McCall Sacked

[Dick Dastardly]

30 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

OK - I will try and explain 

The Management Team were sacked for not meeting the Targets set by the Previous Board as they had the Budget to do so 

That Target as confirmed by AR was second place ( which makes sense given QP & Dundee strengths ) - The Budget was set assuming a second place finish - Woodstock Jag has emphasised that by missing Second Place it means we are £280K down - all of this makes perfect sense

However it is therefore accepted that we were not going up as Automatic First - WJ emphasizes that Dools may drag us into a second place spot - with the reward of £280K so its worth the risk of sacking the Management Team ( as there target of Second Place and associated revenue was in most likliehood being missed ) All Makes Sense 

However as AR pointed out - the Rangers Revenue ( which I believe is in the region of £275K ) negates not getting second place financially - so by the Cup Run -the Management Team offset the loss of Second Place Income- in there start of Season Target which there Player Budget was based on 

So we are then left ( as it was always targeted ) with promotion via a Play Off Spot - Now we were one point away from it - third of the Season to go - couple of wins - we are in the Mix - couple of losses you review the Management Team ( we have three crucial games coming up ) was there a chance of a Post Rangers Game Bounce - possibly 

So applying reasonable logic - the sacking of the Management Team is at best odd -at this Juncture 

But here is my Main Concern - despite the £275K income the Club still faces " significant financial challenges " so without the Rangers Game - where did that leave us - TJF have issued a statement going to great lengths regards why they wanted Due Diligence ( which seems to be sensible given the recent statement ) 

The Key Objective of any Board is to keep the Lights on - however the energy and emphasise on removing the Management Team- seems at odds with the "significant financial challenges "  Now Due Diligence would have flagged up any issues ? 

But lets talk about getting Beat by Hamilton Accies & Cove because thats the key issue 

Oh and that Im Mates with Ian McCall 😉

 

           

Lets start with the first flaw in your argument. The Management Team were NOT sacked. They have been relieved of their first team duties. As far as I am aware, they are still on the payroll, so any actions currently taken have no impact on any budget. Financially they are cost neutral.

At some point down the line we may need to appoint a permanent manager and then we will need to consider where that money comes from, but by then the financial constraints may (or may not) have changed.

 

Edit :Having had a chance to consider this further, there may actually be a very small saving if win bonuses are not being paid, however without having any knowledge of the contracts for the former management team, or any changes to Doolan's contract, that is purely conjecture

Edited February 16, 2023 by Dick Dastardly

[Woodstock Jag]

44 minutes ago, Lenziejag said:

TJF and the working group should be absolutely raging at how this was done, but all you have done,maybe personally, is defend their decision. As I said previously - I am mystified.

(1) Literally read this, we made our views abundantly clear https://thejagsfoundation.co.uk/message-from-the-tjf-chair/

(2) I am happy to state on the record that announcing this on the Sunday was incredibly ******* stupid and pisspoor Comms. Is that critical enough for you? But what’s done is done and cannot be undone in that respect so there’s no point having protracted moans about it. And if even I’m saying that…

(3) I am saying the substantive decision is one the Club Board was entitled to take, and one that I happen personally to think on balance is the right one

(4) TJF has absolutely nothing to do with operational football decisions at the Club. Nor does the working group.

[scotty]

26 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

If Doolan does anything other than make a total hash of it this is a great opportunity for him and for us. If he does make a hash of it, then fair enough, the sceptics have called it right.

 

And if he does really well, gets the team playing in top form and into a position where promotion is possible, does he get another pin, with a suit on?

[Jordanhill Jag]

40 minutes ago, Dick Dastardly said:

But probably wasn't when the need for an interim coach was known. Either way, There were not many options for an interim coach, so picking Doolan is far from illogical under the circumstances.

To Clarify - His Contract was terminated along with the rest of the Management team - but he has been asked to Work his Notice    

[Jordanhill Jag]

36 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

(1) Literally read this, we made our views abundantly clear https://thejagsfoundation.co.uk/message-from-the-tjf-chair/

(2) I am happy to state on the record that announcing this on the Sunday was incredibly ******* stupid and pisspoor Comms. Is that critical enough for you? But what’s done is done and cannot be undone in that respect so there’s no point having protracted moans about it. And if even I’m saying that…

(3) I am saying the substantive decision is one the Club Board was entitled to take, and one that I happen personally to think on balance is the right one

(4) TJF has absolutely nothing to do with operational football decisions at the Club. Nor does the working group.

So and I will return to this - in light of the statements made by AR ref the Managers Target of finishing second ( therefore promotion via playoffs )  - that the associated revenue with second place was offsett by the Rangers Game ( which the Manager is also responsible for ) factoring in the " significant financial challages " despite £275K from the Rangers Game - that sacking one point outside the Playoffs was reasonable & proportionate ?

What is not making sense from the statement by AR is this 

The primary aim for Partick Thistle Football Club for season 2022/23 is to regain Premiership status. The management team were given a budget to support this objective.

Given the playing squad assembled for this season, everyone at the club was united in the belief that this was an achievable prospect

Now the targets were set by the previous Board -and the Management Team were sacked for not Meeting them ie Promotion - Yet AR states the Target on which the Budget was based was Second Place ?  - Confused.Com 

 

[Woodstock Jag]

31 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

OK - I will try and explain 

The Management Team were sacked for not meeting the Targets set by the Previous Board as they had the Budget to do so 

Wrong. They were relieved of their duties because the Club Board made an assessment that the Club’s footballing objectives were less likely to be met with the existing management team in charge than with a change of management team.

This is not the same as simply saying McCall “didn’t meet his targets”.

31 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

That Target as confirmed by AR was second place ( which makes sense given QP & Dundee strengths ) - The Budget was set assuming a second place finish - Woodstock Jag has emphasised that by missing Second Place it means we are £280K down - all of this makes perfect sense

£240k.

31 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

However it is therefore accepted that we were not going up as Automatic First - WJ emphasizes that Dools may drag us into a second place spot - with the reward of £280K so its worth the risk of sacking the Management Team ( as there target of Second Place and associated revenue was in most likliehood being missed ) All Makes Sense 

No, it could be anything from a worsening of £50k on our current league position (if we fall to 8th) and a £240k gain (if, miraculously, we finish 2nd). It’s £160k if we finish 3rd and £80k if we finish 4th.

31 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

However as AR pointed out - the Rangers Revenue ( which I believe is in the region of £275K ) negates not getting second place financially - so by the Cup Run -the Management Team offset the loss of Second Place Income- in there start of Season Target which there Player Budget was based on 

This is only true if you believe Alan Rough has his sums right and that the following other things are all true:

 (a) the Club increased income to cover the £215k operating loss of the previous season

(b) the Club fully replaced the non-recurring revenue from the Queen’s Park groundshare

 (c) the Club, separately, increased income to cover any increase in the player budget compared to the previous season

 (d) the Club, separately, increased income to cover rising off-field costs (given inflation challenges and roof repairs in the summer

The above are all necessary (or at least highly likely) budget assumptions for the 2022-23 season, based on what we know about the Club’s operating costs and income from the 2021-22 season.

If the Club are telling you that meeting the 2022-23 budget is going to face “significant challenges” its safe to say it isn’t because Ian McCall wasn’t given enough money for players. It’s because one or more of the budgeting assumptions isn’t holding up, and/or because the team is underperforming and prize money will be lower than expected.

If, even after the Rangers money, they are still telling you that “significant challenges” exist you know pretty much for certain that one or more of the non-footballing assumptions hasn’t held up. Which is what makes Alan Rough’s break even claim not credible.

31 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

So we are then left ( as it was always targeted ) with promotion via a Play Off Spot - Now we were one point away from it - third of the Season to go - couple of wins - we are in the Mix - couple of losses you review the Management Team ( we have three crucial games coming up ) was there a chance of a Post Rangers Game Bounce - possibly

All purely footballing speculation. A lot of fans don’t share your optimism about how McCall would have done.

31 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

So applying reasonable logic - the sacking of the Management Team is at best odd -at this Juncture

Only if someone shares your assessment of Ian McCall’s performance and expected future performance.

31 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

But here is my Main Concern - despite the £275K income the Club still faces " significant financial challenges " so without the Rangers Game - where did that leave us - TJF have issued a statement going to great lengths regards why they wanted Due Diligence ( which seems to be sensible given the recent statement ) 

Correct. But putting McCall on gardening leave has no significant negative impact on those finances unless you believe McCall would have finished 2nd or 3rd in the league. You clearly think that. Lots of others don’t.

31 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

The Key Objective of any Board is to keep the Lights on - however the energy and emphasise on removing the Management Team- seems at odds with the "significant financial challenges "  Now Due Diligence would have flagged up any issues ?

Only if it has significant cost implications. Which it’s safe to assume giving the gig to Doolan, as opposed to (say) Jim Goodwin, does not.

31 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

But lets talk about getting Beat by Hamilton Accies & Cove because thats the key issue 

Oh and that Im Mates with Ian McCall 😉

I mean it kind of is the key issue Jim. Teams that get promoted don’t (in almost all cases) get pumped at home by part time teams that concede over five goals a game in their previous six games.

As I pointed out earlier, McCall has an established track record at this level of starting very strongly in a season, the arse falling out of the season, and finishing mid table or worse. I like the guy and he’s left the Club in a better place than he found it. But with the players at his disposal there was really no excuse for being 5th at this stage in the season: injuries or otherwise.

[Dick Dastardly]

4 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

To Clarify - His Contract was terminated along with the rest of the Management team - but he has been asked to Work his Notice    

And did that contract have any clauses in it related to league placings ?

What we don't know is the details of the finances and what had been included/excluded prior to the recent announcements on them. It maybe that the cost of paying off the contracts had been factored in already. Who knows ? What I don't believe is that this was some sort of rash decision made on Sunday. I suspect that there was a decision made some weeks ago that allowed McCall some leeway while we remained in the top 4 (possibly also remaining in the cup). The Morton result put us out of the top 4 and that triggered a decision that had already been made by the board. For me that is the only way to tie up all of the facts and the timing and this would not have required a full board meeting as they had already agreed on the action to be taken. 

[G13 jag]

9 hours ago, Woodstock Jag said:

I'm curious as to who you think should have been appointed as Directors in December if not people chosen by the majority shareholder?

There was no functioning fan ownership model in early December 2022. There was no mechanism in place for the fans to exert democratic control over the PTFC Trust. They did not even have a contact list of their existing beneficiaries. Who were they supposed to appoint, exactly, and who were they supposed to reach out to, when 7 of the 8 board members had just stormed off in a petulant huff over a fan protest and some awkward questions about the annual accounts they'd just signed off?

This interim board, as was explained at the outset, was specifically assembled to provide breathing space up to the end of the season to allow essential business decisions (footballing and financial) to continue to be taken. This was an inescapable arrangement while the ownership situation was worked on by the Trust's Short-Life Working Group.

The Working Group was, let's not forget, a broad cross-section of fans which met in their spare time, between Christmas and New Year, to develop proposals. Those proposals have had to be considered and fed-back on by the Trust, and the fans were given an update to that effect less than a month ago, indicating that the next major staging post would be mid-February.

 

 

A fresh team without anyone from the previous board.  The BoD did everything they could to stop a proper fan ownership.  They refused to allow due diligence.  Initially they played down the fan protest, and after the realisation they were probably short of £15k in takings, did we see action.  Money talks, for people whose main interest is money.

we have also kept with the ceo, again, someone who does not have clean hands involving the fan ownership.  And after allowing the pitch to be shared with QP, even at the time saying it would not impact on the playing surface, probably lost us a chance of a title challenge in 21/22, and probably money due to the resurface work.  And made watching football a chore.

Between tJF and jags for good, we see people making a big difference. There are many more thistle minded people out there capable of taking a  seat at the board.

 

My issues with the decision to remove the management team are more to do with the way I want to see thistle run.  I don’t want the present board.  I certainly don’t want them making such drastic decisions.  I’ll repeat myself here.  The proposal must have come from the ceo, to the chair.  The chair was partly responsible for nominating the ptfc trustees.  We now have 2 of them on the board.

Despite what we constantly hear from people who want to profit from our sport, Football is not a results business.  If it were, fans would be changing clubs all the time.  The management team have been treated in a way similar to outfits like P&O.

there were alternatives to the current set up.  We had them.  We have the power to change the club through the money we spend.  The club needs the fans, the fans need the club.  Our club is the fans.

We are not a Newcastle or Man U, where the amount of money involved dwarfs the income from fans.  We do not generate enough money that a crowd without 1000 can be ignored.

Yet we allowed the chair, ceo and 2 other board members to sit round our table making decisions.  

 

 

[Woodstock Jag]

1 minute ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

So and I will return to this - in light of the statements made by AR ref the Managers Target of finishing second ( therefore promotion via playoffs )  - that the associated revenue with second place was offsett by the Rangers Game ( which the Manager is also responsible for ) factoring in the " significant financial challages " despite £275K from the Rangers Game - that sacking one point outside the Playoffs was reasonable & proportionate ?

What is not making sense from the statement by AR is this 

The primary aim for Partick Thistle Football Club for season 2022/23 is to regain Premiership status. The management team were given a budget to support this objective.

Given the playing squad assembled for this season, everyone at the club was united in the belief that this was an achievable prospect

Now the targets were set by the previous Board -and the Management Team were sacked for not Meeting them ie Promotion - Yet AR states the Target on which the Budget was based was Second Place ?  - Confused.Com 

 

The management team was not “sacked for not meeting [targets]”.

They were relieved of their duties because the Club Board felt that its objective: promotion, was more likely to be met with a change of management team.

[Lenziejag]

1 hour ago, Dick Dastardly said:

Can we turn it around. If the board have decided that Ian McCall needs to be relieved of 1st team duties (you may or maynot agree with that decision, but that is a separate question) who do you appoint as an interim coach ? There aren't many options. Doolan, Graham, Britton, Paul McDonald or Arthur are the only ones that come to mind

I suppose my choice would be Graham. Maybe they did approach him and he said no ? Having said that, it would have been unfair on the women’s team as they are trying to get into the top half for the split. Given the other choices, the decision should be not to sack McCall at the moment.

[Woodstock Jag]

1 minute ago, G13 jag said:

A fresh team without anyone from the previous board.  The BoD did everything they could to stop a proper fan ownership.  They refused to allow due diligence.  Initially they played down the fan protest, and after the realisation they were probably short of £15k in takings, did we see action.  Money talks, for people whose main interest is money.

Forgive me here, I’m not having a go, but I don’t understand what your argument is. You’re suggesting that after the other 7 directors left, the first thing that the PTFC Trust should have done was remove Duncan Smillie from the Club Board? When it was absolutely mission critical to understand what had happened in recent Board deliberations and when and how key decisions had been made?

The reason this board is an interim board is so that the transition to what you appear to have wanted could be done properly. Who, specifically, should have been on the Club Board from December onwards? I don’t mean generalities: specific names.

1 minute ago, G13 jag said:

we have also kept with the ceo, again, someone who does not have clean hands involving the fan ownership.

So you think one of the first things the Trust should have done was serve notice on the one other person left in senior management, with day to day operational understanding of the Club?

It’s been barely two months since the outgoing directors resigned. Do you think what you’re saying is credibly here? Honestly?

1 minute ago, G13 jag said:

And after allowing the pitch to be shared with QP, even at the time saying it would not impact on the playing surface, probably lost us a chance of a title challenge in 21/22, and probably money due to the resurface work.  And made watching football a chore.

On the footballing side almost no one regrets the end of groundsharing. But I would just reflect that without it, even allowing for costly remedial works, last year’s accounts would have looked even worse than they do.

1 minute ago, G13 jag said:

Between tJF and jags for good, we see people making a big difference. There are many more thistle minded people out there capable of taking a  seat at the board.

Those are very different skillsets, though. It doesn’t follow that just because someone is good at charitable work, or running a voluntary organisation, that they would be good on a Football Club board.

For example I would be absolutely terribile on the football board. I have no business contacts, I am a millennial who has no independent wealth of my own that isn’t tied up in a mortgage, I live in London, I have no footballing contacts, and I like a good keyboard square go.

But I’d like to think I am doing a reasonably good job as Secretary of TJF.

1 minute ago, G13 jag said:

My issues with the decision to remove the management team are more to do with the way I want to see thistle run.  I don’t want the present board.  I certainly don’t want them making such drastic decisions.  I’ll repeat myself here.  The proposal must have come from the ceo, to the chair.  The chair was partly responsible for nominating the ptfc trustees.  We now have 2 of them on the board.

But we are here we are. People can fight the last war, and many are doing so valiantly, or we can try to improve the current position.

1 minute ago, G13 jag said:

Despite what we constantly hear from people who want to profit from our sport, Football is not a results business.  If it were, fans would be changing clubs all the time.  The management team have been treated in a way similar to outfits like P&O.

Football is a results business. The difference between finishing 2nd and 5th in our league is the difference, in prize money, greater than last year’s operating losses at the Club. Breaking even and losing £200k a year, for a Club that has less than £400k in the bank as of May last year, is the difference between having and not having a football club within a few years.

Was it cack handed to announce this decision on the Sunday evening? Unquestionably yes. Was it the wrong footballing decision? We’ll see.

1 minute ago, G13 jag said:

there were alternatives to the current set up.  We had them.  We have the power to change the club through the money we spend.  The club needs the fans, the fans need the club.  Our club is the fans.

But not immediately. These things take time. There isn’t an off-the-shelf solution that you could have implemented in mid December. That’s not how the transition to fan ownership works. It’s never been like that.

1 minute ago, G13 jag said:

We are not a Newcastle or Man U, where the amount of money involved dwarfs the income from fans.  We do not generate enough money that a crowd without 1000 can be ignored.

I agree, but it takes time to listen to a group representing (now almost) 1050 people (I checked this morning) and to give effect to an agreed plan.

1 minute ago, G13 jag said:

Yet we allowed the chair, ceo and 2 other board members to sit round our table making decisions. 

Because Scottish football doesn’t stop while Partick Thistle sorts out its existential crisis.

[jagfox]

Ian McCall's target was first or second himself. I heard this from a mutual acquaintance. Budgets were agreed but we are not on target for that.

There have holes been left in the finances by meeting this budget which are hopefully going to be partly met by the Rangers game proceeds.

The 4th place playoff team has never even got passed the 3rd place team in championship playoff history, so is not a viable promotion target. Same can probably be applied to 3rd place. You have an extra  two  legged tie if you get through versus 2nd place, so have played 2 more than  the opposition.

All the best to Ian and his backroom staff in the future. Personally, I don't like to see club servants leave their post but I feel their time was up. 

Overall, he was a middling if bordering on mediocre manager over the piece but got us promotion from League One at first attempt and tried to set his teams out to play football, at times to the detriment of results.

Timing was off, and according to another friend a member of the current and previous Board member wasn't very complimentary about McCall or "football people" in general prior to a match a couple of weeks ago.

We do have a decent squad and it will be interesting, even telling how they respond down at Ayr on Sathrday.

Ian left us as he did the last time in the middle of a league with no obvious prospect of promotion or relegation.

Good luck to Dools and his team on Saturday

Edited February 16, 2023 by jagfox

[Jordanhill Jag]

15 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

The management team was not “sacked for not meeting [targets]”.

They were relieved of their duties because the Club Board felt that its objective: promotion, was more likely to be met with a change of management team.

For Clarity ( again ) The Current Board stated the following 

The primary aim for Partick Thistle Football Club for season 2022/23 is to regain Premiership status. The management team were given a budget to support this objective.

As pointed out on numerous occassions the "aim" was given at the START of the Season - by THE PREVIOUS BOARD - the current Board were not in place when the objectives or Player Budgets agreed 

However - AR is now stating that Budgets ( which will include Player Budgets ) were set assuming a Second Place Finish - which contradicts the Club Statement that THE PRIMARY AIM ( at the start of Seaon 2022/23 was Promotion ) - it wasnt - it was second place with the associated revenue 

Now we have a Chairman & a CEO who were there when this was agreed last Summer - Im sure they can clarify if the Target was Promotion or Second Place ? 

[Dick Dastardly]

17 minutes ago, G13 jag said:

A fresh team without anyone from the previous board.  The BoD did everything they could to stop a proper fan ownership.  They refused to allow due diligence.  Initially they played down the fan protest, and after the realisation they were probably short of £15k in takings, did we see action.  Money talks, for people whose main interest is money.

we have also kept with the ceo, again, someone who does not have clean hands involving the fan ownership.  And after allowing the pitch to be shared with QP, even at the time saying it would not impact on the playing surface, probably lost us a chance of a title challenge in 21/22, and probably money due to the resurface work.  And made watching football a chore.

Between tJF and jags for good, we see people making a big difference. There are many more thistle minded people out there capable of taking a  seat at the board.

 

My issues with the decision to remove the management team are more to do with the way I want to see thistle run.  I don’t want the present board.  I certainly don’t want them making such drastic decisions.  I’ll repeat myself here.  The proposal must have come from the ceo, to the chair.  The chair was partly responsible for nominating the ptfc trustees.  We now have 2 of them on the board.

Despite what we constantly hear from people who want to profit from our sport, Football is not a results business.  If it were, fans would be changing clubs all the time.  The management team have been treated in a way similar to outfits like P&O.

there were alternatives to the current set up.  We had them.  We have the power to change the club through the money we spend.  The club needs the fans, the fans need the club.  Our club is the fans.

We are not a Newcastle or Man U, where the amount of money involved dwarfs the income from fans.  We do not generate enough money that a crowd without 1000 can be ignored.

Yet we allowed the chair, ceo and 2 other board members to sit round our table making decisions.  

 

 

Unfortunately we, the fans, have no powers .... yet. As has been repeatedly said, the working group are looking at models that may give us more power to appoint directors at some point in the future.

The club, like any company, requires a board of directors to govern the business. It is down to the shareholders to decide who they should be and they decided on the current set up as an interim measure until the above is sorted. That is not something that we, tjf or anyone else has any control over.

If the board can't make decisions on how they think the club should be run, in what they believe to be the best interests of the business, who can ?

[Woodstock Jag]

1 minute ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

For Clarity ( again ) The Current Board stated the following 

The primary aim for Partick Thistle Football Club for season 2022/23 is to regain Premiership status. The management team were given a budget to support this objective.

As pointed out on numerous occassions the "aim" was given at the START of the Season - by THE PREVIOUS BOARD - the current Board were not in place when the objectives or Player Budgets agreed 

However - AR is now stating that Budgets ( which will include Player Budgets ) were set assuming a Second Place Finish - which contradicts the Club Statement that THE PRIMARY AIM ( at the start of Seaon 2022/23 was Promotion ) - it wasnt - it was second place with the associated revenue 

Now we have a Chairman & a CEO who were there when this was agreed last Summer - Im sure they can clarify if the Target was Promotion or Second Place ? 

If you’re dancing on the head of a pin about teams in second not necessarily winning the playoffs, fine, but that’s a curious ditch to die in, Jim.

[Dick Dastardly]

@Jordanhill Jag You do put a lot of trust in Alan Rough actually knowing what he is talking about. There is plenty of prior evidence to the contrary.

[Tom Hosie]

23 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

Now we have a Chairman & a CEO who were there when this was agreed last Summer - Im sure they can clarify if the Target was Promotion or Second Place ? 

My previous comment about multiple posts saying the same thing and being clearly not "lost for words" was made for a bit of levity but really, JJ, what does saying the same thing over and over really achieve? 

Tragetting promotion and a second place finish aren't mutually exclusive in any case. FWIW I think to have a realistic chance of promotion via the play-offs I really think you have to finish 2nd. 

[Jordanhill Jag]

15 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

If you’re dancing on the head of a pin about teams in second not necessarily winning the playoffs, fine, but that’s a curious ditch to die in, Jim.

Nope - its actually quite fundamental 

As it means that the Club Statement is under Question 

Employees are given targets -and are judged on them ( and can pay the price with there jobs ) They are people and despite the emotion around Football we cannot forget this 

Now if the Board at the start of the Season as stated by AR targeted 2nd Place ( obviously budgets and targets are linked )  - then that meant the objective was a play off spot ( not promotion ) they looked for the associated revenue with 2nd Spot  - which AR confirmed was offset by the Rangers Game ( this Revenue was linked to the Player Budget so its in effect covered ) other Budgeting Issues are not the responsibilty of the Manager   

Now the statement from the Club links dismissal with Promotion ( based on the target by the previous Board at the start of the Season ) 

However its very fundamental - was the target Promotion or a Play off Spot from the previous Board ? 

As you know far better than I do - what did the Contract Say ? Promotion or a Play Off Spot ? 

 

[Jordanhill Jag]

3 minutes ago, Dick Dastardly said:

@Jordanhill Jag You do put a lot of trust in Alan Rough actually knowing what he is talking about. There is plenty of prior evidence to the contrary.

OK then the CEO & Chairman can clarify ? 

[Jordanhill Jag]

2 minutes ago, Tom Hosie said:

My previous comment about multiple posts saying the same thing and being clearly not "lost for words" was made for a bit of levity but really, JJ, what does saying the same thing over and over really achieve? 

Tragetting promotion and a second place finish aren't mutually exclusive in any case. FWIW I think to have a realistic chance of promotion via the play-offs I really think you have to finish 2nd. 

Tom - this is linked to what the Manager was Contracted to achieve - was he targeted with Promotion or a Play Off Spot and the associated Revenue of 2nd Place ( as suggested by AR ) 

We cant have contractidory statements 

[Lenziejag]

1 hour ago, Woodstock Jag said:

No I am talking about promotion by whatever means. The only teams to have gained promotion with as many or more defeats than us are Dundee and Dunfermline. Only a small handful have been in the top 4 with more than 12 defeats (I think it’s fewer than 5 times in over 20 years).

A freshened change of approach, impeccable professionalism, an experienced coach and a very intelligent guy. Zero ego. That’s a temperament that I think could succeed, and if it doesn’t, I don’t think we’ll lose out much.

Because my own view is that McCall wouldn’t have got us into the playoffs, or at best would have got us in 4th and we would have lost to the team in 3rd.

On that rationale Doolan loses us, probably at worst, a five figure sum if the team craters to 8th, and I reckon he’ll probably have us finishing 6th at worst.

And I’m reminded that McNamara as a young manager was also given the reins part way through a season and started to build something pretty special.

If Doolan does anything other than make a total hash of it this is a great opportunity for him and for us. If he does make a hash of it, then fair enough, the sceptics have called it right.

These calls are what Club Boards have to make.

I am going to stick my neck out. I think there will be at least 1 team in the top 4 with 10 losses(even if it isn’t Thistle).Doolan isn’t an experienced coach. Again, I am flabbergasted at the ease with which you are writing off league place earnings, particularly if the financial situation is as bad as we think. Maybe TJF have already said they will back this decision financially?

[madcapmilkdrinker]

What’s the current state of play with dialogue between the Trust and the Foundation? Have the events of the last few days been discussed in any formal way.

What’s the structure or process around the two organisations ongoing communication? 

That’s the main game atm, not whether Roughy did or didn’t let the cat out of any hypothetical bag. 

 

[Woodstock Jag]

49 minutes ago, Lenziejag said:

I am going to stick my neck out. I think there will be at least 1 team in the top 4 with 10 losses(even if it isn’t Thistle).

I agree but they won’t win the playoffs and they won’t be 2nd.

As others have correctly pointed out the whole playoff structure is stacked against the teams in 3rd and 4th.

49 minutes ago, Lenziejag said:

Doolan isn’t an experienced coach.

Yes he is. Not at this level. But he has more coaching qualifications than Ian McCall!

49 minutes ago, Lenziejag said:

Again, I am flabbergasted at the ease with which you are writing off league place earnings, particularly if the financial situation is as bad as we think.

I’m not. I’m suggesting that the ones with the biggest gaps were pretty much a write off with McCall in charge because believe he had a very low chance of finishing 2nd or 3rd (the only positions that would make a six figure difference to prize money that even McCall himself hadn't ruled out).

49 minutes ago, Lenziejag said:

Maybe TJF have already said they will back this decision financially?

That’s a pretty bizarre thing to come out with given that we didn’t even know the decision was being taken until it was announced on the Club website.

For the avoidance of doubt no financial commitments made by TJF are linked to this. At all.

[Woodstock Jag]

56 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

As you know far better than I do - what did the Contract Say ? Promotion or a Play Off Spot ? 

I highly doubt that the target league performance was an express written condition of anyone’s contract Jim.

What the Club’s operating budget would break even at, and what the league performance target set by the board is, and what the manager’s contract says, are three distinct things.

[ThickAsThieves]

We wouldn’t finish 2nd under McCall now so what are we even arguing about at this point? Whether you’re judging it on “promotion” or “2nd” - it looked like he was going to fail to reach his target. 

Edited February 16, 2023 by ThickAsThieves