Jump to content

Bop

Baraclough Out

Recommended Posts

Baraclough's abilities obviously remain up for debate on many fronts - signings among them. But where is the proof that Pearson and McDonald were nothing to do with him and were somehow foisted upon him?

I'm not sure mate. Where is the proof usually kept in these situations?

 

It's common knowledge that Pearo was back at the club training and signed from there. With McDonald it was reported that the signing was all down to Alan Burrows seeing that he was available and doing all the legwork.

 

Neither of them were anything to do with Baraclough identifying a target and going after them. He may have been given the final say on whether they were signed or not but he could hardly take any credit for signing them.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure mate. Where is the proof usually kept in these situations?

 

It's common knowledge that Pearo was back at the club training and signed from there. With McDonald it was reported that the signing was all down to Alan Burrows seeing that he was available and doing all the legwork.

 

Neither of them were anything to do with Baraclough identifying a target and going after them. He may have been given the final say on whether they were signed or not but he could hardly take any credit for signing them.

 

So if he had a final say then it surely can't have been the case they were "nothing to do with him then"?

 

Look I get what you are saying about them both being perhaps not first being specifically identified and targeted as signings. But then how many signings managers make are their first choice? How many players are signed that are genuinely identified and targeted by managers?

 

How many players arrive at clubs that a manager has known absolutely nothing about before a scout has brought a player to his attention or an agent's DVD full of his clients has hit his desk?

 

It's about what the manager does when he's presented with a player's ability, suitability and availability regardless of how they happened to be brought to his attention.

 

Let's take David Clarkson for example. During his purple patch after signing for Dundee great swathes of the Motherwell support were lambasting McCall because he chose not to sign Clarkson. This was Clarkson who ofcourse was training with the club, wasn't specifically identified by the manager and I dare say probably had dealings with Alan Burrows along the way too. Not a great deal of difference to Pearson and McDonald is there?

 

So if McCall was deemed to be deserving of criticism for making what at a the time was perceived to be wrong decision in not signing Clarkson, is it not then fair then that Baraclough is surely due at least some praise for making what at the time appeared to be the right decision in choosing to sign Pearson and McDonald?

 

The bigger point here is that is this is simply a stick that someone has come up with to beat Baraclough with. God knows there plenty to choose from without resorting to fanciful supposition that players are being brought to Motherwell that the manager has zero input in.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Baraclough signed Pearson and McDonald. Credit to him and the owner for getting them over the line.

 

However, these aren't the players where we're going to judge his eye for a player and extensive knowledge of the lower leagues in England. I think he has potentially signed a few good prospects in Laing, Grant and Johnson but unfortunately they haven't been quite prepared for the step up in standard in order to battle our way out the relegation zone. He also reportedly wanted to sign Lyle Taylor who would have been a welcome addition.

 

The less said about Long, Thomas and Straker the better. There was also going to be a few duds amidst the desperation for players in January.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure mate. Where is the proof usually kept in these situations?

 

It's common knowledge that Pearo was back at the club training and signed from there. With McDonald it was reported that the signing was all down to Alan Burrows seeing that he was available and doing all the legwork.

 

Neither of them were anything to do with Baraclough identifying a target and going after them. He may have been given the final say on whether they were signed or not but he could hardly take any credit for signing them.

 

But you have the proof he had nothing to do with the signings so you must know where it is kept

If he is going to get Pelter's for poor signings,he should get credit for better ones

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But you have the proof he had nothing to do with the signings so you must know where it is kept

If he is going to get Pelter's for poor signings,he should get credit for better ones

In my opinion he doesn't deserve credit for signing players who have fallen into his lap. If we're relying on that happening in order to get a half decent signing then we might as well give up now. There probably isn't anybody on this board who is paid to manage a football club but I'd bet that given the choice of signing McDonald and Pearson the overwhelming majority would have said yes. Does that mean we deserve credit for being able to spot a player?

 

My opinion on the matter is probably skewed by the fact that I see Baraclough as a total imposter of a manager who has taken those interviewing him for a ride by doing a bit of research and telling them what they want to hear. All the crap about playing open, expansive football, demanding hard work, the players will enjoy playing here etc - all soundbites that fans want to hear but absolutely nothing to back it up and no tactical knowledge whatsoever. He's a salesman and the people interviewing him were taken in by his sales pitch. When he inevitably gets the boot he can go and sell cars with Gannon.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Baraclough's abilities obviously remain up for debate on many fronts - signings among them. But where is the proof that Pearson and McDonald were nothing to do with him and were somehow foisted upon him?

 

Do you think it's a co-incidence that the two internationalists with Champions League experience he managed to sign were both previously at the club and are good friends with current players?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Do you think it's a co-incidence that the two internationalists with Champions League experience he managed to sign were both previously at the club and are good friends with current players?

 

No I don't, but how we got to the stage where he had a decision to make on signing them is kind of missing the point I'm making.

 

The statement that has been made on several occasions now is that Baraclough had no input in the signings of Pearson and McDonald.

 

All I'm contesting is that unless that statement can substantiated as fact then I'll consider it to be no more than supposition.

 

How the players became available to sign, how much of a no-brainer it was to sign them, how good they've been or otherwise since they've signed - batter in. But to infer that two players have been signed without any of his of input whatsoever, sorry don't buy it for a second.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Baraclough signed Pearson and McDonald. Credit to him and the owner for getting them over the line.

 

However, these aren't the players where we're going to judge his eye for a player and extensive knowledge of the lower leagues in England. I think he has potentially signed a few good prospects in Laing, Grant and Johnson but unfortunately they haven't been quite prepared for the step up in standard in order to battle our way out the relegation zone. He also reportedly wanted to sign Lyle Taylor who would have been a welcome addition.

 

The less said about Long, Thomas and Straker the better. There was also going to be a few duds amidst the desperation for players in January.

Pretty accurate for me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After listening to yet another post match interview with his usual pish. He can fuck right off.

 

You usually expect a bit of a bounce when a manager comes in but this hasn't happened. Managerially and technically he has improved nothing for all of his pish about improving coaching techniques, fitness and positive thinking the same basic crap has been happening on the park game after game, defensively especially we are no better than when he arrived. You would hope that when you are constantly shipping goals he would at least have made us harder to beat.

 

He has been better supported financially that any manager has for a long time and just about all of his signings have improved nothing. We seem to like managers who are aware of the lower leagues in England but only if they know what they are doing and have a real eye for a player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My problem with Baraclough is his failure to adapt tactics. Doesn't matter the opposition or our own display even home and away it's all predictable and if we can see it opposition managers see it quicker, hence the two teams we recently hammered at home completely nullified our attack in return fixtures a few weeks later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, have to agree that some of his post match comments over last few weeks have been beyond embarrassing to hear. Get he is trying to stay positive, but I now cringe every time I hear him talk.

 

I have very little faith in his ability and in an ideal world we would get well rid. However, Les has clearly said he will be staying. Hopefully he will change his mind after we languish in Championship next season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regardless of what division we're playing in next season, it's very likely he'll be given the summer to put a squad of his own making together, and then given time to make a real fist of things next season, which is quite right I think.

 

Once a lot of the current squad are let go this summer we'll see what he can do with a proper summer window rather than the clusterfuck that is the January panic window.

 

Saying that, if he's still not producing within a few months of the new season his position will have to be taken into consideration.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This appointment has Harri Kampman written all over!

Bullets will fly immediately after the play offs.

Watch this space!!

 

You think the new owner was simply lying then when he said that Baraclough was going nowhere?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You think the new owner was simply lying then when he said that Baraclough was going nowhere?

At the time he was quoted we still had a chance of avoiding playoffs, so no chairman is going to publicly doubt his managers future, I imagine things may change IF we end up in the championship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the time he was quoted we still had a chance of avoiding playoffs, so no chairman is going to publicly doubt his managers future, I imagine things may change IF we end up in the championship.

 

I may be wrong, but I got the impression that the owner said Baraclough would be here next season regardless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's had a better return per than Stuart did until he left. However the question is, if Stuart had access to the mini war chest Baraclough had in January, would/could he have done more with it?

 

This is a results based industry and while they are important, I would like to see what Baraclough can achieve when the malcontents and mediocre are moved on.

 

The only issue is when we've had the opportunity to take advantage of our situation in the past year, we've rarely capitalised. Let's not also forget our woeful cup-tie form, which is what we're going to face.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if the 5 on yellows were rested this weekend and fringe players were used to stake a claim. I'd be interested to see what Dom could do with a start.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whether he gets the boot or not is up to Mr Hutchinson. However, the truth will out as soon as players leave or as I expect, us being relegated. The tabloids will have a field day and fully expect no shortage of player quotes and exclusives. However, if he does stay and the fans are disgruntled, Les Hutchison's fan model is a dead duck!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I got the impression from lots of fans round about us that Saturday was the final straw for most. When he relegates us, his position will be absolutely untenable and as such Hutchinson will be left with a sink or swim decision. I have much graver concerns about the potential mess the Well Society could have got us in here if Hutchinson decides to call in his ever increasing loans.

 

Ideal scenario is bring in the experienced head for the last 3 games, offer him as big a bonus as we can muster to keep us up and then spend the summer looking for a new management team.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I got the impression from lots of fans round about us that Saturday was the final straw for most. When he relegates us, his position will be absolutely untenable and as such Hutchinson will be left with a sink or swim decision. I have much graver concerns about the potential mess the Well Society could have got us in here if Hutchinson decides to call in his ever increasing loans.

 

Ideal scenario is bring in the experienced head for the last 3 games, offer him as big a bonus as we can muster to keep us up and then spend the summer looking for a new management team.

 

As much as I agree with what you say, I reckon we have left it too late to change things. We should have done this weeks ago and had the old head in to make us hard to beat.

 

Out of interest, did you have anyone in mind?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regardless of what division we're playing in next season, it's very likely he'll be given the summer to put a squad of his own making together, and then given time to make a real fist of things next season, which is quite right I think.

 

Once a lot of the current squad are let go this summer we'll see what he can do with a proper summer window rather than the clusterfuck that is the January panic window.

 

Saying that, if he's still not producing within a few months of the new season his position will have to be taken into consideration.

 

Sticks in my throat a little, but, this is the likelyhood... Mind, since the introduction of Scott McDonald the 1.7 points per game ratio pre-Saturday (where Mr Hutchinson laid the basis of his claim on interview) would have had us in 3rd place...

 

Inclined to disagree on 'is quite right' though as the heavy backing he received requires payback from the not so vast reserves of the Society. As said previously, you invite a tradesman into your home to undertake works, do you keep throwing finance at him until he achieves the standard required?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we go down, he has to go, its as simple as that.

 

McCall started this demise, through his utter ambivalence towards any sort of preparation for the season, along with his inability to clear out even the most obvious of deadwood in the squad and his lack of foresight in the transfer market.

 

Baraclough, though has had plenty of time, oodles of cash and umpteen opportunities to drag our arses away from the drop zone and so far he has failed to do it.

 

This season we have had two managers who have failed the Club and its supporters and I dont see anyway that Baraclough can stay on if McCall manages to finish the job that he started.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we go down, he has to go, its as simple as that.

 

McCall started this demise, through his utter ambivalence towards any sort of preparation for the season, along with his inability to clear out even the most obvious of deadwood in the squad and his lack of foresight in the transfer market.

 

Baraclough, though has had plenty of time, oodles of cash and umpteen opportunities to drag our arses away from the drop zone and so far he has failed to do it.

 

This season we have had two managers who have failed the Club and its supporters and I dont see anyway that Baraclough can stay on if McCall manages to finish the job that he started.

Spot on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Sticks in my throat a little, but, this is the likelyhood... Mind, since the introduction of Scott McDonald the 1.7 points per game ratio pre-Saturday (where Mr Hutchinson laid the basis of his claim on interview) would have had us in 3rd place...

 

Inclined to disagree on 'is quite right' though as the heavy backing he received requires payback from the not so vast reserves of the Society. As said previously, you invite a tradesman into your home to undertake works, do you keep throwing finance at him until he achieves the standard required?

 

In short, no. I personally think that any manager deserves at least one proper summer to do his job, but at the same time I wouldn't be all that upset if the board decided to remove him after the season finishes.

Share this post


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.   Paste as plain text instead

  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.

Loading...

Twitter @MotherwellFC

×