The Greenock Morton Thread - It's Better Than Yours

[port-ton]

19 minutes ago, Scott-Replay said:

Brian McLean, what’s he like? Can he still move? Even if he can’t, it’s still likely to be an upgrade over our defence last year tbqhwy.

Mobility a bit of an issue and he was one of the reasoks we were forced in to a back five with him because of it. 

Pretty consistent though and an excellent leader and organiser of the defence, which was probably the main reason he was guaranteed to play under Dougie when fit. 

It's genuinely too hard to say how he will do for you as he's definitely on the limits age wise already before this season and if you play a back four then I'd be worried, but alternatively if he turned out to be a leader and rock at the back for you next season I wouldn't be overly surprised. 

[vikingTON]

2 hours ago, Cambyger said:

Again no need to get personal and it’s nothing to do with my sprog as you kindly put it 

It absolutely, 100%, is about your sprog. Which is why all of your posts have been marked for the mewling shite that they are.

Quote

These players you have quoted are past years so clearly it was working . I’m talking about from now moving forward .

King is 17 years of age and so is quite clearly not a product of a 'past', halcyon-era youth setup that was cruelly abandoned when your sprog had to make the grade. King is quickly establishing himself as a capable SPFL footballer; dozens of others in his age group have not and never will.

It is not the job of a professional football club like GMFC to subsidise a completely pointless development squad to pretend otherwise. 

Quote

 

Dont take my word for it ask your fellow fans or board why they don’t have a development squad and for that matter the staff that were running it . 

It’s your club not mine.

I don't need to ask fellow fans or the board, about a grievance that only you have about the patently obvious development pathways that already exist at the club for genuine talent.

We're hardly Ajax but our record of producing players through our own setup is respectable - it will never become exceptional without unsustainable funding, as Hamilton are reaping the consequences of right now. 

I suggest that you take your sprog's likely failure to make the grade at 'Clyde' or some other non-entity in the future with greater dignity than this effort. 

Edited July 8, 2022 by vikingTON

[Colkitto]

Depleted squad with injuries and suspensions aside, the comments on the playing budget  are pretty alarming (if true).

What exactly is going on? Do we have a budget to sign more players or not? If not, the Board need to make an urgent statement!

 

[The Ghost of B A R P]

15 hours ago, Colkitto said:

Depleted squad with injuries and suspensions aside, the comments on the playing budget  are pretty alarming (if true).

What exactly is going on? Do we have a budget to sign more players or not? If not, the Board need to make an urgent statement!

 

Don’t believe for a second the whole budget’s been spent (unless we were openly lied to at the MCT meeting last month).

Injuries and suspensions have combined to make the early-season squad position look more dramatic than it is… and Imrie is, quite rightly in my opinion, using that to send a message to the board.

I’d bet money there’s a specific signing they’ve hesitated over because of cost.

And I fully expect us to add another four players between now and the end of August. The key question is still how good those players turn out to be, regardless of how bad yesterday looked.

[Dunning1874]

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

Don’t believe for a second the whole budget’s been spent (unless we were openly lied to at the MCT meeting last month).

Injuries and suspensions have combined to make the early-season squad position look more dramatic than it is… and Imrie is, quite rightly in my opinion, using that to send a message to the board.

I’d bet money there’s a specific signing they’ve hesitated over because of cost.

And I fully expect us to add another four players between now and the end of August. The key question is still how good those players turn out to be, regardless of how bad yesterday looked.

This is it. There are really three scenarios here off the back of Imrie's interview:

1. The budget has remained the same but it's all been spent on what we've got already

2. The budget has not in fact remained the same and a GMFC board member openly lied to the MCT membership

3. The budget is not actually fully spent yet but Imrie isn't wholly chuffed with the calibre of player left to him with it and is indulging a journalist asking questions about it to put pressure on the board

Scenario 3 is clearly the most likely option there.

1 is a pretty laughable scenario which would only reflect badly on the manager's own recruitment decisions. We've actually had 11 players out, not 13 as he said in his interview (Hamilton, Bysouth, Russell, Ledger, McLean, McEntee, Brandon, Wilson, Oliver, Reilly, Ugwu), so if the same budget has gone with only 7 in and some new contracts, then that would simply be a case of a manager completely fucking it.

People have had their issues with MCT and individuals on the board, but scenario 2 is a massive leap and there's no reason to believe they'd paint a target on themselves by telling an egregious lie like that when it could be so easily exposed.

3? Yeah, that works. The troubling bit is explicitly saying the club needs to find him more funds as if the budget is entirely spent, but a manager sounding off publicly in the hope it puts some pressure on the board to give him more money is something you see dozens of managers doing every single transfer window. It's entirely possible that he's been interested in eg a Craig Sibbald level coup signing and the budget couldn't stretch to the demands of a player of that calibre, but I still wholly expect to see a centre forward, central midfield playmaker and youth goalkeeper added, while we should really get more defensive cover as well.

Having a squad of only 12 does look tinpot, but we had 7 first team players out. Missing that many players isn't going to be a regular occurrence.

[Colkitto]

I would be totally astounded if that was the budget used up with no further funds available. 

I didn't actually hear Dougie's comments, but would still like a bit a of clarity from the Board. Not asking for figures of course, just a bit of clarity in saying " there is a remaining budget to bring in players" or "Unfortunately the budget had to be further cut"... type thing.

It all just seems a bit weird at the moment 

 

[Dunning1874]

1 hour ago, Colkitto said:

I would be totally astounded if that was the budget used up with no further funds available. 

I didn't actually hear Dougie's comments, but would still like a bit a of clarity from the Board. Not asking for figures of course, just a bit of clarity in saying " there is a remaining budget to bring in players" or "Unfortunately the budget had to be further cut"... type thing.

It all just seems a bit weird at the moment 

 

Not fully accurate but I tried to take down as much of Imrie's interview as I could:

Quote

 

It is what it is, we've obviously tried to build a squad over the summer, as you can see we've got 8 academy kids, only 7 today in the squad but out of the squad of 18 we've got 8 academy kids who have come through the academy, so you can see the club are obviously trying to go a different direction. Again we've had a few injuries as well, a couple suspended, it's difficult, but the guys who are in there today will put on a good show.

"Are you going to get any more in for the start of the league season?"

That'll only be up to the club if they can find me some funds to bring players in at the moment. What we've got in the building will be in the building, if that changes who knows.

"That doesn't sound very optimistic Dougie."

Look you've got to be as positive as you can. The club comes first, the club need to look after themselves, at the moment I can't see anything happening but that may change.

"Is that a sense of frustration I'm getting from you?"

Nah I'm not frustrated, obviously I'm looking forward to the season starting today, I'm looking forward to the new season, but obviously you'd like to have more players available in your first game, especially your first competitive game, but again obviously we're struggling with some injuries that have been picked up during pre-season and a couple of players I brought in are suspended for today.

"You did a fantastic job, you salvaged the season for Morton last season, do you feel that's been stymied a bit?"

You could say yes and no. If you look at the players that left, I lost 13, 9 of them were starters every week, I've brought in 5 players of my own and 2 on loan from Livingston which I've got to give huge credit to Davie Martindale for allowing me to do, so yeah, it could be a little bit of frustration but we've built a decent squad and hopefully that'll be enough to see us through the season.

 

 

[vikingTON]

8 hours ago, Colkitto said:

I would be totally astounded if that was the budget used up with no further funds available. 

I didn't actually hear Dougie's comments, but would still like a bit a of clarity from the Board. Not asking for figures of course, just a bit of clarity in saying " there is a remaining budget to bring in players" or "Unfortunately the budget had to be further cut"... type thing.

It all just seems a bit weird at the moment 

 

Not for me. The board should never be engaging on the same level as Chick Young and a bunch of braying clowns on Radio Scotland. 

There's nothing remotely weird about having a first team squad of 19 players by July 10th. What's weird/unfortunate is that so many were unavailable yesterday because of rolled over suspensions and injuries. Even accounting for the early start, we are well ahead of what used to be Duffy's annual rent a ringer drive to fill up the squad. 

We certainly need to add a few more players - above all a centre forward, then a central midfielder and a backup goalkeeper should be looked for - but it's not a crisis and I'm pissed off that Imrie has been airing this in public. He's going to make some mistakes as he learns on the job and yesterday's interview was one of them. 

[Colkitto]

11 hours ago, virginton said:

Not for me. The board should never be engaging on the same level as Chick Young and a bunch of braying clowns on Radio Scotland. 

There's nothing remotely weird about having a first team squad of 19 players by July 10th. What's weird/unfortunate is that so many were unavailable yesterday because of rolled over suspensions and injuries. Even accounting for the early start, we are well ahead of what used to be Duffy's annual rent a ringer drive to fill up the squad. 

We certainly need to add a few more players - above all a centre forward, then a central midfielder and a backup goalkeeper should be looked for - but it's not a crisis and I'm pissed off that Imrie has been airing this in public. He's going to make some mistakes as he learns on the job and yesterday's interview was one of them. 

 

I'm not disagreeing with your general points of view.

Saturday was a bit embarrassing though having only one sub. But agree a first team squad of 19 players is acceptable early/mid-July.

The clarity I'm looking for is there a budget remaining to increase the squad further?  Is our squad complete at 19? 

[The Ghost of B A R P]

15 hours ago, virginton said:

Not for me. The board should never be engaging on the same level as Chick Young and a bunch of braying clowns on Radio Scotland. 

There's nothing remotely weird about having a first team squad of 19 players by July 10th. What's weird/unfortunate is that so many were unavailable yesterday because of rolled over suspensions and injuries. Even accounting for the early start, we are well ahead of what used to be Duffy's annual rent a ringer drive to fill up the squad. 

We certainly need to add a few more players - above all a centre forward, then a central midfielder and a backup goalkeeper should be looked for - but it's not a crisis and I'm pissed off that Imrie has been airing this in public. He's going to make some mistakes as he learns on the job and yesterday's interview was one of them. 

Broadly agree, but I'm not too bothered about how Imrie's gone about it; he maybe overplayed his hand a wee bit, but he's clearly trying to put pressure on the board to back him, which is exactly what I'd want him to be doing.

 

3 hours ago, Colkitto said:

The clarity I'm looking for is there a budget remaining to increase the squad further?  Is our squad complete at 19? 

That's understandable, to an extent, but I think there's something to be gained by the board saying as little as possible in these kind of circumstances. There will be plenty going on out of the public view and statements about what we intend to do and/or how much money is available might actually get in the way of getting the best deals we possibly can.

If we start the league campaign with this squad, especially in the forward areas, that would be the time to start holding people accountable.

Like everybody else, I'd like to see us add a back-up GK, a left-sided defender, and an upgrade in centre-mid; but the priority, as VT says above, has to be one or preferably two players who can play right through the middle up front... and who have goals in them. All the options we currently have (aside from Easedale, who isn't an option) are better playing off the wide areas and none of them will score double figures. Getting the right player(s) for that position will be the difference between a relegation scrap and competing for the promotion play-offs.*

Next priority is the centre-mid, but I still have a feeling that might depend on moving somebody on; we already have the bodies in there, but not enough quality.

Overall, two for the first team and two for the squad and we should be good to go.

 

[* You could say that Quitongo has been signed to play through the middle; but if that's the case, he should be strictly second-choice.]

[vikingTON]

There is a time and a place to give a message to the board and a Chick fucking Young interview on Sportsound is not the correct one, because it then gets taken up by a bunch of braying moron 'pundits' who have no clue about our squad, ownership model, or financial constraints. 

He could have made his point by talking to the GT and the board would still have read it. That was the wrong thing to do.  

[DreamOakTree1]

2 hours ago, virginton said:

There is a time and a place to give a message to the board and a Chick fucking Young interview on Sportsound is not the correct one, because it then gets taken up by a bunch of braying moron 'pundits' who have no clue about our squad, ownership model, or financial constraints. 

He could have made his point by talking to the GT and the board would still have read it. That was the wrong thing to do.  

Whatever it is you take to make you so unbearable at times must have worn off a bit because you’ve hit the nail on the head with this post.

[The Ghost of B A R P]

3 hours ago, virginton said:

There is a time and a place to give a message to the board and a Chick fucking Young interview on Sportsound is not the correct one, because it then gets taken up by a bunch of braying moron 'pundits' who have no clue about our squad, ownership model, or financial constraints. 

He could have made his point by talking to the GT and the board would still have read it. That was the wrong thing to do.  

Fair enough to think 'I hate that p***k Chick Young and thae clowns on Sportsound' (most right-thinking people do), but that doesn't mean 'that p***k Chick Young and thae clowns on Sportsound talking shite about Morton' is necessarily a bad thing... who cares what they think or say, especially if it has the effect Imrie wanted it to have?

It would have been tin-pot for Imrie to air his concerns to the Tele and the board would have completely ignored it; instead, like the ruthless wee b*****d he is, he went straight to the national broadcaster and generated some effective embarrassment... which has a much better chance of having an effect. He knew exactly what he was doing and why; no 'mistakes', just tough, no-compromise choices...

If more Morton managers over the past few years had been similalrly ruthless wee b*****ds, instead of mewling mr nice guys, we'd be in a much better position than we are.

Looking forward to more of the same from him, on all fronts.

 

1 hour ago, DreamOakTree1 said:

Whatever it is you take to make you so unbearable at times must have worn off a bit because you’ve hit the nail on the head with this post.

I rest my case, lolz...

 

[vikingTON]

What desirable effect has it had? How is this 'embarrassment' going to actually change economic reality? And how does it tally with the other reality that we have actually built a large squad for this stage of the season, and that nobody put a gun to the manager's head and told him to retain Blues/Muirhead and sign up Baird and Gillespie rather than adding different players?

On the negative side of the balance sheet, we can already put airing the club's dirty laundry in public and having a bunch of braying morons state complete nonsense about the manager 'not being backed' in the national media.

Oh and not to mention producing yet another wave of utter bullshit gossip about 'fan ownership has failed/Dougie's away' etc., less than three months after the same garbage was doing the rounds at the end of last season.

It was a completely needless destabilising of the club, that can only have the impact of reducing MCT subscriptions/depressing ticket sales and therefore giving him less money to use and not more.

Edited July 11, 2022 by vikingTON

[The Ghost of B A R P]

44 minutes ago, virginton said:

What desirable effect has it had? How is this 'embarrassment' going to actually change economic reality? And how does it tally with the other reality that we have actually built a large squad for this stage of the season, and that nobody put a gun to the manager's head and told him to retain Blues/Muirhead and sign up Baird and Gillespie rather than adding different players?

On the negative side of the balance sheet, we can already put airing the club's dirty laundry in public and having a bunch of braying morons state complete nonsense about the manager 'not being backed' in the national media.

Oh and not to mention producing yet another wave of utter bullshit gossip about 'fan ownership has failed/Dougie's away' etc., less than three months after the same garbage was doing the rounds at the end of last season.

It was a completely needless destabilising of the club, that can only have the impact of reducing MCT subscriptions/depressing ticket sales and therefore giving him less money to use and not more.

Utter bullshit, predicated on the utterly bullshit notion that you know better than Imrie how to maximise his position regarding signings.

It has not, as you hysterically put it, ‘destabilised the club’; and, as already said, it matters not a f**k what braying morons bray.

Whether the stooshie has a positive effect remains to be seen, of course, but your hand-wringing nonsense about ‘destabilising the club’ (once again, f**k me) having an impact on MCT subs or ticket sales is irrelevant compared to whether or not the manager can put a winning team on the park.

But he knows that, hence his actions on Saturday.

[vikingTON]

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

Utter bullshit, predicated on the utterly bullshit notion that you know better than Imrie how to maximise his position regarding signings.

It has not, as you hysterically put it, ‘destabilised the club’; and, as already said, it matters not a f**k what braying morons bray.Whether the stooshie has a positive effect remains to be seen, of course,

You claimed that the embarrassment was 'effective', and yet here you are conceding that, err, f**k all positive has come from this 'ruthless' action.

I'd like you to answer the questions: 

How is this 'embarrassment' going to actually change economic reality?

And how does it tally with the other reality that we have actually built a large squad for this stage of the season, and that nobody put a gun to the manager's head and told him to retain Blues/Muirhead and sign up Baird and Gillespie rather than adding different players?

Quote

your hand-wringing nonsense about ‘destabilising the club’ (once again, f**k me) having an impact on MCT subs or ticket sales is irrelevant compared to whether or not the manager can put a winning team on the park.

It's the exact fucking opposite of irrelevant, because MCT subs and ticket sales are what actually pay for the manager's player budget. 

So the manager is showing a complete failure to grasp how economic reality works, if he thinks that Saturday's pointless outburst is going to get him more rather than less money to spend. 

[The Ghost of B A R P]

17 hours ago, virginton said:

You claimed that the embarrassment was 'effective', and yet here you are conceding that, err, f**k all positive has come from this 'ruthless' action.

f**k me. He made his pitch on Saturday. It's Tuesday. It remains to be seen whether it will have any effect for him (but it has more chance of doing so than, eh, whining to the Tele, which was your 'suggestion').

17 hours ago, virginton said:

I'd like you to answer the questions: 

How is this 'embarrassment' going to actually change economic reality?

Fuckin f**k me. Nobody said it was going to change 'economic reality', but 'economic reality' is not the monolith you appear to think it is. There are always margins, things a board might not be keen to do, but are persuadable (e.g. commit more to a single signing than they might initially want to and trim elsewhere; or risk a bit more on the playing budget in the hope that a competitive team will bring in the revenues to cover it).

He's trying to manoeuvre them, as countless managers at every level have done. Framing it as trying to change 'economic reality' is just dumb, straw-man rubbish... and you very probably already know that.

17 hours ago, virginton said:

And how does it tally with the other reality that we have actually built a large squad for this stage of the season, and that nobody put a gun to the manager's head and told him to retain Blues/Muirhead and sign up Baird and Gillespie rather than adding different players?

It's the exact fucking opposite of irrelevant, because MCT subs and ticket sales are what actually pay for the manager's player budget. 

So the manager is showing a complete failure to grasp how economic reality works, if he thinks that Saturday's pointless outburst is going to get him more rather than less money to spend. 

We've been through this. Imrie has made those signings because he believes he won't get better for the money involved. He might be right, he might not, but he's in a far better position to know than you or me. Our results this season will be the proof one way or another.

And the main point, again, is that while MCT subs and ticket sales are obviously crucial (and nobody has said otherwise ffs), the wee circus on Saturday is utterly irrelevant to the level of MCT subs and ticket sales. You asked me for evidence that Imrie's outburst has had an effect on the board (over a 48-hour period!); where's your evidence that what he said has negatively affected income to the club? That's right, you don't have any; you're speculating, just like I am about any effect on the board.

Your basic premise is that you somehow grasp the 'reality' of the situation better than the manager who is actively involved in trying to maximise our budget and what we can get for it; just sit back for a moment and let that sink in. He's clearly doing what (good) managers do, which is push every button they can to try to improve the squad; his own success/reputation will be judged on how successful we are, so why wouldn't he? And he'll be in constant dialogue with the board about money and individual signings; if he thought Saturday's interview would strengthen his hand in those discussions, that's good enough for me.

Your opinion that he's wasting his time going to the media is a perfectly valid one (although I don't agree); but some of the stuff you came out with in the process of doubling down when that opinion was challenged -- 'destabilising the club', 'washing dirty laundry in public', 'undermining fan-ownership', 'failing to understand economic reality' etc -- is ridiculous... and just as hysterical in its own way as the daft hand-wringing among some supporters on Saturday because we only had 'wan sub'.

Some things matter (the strength of our playing squad, our overall financial health), some things don't (what Chick Young thinks). Let's concentrate on the former, eh?

[vikingTON]

We could concentrate on the former if it wasn't for our manager flapping his trap to the latter, about the 'different club model' that is somehow responsible for most of his senior players being injured/suspended for a one-off game.

So it is the manager who has created that distraction, which incidentally has detracted from his rightly positive comments about the efforts of (most) players in a very inexperienced and makeshift side on Saturday. 

Edited July 12, 2022 by vikingTON

[The Ghost of B A R P]

So nothing, then? Thought not.

[Alibi]

For a team that was sub-optimal due to injuries and suspensions, we seem to have done OK against Falkirk and also against Carlisle United who had previously run up quite a few goals in their pre-season games.  Some of these young players look to have a lot of potential.  Our game at Hibs next week might be a good test to benchmark where we actually are (I understand they had a weakened team out against Falkirk last night), but it doesn't look to me as if we will necessarily be rooted at the bottom of the division.  We need more firepower up front and a creative midfielder would help too, but at this early stage of the season there may be some grounds for optimism at least.