Scottish Football

[Scotch]

1 hour ago, Muzzy_Larsson said:

Slippy slipping off to Aston Villa by the looks of things! Least they're getting £3m for him and his backroom team, only leaves then another £4.5m to find to see out the season  

He's not good enough for the PL yet. He's gonna fail. Too much too soon. 

[Muzzy_Larsson]

12 hours ago, Tinman said:

Its the only way you'll finish above em.

Yeah cos we've struggled to finish above them for the majority of Gerrard's time here

 

In Gerrard's time at Rangers:

 

Celtic: 6 Trophies

Rangers: 1 Trophy

[Muzzy_Larsson]

11 hours ago, Scotch said:

He's not good enough for the PL yet. He's gonna fail. Too much too soon. 

Yeah get that impression too, I think if his name was anything other than Steven Gerrard the Rangers fans would have had him chased. No other Rangers manager in history would survive winning one trophy out of 9. Also his teams are very boring to watch, if he doesn't get results quickly at Villa and his style of play is the same as at Rangers then he may struggle.

[Scotch]

31 minutes ago, Muzzy_Larsson said:

Yeah get that impression too, I think if his name was anything other than Steven Gerrard the Rangers fans would have had him chased. No other Rangers manager in history would survive winning one trophy out of 9. Also his teams are very boring to watch, if he doesn't get results quickly at Villa and his style of play is the same as at Rangers then he may struggle.

That's what I said on another thread. I don't even think he has a style of play. 

 

His team chops and changes so much, its almost like he picks the team out a hat the day before and tries to work out a style depending on who's starting. 

[Muzzy_Larsson]

24 minutes ago, Scotch said:

That's what I said on another thread. I don't even think he has a style of play. 

 

His team chops and changes so much, its almost like he picks the team out a hat the day before and tries to work out a style depending on who's starting. 

Yeah good point.

[Tinman]

57 minutes ago, Muzzy_Larsson said:

Yeah cos we've struggled to finish above them for the majority of Gerrard's time here

 

In Gerrard's time at Rangers:

 

Celtic: 6 Trophies

Rangers: 1 Trophy

But that one trophy.

[Scotch]

Rangers should be going all out for Rino Gattuso. Not sure if the pull of the club will be enough but they need to try. 

 

McIness or Calum Davidson would be the smart money. The latter could be a very good appointment. 

[Muzzy_Larsson]

44 minutes ago, Scotch said:

Rangers should be going all out for Rino Gattuso. Not sure if the pull of the club will be enough but they need to try. 

 

McIness or Calum Davidson would be the smart money. The latter could be a very good appointment. 

Davidson would be a very good appointment as he'd be the ideal candidate to work with little money as it seems the well has run dry and that will continue to be the case until they ever start selling players.

 

Can see Rangers being far more entitled and going for another "name", box office type appointment again, someone like GVB or Gattuso like you mention. Problem with these guys is though you'd imagine they'll want a chunk of cash to spend on the team.

[Scotch]

54 minutes ago, Muzzy_Larsson said:

Davidson would be a very good appointment as he'd be the ideal candidate to work with little money as it seems the well has run dry and that will continue to be the case until they ever start selling players.

 

Can see Rangers being far more entitled and going for another "name", box office type appointment again, someone like GVB or Gattuso like you mention. Problem with these guys is though you'd imagine they'll want a chunk of cash to spend on the team.

I think whoever comes in, they have a pile of deadwood to shift. Gerard has compiled some amount of players...

 

Helander, Goldson, Simpson  Katic and Balogun? You need to drop at least one of them. 

 

Lundstrum, Jack, Davis, Aribo, Kamara  Bacuna, Kelly, Arfield, that fella with the dodgy ticker....atleast 3 or 4 of them need to go. 

 

Defoe, itten, morelos, roofe and sakala... again 1 or two has to go....

 

Like I said before, Gerard hasn't built a great team. He's just hoarded an absolute pile of half decent players that have somehow got the job done. Whoever comes in is going to need to shift through the sh!te to uncover the 10 maybe 11 really talented players in that squad, try and sell the rest and hopefully have enough to add some more quality. 

 

He's left some amount of work for the next guy, I don't think Davidson has the experience to take that on. 

[Raj]

Says it all about Scottish football that he would leave the so called biggest team in scotland for a mid table/relegation tier club like Villa.

Probably about where the 2 "giants" of Scotland  would finish in our league...

 

[The Horse's Mouth]

11 hours ago, Muzzy_Larsson said:

Yeah cos we've struggled to finish above them for the majority of Gerrard's time here

 

In Gerrard's time at Rangers:

 

Celtic: 6 Trophies

Rangers: 1 Trophy

You literally got handed one

[Muzzy_Larsson]

4 minutes ago, The Horse's Mouth said:

You literally got handed one

Nonsense but to humour you that still makes it 5-1!

[The Horse's Mouth]

5 minutes ago, Muzzy_Larsson said:

Nonsense but to humour you that still makes it 5-1!

Tbf though we both know you'd give away the cups to have got the false 10 in a row 

[Muzzy_Larsson]

Just now, The Horse's Mouth said:

Tbf though we both know you'd give away the cups to have got the false 10 in a row 

The 9 season you reference we were 13 points clear with 8 games to play. Rangers at the same time were imploding, their final game before the season was halted they were beaten 1-0 at home by Hamilton (yes Hamilton) and half the Rangers fans were calling for Gerrard's head and the other half held a minute's applause in the 8th minute of the very same match to try and give him a confidence boost such was the terrible run of form they were in. The same night Rangers' captain publicly said in an interview the players struggled under the pressure of playing in front of their own fans. You need to be pretty deranged in the head to think Rangers were going to overturn a 13 point deficit in 8 games and win the league, but if the cap fits. 

 

I wouldn't for a second have swapped the quadruple treble for 10 in a row, as gutting as it was to miss out on the ten and the majority of Celtic fans would say the same.

[The Horse's Mouth]

3 minutes ago, Muzzy_Larsson said:

The 9 season you reference we were 13 points clear with 8 games to play. Rangers at the same time were imploding, their final game before the season was halted they were beaten 1-0 at home by Hamilton (yes Hamilton) and half the Rangers fans were calling for Gerrard's head and the other half held a minute's applause in the 8th minute of the very same match to try and give him a confidence boost such was the terrible run of form they were in. The same night Rangers' captain publicly said in an interview the players struggled under the pressure of playing in front of their own fans. You need to be pretty deranged in the head to think Rangers were going to overturn a 13 point deficit in 8 games and win the league, but if the cap fits. 

 

I wouldn't for a second have swapped the quadruple treble for 10 in a row, as gutting as it was to miss out on the ten and the majority of Celtic fans would say the same.

We can talk probabilities and you'd have probably won it yeah, but you didn't you got handed it. 

 

I'm really surprised by that tbh, I mean those don't really mean anything but I guess the 10 doesn't that much either with everything considered, but it would defo been something to hold over them.

 

[Muzzy_Larsson]

22 minutes ago, The Horse's Mouth said:

We can talk probabilities and you'd have probably won it yeah, but you didn't you got handed it. 

 

I'm really surprised by that tbh, I mean those don't really mean anything but I guess the 10 doesn't that much either with everything considered, but it would defo been something to hold over them.

 

It was in the rules before Covid hit that in this situation, where greater than 75% of the fixtures were completed then the league table would be stand as is. If it was less than that in terms of fixtures fulfilled then it would be null and void. If the shoe was on the other foot and Rangers were at the top of the league they wouldn't have complained or given up the title. It was an unfortunate situation of course but to say a side who is 13 points clear and with only 20% of fixtures still remaining were "handed" the league is a bit ridiculous. What's the point in establishing rules in the first place if they are just going to be disregarded.

 

It did matter a lot but we've done 9 in a row twice to Rangers once and we've won the European cup and they haven't so we have enough to hold over them. We're also close to overtaking them in total number of league titles and if the ratio since the year 2000 continues (leaving out the 9 in a row years) to play out we'll do that soon enough.

 

The quadruple treble was completely unprecedented and will never happen again so that's why most Celtic fans wouldn't swap it, even in the previous 100 odd years no side had even won a back to back treble. For over 1000 days no other side in Scotland won a trophy but Celtic.

 

Although our league is poor, one treble is difficult to do, as Rangers would testify to last season when they had an open goal at one and never managed to win even one of the cups. Same with Celtic, we failed to win a single treble the whole team Rangers were out of the top flight. On the other hand I wouldn't be surprised if one of the sides done 9 in a row again or pretty close to it.

Edited 11 November 2021 by Muzzy_Larsson

[The Horse's Mouth]

13 minutes ago, Muzzy_Larsson said:

It was in the rules before Covid hit that in this situation, where greater than 75% of the fixtures were completed then the league table would be stand as is. If it was less than that in terms of fixtures fulfilled then it would be null and void. If the shoe was on the other foot and Rangers were at the top of the league they wouldn't have complained or given up the title. It was an unfortunate situation of course but to say a side who is 13 points clear and with only 20% of fixtures still remaining were "handed" the league is a bit ridiculous. What's the point in establishing rules in the first place if they are just going to be disregarded.

 

It did matter a lot but we've done 9 in a row twice to Rangers once and we've won the European cup and they haven't so we have enough to hold over them. We're also close to overtaking them in total number of league titles and if the ratio since the year 2000 continues to play out we'll do that soon enough.

 

The quadruple treble was completely unprecedented and will never happen again so that's why most Celtic fans wouldn't swap it, even in the previous 100 odd years no side had even won a back to back treble. For over 1000 days no other side in Scotland won a trophy but Celtic.

 

Although our league is poor, one treble is difficult to do, as Rangers would testify to last season when they had an open goal at one and never managed to win even one of the cups. Same with Celtic, we failed to win a single treble the whole team Rangers were out of the top flight. On the other hand I wouldn't be surprised if one of the sides done 9 in a row again or pretty close to it.

Sure, but at the end of the day we'd have all said that about Liverpool if they were given it despite having a bigger cushion as well. There was no real excuse not to have fulfilled the fixtures when every top league pretty much did as well as our second tier. 

 

Sure but let's be fair, the stars aligned in terms of rangers' rebuilding from the leagues and the lack of just any decent competition. I mean how many teams end up top 4 way in your league then end up getting relegated seems a bit too common . It's probably more disappointing you didn't manage it in the earlier years with rangers down there as there weren't really any excuse to be pumping every trophy then as well 

[SemperEadem]

 

[Muzzy_Larsson]

11 hours ago, The Horse's Mouth said:

Sure, but at the end of the day we'd have all said that about Liverpool if they were given it despite having a bigger cushion as well. There was no real excuse not to have fulfilled the fixtures when every top league pretty much did as well as our second tier. 

 

Sure but let's be fair, the stars aligned in terms of rangers' rebuilding from the leagues and the lack of just any decent competition. I mean how many teams end up top 4 way in your league then end up getting relegated seems a bit too common . It's probably more disappointing you didn't manage it in the earlier years with rangers down there as there weren't really any excuse to be pumping every trophy then as well 

There was, our league is brassic, we simply didn't have the finances or manpower to do the continual testing, put the necessary protocols in place, you need to remember this is a league that said they couldn't afford the multi-ball system initially and is trying to whip round money from sponsors to fund VAR. It wasn't just Scotland, there were leagues with far more money than us across Europe that logistically didn't have the means to resume their league, Holland, Belgium, France, etc.

 

Obviously Rangers being out the top league gave us a free run at some of that 9 in a row, there is no disputing that, part of that is Rangers own fault though, for example it took them two years to get out the championship. It was the same for their 9IAR in the 90's it coincided with us almost going out of business and finishing fourth in the league and the likes and spending 100k on guys from the English lower leagues while Rangers spent millions. Furthermore, it wasn't until the year Rangers came back into the top league that we started being really successful and winning trebles etc.

 

I think only one team has ever finished top 4, in recent times anyway (say the last 20 years) and then been relegated tbh and that's Kilmarnock.

Edited 12 November 2021 by Muzzy_Larsson

[Scotch]

No team handled the demise of Rangers well. 

 

Celtics board took it as an opportunity to take their foot off the pedal and spend as little as possible whilst still delivering success due to the lack of competition when they could have spent that time building a young exciting team and gelling them together, ready for when Rangers would return. 

 

Rangers had the perfect opportunity to start again. They could have went out and signed a team of young prospects, merged them with their youth system and given them the relative ease of the lower leagues to become top top players where they could have been sold for massive profit upon arrival to the SPFL and put Rangers in a strong position. Instead, they bought in their prime SPFL level players on massive (comparitively) wages like Sandaza, Daly and Nicky Clarke who inevitably would need replaced once back leaving them pretty much exactly in the same position they were when they left. 

 

Atleast ONE other team should have really pushed. If ever there was a time to take that risk and put yourself in debt, it was then. An Aberdeen (who tbf were half decent ant the time) could have really pushed for a few washed up PL players/championship players mixed with exciting loans and the big loan fees that came with it to have a real shot. They didn't. They stayed status quo and hoped for a 2nd place finish. 

[Muzzy_Larsson]

3 hours ago, Scotch said:

No team handled the demise of Rangers well. 

 

Celtics board took it as an opportunity to take their foot off the pedal and spend as little as possible whilst still delivering success due to the lack of competition when they could have spent that time building a young exciting team and gelling them together, ready for when Rangers would return. 

 

Rangers had the perfect opportunity to start again. They could have went out and signed a team of young prospects, merged them with their youth system and given them the relative ease of the lower leagues to become top top players where they could have been sold for massive profit upon arrival to the SPFL and put Rangers in a strong position. Instead, they bought in their prime SPFL level players on massive (comparitively) wages like Sandaza, Daly and Nicky Clarke who inevitably would need replaced once back leaving them pretty much exactly in the same position they were when they left. 

 

Atleast ONE other team should have really pushed. If ever there was a time to take that risk and put yourself in debt, it was then. An Aberdeen (who tbf were half decent ant the time) could have really pushed for a few washed up PL players/championship players mixed with exciting loans and the big loan fees that came with it to have a real shot. They didn't. They stayed status quo and hoped for a 2nd place finish. 

Agree in the main, only thing I'd say was under Rodgers we'd built the most formidable side we had in a long time (maybe due to luck rather than design) so we had a second chance at really capitalising after dropping the ball when Rangers were out of the league. However, as various Celtic boards have done for nigh on 100+ years we never capitalised and built from that position of strength. We replaced a Ferrari in Rodgers with an Austin Allegro in Lennon and tried to replace huge players, like Dembele, Tierney. Armstrong, etc, we got huge money for (in our terms anyway) with £2-3m punts. 

 

Deila's final season in charge we were there for the taking in all honesty, Aberdeen had a few chances to really put the pressure on us and bottled it.

[Scotch]

1 hour ago, Muzzy_Larsson said:

Agree in the main, only thing I'd say was under Rodgers we'd built the most formidable side we had in a long time (maybe due to luck rather than design) so we had a second chance at really capitalising after dropping the ball when Rangers were out of the league. However, as various Celtic boards have done for nigh on 100+ years we never capitalised and built from that position of strength. We replaced a Ferrari in Rodgers with an Austin Allegro in Lennon and tried to replace huge players, like Dembele, Tierney. Armstrong, etc, we got huge money for (in our terms anyway) with £2-3m punts. 

 

Deila's final season in charge we were there for the taking in all honesty, Aberdeen had a few chances to really put the pressure on us and bottled it.

...but like you said previously, it wasn't really untill Rangers came back that Celtic truly stepped it up a gear under Rodgers. 

 

Whilst they were away, Celtic really just farywd about under cheap managers and second rate players (for the most part). 

[Muzzy_Larsson]

1 hour ago, Scotch said:

...but like you said previously, it wasn't really untill Rangers came back that Celtic truly stepped it up a gear under Rodgers. 

 

Whilst they were away, Celtic really just farywd about under cheap managers and second rate players (for the most part). 

Yeah but I guess my point was when Rangers did arrive back in the league we had the best team we've had in around 20 years. I'll admit that was by accident rather than design which backs up your original point.

[Scotch]

Looking like it's probably going to be Gio for the Rangers job. Always a favourite of mine when I eas younger. Great player. 

 

Legend status at Ibrox means he will get a lot of good will from the fans, he knows the game and the culture. Good English, good style as a manager and decent record. 

 

I really do hope it goes well for him. Such a likeable guy. 

[Muzzy_Larsson]

On 13/11/2021 at 21:18, Scotch said:

Looking like it's probably going to be Gio for the Rangers job. Always a favourite of mine when I eas younger. Great player. 

 

Legend status at Ibrox means he will get a lot of good will from the fans, he knows the game and the culture. Good English, good style as a manager and decent record. 

 

I really do hope it goes well for him. Such a likeable guy. 

He was a great player indeed and I reckon a good appointment for them.

 

I hope it goes terribly for him though