Follow Follow Rangers. Season 2023/24

[bennett]

32 minutes ago, G51 said:

We all love a good refereeing conspiracy don't we?

 

 

Masons in the black not really pulling their weight are they

 

Saves us missing them tbf.

[G51]

Just now, bennett said:

 

Saves us missing them tbf.

Think that'll be behind us now in all honesty. Itten, Johnson (assuming he signs), Roofe and Hagi can all take one

[bennett]

1 minute ago, G51 said:

Think that'll be behind us now in all honesty. Itten, Johnson (assuming he signs), Roofe and Hagi can all take one

Should've probably kept Tav on them as he previously had a decent record,  Barisic could maybe pretty handy from the spot.

 

[kingjoey]

16 hours ago, thepundit said:

Meh. Four when when we weren’t in the league and another one that was handed to them. Half of the 10 if they win it isn’t worth bothering about. I think a lot of their own fans even think it’s a hollow achievement.

Totally agree winning the league this season is a must though. Then again, that would be the case regardless.

By your reasoning then it was a must that you won the league two years ago and it was a must that you won the league last season. If it’s a “must” that you win the league this season, what happens if you don’t, which is obviously the most likely outcome?

[G51]

3 minutes ago, bennett said:

Should've probably kept Tav on them as he previously had a decent record,  Barisic could maybe pretty handy from the spot.

 

Barisic is a good shout. If he can't take a penalty, nae c**t can.

[Romeo]

Absolutely, you've went for personal abuse then apologised for it. You've been quoting folk then deleting the replies. You're absolutely all over the place (well, always in one place - the Rangers topic - but you get the gist). 
Go have some dinner, watch some TV. Relax a bit mate. We can speak when you come back. 

White knighting the ****?

Oh dear

[G51]

19 minutes ago, kingjoey said:

By your reasoning then it was a must that you won the league two years ago and it was a must that you won the league last season. If it’s a “must” that you win the league this season, what happens if you don’t, which is obviously the most likely outcome?

I have a (probably unpopular) take on this: winning the league isn't a must for us this season.

Reasons being:

1) The direction of travel is more important than anything, and we're clearly going in the right direction. This should be judged primarily by performances and by points won, rather than whether we actually end up with the league title at the end of it. If Celtic end up on 106 points and we end up on 100, then that's a very good team that needs to be kept together.

2) The goal of the club at the minute is to become self-sustaining, and Europe is vitally important for this. Winning the league is no longer a requirement to get a crack at the transformative money available in the CL due to co-efficient improvements (though the Champions path is obviously much easier).

3) Touched on this in 1, but winning league titles (and cup competitions in particular) only rely partially on your teams ability. They also rely on luck, and this is a factor that is never given the credibility it deserves for a title campaign, because folk love to invent and rely on narratives instead. The idea that a team of professional footballers, who are in the top 1% to have played the game and have made some ridiculous sacrifices to get to where they are, aren't "winners" is ludicrous. Some footballers do have mental blocks (Barker is rumoured to have an issue with nerves) but they are the exception to the rule. By and large these narratives are created by fans. Most of what we attribute to mentality is actually a consequence of variance.

Does that mean we shouldn't give 100%  to try and win the league? Of course not, but we shouldn't sacrifice the long term to increase our chance of short-term success. The Murray days are over and that's the key lesson to be learned from them.

Ultimately, 10IAR is something that will primarily be defined by Celtic anyway. If they win it, they'll have dominated a league with a budget an order of magnitude greater than everyone else, including Rangers, put together. It will be the minimum that should be expected given 2012. If they don't, they'll have blown the most advantageous position Scottish football will ever see. And frankly, talking about it is completely f*cking boring. It's something that simply does not matter outside of the city limits of Glasgow.

[wastecoatwilly]

1 hour ago, G51 said:

Think that'll be behind us now in all honesty. Itten, Johnson (assuming he signs), Roofe and Hagi can all take one

You did get 4 in one game so very possible.

[Romeo]

I have a (probably unpopular) take on this: winning the league isn't a must for us this season.
Reasons being:
1) The direction of travel is more important than anything, and we're clearly going in the right direction. This should be judged primarily by performances and by points won, rather than whether we actually end up with the league title at the end of it. If Celtic end up on 106 points and we end up on 100, then that's a very good team that needs to be kept together.
2) The goal of the club at the minute is to become self-sustaining, and Europe is vitally important for this. Winning the league is no longer a requirement to get a crack at the transformative money available in the CL due to co-efficient improvements (though the Champions path is obviously much easier).
3) Touched on this in 1, but winning league titles (and cup competitions in particular) only rely partially on your teams ability. They also rely on luck, and this is a factor that is never given the credibility it deserves for a title campaign, because folk love to invent and rely on narratives instead. The idea that a team of professional footballers, who are in the top 1% to have played the game and have made some ridiculous sacrifices to get to where they are, aren't "winners" is ludicrous. Some footballers do have mental blocks (Barker is rumoured to have an issue with nerves) but they are the exception to the rule. By and large these narratives are created by fans. Most of what we attribute to mentality is actually a consequence of variance.
Does that mean we shouldn't give 100%  to try and win the league? Of course not, but we shouldn't sacrifice the long term to increase our chance of short-term success. The Murray days are over and that's the key lesson to be learned from them.
Ultimately, 10IAR is something that will primarily be defined by Celtic anyway. If they win it, they'll have dominated a league with a budget an order of magnitude greater than everyone else, including Rangers, put together. It will be the minimum that should be expected given 2012. If they don't, they'll have blown the most advantageous position Scottish football will ever see. And frankly, talking about it is completely f*cking boring. It's something that simply does not matter outside of the city limits of Glasgow.

TL;DR

[thepundit]

1 hour ago, kingjoey said:

By your reasoning then it was a must that you won the league two years ago and it was a must that you won the league last season. If it’s a “must” that you win the league this season, what happens if you don’t, which is obviously the most likely outcome?

I think the past few seasons are the only times ever where winning the league wasn’t a must for Rangers. Being realistic it was very unlikely Rangers were going to win it and the focus was on building Rangers back up to a certain level of quality.

But the talk of ‘so and so has certainly improved Rangers’ isn’t enough anymore.

I’m a huge fan of Gerrard but if he doesn’t win it this season then it’s time to give someone else a try, unless as G51 mentioned above Rangers have an incredible season but fall just short. Then a case can be made for giving the management team one more attempt at winning the league.

[AJF]

2 hours ago, G51 said:

I have a (probably unpopular) take on this: winning the league isn't a must for us this season.

Reasons being:

1) The direction of travel is more important than anything, and we're clearly going in the right direction. This should be judged primarily by performances and by points won, rather than whether we actually end up with the league title at the end of it. If Celtic end up on 106 points and we end up on 100, then that's a very good team that needs to be kept together.

2) The goal of the club at the minute is to become self-sustaining, and Europe is vitally important for this. Winning the league is no longer a requirement to get a crack at the transformative money available in the CL due to co-efficient improvements (though the Champions path is obviously much easier).

3) Touched on this in 1, but winning league titles (and cup competitions in particular) only rely partially on your teams ability. They also rely on luck, and this is a factor that is never given the credibility it deserves for a title campaign, because folk love to invent and rely on narratives instead. The idea that a team of professional footballers, who are in the top 1% to have played the game and have made some ridiculous sacrifices to get to where they are, aren't "winners" is ludicrous. Some footballers do have mental blocks (Barker is rumoured to have an issue with nerves) but they are the exception to the rule. By and large these narratives are created by fans. Most of what we attribute to mentality is actually a consequence of variance.

Does that mean we shouldn't give 100%  to try and win the league? Of course not, but we shouldn't sacrifice the long term to increase our chance of short-term success. The Murray days are over and that's the key lesson to be learned from them.

Ultimately, 10IAR is something that will primarily be defined by Celtic anyway. If they win it, they'll have dominated a league with a budget an order of magnitude greater than everyone else, including Rangers, put together. It will be the minimum that should be expected given 2012. If they don't, they'll have blown the most advantageous position Scottish football will ever see. And frankly, talking about it is completely f*cking boring. It's something that simply does not matter outside of the city limits of Glasgow.

This sums up my own feelings on the matter pretty accurately.

While I would desperately, DESPERATELY love to win the league this year and stop 10IAR, I don’t think it is the be-all end-all.

I’d be bitterly disappointed not to win the league, but not any more so than the last couple of seasons.

Whenever the time comes that we win the league, whether that is this season next season or in 5 seasons time, I imagine I’ll celebrate it with no more or less enthusiasm regardless of when it happens.

I will add, I feel Gerrard has this squad a whisker away from sustaining a strong challenge. A little bit of luck and Celtic losing a key player (Edouard) or two may see it swing our way.

[G51]

9 minutes ago, AJF said:

This sums up my own feelings on the matter pretty accurately.

While I would desperately, DESPERATELY love to win the league this year and stop 10IAR, I don’t think it is the be-all end-all.

I’d be bitterly disappointed not to win the league, but not any more so than the last couple of seasons.

Whenever the time comes that we win the league, whether that is this season next season or in 5 seasons time, I imagine I’ll celebrate it with no more or less enthusiasm regardless of when it happens.

I will add, I feel Gerrard has this squad a whisker away from sustaining a strong challenge. A little bit of luck and Celtic losing a key player (Edouard) or two may see it swing our way.

This is the interesting thing for me - what is the probability that we win the league?

Betfair have it as follows: Celtic 4/6, so an implied probability of 60%. Rangers at 6/5, so an implied probability of 45%.

Not withstanding the bookies cut, if you told me we had a 40 - 45% chance of winning the league, I'd say that probably feels about right at the minute. From a Celtic perspective, their impressive strength at set pieces and the retention of Edouard are key. From our perspective, the defensive structure has to be maintained and we need to manage our players properly - we can't have Davis playing 30 games before January again. We also have a little bit of shopping to do.

But like I was saying, the most important thing is the direction of travel. And I'm comfortable that we have a football structure in Ross Wilson, Andy Scoulding and Steven Gerrard that will result in continuous improvement and success. Over time, I expect us to improve, rather than regress.

I can't speak for Celtic fans, but I'd be interested to know how they view their medium to long term prospects.

[gannonball]

2 hours ago, G51 said:

I have a (probably unpopular) take on this: winning the league isn't a must for us this season.

Reasons being:

1) The direction of travel is more important than anything, and we're clearly going in the right direction. This should be judged primarily by performances and by points won, rather than whether we actually end up with the league title at the end of it. If Celtic end up on 106 points and we end up on 100, then that's a very good team that needs to be kept together.

2) The goal of the club at the minute is to become self-sustaining, and Europe is vitally important for this. Winning the league is no longer a requirement to get a crack at the transformative money available in the CL due to co-efficient improvements (though the Champions path is obviously much easier).

3) Touched on this in 1, but winning league titles (and cup competitions in particular) only rely partially on your teams ability. They also rely on luck, and this is a factor that is never given the credibility it deserves for a title campaign, because folk love to invent and rely on narratives instead. The idea that a team of professional footballers, who are in the top 1% to have played the game and have made some ridiculous sacrifices to get to where they are, aren't "winners" is ludicrous. Some footballers do have mental blocks (Barker is rumoured to have an issue with nerves) but they are the exception to the rule. By and large these narratives are created by fans. Most of what we attribute to mentality is actually a consequence of variance.

Does that mean we shouldn't give 100%  to try and win the league? Of course not, but we shouldn't sacrifice the long term to increase our chance of short-term success. The Murray days are over and that's the key lesson to be learned from them.

Ultimately, 10IAR is something that will primarily be defined by Celtic anyway. If they win it, they'll have dominated a league with a budget an order of magnitude greater than everyone else, including Rangers, put together. It will be the minimum that should be expected given 2012. If they don't, they'll have blown the most advantageous position Scottish football will ever see. And frankly, talking about it is completely f*cking boring. It's something that simply does not matter outside of the city limits of Glasgow.

Some very decent points there tbh but I would argue that gulf in finances isn't that  big, especially now.  Our wages were particularly high with champions league bonuses but not so much now. Add in the large transfer surplus we seem to run at every year now the gap really isn't that big. For Rangers* I think backing Caixinha set back the club financially for years with so many well paid duds and finally shifting that sort of deadwood means they can compete on a relative playing field now.

Edited September 14, 2020 by gannonball

[G51]

10 minutes ago, gannonball said:

Some very decent points there tbh but I would argue that gulf in finances isn't that  big, especially now.  Our wages were particularly high with champions league bonuses but not so much now. Add in the large transfer surplus we seem to run at every year now the gap really isn't that big. For Rangers* I think backing Caixinha set back the club financially for years with so many well paid duds and finally shifting that sort of deadwood means they can compete on a relative playing field now.

It's certainly closing and continuing on that path, but our wage bill was still c. 70% of Celtic's last year. Both teams will have added to that up until this point, so it's reasonable to expect it might be something like 75% now.

And ultimately, Celtic had £33m in the bank at the last set of accounts. Whether that's there as a safety net in case of no Europe or whatever, I don't know - it's not clear why Lawwell runs the club in this way, at least to me.

No doubt that we spend enough to have a proper go at the league. But the financial advantage is still with Celtic, and while it is surmountable it's still an advantage.

[AmericanFan]

8 hours ago, thepundit said:

I think the past few seasons are the only times ever where winning the league wasn’t a must for Rangers. Being realistic it was very unlikely Rangers were going to win it and the focus was on building Rangers back up to a certain level of quality.

But the talk of ‘so and so has certainly improved Rangers’ isn’t enough anymore.

I’m a huge fan of Gerrard but if he doesn’t win it this season then it’s time to give someone else a try, unless as G51 mentioned above Rangers have an incredible season but fall just short. Then a case can be made for giving the management team one more attempt at winning the league.

What kind of trade-off would Rangers fans give on the league for Europe?

Say, would you be OK with finishing second in the league if you made another run to the round of 16 Europa League? Just the knockout stage?

I'm curious to see what the thinking is there? Personally, I'd think a deeper run in Europe would be worth finishing second if Celtic say didn't make group stage or got knocked out of group stage in EL.

[kingjoey]

4 hours ago, AmericanFan said:

What kind of trade-off would Rangers fans give on the league for Europe?

Say, would you be OK with finishing second in the league if you made another run to the round of 16 Europa League? Just the knockout stage?

I'm curious to see what the thinking is there? Personally, I'd think a deeper run in Europe would be worth finishing second if Celtic say didn't make group stage or got knocked out of group stage in EL.

Rangers would be deliriously happy to be beaten 10-0 on aggregate by Lincoln Red Imps, and for Hibs to win the league, just as long as  Celtic don’t win10(*) in a row. It is the be all and end all of this season.

[AJF]

3 hours ago, kingjoey said:

Rangers would be deliriously happy to be beaten 10-0 on aggregate by Lincoln Red Imps, and for Hibs to win the league, just as long as  Celtic don’t win10(*) in a row. It is the be all and end all of this season.

Please don't post nonsense like this as if you have an idea what I or any other Rangers fan would be happy with.

I will always be disappointed by not winning the league - certainly if I had to choose then I'd rather someone else won the league than Celtic if it wasn't going to be Rangers.

However, in the scenario you describe above:

Rangers would have been eliminated from the Europa League Qualifying, they don't win the league and I'm presuming you are suggesting we'd finish third behind Celtic and Hibs which would mean we would miss out on the 2 Champions League places next season...

So, no, I would not be 'deliriously happy' with the scenario you've put forward.

[hearthammer]

Did/Were they, aye ??  

https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/sport/football/6030349/rangers-34-clubs-linked-morelos-three-seasons/

[kingjoey]

1 minute ago, AJF said:

Please don't post nonsense like this as if you have an idea what I or any other Rangers fan would be happy with.

I will always be disappointed by not winning the league - certainly if I had to choose then I'd rather someone else won the league than Celtic if it wasn't going to be Rangers.

However, in the scenario you describe above:

Rangers would have been eliminated from the Europa League Qualifying, they don't win the league and I'm presuming you are suggesting we'd finish third behind Celtic and Hibs which would mean we would miss out on the 2 Champions League places next season...

So, no, I would not be 'deliriously happy' with the scenario you've put forward.

You are in the minority. As I said, for Rangers, and in particular the vast majority of their fans, all that matters this season is that Celtic do not win the league. Absolutely nothing else matters to them. If you dispute that, fair enough, but you are in a minority.

[AJF]

Just now, kingjoey said:

You are in the minority. As I said, for Rangers, and in particular the vast majority of their fans, all that matters this season is that Celtic do not win the league. Absolutely nothing else matters to them. If you dispute that, fair enough, but you are in a minority.

On what basis are you claiming that I'm in the minority and that the vast majority of our fans would be deliriously happy to finish third as long as Celtic don't win the league?

I won't be happy if we don't win the league, that is how simple it is. If someone other than Celtic won it though, it would simply be a small silver lining.