Jump to content

Sons' sorrow


Recommended Posts

Looking at the situation objectively I think Ian Murray would get a new club if he left. I'm not so sure about Lee Mair. Anyway what about Gilbert cracking up at the SPFL on the os?

It's a good statement from Gilbert, sensible but also sticking the boot in. Hopefully the SPFL will see sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NEW: Charlie Gibson, one of the heroes of 'Forthbank season', speaks exclusively to The Dumbarton Terrace: https://thedumbartonterrace.wordpress.com/2015/04/17/bonnie-prince-charlie/

No comments on the actual game at Forthbank of 20 years ago, in order to avoid any spoilers for anybody following this season's series in Sons View who doesn't want to know the ending! But still a fascinating read on a club legend.

Charlie's comments on 'Forthbank day' WILL feature in a special edition of the programme at the Raith Rovers game (whenever it kicks off). Both teams are marking special 20-year anniversaries this season. Nobody should miss that issue.

Edited by DumbartonTerrace
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's horses for courses the way Murray has handled various player issues.

I go back to the way Murray used Prunty. We weren't exactly scoring a barrel load of goals. Prunty would have been a decent option. Murray didn't really rate him and the player was allowed to move for more first team football. I think he got it wrong, but it was a footballing decision.

It's the same for Mark McGlaughlin. Player wanted to play. He was never going to get regular football for us. Murray did what was best for both parties.

As far as Nish goes, I think Murray gave Colin far more chances than most managers would. His work with the youngsters seemed to be shambolic or non-existant, his performances on the park weren't good enough and his attitude regarding the vacant assistant manager job seems to have been terrible. Murray had enough of Nish and the 2 parties agreed to part ways. Best for both parties.

The Lee Mair thing is a poor situation, but it's of the club's making this time. If we offer a player a contract with a guaranteed extension clause in it then he has every right to expect it to be honoured if he triggers the clause. Not playing him because we don't want to trigger the extra year's contract? We shouldn't have offered it to him in the first place. It's a poor contract to offer a player who was never a stand-out and who's career is on a downward trend. If he was good enough then he'd have earned his extra year contract anyway.

It was a regrettable clause to offer Mair as part of his contract. If the club don't want to trigger it then the only solution is to pay him to not play. I'd put some of the blame on Mair though - as much as he's accepted the contract he was offered, if it was clear that he wasn't going to play then he could have moved on. I'm sure somebody would have signed him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mair's a shite player and I'm glad he's away regardless of the reason, though I'd rather the club not get bad mouthed, but I won't lose any sleep over it. I'm similarly glad Nish is gone. I'd rather we had kept Ching and Prunty, but life goes on.

Edited by Sweet Pete
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having slated mair and backing the club in not triggering the clause for next season, it struck me that we played some shitey 3 @ the back system in one of the recent games because findlay had a virus. We lost that game partly because of our shape and team selectio..

One thing to play the players that are fit as best you can, but not picking a fit player in hisnatural position seems disrespectful to the away fans who paid to see us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having slated mair and backing the club in not triggering the clause for next season, it struck me that we played some shitey 3 @ the back system in one of the recent games because findlay had a virus. We lost that game partly because of our shape and team selectio..

One thing to play the players that are fit as best you can, but not picking a fit player in hisnatural position seems disrespectful to the away fans who paid to see us.

Picking that one player for that one game purely to fill a particular formation and thereby triggering an extra year's contract for a player you don't want to be there next season would be wrong. Changing the formation to account for the lack of a player was the correct choice in that case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We should have simply told Mair that he wasn't playing again because he isn't good enough! Very naive and a bit silly if the contract he was given had a clause about certain amounts of appearances meaning he gets another years contract... but that being said, Lee Mair has been a bit of an idiot about the situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's whoring himself about for a player/manager gig not realising that his conduct is enough to put the shitiest of shite off him.

Who wants to employ a player or manager who goes running to Peter and Roughie when they realise they are too shite to get another start? Like I mentioned earlier, he has previous for being a wee bitch when things don't go his way.

Would still like to hear our side of the story being made public but maybe it's for the best we keep shtoom. He's doing a good enough job of making himself out to be a pellet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...