Darthter

The like of Black were brought in because they were established & fairly highly rated SPL players. The only way to entice them to join was offering a decent wage, which (from memory) was offset by focusing on free transfers.

What authority are you talking about??? I'm sure both managers were given exactly the same job spec etc. They haven't changed their internal setup, so the manager reports directly to the board. Deila was given full control of the team, same as Brenda, same as Murty, McCoist, Pedro & Warbs. We're talking about how they assert their authority over the players as their manager.

The dressing room, is effectively the manager/coaches domain - no "suits" allowed. He has full authority within that place....its not a privilege handed to him by the board. How he asserts his personal authority over the player is 100% down to the manager. Cathro, Neilson, Deila & Murty do not give off an aura of authority. You never get/got the impression that they had the full respect of their players. What happens when any of the walk into a room??? I would bet that most folk wouldn't even notice. On the flip side, what happens when Souness, Smith, Pep, Mourinho walk into the room - folk will notice. They have a presence about them, they hold themselves in a particular manner that tells folk "The Manager is here...". That, I'm sure, is something you'll get with the likes of Gerrard.

how that authority is handled will vary from person to person....but it needs to be clear to the players where that line is & not to cross it.

Agreed. SG will command a high level of respect due to his playing career - it's then up to him to maintain that into management, and set ground rules down immediately so that the squad know he's not messing about. SG clearly has a winning mentality and is seriously driven to succeed....hopefully that can be driven into our team & players.

To me, that's irrelevant. The DoF is there to essentially bridge the gap between football & business - a foot in both camps. A sound understanding of footballing principals etc is ll that is required. He then relies on the various dept heads to provide the specific technical info/analysis required.

I think he'd be able to replicate certain aspects of what they have done - consistency & reliability being the main parts. I think he'd also start getting better performances out of some of our "duds".

While beating them is not imperative....it is important to the fans & also as a show that we are getting better.

Implementing a new formation effectively takes time - more than a week I would imagine. What would have happened IF Murty had changed his formation, with the same outcome - what would we be discussing now??? I would wage it would be along the lines of "Why did he change formation....just shows how bad a manager he is."

agreed...but in reality, how difficult was it to predict either teams line ups???

I'm talking about Authority in the dressing room - an "iron fist" if you will. Players need to have an element of fear over the manager/coach. He can't be pally with the players, that loses respect and that fear-factor. Players need to know that there is a line that they don't cross, coz if they do there will be hell to pay - I get the impression that with out managers, that line has either been non-existent or at best VERY faint. Wallace, Souness or Smith would not have stood for ANY disrespect or back chat in their dressing rooms - the players knew who was the boss...and it wasn't their egos!!!

While investment is vitally important, without a good solid foundation I would bet the majority of cash will get wasted. We have already brought in players who should be strolling the SPFL, yet are toiling to do the basics. Get a solid foundation in place - consistent & reliable.....they you can use the investment properly.

How do you know that those questions haven't been asked & answered accordingly??? It's up to the manager/DoF to justify ANY player acquisition to the Board....they are the ones who are holding the purse-strings. Hindsight would tell us that the Board have been happy with the justifications & therefore signed off on the purchases. What we don't know is how many were knocked back???

Change the names, and pretty much EVERY point mentioned has been evident for the past 5-6 years.....

worth noting, that since our demotion we have also had multiple Board "configurations" & members...yet the same problems exist. (Yes, I know about the problems with Green etc, which didn't help). A fair number of the points/failures you raise are completely irrelevant to the actual running of the club & the performance on the pitch. - The Board have never knowingly employed a poor manager, we only know that they were poor through hindsight. - The Board are not responsible for player recruitment - that's the managers job. Yes, they will sign off the contract, but only based on information from the manager What happens if we change the Board....what immediate effects are we going to see?? It is simply NOT practical or possible to completely clear the decks - it would bankrupt us. If a company is producing a product, how many times do they replace the workforce or machinery before they realise that it's not the people or tools that are the problem, but the overall procedures or work ethic. That IS the Boards responsibility (as I have stated previously). It is up to the board to identify the root issues within the club & fix them. So far I feel they have been addressing the symptoms rather than the cause. You also have to separate what is important to the fans, and what is important to the actual running of the club - shouting loudly about every misdemeanour committed by other clubs won't help the teams performance on the pitch. Also throw in that our own fans are happy to pick apart & slaughter our OWN club statements then, the Board simply can't win. Blaming the Board is (IMHO) the easy way out for fans....the biggest question there is who replaces them???

That is a basic requirement of any manager, regardless of the style of football they like to play. You can see ceptic adopting a more modern, passing style of play and all the while Brenda has the full respect of his players.

While Murty's formation was predictable....did Ceptic make any ground breaking changes to their formation??? They have a settled, preferred formation & method of play that they use week after week, regardless of the opposition. Murty's formation would have been irrelevant to their match preparation imho....it also appeared irrelevant to ours as well...

Guaranteed results in 48hrs (again)

How exactly do you see that working??? The Board are the business side of the club - they deal with balance sheets, investment etc. How are they better placed to make a judgement on a players suitability than the Manager or DoF???

I think, to a certain extent Scotland is a "special case" in footballing terms....we simply haven't advanced in comparison to other nations - that is why our teams regularly get beaten by all sorts in Europe. In general we still cling onto a blood n' guts style of play, where physicality & strength is preferred over skill & talent.

but it was a "relative" shoe-string budget. If memory serves did we not have a transfer ban in place at the time as well??? he was VERY restricted in who he could bring in due to being in the bottom tier.

Totally agree about the loss of direction & taking our position for granted. As for managerial experience....you could argue that too much experience results in someone too set in their ways to be effective. Someone like Gerrard doesn't have that baggage & will be more open to adjustment & change in order to get the desired effect - IF he has the balls to come in and really shake things up. That may be where the past managers have failed....they have been sucked into a particular way of doing things at the club, coz that's how it's done. Rather than putting their foot down & demanding change.

I'm not saying the manager has "no part to play in leadership" etc....what I am pointing out is that symptoms have remained constant through multiple different managers. Each on doing things differently to the last, but getting the same results. As for the Board, you can not directly link the business side of things to the playing/performance side. It is the Boards responsibility to appoint a manager and with hindsight they failed on all accounts - but they didn't know that when they were appointed....the same with Gerrard (or any other manager), there are no guarantees over how he will perform - good or bad - until he actually gets into the position. The Board are responsible for identifying where the root of the problem lies though and as I said, maybe they have taken the extra time to try & identify that and then appoint the right person who can hopefully fix it. Ultimately, it's not down to the manager, the board, the players or the backroom staff....it is a combination of all the factors that needs to be analysed and fixed.

I'm not sure if it will remove the issues....but it could certainly help change dressing room attitudes.

I agree that too much emphasis is put on Ceptic....however to say they are "out of sight" is just not true - they have won the league this year by 10 pts, with 9pts to play for ie. 3 games to spare.....that's not exactly "out of sight". Looking at the last 2 performances, yes they do look "out of sight", but then you factor in a couple of the performances earlier in the season and suddenly the distance ain't that great again. The team's main expectation this year was to secure 2nd place ahead of Aberdeen, hibs, hearts etc....if that is too much expectation for the players to handle then they are not only at the wrong team, but in the wrong profession. As for handling the expectations, that something that should be addresses behind the scenes @ Auchenhowie - are our players receiving the correct preparations before taking to the field??? Is the environment right for producing a steely, no nonsense attitude??? We have heard time & time again over the years from players that they need to step up & how they have let the fans down....yet nothing changes.