BishopBrennan

Where has anyone said that?

I'm not against a ban being reviewed if/when someone can demonstrate that they've changed their ways, but it would need to be a substantially longer period than a year.

Chris Dodds is reporting in the Tele today that Brian Rice and Sir Douglas of Imrie are both interested in the job.

Oh fuck right off.

I'd like to think that we'd be exploring the loan market for strikers in January. Knowles is already gone, and we should be punting Reilly, which should free up a decent amount of cash to bring a player in.

One uninformed decision (amateur directors appointing a DoF), followed by a series of decisions being made with a more informed decision-making model, is going to have a higher success rate than the current model. Increasing the expertise we have in our football decision-making model increases the amount of footballing decisions we're going to get right. Absolutely nobody is suggesting that a DoF appointment is going to be a magic wand that means we never get another footballing decision wrong. It's optimising our football decision making to ensure that we are, at the very least, guided and advised by someone with industry expertise. Nobody in the fanbase would accept amateurs signing off on the club's books or writing up the takeover agreement between MCT and Golden Casket because they'd an amateur interest in accountancy or law for thirty years. The potential consequences are catastrophic. The fact that our representatives on the Morton board are in favour of this approach in footballing operations, the most important facet of the club, is as unacceptable as it is staggering. Anyone, upto and including the people on the current club board who have appointed themselves as football decision makers, who can't comprehend the case for a DoF are simply choosing not to.

Absolutely. With a good sporting director overseeing the footballing facets of the club, and Chris Ross overseeing the business facets of the club, we are fan owned and expert run. That's the pitch we were given when asked to get involved in this project. Whilst we've amateurs making footballing decisions, making an arse of it, and refusing to answer the fanbase on the back of it, we're a million miles away from that.

The justification for not appointing a sporting director in the Morton Q+A concerned me hugely. I'd argue the exact opposite point - Morton simply can't afford not to appoint a sporting director. MCT membership is nowhere near where it was predicted to be at this point of the first season; MCT's credibility seems to be dwindling by the month; and, largely thanks to MCT's first footballing decision, results on the pitch are pish. I'd say that appointing a successful SD/DoF would go some way to turning the tide on all the biggest issues currently facing MCT.

I'd like to think the club would be open to that possibility, providing it isn't Shelley Kerr.

Andy Ritchie's role at the club should not extend beyond being an (excellent) stream commentator, and shaking hands and mingling at hospitality. Ritchie is a club legend, but let's not go down the road of thinking that automatically makes him a coach, a manager or anything else.

I know of at least one person who submitted a question related to the Lithgow signing.

I’ve just watched the Q&A (twice), and to say it is uninspiring is being generous. I have absolutely no qualms with the footballing aim of the season being Championship survival, along with striving for sustainability. Between Lesley Ann, who could sell snow to the Eskimos, and Chris Ross coming on board with a solid background of income generation, I’ve got no concerns that the club will maximise revenues. I took issue when my question about football expertise on the board was kicked into the long grass. This issue has been raised for the best part of a year now, both internally and externally, so blustered ‘we’re considering it’ type answers really don’t cut the mustard at this stage of proceedings. This is particularly galling when our football decision model thus far has left us as the lowest scoring team in the SPFL with a manager we don’t seem able to sack because of the length of deal we offered. Stability can quite easily be achieved at this level with one year rolling contracts. If only there had been someone in place at the time to advise the board of that… I don’t buy the ‘when finances allow’ argument either. It was acknowledged at least once in the video that a winning football team on the pitch helps boost crowds and engagement, which were stated as key aims of the club in the near future. So, improving footballing performance has tangible benefits to the rest of the club. A good appointment to oversee footballing operations could quite easily justify their salary through an increase in league prize money alone. I'd go as far as arguing that Morton can't afford not to appoint a Sporting Director. To examine the worst-case outcome, MCT overseeing a limp-wristed relegation in their first season will affect their credibility massively. I’d argue that MCT are quite a way behind where they expected to be at this stage of the project in terms of their membership numbers, gaining the trust of the fanbase and their overall credibility. I’m open to all accusations of hyperbole, but if MCT do not change the current manager and/or their governance model, and the club go down this year, it will be the first nail in Morton Club Together’s coffin. And a large one at that. I can see absolutely no positive case for amateurs continuing to make footballing decisions at the club who already have a professional reputation that is lower than a snake’s arse. I also found the choice not to name Gus’ immediate line manager strange. Where exactly does that decision fit into the ‘open, honest and transparent’ policy we were pitched? Taking the current state of affairs at face value, and giving MCT the benefit of the doubt, it is poor decision making that I’d label as ‘penny wise and pound foolish’. Ineffective football decision making at board level will hinder the club’s results, reputation and therefore engagement and ultimately finances. If you were to take a more cynical look at the current set-up, it would appear that we have a director who simply wants to play Dougie Rae on our money, whilst lurking in the shadows to avoid any potential repercussions. Neither of those scenarios are acceptable, and both could quite easily have disastrous consequences.

If you fancy a romantic birthday dinner for you and the Mrs then make sure you go to The Norseman Wine Bar before the game. They do great food and have a fine selection of wine. I'd thoroughly recommend the lobster thermidor.

Yeah, my take on those programme notes was that Gus is going to be in charge for the foreseeable future, regardless of the next two results, which is worrying to say the least. Remember when we anticipated a bit of positive momentum after the fan takeover?