Jump to content

Our former managers


Yngwie

Recommended Posts

 With the cash from the Celtic match either in the bank, or about to be paid into their account,  this must take  a load of the management and increase their  desire to assist Richie to strengthen his team  upon request.

I like the words of the new boy, Laing. Seems to be a steady lad with his head screwed on correctly AND he also seems to have an ability not to get involved in expressing himself with tact and thoughtfulness. Hopefully he will settle in very well.:ictscarf:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Alan Simpson said:

Ryan christie transfer fee money for reaching europe ! Inever said the board lacked ambition i said they never matched his which may have pushed us in to a best of the rest fight we were a decent side under hughes! What sort of $$$$ was yogi asking for?

Doubt anyone apart from The Board will know the real numbers but rumour was anything from £300k to £500k extra which is a big number for our club 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Alan Simpson said:

Fair play to yogi if the board had matched his ambition ie push the boat out for storey i believe wed have been pushing for europe rather than a relegation scrap true saying u only realized what u had when its gone

JH was the author of his own downfall at ICT. Managers will invariably push their chairmen for more money but that should have been kept in house. The moment he went bleating to his friends in the media he was acting entirely in his own interests and against those of the club.

Richie has obvious shortfalls in his ability as a coach, at least for now, but there is no doubting that he has more class in that respect than Yogi.

  • Agree 8
  • Disagree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Alan Simpson said:

Ryan christie transfer fee money for reaching europe ! Inever said the board lacked ambition i said they never matched his which may have pushed us in to a best of the rest fight we were a decent side under hughes! What sort of $$$$ was yogi asking for?

It's been well commented on in relation to many clubs over the years that unless you reach group stages then Europa costs clubs money.

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Alan Simpson said:

Ryan christie transfer fee money for reaching europe ! Inever said the board lacked ambition i said they never matched his which may have pushed us in to a best of the rest fight we were a decent side under hughes! What sort of $$$$ was yogi asking for?

Alan.... for several years now, ICT has had two basic sources of income and relies on them BOTH to maintain its ongoing business (ie keep its head above water) - 1) regular earnings like league gate receipts, TV money and SPFL dividends and 2) Windfalls. These include the likes of transfer fees, cup runs (not, as Don says, Europe though), an exceptionally high league placing, one-off investments and even on one occasion selling the club's last significant tangible asset, the Social Club. Unfortunately there has been this misapprehension that any time one of these windfalls comes along, the purse strings can suddenly be loosened and the club can start splashing out on extra players.

It doesn't work that way. All the things I mentioned in category 2 are part and parcel of basic operations and if there's a period when they DON'T happen then I would imagine that a bit of financial concern materialises. For instance I have always understood the sale of the Social Club to have been made to fill such a gap. As a result, it's a non-starter to suggest "pushing the boat out". There is no boat there!

What you said about ambition was "if the board had matched (Yogi's) ambition.... I believe we'd have been pushing for Europe". That cannot be construed as anything other than an implication that the Board's ambition is inadequate or lacking. It also, however, implies that Yogi's expectation of how much money should be available was the realistic one and the Board were in some respect falling short in some way. It could instead be argued that Yogi did fine with Butcher's team but when it came to having to sign his own players, he was unable to do this in as financially efficient a manner as his predecessors.

  • Agree 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I happen to think there was a basic misunderstanding between JH and the board. The board made extra money available during JH's last season to cover for the players that went out and the injury list at the start of the season after the two Astra games. When they said the budget would not be reduced, they meant the basic budget without the emergency signings JH I think interpreted the budget as being the basic plus the cost of those signings. This is why both could make the claim the board (the budget has been maintained) and JH (the budget has been cut) both statements were actually true depending on your understanding or misunderstanding of what the basic budget was.

I don't go with the line that he engineered his way out I think he genuinely enjoyed his job and from my previous experience of him and his reputation he was always regarded as a straight hitter by all the people he worked with, I know the Falkirk people held him in very high regard.Yes he tried to put pressure on the board by speaking to the press which was his only lever. From my perspective the board lost the rag and sacked him. His legacy I think is being unfairly trashed by some on the forum, we played the best football since Steve Patterson's days finished 3rd in the league won the SC and played in Europe.

I don't expect to see any of that repeated in my lifetime.

 

 

  • Agree 3
  • Disagree 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

3 hours ago, wynthank15 said:

I happen to think there was a basic misunderstanding between JH and the board. The board made extra money available during JH's last season to cover for the players that went out and the injury list at the start of the season after the two Astra games. When they said the budget would not be reduced, they meant the basic budget without the emergency signings JH I think interpreted the budget as being the basic plus the cost of those signings. This is why both could make the claim the board (the budget has been maintained) and JH (the budget has been cut) both statements were actually true depending on your understanding or misunderstanding of what the basic budget was.

I don't go with the line that he engineered his way out I think he genuinely enjoyed his job and from my previous experience of him and his reputation he was always regarded as a straight hitter by all the people he worked with, I know the Falkirk people held him in very high regard.Yes he tried to put pressure on the board by speaking to the press which was his only lever. From my perspective the board lost the rag and sacked him. His legacy I think is being unfairly trashed by some on the forum, we played the best football since Steve Patterson's days finished 3rd in the league won the SC and played in Europe.

I don't expect to see any of that repeated in my lifetime.

 

 

Hear Hear, glad you read things the way I do, I will add to that, that the board had already set their minds on Richie as J H;s successor and took the opportunity to make things difficult for the man, they played on the fact that a proportion of the 'support' saw John's style as being negative football, to some extent it was but John was looking to build on that and was frustrated that he couldn't get the money to 'keep the players he had earmarked for the Club's future success. Remember the Club's success would be his success so no wonder he spoke out when he realised this was slipping away through lack of the board's backing. Any manager worth his salt would decry anyone who would deliberately try to thwart his ambition.

John also knew from the outset of his stay with us that Richie was the manager incumbent and said so on numerous occasions. He knew too that he was fighting a losing battle to better his career at the Cluib and that I believe is why we lost our most successful ever manager.

Now Richie is in post and I have backed him from the start, He can still keep us up he may even close us in on top six, regardless of some of the opinions on here. I hope so anyway for the Club's sake. Today's point is so important it is a first step to confidence enhancement. Small steps can lead to a very long jump.

  • Agree 3
  • Disagree 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The delusion that the Board has some obligation to conjure up money from where it doesn't exist is becoming quite tiresome. What perhaps also needs looked at is Hughes' ability (or lack of it) to produce credible teams on an obviously limited budget. I have already said in another post that a certain amount of what he did was on Butcher's signings while his own signings may struggle to survive a critical look. Hughes' second year at Raith could be interesting.

  • Agree 2
  • Disagree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Charles Bannerman said:

The delusion that the Board has some obligation to conjure up money from where it doesn't exist is becoming quite tiresome. What perhaps also needs looked at is Hughes' ability (or lack of it) to produce credible teams on an obviously limited budget. I have already said in another post that a certain amount of what he did was on Butcher's signings while his own signings may struggle to survive a critical look. Hughes' second year at Raith could be interesting.

Unbelievable, I am supposed to accept your word that you are right, that you know the ins and outs and that my thoughts and theories amongst others are delusional.

Do your egotistical views Charles, for which you are a master at, hold no bounds ? Surely having been shot down in flames  so many times in so many threads it is time you realised that you are not the be all and end all of subject matters, that you can be and often are wrong in your assumptions, generalisations and opinions.

Time for a bit of modesty young man and time to listen to the other fellas' points of view.

  • Agree 4
  • Disagree 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bughtmaster said:

Remember the Club's success would be his success so no wonder he spoke out when he realised this was slipping away through lack of the board's backing. Any manager worth his salt would decry anyone who would deliberately try to thwart his ambition.

What contradictory sentences!  If Hughes' success would be the club's success why on earth would the club deliberately try to thwart his ambition?  I am sure the Board's ambition is no less that Hughes', it is just that they behaved far more responsibly. Kingsmills is quite right when he says it was wrong of Hughes to try to pressure the Board by going public with his demand for funds beyond which he already knew the club could afford.  

If the Board had bowed to Hughes' irresponsible media campaign and if Hughes had managed to bring success to himself and the club as a result,then you can be assured that he would have moved on and left the club to deal with the resultant debt.  The club's success may have been Hughes' success but the club's overdraft would not have been Hughes' overdraft.

Of course, there is also no guarantee that had the Board borrowed money to fund his demands that Hughes would have been able to recruit players to deliver success in any case.  Don't forget, that despite being given a bigger budget than his predecessor, he left the club with a significantly weaker squad than he inherited.  Hughes' actions had made his position untenable and he simply had to go.

  • Agree 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, DoofersDad said:

What contradictory sentences!  If Hughes' success would be the club's success why on earth would the club deliberately try to thwart his ambition?  I am sure the Board's ambition is no less that Hughes', it is just that they behaved far more responsibly. Kingsmills is quite right when he says it was wrong of Hughes to try to pressure the Board by going public with his demand for funds beyond which he already knew the club could afford.  

If the Board had bowed to Hughes' irresponsible media campaign and if Hughes had managed to bring success to himself and the club as a result,then you can be assured that he would have moved on and left the club to deal with the resultant debt.  The club's success may have been Hughes' success but the club's overdraft would not have been Hughes' overdraft.

Of course, there is also no guarantee that had the Board borrowed money to fund his demands that Hughes would have been able to recruit players to deliver success in any case.  Don't forget, that despite being given a bigger budget than his predecessor, he left the club with a significantly weaker squad than he inherited.  Hughes' actions had made his position untenable and he simply had to go.

Spot on DD. 

The evidence is not there that Yogi would have had the ability to recruit wisely even if a bigger budget had become available. He was a decent coach but his recruitment strategy was never as good as Terry Butchers. 

His time was simply up. I saw his man management at first hand when he totally blanked a player at my table at sponsors night. That was in front of everyone and it then transpired that he hsd not spoken to said player in months!! 

I will forever be grateful for the glory days under Hughes but he knows that he also was lucky in landing our job with such a talented bunch of players.

As for the board well they were never going to give into his ever increasing demands and thats even if we had the ability to borrow money which I doubt. If they are at fault there is maybe an argument that was in not withdrawing the offer of an extended deal when he started playing games in the press before finally signing it. 

This is of course only my opinion and others are entitled to theirs. 

 

  • Agree 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, bughtmaster said:

 

 

Hear Hear, glad you read things the way I do, I will add to that, that the board had already set their minds on Richie as J H;s successor and took the opportunity to make things difficult for the man, they played on the fact that a proportion of the 'support' saw John's style as being negative football, to some extent it was but John was looking to build on that and was frustrated that he couldn't get the money to 'keep the players he had earmarked for the Club's future success.

The use of inverted commas around 'support' is a particularly classy touch here.

  • Agree 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, DoofersDad said:

J H wanted money What contradictory sentences!  If Hughes' success would be the club's success why on earth would the club deliberately try to thwart his ambition?  I am sure the Board's ambition is no less that Hughes', it is just that they behaved far more responsibly. Kingsmills is quite right when he says it was wrong of Hughes to try to pressure the Board by going public with his demand for funds beyond which he already knew the club could afford.  

If the Board had bowed to Hughes' irresponsible media campaign and if Hughes had managed to bring success to himself and the club as a result,then you can be assured that he would have moved on and left the club to deal with the resultant debt.  The club's success may have been Hughes' success but the club's overdraft would not have been Hughes' overdraft.

Of course, there is also no guarantee that had the Board borrowed money to fund his demands that Hughes would have been able to recruit players to deliver success in any case.  Don't forget, that despite being given a bigger budget than his predecessor, he left the club with a significantly weaker squad than he inherited.  Hughes' actions had made his position untenable and he simply had to go.

Doofers Dad  might have known you would put your bent pennyworth in 

There is nothing contradictory in these sentences, you  obviously just don't read things properly!

Where have I said anything about money for recruiting??  John wanted money to retain the players that were being given away so consistently by the Club and to ensure that we did not lose any more of our stars.

old caley girl  I new nothing of this blanking of players you speak of, a nasty trait I agree and one I would not have expected from him. What reason /s did he have for doing this??

  • Agree 2
  • Disagree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bughtmaster said:

Doofers Dad  might have known you would put your bent pennyworth in 

There is nothing contradictory in these sentences, you  obviously just don't read things properly!

Where have I said anything about money for recruiting??  John wanted money to retain the players that were being given away so consistently by the Club and to ensure that we did not lose any more of our stars.

old caley girl  I new nothing of this blanking of players you speak of, a nasty trait I agree and one I would not have expected from him. What reason /s did he have for doing this??

Tell us, who was it that was trying to get rid of players like Raven and Tremarco? Who was it that didn't offer Brill a new deal? Which manager wasn't giving Nick Ross game time and forced him into seeking it elsewhere?

Since you are so up to speed on all things John Hughes.....tell us, how many players did he sign, how many appearances  (on average) did these players make and how many are still at the club? Value for money?

When the manager needed support (due to injuries etc) the board backed him to such an extent he had the largest squad and largest budget of any manager at ICTFC. Despite that he failed to do what he said he could/would and you think he should have been given even more?

Feel free to add me to the list of people who think you're delusional.

  • Agree 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, bughtmaster said:

Where have I said anything about money for recruiting??  John wanted money to retain the players that were being given away so consistently by the Club and to ensure that we did not lose any more of our stars.

 

Irrespective of what Hughes may actually have wanted, it involved money which wasn't there and it simply isn't realistic to suggest that it should have been forthcoming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CaleyD unlike you, of great privileged information, I cannot answer all your questions, suffice it to say that in most cases discussion with the Board would have been appropriate before action was taken, if not, then the Board is guilty of poor management and control. That is my opinion.

I am not in any way up to speed on all things John Hughes, merely a supporter of ICT who detests injustice. The man did, in the main, do us proud and gets very little appreciation from many on this forum especially those who did not want him as manager in the first place. I take his side for what h did for us and for what might have been if he had stayed longer.

  • Agree 2
  • Disagree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, bughtmaster said:

Lucky you, others at not as fortunate.

I'm under no illusions that some people cannot make every game. If I were one of them though, I would temper my opinions accordingly and certainly wouldn't arrogantly question the level of support of those who attend far more matches if it did not suit my own agenda. 

  • Agree 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, bughtmaster said:

Doofers Dad  might have known you would put your bent pennyworth in 

There is nothing contradictory in these sentences, you  obviously just don't read things properly!

Where have I said anything about money for recruiting??  John wanted money to retain the players that were being given away so consistently by the Club and to ensure that we did not lose any more of our stars.

old caley girl  I new nothing of this blanking of players you speak of, a nasty trait I agree and one I would not have expected from him. What reason /s did he have for doing this??

Am I not entitled to express my view without you being offensive in reply?

Whether Hughes wanted money for recruitment or for retaining existing players, the fact is he was using the media to pressure the Board for money which he knew the club could not afford.  For some reason, you seem to think that is appropriate behaviour from a manager.

I accept you did not say anything about money for recruiting.  But why didn't you?  Are you seriously trying to tell us that Hughes was not looking to recruit new players?  If he wasn't looking for money to recruit new players then he should have been!  Indeed, I am sure that he was.  I may not be Hughes' greatest fan but I will at least credit him with enough savvy to recognise that no club, rich or poor, can exist without bringing in new players on a regular basis.  

As for retaining existing players, I am not sure what you expect of the club.  You must be aware that that when players develop well here they will get offers from richer clubs which are way beyond the means of our club to match.  Our best players will always move on to more lucrative deals elsewhere and therefore a key role of the manager is to attract new players to the club who have the potential to develop in the particular environment and ethos of this club.  The thing about Hughes though, was that he just wasn't as good at that part of the job than some of his predecessors had been.

  • Agree 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, bughtmaster said:

CaleyD unlike you, of great privileged information, I cannot answer all your questions, suffice it to say that in most cases discussion with the Board would have been appropriate before action was taken, if not, then the Board is guilty of poor management and control. That is my opinion.

I am not in any way up to speed on all things John Hughes, merely a supporter of ICT who detests injustice. The man did, in the main, do us proud and gets very little appreciation from many on this forum especially those who did not want him as manager in the first place. I take his side for what h did for us and for what might have been if he had stayed longer.

Everything I have commented on is in regards to information that is in the public domain.

You can go all Donald Trump, Fake News, Haters Gonna Hate on people if you like; but the truth of the matter is that the verifiable facts as presented by myself and others entirely disprove your theories.  As the saying goes.....you are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts.

FWiW.....I think you'll be hard pushed to find someone who backed Yogi more than I did from the moment he arrived at the club....often in the face of great criticism and accusations that I was merely trumpeting the party line.

 

  • Agree 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. : Terms of Use : Guidelines : Privacy Policy