Sorry you don’t agree but if somebody says “two points from the last three games” that would be, is, bad. Shockingly bad for Rangers.
I guess that makes them unworthy.
5 league games since February and we're just over halfway over April.
think of all the chances we see dessers fluff up, now replace dessers with shankland
I’ve never argued about its accuracy.
If you see Tavernier’s only quality as being a penalty taker, you’re being a bit beyond stupid.
It's not. It's accurate.
To be fair Hearts were asking far too much money for him...money which we didn't have..
Yes, really.
I don't.
I don’t know how much Hearts demanded or even if we lodged a bid but I get we weren’t cash rich in December.
P.C. obviously didn't rate him , so there's not much can be done in that case.
A "free hit"? He's had 24 games, with 5 to play. When he joined we were 7 points behind with games to play. He's had a transfer window too. There's a bit of a falsehood to how bad a situation we were in when he joined due to the lethargy we had with Beale and disappointment with transfers. Rodgers has dropped TWENTY points since he came in too. The talk of the "miracles" he performed to get us in front and turn a bad team around are pretty exaggerated.
That’s a different argument again.
Aye don't disagree with any of that.
100%. There's a big world out there too. The obsession with Shankland is baffling.
I'm not saying he's the right answer, but he's a Rangers fan who has proven, domestically, to be a very competent finisher, who also has a good 'footballing brain' and links up with his teammates well. Dessers' general play has improved during his time in Scotland but his incredible knack of missing gilt-edge chances will probably end up costing us the league because, arguably, if he scored any of his first half chances versus County, then we would probably have won the game and wouldn't have had a catastrophic week.
I just think, taking everything into consideration, the money Hearts were reputedly looking for was too much. He'd have little or no sell on value and while he's had a couple of really good seasons with Hearts, he had a pretty ordinary career before that at the likes of St. Mirren, Morton, Ayr and Dundee Utd, so there's no guarantee he'd transfer that form to us. We've seen players in the past who scored for fun elsewhere, but found the Rangers jersey too heavy. I'd have been delighted to have Shankland in different circumstances EG 6 months of his contract left and available for a reasonable fee, but Hearts held all the cards so the timing just wasn't right.
I was hoping that would be part of Alex Rae’s role.
Thing is, whether just a purple patch or true capability, we needed another goalscorer.
We lost the right to accuse anyone of "Hibsing it" after the Scottish Cup Final.
If signing Shankland was a guarantee of Champions League football next season, then yes, it's a solid investment. But obviously it's not possible to guarantee anything of the sort. And if you spend that money and it doesn't achieve that short term goal, then it's definitely not a solid investment. To be honest, scoring 3 at home to Celtic and 2 away at Ross Co should get you 6 points. It got us 1 point, so I'm not sure signing Shankland would have materially changed things. We shouldn't need to score 8 goals to win these 2 games. We shouldn't need to score 3 at home to Motherwell to win either. With the exception of the Dundee game, the defence has been the bigger issue when we've dropped points.
Do you judge Walter Smith by his unsuccessful time at Everton or his success with Rangers? In isolation you could say he was a complete failure as a manager and struggled hugely. The reality over a longer period is somewhat different.
