Raith Against The Machine

Incompetence.

I'm not making a villain out of anyone, I'm asking you to elaborate on a mad theory you've put forward. "They faked the moon landings" "Okay, explain how and why?" "Why do you think!?" "You haven't answered the question." "I'm not the bad guy here! Look at the FACTS!" Christ, it's like having a conversation with one of those AI chatbots, except its only machine learning has been endless Joe Rogan podcasts.

On who!?

It's your theory, I don't think it's on me to come up with the answers.

It might be ignorance, because I have no idea what you mean. What's been done on purpose? Letting McGlynn go? Then why would the chairman be in talks tonight to keep him? I thought you were suggesting the other day that the long winless run was deliberate? Was that engineered by the board too? With or without McGlynn's input?

To what end?

Falkirk are a total basket case. That's not a dig or a wind up, it's an empirical fact. They've gone through multiple managers and backroom staff at a rate of knots and seemingly decent players turn up at the Falkirk Stadium and turn to shit. And that's before we take into account the fact that they're in the division below us, one that's going to be full of very competitive teams next year. Now let's also think about how, birthday caird pish aside, John McGlynn is clearly minded towards the Rovers. We know that because he left a decent gig at Celtic to come back last time. With all of that in mind, if he chooses to leave the Rovers to go to Falkirk, just what does that say about the absolute nick that the club must be in? When John McGlynn, a man who has fixed the plumbing at Stark's Park before, is walking away because he thinks the situation is too disfunctional, the whole thing really might well be fucked.

I was thinking similar. Given what's gone before, if the new chairman fails to persuade the manager not to leave for a team in League One (given he clearly wants McGlynn to stay), is his position already untenable?

I'd take Alan Temple's word as gospel.

He's been sent off once in his entire career.

He's been sent off once in his entire career.

STOP POSTING WIKIPEDIA

Honestly did not know The National had actual sports reporters, but at least that article has a direct quote in it. Perhaps all is not yet lost.

Of all the names mentioned so far, I'd probably take a punt on Berra.

OMG check it now

Is Paul Smith even full time? Either way, I'd be incredibly surprised if he didn't go with McGlynn, they seem very much like a team. I really think this has all the makings of a complete disaster, especially if we employ James fucking McPake, for f**k sake. I'd rather have Berra than McPake, by an order of magnitudes, on the basis that at least we don't know Berra is a total hopeless eejit of a manager just yet.

Look at the managers that full time clubs in this division and the one below have hired in the last two years: Gus McPherson David Hopkin Billy Dodds Paul Sheerin Martin Rennie Peter Grant Jim Duffy John Hughes Dougie Imrie Derek McInnes Lee Bullen Wullie Gibson Is there anyone there you'd want, other than Derek McInnes (who we definitely couldn't afford) and maybe Dougie Imrie (based on a fairly small sample size). That's the market we're about to go shopping in for a new manager. That's the best that the boards of clubs similar to ours have come up with. It's one thing if the board have decided that they don't want John McGlynn any more. I don't agree, but that's the decisions that boards have to make. It's another thing entirely if they've decided that actually they do want him but they've allowed him to be tempted away because they've done nothing about it until now.

My fear is that without John McGlynn we're basically Ayr, Morton and Queen of the South. With respect to those teams, they've all been at the bottom end of this division for the last two seasons and have to chop and change manager to try and keep their heads above water. There's no permanence and no plan, it's just do whatever's necessary to try and stay up. Another two years of McGlynn and I think we'd have built enough of a footballing infrastructure to really establish ourselves at this level and push for the Premiership. Basically, if McGlynn is the manager, I don't see us ever getting relegated from the Championship. We might not make the playoffs, but we'd always have a solid platform to build from. Now, as I say, I think we go straight into that bucket of "any of these teams could easily go down", and that's just with an average managerial appointment, nevermind a Peter Grant style disaster, which is well within the capacity of this current board.

The managerial market is a total shambles at the moment, and the fact that Falkirk - who are in pretty much the same position as we are in terms of who they can attract - have gone for McGlynn should speak volumes. Short of a novice who turns out to be exceptional (a la Dougie Imrie's impact at Morton) I can't see who'll come in and do a better job.

I think McGlynn covers the work of at least a couple of people at the Rovers. If he goes, there needs to be a serious look at the infrastructure of the football side. The next appointment will be absolutely huge, and if we've lost McGlynn to Falkirk because they're offering more money than the board are prepared to match, I'm really fearful.

What is Ben Williamson's position?

It's probably Liam Dick for us, although that feels a wee bit harsh. He has pretty much just jobbed around at left back for most of the season though. 6/10 most weeks.

I'm really pleased to hear about these "advanced talks", and I really hope they come to pass. See if I'm being completely honest, I just like continuity. I enjoy football and the Rovers more if there's a longstanding manager and group of long-serving players. I can't abide this Watford-isation of modern football where managers get binned at the drop of a hat. I know Burnley have just done it with Dyche and everyone was outraged, but they've gone on to get the results that'll keep them up, but I still don't like it. I'm not that bothered about winning all the time. Obviously if you offered me a new manager and guaranteed we'd win the league then I'd take it, but I enjoy the consistency and longevity of McGlynn. I like that he's the ninth (I think) longest serving manager in the country, and he must be second or third longest association with a club if you add in his first spell. I like that he also just seems attached to the club, too. He jacked that job at Celtic to come back, and I don't get the feeling he's constantly wondering which bottom six Premiership manager is going to get binned so can nab their job. I totally understand the arguments of people who are looking at the league form in the back half of this season, and I certainly understand anyone who can't get past McGlynn's involvement in the Goodwillie affair, but for me it's a kind of variation on "better the devil you know". I enjoy the Rovers more with John McGlynn. I know other supporters of other clubs don't really get that because McGlynn doesn't appear to be Mr Personality from the outside, but I think his work ethic and his philosophy on the game are both well matched for this level of football. He has his blind spots. He can't seem to find a striker to save himself, and too often he gambles on a better standard of player with rocky injury records without an adequate Plan B for when they all inevitably get injured. I find his insistence on leaving everyone back at corners baffling. But every manager you can get in the Scottish Championship is going to have issues like that. Most of them will have issues that are much more severe. Just ask the Pars. I suppose what I'm getting at is that I like John McGlynn. I like the way he approaches the game, and I like watching his teams play. I like the players he signs, too, even if there is the odd Timmy Abraham in there. We might get a few more points if we take a punt on someone else, but from my point of view, I don't think it's worth the gamble.