The New Raith Rovers Thread

[Typicalrovers]

Well said. Training with us all week and his goals end up putting us down. Madness.

As long as our small time blazer wearers run the boardroom any manager having a good season will be off.

[SuperHans]

He got two assists in his time with us as well, so to prove you can make statistics show whatever you want, he scored 4 and set up 2 in 11 starts. That's decent for an attacking midfielder. Going further back he scored 2 in 2 prior to his injury, and scored 2 and set up 3 in his 9 starts for Rovers this season. Again a very decent return.
On your point about him seeing himself as more valuable than the dressing room, you couldn't be more wrong. He's 21 and has already lost of year of his career to a horrible injury. To return from that and find himself on the bench behind guys like Skacel and McManus who simply weren't cutting it must've been brutal. He said all along the reason for him leaving was that he just wanted to play football, and he looked so delighted to just be on the pitch with us. Seriously. I've never seen a player look like he's enjoying his football as much, and I think that's the appreciation that a long injury gives you.
He wasn't played because he wasn't Gary Locke's player. Simple as that. Locke likes 'his boys' and Vaughan wasn't one of them.
Vaughan is a special talent. Barr and Cuthbert will probably be more consistent, solid players. But Vaughan has something special that few players have at this level - the ability to create something out of absolutely nothing. He clearly has a strong relationship with Raith, and the relegation will have hurt him more than any other player, but if he'd been fit in 2015/16 there's no chance he'd still be at Stark's Park. 
If Raith were to let him go then I reckon every other club in the Championship would happily take him.

He stared the season in good faith with Locke and for one reason or another fell out of faith with the management team. Youngs comments in his interview even suggest that he was more valuable than Locke. "He wasn't in the managements plans for this season but would be for the next one" what is that supposed to mean? If a manager doesn't like him then he won't play him, were the board already anticipating Locke to be gone by the end of the season?

I wanted more from Vaughan and he proved a very valuable point to the Rovers. However where were these performances when he was given the chance for us? Any player with a point to prove will do it if they're good enough. For me, our valuable player is Matthews. He's been consistent through both managers and shown professionalism throughout, kept his spot in the team, scored goals, set up goals and defended when needed.

If Vaughan doesn't get on with the next manager what happens? He's one player and right now it's almost like he's 'bigger' than the club. If he wants to go then he can. He's shown his value and he's under contract, if the right offer comes in then I'd take it. I'd rather do that than have him playing the victim with another manager because he's not getting a game.

[Beachbum]

16 minutes ago, Typicalrovers said:

Well said. Training with us all week and his goals end up putting us down. Madness.

As long as our small time blazer wearers run the boardroom any manager having a good season will be off.

From today's Courier:

As bizarre decisions go, farming the front man out to the Sons is right up there.

Hindsight is a wonderful gift but even a blind man could see at the time that loaning one of your most promising young strikers to Championship rivals who were sitting just four points behind Rovers in the table at the time was utter madness.

[Jan Vojáček]

5 minutes ago, SuperHans said:

He stared the season in good faith with Locke and for one reason or another fell out of faith with the management team. Youngs comments in his interview even suggest that he was more valuable than Locke. "He wasn't in the managements plans for this season but would be for the next one" what is that supposed to mean? If a manager doesn't like him then he won't play him, were the board already anticipating Locke to be gone by the end of the season?

I wanted more from Vaughan and he proved a very valuable point to the Rovers. However where were these performances when he was given the chance for us? Any player with a point to prove will do it if they're good enough. For me, our valuable player is Matthews. He's been consistent through both managers and shown professionalism throughout, kept his spot in the team, scored goals, set up goals and defended when needed.

If Vaughan doesn't get on with the next manager what happens? He's one player and right now it's almost like he's 'bigger' than the club. If he wants to go then he can. He's shown his value and he's under contract, if the right offer comes in then I'd take it. I'd rather do that than have him playing the victim with another manager because he's not getting a game.

It's not that he didn't get on with the manager, it's that the manager didn't fancy him. He preferred Skacel, McManus, Stevo etc.

Lewis was out for a year, and grabbed some early goals after his return, but it's always going to take him time to settle back into competitive first-team football. He is/was more valuable than Locke. There was no chance you'd get a transfer fee for Locke, but you would (and a decent one) for Vaughan. For clubs like ours that's what it's really all about.

I don't rate Hughes, but if you'd had him from the start of the season Lewis would've played every week. I think it says a lot when he says: "To me Lewis is one of the best players at the club and he should never have gone on loan. "He is a professional who is doing his job for Dumbarton, that is his club at this moment, even though it's come back to bite us on the backside.”

Look at his comments when he signed for us, and in the interview in the Scotsman. He wasn't content to just sit on the bench and pick up his pay packet, I think that's something to be applauded.

If you are trying to claim that Vaughan isn't 'all that' then, I'm afraid, you're deluded. 

[Scary Bear]

I am enjoying the rapid revisionist history from Rovers fans where M'Voto has gone from their only good player to absolutely shite in the space of a few weeks.
Meant to say about Young's Locke comments; even if you truly believed he was a good appointment, why would you go on camera and say that? Just makes you look so ridiculous. Plus, if he was that good and such a nice guy, why bother sacking him?

M'Voto was a decent enough defender for a while this season. Our defence was fairly rock solid until 2017. Not sure what has gone wrong with the team this year, but we were a solid outfit, albeit we had little clue how to attack teams. The wheels started to come off in January and the 4-0 away at Dumbarton and 5-0 at St Mirren were just terrible.

Story of our season.

[Bring Back Paddy Flannery]

He stared the season in good faith with Locke and for one reason or another fell out of faith with the management team. Youngs comments in his interview even suggest that he was more valuable than Locke. "He wasn't in the managements plans for this season but would be for the next one" what is that supposed to mean? If a manager doesn't like him then he won't play him, were the board already anticipating Locke to be gone by the end of the season?

I wanted more from Vaughan and he proved a very valuable point to the Rovers. However where were these performances when he was given the chance for us? Any player with a point to prove will do it if they're good enough. For me, our valuable player is Matthews. He's been consistent through both managers and shown professionalism throughout, kept his spot in the team, scored goals, set up goals and defended when needed.

If Vaughan doesn't get on with the next manager what happens? He's one player and right now it's almost like he's 'bigger' than the club. If he wants to go then he can. He's shown his value and he's under contract, if the right offer comes in then I'd take it. I'd rather do that than have him playing the victim with another manager because he's not getting a game.

The boy had just spent the best part of a year out with a horrific injury. He's hardly going to come out the blocks flying.

Any manager worth their salt would recognise this and build up his minutes until he was 100% fit. You also have a fair whack of confidence building to do after an injury like that.

I can't help but feel you're trying to play down Vaughan's ability based on his performances directly after recovering from a snapped cruciate ligament and by trying to make decent stats sound poor. 4 goals and 2 assists in 11 starts is a fantastic return.

Stevie Aitken proved what Vaughan is capable of when surrounded by competent players and working under the leadership of a competent management team.

[MrDust]

I never fully rated Vaughan playing against us with Raith but he was my mom against us at home for Dumbarton. He seemed to play better behind the front man.

I don't think that helps 

[GhostZapper]

15 hours ago, Beachbum said:

That's just not true. There was interest from Brechin. The decision to send him to Dumbarton was a financial one and Drysdale has his fingers all over that one.

On the point of the interview panel, certain board members were excluded from the interview process by Drysdale.

Why does this man exert so much power at Stark's?

As I understood it at the time, Brechin were interested, however pulled out, and that left only Dumbarton in for him.

[SuperHans]

It's not that he didn't get on with the manager, it's that the manager didn't fancy him. He preferred Skacel, McManus, Stevo etc.
Lewis was out for a year, and grabbed some early goals after his return, but it's always going to take him time to settle back into competitive first-team football. He is/was more valuable than Locke. There was no chance you'd get a transfer fee for Locke, but you would (and a decent one) for Vaughan. For clubs like ours that's what it's really all about.
I don't rate Hughes, but if you'd had him from the start of the season Lewis would've played every week. I think it says a lot when he says: "To me Lewis is one of the best players at the club and he should never have gone on loan. "He is a professional who is doing his job for Dumbarton, that is his club at this moment, even though it's come back to bite us on the backside.”
Look at his comments when he signed for us, and in the interview in the Scotsman. He wasn't content to just sit on the bench and pick up his pay packet, I think that's something to be applauded.
If you are trying to claim that Vaughan isn't 'all that' then, I'm afraid, you're deluded. 

Regardless of who the manager is, no player should ever dictate to the management team. Vaughan has potential, people in the game know this. His goals at Dumbarton and his performances have obviously put him in a good light but for what we've had out of him versus what we've put into him, I don't see why we should all be so worried about him leaving. If he leaves we'll get something for him, if he stays then I'll be hoping to see some of this form that he showed at another club. Vaughans performances didn't merit a start and obviously his attitude or performances at training didn't merit him getting back into the team. Something didn't click with Locke but what happens if he doesn't click with the next manager? There's 2 sides to this story, the board have made a huge mistake, but I'm sure there's more to it than meets the eye.

[Jan Vojáček]

Just now, SuperHans said:

Regardless of who the manager is, no player should ever dictate to the management team. Vaughan has potential, people in the game know this. His goals at Dumbarton and his performances have obviously put him in a good light but for what we've had out of him versus what we've put into him, I don't see why we should all be so worried about him leaving. If he leaves we'll get something for him, if he stays then I'll be hoping to see some of this form that he showed at another club. Vaughans performances didn't merit a start and obviously his attitude or performances at training didn't merit him getting back into the team. Something didn't click with Locke but what happens if he doesn't click with the next manager? There's 2 sides to this story, the board have made a huge mistake, but I'm sure there's more to it than meets the eye.
 

 

 

I don't think either of us are in a position to pass comment on how a player performs in training, unless you're secretly a certain Mr G.Locke esq trying to make your misjudgement seem less, well, ill judged.

You should be worried (perhaps that's the wrong word, lets say disappointed) if he moves on because he would be an outstanding player for you lot now he has his confidence and fitness back. 

Dictate to the management team? What, like saying "Gaffer I'm not happy with my gametime, I'd like to go out on loan". I'd suggest this happens a few times at every club, every season. Footballers usually want to play football.

[Bambino7]

7 minutes ago, SuperHans said:

 

 

Regardless of who the manager is, no player should ever dictate to the management team. Vaughan has potential, people in the game know this. His goals at Dumbarton and his performances have obviously put him in a good light but for what we've had out of him versus what we've put into him, I don't see why we should all be so worried about him leaving. If he leaves we'll get something for him, if he stays then I'll be hoping to see some of this form that he showed at another club. Vaughans performances didn't merit a start and obviously his attitude or performances at training didn't merit him getting back into the team. Something didn't click with Locke but what happens if he doesn't click with the next manager? There's 2 sides to this story, the board have made a huge mistake, but I'm sure there's more to it than meets the eye.
 

 

 

   

[GhostZapper]

I didn't think it was a particularly bad interview.... He was fairly open in most of what they said, covered most of the questions I had, and obviously couldn't say too much where the staff and players are still in the dark. And to be fair, these guys are prob as much fans of the club as we are, and will rightly be as hurt as we are. Whether you agree or disagree with the answers given, Fair play to him for doing it.

On the David Bates one, the guy wasn't getting much game time here at all, and the club he supports came in for him. Sadly that happens at more clubs that you would think, and at our level, we simply wouldn't be in a position to turn down a reasonable offer and continue to pay his wages whilst he took the huff.

I was as stunned as most when he said he didn't think Locke was a mistake... but they may have saw a lot in him. People working day to day at the club will see more of a person and a manager than maybe we do. On the manager appointment front, they've got 1 right and 1 wrong in the past few years as far as I am concerned. They picked McKinnon the year prior who did a great job.... the same group of guys would have picked Locke. With Hughes, it was a case of who was available at the time, and at the time the majority of Rovers fans were delighted with that appointment.

The comments on the transfer policy were interested, and one which they will hopefully learn from, although I would prefer a manager to bring in his own players to suit his style of play. But there were certainly positive aspects of the expected approach, and that is that we will focus more on the development team. From what I've heard from a mate that goes to the Dev games a lot, Yaw, Stevenson, and Thorsen look very capable, and could easily slot into the first team next season. Glad that they will be setting Youth Development as a key strategy for the new manager as well. Will be interesting to see who that is.

Its a crucial time. I imagine with the cuts enforced, we simply won't be able to maintain a totally full time team, although I expect majority of the first team will be. That's then where the young guys come in, so expect the bench to be filled with more of these guys rather than 7 full timers sitting there. I also expect the majority of the contacted players to stay. Whilst there are clauses in the contract relating to the relegation, that simply entitles them to ask for a transfer, not be released on a free. If we get in a few quid for them because they don't want to stay.... so be it.

For me, we need to keep Cuthbert, CBarr, Benedictus, Matthews and Vaughan as an absolute minimum, and maybe Stewart, McHattie and Callachan. I think whilst we need a rebuild of the midfield, we have a solid base of players to get us straight back up Morton did it. Livingston did it... and Dunfermline would have done it had Rangers not been there season 1. These guys might be persuaded to hang about for a season, and the budget may stretch to affording most of them.............. it wont, and they won't if we are still down there next summer!

 

 

[Beachbum]

Doesn't mince his words does Matthew Elder in Fife Today.

In a season of baffling decisions, the mismanagement of Lewis Vaughan was the biggest blunder of all, and the sight of the youngster in tears on Pratt Street on Saturday should shame all who were involved in putting a 21-year-old in an impossible position.

 

[Rovers_Lad]

24 minutes ago, GhostZapper said:

As I understood it at the time, Brechin were interested, however pulled out, and that left only Dumbarton in for him.

Funnily enough I don't believe that for one minute.Besides if Dumbarton were the only club that wanted him there was no reason to send him out on loan to one of rivals.We,d have better keeping him warming the bench or getting game time in the development team.

Just one of the many f**k ups overseen by our board this season

[R.R.FC]

If we were winning every week and Vaughan was sulking and his replacements were banging in the goals, I could maybe see the point.

Fact is we were getting beat every week, not scoring goals and Locke still wouldn't give him a chance. Not only that, we was persisting with his mate Rudi fucking Skacel in his position. If he wasn't going to get a chance then, when was he under Locke? I can 100% understand why he was desperate to go out on loan and play games. 2 years not getting game time at his age would be disastrous. He showed loyalty to us by signing a new contract. 

I'd agree we've not seen the best of him yet but hopefully he stays and that comes next year. A season in League 1 scoring 15-20 goals would do his confidence and stock within the game the world of good and he could move on having hopefully got us back up, with things left on good terms.

Im happy with him being ambitious and talking about playing at a higher level. Like not wanting a manager for 4/5 years because it means we won't have progressed, it's the same for players. Unfortunately at our level, if a promising young player like Vaughan is with us 3/4 years from now it's because he's not progressed as he should have. Same goes for Matthews and Callachan.

[SuperHans]

I don't think either of us are in a position to pass comment on how a player performs in training, unless you're secretly a certain Mr G.Locke esq trying to make your misjudgement seem less, well, ill judged.
You should be worried (perhaps that's the wrong word, lets say disappointed) if he moves on because he would be an outstanding player for you lot now he has his confidence and fitness back. 
Dictate to the management team? What, like saying "Gaffer I'm not happy with my gametime, I'd like to go out on loan". I'd suggest this happens a few times at every club, every season. Footballers usually want to play football.

Fortunately I am not Gary Locke! Yes managers have conversations like that with players and usually the response is, "show me you're worth it".

If anything, although the loan agreement to Dumbarton was a mistake, the loan itself was a success. He got his first team games, he got his goals, performances were good. But where was this for us? He was coming back from injury, he had spent a year out of the team but clearly something was stopping him breaking through. And if he's not willing to do it because he doesn't get on with the manager then I'd say he's got a lot more to learn because that doesn't work out as well when you move up the leagues.

[The Moonster]

14 hours ago, liam_barnett said:

For part of the season we were housing smaller away supports in the corner of the Main Stand closest to the South Stand but at one point because apparently "it was giving away teams an advantage their supports being so close to the tunnel" we reverted to every away support in the McDermid Stand, apparently the Key-Tech Stand was the same for giving teams an advantage because of players running down the wing.

14 hours ago, liam_barnett said:

I was told this specifically in person by Eric Drysdale.

That is incredible. 

3 hours ago, SuperHans said:

I'll look forward to the pelters I get for this post, but what had Vaughan actually done for the Rovers since he's come through?

The whole Vaughan love in, has really got on my nerves this season. Granted he'd come back from an injury the season before but on the games I saw him play this season, he didn't cut it.

He's scored 9 career goals for the Rovers and his last one came in 2015! The Chairman didn't go into too much details regarding the Dumbarton deal, and Locke was an awful manager but I get the impression Vaughan saw himself as more valuable and important than the management team at the time. Creating problems due to not getting selected and although he made his mistakes, if Locke ruled him out of his plans for this season then it would suggest Vaughan wasn't doing what he needed to get himself back in the team. Is this the type of player we want in our dressing room?

He scored 4 goals for Dumbarton, yes 1 or 2 of them probably had some factors to us getting relegated but 4 goals in the Championship in 15 games isn't exactly the returns of a striker that's setting the heather on fire.

Arguably Court has had a bigger contribution to this season than Vaughan did and he only played in 4 games! Setting up a goal at Easter Road and scoring v Ayr!

If losing Vaughan meant keeping players like either of the Barr's or Kevin Cuthbert then I'd pack his bags for him.

4 goals in 15 games for a part time side fighting relegation isn't a bad return for someone who played his games mostly on the right side of an attacking midfield 3. To question his attitude is quite frankly more laughable than the quotes at the top of my post. Every single one of his goals for us gained us points, not to mention the fact that he created chances for others in these games too. But if you're packing his bags for him then I'll get the guest room ready until he finds himself a nice house on the banks of Loch Lomond.

[GhostZapper]

15 minutes ago, Rovers_Lad said:

Funnily enough I don't believe that for one minute.Besides if Dumbarton were the only club that wanted him there was no reason to send him out on loan to one of rivals.We,d have better keeping him warming the bench or getting game time in the development team.

Just one of the many f**k ups overseen by our board this season

you can believe that or not, but im fairly confident in the information I was told at the time. I'd be interested in what information you have that it isn't correct though.....

However, I would agree, it wasn't absolutely nailed on that he had to go out on loan, if the only other club wasn't suitable.

[rrfsee]

How would you all feel about a Laurie Ellis/Craig Easton management team?

[Ebanda's Handyman Services]

I've no doubt that most of the terrible decisions were made in good faith but good intentions don't hide ridiculous, often laughable incompetence.

Like most of us I expect, I've been brought up to hold my hands up and apologise for any mistakes that I've made that may have an adverse effect on others.

Doing so usually gains respect from people as they admire honesty and don't feel like you're trying to pull the wool over their eyes.

A trait that the board may want to consider putting into practice soon before we lose some more pissed off supporters who hung around after the ill-advised statements and actions of this complete clusterfuck of a season.