See ya 

9 hours ago, Kingsmills said:

I have to disagree. Steve Paterson is a club legend as are the likes of Ross Tokely, Barry Wilson, Grant Munro, Dennis Wyness and Iain Stewart. Yogi had that status too in his grasp despite this last season but by his actions over the last couple of months has forfeited it.

 

yer right kingsmills

While not in the "good riddance" camp, I can't help but feel that this has been inevitable since we knocked back the approach by Dundee Utd, and some of the stuff he has been coming out with in the media has sounded like a man trying to work his ticket out of Inverness. 

Undoubtedly he will go down in history as the manager who brought us our first (and hopefully not last) major trophy, and took us to Europe for the first time too. However, there were serious questions around player recruitment - most people could see that we were short of numbers up front *before* Mckay left, and his forward recruitment was, at best, patchy. A lack of a plan B when teams sussed out our tactics was another weakness. And hopefully this means I don't have to endure another game as eye-bleedingly bad as the last one at Dens Park.

The constant griping about finances was becoming tiresome - such matters should not be aired in public - and if I'm honest, I'm not convinced that Yogi was the man to be trusted with a budget that pushed us to the limit. 

So he leaves with best wishes, but I can't say I'm gutted like I was when the likes of Pele or Robbo left. 

With Hibs now winning the cup, Hughes has had one of the best weeks of his life!

1 hour ago, Yngwie said:

With Hibs now winning the cup, Hughes has had one of the best weeks of his life!

If only he had landed the Celtic job his joy would have been complete....

There is no use in trying to sum up all the different posts that have been made on here since all aspects of his tenure here, including his unique personality, seem to have been covered. And it's up to each of us to  separate the wheat from the chaff and decide for ourselves what is factual, rational and accurate.

As much as  anything, I  suggest that his public statements, and actions (such as ignoring the fans at the cup final venue when even a casual wave would have been an obvious gesture of both recognition, delight and a SHARING of emotions)  often made in a negative-sounding manner, increasingly led to the inevitable decision to terminate the connection by the Board. And not just by the Chairman.   IMHO this was a decision made in unison by the whole board. 

Despite all his achievements he felt that he was entitled to greater recognition perhaps and  therefore just had to speak up without due consideration to what the outcomes could be from such bold frankness. Yet he was the Coach/Manager, not the spokesman for the club! The Dundee United affair highlighted his deep frustrations and  keen ambitions but whether they coincided with that club's needs, or just were representative of his  feelings about his own greatness and capabilities, will always be open to debate.

Constantly hammering away at management for more funds to be provided to allow him to implement his grander plans, when he appears to have been advised repeatedly that the limits within this club were finite and had already reached, was one of the stubborn attributes of his personality that did not allow him to contain his emotions and deal with it. Had he been able to  present a more diplomatic and gracious outward attitude to the public and the press he would have continued to endear himself to both fans and club management alike, all without washing the dirty linen in public. 

If he felt that opining negatively in public, however obliquely, he was going to get the fans on his side or sway the Board's decisions on the financial issue then he was mistaken. This Board is not weak as has been previously suggested, but very practical and clear in their goals .... there must be a limit to expenditures in order to secure the future  of the club as the first priority, unless some wealthy entrepreneurs come along with money to risk and burn.

John really did not appear to be a deep thinking diplomat and relied on outspoken public remarks to attempt to get what he wanted. They may even have been accurate or correct but could hardly have either influenced the Board to meet his terms or disposed them to see him in an ongoing kindly light. He was a rough diamond with talent but IMHO he forgot his place........and humility may not have been one of his strong points. As some other poster put it -- a rift between the Chairman and the Manager as catastrophic as a probable "not speaking" relationship  indicates a very serious problem  which could not have been allowed to continue, and wasn't.

Perhaps future contracts could also be re-written to  make certain things more clear to future prospective managers. That is....if they didn't run a mile when they first reviewed it?  Meaning,  we may need to search for a younger person who has a lot to gain from coming on board on any terms that are clear and rational  and make it quite clear to these prospects that the bosses are the bosses who, within reason, need to be accommodated to ensure the survival of the club as the first priority. And that prospects with a future and are ambitious understand that  they have to prove themselves before  being in a position to dictate anything to the Board of Directors .

 

 

For me Yogi engineered his exit himself . He'll walk away with his reputation in tact while blaming the club for not backing him .

At the same time he has walked away from a very secure job to be on the dole. Did I see him on the pitch at Hampden!

He obviously feels that his record of winning our first cup, and taking us to Europe also on a 3rd place finish will get him a bigger job in the central belt. Cant think where, and if he does get a managers job down there, it will probably be for a team on the down rather than like us a team that was very much on the way up. However, who is to say if Tel and Mo had stayed, would we have achieved 3rd, Europe and the Scottish Cup.

Thank you Yogi, I now have memories that I didn't think I would have.

After John Collins statement surprised Barca has not immediately signed yogi!!! 

Good luck to Yogi, He did us proud and who knows what could have happened if the money was there and the Board gave him their backing.

I for one give  a  big thank you to the man and his vision of how football should be played, glimpses we saw when we were at our best.

I only hope his possession and  passing style can be adapted and adopted into a more offensive strategy by the new regime.

10 hours ago, bughtmaster said:

Good luck to Yogi, He did us proud and who knows what could have happened if the money was there and the Board gave him their backing.

I for one give  a  big thank you to the man and his vision of how football should be played, glimpses we saw when we were at our best.

I only hope his possession and  passing style can be adapted and adopted into a more offensive strategy by the new regime.

The board did give him their backing to a record degree. It was Yogi who decided that that was not enough for him.

There are many different kinds of records Kingsmills........some are getting quite worn out !

yeah cheers Yogi mun

I was speaking today to someone who was regularly in JH's company and said he appeared to be rather passionate about the setting up of a Youth Academy at ICT. At the same time he understood the costs involved in doing so and how unlikely this was in the foreseeable future. Obviously a side of Yogi nobody saw.

On 23/05/2016 at 10:20 AM, bauhaus said:

At the same time he has walked away from a very secure job to be on the dole. Did I see him on the pitch at Hampden!

He obviously feels that his record of winning our first cup, and taking us to Europe also on a 3rd place finish will get him a bigger job in the central belt. Cant think where, and if he does get a managers job down there, it will probably be for a team on the down rather than like us a team that was very much on the way up. However, who is to say if Tel and Mo had stayed, would we have achieved 3rd, Europe and the Scottish Cup.

Thank you Yogi, I now have memories that I didn't think I would have.

In fairness, I doubt he could achieved similar after such a successful season. He inherited a fantastic squad and they were lucky to remain - by and large - injury-free. What's the next target? Is it merely to avoid the drop every season? Or to push for Europe and cup success? Does the club have a long term plan in place? 

On 24/05/2016 at 10:33 PM, bughtmaster said:

Good luck to Yogi, He did us proud and who knows what could have happened if the money was there and the Board gave him their backing.

I for one give  a  big thank you to the man and his vision of how football should be played, glimpses we saw when we were at our best.

I only hope his possession and  passing style can be adapted and adopted into a more offensive strategy by the new regime.

I think people seem to forget just how much support the Board actually gave Hughes over his tenure here.  When Hughes took over we were 2nd in the league and flying.  There is an old saying of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" but Hughes decided he would abandon a playing style which had suited the players and impose his own vision on the team.  As a result, in a season when we should have won a European place and could have tasted cup success we ended the season playing some of the worst football ever played by an ICT side and crashing to a succession of record defeats (losing 5-0 at home in the cup to Dundee Utd for instance).  In those circumstances most Boards would have parted with the manager forthwith.  Instead, the Board kept their faith in Hughes.

After a much more successful following season, the Board showed faith in Hughes by giving him the biggest budget any manager at the club has ever had.  They then gave him a 2 year extension of his contract and then provided further funds to help out in the injury crisis. Finally, despite a very disappointing season last season and a clear failure in the recruitment of new players, the Board continued to support him by maintaining funding levels.  But for Hughes, all of that wasn't enough.  Despite the support shown to him, Hughes embarked on a media campaign of criticising the Board for the level of funding rather than accepting any responsibility for his failure to recruit as successfully as his predecessors.

I accept that Hughes may well have been annoyed at the Board's refusal to let him talk to Dundee Utd and in my view that was an error on behalf of the Board.  But the point here is that having given so much support to Hughes, the Board felt it had a right to expect Hughes to repay that faith with a little bit of loyalty.  Hughes clearly sees it differently and his public criticism of the the Board and his abject failure in signing players simply gave the Board no option.  

As I say, when Hughes arrived we were 2nd in the league.  When he left we were 7th.    After more than 2^1/₂  years at the club, Hughes has lost several good players and leaves it with only a couple of fringe players that he has signed currently signed for the coming season. The core players that are contracted are Raven (who Hughes didn't want), Meekings, Warren, Tremarco, Draper, Tansey, Draper, Doran and Polworth and are all Butcher's boys.  Fon Williams is a Hughes signing but interestingly has only extended his contract now that Hughes is away.  Despite record levels of funding, Hughes leaves the club in a considerably poorer state than he inherited it.  That is his real legacy and as far as I am concerned it is good riddance.  I am just delighted that he's gone.

 

8 hours ago, DoofersDad said:

 Raven (who Hughes didn't want), Meekings, Warren, Tremarco, Draper, Tansey, Draper, Doran and Polworth and are all Butcher's boys

 

I wish we did have 2 Ross Drapers.

9 hours ago, DoofersDad said:

I think people seem to forget just how much support the Board actually gave Hughes over his tenure here.  When Hughes took over we were 2nd in the league and flying.  There is an old saying of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" but Hughes decided he would abandon a playing style which had suited the players and impose his own vision on the team.  As a result, in a season when we should have won a European place and could have tasted cup success we ended the season playing some of the worst football ever played by an ICT side and crashing to a succession of record defeats (losing 5-0 at home in the cup to Dundee Utd for instance).  In those circumstances most Boards would have parted with the manager forthwith.  Instead, the Board kept their faith in Hughes.

After a much more successful following season, the Board showed faith in Hughes by giving him the biggest budget any manager at the club has ever had.  They then gave him a 2 year extension of his contract and then provided further funds to help out in the injury crisis. Finally, despite a very disappointing season last season and a clear failure in the recruitment of new players, the Board continued to support him by maintaining funding levels.  But for Hughes, all of that wasn't enough.  Despite the support shown to him, Hughes embarked on a media campaign of criticising the Board for the level of funding rather than accepting any responsibility for his failure to recruit as successfully as his predecessors.

I accept that Hughes may well have been annoyed at the Board's refusal to let him talk to Dundee Utd and in my view that was an error on behalf of the Board.  But the point here is that having given so much support to Hughes, the Board felt it had a right to expect Hughes to repay that faith with a little bit of loyalty.  Hughes clearly sees it differently and his public criticism of the the Board and his abject failure in signing players simply gave the Board no option.  

As I say, when Hughes arrived we were 2nd in the league.  When he left we were 7th.    After more than 2^1/₂  years at the club, Hughes has lost several good players and leaves it with only a couple of fringe players that he has signed currently signed for the coming season. The core players that are contracted are Raven (who Hughes didn't want), Meekings, Warren, Tremarco, Draper, Tansey, Draper, Doran and Polworth and are all Butcher's boys.  Fon Williams is a Hughes signing but interestingly has only extended his contract now that Hughes is away.  Despite record levels of funding, Hughes leaves the club in a considerably poorer state than he inherited it.  That is his real legacy and as far as I am concerned it is good riddance.  I am just delighted that he's gone.

Possibly the most sensible post this forum has ever had 

 

1 hour ago, oats said:

Possibly the most sensible post this forum has ever had 

 

It seems very fair from the outside looking in. However, sometimes you have to step back to go forward, and this may slightly underestimate what Hughes and Latapy achieved. We might never have reached last year's heights had these two not been appointed. We will never know. For a club of our size and with the injuries we have endured this year but possibly through poor dealings in the transfer market we were never going to reach the same peak.

The irritation with Yogi is his apparent disloyal exit strategy at a club that has a history of being very loyal to its managers and I believe its players. Yogi probably burnt himself out and after taking real umbrage at not going for the Dundee United job, where he clearly would have had far more contact with his twins and wider family, he committed to ICT but could not then contain his frustrations. It also appears that Yogi parachuted in Brian Rice who had some serious issues in his last job. So Yogi is loyal but clearly something behind the scenes that we may not have seen, triggered this fracture. 

 

11 hours ago, DoofersDad said:

I think people seem to forget just how much support the Board actually gave Hughes over his tenure here.  When Hughes took over we were 2nd in the league and flying.  There is an old saying of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" but Hughes decided he would abandon a playing style which had suited the players and impose his own vision on the team.  As a result, in a season when we should have won a European place and could have tasted cup success we ended the season playing some of the worst football ever played by an ICT side and crashing to a succession of record defeats (losing 5-0 at home in the cup to Dundee Utd for instance).  In those circumstances most Boards would have parted with the manager forthwith.  Instead, the Board kept their faith in Hughes.

After a much more successful following season, the Board showed faith in Hughes by giving him the biggest budget any manager at the club has ever had.  They then gave him a 2 year extension of his contract and then provided further funds to help out in the injury crisis. Finally, despite a very disappointing season last season and a clear failure in the recruitment of new players, the Board continued to support him by maintaining funding levels.  But for Hughes, all of that wasn't enough.  Despite the support shown to him, Hughes embarked on a media campaign of criticising the Board for the level of funding rather than accepting any responsibility for his failure to recruit as successfully as his predecessors.

I accept that Hughes may well have been annoyed at the Board's refusal to let him talk to Dundee Utd and in my view that was an error on behalf of the Board.  But the point here is that having given so much support to Hughes, the Board felt it had a right to expect Hughes to repay that faith with a little bit of loyalty.  Hughes clearly sees it differently and his public criticism of the the Board and his abject failure in signing players simply gave the Board no option.  

As I say, when Hughes arrived we were 2nd in the league.  When he left we were 7th.    After more than 2^1/₂  years at the club, Hughes has lost several good players and leaves it with only a couple of fringe players that he has signed currently signed for the coming season. The core players that are contracted are Raven (who Hughes didn't want), Meekings, Warren, Tremarco, Draper, Tansey, Draper, Doran and Polworth and are all Butcher's boys.  Fon Williams is a Hughes signing but interestingly has only extended his contract now that Hughes is away.  Despite record levels of funding, Hughes leaves the club in a considerably poorer state than he inherited it.  That is his real legacy and as far as I am concerned it is good riddance.  I am just delighted that he's gone.

 

An excellent post indeed by D D if you are looking to set out a case for the Board against Hughes.

Sadly it is flawed, It reads as if T B was a very successful manager  compared to J H which indeed he was not. Yes, he did leave us in 2nd position thanks to the players that had been found for him, and yes following the J H induction period there was a long succession of very poor results but that was because the team was learning a very different but much more effective style of play. We came through the bad period and our style of play flourished so much so that other Clubs tried to follow suit. We were playing great football until the unfortunate spate of injuries started and our squad was becoming more and more depleted as we lost some of our most successful players

J H had to find replacements quickly, I'm sure the board responded in the best way they thought they could but the money allocation or the calibre of player for the money just was not there, more injuries came along and things became frantic for a manager who was doing his best to recapture a period of superb play and results.

Our play became bitty and we slumped in style and performance. How frustrating that must have been for a manager trying to build back into a successful winning squad. He knew he could work wonders for the Club and he really wanted to prove that.

''If it ain't broke don't fix it'' is a relatively new saying and one which stifles innovation. Our new style when we had the players to operate it was the best we ever had and brought us to the highs we had aspired to achieve. I really believe he would have gone on to even greater heights should circumstances have been more conducive.

Anyway he still has my gratitude for what he has done for ICT.

17 minutes ago, bughtmaster said:

 

An excellent post indeed by D D if you are looking to set out a case for the Board against Hughes.

Sadly it is flawed, It reads as if T B was a very successful manager  compared to J H which indeed he was not. Yes, he did leave us in 2nd position thanks to the players that had been found for him, and yes following the J H induction period there was a long succession of very poor results but that was because the team was learning a very different but much more effective style of play. We came through the bad period and our style of play flourished so much so that other Clubs tried to follow suit. We were playing great football until the unfortunate spate of injuries started and our squad was becoming more and more depleted as we lost some of our most successful players

J H had to find replacements quickly, I'm sure the board responded in the best way they thought they could but the money allocation or the calibre of player for the money just was not there, more injuries came along and things became frantic for a manager who was doing his best to recapture a period of superb play and results.

Our play became bitty and we slumped in style and performance. How frustrating that must have been for a manager trying to build back into a successful winning squad. He knew he could work wonders for the Club and he really wanted to prove that.

''If it ain't broke don't fix it'' is a relatively new saying and one which stifles innovation. Our new style when we had the players to operate it was the best we ever had and brought us to the highs we had aspired to achieve. I really believe he would have gone on to even greater heights should circumstances have been more conducive.

Anyway he still has my gratitude for what he has done for ICT.

The fact of the matter is that it should never have been a matter of the manager against the board and most certainly never in public.It never has been in the past and should never be so again. Most managers are ambitious and, out our level, will regard the club as a stepping stone which is perfectly fair. The trouble with Yogi is that he took that far too far quite clearly putting his own interests ahead of the club's. Whoever the next manager is it is, in my view, essential that the sense of harmony and working together for the common good that has been a feature  of the club for many many years  is restored and as soon as possible.

There are times Kingsmills when people have to stick up for themselves, especially when he thought he was doing things for the betterment of the Club as well as himself, There are two sides to most coins!

On ‎23‎/‎05‎/‎2016 at 8:53 AM, DALNEIGHCALEY said:

For me Yogi engineered his exit himself . He'll walk away with his reputation in tact while blaming the club for not backing him .

And sadly, with some of the central belt media's help, some people will believe this about his reputation.

There is a world of difference between sticking up for yourself and effectively slagging your employer off in public. 

6 hours ago, bughtmaster said:

 

An excellent post indeed by D D if you are looking to set out a case for the Board against Hughes.

Sadly it is flawed, It reads as if T B was a very successful manager  compared to J H which indeed he was not. Yes, he did leave us in 2nd position thanks to the players that had been found for him, and yes following the J H induction period there was a long succession of very poor results but that was because the team was learning a very different but much more effective style of play. We came through the bad period and our style of play flourished so much so that other Clubs tried to follow suit. We were playing great football until the unfortunate spate of injuries started and our squad was becoming more and more depleted as we lost some of our most successful players

J H had to find replacements quickly, I'm sure the board responded in the best way they thought they could but the money allocation or the calibre of player for the money just was not there, more injuries came along and things became frantic for a manager who was doing his best to recapture a period of superb play and results.

Our play became bitty and we slumped in style and performance. How frustrating that must have been for a manager trying to build back into a successful winning squad. He knew he could work wonders for the Club and he really wanted to prove that.

''If it ain't broke don't fix it'' is a relatively new saying and one which stifles innovation. Our new style when we had the players to operate it was the best we ever had and brought us to the highs we had aspired to achieve. I really believe he would have gone on to even greater heights should circumstances have been more conducive.

Anyway he still has my gratitude for what he has done for ICT.

Butcher joined the club with the club on the verge of relegation.  He managed to bring us straight back, established us as a top six side and left us in 2nd position.  That is pretty successful and represented real progress for the club.  He did this on a smaller budget than Hughes has had available.  Had he stayed, I feel it highly likely we would have made it into Europe a year earlier and who knows what we might have done in the cups - won the league cup possibly but certainly we wouldn't have got dumped out of the Scottish cup 5-0 at home to Dundee Utd!  

Given the squad available, success was there for the taking.  Surely the thing to do was to build on the success the team was having and just tweak things a bit to try to further improve things.  Sure Hughes got things back on track the following season but at the cost of turning the team into one which rarely entertained. I just wonder what we might have achieved if he had built on the successful style we had rather than completely revamping the playing style.

In the year and a bit prior to Butcher's departure the team averaged 1.61 points a game and 1.67 goals a game in the league.  In taking the team from 2nd to 7th, Hughes has managed 1,45 points a game and 1,29 goals a game.  That does not sound like progress to me.

And even when we were successful under Hughes, I think there are many who would disagree with you about the style of play.  I agree that there were times when passages of passing play were excellent and we scored some lovely team goals as a result.  I therefore have some sympathy with Hughes' vision of how he would like the game to be played.  But the reality is that these moments were few and far between and all too often the opposition set out to frustrate us and we were unable to find the space, or the speed and accuracy of passing required to make this work.  Instead we passed the ball sideways and back and even games we won were just boring to watch. 

At least we now have a good core of a squad in place for next season.  Hopefully the new manager will manage in a way that is best for the club rather than pursue his own personal vision.  There is much still to do in order to replace the players who have left during Hughes' tenure at the club, but I am now optimistic that we can move forward again with a more entertaining style of play.