Interviews

[RFCRobertson 11,778]

16 minutes ago, K.A.I said:

No-one disputes that but you get back to the top by making correct decisions on and off the park and we haven't made one yet 

Agree'd. The boards approach to both the footballing side and public relations is farcical.

Pedro does feel like a scapegoat or just a "look, I appointed him, its HIS fault". 

[centenarystand 2,227]

1 hour ago, K.A.I said:

The problem with an interview stage is that a clown like Pedro who talks a good game can come across well and wrangle it - which is exactly what happened. 

I get what the OP is saying to be honest. 

You know what i think you might be right there.

Wouldn't take much to pull the wool over the eyes of those buffoons.

[Turnberry18 3,204]

1 minute ago, OhW said:

The presentation he gave would have been one of the factors which the board took into consideration, yes.

Obviously not. I think, according to some, they looked at him, he looked at them, and then they gave him the job.

[WeirFleckNRothen 1,789]

1 minute ago, OhW said:

The presentation he gave would have been one of the factors which the board took into consideration, yes.

Where is this pish coming from? How can this even come up in topic, then used as a basis to support an argument against Caixinha's appointment?

Incredible shite.

[Ryju84 3,170]

Have to disagree with some of the Pedro haters on here, still... (for the timebeing). 

I know managers who talk the talk in interviews. I have one. 

Some of my team members were lazy, incompetent, and taking the piss. 

I work in the private sector, so we got them punted. No unions or wishywashy public sector strikes. 

I don't have to do their work as well as my own. The team productivity increased. The team morale improved. 

 

Bottom line, any manager could talk the talk in any job - including football management. But all it takes is a handful of team members to make you question your own leadership ability. 

[Bydo 3,215]

4 minutes ago, WeirFleckNRothen said:

Where is this pish coming from? How can this even come up in topic, then used as a basis to support an argument against Caixinha's appointment?

Incredible shite.

I posted it because the topic title is about the interview process- I reckon that's about as relevant as it gets.

[K.A.I 36,183]

2 minutes ago, Ryju84 said:

Have to disagree with some of the Pedro haters on here, still... (for the timebeing). 

I know managers who talk the talk in interviews. I have one. 

Some of my team members were lazy, incompetent, and taking the piss. 

I work in the private sector, so we got them punted. No unions or wishywashy public sector strikes. 

I don't have to do their work as well as my own. The team productivity increased. The team morale improved. 

 

Bottom line, any manager could talk the talk in any job - including football management. But all it takes is a handful of team members to make you question your own leadership ability. 

Your bumbling on like Ricky Gervais in the office there 

[WeirFleckNRothen 1,789]

1 minute ago, Bydo said:

I posted it because the topic title is about the interview process- I reckon that's about as relevant as it gets.

How do you know that Caixinha gave a powerpoint presentation? Not that I give a fuck, but how do you know that he was the only one? Was it you that posted about the other candidates turning-up with just a pad and pen?

I don't even know why I'm asking, to be honest.

[ZZed 4,510]

7 hours ago, GeeSS said:

We are Rangers why on earth did we hold interviews for the position of manager? We should be identifying our target and appointing him we are still a big name and paying good money aclub our size should not be asking for applications ! Next we appoint a football? Board to interview the applicants (Robertson and Park jr) what qualifies them for this very important role? Why did we not as people such as Walter,Souness, etc to form the board along with a director of football (who should have been appointed before a manager). The whole set up is wrong!  Where is the leadership? The director of football? The scouting network?  

Sorry but you don't seem to have grasped where our club is at the moment. We are not able to offer the top tier of football management the funds they would want and we can not afford to pay millions in compensation to clubs for taking them. The boards duty is to appoint the manager (Ferguson - Moyes went well, Walter-McCoist went well.) they know the financial budgets and what is manageable at the club. We have not been able to recruit a DoF yet, so should we have stuck with our under 20's manager in charge of the first team, matter of opinion that one. The DoF is the one to sort out the scouting network until we have one then it falls to the manager. Would the board have accepted our under 20's managers recommendations about who should leave and what players we should get in, as we will need to act as our European adventure starts shortly. Should we have left it until a manger came in and left them with 4 weeks to recruit players. We had to appoint someone and get them in place so they could assess the current squad, inform them they these players were not good enough and to identify and start to recruit new players. If you think Pedro is the man or it should have been someone else is opinion. The board had to act and it did, we now live with it.

[WeirFleckNRothen 1,789]

Just now, OhW said:

What are you on about? Why would he give a presentation if if they were going to disregard it. Why even give interviews if they don't matter? If he had given a terrible presentation they might have thought "this guy is shite". 

What?

I'm asking how on earth someone on this forum knows that Caixinha gave a powerpoint presentation.

[Bydo 3,215]

3 minutes ago, WeirFleckNRothen said:

How do you know that Caixinha gave a powerpoint presentation? Not that I give a fuck, but how do you know that he was the only one? Was it you that posted about the other candidates turning-up with just a pad and pen?

I don't even know why I'm asking, to be honest.

It was me, and I never said that I knew anything. I told you what someone had been discussing at the POTY awards, and I've also learned in this thread that it's been discussed by posters on here independently.

[Turnberry18 3,204]

3 minutes ago, WeirFleckNRothen said:

What?

I'm asking how on earth someone on this forum knows that Caixinha gave a powerpoint presentation.

Giving powerpoint presentations at interviews isn't that unusual, in fact in academia it's quite common, for instance. It wouldn't surprise me if it happened, which is not to say that it did.

[WeirFleckNRothen 1,789]

1 minute ago, Turnberry18 said:

Giving powerpoint presentations at interviews isn't that unusual, in fact in academia it's quite common, for instance. It wouldn't surprise me if it happened, which is not to say that it did.

It's common practice at university and college, never mind a job interview. I'm not saying it's unusual, I'm asking how on earth someone on here would know that he was the only one to use Powerpoint.

It just sounds like a shite, viscious rumour.

[WeirFleckNRothen 1,789]

7 minutes ago, Bydo said:

It was me, and I never said that I knew anything. I told you what someone had been discussing at the POTY awards, and I've also learned in this thread that it's been discussed by posters on here independently.

Nothing more than a rumour, then. A daft one at that.

[Turnberry18 3,204]

Just now, WeirFleckNRothen said:

It's common practice at university and college, never mind a job interview. I'm not saying it's unusual, I'm asking how on earth someone on here would know that he was the only one to use Powerpoint.

It just sounds like a shite, viscious rumour.

It doesn't really; it's hardly incomprehensible that someone would take a powerpoint to an interview, and neither is it that someone would talk in such a manner to wow an interviewing panel. Both of these are possible, anywhere.

[WeirFleckNRothen 1,789]

Just now, OhW said:

That's not what I responded to. I was saying that, if he did give a presentation, of course it would be factored into the board's decision. 

It's not uncommon for managerial candidates to give a powerpoint presentation. Big Sam said he had one ready for his first England interview. 

Of course it isn't. As I said, it's common practise at university and college, never mind job interviews. In this day-and-age, managers have apps created for opponent analysis, so I would be shocked if a manager attended an interview without carrying-out some sort of presentation.

My overall point is that it sounds like a daft rumour with the intent to be viscious; the suggestion that his use of a a presentation, and the other candidates failure to use it, secured or helped him secure the job.

[Bydo 3,215]

1 minute ago, WeirFleckNRothen said:

It's common practice at university and college, never mind a job interview. I'm not saying it's unusual, I'm asking how on earth someone on here would know that he was the only one to use Powerpoint.

It just sounds like a shite, viscious rumour.

Just now, WeirFleckNRothen said:

Nothing more than a rumour, then. A daft one at that.

You know what, perhaps it is. But the fact that two totally unconnected sources have discussed makes it worth comment.

However, I'm of the opinion that football management is not a business that should require there to be such a presentation at interview. The board should have had someone who knows football on there. Someone who 'gets' what it's like to manage Rangers. What the fuck do SR or any of the rest of them know about tactics and style of play?

I really really hope that they are proved to be right. We can't afford to be looking again this time next year with the same set up at board level.

[WeirFleckNRothen 1,789]

1 minute ago, OhW said:

What's vicious about it? Nobody is saying that he was wrong to do a powerpoint (if he did). 

The suggestion that was made earlier in the topic; it was why he secured the job.

[Bydo 3,215]

Just now, WeirFleckNRothen said:

The suggestion that was made earlier in the topic; it was why he secured the job.

I think you missed the point a bit. The suggestion isn't 'wow he did a power point and the rest didn't, give him the job right now'- the suggestion is that perhaps the boards judgement was clouded by someone who used said power point to talk a good game and cover up his lack of experience and relatively low track record of success.

[WeirFleckNRothen 1,789]

3 minutes ago, Bydo said:

I think you missed the point a bit. The suggestion isn't 'wow he did a power point and the rest didn't, give him the job right now'- the suggestion is that perhaps the boards judgement was clouded by someone who used said power point to talk a good game and cover up his lack of experience and relatively low track record of success.

Perhaps.

Perhaps Pedro asked Stewart Robertson about the career progression opportunities associated with position and complimented Paul Murray's hair - which the other candidates failed to do - which secured him the role.

I find it mental that this is even a topic of discussion, considering there isn't a shred of evidence.

1 minute ago, OhW said:

We are now back to where we started. My only point was that, if he did give a presentation, then of course the board factored it into their decision. 

I just did a search on "Pedro Caixinha PowerPoint" and "interestingly" the only places you see people talking about Pedro and PowerPoint is scum forums. I will accept that it's being used a stick to beat him with by outsiders, in the same way that Cathro is derided for being a "laptop" manager.

Exactly; cannon fodder for outsiders, being fuelled by our own.

[Bydo 3,215]

Just now, WeirFleckNRothen said:

Perhaps.

Perhaps Pedro asked Stewart Robertson about the career progression opportunities associated with position and complimented Paul Murray's hair - which the other candidates failed to do - which secured him the role.

I find it mental that this is even a topic of discussion, considering there isn't a shred of evidence.

Whatever he did or said, it must have sounded amazing. To a non-football brain at least.

His signings will really dictate whether or not what he said at interview was a lot of shite or not.

[the_r_sole 366]

Can anyone name me a manager aside from advocaat who had a strong managerial record of winning anything outside of managing us? (especially before us)

the demands and expectations at this club are absolutely exceptional, saying we should have appointed an experienced manager with a track record of winning trophies really rarely happens at any club - never mind us in our first season back in the top flight with no money!

[Turnberry18 3,204]

4 minutes ago, the_r_sole said:

Can anyone name me a manager aside from advocaat who had a strong managerial record of winning anything outside of managing us? (especially before us)

the demands and expectations at this club are absolutely exceptional, saying we should have appointed an experienced manager with a track record of winning trophies really rarely happens at any club - never mind us in our first season back in the top flight with no money!

Le Guen, Willie Waddell.

[Bydo 3,215]

3 minutes ago, the_r_sole said:

Can anyone name me a manager aside from advocaat who had a strong managerial record of winning anything outside of managing us? (especially before us)

the demands and expectations at this club are absolutely exceptional, saying we should have appointed an experienced manager with a track record of winning trophies really rarely happens at any club - never mind us in our first season back in the top flight with no money!

Success doesn't need to be purely about trophies though, does it? I get what you're saying, but guys who have managed at a high level and have shown themselves to be tactically astute can be deemed successful without winning anything.

Brenda won fuck all and his team has absolutely shafted us repeatedly.

McInnes has had no money and yet they have beaten us comfortably to second and reached two cup finals.

[the_r_sole 366]

29 minutes ago, Bydo said:

Success doesn't need to be purely about trophies though, does it? I get what you're saying, but guys who have managed at a high level and have shown themselves to be tactically astute can be deemed successful without winning anything.

Brenda won fuck all and his team has absolutely shafted us repeatedly.

McInnes has had no money and yet they have beaten us comfortably to second and reached two cup finals.

exactly the point - just because a manager has won a trophy is no indication of their ability or an indication of how successful they could be here, so it's a very flawed argument for people saying we should have appointed someone with a good track record of winning things. I don't know much about the leagues or teams that caixinha has managed previously but some of it looks peppered with success for the teams he was managing, just because it wasn't in the uk doesn't change it imo, like getting to the final of the concacaf champions league, sounds as impressive as finishing second in the scottish league tbh...

Le Guen had a huge reputation as a  "successful" manager when he came and look how that turned out