PDA

View Full Version : The Tommy Burns Cavalier Football



rangers352
17-03-2010, 09:23
I'm sick to the back teeth of this p1sh getting regurgitated by the bheggars and their friends in the mhedia, it's always there in the background as some testimony that the hooped hordes enjoyed this wonderful spell under Burns, they won one fecking trophy ffs! Walter (and Goram at times) had him and his team in their back pockets.

I did some research a while back (sadly lost it on my old pc) about the seasons when the two sides faced up, the mhedia would have you believe that Celtic outscored and outplayed Rangers not only in old firm games (the outplayed bit only here btw :D) but in all other games within the league, it's simply not true. Rangers never fully got the credit for some sparkling displays at this time and I know that the facts back me up on this.

For those who read the Pink Panther in the Number One Fanzine, I would love him to do an article on this era, he would do it far better justice than I ever could.

Most importantly though, they won feck all while we lorded it with trebles and doubles. :)

justagrin
17-03-2010, 09:40
Never existed it was a bit like mowbray philosophy pass and pass with no end product, Mowbray has reverted to punts now though.

Steelbear
17-03-2010, 10:01
I think they drew 11 games in the league? they lost one. They won less games than us of course. We lost three games I think. So we won the league.

They had one defeat in the league, one defeat in the Scottish Cup and one defeat in the league cup. All by Rangers. (Im pretty sure)

marlborough1650
17-03-2010, 11:15
Was he not offered the job while sitting in a supermarket car park in a Vauxhall Cavalier?

britain
17-03-2010, 13:58
1995-96.

Rangers: P 36. W 27. D 6. L 3. F 85. A 25. Pts 87. Winners.

Celtc; P 36. W 24. D 11. L 1. F74. A 25. Pts 83. Losers.

Head to Head for that season.

League Games: 2-0 Gers ,then 3-3, 0-0 and 1-1 .

L.Cup. Gers win 1-0 away.

S.Cup SF. Gers win 2-1 then win the Scottish Cup.

That's the stats.

Manticore
17-03-2010, 14:02
They did pass the ball around nicely.

But so did we, and we scored a lot more.

And won a lot more games.....

be11y
17-03-2010, 14:48
1995-96.

Rangers: P 36. W 27. D 6. L 3. F 85. A 25. Pts 87. Winners.

Celtc; P 36. W 24. D 11. L 1. F74. A 25. Pts 83. Losers.

Head to Head for that season.

League Games: 2-0 Gers ,then 3-3, 0-0 and 1-1 .

L.Cup. Gers win 1-0 away.

S.Cup SF. Gers win 2-1 then win the Scottish Cup.

That's the stats.


Pfffft. What's the point of peddling myths if you're just going to come on here and argue the case using hard facts?

mmcd_rfc
17-03-2010, 14:51
If they were such a good team under Burns, u got to wonder why Burns never held onto the job, simples really.

omegaman
17-03-2010, 14:56
I'm sick to the back teeth of this p1sh getting regurgitated by the bheggars and their friends in the mhedia, it's always there in the background as some testimony that the hooped hordes enjoyed this wonderful spell under Burns, they won one fecking trophy ffs! Walter (and Goram at times) had him and his team in their back pockets.

I did some research a while back (sadly lost it on my old pc) about the seasons when the two sides faced up, the mhedia would have you believe that Celtic outscored and outplayed Rangers not only in old firm games (the outplayed bit only here btw :D) but in all other games within the league, it's simply not true. Rangers never fully got the credit for some sparkling displays at this time and I know that the facts back me up on this.

For those who read the Pink Panther in the Number One Fanzine, I would love him to do an article on this era, he would do it far better justice than I ever could.

Most importantly though, they won feck all while we lorded it with trebles and doubles. :)

The myth of bitter losers.

Smith knew exactly what he was doing at the time and simply allowed the Bheasts inferior players to bungle possession away time and time again which Laudrup and others would pounce upon for the inevitable sucker punch.

Even when Burns knew to expect it, he was incapable of preventing it from happening.

Why?

Because his side wasn't very good.

lowerhuttloyal
18-03-2010, 01:41
I'ts made worse by the fact that Burns is dead.

Gives them more license to romanticize about facts and figures.

britain
18-03-2010, 06:44
Pfffft. What's the point of peddling myths if you're just going to come on here and argue the case using hard facts?

'Do apologise !'says Britain in his best Vogie Dipond voice:D:D

It reminds me of Newcastle that 95/96 season.

They were a good team to watch that season no doubt about it, attacking football, Ginola at his best, but Man Utd won the double. Football includes a decent defence and keper. Man Utd had both in 95/96 and Cantona.

frankieboy
18-03-2010, 09:37
This chestnut gets an airing every now and then when they have nothing else to moan about.

The Predator
18-03-2010, 09:43
I'ts made worse by the fact that Burns is dead.

Gives them more license to romanticize about facts and figures.

Doesn't stop me from arguing with the proper facts. End of the day, this cavalier football is just complete mythical stuff. They all know it as well. They know they were inferior to The Rangers.

If they think his death will make me back down, then they would be mistaken. You can't just spread lies. However, spreading lies tends to be what they do. Tell lies often enough and it becomes true to some.

Such is this Cavalier Football myth.

scotty_boy90
18-03-2010, 09:49
1995-96.

Rangers: P 36. W 27. D 6. L 3. F 85. A 25. Pts 87. Winners.

Celtc; P 36. W 24. D 11. L 1. F74. A 25. Pts 83. Losers.

Head to Head for that season.

League Games: 2-0 Gers ,then 3-3, 0-0 and 1-1 .

L.Cup. Gers win 1-0 away.

S.Cup SF. Gers win 2-1 then win the Scottish Cup.

That's the stats.

Silky attacking football maybe...

From the Rangers, we scored more goals, lost the same amout and won the league by 4 points

Points make prizes and occasionally it can come down to goal difference, then goals scored.

We had the upper hand in all 3 areas

;)

Ardoyne RSC
18-03-2010, 10:21
We also had the referees, SFA, Government, MI 5 (and6), United Nations, Mossad, the Masons, DUP, House of Lords, NASA, CIA, all branches of the media, International Rescue, the SAS, Roger Rabbit (and the sexiest film star ever, Jessica his missus) the crew of the Starship Enterprise, Clark Kent, and the Shankill Protestant Boys FB (allegedly)

toadegree
18-03-2010, 11:20
It's just the usual Timmy revisionism, tell the lies so many times that they eventually become established fact. A wee bit like Mowbrays attacking Barcalonaesque football, beautiful to behold and pleasing to the eye, the truth of course is that boring Rangers who Mowbray "will never play like" have scored 11 goals more, conceded 13 less and have a GD double that of Celtic.

Surge
18-03-2010, 12:23
1995-96.

Rangers: P 36. W 27. D 6. L 3. F 85. A 25. Pts 87. Winners.

Celtc; P 36. W 24. D 11. L 1. F74. A 25. Pts 83. Losers.

Head to Head for that season.

League Games: 2-0 Gers ,then 3-3, 0-0 and 1-1 .

L.Cup. Gers win 1-0 away.

S.Cup SF. Gers win 2-1 then win the Scottish Cup.

That's the stats.

Whenever I listen to Clyde or the Record Podcast, the phrase I hear over and over agin is how Mowbray disgracefully finds himslef behind a "poor" Rangers side. The phrase is used so often that I was beginning to think we had changed the name of the club to "Poor Rangers Team FC".

However having a wee look at the goals per game average:

The greatest, most bestest all singing all dancing harlem globe trotter-esque example of the cavelier football that the world has ever known as purveyed by Tommy Burns in the great vice-championship performance of all time:

Games: 36, Goals 74. Average goals per game: 2.06

A Poor Rangers Team ((C) Clyde and the Record) this season under cautious, defensive, set in his ways footballing pragmatist Walter Smith:

Games: 28, Goals 64: Average goals per game: 2.29.

Another Timmy myth bites the dust . . . :) x 52

Bluefin221
18-03-2010, 12:32
For such a great attacking team, they had real problems scoring in big games.

1995-96

0-1 v Rangers in League Cup; 0-2 v Rangers in League; 0-1 v PSG in ECWC; 0-3 v PSG in ECWC; 1-2 v Rangers in Scottish Cup. Five big games that defined their season and one goal.

1996-97

0-2 v Rangers in League; 0-1 v Hearts in League Cup; 0-1 v Rangers in League; 0-2 v Hamburg in UEFA Cup; 0-2 v Hamburg in UEFA Cup; 1-3 v Rangers in League; 0-1 v Rangers in League; 0-1 v Falkirk in Scottish Cup. Eight big games that defined their season and one goal.

:)

doogieblue
18-03-2010, 12:54
Burns' Celtic side were decent, no doubt about it....sadly they came up against one of the greatest Rangers sides of the last 20 years and were pretty much always beaten by us. We'd soak up the pressure the Laudrup would catch them on the counter.

I also remember them sacking him...they must have forgot about what they done to him after calling off that OF game when he died.

britain
18-03-2010, 20:45
Oh and in 95-96 they went out of Europe to Paris St Germain, who they thought they'd beat:roll::D

stuartz
18-03-2010, 20:59
Vice champions

DAZ1964
18-03-2010, 21:00
Oh and in 95-96 they went out of Europe to Paris St Germain, who they thought they'd beat:roll::D

As I have said over the years, there are a growing number of self-delusionists who think they actually won in Shuvull.

happytobeblue
18-03-2010, 21:03
Cavalier ehh. That must mean that Big Quierre was The Dark Tan Yin.




Oh wait a minute that was Musketeer.


:o



;)

el jock grande sabía
18-03-2010, 21:13
We also had the referees, SFA, Government, MI 5 (and6), United Nations, Mossad, the Masons, DUP, House of Lords, NASA, CIA, all branches of the media, International Rescue, the SAS, Roger Rabbit (and the sexiest film star ever, Jessica his missus) the crew of the Starship Enterprise, Clark Kent, and the Shankill Protestant Boys FB (allegedly)

You forgot Team America - World Police!:D

Sir Duncan Ferguson
18-03-2010, 21:31
'Do apologise !'says Britain in his best Vogie Dipond voice:D:D

It reminds me of Newcastle that 95/96 season.

They were a good team to watch that season no doubt about it, attacking football, Ginola at his best, but Man Utd won the double. Football includes a decent defence and keper. Man Utd had both in 95/96 and Cantona.

Newcastle again were another myth IMO.

Man Utd and Liverpool both outscored them. Even Everton in sixth place scored only two goals less than the Magpies.

And their defence only conceded 37 goals in 38 games.

PawsBear
18-03-2010, 21:40
For such a great attacking team, they had real problems scoring in big games.

1995-96

0-1 v Rangers in League Cup; 0-2 v Rangers in League; 0-1 v PSG in ECWC; 0-3 v PSG in ECWC; 1-2 v Rangers in Scottish Cup. Five big games that defined their season and one goal.

1996-97

0-2 v Rangers in League; 0-1 v Hearts in League Cup; 0-1 v Rangers in League; 0-2 v Hamburg in UEFA Cup; 0-2 v Hamburg in UEFA Cup; 1-3 v Rangers in League; 0-1 v Rangers in League; 0-1 v Falkirk in Scottish Cup. Eight big games that defined their season and one goal.

:)

The League Cup exit at the hands of the Jambos - was that the game after Pascali, Ritchie, Weir and Pointon were red carded at Ibrox by Gerry the tim Evans. All were suspended - the Jambos brought in Andy Thorn from Crystal Palace on loan and he had Andreas Thom and the rest of the micks in his back pocket.

Sir Duncan Ferguson
18-03-2010, 21:46
The League Cup exit at the hands of the Jambos - was that the game after Pascali, Ritchie, Weir and Pointon were red carded at Ibrox by Gerry the tim Evans. All were suspended - the Jambos brought in Andy Thorn from Crystal Palace on loan and he had Andreas Thom and the rest of the micks in his back pocket.

and 17 year old Gary Naysmith made his debut for Hearts that night.

britain
18-03-2010, 21:46
Newcastle again were another myth IMO.

Man Utd and Liverpool both outscored them. Even Everton in sixth place scored only two goals less than the Magpies.

And their defence only conceded 37 goals in 38 games.



Fair points, hadn't looked at the Premiership stats for 1995/96.

lauders
18-03-2010, 21:47
they talked about their 4 superstars as the 2nd coming.

Van H, Thom, Cadete, Di Canio.

But I think the 4 of them very rarely played in the same team together as they all played in roughly the same position.

The only time they ever felt they were "superior" was the old firm games when they were superior in possession...however Walter was working on his Muhammed Ali rope-a-dope strategy where goram, gough et al would soak up all the pressure and then break up field to score the winner(s) to hilarious effects.

jim_baxter1960
18-03-2010, 21:49
1995-96.

Rangers: P 36. W 27. D 6. L 3. F 85. A 25. Pts 87. Winners.

Celtc; P 36. W 24. D 11. L 1. F74. A 25. Pts 83. Losers.

Head to Head for that season.

League Games: 2-0 Gers ,then 3-3, 0-0 and 1-1 .

L.Cup. Gers win 1-0 away.

S.Cup SF. Gers win 2-1 then win the Scottish Cup.

That's the stats.

A game where Davie Robertson was caught offside scoring from his own through-ball. Did our lads let it fester and upset their game. No, they got on with it and barely a murmur afterwards. That's the difference between us and them - they get all upset and their game goes to pieces.

Sir Duncan Ferguson
18-03-2010, 21:49
For such a great attacking team, they had real problems scoring in big games.

1995-96

0-1 v Rangers in League Cup; 0-2 v Rangers in League; 0-1 v PSG in ECWC; 0-3 v PSG in ECWC; 1-2 v Rangers in Scottish Cup. Five big games that defined their season and one goal.

1996-97

0-2 v Rangers in League; 0-1 v Hearts in League Cup; 0-1 v Rangers in League; 0-2 v Hamburg in UEFA Cup; 0-2 v Hamburg in UEFA Cup; 1-3 v Rangers in League; 0-1 v Rangers in League; 0-1 v Falkirk in Scottish Cup. Eight big games that defined their season and one goal.

:)

Posted this last week.

They drew 11 games in 95/96. Almost a third of their league matches

They drew three of them against us.

The other eight were against :

Home: Motherwell (1-1), Raith Rovers (0-0), Kilmarnock (1-1), Hibs (2-2)
Away: Kilmarnock(0-0), Kilmarnock (0-0), Falkirk (0-0), Motherwell (0-0)

van Hooijdonk(and Collins in the 1st half of the season) apart there were no Tims scoring goals on a regular basis that season.

For a team that played "pure football" that's a helluva lot of 0-0 draws I see!

wordy_rappinghood
18-03-2010, 21:51
They were garbage but to this day maniacal tims think only masonic referees denied Burns two titles. They looked good against the likes of Falkirk but they didn't win a single league game against us in the two seasons that really mattered.

simply_the_best
18-03-2010, 21:52
I also remember them sacking him...they must have forgot about what they done to him after calling off that OF game when he died.



That was Phil O'donnell mate, they had no reservations about playing a game the week after Burns died for some reason :roll:

britain
18-03-2010, 21:56
As I have said over the years, there are a growing number of self-delusionists who think they actually won in Shuvull.

Think they drew away in Paris and the mhedia built it up for the return leg as a certain Celtc victory...:roll:

Sir Duncan Ferguson
18-03-2010, 21:57
Burns' Celtic side were decent, no doubt about it....sadly they came up against one of the greatest Rangers sides of the last 20 years and were pretty much always beaten by us. We'd soak up the pressure the Laudrup would catch them on the counter.

I also remember them sacking him...they must have forgot about what they done to him after calling off that OF game when he died.

They didn't sack him as such. His contract was up and he was told it wasn't being renewed and not to bother turning up for the final three games of the season.

Reverend
18-03-2010, 21:57
1995-96.

Rangers: P 36. W 27. D 6. L 3. F 85. A 25. Pts 87. Winners.

Celtc; P 36. W 24. D 11. L 1. F74. A 25. Pts 83. Losers.

Head to Head for that season.

League Games: 2-0 Gers ,then 3-3, 0-0 and 1-1 .

L.Cup. Gers win 1-0 away.

S.Cup SF. Gers win 2-1 then win the Scottish Cup.

That's the stats.

the stats dont lie but smelly septic fans will its their breeding you know.

wwe
19-03-2010, 00:18
It seems to have started in their centenary year. When the season 88-89 started, they were getting pumped left right and centre. This was put down to the "cavalier" football having a downside. The apologists would tell the world that Celtic fans wouldn't watch the Puritan football played by Rangers.

They said that the cavalier side containing that cheating **** Aitken, pretty boy (total ****ing diddy) Whyte, Anton, McArthy and Rasputin couldn't become bad overnight. That was true. They were always shite. Only Butcher breaking his leg gave them the league. Andrew Waddell gave them the cup.

britain
19-03-2010, 06:49
Aye their was certainly some 'puritan football' played in a certain 5-1 game at Ibrox in August 1988.

rfcmick1873
19-03-2010, 06:53
Pish. Theres a big diiference in playing silky passing 'barca' style football, and winning a game. Tommy Burns was never told that, all he was told was to hang around like a bad smell, and he done that well

Earl of Leven
10-06-2011, 13:18
Pat Nevin in Rhebel claiming Martinez would have been a perfect manager as he would suit the 'demands of swashbuckling football'.

Was there not a long thread on here (may have been a while ago...I am old) which basically demolished this?

We have scored more goals, created more chances, utilised more wingers etc?

I think Number_Eight and Gub had some useful stuff about truly guff Celtic teams hoofing ball aimlessly in front of a dwindling support. Yet we're told they 'are open to all...in part due to their superb tradition of attacking football'.

Apart from Stein (in spells....remember at times we drew more fans during their NIAR) when did this myth come about and was it ever true before him? Do they draw neutrals for this reason?

Their best manager in decades was O'Neil and you wouldn't watch his team play in your own garden.

brian m
10-06-2011, 13:22
Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaawwwwwwwwwwnnnnnn.

It's Rangers For Me
10-06-2011, 13:23
I remember during 9IAR years if it was a windy day on an OF game someone telling me that would suit us as they play their football in the air. Of course with O'squeel he bought all the big bruisers as target men.

It was Rangers after all who were nicknamed 'The Light and Speedy Blues' in the past.

JellaFella
10-06-2011, 13:24
Artmedia 5-0 Celtic

Open attacking football, this is the sort of game that backs it up. Unlike us they don’t go away from home in Europe and put 10 men behind the ball.

Captain Brad Bellick
10-06-2011, 13:26
Didnt Roy Aitken once launch the ball into the stand from his own corner to waste time?

Sam_English
10-06-2011, 13:26
'swashbuckling football' - have i missed something ?

JellaFella
10-06-2011, 13:27
Motherwell 2 Celtic 1

A league decider when only the one goal was needed. Celtic refused to sit out the game and in their search for more goals were happy to leave themselves exposed at the back.

marlborough1650
10-06-2011, 13:27
It is baloney, hoo-, hah, flim-flam, a load of bollox; however when such tripe is repeated often enough, by enough "interested" people, it becomes received wisdom.
(Cf. religion)

modfella
10-06-2011, 13:30
Look at the Oneil team long ball specialists with a big target man, load of pish.

sirdrinksalot
10-06-2011, 13:31
I think possibly under Advocaat was the first time I can recall the mhedia reporting that Rangers played better football than Celtic. It has always been a well perpetuated myth that Celtic play this wonderful brand of cavalier football. Thinking back to some of the managers that I have seen them play under, the likes of McNeill, Macari, Brady, Strachan, O'Neill etc, it's a fallacy to suggest that they are 'swashbuckling'.

JellaFella
10-06-2011, 13:32
http://www.footballfancast.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/Stuart-Slater.jpg

ThePedroandMaryChain
10-06-2011, 13:33
This myth about an attractive footballing philosophy is just something the 'Celtic Family' has invented to console themselves with the fact that they are and will always be inferior to us.

They know it.

Earl of Leven
10-06-2011, 13:33
In the late 40s and 50s, even early 60s they were gash and 5th best supported team in Scotland, if that.

So clearly it wasn't then that they were 'swashbuckling'.

bearcage
10-06-2011, 13:35
Under Jock Stein they put 10men behind the ball in away ties to Vojvodina and Dukla Prague when theLesbian Lions scared Europe

SpongebobSquarePass
10-06-2011, 13:37
Don't know about "swashbuckling" but it is seldom that our team manages to retain possession against Celtic.

Humped 3-0 then 1-0 and bloody lucky to get a draw at Ibrox when once again in the second half our midfield disappeared.

I would like to see McCoist, who often mentioned lack of quality in possession as a problem in interviews, tackle this.

The_Gub
10-06-2011, 13:41
Like everything else connected with the filth it is lies. They'd rather lose 4-3 than win 1-0 yadda, yadda, yadda. Just absolute 100% Lillian Gish.

Now and again Mr Ding chappy would post me a few sellik vyoos through the post for my entertainment.

There was one issue and I can't remember who was editing, might have been a Cowie or it might have been a Smith.

Anyway whatever particular slimeball it was, gave us a wee piece on the 1977 Scottish Cup final.

His words were roughly to the effect.; A drab, dysmal day influenced by a disputed penalty. But who cares? We won!'

They'll be telling us they were formed for charity, next!

bluebaz
10-06-2011, 13:44
I think possibly under Advocaat was the first time I can recall the mhedia reporting that Rangers played better football than Celtic. It has always been a well perpetuated myth that Celtic play this wonderful brand of cavalier football. Thinking back to some of the managers that I have seen them play under, the likes of McNeill, Macari, Brady, Strachan, O'Neill etc, it's a fallacy to suggest that they are 'swashbuckling'.

They seem to have adopted to term swashbuckling as a replacement for naive and/or foolhardy.

Let them continue peddling the lies to themselves. I'll stick to a team that wins leagues.

Earl of Leven
10-06-2011, 13:46
During the 90s they won very few OF league games....were they swashbuckling then?

omegaman
10-06-2011, 13:50
I think it's a by-word for 'losers'.

During our NIAR we had to suffer the media hogwash eulogising Father Burns wonderful cavaliers even though there were actually only two seasons out of those nine where they gave us a run for our money - the rest they were so utterly lamentable as to finish 5th one season.

Even when Advocaat's side was sweeping all before it during his first couple of seasons at the helm with the best football I've ever seen from any Scottish team, the hacks still laughably dribbled on about how wonderful Larsson and Viduka were.

In the early '80s when they did have the upper hand over us domestically, I remember Dundee United being talked about as the most attractive team to watch (like a Scottish Arsenal - great to watch, but didn't win very much), while Aberdeen's mid-decade dominance wasn't built on any lack of flamboyance either.

I can't really vouch for the Stein era as I was only just getting into football when it ended, but it seems to me any promotion of this 'tradition' stems from that period and has been lazily trumpeted ever since as they've become less and less successful.

Shay o' Turkey
10-06-2011, 14:02
Anyone who wants to know how much they value the cavalier football, only needs to look at recent history.

Under Syd Little, it became the be all and end all, because he was a failure.

Under O'Neill it was never mentioned due to having some success.

It reared its head again only when Monkeyheid came on the scene. His appointment was heralded as an attempt to play the Barca way, but as soon as his experiment failed, there was no mention of football style again, as TLB was appointed to go to war, get in everyone's faces, and bring in the thunder.

The_Gub
10-06-2011, 14:02
During the 90s they won very few OF league games....were they swashbuckling then?

I don't know about the filth, but I will say with absolute conviction we didn't win as many OF league games in the 90s as we should have.

In the 1990s, from the first OF league game in the decade (1/1/1990) till the last in the decade (27/12/1999) I make it we won only 20 league matches.

Given our overwhelming superiority over them in EVERY department of the park in that decade, that to me is a rather pathetic statistic.

53easy
10-06-2011, 14:04
Don't know about "swashbuckling" but it is seldom that our team manages to retain possession against Celtic.

Humped 3-0 then 1-0 and bloody lucky to get a draw at Ibrox when once again in the second half our midfield disappeared.

I would like to see McCoist, who often mentioned lack of quality in possession as a problem in interviews, tackle this.

They had a decent 15 minutes spell in the second half which coincided with them getting another penalty for a dive.

Rangers missed the best chance of the game in the second half.

dalegoalie
10-06-2011, 14:09
Didnt Roy Aitken once launch the ball into the stand from his own corner to waste time?

You are thinking of the 1989 Scottish Cup Final. It was a free-kick just to the right of the box. Aitken fired it into the ranks of the Great Unwashed.

The_Gub
10-06-2011, 14:12
You are thinking of the 1989 Scottish Cup Final. It was a free-kick just to the right of the box. Aitken fired it into the ranks of the Great Unwashed.

Even McNee had a go at Aitken for his antics.

Number_Eight
10-06-2011, 14:19
Celtic does not have a tradition of attacking swashbuckling football, but it thinks that it does, and that's down to the Jock Stein era when they actually did play an attacking game.

Before then, and after it too, Celtic did not have a reputation for being a particularly adventurous side.

On the way to the European final in 1967 they played a very tight game away at Dukla Prague although a friend of mine assures me that the sentiment at Parkhead after this was 'never again'.

That club owes so much to Stein. If it hadn't been for him they might never have raised themselves up from mediocrity.

dmartin809
10-06-2011, 14:27
Well the septic way is to play total football, mowgli did it, lemon does it, not so sure Martinez would have outdone those two guys as far as "swashbuckling" football and trophies go.

Top_Cat
10-06-2011, 14:31
:D

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/4/46/Swashbuckler.jpg/220px-Swashbuckler.jpg

omegaman
10-06-2011, 14:35
Celtic does not have a tradition of attacking swashbuckling football, but it thinks that it does, and that's down to the Jock Stein era when they actually did play an attacking game.

Before then, and after it too, Celtic did not have a reputation for being a particularly adventurous side.

On the way to the European final in 1967 they played a very tight game away at Dukla Prague although a friend of mine assures me that the sentiment at Parkhead after this was 'never again'.

That club owes so much to Stein. If it hadn't been for him they might never have raised themselves up from mediocrity.

They could point to a 'tradition' of unearthing a succession of exciting footballers from the late '60s to early '80s like Johnston, Connelly, Dalglish, McGrain and Nicholas, etc, but for every one of them we had a Henderson, Smith, Jardine, Cooper and so on - Scottish football in general possessed a far greater talent pool then than it's ever done since.

Come the early '80s we'd lost the ability to discover new talent while Celtic managed to shunter on for a few years.

How any team containing Roy f**king Aitken could ever be termed 'swashbuckling' though, I don't know!

sfaulds
10-06-2011, 14:36
they are just like West Ham. They make up this myth that they play open attractive football. Its funny that celtic most successful period in recent memory was when O'Neill had a bunch of thugs as a team

CarltonBanksChinos
10-06-2011, 14:55
The fact the vast majority hail Martin O'Neill, purveyor of some of the most flagrant football ever seen on British shores, as some sort of demigod kinda disputes the theory.

The_Gub
10-06-2011, 15:01
Celtic does not have a tradition of attacking swashbuckling football, but it thinks that it does, and that's down to the Jock Stein era when they actually did play an attacking game.

Before then, and after it too, Celtic did not have a reputation for being a particularly adventurous side.

On the way to the European final in 1967 they played a very tight game away at Dukla Prague although a friend of mine assures me that the sentiment at Parkhead after this was 'never again'.

That club owes so much to Stein. If it hadn't been for him they might never have raised themselves up from mediocrity.

Ba face came out on the eve of the 1965 League Cup final and said 'we have a plan to stifle Rangers' (or words to that effect)

Two minutes in, that 'plan' was made apparent. Ian Young crippled Willie Johnston, consigning him to a role as passenger for the rest of the game.

Stein was all about football in its purest sense? I think not.

Laudrup1
10-06-2011, 15:02
I don't know about the filth, but I will say with absolute conviction we didn't win as many OF league games in the 90s as we should have.

In the 1990s, from the first OF league game in the decade (1/1/1990) till the last in the decade (27/12/1999) I make it we won only 20 league matches.

Given our overwhelming superiority over them in EVERY department of the park in that decade, that to me is a rather pathetic statistic.

20 out of how many Gub? What's the stats for W / D / L ?

grailpr
10-06-2011, 15:30
The most swashbuckling foootball the SPL has seen in years was the first 7 minutes at Rugby Park when we clinched the league. 3 top class goals, attacking play out of defence, one touch passing and great finishing. Grace under pressure, skill when it is needed the most, and a great team spirit, that's why we are Champions!

Earl of Leven
10-06-2011, 15:37
The most swashbuckling foootball the SPL has seen in years was the first 7 minutes at Rugby Park when we clinched the league. 3 top class goals, attacking play out of defence, one touch passing and great finishing. Grace under pressure, skill when it is needed the most, and a great team spirit, that's why we are Champions!

No it pure wisnae man......ra hoops under wee Lenny pure played like Brazil man.

davydumper
10-06-2011, 15:37
they are just a provincial club with a big support who may have played some good stuff but most of that was under stein.

Texas Bear
10-06-2011, 15:43
So because Martinez is from Spain, he would suit their imaginary swashbuckling style? Sounds a bit racist actually.

Zorro for next sellick manager!!

Texas Bear
10-06-2011, 15:50
20 out of how many Gub? What's the stats for W / D / L ?

Yes, i'm a sad statto.......

In the 90's, our record against them in all competitions was:

Played 50
Won 27
Lost 12
Drew 11

Goals for 68
Goals against 51

Dedalus
10-06-2011, 15:52
Unless my memory is playing tricks with me, although I suspect not as it wasn’t too long ago, The Blessed Martin’s footballing approach throughout his five years at the Paedodome was to fill his team with big bruisers at the back who kicked the living shit out of the opposition, while the forwards fell down at every sectarian gust of wind to get the free kicks. All I remember from Swashbuckler FC during the O’Neill years was fouling, long balls and set pieces. Imagine how many penalties Petrov, Larsson et al would have won last season.

britain
10-06-2011, 19:39
The Tommy Burns 'swashbuckling team' of 1995 /96 won ?

Nothing !

britain
10-06-2011, 19:42
Bumped for current 'swashbuckling' thread.;):D

the bundy
10-06-2011, 19:48
a few have said to me, goram was that good, he cost burns his job ..implying if it wasnt for THE GOALIE they would have beat us ..:roll:

rosstheger
10-06-2011, 19:49
I'm possibly being very harsh here but I think our style of football in Europe over recent years has seriously hampered our reputation both in the UK and Europe.

Historically, we have always played the better football.

britain
10-06-2011, 19:56
a few have said to me, goram was that good, he cost burns his job ..implying if it wasnt for THE GOALIE they would have beat us ..:roll:

Aye, but tell them Goram wasn't playing for Raith Roversin that 1994 Coca Cola Cup Final;):D:D:D

davieboy1873
10-06-2011, 19:57
They even mentioned it during Smiths tribute the other night.

1 defeat brilliant
17 draws not so good

I know people like to get sentimental over TB but he was a Rangers hating bassa imo.

Bar King Bear
10-06-2011, 20:02
The great swashbuckler:eek: Paul (prospect) McStay is a fine example of them and their myths that grow up around the "repeat it often enough and it becomes believable.

Newlands_loyal
10-06-2011, 20:06
You can add to this phenomenon, the one type of Rangers player certain for praise from our demented friends and their press pals, you've got it,
THE GOALIES.
Now we've been fortunate down the years in having outstanding keepers, [current one included], but during the niar seasons especially they used Goram's form as some sort of comfort blanket to block out the horrible reality of our superiority in ALL areas of the park.

MALIGNED53
10-06-2011, 20:13
Mhanks of the carribean, ;)

jxh73029
10-06-2011, 20:14
Unless my memory is playing tricks with me, although I suspect not as it wasn’t too long ago, The Blessed Martin’s footballing approach throughout his five years at the Paedodome was to fill his team with big bruisers at the back who kicked the living shit out of the opposition, while the forwards fell down at every sectarian gust of wind to get the free kicks. All I remember from Swashbuckler FC during the O’Neill years was fouling, long balls and set pieces. Imagine how many penalties Petrov, Larsson et al would have won last season.

The biggest cheat ever to grace Scottish football......Chris Sutton

instructor
10-06-2011, 20:21
I thought Celtic did play some good football when we were on our run, Burns had them playing well, so sometimes Celtic play some good stuff and finish second, like last season, don't have a problem about Celtic fans saying that sometimes they play good football, I like to play good football and win, which we did for 9-in-a-row and now for 3-in-a-row. At least under Burns, I cannot remember them blaming the officials or other teams for not winning, I think he blamed Goram once for bing a good goalkeeper, which at least is a true statement, rather than the falsehoods spoken by Lemmon and his backers.

bluenosebazza
10-06-2011, 20:25
Barcelona are swashbuckling. Celtc seem to think 10 of them charging at the opposition box from time to time equates to the same thing. It's chaotic and it doesn't work.

The last few games of the season we played far more attacking, fast paced and with intent. We also remembered to defend at the same time.

superrangers
10-06-2011, 20:27
The biggest cheat ever to grace Scottish football......Chris Sutton

On the field yes, off it, it has to be Liewell for having the shame to put the inadequacies of his own team above the dignity of death, when it came to pressuring the SPL to postpone the new year game which enabled them to cheat their way to the title. This must never be allowed to be forgotten. PHUCKING SCUMBAGS!!!

:mad:

TPABear
10-06-2011, 20:27
Sorry I didnt think it was the tommy burns way, i thought it was the barca way

dh1963
10-06-2011, 20:27
Celtic's league record 1947 to 1965 (19 seasons), from the resumption of league football after WW2 to their run of titles under Stein:

1947 P30 W13 D6 L11 Pts 32 Position 7th (Rangers 1st)
1948 P30 W10 D5 L15 Pts 25 Position 12th (Rangers 2nd)
1949 P30 W12 D7 L11 Pts 31 Position 6th (Rangers1st)
1950 P30 W14 D7 L9 Pts 35 Position 5th (Rangers 1st)
1951 P30 W12 D5 L13 Pts 29 Position 7th (Rangers 2nd)
1952 P30 W10 D8 L12 Pts 28 Position 9th (Rangers 2nd)
1953 P30 W11 D7 L12 Pts 29 Position 8th (Rangers 1st)
1954 P30 W20 D3 L7 Pts 43 Position 1st (Rangers 4th)
1955 P30 W19 D8 L3 Pts 46 Position 2nd (Rangers 3rd)
1956 P34 W16 D9 L9 Pts 41 Position 5th (Rangers 1st)
1957 P34 W15 D8 L11 Pts 38 Position 5th (Rangers 1st)
1958 P34 W19 D8 L7 Pts 46 Position 3rd (Rangers 2nd)
1959 P34 W14 D8 L12 Pts 36 Position 6th (Rangers 1st)
1960 P34 W12 D9 L13 Pts 33 Position 9th (Rangers 3rd)
1961 P34 W15 D9 L10 Pts 39 Position 4th (Rangers 1st)
1962 P34 W19 D8 L7 Pts 46 Position 3rd (Rangers 2nd)
1963 P34 W19 D6 L9 Pts 44 Position 4th (Rangers 1st)
1964 P34 W19 D9 L6 Pts 47 Position 3rd (Rangers 1st)
1965 P34 W16 D5 L13 Pts 37 Position 8th (Rangers 5th)

13 times they won less than half their games.
14 times they finished out the top 3.
9 times they finished out the top 5.
17 times they finished below Rangers.
1 time they won the title.

Some "tradition".....

britain
10-06-2011, 20:42
Celtic's league record 1947 to 1965 (19 seasons), from the resumption of league football after WW2 to their run of titles under Stein:

1947 P30 W13 D6 L11 Pts 32 Position 7th (Rangers 1st)
1948 P30 W10 D5 L15 Pts 25 Position 12th (Rangers 2nd)
1949 P30 W12 D7 L11 Pts 31 Position 6th (Rangers1st)
1950 P30 W14 D7 L9 Pts 35 Position 5th (Rangers 1st)
1951 P30 W12 D5 L13 Pts 29 Position 7th (Rangers 2nd)
1952 P30 W10 D8 L12 Pts 28 Position 9th (Rangers 2nd)
1953 P30 W11 D7 L12 Pts 29 Position 8th (Rangers 1st)
1954 P30 W20 D3 L7 Pts 43 Position 1st (Rangers 4th)
1955 P30 W19 D8 L3 Pts 46 Position 2nd (Rangers 3rd)
1956 P34 W16 D9 L9 Pts 41 Position 5th (Rangers 1st)
1957 P34 W15 D8 L11 Pts 38 Position 5th (Rangers 1st)
1958 P34 W19 D8 L7 Pts 46 Position 3rd (Rangers 2nd)
1959 P34 W14 D8 L12 Pts 36 Position 6th (Rangers 1st)
1960 P34 W12 D9 L13 Pts 33 Position 9th (Rangers 3rd)
1961 P34 W15 D9 L10 Pts 39 Position 4th (Rangers 1st)
1962 P34 W19 D8 L7 Pts 46 Position 3rd (Rangers 2nd)
1963 P34 W19 D6 L9 Pts 44 Position 4th (Rangers 1st)
1964 P34 W19 D9 L6 Pts 47 Position 3rd (Rangers 1st)
1965 P34 W16 D5 L13 Pts 37 Position 8th (Rangers 5th)

13 times they won less than half their games.
14 times they finished out the top 3.
9 times they finished out the top 5.
17 times they finished below Rangers.
1 time they won the title.

Some "tradition".....

Great wee reminder:D

ThePedroandMaryChain
10-06-2011, 20:45
I'm possibly being very harsh here but I think our style of football in Europe over recent years has seriously hampered our reputation both in the UK and Europe.

Historically, we have always played the better football.

Is anyone bothered? We all know that we are superior to them and that's all that matters.

Number_Eight
10-06-2011, 20:52
Celtic's league record 1947 to 1965 (19 seasons), from the resumption of league football after WW2 to their run of titles under Stein:

1947 P30 W13 D6 L11 Pts 32 Position 7th (Rangers 1st)
1948 P30 W10 D5 L15 Pts 25 Position 12th (Rangers 2nd)
1949 P30 W12 D7 L11 Pts 31 Position 6th (Rangers1st)
1950 P30 W14 D7 L9 Pts 35 Position 5th (Rangers 1st)
1951 P30 W12 D5 L13 Pts 29 Position 7th (Rangers 2nd)
1952 P30 W10 D8 L12 Pts 28 Position 9th (Rangers 2nd)
1953 P30 W11 D7 L12 Pts 29 Position 8th (Rangers 1st)
1954 P30 W20 D3 L7 Pts 43 Position 1st (Rangers 4th)
1955 P30 W19 D8 L3 Pts 46 Position 2nd (Rangers 3rd)
1956 P34 W16 D9 L9 Pts 41 Position 5th (Rangers 1st)
1957 P34 W15 D8 L11 Pts 38 Position 5th (Rangers 1st)
1958 P34 W19 D8 L7 Pts 46 Position 3rd (Rangers 2nd)
1959 P34 W14 D8 L12 Pts 36 Position 6th (Rangers 1st)
1960 P34 W12 D9 L13 Pts 33 Position 9th (Rangers 3rd)
1961 P34 W15 D9 L10 Pts 39 Position 4th (Rangers 1st)
1962 P34 W19 D8 L7 Pts 46 Position 3rd (Rangers 2nd)
1963 P34 W19 D6 L9 Pts 44 Position 4th (Rangers 1st)
1964 P34 W19 D9 L6 Pts 47 Position 3rd (Rangers 1st)
1965 P34 W16 D5 L13 Pts 37 Position 8th (Rangers 5th)

13 times they won less than half their games.
14 times they finished out the top 3.
9 times they finished out the top 5.
17 times they finished below Rangers.
1 time they won the title.

Some "tradition".....

And guess who was captain the year they won that solitary title?

Stein.

instructor
10-06-2011, 21:04
The team under Stein certainly played attacking football, no doubt about that, remember thumping Hibs by 6-1 and 6-3 in two cup finals, for instance. Since Stein I would say that their approach is a normal one of attack and defense, not particularly swashbuckling. Their current side is ok to watch as they do at least try and play football, long may this continue and their runners up tag continues.

Hap Hapablap
10-06-2011, 21:05
It can't be denied , watching Rangers vs Burns' Celtic was through the cracks of your fingers material.

Russell_Nash
10-06-2011, 21:07
Tommy Burns cavalier football?

youll never see that again

Hap Hapablap
10-06-2011, 21:09
Tommy Burns cavalier football?

youll never see that again

If it's your goal to crack jokes about dead Celtic footballers, there's a whole lot better to aim at than Tommy Burns.

Russell_Nash
10-06-2011, 21:11
If it's your goal to crack jokes about dead Celtic footballers, there's a whole lot better to aim at than Tommy Burns.

f#ck tommy burns

if your goal is to stick you tongue up his arse

there are other websites to aim at


www.fuddleboard.com------------------------------------------------>

Hap Hapablap
10-06-2011, 21:16
f#ck tommy burns

if your goal is to stick you tongue up his arse

there are other websites to aim at


www.fuddleboard.com------------------------------------------------>

Good for you

Russell_Nash
10-06-2011, 21:18
No, my goal is not to stick my tongue up your arse.

good

tommy burns was a bigoted opus dei bastard
just because he's dead doesnt make him a good guy

bilkobear
10-06-2011, 21:18
Yes, i'm a sad statto.......

In the 90's, our record against them in all competitions was:

Played 50
Won 27
Lost 12
Drew 11

Goals for 68
Goals against 51

A lot of those games that we lost were just ones that never meant much.
We always like to beat them, but sometimes with the league won I suppose the players just couldn't muster the same concentration.
But it kept them looking respectable as opponents at the time, so I shouldn't grumble. :D

Hap Hapablap
10-06-2011, 21:29
good

tommy burns was a bigoted opus dei bastard
just because he's dead doesnt make him a good guy

**** your quick :D I tried to edit that!

He may have been as you described. Do I have a problem with that? No. Each to their own, as warped as their belief may be.

My point was there has been many a Rangers hater in the Sellik rank down the years. Burns may have been one, the same as there has been plenty vice versa. I don't remember him being very vocal with it, unlike others.

Let Burns have his 'Faith'. The fact that it bothers you to the point of forum expletive really should remonstrate with you my friend.

Russell_Nash
10-06-2011, 21:30
**** your quick :D I tried to edit that!

He may have been as you described. Do I have a problem with that? No. Each to their own, as warped as their belief may be.

My point was there has been many a Rangers hater in the Sellik rank down the years. Burns may have been one, the same as there has been plenty vice versa.

Let Burns have his 'Faith'. The fact that it bothers you to the point of forum expletive really should remonstrate with you my friend.

f#ck tommy burns

Hap Hapablap
10-06-2011, 21:31
f#ck tommy burns

I concede :D

albertz11
10-06-2011, 21:34
Vauxhall Cavalier :confused: football more like. This guff about the attacking maestro's and the Celtic way - hilarious pish peddled by the tarrier media laughable actually.

instructor
10-06-2011, 21:38
Reminds me about the Tommy Burns and Johnny Doyle rhyme...

Rookiescot
10-06-2011, 22:03
They invent a phrase like "silky soccer" and the mhedia laps it up.

The truth and them .... forever strangers.

rafterman1975
11-06-2011, 08:42
Great posts...usually history is written by the winners, not Celtic looking through their Rose tinted specs.

britain
11-06-2011, 15:22
Their much heralded and remembered (by them and mhedia) 'cavalier team' of 1995/96 won 3 games and scored 9 goals less than us;)

Hardly 'cavalier' was it:roll:

sdninety
11-06-2011, 15:30
Pfffft. What's the point of peddling myths if you're just going to come on here and argue the case using hard facts?

like it,don,t let facts get in the way of a good myth....football the septic way does my t*ts in..same this season we scored more goals but they played better football....my ar*e....

britain
11-06-2011, 15:35
1995-96.

Rangers: P 36. W 27. D 6. L 3. F 85. A 25. Pts 87. Winners.

Celtc; P 36. W 24. D 11. L 1. F74. A 25. Pts 83. Losers.

Head to Head for that season.

League Games: 2-0 Gers ,then 3-3, 0-0 and 1-1 .

L.Cup. Gers win 1-0 away.

S.Cup SF. Gers win 2-1 then win the Scottish Cup.

That's the stats.

In case you need a wee reminder;):)

Roffey
11-06-2011, 16:26
Barcelona are swashbuckling. Celtc seem to think 10 of them charging at the opposition box from time to time equates to the same thing. It's chaotic and it doesn't work.

The last few games of the season we played far more attacking, fast paced and with intent. We also remembered to defend at the same time.

Somebody who knows what they are talking about (imho)

Up The Bracket
11-06-2011, 16:36
He only lost ONE game in 95/96

What the tarriers omit is the fact that they drew 11 and ended up 4 points behind The Champions. :)

greigo
11-06-2011, 16:47
cavalier football but they couldnt beat the gers in 6 attemps , we were a better team than them simple as that :)

DadoPrso42
11-06-2011, 16:58
They did try to play fast attacking football under Burns, and when it clicked it looked great, you had Di Canio, Cadete, Van Hooijdonk and Thom all quality attacking players who were capable of destroying SPL opposition on their day.

But football's about balance, you can't just go gung ho in every game, and that's something Burns failed to address in his time at Celtic. There was no tactical discipline whatsoever.

They act as if their attacking intent gave them some sort of footballing moral high ground, 'we try to play the right way' etc, but the 'right way' in football is the winning way, i.e both attacking AND defending effectively. Just because they tried to do one and abandon the other does not or did not make them a great team.

Gio Van Bronckhorst
11-06-2011, 17:09
Look at the Oneil team long ball specialists with a big target man, load of pish.

They could play football aswell to be fair :ninja:.

instructor
11-06-2011, 17:17
There always seems to be an attempt by the mhedia to say that we do not play good football. If you go back to Jock Wallace in the 70's it was often commented that we were a powerful team rather than skillful, which is nonsense as we had players like Cooper, Johnstone, McLean, McKean, Russell, Parlane, Jardine and Smith who were all good footballers and I enjoyed watching this team. Certainly towards the end of the last campaign our forward play looked very good as well.:)

DadoPrso42
11-06-2011, 17:25
There always seems to be an attempt by the mhedia to say that we do not play good football. If you go back to Jock Wallace in the 70's it was often commented that we were a powerful team rather than skillful, which is nonsense as we had players like Cooper, Johnstone, McLean, McKean, Russell, Parlane, Jardine and Smith who were all good footballers and I enjoyed watching this team. Certainly towards the end of the last campaign our forward play looked very good as well.:)

I agree, the reputation we gained during the UEFA Cup run and 4-5-1 we played in the first season or two under Walter seems to have stuck with us despite our team clearly evolving hugely since then. We play very quick attacking football, with two out and out strikers, and another in Naisy drifting in from the wing to chip in with goals, there's also Davis in the middle who gets forward to support and plenty of width on the other side too, with Whittaker overlapping at full-back. It's no coincidence this attack minded play resulted in us being the top scorers in the league. Yet the only team that is lauded for their 'good football' is Celtic.

Louden Proud
11-06-2011, 17:31
Does anyone really care

Russell_Nash
11-06-2011, 17:36
Does anyone really care

aye mate a good few on here who seem to have the the tims as their 2nd team

DJ Blue
11-06-2011, 17:41
If TB hadn't died he'd still be an average manager who was a failure at Celtic.

The mhedia go OTT with the career of someone who's died.

Louden Proud
11-06-2011, 17:43
aye mate a good few on here who seem to have the the tims as their 2nd team

Obsessed they are with the dhims. I mean this was about 15 yrs ago ffs, you couldnt make this shit up. WATP

53easy
11-06-2011, 17:47
We won more games
We scored more goals

I'm agreeing with Nash.

SCOOTERBOY
11-06-2011, 18:24
And we all know what a number 2 is dont we??

wother
11-06-2011, 21:03
f#ck tommy burns

if your goal is to stick you tongue up his arse

there are other websites to aim at


www.fuddleboard.com------------------------------------------------>

Thank god someone said it, he's deid.
Polar opposite of everything we stand for as a club.
Let the vermin mourn him, we should have nothing but scorn ;)