Rangers caretaker coach has been told quintet from NUFC have to play if they are fit.
I personally like this they need play time so it's good move for as.
I personally like this they need play time so it's good move for as.
from Mark Douglas[Chronicle]
- Thread starter Salomon #9
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
- Status
Good. What's the point otherwise. Besides which, if Rangers have better players than those five, they would be dozens of points clear.
I don't know why anyone would have a problem with this. I read somewhere that on top of Chelea's already massive squad, they have AT LEAST THIRTY PLAYERS out on loan. Mainly at their sister clubs who are owned by parent companies, in the same way SD "owns" (or is trying to own) Rangers. How's that fair??
I'm personally quite impressed that we have this facility. The best of Scotland could be nurtured by Rangers and sold to NUFC, the wannabe's at NUFC can get some valuable game time. Our problem is that 20 years ago, when we all still used "Webcrawler" and "Dial Up", there weren't thousands of people dissecting the club. I think the term is information overload. Otherwise known as "ignorance is bliss".
I don't know why anyone would have a problem with this. I read somewhere that on top of Chelea's already massive squad, they have AT LEAST THIRTY PLAYERS out on loan. Mainly at their sister clubs who are owned by parent companies, in the same way SD "owns" (or is trying to own) Rangers. How's that fair??
I'm personally quite impressed that we have this facility. The best of Scotland could be nurtured by Rangers and sold to NUFC, the wannabe's at NUFC can get some valuable game time. Our problem is that 20 years ago, when we all still used "Webcrawler" and "Dial Up", there weren't thousands of people dissecting the club. I think the term is information overload. Otherwise known as "ignorance is bliss".
I can see both sides of the arguement. No manager/coach should be told who he can and can't play but at the same time alot of Rangers players are ****ing **** and not exactly doing a great job. Scottish football is **** and a complete embarassment but if it means the players get better what's to lose? They can't be any worse than Rangers current crop of ****s.
The Rangers coach seems to be a bottom feeder of the highest order btw.
The Rangers coach seems to be a bottom feeder of the highest order btw.
Rangers are to be a shop window for the players we will likely ship out in the summer.
Fatty could make a few more £££ out of this arrangement.
Fatty could make a few more £££ out of this arrangement.
It's excellent for us.
It's horrible for the integrity of the game.
As I gather we are in favour of MA being a horrible club "owner" when it is another club being screwed over and we benefit as a result: Three Cheers ! ! !
It's horrible for the integrity of the game.
As I gather we are in favour of MA being a horrible club "owner" when it is another club being screwed over and we benefit as a result: Three Cheers ! ! !
It's excellent for us.
It's horrible for the integrity of the game.
As I gather we are in favour of MA being a horrible club "owner" when it is another club being screwed over and we benefit as a result: Three Cheers ! ! !
It's horrible for the integrity of the game.
As I gather we are in favour of MA being a horrible club "owner" when it is another club being screwed over and we benefit as a result: Three Cheers ! ! !
I too believe that our players are better than those currently playing for Rangers and should play, however, my concern is that the manager was told by the board ( The fat one ) who was to play and that cannot be good for any team. Why have a manager ?
Pick players on merit and if our players are not good enough then clearly no use to us and therefore need shipping out. For someone who has only 8.92% of the shares he's weilding some power.
Pick players on merit and if our players are not good enough then clearly no use to us and therefore need shipping out. For someone who has only 8.92% of the shares he's weilding some power.
Crazy theory here, Maybe Mike Ashley thinks that Rangers will be youth academy in ways for us? Maybe well be using rangers to breed scottish talent? I personally have no problems how much he makes as long as we win and play good football. I can't think of many great premier league players that came from scotland, surely the five we've sent over there will be good enough to start for rangers???
You would think, how often do you see a player go on loan that should be playing and he isn't though? I think you have the occasional pardew who would rather play dummett at LM than Aarons and the kid suffers as a result. Speaking of, I cant wait to have aarons back.....
Very good for Newcastle and they're better than whatever Rangers can scrounge around for, so I'm surprised they've even had to inform there dipshit of a coach that they should be played.
I still think loaning out Streete and Santon from a depleted and injury prone backline is nonsense. The rest is fine although I agree with Freddd re:integrity of game/competition. They all should all benefit but I'm more interested in making sure Newcastle United have adequate cover. We've gambled on fitness in favour of pounds as far as I can see. It may cost us a few league place and a few quid if we pick up three quickfire injuries - say Colo, Willo and Janmaat. Who is your defence then?? Good, Anita, Dummett, Haidara. Good luck with that.
I don't really see this as a worthy story, as pointed out Chelsea have probably 2/3 football teams out on loan and sometimes buy players just to deny them to other teams, as for influencing team selection this has been going on for donkeys years with the rare media spotlight when it suits the sports hacks to fill some column inches.
Carver seemed quite honest today, he probably was third choice even though he had the potential to be better than both our current LB's. I mean, can we all just be honest and admit that Santon never really prospered? Injury-prone, defensive lapses and a real confidence player, I'm not sure he's THAT much better than what we have. Haidara is so thick he doesn't need confidence, he'll just crack on regardless. With training on "how to trap a ball", he'll be ok(ish).
MYM was not good enough for the PL. Well, just not suited to it. As has been said elsewhere, most other managers knew it, but Carr got it wrong. He's well suited to Italy which, in turn, suits him to the CL. You don't have to be a top player to succeed in Italy/CL football, as his (frequent) lapses are forgiven when the intensity isn't there. It was a shame it didn't work, but it happens. He should have been replaced, that's the only bad thing. We're clearly two first-team, Premier league quality players short of a good squad. Real shame, the money and pull of a good club is there, we should really be awaiting debuts of the likes of Aubameyang and Hummels (fck it lets take all Dortmunds Squad!!).
Good post ... As it looks likely Dortmund might be getting themselves relegated ..the fat controller is probably waiting for the summer to TRY (really, really hard. Honest) and buy the ENTIRE Dortmund squad + Klopp and staff ...initial offer..2/6d + a steak slice (slightly drooled on)
- Status