RutherGlen Posted March 12, 2017 Share Posted March 12, 2017 Or to put it another way... If I start a fire which is then worsened by some fanny who, for reasons unknown, decides to fan the flames, which party is ultimately responsible for the damage? Please stop trying to defend the indefensible. It's nauseating. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
haufdaft Posted March 12, 2017 Share Posted March 12, 2017 Yes, Barry and the players were/are to blame for shite performances and league position but that doesn't negate the fact that the board created this situation by appointing Ferguson in the first place. If it wasn't for their total incompetence and disastrous decision making we wouldn't be in this mess! In that respect they are solely responsible for our current predicament. In that case, the CIC owners are solely responsible for choosing the board. That way, the board get off Scot free using your logic. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfcuk Posted March 12, 2017 Share Posted March 12, 2017 In that case, the CIC owners are solely responsible for choosing the board. That way, the board get off Scot free using your logic. Members the are not owners 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
haufdaft Posted March 12, 2017 Share Posted March 12, 2017 Members the are not owners You're correct. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RutherGlen Posted March 12, 2017 Share Posted March 12, 2017 1 hour ago, haufdaft said: In that case, the CIC owners are solely responsible for choosing the board. That way, the board get off Scot free using your logic. Good point were it not for the fact the members had no choice when it came to appointing the current board. Who else put themselves forward for election other than those who were voted in? The board on the other hand could have chosen from a wide array of applicants for the manager's position. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
haufdaft Posted March 12, 2017 Share Posted March 12, 2017 Good point were it not for the fact the members had no choice when it came to appointing the current board. Who else put themselves forward for election other than those who were voted in? The board on the other hand could have chosen from a wide array of applicants for the manager's position. You could argue the members had to vote for the board at an AGM. The fact there we no alternative candidates doesn't change that.To continue the same argument, the fact the board are considered by some to be failing but still they're elected is the fault of CIC members. For example, I'm sure they could vote to disband the CIC and sell the club as others have suggested. (Incidently this is not an endorsement of this view)I don't dispute the board should share some of the blame for reasons set out previously by others. I'm disputing the claim that "there is only one group culpable and that's the board". 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrigtonClyde Posted March 12, 2017 Share Posted March 12, 2017 If players miss a penalty, or an easy chance, or have a poor game, or get injured etc..that's not the responsibility of a board The financial health of a club which has a direct relation to its leverage to attract a specific calibre of manager and player is the responsibility of a board That's a general rule in the case of 99% of clubs We're the 1% exception (if as high as that) relating to the general health of the club because of its structure blurring the edges of responsibility. Sometimes 'members' are to shoulder a burden, while other times its not convenient for them to be fully informed due to technicalities. A model crafted by a small band of architects which became reality without any consultation If we are relegated, the arguments will become redundant. A handful of people attending can't sustain the club. If we avoid relegation, I suspect the CiC's days are numbered 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfcuk Posted March 12, 2017 Share Posted March 12, 2017 If players miss a penalty, or an easy chance, or have a poor game, or get injured etc..that's not the responsibility of a board The financial health of a club which has a direct relation to its leverage to attract a specific calibre of manager and player is the responsibility of a board That's a general rule in the case of 99% of clubs We're the 1% exception (if as high as that) relating to the general health of the club because of its structure blurring the edges of responsibility. Sometimes 'members' are to shoulder a burden, while other times its not convenient for them to be fully informed due to technicalities. A model crafted by a small band of architects which became reality without any consultation If we are relegated, the arguments will become redundant. A handful of people attending can't sustain the club. If we avoid relegation, I suspect the CiC's days are numbered Succinctly put [emoji106] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poet of the Macabre Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 What's with the deer shagger patter? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
same_ol_g35 Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 What's with the deer shagger patter? Too much alcohol. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaggy Snake Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 Everyone has quite rightly pointed out the shambles that is our defence but (just to put a different slant on things) the lack of goals scored from anyone but the strikers is a huge issue as well. Obviously, MacDonald’s 19 goals (and 12 assists) have been huge for us but that’s pretty much where it stops. Gormley’s contributed a lot more recently but still only has 7 league goals this season. Higgins has 8 goals all in but, only one goal since the end of October. Higgins is obviously useless in midfield but at least when he started the season up front he was capable of chipping in with the odd goal. The next top scorer is Chris Smith with 4 goals (another reason I wouldn’t drop him). Everyone else should be embarrassed as Easton, from just 8 appearances, is still level with Flynn and McNeil on 2 goals, and ahead of the rest. Undoubtedly, Flynn would have scored more if he’d started regularly, or even be used as a substitute more effectively. Linton, though playing through injury at times, has only a single goal from 30 appearances this season which is pretty much unacceptable, considering he’s mostly played in midfield. McLaughlin and McNiff only have one each as well, despite plenty of games. After his injury, this season has obviously been about getting back to full match sharpness for Scott Ferguson, which is fine personally but doesn’t help the team. He’s been playing much better recently and is now happy to take on a defender again but we really need him to add goals back to his game. Perry hasn’t scored at all in 25 appearances despite going forward for every single corner we get. We’ve lost 15 games this season by a single goal. Yes, sometimes the answer has to be concede less, but the odd goal here and there from more players throughout the team would have made a massive difference 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrigtonClyde Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 Good point Jaggy and more or less ties into the reason I didnt think we'd win the league, though I didnt expect us to be down where we are. Only Montrose, Edinburgh and Cowdenbeath have scored fewer goals, only Berwick have conceded more. I agree you'd look for more from midfield, but if you don't have the basics right up front and in defence, you'll struggle. The defence, well enough said. Up front, likely have a main striker but you'll always need a second who can add a fair few as well, and that was highlighted as missing back in August. Peaso has been a great addition and lasted the pace longer than could maybe be expected, but then it's a big drop off. We needed a second option and then by all means more from midfield, but as you've said, hard to score if you've spent most of your time warming the bench or dropping deeper to cover for the weakness of the back 4. Bottom line, in 27 league games we've kept clean sheets in 15% and scored in 70%. Unlikely to win anything with those kind of stats. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GYSPY ARMY Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 I see we are close to appointing a new chairman. The detail below about a vision makes me laugh. Does anyone on here know what our vision is.The club has been working through a mutual diligence process with a prospective candidate. As you can imagine any new director has to clarify the financial position of the club, their potential liabilities and any concerns they might have from issues shared in the public domain. From a club perspective it is essential to be sure that the candidate has the right background and experience and understands and supports the club vision and strategy. This has all been an ongoing process that is close to conclusion and we expect that we can comment more fully in the very near future. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
haufdaft Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 Two of the posts of the season. The left-hugging revisionists will be out in force soon enough though to remind you both how lucky we were to have the team we got, that its only been misfortune and a lack of breaks which has us in the mess we are, and listings of the reasons why several of our players can more than make up for their shortcomings in other ways.....no, really! In real terms, we're fucked. Has anyone actually defended the squad in that way? I've obviously blanked them from my memory as i cant recall anything similar to the statements you state. It seems to me that, on the whole, the vast majority of supporters see the same deficiencies as one another. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LiviClyde Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 9 minutes ago, Elementary Penguin said: I wish i shared your belief that we all indeed sing from the same hymn sheet, but yes. There is a sizable group which, and this is entirely up to them, apply very little in the way of emotional or passionate attatchment, preferring to find comfort in the surroundings provided by watching a shite team. I recall many of them were as sedate and unmoved by highly succesful teams in the not too distant past, and in the current environment, seem to feel a sense of righteousness about 'supporting the team', instead of simply not accepting the crap we've endured. There's a few on this very thread. In your considered opinion of course. Care to name and shame who you imagine they may be? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrigtonClyde Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 It's obvious where problems lie Take any team where the keeper is regularly voted MOTM. That suggests they've a good keeper, but also must have some serious problems elsewhere if he's having to regularly keep them in a game. As for "holding midfielder", I hadnt even heard that term until the mid 90's. It used to be a "playmaker". A holding midfielder is an admission that there's a "bit of a problem" with the defence so they need a little extra cover. Two holding midfielders is an admission the defence is a disaster. Course the art of defending seems old fashioned now, they all have to be attacking wingbacks or centre halfs really comfortable with the ball at their feet. Even the keepers have to be like Beckenbauer now ! Listen, it's simple. Defence, clue's in the name. You're there to defend, stop the fucking ball going into the net. Keeper, catch the ball, communicate with the defenders, that's pretty much all you need to do any given 90 minutes. If only we could find a holding wingback utility striker.....to play in the hole..... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaggy Snake Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 25 minutes ago, BrigtonClyde said: If only we could find a holding wingback utility striker.....to play in the hole..... Pat Clarke at fullback then? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David W Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 1 hour ago, Elementary Penguin said: You're capable of reading yourself, as i'm sure everyone else is. It's not merely an opinion when the words are down on here in black and white....there's a lot of exasperation, pointing in many directions....i don't agree with ALL of it, but irs welcome to hear. There's also a lot of heads being stuck in the sand, over the way ahead from now. McGovern/MacDonald's futures as managers, or their 'ideas' they want to try out, seem to be a far greater priority for those who want (and choose) to believe football is only a theory from a shity coaching manual, and we have all the time in the world to support it. We fucking do not!! Maybe some have the ability to discuss minutiae, rather than mangling a thesaurus to rage about a bigger picture. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bridgeton Clyde Boy Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 Higgins has been an absulote waste of a jersey this season apart from the goals he scored at the start of the season.. only reason Flynn was dropped was because of a big fall out he had wth Barry, apparently squaring up to each other in a big blow up.. plus JP doesn't like him either but for the sack of playing a stronger 11 clearly starts him 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David W Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 1 hour ago, BrigtonClyde said: It's obvious where problems lie Take any team where the keeper is regularly voted MOTM. That suggests they've a good keeper, but also must have some serious problems elsewhere if he's having to regularly keep them in a game. As for "holding midfielder", I hadnt even heard that term until the mid 90's. It used to be a "playmaker". A holding midfielder is an admission that there's a "bit of a problem" with the defence so they need a little extra cover. Two holding midfielders is an admission the defence is a disaster. Course the art of defending seems old fashioned now, they all have to be attacking wingbacks or centre halfs really comfortable with the ball at their feet. Even the keepers have to be like Beckenbauer now ! Listen, it's simple. Defence, clue's in the name. You're there to defend, stop the fucking ball going into the net. Keeper, catch the ball, communicate with the defenders, that's pretty much all you need to do any given 90 minutes. If only we could find a holding wingback utility striker.....to play in the hole..... Without wanting to disagree with anything you've said there, one of the obvious problems with tactics is that they're cyclical. Look at the fawning over Chelsea's 343, when such formations were panned in the height of the 4231. What matters is overloads in areas of the pitch. Would you maybe agree that holding midfielders were "invented" because fullbacks got more attacking? The way we've played the last three games, I don't think we've really played that sort of player anyway. The back four hasn't really changed shape too much (McNeil's overlapped maybe a couple of times per game) and McLaughlin has pushed higher up the pitch as a result. One of the problems Ferguson had was that he rarely had us with a situation where we were "ganging up" on an opposition player. Look at the way that Forfar got around McNiff in the New Year game as he was getting little support from McLaughlin. Resulted in two goals. Good players obviously make a difference. That thing about the goalkeeper getting MotM always annoys me as well; Gibson ended up second in the MotM voting last year! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.