims seem like bullshit.

 

You're not even plausible: why wouldn't the top scorer and soon to be promoted player in the u19 not be made captain? I've admitted I don't know but you are strongly asserting you do.

 

Also, you're trying to tell me you know Ally wasn't involved in a transfer of a player who played in the first team in his first season. Maybe you know something the rest of us don't but without evidence, on the internet you just sound like your playing the big man in the know. I'm happy to be corrected with evidence but you must realise how pretentious that looks? It's not even a plausible assumption.

 

I will give you all my sources, they are a bit mundane, but I don't pretend otherwise.

[forlanssister 3,084]

"In Internet slang, a troll (/ˈtroʊl/, /ˈtrɒl/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory,^[1] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the intent of provoking readers into an emotional response^[2] or of otherwise disrupting normal, on-topic discussion,^[3] often for the troll's amusement."

 

At the risk of repetition, some people just don't do irony.

 

Oh but I do irony by the bucket load which is fortunate as your posts contain it by the bucket load, none so blind as those who will not see and all that.

 

After that I've said for people to be careful in their estimation of McCoist as Warburton would have to be judged in comparison. I was assured the results would blow McCoist's out of the water, but in reality they've not been any better. I know it's hard to compare but if you can't compare you can't say Ally is shit - as you don't know how another manager would have fared in the exact same circumstances.

 

Should we compare McCoist's and Warburton's attempts to extradite us from the Championship?

 

Should we compare McCoist's three attempts to win the Challenge (Ramsdens/Petrofac) Cup and Warburton's one and only shot at it?

 

Should we compare their respective attempts at reaching the Scottish Cup Final?

 

The funny thing is that my estimation dropped due to Hearts, but Warburton couldn't match Hearts in an easier league and now can't match them in the same league, despite a far bigger budget and similar circumstances - except for being a year behind.

 

Bit bizarre considering Wedenesday was Warbutons first meeting with Hearts which resulted in the same scoreline as McCoist's last visit to Tynecastle, he also lost the opening League game at Ibrox 1 - 2.

 

Warburton couldn't match Hearts in an easier league? Not surprising when he never played them in the Champioship.

 

Both Neilson and Warburton won the Championship at a canter Neilson by a wider margin but with the benefit of playing a McCoist managed Rangers twice.

 

So I think my analysis has been consistent and fair all the way, the really weird thing is the total lack of respect I've had for that view and the bullshit I constantly have to deal with.

 

Rarely on here a particular emoticon has been so apt

[Ser Barristan Selmy 222]

Once again, you only have to read the hundreds of post and thousands of words I've written on McCoist to see that I have never, ever backed him to the hilt. Many times I've even considered putting it in my signature. I've even emphasised that point hundreds of times. What part of "I think McCoist is not a good manager but the criticism of him is way over the top and much of it unjustified" can't people understand?

 

Once again, someone likes to be contrary to me by making up stuff I never said... Total bonkers.

You're such a liar. I spent countless hours explaining to you what an awful manager he is and you staunchly defended him. The posts will all still be there.

 

By the way, you tell everyone who disagrees with you that they are bonkers. That's pretty much every single person on here! Perhaps the penny might drop soon.

Edited December 2, 2016 by Ser Barristan Selmy

[Ser Barristan Selmy 222]

Anyway, I'm not sure why this site puts up with the most obvious troll I've ever seen. Someone who freely admits he never goes to our games and rarely even watches us at all.

[rbr 1,254]

You're such a liar. I spent countless hours explaining to you what an awful manager he is and you staunchly defended him. The posts will all still be there.

 

By the way, you tell everyone who disagrees with you that they are bonkers. That's pretty much every single person on here! Perhaps the penny might drop soon.

 

That's exactly why I gave up replying to his posts

[calscot 0]

You're such a liar. I spent countless hours explaining to you what an awful manager he is and you staunchly defended him. The posts will all still be there.

 

By the way, you tell everyone who disagrees with you that they are bonkers. That's pretty much every single person on here! Perhaps the penny might drop soon.

 

Ah, I start a reasonable, respectful thread and they start coming out of the woodwork. Now it's the turn of the Chelsea fan who likes to criticise Rangers.

 

If you can't understand the difference between backing to the hilt and defending against extreme and illogical criticism even though it's explained to you dozens of times then I can't help you.

 

The bonkers is for people who constantly say I said stuff that I didn't, even after I've explained myself again several times. They could even quote me but you can't quote what's not there.

[calscot 0]

Oh but I do irony by the bucket load which is fortunate as your posts contain it by the bucket load, none so blind as those who will not see and all that.

 

ha ha, you just can't help yourself eh?

 

Should we compare McCoist's and Warburton's attempts to extradite us from the Championship?

 

Fine, but as many say when the comparison for McCoist is favourable, say for the first 15 games of the season in the SPL, the circumstances are not exactly the same. So we have to be a bit subjective in our assessment which will lead to different opinions.

 

Now firstly, Mccoist didn't finish the season, so the comparison you want boils down to McCoist resigned in a position where extraditing was eminently feasable. So the only difference in your specified comparison is that McCoist resigned. Whether that is worse than Warburton is down to whether you think he wouldn't have done so under the same circumstances.

 

So already it's obvious that our difference of opinion is merely down to how broadly and accurately we look at the full picture.

 

That's even before we look at the vast difference in circumstances - which for someone so involved in the club, I'm constantly surprised at the stuff that is rarely a factor in your opinions.

 

You also ignore the Hearts factor which is up to you, but I would hope you'd at least understand it...

 

I'll explain again. If you assume that if Warburton took over a year earlier, but that didn't affect the Hearts games that didn't include us, then he would be struggling to top them. Any team would, it was a golden season for them. If you look at the games we played in the next season (note: I realise for you, I have to emphasise that I'm not saying that you or I literally played) and imagine that the results were similar, the conclusion would have to be that we'd probably have to beat Hearts 3 times and one draw to top them - that's from memory. Now to assess whether we could do that, we have one game as evidence - and the result is we would probably finish second.

 

That is the position we were in when Ally resigned. So it looks like a draw as both would have had to do the play offs and for me, I think they would both succeed. Ally's record against SP teams as well as Hibs and Falkirk is better IIRC.

 

Now this is all before taking into account the old board, Warburton wouldn't have had a supportive board, no transfer fees, no scout, and then the misery at the club under Llambias - a factor I thought you would be more knowledgeable about. Add in a fan boycotte, and my personal view is that all this would have negatively impacted the results.

 

So definitely a draw or a no conclusion for me. You might disagree but you(and everyone else) should at least be able to respect my view due to the amount of reasoned thinking put into it.

 

Ironically I know you don't. I just put that down to you not liking people disagreeing with you, and even worse them making a well reasoned case you find hard to counter. I think that makes some people very uncomfortable. So I understand the animosity I attract in some people who don't like to question their strong opinions.

 

i can reason the same with any other comparison and due to all the factors it takes a lot of thinking - for me I'd put Warbs a bit ahead, but with the evidence it is hardly even slightly conclusive either way.

 

I can answer your other comparisons with similar analysis and easily show fair stats where Ally wins - although obviously in different circumstances. But I'd like to stick with one at a time for the sake of clarity and time. If you want to rebut this one then I'm happy to listen to rational and respectful replies. Once that's concluded, I will be happy to discuss the next comparison.

 

But if you want my quick synopsis, I think McCoist can do an average Largs graduate job in Scotland - do all the basic stuff and over time get about average results. With a supportive board? Who knows, as he's never had one, in that scenario he may prove me and others wrong.

 

Warburton I think is a bit too inexperienced, he has some interesting theories that are not rigorously tested, and they have not passed the grade this season. Asking for better players is just cheating. If he's any good he should be able to beat teams with the same budget, never mind multiples. Unless there's a massive improvement soon, then I can't see how he's any more fit for Rangers than McCoist.

 

Maybe we need a guy like Rogers, can't hack it at Liverpool but seems to know how to make an OF team do what it's supposed to do in the SPL.

 

 

Bit bizarre considering Wedenesday was Warbutons first meeting with Hearts which resulted in the same scoreline as McCoist's last visit to Tynecastle, he also lost the opening League game at Ibrox 1 - 2.

 

Yes they both lost. i think McCoist's record is 2-1-3. Warburton is 0-0-1. But I think the evidence is overwhelming that the Hearts team of two years ago was better than ours last season.

 

Warburton couldn't match Hearts in an easier league? Not surprising when he never played them in the Champioship.

 

I don't know what you mean - if we can't compare different seasons then how can you judge McCoist at all? You've been comparing stuff all through this thread. Come on be consistent.

 

Both Neilson and Warburton won the Championship at a canter Neilson by a wider margin but with the benefit of playing a McCoist managed Rangers twice.

 

The very simple counter to that is that Neilson dropped 5 points to Rangers, Rangers dropped 2 to their equivalent, St Mirren. When comparing Warburton and Neilson, I think the whoe season is appropriate.

 

Rarely on here a particular emoticon has been so apt

 

You're schoolboy humour is duly placed into the very droll for a schoolboy pile. Well done you...

Edited December 2, 2016 by calscot

[calscot 0]

That's exactly why I gave up replying to his posts

 

if you're anything like SBS then I am so grateful! Many thanks.

[calscot 0]

Anyway, I'm not sure why this site puts up with the most obvious troll I've ever seen. Someone who freely admits he never goes to our games and rarely even watches us at all.

 

Very sad viewpoint, and yes, mking stuff up about the viewing habits of a guy you don't know on the internet is complete bonkers.

 

As I believe you have said you are a Chelsea fan living in Scotland, can I ask how many of their games you attend? do you post on a Chelsea site?

 

You obviously lie about watching Rangers games, as I caught you out with the "same old rubbish" comment when we had a big improvement. That's what prompted you to continually talk weird bullshit about my viewing habits. The bonkers part is that I had to have watched the game in question for you to be caught out doing your slagging Rangers for anything hobby.

 

But it's a sad, sad person who insists the number of games you go to is a factor in whether you are allowed an opinion on your team. Get a life springs to mind. There is more in this heaven and earth than going to a football match - especially when it's about 450 miles away.