vikingTON

Murray stated in the Tele last week that Delaney couldn't be re-signed because it wasn't affordable to have two first team left backs in the squad. So either he is lying, or you and many others are being complacent about our options. I expect any left back option that is added to be of a cheap ringer/gamble of a loan variety. Though if available, it would make more budgetary sense to add an experienced centre back who can cover left back too. The die was cast for this downgrade, back when Longridge was ludicrously given a contract extension about five weeks out from the end of last season.

While some of our midfield signings have been encouraging, it's going to be a long and quite dreadful season if we persist with this utter nonsense of a system, only with weaker full back and sand dancer options than last season.

Nothing sums up the Walter Mitty world that the two Teuchter clubs perpetually live in, than Ross County magically registering an exact break-even amount. Get HMRC in to give both them and 'Uncle Roy' a comprehensive audit.

There's no need to apologise for a delay in regular communications. But I don't think it requires a full comms update for MCT to respond to a development that is being discussed on unofficial channels such as social media and here too. A stock response like 'MCT can confirm/deny that _________. The process for/further details of __________ will be communicated to all members in the next monthly update.' could be sitting there, ready to be filled in and fired out by anyone with the seniority to do so.

Call me picky, but as an MCT member I'd like to have some actual confirmation of any resignation of a director; as opposed to a post on a social media forum that people either shouldn't or don't engage with, from 4-5 days ago. I have checked the email junk filter multiple times (which many MCT communications tend to end up in - as did the GMFC away top launch) when this development was shared on this forum at the start of the week. I don't think I've missed the official (brief) memo that would be appropriate to recognise any such change. The wider Morton/Greater Greenock ecosystem is bad enough for encouraging 'ITK' sweetie women (100% male btw) and taxi driver level bullshit mongers to proliferate, without a neglect of straightforward communication from MCT contributing to that situation.

Too close... causing what issue exactly?

Anyone who signs up for the 'Hamilton Accies project' (or indeed the 'East Kilbride project') is displaying their mercenary disinterest for all to see. Better off not to have such wasters in the squad.

We cannot even remotely afford to have standard Championship level players as backup. What sort of relative budget do you think exists at the club right now? This should also qualify the confidence from other quarters that we will find 'an upgrade' - it's not a position where we or other clubs have great bargaining strength. It's probable that Longridge will at least start out as our left back option, while we run the usual parade of trialists and ringers. Perhaps we'll get a good option either on the open market or holding out for a loan of a young player, but the distinct likelihood is that we'll go into July and probably August too in a weaker position.

Moffat certainly had his best season at the club last time round, but if his wage expectations are beyond the wage structure at the club when Wilson, Savoury etc. are not, then it only confirms that wingers attract a foolish premium in player cost that their marginal impact on team performances and results cannot justify, when every pound in the budget has to be used wisely. Hopefully the other and inferior wingers will leave as well, and we can focus on enhancing the existing strengths of the squad instead of bringing in yet more third-rate jobbers out wide.

One further change that the club should be considering is to have short packages for tickets - such as three home games in a row, or any 3 from a defined run (first 6, middle 6, last 6 fixtures?). The walk-up price is simply too high to encourage people to attend, if they don't have the availability or opportunity to buy a ST. The overall saving on the ST compared to walk up is the right policy - but there should also be a halfway house allowing flexible attendance between the two. I don't think that £50 for a three game package is unreasonable - and from a commercial view you are locking in that income from the first game too.

There is a contradiction running through the statement between drawing a line under last season, a fresh start, setting standards etc. and then handing out new offers to far too many players who were collectively responsible for that end. I'm a broken record on this, but actions should speak louder than words - you just can't declare your standards without showing significant consequences for not meeting them. I'd have exchanged a slightly weaker squad or at least greater turnover in the squad this summer, to clear decks and set that standard.

Much happier to take a gamble on a player like Savoury. We're already retaining quite a few in that area of the park, albeit more defensive options, so can and should be taking that type of risk to freshen things up plans potentially add a game changer. It's much better than going back yet again to players who either failed the first time or didn't impress at all recently.

Hawd me back from buying a dozen for this titanic occasion.

1) The number of players that we've successfully coached to achieve the potential of rough diamonds is also very, very small. For every Nicky Cadden there have been about 50 other players who either performed at par or were duds. 2) The rough diamond category could be applied to just about any signing - especially those who came through a youth setup at the likes of the Old Firm, who are ten a penny. Despite being rolled out for pearl clutching purposes when a new player signing gets criticised every summer - though you are not using it for this purpose - it doesn't justify signing any specific player, many of which are highly likely to be dung at Championship level. 3) Given the above points in addition to your otherwise accurate summary, we need to be considering the point of being one of the smallest full-time clubs in the pyramid - in budgetary terms at least. The only remaining justification I can see for persisting with a full-time model is if the Estrella group are brought on board, and can offer a totally different pool of players who desire full-time professional training in order to join the club. The scraping the barrel exercise within Scottish football, an occasional English non league ringer and relying on key loans year in and year out is achieving nothing.

You can make an individual case for any one or two of these players (as well as the likes of Longridge etc.) re-signing. The issue is that when these cases keep being made for all of the same players of marginal value as last season - only another year older - then you are not improving the squad by a sufficient degree to expect any significant progress next season. Between contract renewals and offers on the table, we are committing too much of our resources too soon to a squad that simply didn't deliver in the campaign just finished. While next season is going to be yet another transition, the squad still merits greater renewal than this.