Morton Club Together Updates - Page 70 - General Morton Chatter - TheMortonForum.com Jump to content
TheMortonForum.com

Morton Club Together Updates


Admin

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, GiGi said:

Agree with this. Even if they just signed it off 'Gordon, on behalf of MCT directors' or whoever it is, and who it is actually on behalf of. I doubt the entire MCT team are contributing to the content of the emails.

Not a huge thing but I agree we should know who the emails are coming from.

I disagree that it’s not a huge thing- we saw the lad Barr harping on about transparency in that staged interview with Gherry the other week, and we’ve had two emailed updates in the last few days in response to the criticisms on this very thread, yet still there’s nobody putting their name to these things. Had I not mentioned Gordon Ritchie’s name yesterday, when would it have been brought up in conversation? Especially when there was previously no profile of him at all and now he’s the only member of the leadership team who’s not prepared to be photographed for their website.

As LargsTON said last night, they are in no position to remain anonymous when they are responsible for our money.

It strikes me that this man in particular, who by all the accounts that I hear is extremely influential within MCT, has an arrogant belief that he isn’t answerable to the plebs in the support, and to a lesser extent, the more junior members of the Leadership Team, who I suspect will also be getting extremely frustrated with his continued refusal to cooperate with anything that requires revealing his identity and role to folk.

There were many criticisms of Nick Robinson back in the day, some of them extremely vitriolic, but in fairness to him, there were a number of times I recall him facing those critics head on, regardless of who they were from. It’s a lead our chairman in waiting could look to follow, and sooner rather than later.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not anti-colts in the pyramid. I am 1000000% anti-colts being parachuted into the SPFL when there is now a pyramid structure which clubs can join at the relevant tier. That tier should never be tier 4. Arguably not even tier 5. If they want to join, they can join the WoS. That's what it's there for. The WoS may choose to put them in their Premier rather than their tier 7 Conferences, but that's up to them.

  • Upvote 2

EOho8Pw.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let me say up front that I haven't joined. I do intend to when the deal is done but what I'm reading and hearing doesn't fill me with confidence. I've been into Cappielow a few times and it would appear that there are MCT folk wandering about. I say wondering about because I don't know what their roles are and from what I'm hearing neither do they. We have a new MCT website with lots of information on the people involved. But none of this is directly associated with their role and responsibility at Cappielow. 

MCT need to very quickly put a management structure in place at Cappielow. I know people will say that they have still to take over but that doesn't matter. At the very least we should know who will do what once the deal is signed. Just saying what their background expertise is is not enough.

I have heard various people asking who's making decisions at Cappielow and nobody appears to be getting an answer.

There really is nothing stopping MCT explaining who will run Morton when the deal is signed and who will be responsible for what at Cappielow. That's basic, and if we can't get the basics right then we really will get of to a bad start that we may not recover from. 

The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Cet Homme Charmant said:

I haven't signed up for MCT yet either, based on my (perhaps incorrect) assumption that until they actually get the keys of Cappielow I'd be as well transferring the money directly into GC's bank account. It was however my intention to join before the ink was even dry on the transfer of ownership contract, but now having real second thoughts. Until recently I've been very much in the 'cut them some slack' camp, but the initial signs aren't good and the goodwill tank is draining quickly.

I think I'll leave it now to see how things pan out over the next few months, before deciding whether or not to join. 

I think this is where I am.  I want it to work, but nothing that has happened so far fills me with confidence.  At the very least they should have a shadow structure in place ready to take over at handover time.  The level of signings and the general level of comms suggests a sense of different blazers, similar attitude.

  • Upvote 1

"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it."

 

George Bernard Shaw

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Toby said:

 

An issue I brought up looking for MCT’s stance on, a full three months ago, only to predictably be met with silence.

I’ve said before that I don’t think we should all be consulted on the likes of which brand of washing powder is used to clean the training gear, but matters as important as this, not just to Morton but to Scottish football as a whole absolutely should be something we’re consulted on. Obviously with time constraints preventing us being consulted, I’d happily accept Morton’s stance to be a resounding “fuck off” to the idea and for that to be communicated to us, preferably before that response is delivered to the SPFL.

If however, they’d actually addressed this query three months ago, they might have a better idea of the strength of the fans’ feelings about this, and not only those as strongly opposed as the majority on here.

Or perhaps we should just pay our money and shut up?

Aye, that's something the members should definitely be consulted on and kept updated. 

The reaction from fans when rangers were potentially going to be dropped into our league showed the feeling so would expect it to be the same if asked. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, vikingTON said:

So why were you harrumphing about not being appointed to the role instead?

This isn't the Russian White Army; you don't get a uniform and commission over the plebs just for turning up.

There wasn't a role to be appointed to?

  • Downvote 2

 

What Carew can do with a ball, I can do with an orange

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, capitanus said:

Whenever there is the changing of guard there is always someone that tries to weasel their way in on the coat tails of others.  Why shouldn't Hayfever try what others would, and succeed?

What makes you think my intentions are anything other than honourable?

  • Downvote 2

 

What Carew can do with a ball, I can do with an orange

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, RealTonKid said:

As a MCT member, I am vehemently against this proposal and will cancel my direct debit in a heartbeat if we vote in favour of proposals to admit Old Firm colts into the SPFL.

Here's the financial sweetener...

 

If there is a financial barrier to the SPFL that should be codified and open to anyone, as opposed to being mooted by the clubs who want to take advantage of it and put to a vote. That is, the SPFL (which comprises its member clubs) should set the asking price and take it from there. Otherwise you're risking any old barrow boy pitching up and making a mockery of the pyramid - precisely as is happening here.

But again, this is why we have a pyramid - so that outfits who want to make a go of it in senior football can enter at an appropriate level and then prove themselves on the pitch. That appropriate level needn't be the absolute bottom rung: in England, the phoenix club of Bury entered at tier 10, which is nowhere near the lowest tier for that region. (Formally they would be in the Manchester Football League at tier 11 otherwise; below that tiers become a bit hazy, but competitive, pyramid football is played in the Manchester area right down to tier 17.) But what is unequivocal is that in countries with functional league systems, you don't just rebuild the entire national league structure for the sake of two newcomers, and that is doubly true when those newcomers are reserve or youth teams.

In world football, perhaps no other major nation has done more to gerrymander its leagues for the big guns than has Argentina, but I imagine that even they would gasp in wonderment at this suggestion. It simply cannot be entertained. Even if the money were multiplied tenfold, it cannot be entertained. The OF colts, should they wish to enter the SPFL, need to get in line with everyone else in the West.

(For what it's worth, the reason I'm not against their entry on principle - that is, if they work their way up from tier 6, I don't have a problem with it - is that the old SFL used to have a third tier featuring reserve teams. Not especially successful was it, but it's not unprecedented. Countries like Germany, Spain, Austria, Portugal, France, Switzerland, and many others also have B, C, or even in very rare cases D teams in the pyramid without the sky falling. Indeed, early in professional football's development it wasn't unusual on the continent for clubs to field as many XIs as they had volunteers for, with the first team being professional and the rest being either part-timers, youths, or simply subs-paying amateurs. Such a model isn't necessarily problematic. There are many community-facing clubs in Scotland that could have a lot of teams on the park. That ought to be encouraged - but not at the cost of competition on the park.)

EOho8Pw.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is the sectarian bile that they will bring to the lower leagues.it was bad enough when Rangers were working their way through the leagues. And as someone mentioned before  4 more old firm games ( no matter what players are playing)and the shite that they bring. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, TRVMP said:

 

(For what it's worth, the reason I'm not against their entry on principle - that is, if they work their way up from tier 6, I don't have a problem with it - is that the old SFL used to have a third tier featuring reserve teams. Not especially successful was it, but it's not unprecedented. Countries like Germany, Spain, Austria, Portugal, France, Switzerland, and 

I can't remember that even although I'm no youngster but on checking is it Seasons 1949 to 1955 you are referring to? If so hardly relevant in today's much more recent changed league set up. Just for clarity I am totally against the proposal in any shape or form.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Toby said:

This is absolute nonsense and you probably know that.

It’s about inequality, two members being treated differently to the rest, distorting a perfectly good league and pyramid system and jumping the queue in front of worthy clubs who are trying to climb the ladder in the correct manner.

The sort of Rangers and Celtic fans that are likely to attend these games are anoraks, local parents with kids and perhaps the odd teenager that doesn’t have a bus fare. It’s hardly going to bring the 1980 cup final to Galabank or Borough Briggs.

If you’re going to argue against the colt teams, as I’d hope we all do, stick to the actual issues as to why the proposal is completely wrong instead of making up silly wee scenarios in your head that you can get yourself offended about.

I give you 2 BP youth cup finals a few years ago. 

  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Boogs49 said:

I can't remember that even although I'm no youngster but on checking is it Seasons 1949 to 1955 you are referring to? If so hardly relevant in today's much more recent changed league set up. Just for clarity I am totally against the proposal in any shape or form.

That's fair, it's so far in the past and so short-lived that it's not really relevant. I'm still not against it on principle. 

EOho8Pw.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm obviously not denying the existence of sectarianism among the Old Firm, by the way, but by far the worst sectarian abuse I ever heard was from a couple of Airdrie fans in a play-off game at Broadwood that I attended as a neutral. This would have been around 2004-ish. I daresay it's become less common since then.

EOho8Pw.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, TRVMP said:

I'm obviously not denying the existence of sectarianism among the Old Firm, by the way, but by far the worst sectarian abuse I ever heard was from a couple of Airdrie fans in a play-off game at Broadwood that I attended as a neutral. This would have been around 2004-ish. I daresay it's become less common since then.

Nobody’s denying the existence of sectarianism at Rangers and Celtic, my point is that it’s really not relevant to a debate about their colt teams. There are so many more relevant issues related to this that bringing sectarianism into it achieves nothing, other than perhaps detracting from the more pertinent points.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...