ahemps
-
Posts
896 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by ahemps
-
-
1 hour ago, Skyline Drifter said:
I don't think we're really disagreeing much here. He was good which is why I highlighted him as one of the few in that squad who'd be a candidate now at his best.
James Morrison was a decent level Premiership midfielder. He spent the vast majority of his senior career at West Brom after initially coming through at Middlesbrough. He was a regular for a bottom half premiership side for a decade or so. A more than decent player who did well for us but he was with us in the first place because he couldn't get a look in for England. I think "absolutely class" is a stretch. I think my suggestion he was of a comparable standard to the likes of Christie and Armstrong (or at the time, James McArthur) is not unreasonable. He's not starting in a midfield for me that has McTominay, McGregor, Gilmour and McGinn in it usually. I appreciate McGregor's not been tested in the English Premiership but the other three are likely in the England squad for me right now if they're English (McTominay and McGinn definitely would be).
I wonder how he would get on and where he would find himself??? I don't think Rodgers seriously wanted him at Leicester or he'd have taken him. £12m would have got him and McGregor would have trebled his wages so the deal would have happened but Leicester had Teilemans, Maddison and Ndidi so they didn't really need him.
I think this season he seems to have stalled a bit (while still being a good player) maybe the opportunity has passed him now and in hindsight a move in the summer might have suited all parties. I think now instead of possibly finding himself at a European challenging side like Leicester where he would find himself at a bottom half Notts Forest or Palace.
0 -
9 hours ago, ancientnoise said:
Our league lacks the investment both financially and in the drive developing our youth properly.
When any of our clubs get the transfer fee from a promising player, they tend to spend it on keeping the boat afloat.
Our best youth players are pinched by bigger clubs as soon as they show promise.
The managers then have to piss with the cock they are given.
This is our Gordian knot.
I think having less money makes the excuse for not developing youth weaker. Some teams fill their squads with some really average journeymen when they could be throwing some youth in there.
Sometimes a player surprises you and performs above expectation.
Sometimes you can get a season or 2 out of a player who will ultimately end up down the leagues but can hold a place for a while and that is better than paying an ex Chesterfield/Lincoln squad player twice the wage for the same outcome.
0 -
Just looked it up. For West Han v Freiburg, West Ham season ticket holders can get a ticket for £25 and £5 for kids. Non season ticket holders can get for £30 and £10.
How does that compare to Rangers?
0 -
If Gunn and Gordon are both fit for the Euros I'd look to take the current under 21 goalkeeper or someone who is under 23 with potential. I don't know much about Cieran Slicker at Ipswich on loan from Man City but someone along those lines rather than any of Clark, Kelly or McRorie. The 3rd choice keeper is extremely unlikely to play so it is worthwhile having a longer term option there. Steve Clark wont do that as he is very loyal to his players and I can't criticise that.
0 -
13 hours ago, AJF said:
The price that we charge for our European packages is ridiculous. I said as much last season when the prices came out for our Champions League 3 match package.
It was raised at a fan engagement event the board attended and they said they were aware of the feedback on pricing but u very much doubt they will do anything about it as long as we keep buying the tickets.
I think your board see your fans as a cash cow. That is why you release 15 strips a season and have a Mygers thing that all I hear from other Rangers fans is negative, what really is it? To me it sounds like an expensive way to get put on a waiting list for spare tickets. It used to be if you knew the guy running the bus he'd have a few spare season tickets and I expect this is still the case so it is probably for gullible fans that don't know many people who can get them spare tickets so they pay money for very little return. That is not a dig by the way, it is my perception from what I hear from Rangers fans (the 15 strips a season is a dig though
)
How do your ticket prices compare in the Europa league say to West Ham and Liverpool?
0 -
13 minutes ago, Bairnardo said:
Regards your first point and the running of Celtic FC, a reminder that when Tories have eaten everything else, they begin to eat themselves.
Poor Tory loving Celtic, the Champagne Socialist Club.
0 -
13 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said:
Rodgers heart quite clearly isnt in the job, and it shows every time Celtic play a match.
I genuinely believe this is the case and I have thought so since they approached him. Celtic were a stepping stone for him 1st time around and 2yrs ago when things were going well for Leicester he probably thought he was staying in the EPL for a good while and probably envisaged he was in line for a Spurs or Chelsea type job. To find himself back to playing Kilmarnock and Ross County 4 times a season while the Celtic board penny pinch around him is miles away from where he wants to be.
He is a few results away from this becoming toxic and the best support in the world attacking their own players again.
6 -
13 minutes ago, wingnut said:
As a Celtic fan I look at anything we get as a bonus because tbh we’re no good enough and it’s just good to get good teams at Celtic park midweek,I’ll be there for Feyenoord who’s fans we get on great with mainly due to the Wim Jansen days,as for the paris buns getting further I don’t want them to win anything but if they’re still in it them gives them more games to play but if they did go out we’ll beat them next game and the gap will be even wider by the time that game comes round
Exactly, beating St Johnstone on Saturday is the main priority for your club this week.
Taking on guys around your own size has to be considered a bonus.
6 -
1 hour ago, Venti said:
They are resigned to only getting 3 home games.
Ironic really that the two shitest teams in the competition have the cheek to charge the most.
I think Rangers charged their own fans the maximum allowed as well..........to watch the worst team ever in the competition.
0 -
18 minutes ago, MazzyStar said:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/67552558
Charging nearly 70 quid to watch a game of football is awful.True but the away fans know they are going to see their team win so at least they are getting value for money.
11 -
I would like to see a back 4 for these games, we played it before with some success and our choice of defenders is not as strong for this camp so we are trying to fill a space with a mediocre defender at the expense of a good midfielder somewhere.
I think Clarke might stick with the 5 at the back though even though the main reason for a 5 (Tierney-Robertson scenario) isn't a factor this week.
0 -
15 hours ago, Luddite said:
If there ever was a 'Celtic Way" it ended in the late 90s/early2000s when the PLC/corporation (formerly known as The Celtic Football and Athletic Company) rejected Fergus McCann's sensible fiscal approach and adopted the suicidal Rangers/Souness/Murray/Thatcher/Neoliberal mindset of inflating wages and transfer fees for sporting mercenaries, to allow them to occasionally sit at the same table as the real big teams (dining on crumbs mainly, but occasionally allowed to taste a mouthful of hors d'ouevres), craving compliments about their stadium and atmosphere and blah blah blah.
Celtic have become Rangers. Everything that was hated about the loadsamoney, all-conquering, entitled and arrogant Rangers is now the Celtic Way.
You have become your enemy.
I have believed this for a long time now. Celtic have morphed into Rangers of the 90's. Their fans who used to be a lot more palatable have now become the 'nobody likes us' brigade and the WATP nonsense applies a lot more to them.
They are also the most Tory club around yet kid on they are socialists, they absolutely would not follow this club if they genuinely believed in that.
4 -
38 minutes ago, willywastecoat said:
Only if results matter more than the way you play the game.
In 5yrs time your fans won't remember your glorious 3-0 defeat to Real Madrid, they will still remember the 2-1 Barcelona victory that was backs to the wall.
Results trump any footballing philosophy.
0 -
4 minutes ago, willywastecoat said:
The Celtic way is an identity and successful, nothing is guaranteed, parking the bus and still getting beat is a diddy mentality.
You still don't realise that you are the diddy at this level.
10 -
25 minutes ago, AJF said:
What is it about then if it's not about results?
And I haven't said Celtic should sack Rodgers based on European results, I am asking why you'd be against parking the bus if it meant you may potentially pick up more points in the CL?
Football fans are fickle as anything and will support their 'strategy' just as they will their team against anything.
If Celtic were sh*tfesting to draws and wins in Europe against better teams and going deeper in these tournaments they absolutely would take it and embrace it and phrase it as it is what they need to do and there would be nothing wrong with that. However they are getting pumped with a 'footballing philosophy' but embrace that as the way to play.
Celtic fans reminisce about beating Barcelona in 2012 (Tony Watt goal) I believe they had about 16% possession and 3 shots on goal. Will fans really remember the 3-0 Real Madrid loss in 20yrs time because they played in a certain manner?????
3 -
10 hours ago, Monkey Tennis said:
Remember in his last stint, when some journalist asked Rodgers at a press conference, about the financial gulf between his side and other Scottish ones, after he'd been moaning about another European hammering.
He simply argued that it was different, but didn't even attempt an explanation as to why.
I just love it when they get thrashed in games like tonight's. No downside at all, except of course that they get an immense fortune for literally making up the numbers.
I remember a press conference where he said Scottish football should be supporting them because them getting into CL brings money to the rest. The fact that the money is divided £30m to Celtic and £100k each to the rest is totally lost on him and supporters of these clubs.
2 -
9 hours ago, Thenorthernlight said:
Celtic’s board clearly don’t see themselves as a Champions League club.
Their spending, and on who, makes that obvious.
The irony & brass neck of some Celtic-minded pundits etc to cite budgets is laughable & embarrassing.
I have no sympathy for them but they are not at this level. They would need to double their wage bill to compete for 3rd spot and Europa league but this would be a gamble and not worth the return. That would also mean even bigger humpings in the SPFL for the rest. Celtic as a business are where they want to be, they are making profit while being dominant domestically, a few humpings in Europe isn't going to change this because come May when they are celebrating a double their fans won't care.
0 -
4 minutes ago, CambieBud said:
From a Scottish point of view, the eventual breakaway Super League will help us. Only the most brain dead Celtgers fans could believe that either of them would be invited to join. Therefore the huge financial gap caused in no small measure by UEFA money would diminish over time. Both would still be miles ahead of the rest financially but the gap would undoubtedly reduce over time
I think there wold be a period where they may get invited. They wouldn't be in the 1st wave but if they created a 2nd tier they may get invited to that although I think bigger markets like Turkey would be ahead of them.
A super league would kill off European cup competition or at least it would lose the huge finances it gets. The gaps would remain but they may be at a level where we see the odd other team win the league. I would actually be accepting of that even if the OF still win 70-80% of leagues but the games were closer and they weren't dishing out hidings every week.
1 -
I'm not as opposed to the super league as many are. Some clubs have outgrown their domestic setups so why persist with what we've got or wish it could be what it was 50yrs ago. Let some of the bigger clubs form a super league of 18/36 and leave them to it. I would still watch it and I would be more likely to return to the domestic game knowing it is a fairer fight.
1 -
5 minutes ago, gannonball said:
Yeah like I say as much I absolutely love watching us in Europe it's absolutely fucked our league. The best thing that can realistically happen now tbh is this super league actually still happens and takes a large amount of TV cash with it to bridge the gap.
I agree. I actually thought 'a super league' would have been a bad solution to a terrible problem. Instead we are getting a new version of the CL which in my view still inches closer to a super league by default eventually. This doesn't address any of the current issues, in fact it exasperates them even more.
1 -
1 hour ago, gannonball said:
European cash is the real distortion of finances for me imo.
This is the biggest issue. Your club are massive beneficiaries of this.
The solidarity payments used to be much higher (25%) but the likes of Juventus lobbied against this to take even more, it got down to around 12%. Then after these clubs played their super league card and UEFA had the upper hand they still pressed through changes to bring this down to around 8% when they should have been going back up the way.
0 -
41 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:
Excellent news.
Fingers crossed.
Celtic have been trying their best to drop the coefficient for years now but Rangers keep propping it up.
0 -
7 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:
Good post, but I'd disagree even with your first line.
Those buying tickets pay to see 2 sides 'compete', even if they have a strong preference over who wins.
if Livingston's players don't show up at Ibrox, neither do 50,000 others. The money really should be divided accordingly. It's morally correct and it aids competition.
I worded it that it is the only point I can see an argument for. If you buy a season ticket for a team then some people want all that money going to that team.
I agree with some sort of gate split but I am willing to concede that it doesn't need to be 50/50.
The UEFA money is the biggest killer of the smaller domestic leagues.
1 -
A few years ago on BBC Radio Scotland I heard a guy from Scottish rugby saying they had put out an opinion survey to the youth and amateur clubs and were going through the feedback to try and grow the game. They mentioned this is something they do every so often and try and implement the popular suggestions.
Has the SFA ever done anything like this for youth or amateur football? It seems such an obvious thing to do and if there is massive support for certain aspects then do them.
0
)
Rangers' Wee Spot in Europe - Season 2023/24
in Scots in Europe
Posted
Does he not have a 4yr deal???