Because they and especially in Tavernier's case are the common denominator. In the last 3 games his contribution has been scoring 2 pens. He couldn't lead a duck to water let alone this Rangers team. I get your defence of him though as he's obviously your favourite player.
It's a pity we don't have a rule in football where you can bring a player on to take penalties, the same way a player comes on in American football to take field goals, Tav would be worth upwards of £20m.
But they aren't the common denominator. We have rubbish footballers. That's what it comes down to. That's what the common denominator is. Poor recruitment and poor players.
You put the leadership of Richard Gough and John Greg into that team and it doesn't change the fact the players are rotten amking basic errors.
I think Taverniers time is up at Rangers.
But the way people are rounding on 3 players, one of whom is one of a few who regularly contribute, for "leadership" worries me because it seems to be a smokescreen for the fact that most of the team has been downgraded over the last few years to be utter dross. Then next year when these same carthorses are making the same mistakes, who will we blame then?
Barry Ferguson, John Greig both captained Rangers teams who didn't even finish second in the league. Richard Gough's team threw 10 in a row away.
The fact is football is about how good your players are and ours are miles off it. I'd happily see them all go with very few exceptions.
But there's now a huge pile on where literally everything about the recent failings is being put at Tavernier's door. It's becoming quite weird. And nothing will change next year until we get better footballers.
A thread where Sterling has raised worrying concerns with the squad is automatically assumed to mean 3 players. That's what I'm getting at. We have a lot of guys who have contributed nothing at all, constantly playing rubbish getting off scot free here while 3 men get it for everything. And it could be anyone in that's squad Sterling means.
