calscot 0 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 Hopefully I'm wrong, but I keep thinking of John Greig. I think the difference with Greig is that he went straight from the dressing room as a player to the manager's office. McCoist has had some time out on the telly, sat his coaching exams and then had an apprenticeship as an assistant, first at Scotland and then Rangers. He's not played with the players and he has experience as an understudy. He's also fast approaching 50 years old. Souness did not bad as a young guy coming straight to management from being a player - although he was a larger than life character and again didn't play with the current squad till he got there. A clearly modern and relevant example to compare is Lennon - you might not like him and think his team is shite, but if Ally can emulate his current level of success, we'll at least be competitive. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 What I find most disheartening about that interview is that Martin Bain was there. Not that he shouldn't be, but similar managerial appointments elsewhere would see the manager draped in the hier-archy of the club - specifically the chairman. Our chairman is probably in America, and our owner is in the void he's been in for ages. The appointment of a manager is big news - regardless of whether we want Ally - and to see Martin Bain who is only a chief executive as the only person supporting isn't great. .. Our chairman's absenteeism is a bit of a joke. However, the way our club is being run at the moment, and the constant speculation over a takeover which will effectively put him out of a job, I personally doubt it makes much difference. When a ship doesn't have a rudder you don't really miss the helmsman... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmck 117 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 ..Our chairman's absenteeism is a bit of a joke. However, the way our club is being run at the moment, and the constant speculation over a takeover which will effectively put him out of a job, I personally doubt it makes much difference. When a ship doesn't have a rudder you don't really miss the helmsman... Haha, perhaps. The difference is though, it's not like we're on the ship - we're being sold it. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 I honestly don't understand your point of view at all. Nothing has changed except that Ally knows he WILL be Walter's successor and can make sure he's as well prepared for it as possible. He can also be starting thinking about how he wants our squad to look for the start of next season and I think that's a good thing. However Walter is still the manager and Ally is still his assistant. If anyone wants the process speeded up, write to AJ or Jimmy Saville or something. I think it at least brings some authority back to the dressing room. Players can't hide, throw away the season and then expect a fresh start from a new manager. There are consequences now. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,356 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 What I find most disheartening about that interview is that Martin Bain was there. Not that he shouldn't be, but similar managerial appointments elsewhere would see the manager draped in the hier-archy of the club - specifically the chairman. Our chairman is probably in America, and our owner is in the void he's been in for ages. The appointment of a manager is big news - regardless of whether we want Ally - and to see Martin Bain who is only a chief executive as the only person supporting isn't great. I don't see it as being an issue. The Chief Executive is the one who is running things day-to-day and is the one who makes most of the decisions in a normal company. There's nothing wrong with a CEO dealing with it. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 I think it at least brings some authority back to the dressing room. Players can't hide, throw away the season and then expect a fresh start from a new manager. There are consequences now. Exactly. I really do think this is a positive announcement, but I'm completely biased because I'm one of the people who wanted McCoist to get the job. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,356 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 ..Our chairman's absenteeism is a bit of a joke. However, the way our club is being run at the moment, and the constant speculation over a takeover which will effectively put him out of a job, I personally doubt it makes much difference. When a ship doesn't have a rudder you don't really miss the helmsman... I don't see why the Chairman being absent is an issue. He's not involved day-to-day. That's not a Chairman's job. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 Have to say that I'm really pleased about this. Whether you're someone who wanted Ally to take over in the summer or not it would be hard to say that this isn't a good move right now because it puts all the speculation to bed once and for all. I think it will be a good thing for the players too because those who are on longer term contracts and those who will be here next season now know who their manager will be and have the chance to work with him and speak to him before he even takes over. If this announcement hadn't been made and the whole thing put to bed the squad would have been playing till the end of the season not knowing who was to be their manager which can probably be a bit unsettling for players. Mccoist was asked in December to take the reigns in the summer. One has to suspect that the players were aware of it. Unlikely they werent. Given they dont seem to be playing for the current management team what is there to believe they will make more of an effort for someone who is part of that management team. There is much malaise in our squad and the management team are struggling to reverse the trend. ANY player should be concerned on the here and now, the season will end soon enough, they should be taking professional pride in trying to send off the current incumbent laden with silverware. The way this squad are playing it seems they have downed tools. And it hardly bodes well given that they should be making as much effort as possible to convince the current Assistant Manager, soon enough to be manager, that they have a long term future at the club. They arent exactly going about it the right way in proving they either have a long term future at the club nor even want one. The ONLY thing that is positivein this news, as things stand right now, is that uncertainty is gone. The rest of it I just cant get excited about given AM is part of the current management struggling to keep us competitive. As is the case with ALL fans, I hope he proves me wrong. And... just how condescending is it to have to listen to Martin Bain spout how much of a Rangers man Ally is. Yes, we all know that, but what we want, Rangers man or not, is a successful team and, yes, playing with some style and panache if possible. We dont want a Tim admittedly, but other than that I just want the best man for the job, regardless of which team they have an affiliation for. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 I don't see why the Chairman being absent is an issue. He's not involved day-to-day. That's not a Chairman's job. Correct. The chairman of our company has perhaps 6 meetings a year with internal senior management. It is the CEO and senior management that deal with the day-to-day, not the Chairman. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chilledbear 16 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 I think the difference with Greig is that he went straight from the dressing room as a player to the manager's office. McCoist has had some time out on the telly, sat his coaching exams and then had an apprenticeship as an assistant, first at Scotland and then Rangers. He's not played with the players and he has experience as an understudy. He's also fast approaching 50 years old. Souness did not bad as a young guy coming straight to management from being a player - although he was a larger than life character and again didn't play with the current squad till he got there. A clearly modern and relevant example to compare is Lennon - you might not like him and think his team is shite, but if Ally can emulate his current level of success, we'll at least be competitive. Thinking more of what he meant to the Supporters as a player, and not wanting his memory being tarnished by failure as manager. 0 Quote Link to post 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.