Gary Caldwell's Celtic-Rangers view is too narrow-minded
Gary Caldwell’s comments about Rangers being better than Celtic are far too narrow-minded to be taken seriously.
Celtic sit 10 points clear at the top of the Premiership after a recent collapse from Steven Gerrard’s side. As well as that, we’ve beaten them on two out of the three occasions we’ve played them this season.
However, despite that, Caldwell still believes that Rangers are as good “or possibly even better” than Celtic if you compare them 1-11. He told BBC Sportsound on Monday night that he could see Rangers winning both of the two remaining Glasgow derby matches because of it.
But football simply doesn’t work like that. Teams aren’t compared with each other based on what they’ve done in single matches against each other. They’re based on what they do over the course of a season.
So far, this group of Rangers players have won absolutely nothing. They look over and see a Celtic team who have, incredibly, won the last 10 domestic trophies and are looking good to make it 12 this season.
Rangers have done nothing to prove they’re better than Celtic
Yet, what’s even more bizarre is that Rangers have only won one of three games against us. Talking about the fact they did well in the Betfred Cup final yet lost is totally irrelevant. Rangers lost the game, just like they did when they were outplayed by us at Ibrox back in September.
So it’s not as if Rangers have beaten us three times this season but are simply struggling against the other sides.
But Caldwell’s logic here is totally bizarre in the bigger picture. He thinks that Rangers could have a better team than us because they’ve performed well in two matches against the Hoops.
Well, let’s apply that logic elsewhere. Livingston have gone unbeaten in three games against us. They have one win and two draws. Does that mean that they have a better team than Celtic from 1-11?
You can also take it back to when Neil Lennon was the Hibernian manager and Brendan Rodgers was at Celtic. Lennon bagged two wins and two draws against Rodgers’ Celtic in the Premiership. We only managed three wins against them in that period too.
Therefore, does that mean that Lennon’s Hibs were close to Rodgers’ double-treble winners? Of course it doesn’t, because Hibs couldn’t keep up those consistency levels over a season.
Rangers fall into the same category. Caldwell, who seems so keen to credit Rangers, should know better given he’s a two-time title winner himself. His view was too narrow-minded, and that’s why many will be critical of it.