Yeah. Why not? As long as G.Nev gets offered the Liverpool job first.Question: Steven Gerrard proves to be a great manager, a Pep mark II if you will. Would you take him at United?
So much material, you should bump your thread.Amadeus strikes again.
Didn’t take long, thought he was doing well (football style-wise in particular), especially, in Europa?Booed off the park tonight, fans already had enough
“I can sit here and protect them all night and take the blame. If that’s what they want then I will.
“But, they are Rangers players. They are the ones who have to go out and deliver and tonight they haven’t
“We will all take the blame together but they have to take responsibility at some point."
If those ties are misleading, then it would only be fair to highlight the games we haven't won in Europe and domestically where we have been the better team. And there have been plenty.Reminds me a lot of Le Guen so far. Strong in Europe and at home but very poor away.
Fans would 100% be calling for his head if not for the Europa campaign so far, which in itself is a bit misleading. Outplayed by Osijek massively away and really should have lost that tie. Villarreal should have been 3-0 at ht and dead and buried.
Isn’t anything to suggest they’ll improve either given his lack of experience as a manager, be interesting to see how things go. Old firm fans turn very very quickly when things go badly.
Of course, but unlucky results generally don’t stop fans wanting a manager out, especially league matches where every game you’re expected to win.If those ties are misleading, then it would only be fair to highlight the games we haven't won in Europe and domestically where we have been the better team. And there have been plenty.
True. League results have not been good enough and we're lucky Celtic have been off the pace this year. 11 unbeaten games in Europe is excellent though.Of course, but unlucky results generally don’t stop fans wanting a manager out, especially league matches where every game you’re expected to win.
Sir Matt Busby spent 8 years at City and was captain at Liverpool, yet we don't even think of those bits when his name gets mentioned. So basically, why not? (On the basis that he becomes a fantastic manager, wants to manage United, we're in a situation that hires him, whatever else). Never happening, but I wouldn't rule anyone out based on playing career, and the proof is in one of the 2 great managers we've had.Question: Steven Gerrard proves to be a great manager, a Pep mark II if you will. Would you take him at United?
Yeah but then there was no internet or TV and newspapers once read were instantly used to wrap chips hence facts were easy to forget. Gerrard taking a Utd side to Anfield is about as likely as you leading out the Serbian national side.Sir Matt Busby spent 8 years at City and was captain at Liverpool, yet we don't even think of those bits when his name gets mentioned. So basically, why not? (On the basis that he becomes a fantastic manager, wants to manage United, we're in a situation that hires him, whatever else). Never happening, but I wouldn't rule anyone out based on playing career, and the proof is in one of the 2 great managers we've had.
It was also a different time back then.Sir Matt Busby spent 8 years at City and was captain at Liverpool, yet we don't even think of those bits when his name gets mentioned. So basically, why not? (On the basis that he becomes a fantastic manager, wants to manage United, we're in a situation that hires him, whatever else). Never happening, but I wouldn't rule anyone out based on playing career, and the proof is in one of the 2 great managers we've had.
It would be some achievement for a new club only created a few years ago, however history suggests that Gerrard will bottle it in the end.If Gerrard guides Rangers to win the Scottish Premier League he will join Graeme Souness and Walter Smith as a Rangers legend. This decade is the most fallow period in Rangers history since 1978-1986. He will also show a tangible reward for the work he has done so far at Ibrox. Given that he can't outspend Celtic that would only add to the magnitude of the achievement should he pull it off.
It obviously meant a lot to him. It would also endear him further to the fans. However I do think he should have been more dignified at the final whistle. They won a match not a trophy. Yes the result is significant but too early to say to what extent.His reaction at the final whistles yesterday sums him up as a person . Is always been Steve Me . He is one horrible C.nt of a man . I was always taught as a child the only thing worse than a bad loser was a bad winner ..
They should hedge their bets on Gerrard ASAP.Gerard is clearly being groomed for Liverpool job after Klopp leaves. Winning scottish league title or two will be helpful addition to his resume.
Interesting you mention new club. I am a Celtic supporter and I do read the Kerrydale forum. Rangers are called Newco and Huns on that forum. The club is still known as Glasgow Rangers so all this new club talk seems like nonsense and seems kind of pointless and pathetic.It would be some achievement for a new club only created a few years ago, however history suggests that Gerrard will bottle it in the end.
There is no need for sectarian terms but the fact is that the club were liquidised and died and a new club formed.Interesting you mention new club. I am a Celtic supporter and I do read the Kerrydale forum. Rangers are called Newco and Huns on that forum. The club is still known as Glasgow Rangers so all this new club talk seems like nonsense and seems kind of pointless and pathetic.
What’s the deal with their titles are they still officially classed as winning 54 under this new company or have they technically zero SPL’s?There is no need for sectarian terms but the fact is that the club were liquidised and died and a new club formed.
Nope.There is no need for sectarian terms but the fact is that the club were liquidised and died and a new club formed.
They retained all historical titles because they’re considered the same club.What’s the deal with their titles are they still officially classed as winning 54 under this new company or have they technically zero SPL’s?
That would be the same SFA that let the old rangers club keep the league titles that they had won despite breaking the leagues rules.Nope.
“In December SPFL chief executive Neil Doncaster insisted Rangers are the same club which existed before liquidation.
He said: "In terms of the question about old club, new club, that was settled very much by the Lord Nimmo Smith commission that was put together by the SPL to look at EBT payments at that time.
"The decision, very clearly from the commission, was that the club is the same, the club continues, albeit it is owned by a new company, but the club is the same.
"It's the same club, absolutely.”
https://www.heraldscotland.com/spor...-new-row-over-rangers-old-or-new-club-status/
They retained all historical titles because they’re considered the same club.
And?That would be the
That would be the same SFA that let the old rangers club keep the league titles that they had won despite breaking the leagues rules.
It's simple, it's the same club, you're wrong.The Advertising Standards Authority in December, 2013, in considering challenges to Rangers' claims as "Scotland's most successful club", supported the view that continuity of history continued.
It has emerged that UEFA confirmed to the ASA that its rules allowed for the recognition of the "sporting continuity" of a club's match record, even if that club's corporate structure had changed.
The European Club Association, the sole independent body recognised by UEFA and FIFA as representing clubs at European level confirmed Rangers remain as members of the organisation in December, 2012 after the transfer of ownership.