Full points v Motherwell or the sack - agree/disagree

What subs does he usually have? Mccourt, samaras and wanyama. Does it really matter ehen he brings them on? Wanyama looks decent but not a game changer. The other 2 play one good game in 10.

 

Everytime the team goes through a bad spell we cant just say sack the manager. We need to have a bit of stability otherwise a year down the line when we have another manager and a completely changed team of the same budget we'll be saying "We should have kept Lenny, he wasnt THAT bad", just like everyone was thinking about Strachan after Mowbray came in.

The board need to back Lenny in January. Rangers cannot go out and spend but we can. Strengthen the defence with a couple of quality signings and maybe a good attacking player and who knows how this title race could end up.

 

ok sack him THEN WHAT

 

The reason lennon isn't backed to the full extent you might like him to be is because we currently sit 15 points behind the huns, that shane is the reason he might not be well liked and its the most obvious and valid point, 15 points is all that needs to be said.

 

There's only one Neil lennon!
Lets get stuck right into these huns without the bus fare tomorrow.
I think we'll take at least 3 off them and put that * mccall in his place.

 

And that comes as a result of poor investment. They've spent £4m on their star striker and he scored a hat trick today.

More money spent = more points gained and more titles won. Simples.

 

I agree completely, i possibly blame the board more than i blame lennon, i was consistently calling for more investment in the squad because the depth level of quality wasn't there, yet was shot down because i asked for more than what was currently being invested. With reply's like celtic can't afford to etc..., we can afford to, to an extent its just the board won't do it.

 

if we were losing at full strength i'd be shouting for Neil to go.....but the injury list and knock on effect of chopping and changing the team has been a massive factor in poor results.

 

Well, aye...we can't afford to make it a habit. A one-off big transfer would make a major difference for the rest of Neil's tenure as manager, though. For however long that happens to be...

 

It can be a risk with bigger transfers but frankly celtic waste the same amount of money anyway getting 2 or 3 duds, our policy of buying players at 1.5 to 2 mill would be better lumped together to go and get a 4/5 million pound player.

Celtic would be able to make it a habit of buying a good player every once in a while if we were able to qualify for the champions league, to qualify you need a good consistent level of quality throughout the whole squad, not just in places throughout the team.

 

Very well said!

Whilst we have been hard to watch at times this season, we are still Celtic supporters and as such we support the team, the manager, the club!

Hail Hail

 

changing the manager this early never works, besides motherwell are 2nd and playing good football, we should win but regardless give him the rest of the season

 

What the * does making substitutions have to do with identifying good players and spending money?

 

Well would you give 10 million pound to a manager who has the inability to realise that a substitution is needed?. Against Rennes (away) stokes looked like he was going to collapse and in the match thread I said he would most likely make a sub in the 89th minute which he did because he is that clueless.

 

He made up for it when he brought Hooper on in the home game.

 

No he didn't? We were 2-1 up when he was brought on renne were not going to score. Anyway hooper should have been brought on earlier. Hardly a masterstroke bringing on our best striker..

 

There was always the chance Rennes would score. They are a decent French side and we were playing Majstorovic in defence. Hooper came on and made an impact right away. So, er, aye he did.

 

Well if there was a chance Rennes were going to score would it not have been more senensible to bring on a defensive player?.

 

Nope, because it's not like we were under constant pressure. By saying there was always the chance they would score, I'm not suggesting that they could just run up the pitch and score at will. A corner, a free kick, our defence is not great at dealing with these situations. They could have scored from any of these.

As far as open play was going though, we were doing alright. Bringing on Hooper when he did was a great choice, as he scored in the 84th minute and it knocked the stuffing out of them. Late goals tend to do that to teams, especially when they are chasing the game.

 

You never answered my question.

I'll answer yours. Yes I would trust Neil Lennon with £10million because he has proved he has the capacity to identify good players.

His ability, or inability, to make good substitutions has no bearing whatsoever on his ability to spend a transfer budget.