1.  The Scotsman

Numerous mistakes throughout the article with regards to player names and recall of events and then to top it all off the closing line reckons the Caley Thistle fans see Craig Brewster as "The Messiah"  :029:

2. BBC]

According to Grassa the manager will be announced tomorrow - their will be no surprises in who is appointed and the decision was unanimous.  A further display of arrogance and more proof (if it was needed) that our opinion counted for feck all.

Did you really think your opnion would make a difference?  they are running the club quite well i think and Bennett more experienced in hiring managers than any fan.

And if you read his statement on the BBC site you will understand that Warnock was never a real proposition as a manager for us.

Then there are no real other candidates better qualifed to get us out of the mess we are ( on the pitch)

Owen Coyle is more qualified than Brewster to take the job

Would have to disagree. Coyle isnt exactly doing a wonderful job at Perth at the moment and he has no management experience at a higher level. I would even say that Brew is the better all round footballer.

I would have been quite happy to have had Brew in place when he was first asked at the end of last season.

As we keep being reminded on here....its early doors yet IHE. He took them to within a gnats bollock hair from getting to SPL last season, as well as semi-finals of BOTH national competitions. That is INFINITELY more than brew has done in BOTH his magagerial appointments

Would have to disagree. Coyle isnt exactly doing a wonderful job at Perth at the moment and he has no management experience at a higher level. I would even say that Brew is the better all round footballer.

I would have been quite happy to have had Brew in place when he was first asked at the end of last season.

Good ole IHE....

Up to his old tricks again....!!  :004:

Did you really think your opnion would make a difference?  they are running the club quite well i think and Bennett more experienced in hiring managers than any fan.

And if you read his statement on the BBC site you will understand that Warnock was never a real proposition as a manager for us.

Then there are no real other candidates better qualifed to get us out of the mess we are ( on the pitch)

I had a whole page of stuff typed up in reply, but it's nothing I haven't said before and it contained info that would likely do more damage than good in the long run.

Here it is in a nutshell.

Do I think my opinion would make a difference?  Probably not.  Do I think the overall fans opinions would have made a difference?  Probably not.  Do I think we deserved to be acknowledged for at least having an opinion?  Most definitely.

It's not about the outcome, it's about the ways and means and the club showing a little respect for the fans.  I spoke to Alan Savage and Grassa very briefly after the meeting the other night, looked them in the eye, shook their hands and believed they actually might be listening.  The quotes on the BBC website prove I was wrong in my assessment.  It's not a mistake I will be quick to make again.

Well it is all yesterdays news now. I hope that the club desist from holding tokenistic  meetings and appalling attempts at psychology. Reckon Messrs Savage, Bennett and co. may have learnt from this debacle.

I would suggest that they look fer reactions through this website in the future and/or through the loval papers. It would be an idea if they had a specific fan to whom they communicated with. I just hope they dont get some of the Board members to ever again try to masquerade as new posters on this site. That was possibly the most pathetic move of the week.  :rotflmao:

TBH i was shocked that there was a meeting to ask the fans about who they wanted to be the next manager.  I don't know if that has ever been done before but the board were always going to be onto a hiding to nothing.

It was interesting to read that the club have spoken to Warnock about the managers position, so they have obviously decided against hiring him, for better or worse.  Personally I didn't want him here because in all likelyhood he would have been off at the 1st opertunity and we donot need to go through all this again.  As it stands I believe that Brew IS a backwards step but I will be happy to be proved otherwise.

This "off at the first opportunity" line that keeps getting trotted out does my head in.

The only managers that are going to attract interest from anyone else are successful ones, so if you follow through on the logic of the statement then we should be hiring the worst possible candidates to make sure that they stay here for a long time.

What would you rather do....

- share in the success of a good manager for a shorter period of time and progress as a club

or

- struggle with a rubbish/mediocre manager who isn't going anywhere and not progress as a club

If Brewster has been appointed on the basis that he'll not end up going elsewhere in 12 to 18 months then it's even scarier than the thought of him being hired because he was a mate of the Director of Football.  I want the best Managers and Players we can afford to be at this club and I want them to be as successful as they possibly can be.  If that means we have a large turnover of players and managers then so be it, so long as the team as a whole progresses and we keep moving up the table.

The problem with having a large turnover of players and managers is that is rarely works in the long term.  Look at the most consistantly sucessful clubs in football and you will find that they do not have that high a turnover of managers or players.  Take the EPL as an example Ferguson and Wenger have both been in their jobs for a while and both clubs do well year in year.  Caley as a club have not had a large turnover of either players or managers and we have continually progressed up the leagues.  Why change a formula that has worked well for us in the last 13 years?  Yes it would be nice to have a "Big" name as Head Coach but somewhere along the line you have to balance the Risk/Reward ratio.  Warnock and Brewster both have different risks attatched to them and in my opinion both of them are wrong for the job, but at least with Brewster there is an known element to him which is both a positive and a negative.

Which clubs would have the funds to lure away the likes of Ferguson and Wenger and offer them a better wage at a bigger club?

Your comparison is nonsense IMO.

Why change a formula that has worked well for us in the last 13 years?

Very good point, why don't you ask the Board who are the ones who seem to have changed the formula on this occasion.

The comparison isn't nonsense it's just the clubs they manage are a completely different level to us.  As for Clubs who could lure them?  Juventus/Barca/Real/AC Milan come to mind. The point I was trying to make was that you need a management team to stay and to want to stay for an extended period of time to make a club successful.  Chopping and changing managers and players does not allow for progression and can lead to all sorts of problemsas well as wasting vast amounts of money.  Ferguson and Wenger are the two examples I could think of off the top of my head.  There was also a French manager iirc who managed his club from the very bottom to the very top of the French football leagues Guy something I think he was at the club for 20 odd years.  Now these are all pretty extreme examples but why shouldn't we look at the same idea and get a team in place, give them time, let them do their thing.  Not just 6-18 months at a time.  We need people who ARE ambitious, who WANT to make us a bigger team.  Are any of the names mentioned for the post any of this? maybe, maybe not.  Do the board want to do this?  I don't know.  Have the board made mistakes? Yes they have no doubt about it.  Here is hoping that this next appointment works for us.

I hope that this appointment works for us too, but you have to accept that if it does then other people at larger clubs with more money are going to be coming in offering packages that we simply cannot compete with.  That's not speculation, that is fact.  And it doesn't matter if your Craig Brewster, Walter Smith, or Alex Ferguson, although the further up the pay scale you go the fewer teams there are above you that can afford to poach your manager and/or players.

The only way other clubs aren't going to be coming in and making such offers is if the manager/players aren't performing.

If the manager/players aren't performing then we aren't going to be making any progress and they will be shown the door.

Their is no logic to what you are trying to say and it is hinged purely on the fantasy that we could somehow have a successful manager that wouldn't move on for a larger pay packet.  Pele did, Robbo did and Brewster has once already.  The "he is less likely to jump ship again" idea is utter poppycock and I would not expect him to stay if he was being offered more elsewhere (I would however expect him to be a man of his word and not announce one day he is staying and play the loyalty card only to resign 48 hours later).

I'd far rather have 10 successful managers in 10 years than 1 mediocre one for the same length of time.  That is the point I ma trying to make.

I can and cant agree with all the comments above.

We do need good results yes, and we do need consistancy... but would we get consistancy with 10 managers in as many years - i doubt it.

Neil warnock was not a choice for the board for the simple reason they were scared of loosing him not long after gettin him. This guy, I am certain, would have stuck it out for at least 3 years... AND gained us results and maybe even some silverwear. It is ICT's loss now - i doubt we'll get another manager of his Kailbre for many more moons.

Brewster will find it very hard to gain 'loyalty' back in this team. He has no idea what it means and I am sure the fans (and some players) will still feel let down by him to a certain degree. I am, however, willng to see him prove me wrong and succeed - afterall, he is now our club manager and at the start was scepticle of robbo's appontment - look what he ended up achieving...

as for the rest I wasnt really interested. They would not, IMHO, bring success to Inverness.

So long as we get results, maintain a good stature in the spl and have a few decent cup runs, I wll be happy.

What I would like to learn in due course is whether he is going to get as much as CC, or more, or less as a monthly pay cheque.

If less, then there probably will be bonuses or certain strings attached which may prove to be beneficial to the club in the long run.

If more, then the Board are simply desperate which I think is very close to the truth because some, or all , of the other candidates may well have turned down the position for all we know.

No one doubted his ability on the park or praised him for this more than I before he came to Inverness so it was with a considerable amount of disappointment and a big feeling of surprise that I noted the way in which his statements upon exit belied his immediately-preceding professed feelings for the club.

I do not in any way blame him for accepting the offer of a much more highly-paid job with the attendant opportunity of his becoming  possibility very successful and fulfilled but the manner of his exit  left acrid ashes in my mouth. These ashes are still there to only a lesser degree.

If he now came out and said that these statements were ill advised and he was in the wrong and  he was now,  on reflection, very sorry it would be very gratifying and a first step to his ultimate acceptance at Tulloch.

Otherwise I regret to say that I feel that his road could be a hard one which could flare up at any time into passionate negative criticism.

Because IMHO the sullen resentment felt at his departure date is still there simmering under the surface  because it is related to hypocrisy and ill-considered statements rather than to his  his footballing prowess and this cannot be removed simply by a series of good results which simply relate to the football side of the equation. :007: