Managerial Discipline?

[JohnMc 2,473]

so what if PC's successor fares no better ? get shot of him too & start all over again ?

what guarantee is there a new manager will get more out of this squad as AJ dangerously suggested recently.

 

The problem we have is we need better quality players & to get rid off the deadwood MW & Pedro brought. It's that simple. It's where the funding for this will come from that's the issue & whether we can attract the right calibre of manager

 

And SAF dealt with the indiscipline he inherited when he took over at Man Utd by getting rid off the likes of Whiteside& McGrath.

 

Again with the comparing Sir Alex and Pedro, it's bizarre.

 

For the record Ferguson took over Man Utd in 1986 but Whiteside didn't leave until 1989. He'd handed in a transfer request because he was unhappy with new contract talks stalling. Ferguson's issue with Whiteside was his appalling injury record, something born out by his eventual retiring from football at only 26. Whiteside also credits Ferguson with negotiating his contract with Everton, the best he'd ever had as a professional and he has never criticised Ferguson. Likewise Mcgrath left Man Utd in 1989, and again Ferguson's issues with McGrath were around injuries. McGrath was offered retirement and a testimonial by Ferguson but he felt he could play on and left for Aston Villa. McGrath did indeed play on but has serious mobility issues today. The fact McGrath was an alcoholic and Whiteside a big drinker is often used as the reason but it's not, Ferguson couldn't have cared if both were hammered when playing as long as they played and played well, but big salaried players sitting on the treatment table wasn't something Ferguson would tolerate.

 

As for PC's successor, yes, if he doesn't deliver better results he'll be removed too. This is a results business, they know what they're getting into. I agree with AJ, the squad should be producing better results than it has, certainly better consistency.

[Darthter 542]

Let me be clear here....I don't think this is an issue specific to Rangers or Pedro Caixhina. It is more of a reflection on modern society etc.

 

A manager is trying to enforce certain discipline, but as soon as someone ain't happy, the story is all over the press and putting managers a VERY difficult situation. If the manager caves in to the media pressure, he is weak and opens the door for more problems. If he sticks to his guns, he's a dictator, a bad man-manager & has "lost the dressing room".

 

The player's part in in it is virtually forgotten. They just sit back & let things play out in the public eye.

 

 

As for PC's comments on MOH....he didn't just randomly blurt these things out in conversation - he was asked specific questions & regularly pushed for answers. However, people seem to forget that MOH struggled to get a game under the previous manager - PC at least put him out on loan, rather than sitting in the stands every week, which would most likely lead to a transfer offer being made from somewhere.

[Darthter 542]

Come on Darthter, you just made all that up!

 

I did, and said so. But the point being even though it was made up, it is not inconceivable or unbelievable.....

 

If someone could point out ANY bit that might NOT possibly be true....

[der Berliner 3,251]

J Barton was another who told them home truths, not a thing that endeared him or does anyone else either.

All about refusing to face the reality that the day murray succumbed to player power it was a slippery slope.

 

As for KM, mercenary short and sweet,doesn’t make him a bad person just a mercenary.

 

Not agreeing all too often with you, but this is an exception.

 

We hardly know what exactly went on behind the scenes and most of what we got - something which has to be taken into consideration - comes from leaks most likely NOT from those who were on the manager's side. And what irks here is that the club did not take any visible action. Not too dissimilar to the PLG affair, even though Ferguson et al had probably far greater an influence than any of the current folk. IMHO, much more now than in the PLG days, the pressure to remove him came from the outside rather than struggles within the club. People will sure have different opinions about the results, but a quick glance at the record books will show that de facto we are not exactly much worse of than in seasons gone by* at this stage of the season.

 

 

*I don't buy into that face-losing stuff regarding Progres, not least when we dropped out with hardly a handful of PCs players on the field. Same goes with a defeats vs the Scum and Aberdeen with players way below our and their own standard at the time. We have often enough been out of Europe, the League Cup and trailing at this stage of the season, if you look a bit further than the glory years ... and a situation more akin to ours right now.

[Rousseau 9,384]

Well let's agree on something at the beginning; Pedro is no Sir Alex so comparing them is futile.

 

I don't know what you do for a living Rousseau so you might already have experience of this. If you manage a group of people at any one time some of them will be less happy than the rest. If those people are on performance bonuses that they're not achieving then they might be vocal about their unhappiness and if they believe that their ability to achieve their bonus is being held back by you, their manager, you can expect that disquiet to only grow.

 

PC didn't have a discipline problem, he had a failure to win matches problem. Every manager faces discipline problems, but if your side is winning regularly those problems are easier to deal with because you're in a position of strength.

 

Why do you think Graeme Murty brought on Hardie at the weekend, for all of 30 seconds? It wasn't tactical and we were already 3-1 up and Hearts had chucked it so the result wasn't in much danger. No, it was so he could get an appearance bonus and a win bonus. That's good management. Hardie won't have had many of them this season, and as a young striker not getting a game for a side that wasn't winning as often as it should he was almost certainly getting hacked off and questioning his future. In one go a player is appeased and given hope. How do you think Hardie will have been in training this week?

 

O'Halleron isn't 'crap'. Whether he'll ever make it at Rangers is moot, but publicly criticising him was a bizarre thing to do. MO'H had made no comment by that point after all, and the fact he'd found some form at St Johnstone I'd have thought would have drawn praise from PC whether he meant it or not. No one likes to hear their friends slagged off in public, MO'H has friends in the Rangers squad. No one likes to see their friends embarrassed in public, Kenny Miller has friends in the Rangers squad. Any manager who feels he has to do that is either lacking self-confidence or hasn't figured out how to manage professional footballers.

 

But as I said all of this wouldn't have mattered a jot if his side could have won the important matches. Had we beaten Progress and Motherwell and given Celtic more of a game than we did PC would still be manager. That was his problem.

 

I certainly wasn't comparing PC to Sir Alex! They're not even in the same league! It was an analogy to show sometimes you need to remove the cause of the problem.

 

So, you are saying it is not a disciplinary problem, it's bad management because results were not good enough.

 

However, surely discipline is distinct from results. Even if you're winning there can still be disciplinary problems, therefore results are irrelevant. Whatever he did you'd be criticising because "results weren't good enough". If he kept Miller and MOH around and results are bad, it's poor management and weak; get rid of Miller and MOH and results are bad, it's poor management. He can't win here.

 

If a player is causing problems, then yes, you try to cajole them, but sometimes you get shot of them; sometimes there is no other way. What else could PC do, assuming they won't follow the manager's instructions? Keep around a disrupting influence? You sell them, or demote them. I don't think it's an unusual situation?

 

I do have a problem with player's thinking they are bigger, or more important than, the manager. The manager is the most authoritative figure at a club, in terms of the team. We can't have a situation where a player can choose whether a manager stays or not, or what tactics or players they choose -- why not just give Miller the manager's position? He doesn't have the skills or experience for that role, so he should've put up or shut up. A player being dropped is normal, but it should be kept in-house; as far as I'm aware it wasn't the manager that 'leaked it'.

 

You're more than welcome to bask in the glory of his sacking, but I don't quite see the need to twist every situation to prove that he was a bad manager. We're just flogging a dead horse. The OP was merely suggesting that we may have a disciplinary problem, as it's not the first time we've had players speaking out -- it's not specific to PC.

 

I'm more than willing to concede that he wasn't good enough; results weren't good enough; performances -- although good in parts -- were not good enough. I disagree he was directly at fault for the disciplinary problems.

Edited November 2, 2017 by Rousseau

[Darthter 542]

The OP was merely suggesting that we may have a disciplinary problem, as it's not the first time we've had players speaking out -- it's not specific to PC.

 

I don't think Rangers specifically have a discipline problem....I think it is throughout the game. Players believing they are bigger/more important than the manager.

If they don't like a managers decision, they squeal to the press....

[Rousseau 9,384]

I don't think Rangers specifically have a discipline problem....I think it is throughout the game. Players believing they are bigger/more important than the manager.

If they don't like a managers decision, they squeal to the press....

 

Apologies. I agree it's not Rangers, specifically: there is a growing problem in the game in general. Unfortunately, it's down to money: cheaper to sack manager than a squad!

[JohnMc 2,473]

I certainly wasn't comparing PC to Sir Alex! They're not even in the same league! It was an analogy to show sometimes you need to remove the cause of the problem.

 

So, you are saying it is not a disciplinary problem, it's bad management because results were not good enough.

 

However, surely discipline is distinct from results. Even if you're winning there can still be disciplinary problems, therefore results are irrelevant. Whatever he did disciplinary-wise you'd be criticising because "results weren't good enough". If he kept Miller and MOH around and results are bad, it's poor management and weak; get rid of Miller and MOH and results are bad, it's poor management. He can't win here.

 

If a player is causing problems, then yes, you try to cajole them, but sometimes you get shot of them; sometimes there is no other way. What else could PC do, assuming they won't follow the manager's instructions? Keep around a disrupting influence? You sell them, or demote them. I don't think it's an unusual situation?

 

I do have a problem with player's thinking they are bigger, or more important than, the manager. The manager is the most authoritative figure at a club, in terms of the team. We can't have a situation where a player can choose whether a manager stays or not, or what tactics or players they choose -- why not just give Miller the manager's position? He doesn't have the skills or experience for that role, so he should've put up or shut up. A player being dropped is normal, but it should be kept in-house; as far as I'm aware it wasn't the manager that 'leaked it'.

 

You're more than welcome to bask in the glory of his sacking, but I don't quite see the need to twist every situation to prove that he was a bad manager. We're just flogging a dead horse. The OP was merely suggesting that we may have a disciplinary problem, as it's not the first time we've had players speaking out -- it's not specific to PC.

 

I'm more than willing to concede that he wasn't good enough; results weren't good enough; performances -- although good in parts -- were not good enough. I disagree he was directly at fault for the disciplinary problems.

 

I'm not basking in any glory Rousseau and I'm not saying anything I've not been saying for months.

 

My only criticism of Pedro is that results weren't good enough, had the side been winning every match he could have sent Kenny Miller to Timbuktu with the under 11s and no one would have complained. It's a results business, that's what he's judged on. In my opinion focussing on apparent discipline issues is to miss the point. Do we think there are no unhappy players at Celtic just now? Of course there are but because their side is winning regularly any complaints are ignored or better managed in-house. My point is some Rangers fans have already decided we do have a discipline problem despite there being no actual evidence of one. I assume it helps frame how Pedro was let down instead of simply grasping the nettle that Pedro was a poor manager of Rangers and should never have been appointed in the first place. Where is the evidence that any player thinks they bigger or more important than the manager, I hear this narrative but it's based on nothing but supposition.

 

A player being dropped is "normal" but making an example of them by sending them away with the youths is not. No other manager, in nearly 20 years as professional, has ever accused Miller of being a disruptive influence, indeed quite the contrary. I repeat Pedro was a poor manager of Rangers, he struggled to manage his players and he didn't manage to get results or even performances required. There is no more criticism of him required, that's more than enough.

[JohnMc 2,473]

Let me be clear here....I don't think this is an issue specific to Rangers or Pedro Caixhina. It is more of a reflection on modern society etc.

 

A manager is trying to enforce certain discipline, but as soon as someone ain't happy, the story is all over the press and putting managers a VERY difficult situation. If the manager caves in to the media pressure, he is weak and opens the door for more problems. If he sticks to his guns, he's a dictator, a bad man-manager & has "lost the dressing room".

 

The player's part in in it is virtually forgotten. They just sit back & let things play out in the public eye.

 

 

As for PC's comments on MOH....he didn't just randomly blurt these things out in conversation - he was asked specific questions & regularly pushed for answers. However, people seem to forget that MOH struggled to get a game under the previous manager - PC at least put him out on loan, rather than sitting in the stands every week, which would most likely lead to a transfer offer being made from somewhere.

 

Is it really a modern issue? I'm not convinced. Players have always fed titbits to favoured journalists, and ill-discipline is hardly a modern problem, imagine a current international got drunk, climbed into a boat and had to be rescued by the coastguard, bloody hell the internet would explode with indignation. Managers and clubs have less power today, that's a factor certainly. Transfer windows, Bosman and agents have certainly tilted the balance of power but good managers adapt to this. In the end we need a manager who can deal with modern problems, there's little to be gained to harking back to another era.

[JohnMc 2,473]

I did, and said so. But the point being even though it was made up, it is not inconceivable or unbelievable.....

 

If someone could point out ANY bit that might NOT possibly be true....

 

None of it's true mate, you made it all up, that's the point.