Kmcalpin

Winning games isn't all about great football its often about hard work, organisation, not making mistakes and taking your chances. Thats why Saints won and we didn't.

The Directors, in consultation with the manager set the overall playing budget. How that money is spent is the responsibility of the manager

and if so, why?

I'd think twice before placing too much emphasis on red top stories and we don't know what went on behind closed doors. However if this particular rumour is true I don't know how they could have handled it any better. If 2 candidates, irrespective of how they arrived on short leet, pull out of their own volition then I don't see how the Directors could be blamed for that.

I always thought that managerial compensations were adjusted to take into account new earnings. For example Manager X is given £100k total compensation for a year. He takes up a new job immediately for £50k per year and so his compensation is reduced by £50k. Clearly its more complicated.

A well reasoned and set out post El Grew, which has generated discussion, but I don't necessarily agree with most of it. Are we no longer an attractive club to manage? Were we ever? I've trawled through our previous managers and I really don't think the current recruitment pool is any worse than it ever was. Its full of first time managers - Sailor Hunter, George Stevenson, Bobby Howitt, Roger Hynd, Davie Hay, Alex McLeish, Billy Davies and so on. Also quite a few managers from Scots lower league clubs such as Bobby Ancell, Tommy MacLean, Bobby Watson, and Willie MacLean. Also a few wild cards like Harri Kampmann and Ian Baraclough. At the time of appointment would they be much different to the likes of Simo Valakari, Lee MacCulloch, and Barry Ferguson? In terms of lack of finance, are we any worse off than say St Johnstone, Partick, Inverness, Hamilton, and Kilmarnock? As for Mark McGhee's departure there may have been more to it than a group of young lads protesting. Two very bad hammerings, a poor run and erratic behaviour. Whilst there was most certainly a small public demonstration, almost universal talk in the stands amongst fans of all ages was that he should go. Yes, there were a few who thought he should stay but not many. I think more than most managerial changes, quite a lot has gone on behind the scenes with this one that we aren't party to. A few well founded snippets have emerged such as contact with Owen Coyle. I'm still not 100% comfortable with the process and outcome ie why invite Simo Valakari across from Finland and then pass him over in favour of the internal candidate, but I don't know the internal behind the scenes goings on.

Must admit they were and still are my concerns. I would have have been a bit, but not a lot happier, last weekend if we'd had 2 or 3 decent efforts on target, but still lost. As for the Killie game you're right but I suppose we could all trawl the season and asked ourselves what if such and such had happened. Still Robinson did manage to beat Killie and the old adage held true its better to be lucky than good. Of course we have to tighten up our defensive game (as opposed to our defence), but in the coming run of home matches we'll need to do more than just defend well, we'll need to score and win.

That could well be down to the formation that we've played. I'd like to see Pearo or Frear start wide left and stay there. Pearo often plays in a deep left central berth and that leaves the left back exposed. If Frear plays he has to be given the ball. Cadden's game will improve if he's given more support and we play with more than one outball ie him. Too often this season Cadden has broken out of defence only to receive no support when he's closed down by 2 or 3 players. If we have an outball on the left hand side that creates more space for not only Cadden but the 2 strikers.

I'll sit on the fence with this appointment. This season I'm not looking for exciting football just survival. Robinson has the big advantage of being able to hit the ground running as he knows the club and many of the players and staff. However, he is inexperienced. He's been coaching senior players since 2014 and had an unsuccessful six month stint in management at Oldham. As Catweazle's Ringpiece wrote he can't rely on an experienced No 2 in Faddy, who is still learning his own role. Its all very well to slate Robinson's appointment but who were his competitors? Valakari, Hughes?, and two other unknown candidates. The bottom line is that he's a risky appointment. That might turn out very well or it might turn out very badly. We'll know in a couple of month's time. I'm certainly surprised that he's only been given an appointment until the end of next season. Still, he has my support.

Raith Rovers?

Quite telling I think. I wonder if loyalty / integrity will be a quality our Directors will be seeking. Again we have to caveat our comments as Hughes' involvement is simply a rumour at this stage.

I admit he's a bit smarter than he sounds but I've never been convinced by him. At Falkirk he had a reputation for getting them to play fine football but I saw little evidence of that. A Falkirk supporting work colleague, at the time, said he was baffled by that claim and it was down to a fawning media. At Starks Park he has a difficult job with Raith lying in 3rd bottom spot (maybe a bit similar to us) and he's done nothing so far. So, to sum up I'm just not convinced of him. However, his name being in the ring may just be conjecture, nothing more.

I've no problem with a bit of pant wetting on here Jim. Whatever the appointment there will be happy clappers and pant wetters and all shades of opinions in between; just like large disparate groups such as our support. C'est la vie.

Maybe the Robinson story is one of Mitch's much loved hoaxes. Time will tell.

I agree with this. Maybe things will be clearer by close of the day (COTD). I hate acronyms as the same letters can mean different things to different people.

The inference a few weeks ago seemed to be that our club's interpretation of what constituted a red card was outdated and out of line with everyone else but from incidents since and comments it appears that it is the SFA who have either not made interpretations clear and/or are nor ensuring their employees, the referees, are implementing their updated guidance.

On the Griffiths /Hill penalty claim, former ref Charlie Richmond said Madden got the penalty call right as Hill did get a touch on the ball. Also an excerpt from the Scotsman "If he doesn't know for certain what came first, man or ball, he shouldn't give the penalty." So the issue of excessive force doesn't seem to come into it, its more what came first man or ball. Not what we were led to understand.

I seem to recall that Alan Burrows dismissed a Director of Football role on the basis we couldn't afford it.

We should be up for it Andy given the importance of the fixture. One thing in our favour is that Tom (yes, Tom to some who know a bit about him) Wright won't have much of an idea what to expect from us.

My thoughts exactly. If the people we approached weren't interested will there a better choice in the summer or is it a case we need to find out which division we're playing in? Either way it smacks of indecision and lack of confidence. IF this is the outcome then the Directors have caused at least 2 weeks of unnecessary uncertainty for all connected with the club. A decision 2 weeks ago to give Robinson the job until the end of the season would have made sense then. IF he is given the role temporarily it also suggests that the Directors don't have full confidence in him, unless thats his own choice. Is Robinson the right man for us? I genuinely don't know. He might be or he might not. Anyway until an announcement its made is all speculation and we may have got it totally wrong.

3-5-2 is Motherwell speak for a 5-3-2 or a 5-3-1-1 formation Del. At this stage its almost impossible to call the outcome. We don't know who'll be in charge; it'll be a weaker defence yet with Heneghan missing out; Moulty will be returning; and who knows about injuries. One thing is for sure it won't be a classic. Whatever, I'd like to see either Frear or Pearson starting wide left as that would take the pressure off our sole outball (Cadden). I think young Campbell deserves some game time either from the start or from the bench as we badly need some energy and bite in midfield.

Agree 100%, but it does make you wonder about the quality the other candidates if thats who we've approached. Still we might be pleasantly surprised.

The club may also have approached some candidates who did not apply. In Rumsfeld language its a known unknown.

Lets just take stock shall we. Stephen Robinson has been appointed on a caretaker basis until the Aberdeen game or more likely until a permanent successor is found. So on that basis he's not going to be sacked nor should he be. Postiejim never suggested that he should be fired. The suggestion that he had failed, on the basis of 2 games, is a world away from saying he should be sacked. Its not a matter of semantics nor splitting hairs. There are many opinions of Stephen Robinson on these forums and each member is quite entitled to express them, without being subject to ridicule. I may not agree with some but thats what sensible reasoned debate is all about. Live and let live. Postiejim doesn't think that Robinson has done well and presumably shouldn't be given the job permanently and thats fine. There are quite a few others who agree. That does not mean they should be ridiculed by you or anyone else. There are yet others who think he has done well and should be given the chance. And, finally there are those like me who don't think he has done much (for better or for worse) to help the Directors make their difficult choice - an in between or neutral view if you like. There are many views in between. Stephen Robinson was given, probably, 2 games in charge and its hard to achieve a lot in that time. He's had to work with players not of his choosing. I wasn't expecting miracles in that time. The Killie result, against a fellow bottom 6 side, was good but our defending was still a bit shambolic, Killie hit woodwork several times and we seemed to struggle in the latter stages...yet again. Yesterday we cut out individual calamitous errors, but our defending was still a bit shambolic, we lost and to a late goal again. It was to the league's second best team. So, I was neither impressed nor disappointed by Robinson's 2 games in charge. As for filling the vacancy, A lot is going to depend on who the other 4 candidates are.

Not sure where you picked this up from Stu. I've checked back the posts after the game and haven't found anyone who has suggested that Robinson be sacked from his caretaker role because of the loss today. Given thats only liable to last for a few more days, I can't fathom out what that would achieve. I merely suggested that his performance over the past 2 games has neither helped nor hindered his prospects of landing the job. A lot will depend on who the other 4 candidates are and we don't know. If you can find the source suggesting that he be sacked then fine.