Seven ways I disagree with Warburton's footballing philosophy

[the gunslinger 3,366]

Glad it's not just me that sees through this.

 

 

[the gunslinger 3,366]

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.

Dpes you have evidence to back up your wild assertion that super was picking captains for the u19s. Or buying 16 year olds.

 

I slept with Kate Moss once. Prove I didn't.

 

 

[limeburner 0]

I slept with her last night-----she said she had never heard of you(this is a joke ,incase the wife looks in).

[calscot 0]

Dpes you have evidence to back up your wild assertion that super was picking captains for the u19s. Or buying 16 year olds.

 

I slept with Kate Moss once. Prove I didn't.

 

The difference is is I'm not arrogant enough to say I categorically state that you didn't. I don't state things as facts that I don't know. I also realise that you may be say talking about a friend's cat called Kate Moss, or even some tranny who you met who claimed that was their name.

 

For the model maybe you did, but plausibility is low, while a manager being involved in a transfer of a player who plays that season is more than highly probable.

 

But in any case you are still trolling as it's a minor detail to the thrust of the point I was making, and the strange thing is that I've already admitted my mistake ages ago and apologised for it.

 

So really, what salient point are you making that contributes to the actual thread? Your persnickety game is becoming very tedious and I believe you've already lost.

[calscot 0]

Tonight I'm going to get some moss from the garden, call it Bob, shorten it to Kate, put it next to my bed, and tomorrow I'll be able bullshit like the best on here.

[forlanssister 3,084]

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

 

Said many times I don't mind feeding the troll in moments of inane boredom such as now as I await the arrival of a nurse to play about at my bum, it's not as if it requires any bait is it?

 

 

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.

 

By the time McCoist finally got round to resigning promotion under his stewardship was anything but feasible.

 

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.

 

Of course it's a factor in my opinions that's why I'm not hitching up to the Warburton must go bandwagon, I'm fully aware just how f*&ked we were at every level of the footballing department from the very bottom to the very top, note Craig's constant posts re the current progress of all levels of the youth department and how they are embracing Warburton's philosophy.

 

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.

 

In amongst the bollox of imagining Warburton's side is as bad the McCoist manged version the condescension is indeed noted.

 

 

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 have absolutely no problem with people disagreeing with me 30 odd years married to the most contrary woman on the planet is testament to that.

 

You have a fundamental misunderstanding of why you attract animosity it certainly isn't because you make a well reasoned case far from it as you actually seldom do. What you think is a well reasoned case is usually little more than pontification and a not so subtle claim to moral and intellectual superiority usually complete with some free psychoanalysis it's that and the constant I,I,I,me,me,me,you,you,you shit causes the animosity and antipathy.

 

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.

 

McCoist had over 2 years to prepare a team for promotion from the Championship, Warburton had 6 weeks and a budget less than the cost of David Templeton. I don't doubt for one second that you can't see how Warburton is a better fit for Rangers than McCoist in the managerial arena.

 

 

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.

 

What evidence is that?

 

 

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.

 

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.

 

However he lost 0 points to a McCoist managed Rangers, St Mirren equivalent to Hearts aye right. Yes the whole season would include the Petrofac and Scottish Cup Finals both of which are absent from Neilson's CV.

 

 

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

 

Ooh such dry wit, shouldn't that be over my head?

[calscot 0]

Glad it's not just me that sees through this.

 

Through what? Please share and explain your insight. Show us your chops. Otherwise you are just killing the thread with meaningless one line innuendo.

[limeburner 0]

Ok,i admit it,it might have been a tranny that looked like Kate Moss.

[calscot 0]

Said many times I don't mind feeding the troll in moments of inane boredom such as now as I await the arrival of a nurse to play about at my bum, it's not as if it requires any bait is it?

 

Can we stick to the thread, stories about feeding yourself etc are very dull and detract from the debate?

 

By the time McCoist finally got round to resigning promotion under his stewardship was anything but feasible.

 

A very subjective opinion which one again strangely ignores the Llambias effect that I thought you had more knowledge of.

 

You are entitled to that opinion but it should not be difficult for you to understand why someone would have an opposing view especially when you consider the more objective facts. Are you really unable to play a devil's advocate on your own opinion? I think it's obvious that you have a problem with that.

 

Of course it's a factor in my opinions that's why I'm not hitching up to the Warburton must go bandwagon, I'm fully aware just how f*&ked we were at every level of the footballing department from the very bottom to the very top, note Craig's constant posts re the current progress of all levels of the youth department and how they are embracing Warburton's philosophy.

 

That's all very well but I've painstakingly pointed out where I don't agree with his philosophies, and like the Kate Moss thing, anyone can boast when there is no evidence, and I've pointed out the example of Roxburgh. In fact there is a lack of results that make it worrying - we don't even have a Lewis McLeod never mind a Durrant, neither of which had the benefit of Warburton's scheme. And I can name countless others.

 

Until we have results the jury is out. And as I've alluded to I'm worried about having a guy who follows the text book. I want the guy who writes it.

 

In amongst the bollox of imagining Warburton's side is as bad the McCoist manged version the condescension is indeed noted.

 

I've always said I'm comparing results. I'm also on record as not fully liking either manager's main style. You are condescending but regularly fail to justify it. I'v said before that you may disagree with me, but you need to understand my reasoning, which I hope isn't too hard, when you get that, I think my opinion while different from you is not worthy of condescension. However, your mo is condescend opposing views regardless of their validity.

 

I have absolutely no problem with people disagreeing with me 30 odd years married to the most contrary woman on the planet is testament to that.

 

Your posts tend to contradict that.

 

You have a fundamental misunderstanding of why you attract animosity it certainly isn't because you make a well reasoned case far from it as you actually seldom do. What you think is a well reasoned case is usually little more than pontification

 

You always seem to accuse me of your own faults. Pontifs don't go to great pains to explain their views or debate them - i do this, you don't. Your mo is one line put downs implying people are stupid for not being privvy to your knowledge. I find most of your posts are rude and condescending and told you that when you first joined, but I'm not going to stalk you about it like you are me. if you don't like my posts, don't reply. Simple.

 

and a not so subtle claim to moral and intellectual superiority usually complete with some free psychoanalysis it's that and the constant I,I,I,me,me,me,you,you,you shit causes the animosity and antipathy.

[/quite]

 

You really need help.

 

This forum should not be about "why I hate you", I've been very respectful and tried to debate the Rangers stuff but once again you come out with your drivel. I really can't help any inferiority complexes. It's at times like this I probably sound superior and psychoanalyse. It's nuts.

 

McCoist had over 2 years to prepare a team for promotion from the Championship, Warburton had 6 weeks and a budget less than the cost of David Templeton. I don't doubt for one second that you can't see how Warburton is a better fit for Rangers than McCoist in the managerial arena.

 

Fair enough, but the templeton is a stange one. Sometimes players don't work out - Barton, Krnajcar? But your obfuscating, McCoist never had a positive transfer spend IIRC. Warburton has had two. Now maybe I'm about to sound superior (woo), but have you read my posts? I have doubts about MW and have said for years that AM is not a good fit. If MW doesn't improve it will be like slagging me off for not thinking the square peg fits in the round hole better than the triangle. I don't get your thinking.

 

What evidence is that?

 

I refer you to the answer I gave earlier.

 

 

However he lost 0 points to a McCoist managed Rangers, St Mirren equivalent to Hearts aye right. Yes the whole season would include the Petrofac and Scottish Cup Finals both of which are absent from Neilson's CV.

[/quite]

 

Eh, we're swapping St Mirren for Rangers.

 

Neilson was beaten by Celtic in the cups IIRC and also once by Hibs. Ring any bells? As for the petrofac, it's common knowledge they didn't treat it seriously, and fair enough MW won it, but for me (as in only my opinion, me,me,me) It's not that relevant. Good managers lose the odd game, in a cup it means they are out. There is no such anomaly in the league, which is why a SP champions trump a cup double (or even treble) for best team in the country.

 

Again I've presented reasonable argument for my opinion and if you don't agree with my opinion, fine, but if you have any decency you'll at least stop attacking me about it and you know, being superior and condescending.

 

If you don't like my style, i don't care - I can't stand yours. If you point out where I'm out of order and you have been previously respectful, fine, I'll have a look at it and apologise if it's a valid complaint.

 

As for the "nobody likes you" stuff people are doing, grow up. Speak for yourselves not others - and it really is sad. I'm not here to be popular, and as I don't kiss arse, give platitudes or follow the popular memes like a sheep or shrink like a violet, I don't expect to be popular or make new buddies. I do that in real life. If you think it's important I'll leave you to your imaginary Kate Moss girlfriend to dream about basking in your amazing popularity.

 

Now can we get back to the thread?????

I'm here to discuss Rangers as that's otherwise difficult in deepest England.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

The difference is is I'm not arrogant enough to say I categorically state that you didn't. I don't state things as facts that I don't know. I also realise that you may be say talking about a friend's cat called Kate Moss, or even some tranny who you met who claimed that was their name.

 

For the model maybe you did, but plausibility is low, while a manager being involved in a transfer of a player who plays that season is more than highly probable.

 

But in any case you are still trolling as it's a minor detail to the thrust of the point I was making, and the strange thing is that I've already admitted my mistake ages ago and apologised for it.

 

So really, what salient point are you making that contributes to the actual thread? Your persnickety game is becoming very tedious and I believe you've already lost.

But I'm right.