Is Burley going to walk away?

[DALNEIGHCALEY]

Many far better players than Boyd have failed to score against Celtic also...the likes of Henry, Kaka. It doesnt mean anything at the end of the day.

Oh deary me

[Council Juice]

Boyd in all his career with Killie and Rankers has scored 1 goal against Celtc , says it all really.

we beat Georgia 2-1

Well it proved important then eh? the goal in a 2-1 win. Killie rarely score against Celtic. Whether with Boyd, naismith or whoever. And as Smith has said before he has to pick the team for the game and Boyd has his uses when trying break the teams down who defend the whole game but against Celtic its different. He trys to ht them on the break alot.

Thats Barry Ferguson saying he understands Boyds decision. Says he's disappointed but respects his decision. In other words he thinks he's right. He wouldnt publicly critisise a team mate but he would either back his manager or say nothing.

George Burley again used a player to justify himself " i only want commited players" as he's running out the door. Saying like a school boy who's been caught out "aye well i had Barry Ferguson saying he canna wait to play so it shows that players are commited so there" (not exact quote) Burley really took the hump when asked if players were commited to play for him. He really mucked up that press conference.

[DALNEIGHCALEY]

the problem I have is bit part club players trying to undermine our National manager. Boyd cant even get a start for his club team.

[Alex MacLeod]

Lets look at Burley's quote:

"Kris is disappointed not to play but this is your country you're talking about," Burley said.

"I've never had a cross word with Kris. They come in, stay at five-star hotels, in this day and age they have massive wages.

"How much do you care? You don't need to like everybody. This is your country.

"Okay, he didn't get on but the only way Kris Boyd is going to get in the team is playing regular, showing what he can do, coming to the squad and looking lively and bright and look better than the other strikers. That's how you get in the team.

"You have got to show that passion and if you don't want to show it, you make that decision that you want to step out, fine.

"We have big games coming up, people might think we are out of it but we're not, we are in second position.

"We need people wanting to fight for the cause, go to war for the country. Roll your sleeves up and go for it."

The bold paragraph says to me Kris Boyd didn't put the effort in on the training ground which is where he should have done the talking. Not after he wasn't picked. "fight for the cause, go to war for the country. Roll your sleeves up and go for it." If he isn't puting the effort in, or isn't showing the passion in training, hell mend him.

[CaleyD]

That's only one man's side of the story though Alex.

Not saying Burley is right or wrong, but if Boyd wasn't showing the work and commitment, then why was he in the squad at all?

Both Burley and Boyd are, IMO, arrogant tawts....however, Boyd is an arrogant Tawt who can put a ball in the back of the net....whereas Burley just seems to spend a lot of his time spouting hot air.

[Council Juice]

Its the fact that Burley used Boyd not playing for his club, to justify playing Iwelumo.

Yes this afternoon Burley DID say he wasnt interested in reputations. Form and the fact your playing. ie Chris Iwelumo.

Why on earth is James McFadden in the team then? 1 goal in his last 14 league games. Struggling for form (said by player himself) Dropped at weekend from starting line up.

I'll tell you why. Everyone has seen his goal against France. Its because he can do that he is in the team. Perfectly justified on reputuation.

Kris Boyd is not playing week in week out. Has only scored 4 goals this season thus far (probably in as many starts mind) and isnt at the top of his game. Why SHOULD he be in the team, or coming on?

Well everyone saw his goal against Partick. Everyone saw what he done in the League cup final. Everyone saw what he done in the Scottish Cup final. Including that belter of a free kick. (he didnt stand about waiting on his team doing all the work there, that was the ability to strike the ball crisp and true) His reputation as a match winner in those big games (cup finals are big games no matter the opposition) is undoubted.

In his 3 home internationals Georgia, Lithuania and the Faroes he scored 4. the team scored 11. only conceding 2.

In our last 3 home games where he has not had any real playing time. Croatia, Italy and Norway (accepted all better teams granted) we scored 2, conceding 3. Even with the Ukraine win taken into account thats 5 scored 4 conceded.

I have no doubt on form Iwelumo was rightly in the Squad. 8 in 6 for a Scot is not to be passed off.

Riordan has scored 3 in 3 for hibs yet is not match sharp and he isnt though.

David Clarkson doesnt score that much. Not that good. average SPL player.

Steven Fletcher hasnt done anything of note this season.

Neil Alexander was playing well for Rangers in his two games and at the tail end of last season. Wasnt in the squad. Magregor has suffered a slight dip in form. In the squad

McCormack- Cardiffs main man, scored a fair few, In under 21s. The reason why Clarkson was good last season.

So if you have to be playing regularly and on form.

Riordan, McCormack and Alexander in,

Fletcher, Clarkson, and Magregor out. Simple eh?

Face facts though. Burley has said to take us forward he wants us to play football.

The Norway game was described as "must win" by his boss.

The football we played against Norway was the most tedious we have played in a home game since 2005 when Smith took over. Even against France although outclassed, it was very exciting stuff.

Norway are very average apart from Carew. Iversen and Risse past their best.

If it was must win, we want to be an attacking team, and are playing at home. Why did Iwelumo, Boyd or Fletcher not start?

Why with 10 minutes to go, if your trying to be attacking and its a must win game, and still have a substitute to use, not make a change? Sacrifice a defender perhaps? Boyd for the last 10?

facts are to be one of the 8 best runners up we need the points. that draw at home against a beatable team, who in the end should have beaten us was a failure.

We havent went forward and we never won. Its that simple.

[KingBeastie]

We comfortably beat Georgia at home by two goals

Small point but we were far from comfortable in that game.

I was there and the elation when Beattie scored the winner was born more out of sheer relief than anything else. We were poor in that game.

(a bit pedantic - sorry!)

I can't help but think that perhaps the reason that Boyd doesn't play so often for Rangers or Scotland may be connected to the rumours most of us will have heard regarding some of his recreational activities.

Regarding the comments about Burley being arogant - I think he's got many faults but I don't regard him as arogant. Maybe I'm missing something?

[Council Juice]

If a player has "recreational activities" which are the reason he doesnt play, why have him in the squad?

Smith dropped Macgregor and said he needed to shape up.

He hasnt done so with Boyd, says he needs to work on his game and he''l play given the right game. And that with the right options he'd build the team around him.

Why would he get called up for Scotland and placed on the bench if he had a problem?

He was an unused sub in a "must win" game, where we had one sub still available.

Burley is egotistical, not arrogant.

It doesnt matter now. We're down our most natural goalscorer. and have to look forward. It doesnt bode well tho.

And remembering the georgia game, it was a nervy affair in recollection. Fact is Boyds goal was important there.

Edited October 13, 2008 by iamthecaptain1

[EWS]

Being a patron of Glasgow and having worked and known most of the security in the Glasgow clubs, I do know the reason why Boyd isn't played. However, I cannot reveal it on here due to it being a "rumour" and most definelty being slanderous.

[johnnykipper]

Being a patron of Glasgow and having worked and known most of the security in the Glasgow clubs, I do know the reason why Boyd isn't played. However, I cannot reveal it on here due to it being a "rumour" and most definelty being slanderous.

Your posting is either

1) a contradiction thus making no sense

or

2) you know the reason why he is not being played but you know that this reason to be false and malicious. If that is correct then what you are saying is that he is being unfairly treated by both his Employers and Scotland.

If you change the phrase " I do know the reason" to " I have heard a reason as to" then in my opinion your posting would make sense.

Edited October 13, 2008 by johnnykipper

[KingBeastie]

A touch pedantic maybe?!

I've heard the same rumour a few times and haven't posted it here either. I think the mods have a hard enough time without me adding to their workload.

I am inclined to be in agreement with EWS that the truth in these rumours have influenced Burley's decisions.

However I'm not sticking up for GB as I feel he got a few things wrong and his refusal to admit as much doesn't really help.

I'm not keen on the (almost) hysterical reaction to us drawing a game tho, lets not turn into england and start demanding the managers head 'cos we don't win every game.

Anyway after being at the game on Saturday, the post-match debates and discussions, reading the newspapers and various websites since the game its safe to say I've had enough of this topic so will make my exit and leave the rest of you to it.

Enjoy!

[EWS]

Being a patron of Glasgow and having worked and known most of the security in the Glasgow clubs, I do know the reason why Boyd isn't played. However, I cannot reveal it on here due to it being a "rumour" and most definelty being slanderous.

Your posting is either

1) a contradiction thus making no sense

or

2) you know the reason why he is not being played but you know that this reason to be false and malicious. If that is correct then what you are saying is that he is being unfairly treated by both his Employers and Scotland.

If you change the phrase " I do know the reason" to " I have heard a reason as to" then in my opinion your posting would make sense.

My post makes perfect sense. It is one of the worst kept secrets in Scottish football, but because it cannot be proven, it is considered a rumour. There are some things that you hear that are false, and some that I know to be true.

A few recent events in Glasgow involving footballers haven't exactly had the real truth revealed in the papers.

[johnnykipper]

Being a patron of Glasgow and having worked and known most of the security in the Glasgow clubs, I do know the reason why Boyd isn't played. However, I cannot reveal it on here due to it being a "rumour" and most definelty being slanderous.

Your posting is either

1) a contradiction thus making no sense

or

2) you know the reason why he is not being played but you know that this reason to be false and malicious. If that is correct then what you are saying is that he is being unfairly treated by both his Employers and Scotland.

If you change the phrase " I do know the reason" to " I have heard a reason as to" then in my opinion your posting would make sense.

My post makes perfect sense. It is one of the worst kept secrets in Scottish football, but because it cannot be proven, it is considered a rumour. There are some things that you hear that are false, and some that I know to be true.

A few recent events in Glasgow involving footballers haven't exactly had the real truth revealed in the papers.

I think you should look up the meaning of slanderous.

[Scotty]

I've heard the same rumour a few times and haven't posted it here either. I think the mods have a hard enough time without me adding to their workload.

:thumb04:

It is one of the worst kept secrets in Scottish football, but because it cannot be proven, it is considered a rumour.

Thanks for not posting it. Despite the fact that a particular story appears to be in wide circulation verbally, we would just have had to remove it like other unprovable/unfounded rumours that have been posted here in the recent past.

[EWS]

Being a patron of Glasgow and having worked and known most of the security in the Glasgow clubs, I do know the reason why Boyd isn't played. However, I cannot reveal it on here due to it being a "rumour" and most definelty being slanderous.

Your posting is either

1) a contradiction thus making no sense

or

2) you know the reason why he is not being played but you know that this reason to be false and malicious. If that is correct then what you are saying is that he is being unfairly treated by both his Employers and Scotland.

If you change the phrase " I do know the reason" to " I have heard a reason as to" then in my opinion your posting would make sense.

My post makes perfect sense. It is one of the worst kept secrets in Scottish football, but because it cannot be proven, it is considered a rumour. There are some things that you hear that are false, and some that I know to be true.

A few recent events in Glasgow involving footballers haven't exactly had the real truth revealed in the papers.

I think you should look up the meaning of slanderous.

You aren't quite getting this are you?

I'll try once more.

Tim liked having sex with small boys.

Bob knew that Tim liked having sex with small boys but couldn't prove it. Regardless, Bob told the newspaper that Tim liked having sex with small boys.

Tim denied it and sued the paper for slander against his character.

Because neither Bob, nor the paper could prove that Tim liked having sex with small boys, Tim won.

Note, the above story is fictional and is nothing to do with Boyd at all. Understand yet?

[johnnykipper]

Being a patron of Glasgow and having worked and known most of the security in the Glasgow clubs, I do know the reason why Boyd isn't played. However, I cannot reveal it on here due to it being a "rumour" and most definelty being slanderous.

Your posting is either

1) a contradiction thus making no sense

or

2) you know the reason why he is not being played but you know that this reason to be false and malicious. If that is correct then what you are saying is that he is being unfairly treated by both his Employers and Scotland.

If you change the phrase " I do know the reason" to " I have heard a reason as to" then in my opinion your posting would make sense.

My post makes perfect sense. It is one of the worst kept secrets in Scottish football, but because it cannot be proven, it is considered a rumour. There are some things that you hear that are false, and some that I know to be true.

A few recent events in Glasgow involving footballers haven't exactly had the real truth revealed in the papers.

I think you should look up the meaning of slanderous.

You aren't quite getting this are you?

I'll try once more.

Tim liked having sex with small boys.

Bob knew that Tim liked having sex with small boys but couldn't prove it. Regardless, Bob told the newspaper that Tim liked having sex with small boys.

Tim denied it and sued the paper for slander against his character.

Because neither Bob, nor the paper could prove that Tim liked having sex with small boys, Tim won.

Note, the above story is fictional and is nothing to do with Boyd at all. Understand yet?

Are you saying that you don't have any firm evidence to substantiate the reason as to why the named party is not played regularly but you do know it to be true as you have witnessed it?

[EWS]

In essence yes.

[AJS]

George Burley just does not claim the national respect that Alex McLeish nor Walter Smith did.

His ideas are good but his ways of suggesting them and presenting them have proved not so good, Kris Boyd and Lee McCullochs omissions from the team being prime examples and the introduction of a dodgy formation leaving our key player McFadden useless.

He has not got the experience of a high profile manager, a failed play off final with Derby and getting Ipswich Town into the Uefa cup being his main highlights, all be it he resigned from Derby the following season and Ipswich were relegated a season after entering Europe.

Why the S.F.A appointed him is because no one else would take the job. I think the Norway result is now past the "early days" excuse so if he dosen't deliver come next year i think he will be gone unless he goes sooner of his own accord.

[ictchris]

George Burley has spent his whole career in England and doesn't have the pals in the Scottish football press that Alex McLeish and Walter Smith have. Smith lost to Belarus at Hampden and drew 0-0 away from home with them. Alex McLeish blew qualification by losing to Georgia away from home - they only managed to beat Faroe at home in the entire campaign and were playing a couple of youth team players in that match.

[Council Juice]

People keep defending Burley with the notion that as he doesnt have the media friends because of never managing in Scotland like the two previous managers he gets pelters and stick.

Sorry but Im sure that if the previous two made poor decisions and got bad results they'd get stick from the media, friend or foe. Thats how the Scottish media always work. One minute a God, next an abject fool.

My manager says im laying into him because he has a stutter and appears a bit slow. That because he doesnt seem comfortable with the press he is easily picked on. My manager says Boyds a traitor, should get a kick in out clubbing, boo'd at every ground etc. I'd prefer to ignore him. He's made his bed so he can lie in it. His call.

I didnt even notice he had a speech impediment. He just seemed a bit drunk perhaps

I only critisised his team selection, tactics and general handling of situations.

I see it this way. His boss (wrongly in my opinion - another said too much from mr Smith) said it was must win and we didnt. We should have started with two up front in a home game and went with no strikers really. Burley waited an hour to work this out and get more forwards on.To use Burleys words - somethings not right there.

Forget Boyd altogether. He had a sub left, why not throw on Hartley to sit in the midfield and throw Brown further up the field? Instead Burley chose to do nothing. Somethings not right there.

Also he wants to ignore past reputations. What about current ones. Ross McCormack is the top scorer in the championship and Faddy has scored 1 and hasnt impressed. So why on earth is David Clarkson in the squad?! I dont care how commited he is. He should be nowhere near a scotland squad.

On Boyd, the player made one good point, if he hasnt impressed him and isnt playing enough, why is he in the squad at all? I think he's now scored 6 in 8 this season. Similar to Iwelumo.

Burley says he has purposly went to see Boyd play and he hasnt even got on the pitch so thats a reason (why call him up) Im sorry but if the national manager wasnt at either the CIS cup final or Scottish cup final then again, somethings no right there.

And on not impressing in training, i really dont care aout how he trains. If he is one the goal line to tap in a cross to put Scotland 1 up and we win and then get to a major finals thats what matters. He can sit about and eat pies all week if he does that.

If Burley was of the opinion that if you dont play for your club, you dont play for Scotland and yet call him up surely he should pull him aside and say that in order to play he'll really have to work hard to impress in training.

You know encourage him. install confidence.

I'm really annoyed with Kris Boyd. He's let alot of people down, the fans who would all love to play for their country, especially. I'm not defending his actions. He's acted quite imaturely but from all that seem to know him personally they seem to sympathise with him. He seems to just want to play. He has to earn that though. But he hasnt made a good choice. Im no mr Kris Boyd fan club member, but i do understand what he can do for a team.

I just think that Burley has not handled the situation well and am getting sick of Terry Butcher saying he had his nose broken by him to defend him! That means nothing.

Some say that he struggles as he aint media friendly. Sorry but national manament is very much media oriented. Every little thing is scrutinised. You've got to be media friendly.

On my manager "IF we win in Holland and you'll be on the street singing George Burleys name" Indeed i shall but its a big IF. Sorry but i believe in judging people on their actions and results and george hasnt got any yet to say we'll get anything against the Dutch.

Its a SH**e state affairs to be in and all the fresh air wont make any _____ difference!

I think im going to leave this matter. At least until after the Agry game. I really hope we get a positive result there as any Scot does, sadly im a realist.

[PompeyCT]

If im totally honest Burley's reign has seen a step backward. I know Alex Mcleish left to manage in the prem and Walter Smith left to manage Rangers but honestly they left Burley with a confident side after the Euro Qualification and hes done little with it. I know we need to retain managers but Burley isnt really the man for the job. Weve got to end this wretched stretch without a tournament and find someone who can really take us to the World Cup.

Alex Ferguson anyone?

[Council Juice]

I've always thought that the whole idea of being a national coach was to make all the players confident before a game. You only ever see them for a week. The camp should have a feel good factor. Everyone should be buzzing. Especially teams like Scotland where its part of the culture.

Watching Scotland under Smith and big Eck there was a passion I've yet to see under a Burley side.

I really want Burley to be a success but he's done little to suggest he's taken a hungry confident side forward.

And some of his call ups. Calum Davidson? David Clarkson? nah.

As i said i want to wait and see. Its all we can do and i'll support any of the lads out there, but truth be told, i've never been as anxious about a game (v Holland) Im worried. We took on Brazil in 98, England in 96, Germany under Vogts (with Mo Ross in the side!) in Germany, Holland in the playoffs and i believed we could do something. Against France and Italy at Hampden I believed so the fact i was a naive youth for the earlier ones has nothing to do with it.

The last time i predicted a negative result for Scotland i got the result correct and the scoreline 2-0 England at Hampden. Imagine the accusations of pessimism and anti Scots (for being realistic) I then predicted we'd win the 2nd leg but wouldnt go through. We won 1-0 at Wembley, a Christian Dailly diving header away from glory.

Truth be told for the 1st time in 8 years (since Craig Browns last game) i fear a negative outcome.

But lets wait see and hope.