shurlock

Gove is a f**king loon and got a nasty and vindictive streak.

A promising interview but raises more questions than answers. If the goal is to challenge for Europe, it will mean business as usual in terms of spending. Cant see how we can depart too far from previous windows. Found the reference to our 20-man strong scouting division as supposed evidence of our European ambitions slightly odd. Seems like no player will go before the world cup which is a good thing. But unclear what the new manager's input will be in deciding who is bought and sold as they will not have seen much of us. Les will be having an even bigger say than usual; though the danger is a Forren-type situation where a player is foisted on an unsuspecting manager. In terms of appointment, most domestic candidates -with the exception of Moyes prhaps- dont seem to have the necessary quality. Of course, quality is in the eye of the beholder...

And I hope he doesn't tell them that they have 20 scouts on their books as evidence of their European ambitions. Very odd example to give.

Come on, if you're going for the Europa, you're only 3 wins away from the CL. Sometimes less

They showed different clips from the interview on SSN.

In the other interview I saw, RK basically said he got the impression from MP very early on that he was going to leave. You hope that there would have been more succession planning.

Who would you consider a success?

In the interview I saw, RK basically said there was an 'air' that MP would always leave when the new leadership took over in Jan/Feb.

And to think in the good old days, you would have already attracted double-digit bites. #Got to hurt

By "pseudo waffle with a smirk", you don't mean Joey Barton That's who was on when I switched over (around 3.25pm).

No he isnt

No reason why it can't be a good interview - why RK can't impress. In his defense, its hard not to be vague when there's nothing to report and you've literally been given a blank sheet. He now has the chance to prove he can deal with tangibles and the nitty gritty.

Bassett/Wise, Gormon and Wilkins don't count IMO.

Time to shine Ralph.

As long as its none of our fanbase, a battle of the yokels between Callaghan and Illingsworth.

How is the article pro-Cortese or propaganda puff?

Agree that looking to impose yourself on the opposition probably had costs. Just as obsessing about how neutralise the opposition a la Big Sam does. What I will say is that go to any mongboard and you'll find people moaning about a lack of a plan B. The charge covers such a promiscuous litany of grievances that it soon becomes meaningless. Boil away the bluff and many are effectively saying that the team's not good enough. No s**t. The alleged failure to break teams down is and always will be a bit of a red herring. It happens to the best of teams - does Mourinho lack a plan B because he couldnt break down Wham or Norwich or Rodgers couldn't open up Chelsea (some scousers have claimed as much). Perhaps we dont shoot enough from distance -as someone on this thread has stated. Which might or might not be true; but it hardly justifies the bombastic label of lacking a plan B. IMO, there were times when we could have closed up shop; but football isn't a controlled experiment where you can isolate the impact of different variables and know with confidence that improving one part of the game won't negate others.

Slow down Tim. I've read the article or the bit in red if it makes it easier for you. I'm saying that the poster's conclusions drawn from it about a lack of plan B don't necessarily stack up. Feel free to resume.

You're making things up out of thin air. Give me an example of a team that hasn't had problems breaking other sides down. The onus is on you to show that things were worse here than elsewhere. The only side against which we genuinely struggled tactically -as opposed to players not executing properly- was Chelsea. And that's nothing to be ashamed of. Give me an example of a team that hasn't sometimes had problems adapting when they have limited personnel. Normal people call that a lack of squad depth, not a lack of a plan B.

Difference Glasgow is that while MP inherited some excellent players, he improved them or, at least, they reached their potential under him. Perhaps they too would have improved under NA with more prem experience but nowhere to the same extent IMO.

Question is how much was success due to him or having the luck to ride the wave of a very good side - remember Basel beat Man U in the CL the year before he took over.

Lack of discipline in training, dressing room cliques, fights between players, boozy training camps abroad, refusing to take training in the rain - just some of the allegations made against Laudrup and his management.

Agree his bread and butter has been the Swiss leagues; but his exploits in Europe have been nothing short of excellent. Still remember the first leg of the Europa Cup quarter finals at White Hart Lane - they thoroughly outplayed and outclassed Spurs that were lucky to bundle in a scrappy set-piece and score from a deflection. Remember thinking at the time that if we played like them, I would be delighted. AVB admitted that they were the best team he'd seen at WHL. Compare him with another poster boy -Frank De Boer who's done well with Ajax domestically, a league that's not much better than Switzerland but done abysmally in Europe.

Because our spending and theirs is totally comparable. Save the UKIP bogeyman tactics for elsewhere, pal.

Mix it up, Glasgow? Nonexistent movement and pummeling cross after cross into the box. What was it- 81 against Fulham? Moyes is a decent manager but its as much about 'fit' as anything. Moyes doesn't fit our system -and how our team has been very successfully trained to set up and play. If there were faults with our system, they were not fundamental. Its about finding a manager who can work with the grain of it, not outside it.