McCall Sacked

[javeajag]

2 hours ago, Woodstock Jag said:

Jim this really boils down to you think Ian McCall would produce a better league outcome than Kris Doolan.

That's fine. Plenty of people agree with you.

The Club Board disagrees, and clearly thinks McCall should have been doing better given the resources made available to him.

That's their current assessment of the situation, irrespective of whether he was in fact given sufficient resources by the previous Board to meet whatever target he was set, and irrespective of how realistic it was that that target would be met.

I guess that leads to the obvious question of the skills, knowledge and expertise of the current board to make such a decision.

 

[javeajag]

2 hours ago, Lenziejag said:

That’s the worrying thing. It’s seems to be a decision taken without considering all the factors, unless they aren’t telling us something. I just can’t see how they assess if their decision is the correct one at the end of the season.

Calling replacing McCall with Doolan a strategic decision is quite the stretch 

[bawheid]

16 minutes ago, Dick Dastardly said:

Just to pick up on this one point. On exactly what basis do you make that a likely outcome ? The current trajectory is downwards, the current form is 1 win in the last 6 and the league performances have been appalling. Yes there was a chance to say that we could have been top 4 (which would still be below expectations) but it is far from likely. By any extrapolation of current form we would be looking at  6th or 7th as being the likelyhood.

Not supposed to be a debate on footballing merits of sacking McCall or not, but perhaps more accurately you could say that without an exceptional replacement lined up to take over immediately, and without a transfer window or funds to make squad changes, then the likelihood is that our league position at season end would be as good under McCall is it will be under Doolan or any other replacement.  It might work out differently of course, but looking at it rationally I think this would be a fair analysis.  Maybe the club has an excellent replacement lined up this week, but it doesn't seem like it, and such replacements generally cost money which we don't have.  

This should be taken in context of the rest of my post, re club stability and authority of the board to make such a decision...i.e. such a major decision shouldn't be made by this board at this time unless there are very clear justifications for it and a solid plan for how things are going to be better under a new manager

Edited February 15, 2023 by bawheid

[javeajag]

1 hour ago, dl1971 said:

Looks clear to me that this is a predominately football decision, rather than financial, albeit much will depend if a new managerial team is coming in? To expect doolan and Mcdonald to make a major impact is undoubtedly a gamble. I'm hoping it will work, but ultimately this is the same group of players who have a very average success rate this season. For the record the timing of the sacking was abysmal, similar ironically in the way Doolan was treated. 

Maybe the begging bowl bring out is to see  if we can get enough cash in to appoint a new manager …. We are skint forget and still paying the previous mgt team 

[javeajag]

32 minutes ago, ChiThistle said:

Hard to say the board should resign if the change doesn’t work out.  If the board kept the status quo and we didn’t get promoted, should they resign for not acting earlier?

I think the unstated bit here is that if this works out, we are potentially saving 5-6 figures next season (assuming the management team stays at 2, and that they will be on slightly less money due to experience).

What I find more interesting is that Dools, to my knowledge, has never been in charge of a transfer window.  And we have a LOT of guys out of contract this summer.

 

On a 12 month rolling contract that will be march 2024 before the savings kick in ( assuming none of them get jobs before then )

[Dick Dastardly]

17 hours ago, Auld Jag said:

I do not understand why he came back as one of McCall's assistants though.

What is not to understand about an unemployed man accepting a circa £50k per year job offer ?

[Lenziejag]

28 minutes ago, Dick Dastardly said:

Just to pick up on this one point. On exactly what basis do you make that a likely outcome ? The current trajectory is downwards, the current form is 1 win in the last 6 and the league performances have been appalling. Yes there was a chance to say that we could have been top 4 (which would still be below expectations) but it is far from likely. By any extrapolation of current form we would be looking at  6th or 7th as being the likelyhood.

We’ve been here before this season, but recovered back to top 4. Recovering again was more likely with a full strength squad than slipping further back. 

[Dick Dastardly]

1 minute ago, Lenziejag said:

We’ve been here before this season, but recovered back to top 4. Recovering again was more likely with a full strength squad than slipping further back. 

I don't know how you can say more likely. It was possible, but I don't think you can say either more likely on current form, or that we would maintain a full strength squad over 13 games. The later is highly unlikely and if (from previous arguments on here) it takes only 2 players out to wreck our performances then it puts into further question the likelyhood of finishing top 4.

It is something that we will never know for sure, but I would think that 6th or 7th was the more likely outcome.

[jlsarmy]

22 minutes ago, Lenziejag said:

We’ve been here before this season, but recovered back to top 4. Recovering again was more likely with a full strength squad than slipping further back. 

Unlikely that was going to happen ( full strength squad ) , even this Saturday against Ayr is going to be tough without Brian Graham , one thing you could level at McCall is the recruitment wasn’t good enough and not balanced , lots of midfielders but short up front and that’s when it became an issue when a 36yr old striker isn’t playing.

[sandy]

4 hours ago, SteppsJag said:

Nicola Sturgeon spotted on Firhill Road last night. Just saying. 🤪

She’ll be in Jaconellis tomorrow if you want to buy her pie & chips 

[Woodstock Jag]

46 minutes ago, Lenziejag said:

We’ve been here before this season, but recovered back to top 4. Recovering again was more likely with a full strength squad than slipping further back. 

That's a footballing judgment which may or may not be correct.

I am not confident that (a) there would be a fully fit squad or that (b) even if there was, that McCall would improve on recent form enough to secure a top 4 finish.

I'm assuming the Club Board must have felt the same way.

[sandy]

The decision has been made by the Club Board. I think it’s time to move on and support the team under Dools.

There are a number of key decisions to be made about how fan ownership will work - and the Club does need new income.

If Dools can keep us there or there about for top 4, that’s good enough for me for this season. 

[laukat]

I struggle with the idea that McCall's sacking was purely for results to my mind it has to mixed in with the finances and contracts.

If you look at purely footballing reasons and how the team achieves its highest position this year it would have made more sense to have kept McCall until at least the end of the month and probably the end of the season. Mainly because he could have got us back in the playoffs but also because the first 3 games Doolan or a new manager are taking on now are possibly the hardest they could have i.e away to Ayr, Arbroath and Dundee.

If McCall loses all of them then its obvious he has to go and the board present it as saving our season whereas a Doolan/new manager Loses all 3 and they will be be up against it and we might be in the mix for relegation. If McCall wins all three or gets reasonable results you keep going until Summer.

If the footballing reason was that you think the manager has gone stale and can't take you forward to the point he risks next season's plans then surely you want a smooth succession by waiting until our final position is known and then do it.

McCall clearly was backed at the start of the season and based on his comments was only 1 defender short of everything he asked for. By January which is really his next chance to spend budget its clear promotion is very unlikely and unlikely to get to 2nd in which case it would be perfectly valid/prudent for old or new board to not commit any more funds and look to rebalance the books. Would JLow if she had still be in charge thrown more money at McCall and ran up at loss or done what the current board are doing and cut costs? If she hadn't at least cut costs she's madder than we all gave her credit for.

After the Cove game McCall said in his post match interview we could "forget about the title" at that stage Queens Park were top and 10 points ahead. Dundee are now 9 points ahead so if the manager is giving up on the title he was also arguably giving up on 2nd and what we believe was the target set by the board. Perhaps that was enough for the board to trigger the end of his contract? It would certainly be enough for a board to be asking McCall why he by his own admission can no longer deliver his agreed targets?

Is an essential part of sorting out the budget for this year and next the salaries of McCall and his staff? Where they on contacts that awarded extra payments for wins, finishing top 4 etc and getting rid now reduced costs?

 

 

[javeajag]

26 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

That's a footballing judgment which may or may not be correct.

I am not confident that (a) there would be a fully fit squad or that (b) even if there was, that McCall would improve on recent form enough to secure a top 4 finish.

I'm assuming the Club Board must have felt the same way.

Assuming because in their world actually telling you is banned 

[allyo]

Remember exactly 10 years ago, when we'd had a good start but were faltering through winter, couldn't win away, we'd fallen behind our rivals, our manager left and a club legend with no managerial experience stepped up from a coaching role within the club, to take charge on an interim basis.....

 

All that's missing is the Cowdenbeath fog

[Lenziejag]

2 hours ago, Dick Dastardly said:

I don't know how you can say more likely. It was possible, but I don't think you can say either more likely on current form, or that we would maintain a full strength squad over 13 games. The later is highly unlikely and if (from previous arguments on here) it takes only 2 players out to wreck our performances then it puts into further question the likelyhood of finishing top 4.

It is something that we will never know for sure, but I would think that 6th or 7th was the more likely outcome.

I don’t think I said it only takes 2 to wreck our performance. Even in our injury wracked period between October and now, we have still had some good results. I justified why I thought it was more likely.

[Lenziejag]

2 hours ago, Woodstock Jag said:

That's a footballing judgment which may or may not be correct.

I am not confident that (a) there would be a fully fit squad or that (b) even if there was, that McCall would improve on recent form enough to secure a top 4 finish.

I'm assuming the Club Board must have felt the same way.

But they think Doolan can ?

[Lenziejag]

2 hours ago, Woodstock Jag said:

That's a footballing judgment which may or may not be correct.

I am not confident that (a) there would be a fully fit squad or that (b) even if there was, that McCall would improve on recent form enough to secure a top 4 finish.

I'm assuming the Club Board must have felt the same way.

I am mystified by your support of the current board.

[javeajag]

Interim board led by interim chairman appoints interim manager …. It’s all a bit interim 

[Woodstock Jag]

8 minutes ago, Lenziejag said:

I am mystified by your support of the current board.

I’m not “supporting” them.

As TJF explained on Monday morning, we were critical of their decision to overshadow Sunday’s game with the timing of the announcement. I still think they got that wrong.

I’m simply saying that there’s a reasonable argument for relieving the management team of its duties at this point in the season: a respectable footballing argument that also makes sense financially given reasonable assumptions, in the context of Doolan being appointed interim manager.

Let us not forget that the outgoing manager had presided over back-to-back home defeats against the two worst teams in the league, had openly “chucked it” on the league title itself (usually managers aren’t that candid to be fair) and his team was significantly underperforming league performance relative to what was widely accepted as being at least the second best resourced player budget in the league back in the summer. That budget may subsequently have been overtaken but I don’t see much evidence of a splurge by Ayr, Morton, QP or Dundee. Do you?

I was commenting on here, as a fan, several days before McCall’s sacking that I thought people’s excuses about his squad carrying injuries was a sideshow. My view hasn’t changed: that the case for a change is finely balanced but that things were going stale and that, as long as the replacement doesn’t end up costing significantly more, a change is justifiable.

It would have been much harder to justify bringing someone in externally, because that would have cost a lot more, and provided no guarantee of improved performance to pay for itself.

[javeajag]

10 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

It would have been much harder to justify bringing someone in externally, because that would have cost a lot more, and provided no guarantee of improved performance to pay for itself.

So the strategic rationale for sacking McCall at this time is Doolan is cheap …. Reassuring 

[dl1971]

1 minute ago, javeajag said:

So the strategic rationale for sacking McCall at this time is Doolan is cheap …. Reassuring 

More pragmatic in the circumstances we find ourselves in. Let's cut to the chase the club in all aspects is in a state of flux. Time will tell very quickly how the football aspect unravels. 

[Fawlty Towers]

Not that anyone really cares but here is my tuppence worth.

Would I have sacked him after the Rangers game? No as I would have sacked him after the Dundee game that we blew a 2-0 lead in.

There is a degree of conflation between the manager's position, the fan ownership issue and finances here. Again so my position is clear I would still say he should go even if TJF had been given the shares last year and our finances were such that the directors could swim around in a vault of money under Firhill like Scrooge McDuck.

Also, rather than just bump my gums on here I actually wrote to him last week explaining that whilst I had no personal issues with him I was of the opinion he should step down and my thinking behind that.

 

[Jordanhill Jag]

20 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

I’m not “supporting” them.

As TJF explained on Monday morning, we were critical of their decision to overshadow Sunday’s game with the timing of the announcement. I still think they got that wrong.

I’m simply saying that there’s a reasonable argument for relieving the management team of its duties at this point in the season: a respectable footballing argument that also makes sense financially given reasonable assumptions, in the context of Doolan being appointed interim manager.

Let us not forget that the outgoing manager had presided over back-to-back home defeats against the two worst teams in the league, had openly “chucked it” on the league title itself (usually managers aren’t that candid to be fair) and his team was significantly underperforming league performance relative to what was widely accepted as being at least the second best resourced player budget in the league back in the summer. That budget may subsequently have been overtaken but I don’t see much evidence of a splurge by Ayr, Morton, QP or Dundee. Do you?

I was commenting on here, as a fan, several days before McCall’s sacking that I thought people’s excuses about his squad carrying injuries was a sideshow. My view hasn’t changed: that the case for a change is finely balanced but that things were going stale and that, as long as the replacement doesn’t end up costing significantly more, a change is justifiable.

It would have been much harder to justify bringing someone in externally, because that would have cost a lot more, and provided no guarantee of improved performance to pay for itself.

But despite all that - still one point off the Play Off Spot with a Third of the Season to Go - I have never  seen a management Team sacked in a similar position - changing Managers for a Board is one of the most risky decisions they can make and they only do it when all avenues have failed - to have this done by an Interim Board ?   

And to do it whilst still clearly in contention - with No Obvious replacement us well - very unusual to be polite 

So what would have happened if we beat Rangers ? Or was that not factored in ?

What if Morton had been Beat ? 

It all seems poorly thought out - as for how it was executed - Words Fail me 

     

[fenski]

As mentioned above, one of the consequences of the timing of this change, is that Doolan is immediately facing a really tough run of games. Hope the fans cut him some slack.

It'd help if the board clarified what is meant by interim - are they recruiting now or is it an interim appointment to end of the season.