buster.

You don't get 19 caps for Mexico if you have no ability.....but neither can you ignore the reasons why his last cap was 3 years ago. There currently seems to be a mutual lack of interest between club and player that either gets (partly) resolved by a new manager or we try to mitigate the financial loss in January/summer. It's getting to the stage where he might get a game because there is nobody else left.

I think in his heart of hearts, Pedro knew it was only a matter of time from before the SPFL kicked off. Some of his comments towards the end seemed as much designed to hasten the process as to deepen siege mentality. To have any chance of working, a siege mentality can't have a significant 'enemy within' and even back when PC took over, there seemed to be a number of players who weren't fully on board and/or knew their futures weren't at the club under Pedro. There was a metaphorical 'cull', which isn't at all unusual when a new manager comes in but in this case there seemed to be acrimony in it, or at least reaching the public view because of various leaks. The 'cull' eventually saw a good number leave but Miller got a new contract. In late April, PC eventually offered Miller an extension after a fairly robust media push on the back of some decent performances. (When Keith Jackson starts a 'campaign' of sorts you know it's in exchange for something). We can speculate that no Miller may have given Pedro a better chance to succeed but the real issue is that the club would almost certainly have had a better chance in 2017/18 if we'd had gone about the managerial appointment in a more 'professional manner' than what AJ seemed to term as "institutional failure".

You are right, the title isn't quite right for the content, ie. lesson is not to choose title before scribbling the content. The boardroom dynamic in relation to decisions surrounding the hiring and firing of first team managers has been more than questionable. Alastair Johnson made strong comments on this (apparently aimed at Pedro Caixinha appointment). For a football club these are the big decisions (including relative financal impact, eg. transfer fees/salaries) and despite a recognition of this regarding the player recruitment of MW.......what followed was to play the same high-risk game with more money and at longer odds, then a period of chasing your losses before the inevitable firing of PC. ------------- The mainstream media side of things is more complicated because we have made 'enemies' out of so much of it when it would have always been better to be more selective in this regard and box clever where possible. What 'box clever' actually means should be a question for an experienced PR professional, rather than an ex-journalist taking his first stab at it. Some of the time this has been reactionary/apparently vindictive to appease fan outcry and Traynors whims. It tends to give you a day or two of positivity and then becomes more problematic. Unless you have something constructive to say then you are better saying nothing. DK is a case in point and everytime he goes in front of them, he only seems to extend the rod he has made for his own back.....and all the positives he may have mentioned will be forgotten as the negative is jumped upon. I don't have the answers but it's definately an area that needs work on and may actually be being addressed (recent advert for Comms & marketing diretor). You finish by mentioning leadership. Just as a football team is often built upon a spine, we need it within an effective structure throughout the club. Effective Boardroom dynamic (Strategy) Implementation (CEO) Football Operation (DoF) First Team manager (Pick a good one)

Of course they want and should have a say. That's what they are there to do,....but IMO it's about making the right/consistent decisions within a plan/framework/strategy rather than simply reacting with a tendency to go from the rough on one side of the fairway to a bunker, on the other. If the boardroom dynamic is 'difficult' and not conducive to decisive leadership/feasibility at a time when it is desperately needed, then surely something would have to change. That isn't aimed at any particular person(s),... but surely the collective need to somehow address this. From the outside looking in, the core of leadership throughout the club seems to be lacking. From a joined-up strategy coming from the boardroom..........to a hard-nosed & competent CEO to implement it on a daily basis...........to the communications coming from the club............to a first team operation wrt managerial appt. (Pedro) and two summer transfer windows. As another poster pointed out, there are potentially positive things happening that could be regarded as part of a longterm strategy, eg. DoF, new scouting operation, recent advertisment looking for Comms & marketing director....but the current focus is on the first team and after a good start (15/16), we've been all over the place.

By the year Lawwell increasingly gets to play with the fixture list. They've also postponed a fixture this month so as to be able to play a friendly elsewhere. Now the latter is doable because of new rules that were brought in but fixing an away fixture against a particular team for a particular date is taking this to another level. It's a Dundee home match but this will be mainly about Celtic and their wish to make more money and market the brand. It reeks of a club who don't only not care about sporting integrity, but openly flaunt it.

We released him and according to wiki didn't even get a compensation fee (Motherwell would later get one). If true, it would be typical of our management of contracts at that time.

That bet was always going to be a 'how much loose change in coins of less value than a pound have I got in my pocket' type of stake...!

How random was that ? Well done to the punter !

Generally fitness won't be a problem. I've just got 'a downer' on Kranjcar and can see him being a luxury we can't afford, ie. teams will actively look to get on top of him quickly, win ball and counter an exposed backline. I'd add that this is more gut feel than a football expert talking (I thought McKay was heading for scrap heap last summer ). On the plus side you have Rossiter and the competition for defensive midfielder. Difficult to see anyone else but Barton start but he'll not be able to relax. Looking forward to Saturday to see how MW lines the team up and I'd imagine he'll get a good response from the team. The following weekend at Dens park will probably be a more interesting test.

Rather than reacting simply to a defeat, it was more the manner of the defeat that has had some reading slightly more into it than a meaningless friendly result. MW has said that the pre-season has been far from ideal and perhaps that is refelected in the team not being at the stage he would have wanted a week prior to the league starting, including probably not knowing what his best starting XI are yet. The other question is how long will it take Kranjcar to get up to speed because he was so far off the pace that you begin to wonder if he's going to become a luxury we can't afford to start against decent opposition.

The piece of skill from Ibrahiamovic in 27 seconds was something else. The actual finish was pretty much standard ZI. Saw him in some CL games last season and ZI is definately on the way down and I was surprised MU signed him although I guess he's box office and helps the commercial brand. Obviously still a player but if MU want to compete at the very top level they are going to need footballers in their prime. Although I guess a one year contract means he won't be playing CL and it is more understandable. MUtd post Ferguson - Long term project who wasn't really backed / binned - Experienced supposedly safe pair of hands who got loads of money / binned - Throw mucho money at manager with great track record but has he past his best ?

It wasn't laziness yesterday, he was just way off the pace. His style is languid but he needs to be sharp to carry this off against decent opposition and not get closed down and become a passenger. I think you'll find the ICT's and Dundee's of the league will look to close him down quickly and it'll be up to NK to get up to a level where he'll be able to cope with that. We all know NK was a quality player and that we'll see glimpses of that but he'll need to get a lot fitter and sharper to make a contribution that helps make us a team who can win the league. To compete for the league we'll need to win most of our games from the get-go and it starts next weekend.

After seeing some of the pre-season games, I'd be surprised if we won it this year. Kranjcar looks way off the pace and unless he improves fitness and sharpness markedly, top tier sides will close him down very quickly and he'll become a bit of a luxury we won't be able to afford at times.....On the positive Windass has looked decent. I've preferred Rossiter to Barton tbh. JR looks a real player in the making.............. but at least that is a positive dilema. Without going through the whole team, when MW talks about a forward and a defender........if he were to get a decent one of each we'd be in a better place.

It was due to be presented to the SFA board by today, so I'd imagine it will go puiblic this week sometime.

Fans are always important. Bridges, of occasion are necessary We'll wait until the commission reports, then you can tell us what you think the club should do ?

What would you suggest the club do ?

That is hugely disappointing to hear.

We might end up playing Hamilton at Ibrox twice in 4 days

I think it is the following potentials in the draw tomorrow. Hamilton Inverness St.Johnstone Peterhead Queen of the South Motherwell Ayr Dundee Utd or Dunfermline (play tomorrow) The seeded teams include Alloa, Morton, Partick aswell as ourselves and the four teams in Europe.

Interesting to see Hill start. Probably earmarked for first choice going forward. Part of a more experienced spine of 'leaders'. Wallace (captain) Hill Barton Halliday Miller

We'll have to see what the commission says but there is no doubt both sets of fans will be criticised. The part played by the Hibs fans will hopefully be fully highlighted and reflected when it comes to punishment...and I agree regards the SC ban for Hibs because fans physically attacking football players on the field of play needs such a punishment to be seen implemented. ps. It was the Police Federation that spun a line via Jane Hamilton.

Ian The statement (in part) was weak and unsustainable. In as much as that position was unlikely to be able to be further defended at a later date, if/when the police investigated and brought subsequent charges that led to convictions. Since that statement, we have had the intervention of the Scottish Justice Minister (incidently, whose party would love the opportunity to go after Rangers) and the SPFL's reply which fell short of doing what the minister wanted but did vote through a resolution that puts more onus on clubs to tighten regulations on unacceptable conduct. So even if the club in it's statement thought it possible to fully follow up on it, the ground rules/enviroment have since changed. To be clear and only IMO, the initial statement was in part, making a rod for the clubs own back, ie. a position that was unlikely to be sustainable and after further events became clearly unsustainable. --------------------- ie. the club (as a member of the SPFL) has taken the only route realistically open to it at this time but has clarified what will happen if those charged are found 'not guilty'. We live in a time when Scottish legislation openly discriminates against the football supporter and has helped to set a tone which was emphasized by the Justice Minister post SCF when putting pressure on Scottish clubs/governing body.

They certainly seem to be plodding their way through this investigation. You can almost visualise a picture of 1 nearly retired polisman having been assigned a large cupboard and given a TV and accessories, a pile of videos, an instruction manuel of how to screen grab and put together a tiled line-up of faces with the brief that when you have completed a set of 12, send it up to X.....but on the last weekend of July when the commission is due to report just send up whatever you have ready, even if it's only 5.

It remains to be seen how this will pan out but if it were to fizzle out, it would send out some very negative messages / invitations.

Unfortunately it becomes more understandable in light of what has happened since the SCF. - Scottish Justice Minister calls on strict liability to be adopted by clubs or else other action may be forced upon him - SPFL refuses to do so - However SPFL vote through a resolution that puts more onus on clubs to tighten regulations on unacceptable conduct