McCOIST

The place to discuss Scottish football
Scottish
Site Admin
Posts: 7665
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2005 4:51 pm
Contact:

Re: McCOIST

Post by Scottish » Mon Mar 05, 2012 9:34 am

LEATHERSTOCKING wrote:Now chaps, let`s not start down the dangerous political road. This is a football forum.
Agreed entirely. But, as they used to say in my playground days, you started it.

lbb
Posts: 1316
Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 10:25 am
Contact:

Re: McCOIST

Post by lbb » Mon Mar 05, 2012 9:35 am

LEATHERSTOCKING wrote:It reminds me of the late 1970s when Harold Wilson, having made a cocked a*** of things, passed the buck to James Callaghan. Poor McCoist was the recipient of the hospital pass in the summer of 2011. Nary a word from Walterwallcarpeting since.
Smith has spoken in public.

Smith was allied to the Alastair Johnston faction on the board so he must have shared those doubts about Craig Whyte. Whether he anticipated things turning out as they have, I'm not sure. I think even David Murray thought the plane was going to have to make an emergency landing but I don't think he anticipated Whyte flying it straight into a mountain.

Scottish
Site Admin
Posts: 7665
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2005 4:51 pm
Contact:

Re: McCOIST

Post by Scottish » Mon Mar 05, 2012 9:36 am

lbb wrote:The reality is we should still be top of the league even with a 10-point deduction which would be very funny indeed.
140 years of arrogance summed up in a single sentence.

lbb
Posts: 1316
Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 10:25 am
Contact:

Re: McCOIST

Post by lbb » Mon Mar 05, 2012 9:45 am

scottish wrote:140 years of arrogance summed up in a single sentence.
Rangers were 12 points clear in October. It's hardly 'arrogant' to suggest the manager and players should have been capable of maintaining a lead like that. At the time of administration, there had been, I think, a 16 point swing in Celtic's favour in just 4 months.

Scottish
Site Admin
Posts: 7665
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2005 4:51 pm
Contact:

Re: McCOIST

Post by Scottish » Mon Mar 05, 2012 11:57 am

Aye, the Rangers shouldn't be losing games to diddy clubs.

lbb
Posts: 1316
Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 10:25 am
Contact:

Re: McCOIST

Post by lbb » Mon Mar 05, 2012 12:27 pm

I don't know why you're struggling to comprehend that a 12-point gap should have been a good cushion for Rangers for a significant period of the season. It should not have been overhauled as quickly and easily as it was. This isn't unique to Rangers but would apply to any team in any league which has a large lead over their nearest challengers.

Scottish
Site Admin
Posts: 7665
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2005 4:51 pm
Contact:

Re: McCOIST

Post by Scottish » Mon Mar 05, 2012 12:53 pm

You lost to your nearest rivals. That makes a six-point gap. You were overhauled because they kept winning while Rangers were beaten at Kilmarnock and St Mirren and drew at home with St Johnstone and Aberdeen. That in fact left Rangers four behind Celtic BEFORE administration. It is downright disrespectful to Killie, the Dons and the two Saints to suggest that these were matches Rangers should have won and indicative of the arrogance which has marked Rangers for over a century to suggest that other clubs are only there for the benefit of the mighty Gers.

lbb
Posts: 1316
Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 10:25 am
Contact:

Re: McCOIST

Post by lbb » Mon Mar 05, 2012 1:22 pm

scottish wrote:That in fact left Rangers four behind Celtic BEFORE administration.
This was precisely my point. Rangers had been overhauled by Celtic before administration so McCoist has to take the blame for it. Administration finished off the title challenge but, theoretically, the club could still have been in a strong position if McCoist had managed the situation better before administration. In an ordinary season, a Rangers manager who sees a 16-point swing towards Celtic would be under a lot more pressure than McCoist. Surely you can see that.

Scottish
Site Admin
Posts: 7665
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2005 4:51 pm
Contact:

Re: McCOIST

Post by Scottish » Mon Mar 05, 2012 5:51 pm

Rangers went fifteen games unbeaten at the start of the season - twelve wins and three draws including nine successive victories. There weren't too many calling for McCoist's head at that point. On the morning of their sixteenth match they were four points ahead of Celtic with a game in hand. Take ten points off that and see where it leaves you. First? Or second?

After that and before administration Rangers were beaten by Kilmarnock, St Mirren and Celtic and drew with Aberdeen while Celtic won every match. Your lead started to vanish because the Celtic winning streak started while Rangers were still undefeated and twelve wins and three draws is a fantastic start for any team. Well, for most. For Rangers apparently it isn't good enough. Let's assume Rangers beat all the diddy clubs from that point up to adminstration but lost to Celtic (even Struth, Symon, Waddell and Smith lost at Parkhead). Rangers would have been four ahead before administration. Tell me again how a ten point penalty then makes Rangers top of the league.

Here is your club fighting for its very existence, in administration, under investigation by HMRC, Strathclyde Police, the SFA, and now the SPL and you are waffling on about the manager and how you should still be top of the league even with a ten points deduction. That's what I mean by 140 years of arrogance.

lbb
Posts: 1316
Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 10:25 am
Contact:

Re: McCOIST

Post by lbb » Tue Mar 06, 2012 9:42 am

scottish wrote:Rangers went fifteen games unbeaten at the start of the season - twelve wins and three draws including nine successive victories. There weren't too many calling for McCoist's head at that point.
Presumably if they had, you would have accused them of being 'arrogant'.

By the 16th SPL match, Rangers had been eliminated from 3 competitions including 2 in Europe which would have been financially important for the club. And, of course, a manager is not judged solely on results but performances were poor, signings were hit-and-miss (Ortiz was described as a 'pacy winger' which was either a barefaced lie or proof that the manager had never seen him play) and there was no discernible pattern to our play other than a general muddle. So it wasn't quite the plain sailing that the league position might have suggested. However, it was a strong league position and by mid-October, Rangers were 10 points ahead of Celtic albeit the plucky Hoops had a game in hand. That's a strong lead in any season. If I was 10 points behind Celtic, I'd be worried about catching them even as early as October. Of course, as you rightly say, a succession of points were lost leading us to a situation where, by administration, Rangers were 4 points behind Celtic. So, Rangers were behind solely because of results on the pitch - as Neil Lennon would undoubtedly tell you - and administration simply finished it off. However, there was a point in the season when Rangers could have entered administration and still remained top of the league and the fact this lead was lost, on the pitch, is down to the manager and players.
scottish wrote:Here is your club fighting for its very existence, in administration, under investigation by HMRC, Strathclyde Police, the SFA, and now the SPL and you are waffling on about the manager and how you should still be top of the league even with a ten points deduction. That's what I mean by 140 years of arrogance.
No-one is waffling other than yourself. The football is secondary at the moment and Rangers could lose every match between now and the end of the season for all the difference it will make. However, if Rangers do survive then some analysis of the manager's performance is going to have to take place and I don't think he was doing very well on that score.

God be with you.

Scottish
Site Admin
Posts: 7665
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2005 4:51 pm
Contact:

Re: McCOIST

Post by Scottish » Tue Mar 06, 2012 10:33 am

Yada yada yada. And by their ninth match of the season Celtic had lost three times in the league after throwing it away at the death last year and been knocked out of Europe before getting a back door reprieve. At that stage of the season it was their fans questioning their manager. Now he is untouchable. I said earlier on another thread that I have no idea whether McCoist is a poor manager or just a poor sod, given what has happened this season. But by all means blame your manager if you like. Oh and the very fact that you think your club should have been able to take a ten points deduction and still win the league is indeed proof of 140 years of arrogance. There are none so blind.......

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests