Kmcalpin

Its interesting the general opinions of posters on two of the candidates for the vacancy, Simo Valakari and Mark McGhee. The former was a fans favourite who did very well for us and the latter is commonly supposed to have done the dirty on us. In point of fact the opposite is the case. Anyhow thats a bit of sideshow in the great scheme of things. I agree with some earlier posters that Ian Baraclough's track record was poor or mixed at best. At our level, that of a large Scots club, we can't expect to lure a manager with a good record at big clubs, but I'd hope we'd take previous success or failure into account which we didn't seem to do last time around. Appointing someone with no managerial track record is a huge gamble. Many of the best managers were not overly successful or popular as players.

Stephen Craigan is a decent guy and rightly popular with our support but this job may have come too soon for him. If we were to appoint him it would represent a huge gamble given that he's untested and thats not what we need right now.

47 I think. Media reports Steve Evans has applied. Jim McIntyre has rebuffed Dundee United's approach. Mark McGhee left FP on very good terms with the directors but not the fans.

Jim McIntyre and Tom Wright now being quoted for Tannadice also - the usual media speculation. Interestingly sources on Tayside are saying they'll just appoint who they want as money is no object (to an extent) - the kind of compensation St Johnstone and Ross County would be looking for is chickfeed to them.

McCall and Paateleinen now being quoted for the United vacancy. I suspect that our vacancy to an extent may have forced United's hand on Saturday. They expect to make an appointment very quickly - probably well before we do. We probably can't expect much more to come out of FP until after tonight's board meeting.

16-0 I believe. Their winning run just goes on and on.

No, I thought he had a reasonable game maybe 5 out of 10 but no better. That said he was all over the place at times. I believe he can play RB but is basically a central midfielder and I assumed that he had been signed to play there.

Jackie Macnamara? A resounding no from me. Yes, he lost 4 very decent players, but look at the money he's had at his disposal to bring in new players. There were also another 7+ players deemed good enough to play for United. Ok it may have taken time to rebuild but with their playing budget they shouldn't be sitting anywhere near second bottom.

Agree with much of this. In terms of his on the park organisation and tactics, you'r right. Because an idea is new though doesn't necessarily mean its right. Both he and Jim Gannon made similar errors. The kind of football they wanted to play was fine in theory. The problem however was that it didn't suit the players they inherited or indeed brought in. They failed to realise that you have to work with what you've got. In Gannon's case he wanted to play constructive passing from the back - great in theory. The problem was that our defence was in the main slow and lacking in footballing skill. Opposing teams soon realised that if they pressed us high up the park and harried our defenders they'd beat us and thats just what happened.

Kennedy for me but Ainsworth also impressed.

First and foremost I was relieved to pick up the 3 points today. Beyond that I though Partick looked a decent side if somewhat toothless. They fielded big powerful lads who knew how to throw their not inconsiderable weight around to good effect and that proved to be problematic for us. Credit where its due their midfield seized control of the game for long spells, without asking. Over the piece they deserved a draw but I'm not complaining that they didn't get it. For our part I thought Kennedy was our man of the match - big powerful and got tore in when it mattered and whats more annoyed the Partick players by refusing to be intimidated. Ainsworth too had a good game with some telling runs. The team line up was about right with no sign of Taylor or Twardzik. Thought Grimshaw had a reasonable game at RB but was disappointed he wasn't deployed in midfield. Still he can't play in 2 positions at once and I can understand why he he featured at RB. Good to see Pearo back although he looked far from match fit. Encouraging too that Fletcher made a brief appearance from the bench. Over the 90 minutes I thought the central midfield was poor and simply didn't compete against bigger and more physical opponents. They allowed Partick far too much time and space around our box and didn't shield Kennedy or McManus. Once Pearo tired it was non existent. Very worrying in the last 30 minutes or so how our engine room simply vanished without trace. Our defence was poorish and looked disorganised. Grimshaw was just ok, but Kennedy fortunately was a standout. Our left side collapsed once Johnson retired and Partick made full use of that. Tactics wise I was disappointed. OK I accept we found it hard to compete against physically powerful opponents but it was worrying that we defended so deep after going a goal up. Not what I was expecting. Maybe the squad was knackered after the draining midweek marathon at Greenock. Partick's goal was so predictable in coming. I can quite understand why Moult was pulled off but didn't understand why Leitch was brought on - that was a sign to Partick that we were going to dig in and they took heart from that switch. In my view Leitch was pretty anonymous when he came on. Apart from the team selection our tactics were very much out of the Ian Baraclough mould and I was expecting a few subtle changes but that wasn't how it panned out. A special word for the ref - possibly the worst display I've seen this season. From start to finish he gave us virtually nothing. Dan Seabourne committed 8 fouls up to the 30 minute mark and escaped censure at every one. After that I simply gave up counting.

We saw Mixu Paateleinen in the POD Stand today, so it would seem he's interested in our vacancy. According to Radio Scotland we hope to have a new man in place by next weekend.

I was a bit surprised to learn that the Directors are not meeting until Monday to discuss what to do about the managerial vacancy. You'd have thought they'd want to meet quickly to discuss the way ahead and get things organised. Whilst we don't want to rush into a hasty appointment we can't afford to delay things either. The only thing I can think of is that someone, maybe Alan Burrows has been remitted to manage the process in the meantime.

A bit concerning that Les Hutchison asked Ian Baraclough to leave without the knowledge of the Club Chairman, Brian MacCafferty. You'd have thought that he'd contact the Chairman first out of courtesy to let him know.

Its a bit harsh to have a go at McManus. He's not played as well as we expected granted but by all accounts has had problems in the past year or so. Best left at that.

It seems that interest from former English Premiership players and some of our old club favourites always generates excitement on these boards when our managerial hot seat is up for grabs. Personally I couldn't care less about these groups in general. What we need is managerial ability end of. Some have it and some don't. Its the same with many other occupational groups for example teachers. Those who know the most (or play the best) don't necessarily put it across well in the classroom. Just because a player has played at the highest level doesn't necessarily translate well into good management.

Probably true and that leaves us, in my view with limited feasible central midfield of Lasley and Grimshaw, who are both defensive midfielders. Cadden - who knows?

I thought so too Ian but perhaps the bizarre team line up, the alleged dressing room fracas and the fans' reaction were the straws that broke the camel's back. The result too would have been a huge factor. I admit to changing my view after the game.

Again?

He was also mentioned last time around. Has he ever managed a club? I get the impression he's a young man in a hurry. Although he seems to be "rated" what has he actually done or achieved?

I think what counted against him, in addition to poor results, was the fact that on paper he was putting together a reasonable squad that looked as though it was underperforming. Long running problems such as a leaky defence and soft / ineffective midfield were never addressed. All too often team selections and tactics left you wondering if a few more rational changes might not have achieved something.

I'll go along with that. There are obviously big personalities in the dressing room and whilst it great to have one, two or more is usually disastrous. The new man will need to command the dressing room, although there are various ways of doing that.

Maybe I'm being a bit negative but I'm surprised that names like Mixu Paatelinen and James Fowler are being mentioned. While the former did well at Kilmarnock his spell at Easter Road was far from impressive. The latter has been in management for 12 months only and his taken his side to 6th out of 10 ie mid table. Stephen Craigan is completely untested.

McCall has had his day and I wouldn't even contemplate bringing him back. By his own admission he ran out of ideas last season. Malpas is a definite no go and would not be welcomed back. I agree though a steady experienced hand is the way to go. In our current position its not a job for a rookie. We need a good man manager.

Agreed Iain - no disagreement on my part. He's always given 100% and thats all you can ask of a player. In our squad we have the makings of a decent team, albeit with some passengers/poor signings. For whatever reason Ian Baraclough was not getting the best from them.