Not signing a number nine in the January window.

Skunkworks said:
Doesn’t matter who we our up front. They don’t get any service from the wings or the midfield. They are mostly isolated up front and spend a large part of the game chasing the ball.
For all Dessers faults the first ball into the box he put away then we just stopped it. Anyone could see they are suspect in the middle of defence but we didn’t throw a single ball in.
We need more goals from other players. Bring any striker in and depend on his goals alone we’ll struggle again and again.
Click to expand...
Back post was the ball to play all day long but we couldn't hold onto it long enough to get into position to do it.
 
Snoopproddiedogg said:
Decent striker brought in Jan and we could have got beat yesterday and probably still won the league.

The games we dropped (not including the OF games) we created multiple chances, didn't take them before the inevitable happened.
Click to expand...
what we needed was the three behind dessers to contribute, Sima was but thats it and thats not even discussing the non scoring midfielders behind them.

Dessers wasnt the problem.
 
I don't know the circumstances why we didn't sign a proven goalscorer then, but I wasn't convinced of PC implying we didn't need one as we had Dessers,Roofe, and Silva they were never going to be the solution.
 
I'm sure we've been told since that there was no real money to spend in January?

I think we gambled that we would have Sima and Cortes as the main wide men with Dessers and Silva able to rotate up front. Sima and Cortes then get injured for the rest of the season and Matondo can't stay fit so it forced us to play Silva on the left and the rest is history.

There's a lot wrong with the squad and I don't begrudge people having their say on Clement but those two injuries to Sima and Cortes royally f*cked us. It's ok to say that, it doesn't excuse anything else. The quality of the forward line we've had available since just isn't good enough to sustain a title challenge as we've seen.
 
Not signing a goalscorer was a mistake. But the biggest mistake was keeping trust in the defence. Same players same mistakes same goals against us especially by absolute shite teams. They have let us down time and again . We need real defenders not the sappy after you Claus fuds that parade in a Rangers jersey week in week out .
 
TPP said:
We still brought in 3 high value players. poets brought in a Norwich reserve on loan to at least support the diver up front.

It was and remains utterly astonishing our only option was Dessers
Click to expand...
Completely agree and you’d think for the likely loan fee involved we could have got better than Silva.
 
Bluenose Whistler said:
Another striker when have 2 or 3 more on the books some on loan/injured so why would we pay for another?
This is a team game the rest of the team should be chipping in as for Lundstrum hopefully he goes to Turkey or Ipswich , if Gerard going to Liverpool as rumoured then no fees allegedly for Tavernier or Goldson for the Clement rebuild.
The rebuild has to be bang on hopefully Clement can bring in a quality player or two from his knowledge and travels.
Click to expand...
Liverpool appointed that Dutch boy
 
albop said:
Couldn't we have done a loan to buy with a actual prolific striker
Click to expand...
Define prolific.

Dessers scores roughly every 145 minutes. That's a goal in just over 3 halves of football.

Danilo scored every 133 minutes, that's a goal in just under 3 halves of football.

We aren't getting a Haaland/Mbappe goal every 80 minutes type of player, so please do define prolific relative to our budget
 
PMB1872 said:
Completely agree and you’d think for the likely loan fee involved we could have got better than Silva.
Click to expand...
What loan fee. Was said at the time there wasn't. We also only paid a small percentage of his salary. A player bought for £35m was in theory and on paper a major coupe. It hasn't worked out. But we still didn't have any millions to bring in a prolific goalscorer. Why would a club just loan us a prolific goalscorer. If that player was prolific he wouldn't be going out on loan
 
SaulBearenson said:
And yet we've still conceded fewer goals than any other team in the league.
Click to expand...
Not at the business end we havent.

3 clean sheets in 13. 16 goals lost.
Celtic 3 clean sheets in 13. 13 goals lost

Depends which way you look at it. Score 1 against dundee and another against celtic, we win both games.

However, we shouldnt be conceding 3 against ross co, 2 at home to motherwell or 3 at home against them.
 
Last edited:
Chocolateleftfoot said:
Prior to to semi final, he had 1 goal in 9 games, as his, and our, form fell off a cliff.

He's played more minutes than any Rangers striker in recent memory.

His overall play is woeful. He can't hold it up, can't bring others into the game, can't occupy defenders. We binned Colak because all he offered was goals. All Dessers offers is goals at a much lesser rate.

He's not good enough, whichever way you want to dress it up.
Click to expand...
Colak:
Career: 172 goals in 427 appearances, scores every 148 minutes.
For us, he averaged 56 minutes per appearance (12 games as a sub), and scored 18, and assisted 3. 21 goal involvements in equivalent of 25 full games. 1 every 109 minutes.

Dessers:
Career: 132 goals in 331 appearances, scores every 138 minutes.
For us he has averaged 63 minutes per appearance (13 as a sub) - equivalent of 36 full games, scored 21, and assisted 8. 29 goal involvements. 1 in every 113 minutes of football.

They're very much alike, and not a "much lesser rate" as you suggest.
 
BlueSteish said:
The injuries on the flanks have killed us IMO.

Cortes, Sima & Ridvan.
Click to expand...
Pretty sure had all 3 stayed fit well still be top of the league just now.

Our injury record is largest element of why we are where we are, outside of our recruitment in the summer.

We should have a lot of wages to free up as part of the rebuild that have contributed next to zero so far this season.
 
Just look at the difference Idah made to them.
Scored some vital goals, allows them to change their style of play and go more direct.
For all people are saying we had no money.. Silva isn't free. We did have funds, we just used them poorly again.
 
We did sign a number 9 in January it just wasn’t the number 9 many of you wanted.

Due to injuries the clown has had to play out of position wide left

Dessers is a much better player than colak and they’re both rubbish.
 
SaulBearenson said:
Colak:
Career: 172 goals in 427 appearances, scores every 148 minutes.
For us, he averaged 56 minutes per appearance (12 games as a sub), and scored 18, and assisted 3. 21 goal involvements in equivalent of 25 full games. 1 every 109 minutes.

Dessers:
Career: 132 goals in 331 appearances, scores every 138 minutes.
For us he has averaged 63 minutes per appearance (13 as a sub) - equivalent of 36 full games, scored 21, and assisted 8. 29 goal involvements. 1 in every 113 minutes of football.

They're very much alike, and not a "much lesser rate" as you suggest.
Click to expand...
Going by your own figures, it has taken Dessers 11 full games, or 990 minutes if you prefer, to score 3 more goals than Colak over a season for Rangers.

That is a much lesser rate and not "very much alike" as you suggest.
 
JW1988 said:
Just look at the difference Idah made to them.
Scored some vital goals, allows them to change their style of play and go more direct.
For all people are saying we had no money.. Silva isn't free. We did have funds, we just used them poorly again.
Click to expand...
his signing has won them the league. He scored the late winner at Motherwell and a goal at Ibrox. without those goals I dont think they win the league.

you won't find a top striker in January, but that's not the point. you get someone that chips in with important goals. another option off the bench. a few goals can change a season in the run in
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top