McPherson sacked - Page 6 - General Morton Chatter - TheMortonForum.com Jump to content
TheMortonForum.com

McPherson sacked


TRVMP

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 287
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Get Millen to fuck. Can't understand why he's been allowed to continue in a role that he has proved so inept at.

There's a storm on the horizon

And for that I can't see the sun

For I'll keep a waiting on the pavement

For the ice cream van to come

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't believe people are mentioning absolute whamees such as Kevin Thomson - just watch him during the Hibs vs **** semi, jesus wept - and Kettlewell.

Think I've mentioned it before but worked with Kevin Thomson's cousin recently. Boy said that he got offered the Falkirk job but Kelty offered him nearly double what Falkirk could. Also mentioned that when he asked for money for a defender and he got O'Ware, they gave him the option to sign a back up for him as he was injury prone. Would be daft to leave Kelty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a time and place for taking a gamble on first time managers and I'd generally say that when you're in a dire relegation battle with a flawed squad, that isn't it. However, when the list of experienced names is as uninspiring as the current one and there's also a reasonable chance that some of those names will be looking at the Morton job as a second choice to Falkirk, I think we could do far worse than Imrie.

There's always a risk that any first time manager could turn out to be a Johansson or even John Potter level dud, but if it's a choice between that risk and Brian Rice then Imrie's less of a gamble.

Brian Wake my Lord, Brian Wake

Brian Wake my Lord, Brian Wake

Brian Wake my Lord, Brian Wake

Oh Lord, Brian Wake

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Certainly an attraction to Imrie in that he is an unknown quantity. would surely have a bit of desire. 

I agree about Rice, he's been an assistant for 2 decades then struggled to make an impact as a manager. Would probably rather be in the trenches with Imrie than Rice at this stage. 

Personal view is that if Ugwu stays fit, we have a decent chance to get up the table. Don't see enough goals coming from elsewhere regardless of who the manager is. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Imrie is an interesting one. Worked hard to get to to a decent level from the juniors up and looks to have been doing a lot of coaching towards the end of his playing career so a hard worker with a bit of confidence and ambition. 

A gamble as a first time manager but could be a good option. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Imrie the first name I've heard that intrigued me. No idea how suitable he'd be for the role but if he's impressive enough at the interview stage I'd be alright if we gave him a shot. 

Good people will do good things, bad people will do bad things, but only with religion do good people do bad things!

 

32.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll repeat what I said earlier in the thread - I'm less interested in who gets it and more interested in what the club actually wants. What are their aims and what are their metrics and what is their vision for the role?

Their public words are, the aim is survival in the Championship. We're still very much in the fight for that. So why did they punt Gus? Was it over style of play? Was it because he lost the dressing room?

Right now I have no idea what the remit of the manager actually is, because prior to Saturday at 6pm there was no indication from the club that they were unhappy with the results or where we were in the table. So what's the actual plan, what do they actually want the manager to achieve and how?

EOho8Pw.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, TRVMP said:

I'll repeat what I said earlier in the thread - I'm less interested in who gets it and more interested in what the club actually wants. What are their aims and what are their metrics and what is their vision for the role?

Their public words are, the aim is survival in the Championship. We're still very much in the fight for that. So why did they punt Gus? Was it over style of play? Was it because he lost the dressing room?

Right now I have no idea what the remit of the manager actually is, because prior to Saturday at 6pm there was no indication from the club that they were unhappy with the results or where we were in the table. So what's the actual plan, what do they actually want the manager to achieve and how?

My understanding that Gus's target was a points total that was built around an 8th place finish. 

The draw on Saturday put us well under that target. Got to assume that is 1.1 to 1.2 points per game (maybe higher to guarantee 8th), so 13 points from 16 games is well behind where we'd hope to be. 

Perhaps mood amongst the fans not helping. I thought after getting the draw Gus would get at least another week, but got to assume Saturday's decision was premeditated on the part of the board given how quickly things moved after full time. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gus may have been a good guy and exactly what was required off the park but he is in a results business and they have not been good enough. I suspect the insipid performance against QoS and the last-gasp draw with Ayr accompanied by the vitriol from the stands forced the Board to take decisive action.  Never forget though MCT are complicit in this mess having offered up a two-year contract and a performance benchmark of 8th. As fans, we need more ambition on and off the park.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, piehutt said:

My understanding that Gus's target was a points total that was built around an 8th place finish. 

The draw on Saturday put us well under that target. Got to assume that is 1.1 to 1.2 points per game (maybe higher to guarantee 8th), so 13 points from 16 games is well behind where we'd hope to be. 

Perhaps mood amongst the fans not helping. I thought after getting the draw Gus would get at least another week, but got to assume Saturday's decision was premeditated on the part of the board given how quickly things moved after full time. 

 

That all sounds perfectly reasonable. It also sounds completely, 100% incompatible with a two-year deal and aims of managerial stability.

EOho8Pw.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...