The Greenock Morton Thread - It's Better Than Yours

[The Ghost of B A R P]

Worrying times… an injury-free August and rabbits out the hat now required.

MacPherson either has balls of steel… or he’s blown it.

Edited to add: just read the MCT update… there’s something up here. We need to be told what it is.

Edited July 30, 2021 by The Ghost of B A R P

[Mr Toon]

How many very good loan signings have we made in the past, very late in the day? 

[Dunning1874]

4 hours ago, Mr Toon said:

How many very good loan signings have we made in the past, very late in the day? 

Declan McManus was signed the day before our first league game in 2014 so relatively late in the grand scheme of things, but obviously anyone this season is going to be later.

If you want basic competence rather than particularly good we did get Jack Baird on loan on the last day of the window in 2019. However we also got Adam Livingstone the same day then dipping into free agents signed Billy King a couple of weeks later, so there's a cautionary tale about the general standard of player still available that late on.

[The Ghost of B A R P]

Think MacPherson set up specifically for Dunfermline’s wing-backs yesterday, so not sure we’ll play that way most weeks.

The game did make what we still need even more obvious than it already is:

Either a RB or another CB: Hynes  looks like a back-up option and no more. Ledger can adapt according to what we sign.

CM: Blues was ok again, but we’re crying out for someone who can run a game. Hard to find, but a real priority. That would also make it more realistic for us to commit to 4-3-3.

Wide-forward, either side: again, crying out for someone with a bit of pace and strength to play wide and forward of Oliver… and shuffle the big stroller onto the bench. We probably won’t get the likes of Jake Hastie on loan (although we should be trying), but that kind of player.

Back-up GK and that might be us (unless we can get two in the forward areas).

[JustOneCornetto]

Yeah someone like Jake Hastie is what we're crying out for, just hope Gus can find someone like that for the wide attacking role. The no. 5 has not been allocated in the squad yet so he is definitely looking for a 'quality' centre half which would allow Ledger to go across to RB. Add in a midfield playmaker and a strker capable of getting double figures then we should be set to hold our own against anyone in the league

Edited August 1, 2021 by JustOneCornetto

[AsimButtHitsASix]

What's the deal with our women's team? Are the affiliated with the club at all? There's nothing about the squad/fixtures on the website and can't tell if it's because they're a separate entity entirely or because our club is just shit at the most basic things.

[madton]

29 minutes ago, AsimButtHitsASix said:

What's the deal with our women's team? Are the affiliated with the club at all? There's nothing about the squad/fixtures on the website and can't tell if it's because they're a separate entity entirely or because our club is just shit at the most basic things.

I'm guessing both.

[Colkitto]

Is Hugh de Grenok's name on the title deeds at Cappielow?  

[Rudolph Hucker]

37 minutes ago, Colkitto said:

Is Hugh de Grenok's name on the title deeds at Cappielow?  

Dunno, but the point MCT made about the old Sasines Registe and the first change of ownership after the system changed is entirely relevant and explains the delay.  I had an issue a few years back with 4 small areas covering about 6 square metres in total that took about 10 weeks for lawyers to resolve. Frustrating all round, but it got there in the end and so will this. 

[The Ghost of B A R P]

Explanation for the delay is welcome and reassuring; as Rudolph says, these things happen very often with transfer of title and it never takes five minutes to sort out… so I have sympathy for them publicly stating 1st June and missing by miles.

On the other hand, it’s clear that inactivity on signings isn’t related to some concern about making financial commitments while there’s any doubt about ownership… so we just haven’t been able to get the right kind of player in for the money we’re paying.

That is now a priority above everything else that’s happening at the club; we’ve got about 3 and a half weeks to round out a credible squad and a competitive team… and in the process really set this fan-ownership project on the right course.

Most important wee spell in our recent history.

[vikingTON]

56 minutes ago, The Ghost of B A R P said:

Explanation for the delay is welcome and reassuring; as Rudolph says, these things happen very often with transfer of title and it never takes five minutes to sort out… so I have sympathy for them publicly stating 1st June and missing by miles.

The idea of transferring the land was first up for a membership vote before negotiations with GC could even commence, which was ample time for at least one of the two parties to ask for the deeds for Cappielow to be looked out and flag this as an issue. Remember that we've supposedly had hotshot lawyers working on the case all along and even after June 1st the claim was that only HMRC was holding things up, then it was just dotting the is and crossing the ts, but now it's this instead. 

The delay is unfortunate but reasonable but the wildly optimistic timeline and poor communication over the past three months is on MCT. It has improved over the past fortnight but that was a problem entirely of their own making. 

Edited August 4, 2021 by vikingTON

[The Ghost of B A R P]

2 hours ago, virginton said:

The idea of transferring the land was first up for a membership vote before negotiations with GC could even commence, which was ample time for at least one of the two parties to ask for the deeds for Cappielow to be looked out and flag this as an issue. Remember that we've supposedly had hotshot lawyers working on the case all along and even after June 1st the claim was that only HMRC was holding things up, then it was just dotting the is and crossing the ts, but now it's this instead.

I was beginning to imagine a nightmarish ongoing legal wrangle with Golden Casket… arcane flaws in title (‘shepherd’s hut’, ffs) - which are common and tend to get noticed only at the point where title is about to be transferred - are both understandable and a huge relief in comparison. 
 

We’re now approaching the real starting line; what happens from here on is what will really count.

[vikingTON]

In terms of the deal yes; in terms of MCT's standing with the fanbase, not so much. 

It's the equivalent of losing your first five games of the season: you can still clearly turn things around on paper, but you're playing catch-up from a poor position. 

ETA: And if such arcane flaws are both 'common' and 'understandable' then MCT can have no excuses for not factoring in that risk for the transition period, rather than plumping for an unrealistic June 1st completion date. It's a predicament entirely of their own making. 

Edited August 5, 2021 by vikingTON

[The Ghost of B A R P]

1 hour ago, virginton said:

In terms of the deal yes; in terms of MCT's standing with the fanbase, not so much. 

It's the equivalent of losing your first five games of the season: you can still clearly turn things around on paper, but you're playing catch-up from a poor position. 

ETA: And if such arcane flaws are both 'common' and 'understandable' then MCT can have no excuses for not factoring in that risk for the transition period, rather than plumping for an unrealistic June 1st completion date. It's a predicament entirely of their own making. 

You’re being a bit harsh here… these defects are common, understandable… and liable to emerge precisely at the last minute.

No one can be expected to foresee that e.g. it turns out that your neighbour legally owns part of your downstairs lavvy (which actually happened to me) or that you’ve got to imagine where a fkn shepherd’s hut used to be to establish a boundary. Literally no one knows these things until a lawyer examines the title for the purpose of transferring ownership.

Agree that the comms have been terrible and a bit of goodwill has been squandered; but the legal stuff is classic ‘unforeseen circumstances’ and not on them… and fixable, albeit with the usual drag when lawyers are involved.

I’ll be judging them on what they do from here on.

Edited August 5, 2021 by The Ghost of B A R P

[The Ghost of B A R P]

On signings, I’m not overly bothered about the specifics of missing out on Virtanen (would have been a decent addition, but not exactly what we need); but the general situation of ‘missing out’ is more concerning with every passing day.

Wee Gus must be sweating buckets here…

[vikingTON]

47 minutes ago, The Ghost of B A R P said:

You’re being a bit harsh here… these defects are common, understandable… and liable to emerge precisely at the last minute.

No one can be expected to foresee that e.g. it turns out that your neighbour legally owns part of your downstairs lavvy (which actually happened to me) or that you’ve got to imagine where a fkn shepherd’s hut used to be to establish a boundary. Literally no one knows these things until a lawyer examines the title for the purpose of transferring ownership.

Agree that the comms have been terrible and a bit of goodwill has been squandered; but the legal stuff is classic ‘unforeseen circumstances’ and not on them… and fixable, albeit with the usual drag when lawyers are involved.

Well no, if it is a 'common' and 'understandable' issue then it absolutely can and should be factored into MCT's timetable for completion. You do not need a copy of the sasines to foresee what the specific land issue is; all you need to do is account for it as a known risk that could delay completion of the takeover into your timetable. Not least considering that we are dealing with the oldest football ground in Scotland, rather than some flat-pack ground on the outskirts of town built in the 1990s. 

There is no excuse for MCT not taking a conservative view of the timeframe for transferring the land, rather than assuming that things would just be okay. Had they given a more cautious date of August 1st and the transition was completed earlier than that, nobody would have been complaining. There'd also have been no room for suspicion and rumours about what was holding things up, which has damaged all sides in the takeover process during the bizarre two months of omerta. 

Edited August 5, 2021 by vikingTON

[The Ghost of B A R P]

1 hour ago, virginton said:

Well no, if it is a 'common' and 'understandable' issue then it absolutely can and should be factored into MCT's timetable for completion. You do not need a copy of the sasines to foresee what the specific land issue is; all you need to do is account for it as a known risk that could delay completion of the takeover into your timetable. Not least considering that we are dealing with the oldest football ground in Scotland, rather than some flat-pack ground on the outskirts of town built in the 1990s. 

There is no excuse for MCT not taking a conservative view of the timeframe for transferring the land, rather than assuming that things would just be okay. Had they given a more cautious date of August 1st and the transition was completed earlier than that, nobody would have been complaining. There'd also have been no room for suspicion and rumours about what was holding things up, which has damaged all sides in the takeover process during the bizarre two months of omerta. 

Aye, because people somehow foresee unforeseen circumstances all the time…

You’re right about them not communicating what the problem was for two months; totally wrong about the nature of the problem and what they could or should have done about it.

[Branch Ton]

2 hours ago, virginton said:

Well no, if it is a 'common' and 'understandable' issue then it absolutely can and should be factored into MCT's timetable for completion. You do not need a copy of the sasines to foresee what the specific land issue is; all you need to do is account for it as a known risk that could delay completion of the takeover into your timetable. Not least considering that we are dealing with the oldest football ground in Scotland, rather than some flat-pack ground on the outskirts of town built in the 1990s. 

There is no excuse for MCT not taking a conservative view of the timeframe for transferring the land, rather than assuming that things would just be okay. Had they given a more cautious date of August 1st and the transition was completed earlier than that, nobody would have been complaining. There'd also have been no room for suspicion and rumours about what was holding things up, which has damaged all sides in the takeover process during the bizarre two months of omerta. 

Give it a rest. You are making Saul Goodman and Lionel Hutz seem competent. 

[vikingTON]

1 hour ago, The Ghost of B A R P said:

Aye, because people somehow foresee unforeseen circumstances all the time…

^^^ idiot found

You're the one who has described the issue on multiple occasions as being "common" and "understandable". If it's both of the above then the risk that it would come up in a handover of the Cappielow land can absolutely be foreseen - and factored into MCT's realistic timetable for the completion of the takeover. You do not need access to the sasines or awareness of the precise cause of difficulty to account for the likelihood that something will come up. What with it being so 'common' and 'understandable' that it would. This is absolutely basic risk management. F**k knows how else you think any complex organisation runs their projects, without Mystic Meg around to tell them exactly what will happen in advance. 

And with it indeed being a 'common' and 'understandable' issue, then nobody would have had an issue with MCT setting a more conservative date for completing the takeover, nor with the explanation that took two months and a truckload of mutually exclusive excuses to actually detail. Those have been two completely unforced errors. 

Edited August 5, 2021 by vikingTON

[The Ghost of B A R P]

4 minutes ago, virginton said:

^^^ idiot found

You're the one who has described the issue on multiple occasions as being "common" and "understandable". If it's both of the above then the risk that it would come up in a handover of the Cappielow land can absolutely be foreseen - and factored into MCT's realistic timetable for the completion of the takeover. You do not need access to the sasines or awareness of the precise cause of difficulty to account for the likelihood that something will come up. What with it being so 'common' and 'understandable' that it would. This is absolutely basic risk management. F**k knows how else you think any complex organisation runs their projects, without Mystic Meg around to tell them exactly what will happen in advance. 

And with it indeed being a 'common' and 'understandable' issue, then nobody would have had an issue with MCT setting a more conservative date for completing the takeover, nor with the explanation that took two months and a truckload of mutually exclusive excuses to actually detail. Those have been two completely unforced errors. 

Sure, I’m the idiot here… no doubt.

Pro tip:  stop talking about something you very clearly know nothing about.