Is Ally the Man for the job? - The McCoist Thread

[kuznetsov 0]

The problem is that it's just snidy comments with no logic or reason. Some people have their managerial "favourites" and the ones they dislike and they post negative things about the ones they dislike when they have no facts or evidence and use mostly made up stuff.

 

The thing that puts this into perspective is when you contrast the comments of the same people on McCoist and a "favourite" of theirs, PLG. There is absolutely no consistency at all.

 

Players don't look motivated by McCoist = McCoist is atrocious.

Players have total backlash against PLG = Barry Ferguson's fault.

 

McCoist finishes second 21pts behind but well ahead of third after 10pts deduction and three losses in four after administration = McCoist is never a manager

PLG is 17 points behind at the half point and struggling to stay in 2nd = needs more time

 

McCoist out of cups early = can't manage

PLG out of cups at first go including to first division team = players not playing for him, needs a clear out.

 

McCoist puts in best start to a season in a long time but loses points when troubles begin = bottle merchant who can't manage.

PLG has worst run in Rangers history = players not playing for him, needs more time.

 

McCoist admits players embarrassing = can't manage or motivate.

PLG says players playing fine even though they playing abysmally = great manager.

 

McCoist devotes himself to Rangers = shouldn't be near the manager's job.

PLG can't be bothered sorting out his mess and wants away = needs backing by board and more time.

 

McCoist wins 5-1 = we played shit

PLG draws 2-2 = we were brilliant

 

Etc, etc.

 

There is also the made up stuff like:

 

We ALWAYS play the long ball. The game I saw we played the ball mostly on the ground but couldn't penetrate and so resorted to a long ball now and again. The ball was played on the ground the vast majority of the time and we lost it on the deck far too often. Although we did scrore from a long ball...

 

Berwick were the dominant team and played better football - which game were people watching? Berwick had some chances but they were mostly on the break with Rangers pushing up - it happens all the time in an unmatched game but the self appointed experts don't seem to know about these basics of football.

 

McCoist doesn't play kids enough - how many U21's have been playing? How well did they play?

 

McCoist doesn't make substitutions - yes he does.

 

McCoist doesn't shout at players, but I wasn't at the game - then how do you know?

 

McCoist doesn't need a pre-season - then why do all other managers go on about the importance of them?

 

We should be beating all the teams 10-0 - in what league does that ever happen?

 

There is a load of this stuff spouted and very little of it is near the truth or reality and none of it seems reasonable.

 

People are judging him on last season where no known manager could expect to win the title under the circumstances. Hell, you could have given PLG a 30pt addition and he still wouldn't have won. Give him a 10 point deduction and who knows where we would have finished - add in a 75% wage cut and it's clear we wouldn't have fulfilled the season with PLG and so would have a good chance of finishing last.

 

We're in a totally new position with almost a whole new squad and no preseason and people are sniping every five minutes while he doesn't lose a game. Yes he could do better but let the guy warm up first. It's like signing a new player who hasn't played all summer and then criticising everything he does before five minutes are past, whether he's any good or not.

 

There are no people who think Ally is untouchable but there are quite a few who would like to give him a proper go before making a judgement.

 

A manager is rarely responsible for individual games, once the team are our there, there is not much he can do till the next game. That makes him responsible for the season as a whole or even each half season. That gives him enough time to have influence. Even those that play FM should know this. If management is a game of chess then each game is a move or two. But you don't judge a chess player on each move, you judge him on the match. A manager's match is the season.

 

there is always reason and depending on the camplainant there is logic.

 

not everyone who thinks mccoist is useless has plg as their favourite that generalised rubbish.

 

players dont look motivated. well argue against that because they absolutely do not look like they are playing for him or the jersey. their attitude is disgarceful.

 

it was widely known that ferguson was the ring leader in the players revolt against plg.

 

mccoist isnt a manager. this is his first job, he is a novice. only a few knew how this would go but no one listened because it didnt suit.

 

plg didnt need more time. he admitted himself he didnt know how to fix the problem.

 

the cup exits were embarassing and shameful and a horrible indication of what was to come under ally.

 

plg couldnt organise the defence, that was his failing on the park. the defence was a shambles.

 

he lost points long before trouble came about. we imploded in november, a whole 4 months before administration. and even on the winning run you speak of, we were playing poor and scraping by. very lucky in fact. lucky celtic were struggling.

 

we have already established he cannot manage or motivate, that is not in doubt or debatable.

 

plg was trying to stay positive in the face of disgusting mutiny.

 

i am devoted to rangers, can i have a job? can i be manager? i want a game, can i get a game?

 

again, plg didnt need more time, he needed support from his players which he was never going to get.

 

i was at the 5-1 game, we were dreadful.

 

we do always play the long ball. we now have the american captain punting aimless long balls to no one.

 

berwich were and deserved at least a point. we deserved nothing from it.

 

i dont care about the kids argument. i just want to see 11 players no matter their age, give 100% and be able to do the basics. that is all. we dont and cant.

 

he is clueless pitch side. he makes subs too late or makes the wrong substitutions. imagine hooking young mckay when macleod was having a complete nightmare. imagine getting past the 10 minute mark and not changing anything to help sandaza when he was clearly also having a stinker. mcculloch in midfield, no changes.......bla bla bla always the same mistakes.

 

who cares if he shouts at players or not. it is not about volume or emotion but quality of information and instruction.

 

everyone needs pre season. to say otherwise is deluded and pathetic.

 

no we shouldnt, 10-0 is ridiculous against anyone but we should be winning comfortably.

 

plenty of it seems reasonable.

 

then you just go onto excuse after excuse, it gets boring after a while.

[foggy dewhurst 0]

ive been watching rangers since the mid 50s and the one common factor in all the good teams we put on the park was the ability to do the simple things and do them well pass and move ,find space ,wingers who could put in good crosses,defenders who cleared their lines ,forwards one step ahead of their opposing defenders that extra yard is in anticipation we need a coaching staff to instill these basic things into our game and until we do we will struggle .

[simplythebest 0]

The problem is that it's just snidy comments with no logic or reason. Some people have their managerial "favourites" and the ones they dislike and they post negative things about the ones they dislike when they have no facts or evidence and use mostly made up stuff.

 

The thing that puts this into perspective is when you contrast the comments of the same people on McCoist and a "favourite" of theirs, PLG. There is absolutely no consistency at all.

 

Players don't look motivated by McCoist = McCoist is atrocious.

Players have total backlash against PLG = Barry Ferguson's fault.

 

McCoist finishes second 21pts behind but well ahead of third after 10pts deduction and three losses in four after administration = McCoist is never a manager

PLG is 17 points behind at the half point and struggling to stay in 2nd = needs more time

 

McCoist out of cups early = can't manage

PLG out of cups at first go including to first division team = players not playing for him, needs a clear out.

 

McCoist puts in best start to a season in a long time but loses points when troubles begin = bottle merchant who can't manage.

PLG has worst run in Rangers history = players not playing for him, needs more time.

 

McCoist admits players embarrassing = can't manage or motivate.

PLG says players playing fine even though they playing abysmally = great manager.

 

McCoist devotes himself to Rangers = shouldn't be near the manager's job.

PLG can't be bothered sorting out his mess and wants away = needs backing by board and more time.

 

McCoist wins 5-1 = we played shit

PLG draws 2-2 = we were brilliant

 

Etc, etc.

 

There is also the made up stuff like:

 

We ALWAYS play the long ball. The game I saw we played the ball mostly on the ground but couldn't penetrate and so resorted to a long ball now and again. The ball was played on the ground the vast majority of the time and we lost it on the deck far too often. Although we did scrore from a long ball...

 

Berwick were the dominant team and played better football - which game were people watching? Berwick had some chances but they were mostly on the break with Rangers pushing up - it happens all the time in an unmatched game but the self appointed experts don't seem to know about these basics of football.

 

McCoist doesn't play kids enough - how many U21's have been playing? How well did they play?

 

McCoist doesn't make substitutions - yes he does.

 

McCoist doesn't shout at players, but I wasn't at the game - then how do you know?

 

McCoist doesn't need a pre-season - then why do all other managers go on about the importance of them?

 

We should be beating all the teams 10-0 - in what league does that ever happen?

 

There is a load of this stuff spouted and very little of it is near the truth or reality and none of it seems reasonable.

 

People are judging him on last season where no known manager could expect to win the title under the circumstances. Hell, you could have given PLG a 30pt addition and he still wouldn't have won. Give him a 10 point deduction and who knows where we would have finished - add in a 75% wage cut and it's clear we wouldn't have fulfilled the season with PLG and so would have a good chance of finishing last.

 

We're in a totally new position with almost a whole new squad and no preseason and people are sniping every five minutes while he doesn't lose a game. Yes he could do better but let the guy warm up first. It's like signing a new player who hasn't played all summer and then criticising everything he does before five minutes are past, whether he's any good or not.

 

There are no people who think Ally is untouchable but there are quite a few who would like to give him a proper go before making a judgement.

 

A manager is rarely responsible for individual games, once the team are our there, there is not much he can do till the next game. That makes him responsible for the season as a whole or even each half season. That gives him enough time to have influence. Even those that play FM should know this. If management is a game of chess then each game is a move or two. But you don't judge a chess player on each move, you judge him on the match. A manager's match is the season.

 

So is it your opinion that no hard questions should be asked of him?

[calscot 0]

ive been watching rangers since the mid 50s and the one common factor in all the good teams we put on the park was the ability to do the simple things and do them well pass and move ,find space ,wingers who could put in good crosses,defenders who cleared their lines ,forwards one step ahead of their opposing defenders that extra yard is in anticipation we need a coaching staff to instill these basic things into our game and until we do we will struggle .

 

I don't get this perception that a manager who has virtually a whole new team that he's not worked with before, is supposed to take professional footballers and "teach them the basics"...

 

I'm sure you would have a bigger dressing room revolt than PLG if you patronised them that way.

 

But you also have to wonder, why is it down to McCoist to teach them this - why not their previous managers and coaches? Are we saying all the players' previous managers are a lot worse than McCoist and it's up to him to teach them how to kick a ball?

 

I really don't think that is the job of a manager.

 

Also the motivational aspect - has anyone who has played football on here, really needed motivation to come from their manager or captain? Does the pre-team talk totally change how up for the game you are? It is up to a manager not to ruin motivation by the way he manages and to perhaps be somewhat inspiring, but if a team of professionals can't get themselves up for a game, what is the manager to do? This is not something that you can do a one day course on motivation and leadership and learn how to do it and I can't see evidence of many on here being an expert at this, me included.

 

(I also still don't see how one unmotivated team is the manager's fault while an even less motivated team is a player's fault. The latter may be true to some extent but isn't that still a fault of the manager for not dealing with it? What about players in McCoists squad?)

 

At best the manager can mould the players' thinking over time to match his own, get them playing as a team and the way he wants. But yes, that does take time. I'd imagine the better players you have the easier that is but that's not where we are right now. We're probably about a middling SPL level team and we all know the banana skins they slip on when facing lower division teams.

 

The gap is not as great as some people think - it's still 11 men who know how to play football against another 11 and take into account home advantage on a tighter pitch and a defensive formation and it's difficult for any team. Just ask Man U and Barcelona. Liverpool were lucky with their win against Hearts so should the manager be sacked?

 

I'm sorry, we're not going to get anywhere at this level by bringing in coaches who teach players how to kick a ball properly or making motivational speeches. There is a lot more subtlety to professional management than that.

[Scott7 5,168]

Foggy - you're my generation near enough. Is it not the case, though, that whatever the match - Albion Rovers or AC Milan - Rangers always went for it from the start?

 

When celtic began to revive and play very decent football under Burns, WS learned that the way to beat them was to stand off and let them run out of steam then snatch a goal. Now it's a way of playing Rangers can't seem to shake off.

[GovanAllan 0]

At least we have been moved up to a faction instead of just Ally Bashers, I'm moved guys thanks.

 

I'm not interested in the score, it's the football I want to see improve the scoreline will take care of itself if we play a high tempo passing game.

[GovanAllan 0]

I don't get this perception that a manager who has virtually a whole new team that he's not worked with before, is supposed to take professional footballers and "teach them the basics"...

 

I'm sure you would have a bigger dressing room revolt than PLG if you patronised them that way.

 

But you also have to wonder, why is it down to McCoist to teach them this - why not their previous managers and coaches? Are we saying all the players' previous managers are a lot worse than McCoist and it's up to him to teach them how to kick a ball?

 

I really don't think that is the job of a manager.

 

Also the motivational aspect - has anyone who has played football on here, really needed motivation to come from their manager or captain? Does the pre-team talk totally change how up for the game you are? It is up to a manager not to ruin motivation by the way he manages and to perhaps be somewhat inspiring, but if a team of professionals can't get themselves up for a game, what is the manager to do? This is not something that you can do a one day course on motivation and leadership and learn how to do it and I can't see evidence of many on here being an expert at this, me included.

 

(I also still don't see how one unmotivated team is the manager's fault while an even less motivated team is a player's fault. The latter may be true to some extent but isn't that still a fault of the manager for not dealing with it? What about players in McCoists squad?)

 

At best the manager can mould the players' thinking over time to match his own, get them playing as a team and the way he wants. But yes, that does take time. I'd imagine the better players you have the easier that is but that's not where we are right now. We're probably about a middling SPL level team and we all know the banana skins they slip on when facing lower division teams.

 

The gap is not as great as some people think - it's still 11 men who know how to play football against another 11 and take into account home advantage on a tighter pitch and a defensive formation and it's difficult for any team. Just ask Man U and Barcelona. Liverpool were lucky with their win against Hearts so should the manager be sacked?

 

I'm sorry, we're not going to get anywhere at this level by bringing in coaches who teach players how to kick a ball properly or making motivational speeches. There is a lot more subtlety to professional management than that.

 

Honestly don't even know where to start with that so I'm just going to leave it alone and move on.

[forlanssister 3,050]

 

McCoist out of cups early = can't manage

PLG out of cups at first go including to first division team = players not playing for him, needs a clear out.

 

PLG only got knocked out of one cup, and didn't McCoist get knocked out by a first division team too?

 

McCoist puts in best start to a season in a long time but loses points when troubles begin = bottle merchant who can't manage.

PLG has worst run in Rangers history = players not playing for him, needs more time.

 

Does McLeish not hold the "worst run in Rangers history" honour?

[simplythebest 0]

I don't get this perception that a manager who has virtually a whole new team that he's not worked with before, is supposed to take professional footballers and "teach them the basics"...

 

I'm sure you would have a bigger dressing room revolt than PLG if you patronised them that way.

 

But you also have to wonder, why is it down to McCoist to teach them this - why not their previous managers and coaches? Are we saying all the players' previous managers are a lot worse than McCoist and it's up to him to teach them how to kick a ball?

 

I really don't think that is the job of a manager.

 

Also the motivational aspect - has anyone who has played football on here, really needed motivation to come from their manager or captain? Does the pre-team talk totally change how up for the game you are? It is up to a manager not to ruin motivation by the way he manages and to perhaps be somewhat inspiring, but if a team of professionals can't get themselves up for a game, what is the manager to do? This is not something that you can do a one day course on motivation and leadership and learn how to do it and I can't see evidence of many on here being an expert at this, me included.

 

(I also still don't see how one unmotivated team is the manager's fault while an even less motivated team is a player's fault. The latter may be true to some extent but isn't that still a fault of the manager for not dealing with it? What about players in McCoists squad?)

 

At best the manager can mould the players' thinking over time to match his own, get them playing as a team and the way he wants. But yes, that does take time. I'd imagine the better players you have the easier that is but that's not where we are right now. We're probably about a middling SPL level team and we all know the banana skins they slip on when facing lower division teams.

 

The gap is not as great as some people think - it's still 11 men who know how to play football against another 11 and take into account home advantage on a tighter pitch and a defensive formation and it's difficult for any team. Just ask Man U and Barcelona. Liverpool were lucky with their win against Hearts so should the manager be sacked?

 

I'm sorry, we're not going to get anywhere at this level by bringing in coaches who teach players how to kick a ball properly or making motivational speeches. There is a lot more subtlety to professional management than that.

 

What the hell is the point in even having a manager then?

 

Have things really got so bad that we're going to be claiming there isn't a big gap between full time and part time players?

 

Dear god.

[calscot 0]

So is it your opinion that no hard questions should be asked of him?

 

You don't get on a guy's back with hard questions when he's hardly started the job - I think he's perfectly capable of doing that himself at this point, and the evidence is there that he has done so. It's not asking questions in any case, it's using every excuse to say we should get shot of him.

 

The difference here is that those who criticise him have already made up their mind before seeing much evidence, there is NO-ONE who has made up his mind that Ally is the best. The sides are: "He's rubbish and I'll never change my mind no matter what he does and I will point out every negative I can think of while chiding those that disagree with me for being blind" and "he's in a difficult job, under difficult circumstances, give him a bit time before judging and if he's not good enough then, then he has to go".

 

I was all for giving PLG time until the halfway point when we were 17 points behind, struggling for third place, making negative records and getting worse. If Ally does the same I will want him to go - actually Ally probably needs to at least win the league to get my approval whereas I just needed PLG to compete.

 

People seem to think that just by bringing in a new manager, that will solve all our problems - well PLG showed that that is nowhere near guaranteed - as did Advocaat eventually.

 

There are very few managers that have instantly turned around a club in dire straights without a load of money to spend. And if we judge subsequent managers the way McCoist has been judged and those detractors get their way, we'll be bringing in a new manager nearly every month.