MelvinBragg

Therein lies the question. Enough to buy a goalkeeper (Ruddy or otherwise)? Possibly also strengthen elsewhere...?

Be interesting to see how they do in their three games. All going well, and depending what happens with the loan players, would be interesting to see who they could bring in with their contacts throughout the game. Although both have been out of the game for a while, they have solid reputations. A few managers kicking about who played under Brown and Konx for Scotland and various clubs in Knox's case. Knowing their strengths as coaches, might be more willing to let these two guys take their young players on loan knowing they'll be in good hands...

Conspiracy number 107: Ally McCoist's contract apparently runs out in a couple of weeks...

I'm basing it on the few performances I've seen from Craigan and Lasley and the games I've seen Hammell play. I've said elsewhere that yes professionals should give 100% in their jobs as we all do. But in sport enthusiasm can contribute to your performance. And I would say it would be difficult to be enthusiastic when your boss is constantly talking you down. I would find it hard to put my heart and soul into any job where I did not respect my boss. I did not attack your views. I argued with them. And I did say that "If you believe...you're off your head" . Which I still say...

Aw, fuck, don't tell me McGarry is happy he's away. Does that mean he thinks he'll be back in the fold? That was one of the things Gannon got very right...

Specifically, Hammell, Lasley and Craigan. Guys who have a real affection for this club. And who this season look like they hate being here. If he's doing a shite job, you seem to be the only one who's noticed it. Let's just agree to disagree, eh...

I am no believer of Boyle's propaganda machine. I just watch the games most weeks. And don't see players busting a gut for Jim Gannon. Guys who were previously sweating blood for Motherwell. Deserve better stewardship? Boyle is a steward at FP. A caretaker. All he has to do is keep us in reasonable shape for when we're no longer his. We're in profit, we're in the SPL, we've seen some great football in the last few years under Butcher, McGhee and very occasionally Gannon. Aye, fuck it, you're right, he's doing a terrible job...

Name names. Reynolds and Forbes? O'Brien and McGarry? A combination of these names? I also heard today that most of the players are happy he's away (from a family member of one of the players about ten past one today)...

No, I believe the long term goal is to keep us sustainable and in the SPL. And we won't do that with a manager who is struggling to motivate any player he has with reasonable SPL experience. No brainer for me. Boyle got it right...

Yes, and you've made that perfectly clear in every single post you've made tonight. Personally I reckon getting rid of a manager who was alienating everyone at the club and showing no commitment to the club without having to pay compensation does not constitute a fuck up. Gannon had lost the players, in my opinion. Not just the senior players. No one escaped his criticism in his past two post match interviews. Whether he was right or not, you do not do this in public if you want the players to keep fighting for you. Unless you think we are able to ship out the full squad and bring in another one in the month of January, today Boyle made the right decision... As for "we will find out soon". There are two sides to every story. But on previous evidence, we know that Gannon's story will exempt him from all blame...

Where's that from, Ricky?

Also have to factor in that we are in a totally different situation now to the one we were in in June. Then we had to quickly assemble a squad. Now we have to get a squad to pull together and get results in difficult circumstances. For me, Craig Brown is not suited to the first situation but is tailor made for where we find ourselves now...

Clearly, Burma, you have an issue with John Boyle and the way he has dealt with this situation. If the problem really was the fact that Boyle wanted to invest in Ruddy and Gannon thought that we could maybe get him on loan and sign a couple of other players, then maybe you have a point. But given that Ruddy had worked under Gannon prior to coming here and sacking Gannon would make it less likely for Ruddy to stay, I find it hard to believe that this is Boyle's plan. If he really was trying to be that machiavellian, he would have bought Ruddy in the first week of January telling Gannon that yes of course that there was more money to spend. Then Gannon could walk or Boyle could let him go if Gannon found out that was not the case. In short, if you think that Boyle sacked Gannon simply in order to buy Ruddy and sell him for profit later then you, sir, are off your head...

Clearly, Burma, you have an issue with John Boyle and the way he has dealt with this situation. If the problem really was the fact that Boyle wanted to invest in Ruddy and Gannon thought that we could maybe get him on loan and sign a couple of other players, then maybe you have a point. But given that Ruddy had worked under Gannon prior to coming here and sacking Gannon would make it less likely for Ruddy to stay, I find it hard to believe that this is Boyle's plan. If he really was trying to be that machiavellian, he would have bought Ruddy in the first week of January telling Gannon that yes of course that there was more money to spend. Then Gannon could walk or Boyle could let him go if Gannon found out that was not the case. In short, if you think that Boyle sacked Gannon simply in order to buy Ruddy and sell him for profit later then you, sir, are off your head... EDIT Bollocks, wrong thread...

Much like Lobey and Frazzle, I struggle to think of much that Boyle has got wrong in the last couple of years. Sure he made plenty of mistakes in the years prior to that but it would appear we're now benefiting from that steep learning curve. Was it a mistake to appoint Gannon? No. We needed a man who could get young players playing well and believing in themselves, and someone who could assemble a squad without too much expense. Boyle went out and found one. The squad we had in June this year, we needed someone with experience of working under serious constraints. But at the same time, it was the right decision to let him go now, even if not for the reasons given in the press statement. We now need someone to steady the ship and get the team through a period of crucial games when we are seriously lacking fitness (the games in Europe when we could have been working on fitness training were always going to come back to haunt us a bit). For me in the last six months, Boyle has played a blinder...

Sorry for quoting myself, but it seems like this fits better here...

My only concern would be that Brown and Knox might put a hefty dent in the wage bill...

I was told (and I think I posted on here at the time) when Gannon was appointed that when things went wrong, it was never his fault if you listened to him. His last couple of post match interviews really made me think of that reputation. I appreciate the fact that there is a limit to how much technique you can coach into a player after a certain age, but why under Gannon was our back four going backwards in terms of organisation? Clean sheets at Parkhead, Pittodrie and Tannadice seem like an age ago now. Much like Harri Kampman, Gannon in his short spell has done something that was required. Kampman got rid of a lot of guys 32+ whose reputations might have got them contracts with some Scottish managers when they were really past their best (Coyne, Falconer, Martin). Gannon came in to a threadbare squad and with a mixture of loans, frees and promotion of good young players managed to get a team ready to start the season. But despite his comments to the contrary, you never got the impression he was here for the long haul. And an abrasive personality in a manager is not always something a club with our squad size can work with. I said when Lasley and Craigan were discarded earlier in the season, that my fear was that we would need them later in the season. Some of Saturday's problems were ring rust on those players. And while I agree that players are professionals and should give 100% as we all do in our jobs, football (and other sports) require a degree of enthusiasm about the task in order to get the best performancer. And it is very difficult to be enthusiastic about working under a boss you don't like. We all knew the form of the young players would be up and down. Gannon's man management was poor in that he was unable to keep the older players onside for when this happened. In essence, thank you to Gannon for doing what was required. But JB was right in his statement. For various reasons, Gannon continuing as manager was "untenable"...

As soon as I typed that, I knew what someone's response would be. I earned that one, I s'ppose...

Not Leitch. Not McCall. Not Robertson. Other than that, I'm not bothered...

I did say in the pub last night that I thought we were too nice at the moment. Other than Coke a couple of times early in the season, I can't remember many crunching tackles from anyone in our team. Though I do agree with others that Hutchison definitely looks the man most capable of dishing it out...

Aye, us and everybody else...

For what it's worth, I reckon you're right. Having said that, it is only Wednesday, plenty of time for the weather to take another mental turn. I have a funny feeling ir could be that the roads and concerns about fans travelling being sued might be the reason and not the pitch...

To answer this question, I'd need the link to that really detailed Motherwell database website that I've lost. Because like a few people on here, I'm foggy as to who played in the early 00s and who just played in the late 90s...

Give you a clue, he wears number 4...