Gordon Smith and George Burley have been vociferous in their thoughts on the current fixture congestion by making it clear how unfair it is on Rangers.
It is unfair, however, that they are hanging the SPL out to dry and not being impartial. They have failed to address how unfair it would be on the other clubs involved had the season been further extended. The bottom line is that there isn't an ideal solution for everyone involved, and for Messrs Smith and Burley to voice an opinion only on one side of the debate is totally wrong. They are doing themselves no favours and, let's not forget, the SPL postponed fixtures for the Scotland/Italy match. Will they do so in the future?
John Brady, Kilsyth I am not particularly interested in Scottish football, but I do find Rangers chairman David Murray's chutzpah breathtaking.
Are we to believe that he has not had boardroom meetings with Rangers managers and directors in which they have discussed the financial rewards that European success might bring? The funds that would then be available for new players? New players who would make success in domestic competitions more likely by crushing the underfunded opposition? Domestic success which would provide entry to more European competitions?
For a "lesser" Scottish club, to make life easier for Rangers by agreeing to postpone fixtures would be like a turkey voting for Christmas.
Ronnie Somerville, via email Now is time to experiment SCOTLAND'S second-row fiasco is the perfect chance to experiment. Sebastian Chabal and Jason White play back-row and second-row for Sale and, as Scotland have an abundance of back-row talent, why not try them out in the second-row? White certainly can do it. Johnnie Beattie and David Callam are both lineout jumpers, so there would be no shortage there. Agreed, they may not be big enough but they are quicker than the current second-row, better defensively and better at the break-down. This may be a bit far-fetched but, after a dire Six Nations, Scotland have nothing to lose.
Robbie Stewart, via email
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article