Managerial Discipline?

[stewarty 1,876]

The point has been made already, but looking back, its pretty clear that Pedro's man management was a clear weakness. For whatever reason, he seemed to alienate most of our senior squad members, to the point where it was not only limiting the players who he would select, but it was having a detrimental impact on performances.

 

We can dress that up however you like and point to indiscipline or unprofessional conduct on behalf of the players, but the bottom line is he wasn't getting results and thats when these problems become more and more prominent.

 

I for one quite liked the public persona of Pedro, but for whatever reason that wasn't translated into the dressing room and any trust and backing he had just eroded over time.

 

One of the reasons for that could be communication and whether English as his 3rd (?) language, limited the message or made it difficult to translate.

 

And another sign that it was not player discipline at the heart of the issue was the way they pulled together and put in a performance for Murty at Murrayfield.

[JohnMc 2,473]

The chap who decides who gets the armband on the day is - AFAIK - the manager. I doubt there is much talk between the players or some democracy going on. Perhaps people may utter their comments, but I reckon the gaffer decides. Unless I am mistaken, Miller has coached the development sides alongside Murty since Warburton. Miller sure has bags of experience and Murty sure respects him. Will he know all about what went on between Miller and PC (did the two had a few talks "in private")? There is so much we don't know that saying who's correct and who isn't becomes rather spongy. A few "old bulls" will sure tell a young chap like Murty a few things and I reckon Murty will heed their advice, even if not 100%. And I also reckon that the "Scottish bulls'" words will have a greater impact too. That is almost natural and probably not too wrong. We have to wait and see though whether e.g. a Miller will keep his form of last week and if not, whether he still retains his place. If so, one actually MAY conclude that after what happened to Barton and now also PC, that there is a cabal of players who wield enough power to oust people, a cabal that does not take it well if they are told in no uncertain terms that they are not good enough. No doubt the latter idea will be ridiculed, and perhaps rightly so. But can anyone say for sure that this ain't the case? I think not.

 

We'll have to wait and see how Murty will handle the task at hand and may come to a better understanding of the problems thus far.

 

Does this cabal you just invented have a name dB? You really should give them one, and make it sound menacing or secretive that'll heighten the sense of threat they wield to anyone stupid enough to cross paths with them... Sorry, I'm ridiculing you, amn't I, and you predicted that too so maybe your secret powerful cabal isn't such a batshit crazy idea after all. Or is that what I'm meant to think? You've no idea how high this goes!

 

Honestly? What's with the allergy to facts on this thread? It's like a rejected storyline for Scooby Doo.

[JohnMc 2,473]

The only bits I actually made up were the bits about going in the huff & talking to the media....All the other bits are indeed fact, unless you know otherwise.

 

As to KM's return....again, this may be completely untrue, but the board have just sacked the manager, the team needs some kind of stability...that stability may have come by reinstating KM to the starting 11 & allowing him to take the arm band. It may simply have been the easiest route to restore some harmony.

 

Here's something to consider...in an earlier post it was mentioned about PC being unhappy with Dorran's for giving KM the armband, yet Dorran's wasn't dropped or sent out with the youths following that allegedly major bust-up.....

 

Have you watched the incident where Dorrans gives Miller the armband? Does he look coerced or bullied into it?

 

Anyway, Miller was sent to the youths for allegedly speaking to the Record about the incident, not for the incident itself.

[JohnMc 2,473]

Interestingly....

There's an article in todays National which kinda goes over this thread. The sub header reads "Kenny Miller found himself in a power struggle".

That kinda sums up the situation....No player should EVER be in a power struggle with their manager....

 

I missed the National today. Was it written by that guy who writes in broad Scots or by the guy who's a dog?

[JohnMc 2,473]

There was rumours of Miller having problems with Pedro from a very early stage and it was even thought he was moving to Hibs. Then it died down for a while until the final explosion.

 

Pedro gave him a one year contract extension in April so you have to assume they were getting on okay then.

 

You know, even if Miller was completely to blame, and it's a big if, for what happened, that still doesn't prove there's a discipline problem at the club. It's one player clashing with the manager, not an endemic malady running through the club.

[Rousseau 9,385]

It's worthy of discussion, that's what we're doing. My contention is there isn't a discipline problem, there was a management problem. The OP stated pretty clearly he felt there was a discipline problem at Rangers in his opening post and why weren't players being punished.

 

No, being sent to train with the youths or on your own is a punishment. A player being dropped for form reasons is kept in the 1st team squad. An assistant manager or coach is tasked with building the player back up, either through tough love or encouragement or one on one training. That's how it works at almost every club.

 

Look at what actually happened with Miller. After another poor performance against Celtic there were reports in the media that the club had held a meeting with all the players and apparently PC had criticised the UK ones and given Dorrans in particular a hard time for giving Miller the captain's armband when he came on. Is that the kind of thing that should make its way into the papers? No, it shouldn't. At the same time is it the kind of thing the manager should have said after the Celtic game? It struck me as totally missing the issues the team had. He then dropped Miller and sent him with the youths to London. The clear insinuation was he blamed Miller for the story. He might even have been correct, who knows. So all of a sudden the support are blaming Miller for undermining the manager, for disrupting the dressing room and for the dark nights. But there is still no evidence that a. the story was wrong or b. that Miller was the source of it. It was a further 3 weeks before before Miller's agent expressed his anger that his client was being blamed for something he said he didn't do and being punished by the club for it. Is that ill-discipline or frustration at bad management?

 

Now if the incident with Miller was a one off it could be written off as a clash for which there can only be one winner; the manager. But it wasn't a one off, Pedro was falling out with players, the media and with opposition managers with incredible regularity.

 

There's no actual evidence we've a discipline problem.

 

I said "out of contention", not dropped through poor form. If he's been punished then surely something has happened. It is a manager's prerogative to do as he see's fit.

 

The veracity of the story is irrelevant -- as you say, it should not be leaked -- so the fact that it was implies someone wanted it to be and that's a disciplinary problem, to me. To be honest, you seem to say so yourself, with "Is that the kind of thing that should make its way into the papers? No, it shouldn't." If there are stories being leaked, then there is a disciplinary problem.

 

He wasn't "falling out with players, the media and with opposition managers with incredible regularity"; he had clearly fallen out with Miller, but the rest is propaganda and rumour: he said MOH wasn't his type of player, which is normal -- perhaps not in a public way but its difficult to avoid that when so-called 'journalists' are asking specific questions looking for a 'Rangers-bad' story; he's not criticised any manager directly from what I recall, it was fanned by the media, and then other managers were picking fights with him; and I'm glad he was dismissive of the media, because they are a joke.

 

Clearly there is evidence; it's too regular to be otherwise, and not specific to PC as it happened under MW and Ally too. We'll just have to agree to disagree if you can't see it.

Edited November 3, 2017 by Rousseau

[Rousseau 9,385]

Interestingly....

There's an article in todays National which kinda goes over this thread. The sub header reads "Kenny Miller found himself in a power struggle".

That kinda sums up the situation....No player should EVER be in a power struggle with their manager....

 

I missed the National today. Was it written by that guy who writes in broad Scots or by the guy who's a dog?

 

We've lost the debate if you're using the National as a source...

[der Berliner 3,251]

Does this cabal you just invented have a name dB? ....

 

Would you read carefully, you would note the subjunctive in If so, one actually MAY conclude ...

 

As I (actually) said, a lot is being flung about and almost accepted as gospel when it goes against PC as well as Barton, yet do we know for sure? What we know is that nigh any stuff leaked is being leaked by sources close to people who were annoyed by gaffer and thus spread discontent. As is stated above ... and can be easily verified by the standard of info that was put out.

Edited November 4, 2017 by der Berliner