Diamond Scot

Im not laying the blame solely at McGreggors feet for the goal. Was just highlighting that ut was his very sloppy pass to Jack that gave the ball away that led to Holland counter attacking. Of course alot had still to be done at the point but it was the sloppy giving away of the ball that was ultimately punished. Similar to Englands 2nd goal when Armstrong gave it away. The point im making is that in the SPL when Armstrong and McGreggor give the ball away in similar situations then they arent punished and in turn they wont learn as much from their mistakes. I think both are good players but merely highlighting some of the issues with players playing at a lesser standard.

You do understand the concept of counter attack dont you? Cheap ball given away whilst players are commited. Good teams then break with pace and score as per last night . If you dont understand that then i cant help you

McGreggor did ok but it was his sloppy pass that led to the goal. For me thats the problem with guys playing in the SPL. If McGreggor does that same pass in the SPL then it doesnt result in a goal. Do it in the EPL then it does. Only by playing with and against better players do you get better. Nothing against McGreggor but perhaps people are being slightly selective in their reviews based on the flavour of the month as opposed to the current villians of the squad.

Its not logic, its fact. Go and look at some of the teams we have beat in competitive games when they have been playing. Are you trying to say we could beat those teams effectively a man down? If thats the case then the other 10 players cant have consistently failed to deliver as you suggest. Your logic doesnt stand up to facts. But instead of asking me another question how about you answer mine first. Is 8 caps, 5 of which come in competitive games with only 1 loss consistently failing to deliver? Is only losing 3 games in 13 competitive games all away to Germany Spain and Slovakia and being in the team that beats Croatia home and away amongst others consistently failing to deliver? If it is then we all might as well give up.

Matt Phillips has 8 caps for Scotland. 5 of these in competitive matches. His record in these matches are played 5. Won 3, drawn 1, lost 1. Id suggest that that record is quite good. Under no circumstances can it be described as not delivering the goods. How can he consistently fail to deliver when he has only played 8 times. I repeat 8 times!!!! 1 competitive defeat!!! If we dropped players who got defeated once then it wont be long before I get a call up. Bannan has 25 caps. 13 in competitive matches. 8 wins, 2 draws and 3 defeats. The 3 defeats were to Spain, Germany and Slovakia. All of the defeats were away from home. Good point well made though. Get them both out!!!

What so called better players are Northern Ireland leaving out to play the Spfl players? That is was you are advocating. Leaving out Scottish players who play in the EPL to play Scottish players who play in the Spfl. As I have said, The Spfl has the odd good player and clearly these players can do a job in certain circumstances however better players play in better leagues and better players managed properly with the right attitude will be a better team. We have the option of playing guys who play at a higher standard but you want us to play guys who play at a lower standard. Northern Ireland dont have the option. Do Italy select players from Seria B, Spain from Liga 2 etc etc. No, they pick players from the best leagues. How many Belgium players play their football in Belgium? Why dont Belgium pick the leading players from Club Brugge over guys playing for Everton for example?

Northern Ireland pick the best players available to them and they have done very well. The best players they have available to them come from lesser leagues. How does that change the argument that better players play for better teams in better leagues? You would only have a point if Northern Ireland were leaving out guys playing for Stoke / West Brom etc and choosing to play guys playing for Partick and Hamilton. This isnt the case. Its a simple premise that I would challenge anybody to actually provide an position against. If a player playing in Scotland for any team outside Celtic is of international class quality then why dont scouts or managers of any team in Europe and that includes England come in and pay the buttons it would cost to buy them? Can we open our minds to the possibility that the answer is because in their professional judgement the player isnt that good. Please provide an alternative reason if you have one. I watch Scottish league football all the time. I enjoy it for what it is but to say its players are on a similar level to the top 2 leagues in England is laughable. The odd player is but not the overall standard.

Why not pick on form players from scottish league one or two then? If a forward for Alloa is banging in the goals then get him in the squad. Largely speaking the teams / leagues a player plays for / in represents what professionals think their standard is. Ie the better players play for better teams in better leagues. People talk about guys like Steven Fletcher being rubbish. If Fletcher played for either of the old firm he would be a goal a game striker. Likewise would guys like McGreggor get a game at clubs in England? If so at what standard. Most likely the championship. Its easier to look better playing against worse players and they dont expose your weaknesses or punish your mistakes. Tierney is a classic example of this. Personally i really rate the boy but until he plays for a side who are not heavy favourites and comes up against top wingers week in week out then we cant really judge how good he is.

McArthur has played in a higher standard of league with better players and against better players for years. McGinn plays in an average league having previously played in a very poor standard league. McGreggor plays for a good team but is mainly a sub. On what basis are either better than McArthur. If McGinn was so good a team would have paid 2 million for him in the summer. Can you explain why no scout or manager felt he was good enough to pay such a small few for if he is better than McArthur or as good as many on here make out?

Still game theme. Simple, fun, recognisable and Scottish.

From memory the side letters were found to show that Rangers breached the rule to declare all earnings of players to the SPL. This was a breach but its a breach that the authorities have already dealt with. Nothing new has changed since then in terms of that rule. Its all very well people wanting punishment and saying no precedent is required but the SPFL and SFA need to follow their own rules. Despite what people think they cant make it up as they go along.

Im not ignoring it. For what its worth I think its clearly wrong what has happened. I was just pointing out that there is no basis in law. The sporting advantage thing has already been ruled on by the authorities. Thats all I am saying here.

Feel free to point out how. In particular please point out where the basis for stripping titles in law is. Based on facts, process and law. Not on opinion. Any route that the authorities could have went down has been closed off. Ie they didnt rule on non disclosure of the scheme in a way that opened the door to the stripping of titles. No court has made a judgement about illegal behaviour.

Unlawful is different from illegal as you have pointed out. I have no strong opinion on the case. I just think that it weakens peoples arguments when they use incorrect terms. Rangers used a scheme that meant they could sign players they otherwise couldnt afford. I am saying that in real terms this is no different from clubs using money they dont have to sign players they cant afford. If Rangers had the money to pay back the EBTs after the authorities decided that tax should have been paid on it then they would have done so. As other clubs have done who used the same scheme. The problem here is that Rangers didnt have the money and subsequently went into admin and went bust. The authorities have already punished them for that. (Regardless of the severity of the punishment) There is no basis to strip Rangers of titles in law.

There's a difference between tax avoidance and tax evasion in terms of legality. Saying a scheme should have and is subject to tax is not the same as saying its illegal. Effectively the courts have ruled by saying the money should have been and must be repaid. There has been no ruling as far as im aware and I stand corrected if wrong to say anybody has acted illegally. So with reference to the original statement there is no real term difference to using EBTs than to running up huge debts. Both are operating outside the clubs means. For example if Rangers didnt go bust and this tax ruling happened today then Rangers would just have to pay the money back.

I think thats the plan with the formation but Rangers tend to have the wingers very wide or deep. If you compare with Celtic who on paper have the same formation. Armstrong plays the attacking mid and gets into the box more. Sinclair plays more narrow aswell which probably is a factor on the number of goals he scores. Rangers seem setup for crosses but dont have bodies in the box for either the original cross or the knock down / 2nd ball.

Rangers problem last night was the same as last season. They play with 2 holding midfielders and an attacking midfielder who drops deep so therefore doesnt get into the box. They dominate possession but teams get men behind the ball and hit them on the counter. They have attacking full backs and wingers who get into good positions but when the ball comes into the box only the centre forward is in there. Against the majority of teams Rangers dont need 2 holding mids. They could have 1 holding and Nico dropping to be a playmaker. Then either play an attacking mid who gets into the box or a 2nd forward.

Based on previous records at Chelsea he has a chance of becoming an elite footballer. At Rangers he does not. He will also earn multiple times the money at Chelsea and have access to the best coaching and facilities. Again something he would not get at Rangers. This concept of getting first team football is a red herring. For a start he wouldnt at Rangers and even if he did it would be in a lesser league. If first team football is so important why not encourage him to go to Livingston or somewhere that he would play every week from day 1.

The original comment was about Burke not making the bench. The debate has then been argued on why he shouldnt be starting. The bench for international matches is huge. No reason why Burke shouldnt have been given a place on the bench. Even if it wasnt the intention of playing him at any point it gives him experience and also gives the manager the option of bringing him on if the game dictated it. Ie if they played a really high line and we wanted pace to go in behind. We named 2 keepers on the bench. Can anybody give me a reason why you would have a 3rd gk rather than another outfield option? Most countrys in the world recognise young talent and bring them through accordingly. Wales for example had the likes of Ramsay and Bale in at a younger age and were getting humped all the time. They did so because they knew that in the years to come both players would be key for them and when that day came they would have loads of experience. We have a player who has the physical assets to be a top top player. He has moved for a Scottish transfer record fee, is getting game time albeit limited in one of the top 4 leagues at at team who are 2nd top of that league. What do we do with this player? Treat him with utter contempt. Send him home mid way through an international week and then dont let him get stripped for another, instead having a 3rd gk on the bench.

No because it can include players bought from abroad. ie Van Dyke for Celtic. The thought came from a comment made in the Southampton game about what kind of team they could have had if they didnt sell. I think Hibs might have a very strong team. Was Hibs Griffiths first Scottish team? If so you would have Scott Brown in centre mid with Griffith and Miller up front. Not sure if they have ever had a decent GK though.

Bored so thought id put this out there. What is the best team that your club could put out based on current or past players who are still playing. Standard of player to be judged on how they are now, not at any time in their career. ie Celtic could have Van Dyke as he is playing now. Rules are that if another SPFL sold a player first then that club has the player not yours. ie Craig Gordon is Hearts. Scott Brown is Hibs. Kenny Miller is Hibs etc What club would have the best team?

If thats the case would you expect Stoke and West Brom to be bidding for Armstrong and Rogic in January? Or any other EPL clubs ir even Championship clubs Both could be picked up for 5m each which is nothing to either of these clubs. We are kidding ourselves if we think EPL players wouldnt walk into any team in Scotland.

People list the faults of players such ad Fletcher, Adam, Morrison etc however they are all still playing at a higher level. If they were as bad as people suggest they wouldnt be getting a game at that level. Likewise if Armstrong or any other scottish based player was as good as people say they would be playing at that level. They arent, why? because no manager in the EPL or championship agrees. If they did then they would have been bought. Its a pretty simple rule that the best players play in the best leagues. There is the odd exception but as a rule its true. Why dont we pick players from the likes of Livingston etc. They are flying atm and some players look fantastic. Answer. Its all about levels. Adam, Fletcher and Morrison would all walk into every single team in Scotland. For me its not about slagging off individual players. I actually like Armstrong both on and off the pitch. Its about recognising that he is playing at a much lesser level and realising that nomatter how good he looks playing there that it holds less weight.

Not having a go at you but I feel this is where we go wrong as a country football wise. We constantly think players playing well in Scotland means that they are good without taking into account the standard of opposition. Almost every player over the past 10 years who has been held up as a Scotland starter that has moved to England or abroad has failed to make an impact. Surely the best team comes from players who play week in week out at the highest level because A) they are used to playing against better opposition and they are being picked to play at that higher level. Armstrong is a prospect, no better and should be nowhere near the starting 11 until he plays at a higher level every week than the other options in the squad. McArthur, Fletcher, Morrison, Adam in EPL, then you have the likes of Bannan and others in the Championship. Griffiths is another classic example. He scores goals for the best team in the league against defenders who would be lucky to get a game in league 1 yet we think that justifys him a starting spot.

To find that out though clubs would have to be interest and put bids in for him in the 1st place. As far as we are aware they havent. Celtic would defo accept a bid of anywhere near 8-10 million that was paid for Rhodes and McCormack so im guessing we would have heard. As for whether he would be interested, saying that scoring goals winning things and playing around 6 games in proper euro competition would be enough to make him stay in Scotland probably takes away from the argument that he is our best striker. If a Scottish player was playing in the Irish league scoring 80 goals a year and playing in euro qualifiers or even the europa league would it make him our best striker? Id suggest not. What we know at the moment is that Griffith is an excellent domestic level striker. Id rather rather go with players able to compete reguarly at a higher level.