The slating of walter smith and the team!

[gisabeer 409]

You find it hard to remember and enjoy the wonderful 3-0 away victory in Lyon? You find it hard to remember and enjoy a double header against Barcalona? You find it hard to remember and enjoy a pulsating game against Stuttgart? and only missing out on qualifying from the group of death by 3 points? Remember this was a group where many experts predictated that we wouldn't gain 1 single point.

 

The UEFA Cup run also had some very rememberable high points, especially away from Ibrox, the 2-0 victory in Lisbon over Sporting and the drama of the penalty shoot out against Fiorintina being instantly rememberable.

 

Walter Smith is due stick for some of his decisions last season (and this), but to completely write off the CL Group and the run to the UEFA Cup Final as nothing to remember is absolutely mental.

 

Cammy F

 

I remember getting cuffed 3-0 nil off Lyon at Ibrox. I remember going to every Uefa cup game at home and seeing two goals. I remember being bored ridgid by our managers negativity at home and remember being embarraced by our performances in most of the away games.

 

I also remember whilst standing in Albert square in Manchester that our manager would be more than happy to take this game to penalties.

 

How right i was.

 

We could have and should have shown more quality and skill on the park cammy.

 

I personally think Smiths extremely negative tactics were a disgrace to the the supporters who pay there money to watch Rangers and to the club on a whole. I feel Smith dragged us through the gutter last season and hes left a very bitter taste in my mouth with his tactics in the final.

 

no amount of discussion will ever change my views on Smith. Hell get no quarter from me. He desrves every bit of critisism in my eyes.

[Super_Ally 0]

I personally think Smiths extremely negative tactics were a disgrace to the the supporters who pay there money to watch Rangers and to the club on a whole.

 

I think sometimes people forget that sport is about winning first and foremost and looking pretty while doing it comes a distant second.

 

I still believe fully that this want for pretty football at the expense of results is a symptom of the sky/tv generation (says a youngster himself) and is ruining the game.

 

Win first, win second, win third. After that, if you're good enough do it with total football.

 

I know many will disagree but I leave Ibrox happier when we've won than when we played nice footy but didn't win. Yes, both could/should be achievable, but i'll still take the winning first.

[gisabeer 409]

I think sometimes people forget that sport is about winning first and foremost and looking pretty while doing it comes a distant second.

 

I still believe fully that this want for pretty football at the expense of results is a symptom of the sky/tv generation (says a youngster himself) and is ruining the game.

 

Win first, win second, win third. After that, if you're good enough do it with total football.

 

I know many will disagree but I leave Ibrox happier when we've won than when we played nice footy but didn't win. Yes, both could/should be achievable, but i'll still take the winning first.

 

Best game ive been to this season at Ibrox was the 3 3 draw with dundee utd. I actually left the stadium feeling that I actually enjoyed a match. and i can count the amount of times Ive left Ibrox feeling like that over the last 18 months on one hand with 3 fingers cut off.

 

Im not asking for super silky football every week. i want to see a will to win. not the dross we had to endure at Parkhead last sunday.

 

you also have to remember that we didnt win the league adopting Walts negative tactics last year.

[calscot 0]

Do you have the numbers?

 

I think with Grieg, Wallace, Souness and Walter's first session can be taken for granted and don't need numbers but here are some anyway:

 

 

JG + JW

(2pt win)

-3

-12

-12

-18

-15

-21

-15

= -96

AVG = -14

 

GS

+6 (+11 3pt win)

-12 (-17 3pt win)

+6 (+10 > CFC) (+12 3pt win)

+7 (+17 > CFC) (+10 3pt win)

+2 (+14 > CFC) (+4 3pt win)

= + 9 (+20 3pt win)

AVG = +2 (+7 > CFC) (+4 3pt win)

(I'm giving Souness the 90/91 Season as I can't remember the split for WS)

 

WS1

+9 (+10 > CFC) (+15 3pt win)

+9 (+13 > CFC) (+15 3pt win)

+3 (+8 > CFC) (+8 3pt win)

3pt win now

+15 (+18 > CFC)

+4

+5

-2

= +43 (+60 3pt win)

AVG = +6 (+8 > CFC) (+9 3pt win)

 

DA

+6 points

+21

-15

01/02 DA leaves while 12 points behind.

= 0

Avg = 0

 

So DA did not gain more points than Celtic in his time.

 

Eck:

-6

0

-17

+1

-18

= -40 in 4.5 seasons.

Avg = -9

 

PLG

-17 in 0.5 seasons.

Avg = -34

 

WS2

+5

-3

0

= +2 in 2 seasons.

Avg = +1

 

So the league table is:

 

1. WS1 +9

2. GS +4

3. WS2 +2

4. DA 0

5. AM -9

6. JG/JW -14 (2pt win)

7. PLG -34

[maineflyer 0]

I think with Grieg, Wallace, Souness and Walter's first session can be taken for granted and don't need numbers but here are some anyway:

 

 

JG + JW

(2pt win)

-3

-12

-12

-18

-15

-21

-15

= -96

AVG = -14

 

GS

+6 (+11 3pt win)

-12 (-17 3pt win)

+6 (+10 > CFC) (+12 3pt win)

+7 (+17 > CFC) (+10 3pt win)

+2 (+14 > CFC) (+4 3pt win)

= + 9 (+20 3pt win)

AVG = +2 (+7 > CFC) (+4 3pt win)

(I'm giving Souness the 90/91 Season as I can't remember the split for WS)

 

WS1

+9 (+10 > CFC) (+15 3pt win)

+9 (+13 > CFC) (+15 3pt win)

+3 (+8 > CFC) (+8 3pt win)

3pt win now

+15 (+18 > CFC)

+4

+5

-2

= +43 (+60 3pt win)

AVG = +6 (+8 > CFC) (+9 3pt win)

 

DA

+6 points

+21

-15

01/02 DA leaves while 12 points behind.

= 0

Avg = 0

 

So DA did not gain more points than Celtic in his time.

 

Eck:

-6

0

-17

+1

-18

= -40 in 4.5 seasons.

Avg = -9

 

PLG

-17 in 0.5 seasons.

Avg = -34

 

WS2

+5

-3

0

= +2 in 2 seasons.

Avg = +1

 

So the league table is:

 

1. WS1 +9

2. GS +4

3. WS2 +2

4. DA 0

5. AM -9

6. JG/JW -14 (2pt win)

7. PLG -34

 

A hell of a lot of work but what it proves I haven't a clue.

[calscot 0]

I think sometimes people forget that sport is about winning first and foremost and looking pretty while doing it comes a distant second.

 

I still believe fully that this want for pretty football at the expense of results is a symptom of the sky/tv generation (says a youngster himself) and is ruining the game.

 

Win first, win second, win third. After that, if you're good enough do it with total football.

 

I know many will disagree but I leave Ibrox happier when we've won than when we played nice footy but didn't win. Yes, both could/should be achievable, but i'll still take the winning first.

 

It's too true as before sky/setanta most people not at the game, "watched" it on teletext or waited for the classified results and read about it the next day in the papers, while catching the odd highlights. You aren't so critical when that's your football diet.

 

While I started supporting at 5 years old in 1974, I didn't really start following all the results, watching the highlights, reading the match reports and going to games till I was about 11 in 1980 - just after a very successful period and the start of the dark days.

 

Compared to 80 - 86, what we have on the pitch right now is fantastic - although we could still do with a Davie Cooper in the team...

 

I do remember watching the soccer sixes in the early 80's and thinking it was far more entertaining than a proper game. Going back to a muddy field with the game full of long balls and pass-backs was a bit disheartening after the tournament.

 

God the pass back was the most boring part of the game and I'm glad it got banned.

[calscot 0]

A hell of a lot of work but what it proves I haven't a clue.

 

Well for one it shows WS is statistically our best and most consistent manager in the last 30 years, probably more.

 

It says that in 9 seasons in charge he has been competitive till the last day of the season.

 

It says he ALWAYS competes strongly for the league - all the other managers except him have collapsed at least once, including Souness.

 

He may not be the best manager in the world but he's a pretty good one who will always have us competing for the league and cups.

 

You may not like his football but you can't truthfully disagree with its effectiveness.

 

:box:

[calscot 0]

PS I didn't really want Walter back (and partly because he was doing a great job for Scotland) but now he's here, I can't yet argue with his results - bar the Kaunus game which by all accounts looks like a glitch with plenty of mitigation.

 

As for the latter, I think when someone does something brilliant and then does it again shit, then it's time for best two out of three before you judge them. One or the other or both could be a fluke, we at least one more piece of evidence to make a conclusion.

[gisabeer 409]

Well for one it shows WS is statistically our best and most consistent manager in the last 30 years, probably more.

 

It says that in 9 seasons in charge he has been competitive till the last day of the season.

 

It says he ALWAYS competes strongly for the league - all the other managers except him have collapsed at least once, including Souness.

 

He may not be the best manager in the world but he's a pretty good one who will always have us competing for the league and cups.

 

You may not like his football but you can't truthfully disagree with its effectiveness.

 

:box:

 

What the hell is the point of playing football that isnt worth watching?

 

And i do disagree with his "effectiveness"

 

Where was Walters effectiveness in the run in to the league last year? It should have been put to bed long before the fixture congestion, he had ample oppertunity to do so.

 

Souness was competitive and succesfull. Advocaat was competitive and successfull. McLeish won two titles against a C****c side who were miles ahead of the current one with a fraction of the budget smith has at his disposal. What do your stats say about that?

 

Sod all.

 

Smith is selling the fans short with his brand of football, and the club for that matter.

[maineflyer 0]

Well for one it shows WS is statistically our best and most consistent manager in the last 30 years, probably more.

 

It says that in 9 seasons in charge he has been competitive till the last day of the season.

 

It says he ALWAYS competes strongly for the league - all the other managers except him have collapsed at least once, including Souness.

 

He may not be the best manager in the world but he's a pretty good one who will always have us competing for the league and cups.

 

You may not like his football but you can't truthfully disagree with its effectiveness.

 

:box:

Hmmm, it's not clear exactly what all these numbers actually mean but I've a feeling what they really represent is a comparison between two entities and, as always in such cases, is as much about one as the other. Perhaps Liam Brady and Lou Macari weren't all that hot either. Perhaps a bunch of money compensates for lack of ability. Perhaps Some of those other Rangers managers didn't have the same financial latitude, or perhaps they weren't all that good either.

 

What I do know is that these numbers prove very little about Smith's abilities as a manager. Sorry, anything else?