Jump to content

The Importance of Fixing "Institutional Failure" before New Manager appt.


buster.

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, buster. said:

I re-read the reports regards those AJ quotes and it seemed to point more towards the football operation and would include the selection process for the last manager. As I said in the OP, I think it goes deeper than that and that some major decisions will have to be taken with an eye to put things right. 

It would seem to me what with the advertised change re.director of communications, the DoF announcement of the new scouting set-up and the ongoing selection procedure for first team manager,... that the board are looking to make structural changes that might begin addressing the AJ quotes.

Quotes that I think would only have been made if he thought a process was in place attempting to correct failings and that could be pointed toward at the AGM to be so doing.

Yes, good points.    King and his directors came in partly on the platform of promising greater transparency, a promise I don't regard has having been uppermost in their minds in keeping.   Then again, all promises - a bit like views - are subject to revision.   

Having lifted the lid and revealed that systemic and institutional failings are happening under their watch I hope Johnston and his fellow directors might now go further in due course by advising when they think the failings have been overcome, otherwise we'll forever be left to wonder if any continuation of a lack of sufficient competitiveness of the first team is still due to lingering systemic failings.  

Even with the issues you mentioned (comms director, new scouting and firs team selection process) the link to those and performance of Pedro as manager and performance of the first team this season so far do not seem to me to be hard-wired links to ousting Pedro as quickly as they did.    That's what makes me wonder if some of the institutional and systemic failings are much closer to the way the first team operations are (or were) being run.   I dare say we'll never find out or at best only get snippets of insights.   

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 90
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

36 minutes ago, buster. said:

 

especially when we see from the past what you seemed to prefer. 

:duh:

Time you started to see what has not been achieved with this present board .... who have had the benefit of no outside interference of any degree .... and stop bringing up the past boards' deficiencies or who preferred who at the time.

It does your argument no good when you persistently accuse people of not backing King&co when replying to a post ... that in essence is what does not cut it .... this board is the only one at the scene of the crime now ..... and all your deflecting otherwise will not change that fact .... they have to up their game .... if not .... there needs to be more than "questions" asked .... in fact they should own up and move on if they are man enough to admit culpability for institutional and systemic failings ..... the buck stops with the current incumbents now ... no one else.

:UK:

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Reformation Bear said:

Yes, good points.    King and his directors came in partly on the platform of promising greater transparency, a promise I don't regard has having been uppermost in their minds in keeping.   Then again, all promises - a bit like views - are subject to revision.   

Having lifted the lid and revealed that systemic and institutional failings are happening under their watch I hope Johnston and his fellow directors might now go further in due course by advising when they think the failings have been overcome, otherwise we'll forever be left to wonder if any continuation of a lack of sufficient competitiveness of the first team is still due to lingering systemic failings.  

Even with the issues you mentioned (comms director, new scouting and firs team selection process) the link to those and performance of Pedro as manager and performance of the first team this season so far do not seem to me to be hard-wired links to ousting Pedro as quickly as they did.    That's what makes me wonder if some of the institutional and systemic failings are much closer to the way the first team operations are (or were) being run.   I dare say we'll never find out or at best only get snippets of insights.   

My impression (and that is all it is) has been for some time now that the board has been divided and split regards it's relationship with first team management, going back to April 2016.

I got the feeling that Warburton was more or less going through the motions thereafter and waiting for the inevitable. With Pedro, he knew from a far way back that he wasn't going to be able to meet expectation levels and towards the end, we saw someone working his ticket, wanting out.

An important failing might be in partly contributing towards making the Rangers job unattractive amongst those decent managers who can afford to turn down such an offer.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Bobby Hume said:

:duh:

Time you started to see what has not been achieved with this present board .... who have had the benefit of no outside interference of any degree .... and stop bringing up the past boards' deficiencies or who preferred who at the time.

It does your argument no good when you persistently accuse people of not backing King&co when replying to a post ... that in essence is what does not cut it .... this board is the only one at the scene of the crime now ..... and all your deflecting otherwise will not change that fact .... they have to up their game .... if not .... there needs to be more than "questions" asked .... in fact they should own up and move on if they are man enough to admit culpability for institutional and systemic failings ..... the buck stops with the current incumbents now ... no one else.

:UK:

Good post mate and the highlighted line is one of my points about past boards and how would this one cope with what others had to try and work with. That is  not saying some of the old ones were good, it is just that we will never really know.

:cheers:

Link to post
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Bobby Hume said:

:duh:

Time you started to see what has not been achieved with this present board .... who have had the benefit of no outside interference of any degree .... and stop bringing up the past boards' deficiencies or who preferred who at the time.

It does your argument no good when you persistently accuse people of not backing King&co when replying to a post ... that in essence is what does not cut it .... this board is the only one at the scene of the crime now ..... and all your deflecting otherwise will not change that fact .... they have to up their game .... if not .... there needs to be more than "questions" asked .... in fact they should own up and move on if they are man enough to admit culpability for institutional and systemic failings ..... the buck stops with the current incumbents now ... no one else.

:UK:

Seems daft to slate the posters who knew all this would happen under King. It doesn't cover up what an absolute shambles this board has been however hard he tries..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mistakes have been made , but everyone makes mistakes , we are only human .

They weren't happy with Warburton , he went .

Pedro didn't do it , he went .

The next guy has every opportunity , but if he doesn't do it then he will also go .

When we had Ally things went on a bit too long , we all knew it was coming . 

I have faith in the current board that they will at least take big decisions like sacking the manager.

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, buster. said:

Criticising the existing board is fine, I do it myself (eg. have a look at the OP on this thread/it also answers some of your serious questions). So, firstly, your perception of my premise is simply wrong.

I simply point towards your (and others) wish that the current board was gone and say, ok.......but what happens next, what are the mechanics of such a change (including financial implications) and who, that has the clubs interests in mind, might be out their with a huge amount of money.....(and that didn't show during the last 6 years) ????

To effectively answer....'the cheque might be in the post and I have no idea how much it's for'...doesn't cut it IMO, especially when we see from the past what you seemed to prefer. 

I am not Mystic Meg and can't say what will happen next.  If I knew that I would win Euromillions. 

Tell me what my preference was in the past.

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Bobby Hume said:

:duh:

Time you started to see what has not been achieved with this present board .... who have had the benefit of no outside interference of any degree .... and stop bringing up the past boards' deficiencies or who preferred who at the time.

It does your argument no good when you persistently accuse people of not backing King&co when replying to a post ... that in essence is what does not cut it .... this board is the only one at the scene of the crime now ..... and all your deflecting otherwise will not change that fact .... they have to up their game .... if not .... there needs to be more than "questions" asked .... in fact they should own up and move on if they are man enough to admit culpability for institutional and systemic failings ..... the buck stops with the current incumbents now ... no one else.

:UK:

Spot on, but the problem is the "questions" will not be asked, delusion will applaud more mediocrity and we will sleep walk into harms way again and make it another managers fault ! Big Shot or Shots needed with Big Money ! It's not rocket science ! PS - Oh and a manager with local knowledge sometimes helps! Sometimes!

image.jpeg.bbbfa7023785d335b44a984bc2aa31d1.jpeg

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, JCDBigBear said:

I am not Mystic Meg and can't say what will happen next.  If I knew that I would win Euromillions. 

Tell me what my preference was in the past.

I didn't just ask for an overall general 'what happens next'

I went onto to ask for specifics that given what you would like to see,....I'd hope you could give some kind of answer to........

ie....."what are the mechanics of such a change (including financial implications) and who, that has the clubs interests in mind, might be out their with a huge amount of money.....(and that didn't show during the last 6 years) ????"

Now if you have no idea as to the answers of the above, then your calls for comprehensive change would need an attachment that gives contact details for Mystic Meg.

----------------

Wrt your past preferences.  

I recall a direct conversation with you on FF (somewhere around the spring of 2014) when you were using the online tool that TheLawman had written re. accounting for monies spent to defend the then board and partly, the performance of previous (pre Nov.2013).

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, buster. said:

I didn't just ask for an overall general 'what happens next'

I went onto to ask for specifics that given what you would like to see,....I'd hope you could give some kind of answer to........

ie....."what are the mechanics of such a change (including financial implications) and who, that has the clubs interests in mind, might be out their with a huge amount of money.....(and that didn't show during the last 6 years) ????"

Now if you have no idea as to the answers of the above, then your calls for comprehensive change would need an attachment that gives contact details for Mystic Meg.

----------------

Wrt your past preferences.  

I recall a direct conversation with you on FF (somewhere around the spring of 2014) when you were using the online tool that TheLawman had written re. accounting for monies spent to defend the then board and partly, the performance of previous (pre Nov.2013).

 

So first of all nobody is allowed to criticise the current directors without having to give you chapter and verse on who should be brought in, etc etc?  

Secondly you now refer to something I may have posted on FF some years ago about accounting for money spent by the club and you think that shows my allegiance or something.

:headwall:   :facepalm:

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JCDBigBear said:

So first of all nobody is allowed to criticise the current directors without having to give you chapter and verse on who should be brought in, etc etc?  

Secondly you now refer to something I may have posted on FF some years ago about accounting for money spent by the club and you think that shows my allegiance or something.

:headwall:   :facepalm:

Everybody's one of them(taigs) apart from Buster he's that staunch he was fighting the good fight on the internet saving Rangers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, JCDBigBear said:

So first of all nobody is allowed to criticise the current directors without having to give you chapter and verse on who should be brought in, etc etc?  

Secondly you now refer to something I may have posted on FF some years ago about accounting for money spent by the club and you think that shows my allegiance or something.

:headwall:   :facepalm:

No, criticise them all you want (I do in the OP and have done so in the past)

...... but when you say that you want them gone, then it's reasonable to ask a poster like you with business experience, to set out what you see as realistic alternatives and how the mechanics would work.

It's not a trick question, I'm trying to gauge the plausibility behind what you say instead of just effectively hearing another 'sack the board' post and I'm sure other posters would be interested to hear your thoughts.

It's next to impossible to know exactly what would happen but if plausible, then surely  it's very possible to paint a rough overview of how it might happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Land Rover said:

Mistakes have been made , but everyone makes mistakes , we are only human .

They weren't happy with Warburton , he went .

Pedro didn't do it , he went .

The next guy has every opportunity , but if he doesn't do it then he will also go .

When we had Ally things went on a bit too long , we all knew it was coming . 

I have faith in the current board that they will at least take big decisions like sacking the manager.

How about them getting the right manager in so that we dont need faith in them sacking another one.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, buster. said:

....."what are the mechanics of such a change (including financial implications) and who, that has the clubs interests in mind, might be out their with a huge amount of money.....(and that didn't show during the last 6 years) ????"

 

 

Please play a straight ball for once.

Pre and during admin we had the BTC hanging over the club.

You accused previous boards of being not being straight and in some cases no-one can argue.

The chairman of the existing board is a convicted criminal and is still having court problems.

..................

So looking at the situations above for each condensed era, what straight businessman with 'a huge amount of money'  to invest would want to get involved. Nothing will happen until DK departs.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Wullies_bowly_legs said:

Please play a straight ball for once.

Pre and during admin we had the BTC hanging over the club.

You accused previous boards of being not being straight and in some cases no-one can argue.

The chairman of the existing board is a convicted criminal and is still having court problems.

..................

So looking at the situations above for each condensed era, what straight businessman with 'a huge amount of money'  to invest would want to get involved. Nothing will happen until DK departs.

 

A straight ball ? I'm not getting any real balls to play here.

What is straightforward is the question I put forward. The answer is obviously more complicated but for those with business experience who propose wholesale change upstairs, I'd expect them to be able to offer something more than silence and excuses.

As for 'businessmen with huge amounts of money' waiting on the sidelines, I think the last six years has told us that they aren't a great deal of them and those who did step forward and are currently financing the club and keeping the lights on deserve some credit for that. Just as the board deserve some criticism for their management.

------------

I've said for a while that it would probably be better for the club if DK sold his shareholding, but subject to who bought it / their intentions.

Bearing in mind the latter, who is out there that would be prepared to do so ?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...