the gunslinger 3,366 Posted August 12, 2021 Share Posted August 12, 2021 The worst part of this result is the arguing it has caused. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Rousseau 10,655 Posted August 12, 2021 Author Popular Post Share Posted August 12, 2021 16 minutes ago, the gunslinger said: The worst part of this result is the arguing it has caused. NO IT ISN'T!! 8 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ranger_syntax 4,330 Posted August 12, 2021 Share Posted August 12, 2021 10 hours ago, craig said: If you can’t understand the point being made and why it’s relevant then I’m not sure what more can be said. ... When you stated “It was quite clear to me, and presumably many others, that we were not going to turn this around” someone responded about the Braga game, essentially asking if the outcome of that game was likewise obvious. The point being made was that, at 2-0 to Braga very, very few people expected us to turn it around - ergo, the outcome was “quite clear”…. Except it wasn’t. And that’s what the point was. Even if people thought the outcome last night was obvious, it COULD have been different. But I also fear we are now heading in tangents with respect to the thread. ... I understand the point being made and I know that it is irrelevant. I thought I should ask you and the other fellow to make your point clear first. The outcome, on Tuesday, was obvious at 70 minutes. The outcome of many matches over the last decade has been obvious at 70 minutes. The fact that there have been matches, like Braga, where the outcome was not obvious at 0 - 2 doesn't contradict either of those facts. The possibility of Rangers coming back doesn't contradict them either. It was obvious that Rangers were not going to start playing well again after the second Malmo goal. If you go back and watch the second half I think you will see that Rangers made few real attempts to play through the middle and break down the Malmo defence. You will see lots of sideways passing and aimless crosses. These things make the outcome obvious. If you don't believe your own eyes then look online and you'll also find no shortage of comment about sideways passing and aimless crosses into the box. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ranger_syntax 4,330 Posted August 12, 2021 Share Posted August 12, 2021 10 hours ago, craig said: I’m not sure if you’re aiming that at @ranger_syntaxor me ? Either way I think it was very snide. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted August 12, 2021 Share Posted August 12, 2021 1 hour ago, ranger_syntax said: I understand the point being made and I know that it is irrelevant. I thought I should ask you and the other fellow to make your point clear first. The outcome, on Tuesday, was obvious at 70 minutes. The outcome of many matches over the last decade has been obvious at 70 minutes. The fact that there have been matches, like Braga, where the outcome was not obvious at 0 - 2 doesn't contradict either of those facts. The possibility of Rangers coming back doesn't contradict them either. It was obvious that Rangers were not going to start playing well again after the second Malmo goal. If you go back and watch the second half I think you will see that Rangers made few real attempts to play through the middle and break down the Malmo defence. You will see lots of sideways passing and aimless crosses. These things make the outcome obvious. If you don't believe your own eyes then look online and you'll also find no shortage of comment about sideways passing and aimless crosses into the box. You’re fighting a straw man. Not sure what you gain by that. Doesn’t matter if there are 100 instances or one solitary instance whereby the result was “obvious” at 70 minutes to then not occur, the fact is proven that things can change no matter what it looks like at 70 minutes. The outcome in the Braga match WAS obvious at 70 minutes, it was obvious we would lose - that’s the whole point. We didn’t look like scoring that night either, but we did. And the game changed. In many ways it was similar to Tuesday night. I’m effectively playing devils advocate because I, too, couldn’t see a comeback on Tuesday night but the fact remains that it COULD have happened, no matter how we felt. Braga proved that. Your last paragraph is preaching to the choir. I was there, I witnessed it, I agree. Still doesn’t mean things couldn’t have changed. Either way, continuing this is futile because neither of us are prepared to alter our position. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,724 Posted August 12, 2021 Share Posted August 12, 2021 Heart & Hand podcast, post match. AUG 11, 2021 AT 2:40 PM Daily Update 11 Aug 2021 David is here with a post-Malmo show which is a bit ranty, so be warned. https://www.patreon.com/posts/daily-update-11-54782136?utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=postshare 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackSocksRedTops 3,752 Posted August 12, 2021 Share Posted August 12, 2021 7 hours ago, ranger_syntax said: I understand the point being made and I know that it is irrelevant. I thought I should ask you and the other fellow to make your point clear first. The outcome, on Tuesday, was obvious at 70 minutes. The outcome of many matches over the last decade has been obvious at 70 minutes. The fact that there have been matches, like Braga, where the outcome was not obvious at 0 - 2 doesn't contradict either of those facts. The possibility of Rangers coming back doesn't contradict them either. It was obvious that Rangers were not going to start playing well again after the second Malmo goal. If you go back and watch the second half I think you will see that Rangers made few real attempts to play through the middle and break down the Malmo defence. You will see lots of sideways passing and aimless crosses. These things make the outcome obvious. If you don't believe your own eyes then look online and you'll also find no shortage of comment about sideways passing and aimless crosses into the box. Utter guff. There are no obvious outcomes or certainties in any game where there 1 and 2 goals in it. As they say goals change games and it only takes less than a minute to score a goal. What if Salakas shot spins over their keeper with 5 minutes to go? Would it still be obvious? 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Moon 1,300 Posted August 12, 2021 Share Posted August 12, 2021 Goldson had so much of the ball on Tuesday and slowed the game down horribly. We missed chance after chance to play through them and the ball went side to side and to the right wing and an aimless cross ensued. I am not blaming him entirely but he really needs to part with the ball much faster. The success of our game depends on one touch football. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
onevision 1,571 Posted August 13, 2021 Share Posted August 13, 2021 8 hours ago, Blue Moon said: Goldson had so much of the ball on Tuesday and slowed the game down horribly. We missed chance after chance to play through them and the ball went side to side and to the right wing and an aimless cross ensued. I am not blaming him entirely but he really needs to part with the ball much faster. The success of our game depends on one touch football. Agree, we need to start driving with pace at the very heart of teams and stop this pass pass pass out wide cross stuff. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.png.933227737d9b1db3d025cd3f6cbbf371.png)
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.