Mckinlay

[Rudy T]

28 minutes ago, fabienleclerq said:

 

I fail to see how you wouldn't be impressed,  he was open and addressed a lot of points made here.

 

He is correct in regards the signings, barely a dissenting voice at the time they were signed. It's nit turned out well but that's not his remit.

 

Again SN getting a new contract after skooshing third and cup runs, no one was complaining. He also explained how the contracts appear to protect the club well etc.

 

I think it's quite common for folk to demand heads roll all the time. I don't think the board have much to answer. Could they have sacked him earlier? Yes but then we don't want that reputation either and the contract thing would've been a bigger issue 

My issue with him is around Savage, it stinks quite honestly. He says in that interview Savage was brought in for recruitment and that was his focus. Not so long ago we were told Savage had a wide ranging role and the recruitment was done by Lancefield and his team. There’s long been rumours around a rift between Naismith and Savage. It does make me question what goes on behind the scenes and do we get told what he thinks we want to hear at the time and the reality is very different.
 

No matter who is interviewed at the club it never seems to be their fault, he’s the head of the club surely he’s asking questions of either the sporting director or the manager when he sees we have one Striker he might not be Pep but he knows enough about the game to ask the question. He says we update the manager list every 3 months yet after the start we’ve had he didn’t think it appropriate to update it a couple of weeks ago? He’s not the only one Savage always deflected, Naismith was similar this season it’s a bit of a theme.
 

Don’t get me wrong I think he’s great for the business and I’m sure on the commercial side he’s brilliant, but the new Sporting Director needs to take control of the football side.

[Lone Striker]

4 hours ago, Pasquale for King said:

I think it was more that they wanted him to take a PAY CUT 😆

Not sure that was the reason.  It was rumoured that he demanded to bring Tony Docherty with him, but Rangers advised that ......  ahem...  "would not  be advisable "  

 

 

[Pasquale for King]

7 minutes ago, Lone Striker said:

Not sure that was the reason.  It was rumoured that he demanded to bring Tony Docherty with him, but Rangers advised that ......  ahem...  "would not  be advisable "  

 

 

He was on £800k a year at Aberdeen, they kept putting his wages up every time he was linked with another job. 
Yeah after McInnes couldn’t take Docherty they got Pedro Caixinha, very staunch 🤪. 

[boag1874]

1 minute ago, Lone Striker said:

Not sure that was the reason.  It was rumoured that he demanded to bring Tony Docherty with him, but Rangers advised that ......  ahem...  "would not  be advisable "  

 

 

Thats what I thought the issue was, along with him already getting a bit pissed off with them playing their stupid media games & mucking him about rather than just approaching off the bat.

[Lone Striker]

4 hours ago, Smithian said:

I gained some confidence in McKinlay from that interview.

 

He is making the best of an awful situation. The most negative Hearts fan couldn't reasonably have predicted a start half this poor. McKinlay isn't directly to blame for it going to hell this fast, he's just the guy digging Hearts out of it.

 

I do hope the lesson learned is in the future Hearts need to go to a "head coach" model with an empowered football executive guiding recruitment decisions. I'd prefer McKinlay be crunching numbers and reviewing plans for a Hearts-specific training ground than trying to rescue the first team.

Good and fair post.  McKinlay comes in for some ridiculous criticism and abuse on here from some posters.   He's inherited the abuse that Ann Budge got on here, maybe from the same posters,  when she was CEO.

 

Must admit I was surprised & impressed about his stated reasoning for sacking all three - that fact that he'd dished out new contracts to them 2 months ago didn't cloud his opinion (which most fans  shared) on how their coaching/tactics weren't bringing about any change on the pitch - which I think shows him to be a strong & alert CEO.   Credit to the rest of the board for agreeing.

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

4 minutes ago, Lone Striker said:

Good and fair post.  McKinlay comes in for some ridiculous criticism and abuse on here from some posters.   He's inherited the abuse that Ann Budge got on here, maybe from the same posters,  when she was CEO.

 

Must admit I was surprised & impressed about his stated reasoning for sacking all three - that fact that he'd dished out new contracts to them 2 months ago didn't cloud his opinion (which most fans  shared) on how their coaching/tactics weren't bringing about any change on the pitch - which I think shows him to be a strong & alert CEO.   Credit to the rest of the board for agreeing.

Doesn’t that make the original decision a bad error?

 

**** me, I give up

[Daveandal]

4 minutes ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

Doesn’t that make the original decision a bad error?

 

**** me, I give up

 

Things change quickly in life. What's correct today might be wrong tomorrow.

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

3 minutes ago, Daveandal said:

 

Things change quickly in life. What's correct today might be wrong tomorrow.

Christ almighty

[MoncurMacdonaldMercer]

35 minutes ago, Lone Striker said:

Not sure that was the reason.  It was rumoured that he demanded to bring Tony Docherty with him, but Rangers advised that ......  ahem...  "would not  be advisable "  

 

 

I heard it was the other way about that Tony docherty didn’t want to go to rangers 

[Daveandal]

3 minutes ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

Christ almighty

 

It's true though. Life isn't binary. It's complicated.

[Chuck Berry]

53 minutes ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

Staggering that people are buying this wedge’s spiel. But then again, the Budge regime speaks, the fanbase nods

 

He’s hiding behind the fact that Bloom will have good ideas about who to appoint. Left to fat boy, we’d get a Naismith clone. Thank **** that’s not happening 

 

Bloom will see McKinlay gone pronto. Take that to the bank 

 

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

Just now, Daveandal said:

 

It's true though. Life isn't binary. It's complicated.

last time we had virtually no applicants, according to McKinlay. This time we have loads, also according to him.

 

You’d almost think that Bloom is about to revolutionise the tinpot Budge/McKinlay operation and McKinlay doesn’t dare pretend that he has to appoint Liam Fox.

 

It’s all good though. Bloom knows what he’s doing and McKinlay will be gone before long.

[MoncurMacdonaldMercer]

25 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

He was on £800k a year at Aberdeen, they kept putting his wages up every time he was linked with another job. 
Yeah after McInnes couldn’t take Docherty they got Pedro Caixinha, very staunch 🤪. 

I heard it was docherty didn’t want to go to rangers but on Pedro for some strange reason foreign catholics and even English ones seem to be more acceptable than Scottish or Irish ones in the eyes of rangers supporters 

 

Lots of their team have been crossing themselves on the park for the best part of 30 years (probably none of them Scottish / Irish)

 

 

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

1 minute ago, Chuck Berry said:

 

I know you died in a plane crash Chuck my lovely but even you know this is true 

[Chuck Berry]

Just now, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

I know you died in a plane crash Chuck my lovely but even you know this is true 

 

No offence, but you're babbling shite.

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

Just now, Chuck Berry said:

 

No offence, but you're babbling shite.

I don’t see how you can possibly apply any credibility to McK. Look back at what he said post Neilson. It’s staring you in the face. 
 

Another Budge payroll winner.

[Lone Striker]

9 minutes ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

Doesn’t that make the original decision a bad error?

 

**** me, I give up

No - he explained the reasoning behind the decision to extend their contracts. Seemed reasonable at the time. Its only hindsight due to our sh1teness ever since pre-season that folk are now complaining about it.

 

If you're looking  to criticise the board for something,  I'd suggest them agreeing to  the whole expensive Tenerife adventure which featured no proper competitive friendly matches as an example.  What was the point, really ?

 

 

 

 

[Chuck Berry]

Just now, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

I don’t see how you can possibly apply any credibility to McK. Look back at what he said post Neilson. It’s staring you in the face. 
 

Another Budge payroll winner.

 

What does the even mean?

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

Just now, Lone Striker said:

No - he explained the reasoning behind the decision to extend their contracts. Seemed reasonable at the time. Its only hindsight due to our sh1teness ever since pre-season that folk are now complaining about it.

 

If you're looking  to criticise the board for something,  I'd suggest them agreeing to  the whole expensive Tenerife adventure which featured no proper competitive friendly matches as an example.  What was the point, really ?

 

 

 

 

Come on. You saw the football last season, the same as me. They appointed three competition winners

[Pasquale for King]

5 minutes ago, MoncurMacdonaldMercer said:

I heard it was docherty didn’t want to go to rangers but on Pedro for some strange reason foreign catholics and even English ones seem to be more acceptable than Scottish or Irish ones in the eyes of rangers supporters 

 

Lots of their team have been crossing themselves on the park for the best part of 30 years (probably none of them Scottish / Irish)

 

 

Quite possibly, i know they offered him less money so thought it was that.

[OTT]

25 minutes ago, Lone Striker said:

Good and fair post.  McKinlay comes in for some ridiculous criticism and abuse on here from some posters.   He's inherited the abuse that Ann Budge got on here, maybe from the same posters,  when she was CEO.

 

Must admit I was surprised & impressed about his stated reasoning for sacking all three - that fact that he'd dished out new contracts to them 2 months ago didn't cloud his opinion (which most fans  shared) on how their coaching/tactics weren't bringing about any change on the pitch - which I think shows him to be a strong & alert CEO.   Credit to the rest of the board for agreeing.

 

He does, it seems a bit unfair for the most part. He's came in and things seem to be moving in the right direction across the board. Is that all down to him? Of course not. But things have broadly speaking been successful across all areas of the club. Obviously current circumstances not withstanding. 

 

I'm not unhappy (I really don't want to say happy about anyone losing their job because that is rank) about the decision to remove all 3. The style of play is broadly speaking the same one paced guff that Neilson had implemented, with Gordon Forrest, so bookending this with all 3 going is probably the right decision. Give the incoming guy a fresh start with his own guys. Its cleaner and minimises any old regime hangover. 

 

I'm pretty sure all 3 will land on their feet. 

[Pasquale for King]

30 minutes ago, Lone Striker said:

Good and fair post.  McKinlay comes in for some ridiculous criticism and abuse on here from some posters.   He's inherited the abuse that Ann Budge got on here, maybe from the same posters,  when she was CEO.

 

Must admit I was surprised & impressed about his stated reasoning for sacking all three - that fact that he'd dished out new contracts to them 2 months ago didn't cloud his opinion (which most fans  shared) on how their coaching/tactics weren't bringing about any change on the pitch - which I think shows him to be a strong & alert CEO.   Credit to the rest of the board for agreeing.

Strong and alert because he realised their methods weren’t bringing any rewards on the park, sitting bottom of the league with no wins in 9 games? Yeah it took a genius to spot that eh 😆?!?!

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

Just now, Pasquale for King said:

Strong and alert because he realised their methods weren’t bringing any rewards on the park, sitting bottom of the league with no wins in 9 games? Yeah it took a genius to spot that eh 😆?!?!

unreal innit

[Pasquale for King]

3 minutes ago, OTT said:

 

He does, it seems a bit unfair for the most part. He's came in and things seem to be moving in the right direction across the board. Is that all down to him? Of course not. But things have broadly speaking been successful across all areas of the club. Obviously current circumstances not withstanding. 

 

I'm not unhappy (I really don't want to say happy about anyone losing their job because that is rank) about the decision to remove all 3. The style of play is broadly speaking the same one paced guff that Neilson had implemented, with Gordon Forrest, so bookending this with all 3 going is probably the right decision. Give the incoming guy a fresh start with his own guys. Its cleaner and minimises any old regime hangover. 

 

I'm pretty sure all 3 will land on their feet. 

Apart from the GK coach thats been part of every failure since he arrived in 2016.

[Kalamazoo Jambo]

17 minutes ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

I know you died in a plane crash Chuck

You may want to check your facts on that one

 

[Lone Striker]

4 minutes ago, MoncurMacdonaldMercer said:

ILots of their team have been crossing themselves on the park for the best part of 30 years (probably none of them Scottish / Irish)

 

 

You're right about non-Scottish/Irish Catholics,  the attitude of  fans of the original and tribute act Rangers towards players raised in a particular faith is quite inconsistent.   Seemed to turn  a blind eye to  Amoruso, Negri, Caneggia etc ...

 

 

[Lone Striker]

14 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

Strong and alert because he realised their methods weren’t bringing any rewards on the park, sitting bottom of the league with no wins in 9 games? Yeah it took a genius to spot that eh 😆?!?!

When would you have pulled the trigger (if 9 losses was too long) ?    After 2 losses ?  3 losses ? 

[MoncurMacdonaldMercer]

12 minutes ago, Lone Striker said:

You're right about non-Scottish/Irish Catholics,  the attitude of  fans of the original and tribute act Rangers towards players raised in a particular faith is quite inconsistent.   Seemed to turn  a blind eye to  Amoruso, Negri, Caneggia etc ...

 

 

there’s no logic to any of it - I know plenty hearts and rangers supporters with loyalist tattoos who are married to catholics

 

nacho novo who I presume is a catholic seemed quite happy to sing along to the full song book

 

big amaruso presumably a catholic captain of rangers - back in the day people were following butcher as there were rumours he was going to the chapel (turned out he wasn’t)

 

 

 

 

[MoncurMacdonaldMercer]

32 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

Quite possibly, i know they offered him less money so thought it was that.

it was probably a mixture of reasons - mcinnes latest version was that Walter smith advised him to be cautious about taking the job - presumably because things not good in the background plus the rangers fans not really impressed with him as an appointment so he wouldn’t get much fan-backing if things not going well

 

I reckon he would jump at it now but can’t see it happening

 

 

[Penrices left boot]

1 hour ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

Doesn’t that make the original decision a bad error?

 

**** me, I give up

 

No, the original decision got us 3rd place on 68 points.

Just last season,  if you paid attention then we are doing well and not only venting when we're shite you'd know that.

👍

 

You should definitely give up tho.

 

Edited September 25, 2024 by Bazzas right boot

[MoncurMacdonaldMercer]

3 minutes ago, Bazzas right boot said:

 

No, the original decision got us 3rd place on 68 points.

Just last season,  if you paid attention then we are doing well and not only venting when we're shite you'd know that.

👍

 

You should definitely give up tho.

 

the original decision as referred to in the conversation was extending the contracts not hiring him 

 

 

[Pasquale for King]

28 minutes ago, Lone Striker said:

When would you have pulled the trigger (if 9 losses was too long) ?    After 2 losses ?  3 losses ? 

Thats not the point, you are giving him huge credit for realising that he had to go like hes some visionary, hardly anyone thought he should stay. 

[Pasquale for King]

13 minutes ago, MoncurMacdonaldMercer said:

it was probably a mixture of reasons - mcinnes latest version was that Walter smith advised him to be cautious about taking the job - presumably because things not good in the background plus the rangers fans not really impressed with him as an appointment so he wouldn’t get much fan-backing if things not going well

 

I reckon he would jump at it now but can’t see it happening

 

 

The press are linking him with us and them today.

[1971fozzy]

Good interview apart from the 2nd half in Paisley to save his job nonsense.

[Darren]

2 hours ago, OTT said:

 

He does, it seems a bit unfair for the most part. He's came in and things seem to be moving in the right direction across the board. Is that all down to him? Of course not. But things have broadly speaking been successful across all areas of the club. Obviously current circumstances not withstanding. 

 

I'm not unhappy (I really don't want to say happy about anyone losing their job because that is rank) about the decision to remove all 3. The style of play is broadly speaking the same one paced guff that Neilson had implemented, with Gordon Forrest, so bookending this with all 3 going is probably the right decision. Give the incoming guy a fresh start with his own guys. Its cleaner and minimises any old regime hangover. 

 

I'm pretty sure all 3 will land on their feet. 

What do you mean by one paced?

[JimmyCant]

3 hours ago, Rudy T said:

My issue with him is around Savage, it stinks quite honestly. He says in that interview Savage was brought in for recruitment and that was his focus. Not so long ago we were told Savage had a wide ranging role and the recruitment was done by Lancefield and his team. There’s long been rumours around a rift between Naismith and Savage. It does make me question what goes on behind the scenes and do we get told what he thinks we want to hear at the time and the reality is very different.
 

No matter who is interviewed at the club it never seems to be their fault, he’s the head of the club surely he’s asking questions of either the sporting director or the manager when he sees we have one Striker he might not be Pep but he knows enough about the game to ask the question. He says we update the manager list every 3 months yet after the start we’ve had he didn’t think it appropriate to update it a couple of weeks ago? He’s not the only one Savage always deflected, Naismith was similar this season it’s a bit of a theme.
 

Don’t get me wrong I think he’s great for the business and I’m sure on the commercial side he’s brilliant, but the new Sporting Director needs to take control of the football side.

Look there might well be some dirty washing in regard to Joe Savage, however the club are determined it’s not being washed in public. That leads to speculation obviously but it’s better sometimes having speculation than having something damaging all over social and main stream media

 

Maybe this sleeping dog should be allowed to lie ?

[MoncurMacdonaldMercer]

2 hours ago, Pasquale for King said:

The press are linking him with us and them today.

I don’t think he would be a popular appointment for either especially sitting on a current record almost as bad as naisy

 

without the bloom stuff I would have been ok with him or Robinson but I’m hopeful that the wider bloom plan will possibly in time take us somewhere better than 3rd/4th and digging out draws against old firm (not to be downplayed) and a cup once a decade

 

the only thing that will stop the rangers fans going bananas if mcinnes is appointed there is they might soon be reaching the anybody but clement stage

 

 

[Baxfee]

8 hours ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

Doesn’t that make the original decision a bad error?

 

**** me, I give up

Finally. Best news in ages 

[Dazo]

8 hours ago, Kalamazoo Jambo said:

You may want to check your facts on that one

 

If you are going to send him away to check facts on things he’s posted he may be a while. 
 

Double-down till dawn. 

[OTT]

6 hours ago, Darren said:

What do you mean by one paced?

Slow

[Fire_At_The_Disco]

By the feel of things this deal is almost done, exciting few years ahead if it happens. 

[Captain Canada]

It's clear from a lot of posts that anyone in the CEO job just can't win. 

 

If McKinlay had sacked Naismith after three or four games, he would have been criticised. The same goes for if he'd waited until after the Ross County game. 

 

If we hadn't offered contract extensions and we'd had a flying start, he'd have got stick if another team made an approach. 

 

I'm sure he'll get flack when we hire a new manager before they've even had one game in charge. 

 

It's not a job I'd want to do. 

 

[Hashimoto]

I watched the interview and I have to say I found McKinlay a bit disingenuous. From a personal perspective I just got the impression there are a few half truths in a lot he said. Some of phraseology like referring to the "noise" also grated with me as it was clearly reference to the fanbase and forums in general.
For me noise should have been swapped for concern.  
Good of him to give an interview and provide updates, but I still think he has a lot of work to do to win back the trust of the support.

The focus is firmly back on him and the board to get it right next time.    
 

[fabienleclerq]

10 hours ago, Rudy T said:

My issue with him is around Savage, it stinks quite honestly. He says in that interview Savage was brought in for recruitment and that was his focus. Not so long ago we were told Savage had a wide ranging role and the recruitment was done by Lancefield and his team. There’s long been rumours around a rift between Naismith and Savage. It does make me question what goes on behind the scenes and do we get told what he thinks we want to hear at the time and the reality is very different.
 

No matter who is interviewed at the club it never seems to be their fault, he’s the head of the club surely he’s asking questions of either the sporting director or the manager when he sees we have one Striker he might not be Pep but he knows enough about the game to ask the question. He says we update the manager list every 3 months yet after the start we’ve had he didn’t think it appropriate to update it a couple of weeks ago? He’s not the only one Savage always deflected, Naismith was similar this season it’s a bit of a theme.
 

Don’t get me wrong I think he’s great for the business and I’m sure on the commercial side he’s brilliant, but the new Sporting Director needs to take control of the football side.

 

If Mckinley was telling the dof or SN who to sign people would got nuts and say he knows nothing about football etc. 

 

He said SN didn't want another striker.

 

I get the impression you'd find a slant to have a go at him no matter what. We 100% haven't got recruitment right. We've put a new sporting director in place and what looks like a top data company to help. The Board have done that, they realise it needs to be better and are responding. 

[fila]

11 hours ago, Diego10 said:

Not what he said.  

Having said that, if we lost 2-1 at the weekend but had a second-half performance that was unlucky or really spirited or we just didn’t get the rub of the green then that might’ve made me think slightly differently, but we didn’t. We had a very average second-half performance and that, unfortunately, left me in no doubt that we had to look at making a change.

[brownkg]

46 minutes ago, fila said:

Having said that, if we lost 2-1 at the weekend but had a second-half performance that was unlucky or really spirited or we just didn’t get the rub of the green then that might’ve made me think slightly differently, but we didn’t. We had a very average second-half performance and that, unfortunately, left me in no doubt that we had to look at making a change.

might not would

[steve89]

1 hour ago, fila said:

Having said that, if we lost 2-1 at the weekend but had a second-half performance that was unlucky or really spirited or we just didn’t get the rub of the green then that might’ve made me think slightly differently, but we didn’t. We had a very average second-half performance and that, unfortunately, left me in no doubt that we had to look at making a change.

BBC Scotland were trying to spin this narrative yesterday misquoting the interview.

[PapaShango]

Thought he came over well in his interviews and is good to get some communication from the top. 

[Bill Sikes]

1 hour ago, Captain Canada said:

It's clear from a lot of posts that anyone in the CEO job just can't win. 

 

If McKinlay had sacked Naismith after three or four games, he would have been criticised. The same goes for if he'd waited until after the Ross County game. 

 

If we hadn't offered contract extensions and we'd had a flying start, he'd have got stick if another team made an approach. 

 

I'm sure he'll get flack when we hire a new manager before they've even had one game in charge. 

 

It's not a job I'd want to do. 

 

 

Course he can win, most of the bampots on here disappear pretty sharpish at the 1st sign of 3 points. The very small minority of moaners and trolls are just that.

 

Let's start winning again and the dynamic completely changes.

[Diego10]

1 hour ago, fila said:

Having said that, if we lost 2-1 at the weekend but had a second-half performance that was unlucky or really spirited or we just didn’t get the rub of the green then that might’ve made me think slightly differently, but we didn’t. We had a very average second-half performance and that, unfortunately, left me in no doubt that we had to look at making a change.

Thanks for making my point