Diamond Scot

This debate comes uo every now and then with people on one side pointing to the likes of Robertson and Tierney and those on the other pointing at the likes of Fletcher, McTom and Gilmour. Just taking Gilmour as an example, I am convinced he wouldnt even have become a 1st team regular at Rangers. Neither OF team are any good at bringing through youth but Rangers in particular have a horrific record. If you stay in Scotland then theres probably a much higher chance of you becoming a football but imo if you want to be an elite footballer then your chances are significantly improved by getting elite coaching and playing alongside elite people your age and then eventually training and playing with elite players. An example I always give when talking about the importance of playing at a higher standard is somebody like Stuart Armstrong and the mistake he made against England. At that time he was considered to be a very good player. Had something like 125 appearences for Dundee Utd and 60 odd for Celtic under his belt. He was an established football player however the choice of pass he made was a by product of the oppositon he was used to playing against. Losing the ball the way he did would come to nothing 99% of the time in Scotland but in the EPL it gets punished. Only through getting punished do players learn. Im totally convinced that if the same Stuart Armstrong (in terms of talent) had played 50 games in the EPL he doesnt do that pass. Ben Doak might have had 50 appearences for Celtic by now but none of them would have been against defenders of a decent standard. So he looks like a superstar going past people with ease. Until he comes up against a proper defender in Europe or for Scotland and all of a sudden none of the stuff he normally does works.

Ever thought about using EBTs?

How does everybody feel about their teams season so far. Airdrie have slightly exceeded my expectations. I said pre season that I thought we would stay up as we play good football but that squad size might affect us. We have shown that we can give all the teams a game in the division and look to have opened up abit of a gap to 9th and 10th although it can change very quickly in the Championship. Outside chance of playoffs but id settle for mid table and keep building next year.

A few of my mates have moved abroad and loved it. The reason why I havent are things like wanting to be close to family etc but these day to day concerns are largely taken away if you have money. Ie if a parent falls ill you could private jet back in a couple of hours.

I said standard of teams though which is kind of my point. Shankland has never scored at a higher standard because he hasnt proven to anybody in the game that he is at that standard. He moved to Belgium and didnt perform. He has only ever really scored at Scottish domestic level. Adams has scored goals against the best teams in one of the top 3 leagues in the world. If we were purely looking at goalscoring stats then guys like Kenny Deuchar would have got caps back in the day. The level you are scoring at matters and should be taken into account. As I keep saying though, its just one of many factors. One thing to consider though is people are paid loads of money to scout and recommend players. If Shankland is a much better player than Adams then why hasnt an EPL or Championship side snapped him up. It would only take between 3 and 5 million which is buttons to some of these sides.

Anybody can choose random players to suit their agenda though. It is a fact more EPL players have scored international goals than Championship or league 1. I could say Harry Kane scored more than David Healy but that doesnt really move along the debate does it. Better players play in better leagues. Thats common sense. Now of course that doesnt always translate to performing well at international level and isnt the be all and end all. However its a good starting point for judging a players general ability. Adams is a low end EPL / top end Championship level player. Dykes and Shankland are probably mid level Championship players. They all have different strengths and weaknesses though and Clarke will play them in the games / moments that play to their stengths.

If you take the top 10 teams that Adams and Shankland have scored against in the career then Adams record is levels above Shankland Its not fair or accurate to not look at the whole picture. Adams has scored goals against the likes of Man City, Chelsea, Newcastle etc so he has the ability to score against top teams. If anything using this criteria goes against Shankland as I imagine the best he has scored against will be Rangers or Celtic. In terms of starts Shankland is probably 4th choice. In terms of coming on a sub when we need a goal he is 1st choice. For that reason if we only take 3 strikers, he will be one of them and Brown will miss out.

Its not an unusual situation when a club get relegated and a player looks to be moving on. The manager, especially a new manager makes plans without the player so is often not included if the deal breaks down. Generally a manager will want to move forward with players who want to be at the club. If its suspected that Adams will mive in January theres little value in having him start in front of somebody who is going to be there after January.

You hit the nail on the head. Why are other clubs not outraged? Thats not Rangers fault that other clubs just accept bad decisions or incompetence. These clubs should step up their game. Again I stress that how Rangers go about things is wrong. You say the decision isnt even wrong but sometimes its not about the outcome. Its the process to get to the outcome. There is a reason why processes are in place. Checks and balances. On the face of it the ref and VAR have decided that it wasnt a handball. I understand that VAR made this decision very quickly. Ive yet to hear anybody that doesnt think it was a handball. 30 mins later somebody has released the offside pictures. Whether Sima was offside or not is irrelevent if that wasnt part of the decision making at the time. Even if the outcome eventually might have been no penalty. Rangers are entitled to ask for clarity. If the ref and VAR dont think it was a penalty then thats something the ref bosses will deal with. Its similar to the disallowed McTominay goal where the ref seemed to award one thing when in fact it was another. Once everything was cleared up then people moved on. Were Scotland wrong to ask for clarity on that?

I dont think we are actually in disagreement. I dont agree with the public nature of how Rangers go about things but I do think they are correct to seek answers. Its not Rangers concern about wrongful decisions against other clubs, even if in some cases the decisions benefited Rangers. Theres obviously a balancing act. Im not suggesting clubs demand meetings with the SFA for every ref mistake however when its a case where a process hasnt been followed, a blatant inconsistency etc then imo its a clubs responsibility to seek answers. Ive watched a good few Aberdeen games this season, both domestically and in Europe and can think of at least 3 or 4 cases where id expect them to be demanding written / formal answers. Calling for refs heads / not to do clubs games etc is totally wrong and is part of the playing to the masses thing thats out of order.

Im not overly concerned about that aspect atm. Clarke has shown that he is more than willing to play youth when the time is right. By the time Armstrong and Christie are winding down, Ferguson will have been in the squad for years, have a decent amount of caps and im sure Clarke will start to gradually increase his game time, probably after this Euros. We finally seem to be producing a steady stream of players. Maybe not all top top class but you can pick pretty much any position except GK and CF and see a good few potential replacements. There was a time when a big player retiring or getting injured would have meant a massive drop off in quality. Thats not the case anymore. Our 4th or 5th choice left backs are either playing in Italy or for Celtic. We have multiple CBs all around the same standard. 2 solid RBs and then another 2 or 3 with potential. Midfield we are strong with a good few potentials in and around 1st team football. My bigger fear is what happens after Clarke. I really hope we are looking at managers with similar approaches.

Totally agree with your initial point regarding Clarke. He has shown that in order to take somebodys place in the squad / team then you need to be clearly better than them. This is probably because the current occupant knows the setup, systems, phases of play etc and have done a job. I think this way of thinking is a big part of our success as there has been way less chopping and changing. It feels like getting a call up is much more of a thing now, more earned than previously. It comes with frustrations for fans though. Many including myself think Ferguson should have had more chances, especially late in games or friendlies but instead Clarke brings on guys like Christie and Armstrong. Its a similar thing with Shankland. Im not sure I agree with your assessment of Shankland though. He is a much more natural and better finisher but he is nowhere near as strong as Dykes or Adams. He can hold the ball up much better than he used to and lay off others but this tends to be more around the half way line than in and around the box. The one thing that the other 2 do better in my opinion is occupy the centre backs either by bullying them or running them out of position. Thus allowing space for midfielders. Imo this is the main reason why Shankland will only be used as an impact sub.

I agree. I dont like how Rangers do things, especially what seems to be pandering to the lowest of their support however I dont dont understand the criticism of some on here for them seeking answers. Every club has had questionable decisions made against them. Some much worse than what might have happened to Rangers last week but its the responsibility of each club to seek answers and fight their case. The fact that other clubs havent done that much and then Rangers have gone all in should be a criticism of the other clubs, not Rangers. Its about time the other 10 non OF clubs got together and formed as collective to give their voice more weight. Why this hasnt been done makes me question the motives of the owners.

Who released the offside stills?

Apparently Rangers have been allowed to listen to the audio and there is no mention of offside. Decision made purely on basis of handball. I didnt watch the game but im lead to believe that any handball review didnt take long which having now seen the incident seems like madness to me. Jonhsons hand clearly takes an independent change of direction to hit the ball. Im not overly sure if he means it or not, my 1st thought was that he was trying to grab / manoveure Sima but if its hardly been reviewed then thats really poor from the VAR ref. Especially (and this shouldnt make a difference) in the biggest most contentious game in our footballing calender.

Thats why I think having the ref ask a direct question is better. For example the ref blows for a foul. Before giving a card he says to the VAR, I want you to check where the red player has connected with the yellow player and if leg was straight or bent at point of contact. VAR does a quick check and comes back and says, on the shin, straight leg. Ref then says, ok confirmed im going to give a red is there anything else I should be aware of. No, good, red card. As long as refs werent going to VAR for every challenge then I think people would accept this. It would also allow us to see the thought process of the ref which is part of the problem atm. For the Rangers / Celtic game at the weekend there would be an assistant on that side of the goals. If the assistant and ref dont see the handball then nothing happens. If they do and want to confirm if its deliberate then just go to VAR. VAR, can you check if Green players hand moves towards the ball and makes contact. Thats what I believe happened, yes, ok thanks penalty. Offside can be fully automated now as per world cup and champions league so the conversation wouldnt even get that far if Sima was offside. Everybody in the stadium and at home would be in the loop so vastly reduces the scope for all this nonsence. Of course the problem comes when none of the 6 (ive added 2) officials see something obvious but for me thats sport and can be dealt with by authorities in their review of how the officials handled the game.

My point being is that its a choice that footballers dont really have to make although I agree they 100% should commit to as Ferguson has done. Some footballers spend many years in a foreign country without learning the language etc. Their priviledge as a footballer allows them this luxury. Ie it would be impossible for an IT person or a nurse etc to move to Spain and not learn Spanish. Day to day would be extremely difficult and doing the job would be impossible.

If fit Adams and Dykes start. For a tournament of 3 games minimum I think Clarke looks at his 3rd choice striker and goes with somebody who can do something different which Shankland falls into. Ie needing a goal you bring him off the bench (like Georgia). This would make sence using the Norway game as an example. Many wanted and thought Shankland would replace Brown however Dykes did. We were winning 3-2 at that stage (70 mins) and therefore needed somebody to continue the role rather than change it. Had it been 3-3 then I suspect Shankland might have got the nod. Again, personally I think that Shankland could play the role and Norway would have been an ideal time to find out but Clarkes sees him in training and will have studied videos etc so maybe he thinks differently.

This was always my problem / fear with VAR. Im very much in favour of using technology for factual matters. Ie is the ball over the line, offside. Even whether or not a foul is inside the box or if the ball has hit a players arm. However the minute you use it the way it is now then you just create chaos and inconsistency. You end up just reffing the game twice. People use other sports as an example but in most sports its factual stuff that gets checked. Even in Rugby, although its changed slightly, it used to be that the ref asked the VAR a direct question. Ie can you check to see if the ball is grounded etc. You would then see what the VAR guy is looking at and then hear him come back and say yes or no. I believe it would work much better in football if it operated like that. Only for truely off the ball violent conduct, like getting punched off the ball should VAR bring stuff to the refs attention. And even then it should be so obvious that the VAR just tells the ref to send off Red player 7 for punching yellow player 5 etc Id even be up for having the the assistants to the side of the goals like they trialled a few years back. Assistants on both wings, one to the side of each goal on the opposite side from the one on the wing and the 4th official. Any of them can bring something to the attention of the ref who can then ask VAR a direct question. Heard by the crowd and then the reply also heard.

Always annoys me when footballers cant adust to life abroad. Its not like if a normal person moved to Spain where they would be under immense pressure to learn the language and understand all the different ways things get done. I can imagine that would be very difficult however most of Tierneys team mates will speak a level of English, he will have a translater, his personal life will be largely unaffected by language as he has some much money that he has no need to interact with the public in the same way a normal person would. Ie he will have a personal shopper, a chef if he wants one etc. Almost all upmarket restaruants etc speak English. You would think some hot weather would be a good thing. These guys can jump on a plane and be back in Glasgow in an hour if want. Realistically he could come home for a day every week if he really wanted to.

Villa have vast resources. They will keep most young talent on regardless of whether they rate them highly or not. Obviously if they think they are rubbish they will let a kid know but it makes business sense to keep as many prospects on as possible as the rewards for one breaking through are massive. Ie if they have 100 youth players they might only rate about 5 as 9 or 10/10 potential but they will keep all the 6/10s on aswell because at that age one of them might develop late and become a star. The wage these guys are on wont be high either. Its good that he will get some game time at St Johnstone though. Hopefully does well and gains some experience.

Its good that we have around 26/27 good players as its usual that players become N/A for tournaments. I cant see Cairney breaking in if everybody is fit but he is exactly the standard of squad player we need should a few 1st teamers miss out. On the Shankland front, I think he is currently in a weird position. If Clarke only takes 3 strikers which I think he might then Shankland is probably that 3rd striker however I dont think Clarke see's him as a starter. He is our best finisher but I disagree with some posters saying thats all that matters. Its all about putting a team out that best compliment each other and that help get the best results. If for example the striker is great at goalscoring but doesnt hold the ball up or create space for midfielders etc then its alot easier for teams to just mark him. Currently they need to worry about midfield runs from deep aswell as the striker. That being said, I think Shanklands all round game has improved loads in the last 2 years so to label him as just a goalscorer in the mould of Boyd and Rhodes is probably unfair.

As I understand it, they are looking for clarity on the decision making process. They believe they were told one thing at the time and another later on. The audio would confirm which took place. I dont like the way Rangers go about things. Making a big song and dance out of everything however there should be nothing wrong with asking the authorities to explain decisions. As ive said previously on multiple occasions, maybe if other clubs started doing the same and sticking up for their own club / supporters then the game might start to get rid of some of the errors that litter our football. Ie, rather than moaning about ticket allocations, get together with other affected clubs and do something about it.

Why would they? Rangers are only doing what all clubs should be. They are challenging / seeking clarity on a decision that they feel has gone against them. Maybe if all clubs took the same approach and had more of a backbone / stopped rolling over at boardroom level then refs wouldnt find it so easy to give these questionable decisions against the non OF clubs.

I believe there was bids for Adams in the summer. It often happens when a team get relegated and dont sell a player, that the player falls out of favour and doesnt perform. More often than not the player moves in January as it suits both parties. The buying club normally get the player for abit cheaper than they would the previous summer and will be banking on getting the player back to previous levels. Adams could still do a job for a number of EPL lower half sides and for about 10 million he will be worth a punt.