We all love Emilio - but Izzy the answer for Celtic?

After a trying week for Celtic, one piece of news with the feelgood factor was the return of Emilio Izaguirre as cover for Kieran Tierney at left-back.

It's not at all hard to love Izzy and most fans do.

A player who is never gave less than his all (as he noted himself) those years of flying down the left wing have not been forgotten by the fans and he left to real affection and well-wishing from the supporters.

That's all well and good and I'm happy for him as he seems so pleased to have made his return.

From a football point of view, however, I'm not sure quite what this tells us about recruitment policy at the club.

Those who remember Izzy's early days will recall the expectation that those exciting early displays would lead to big-money bids from English clubs (with speculation that Manchester United were considering a move).

But, such is the power of social media that before long the wise amongst us were mostly agreeing online that there was a problem with his positional sense.

For my part, I predicted that Izzy would leave as, fine player that he is, I couldn't see him fitting into Brendan Rodgers's style of play.

His running and crossing can be excellent - he could easily have found a place in Martin O'Neill's Celtic teams - but I didn't think his touch was quite right for the quick passing that Brendan favours.

So, what has changed?

Was it a blunder to let him go and did Brendan really rate him and want to keep him? (He will have made good money in Saudi Arabia and good luck to him for that.)

Or is there more to the move than meets the eye?

Calvin Miller has looked promising but, at 20, is perhaps not considered ready to be considered as reliable cover for that 21-year-old veteran Kieran.

That's fair enough and if the Izzy move is to take pressure off Calvin while Kieran remains as our left-back, then we can all breathe a sigh of relief.

But let's be clear about something.

Having Izzy supporting Kieran is fine. Bringing back a popular player because, for example, Kieran might be sold is not fine at all.

We can all make mistakes and reversing a bad decision (if that's what letting Izzy go was) is smarter than ploughing on, rather than admitting a mistake.

But two days after Brendan expressed his displeasure at missing out on John McGinn, there is room for scepticism as to whether bringing Izzy back is a move that Brendan really wanted or an admission that Peter Lawwell and the board have no intention of supporting Brendan in terms of developing the squad.

So, who signed Izzy - Brendan or Peter?

And, if the answer is the latter, then no amount of love for Izzy is going to bring us much joy in the time to come.
--

Celtic in Crisis? No, but bad omens after Lawwell loses John McGinn poker game

Too often blaming the mainstream media gives an easy out to Peter Lawwell and the Celtic board. We could lose Brendan Rodgers

Commodities

I once watched a documentary about craftsmanship in which a man proudly showed off one of his greenwood chairs. (A traditional method of woodworking using the natural moisture of the wood to create strong joints without glue or  metal.)

"That costs £700," he told the shocked person who inquired.

As justification, he said: "Well, I like to try to pay myself £10 an hour and it takes me 70 hours to make one chair."

Fair enough but when you can get a functional chair from IKEA for one twentieth of that price - both of which will support your backside quite acceptably, it's a tough sell.

But for some, only the greenwood chair would do while others will shell out even more for the one-off designer seat that captures their heart.

Now before you kindly offer help in recovering my marbles, let me say that I do realise that footballers are different to chairs in a number of key ways.

Firstly, they are people, not commodities, though the archaic transfer system might lead you to think otherwise.

Secondly, they have minds of their own and are capable of making their own decisions.

But, as a third point, footballers have something in common with any other item for sale - they are worth whatever someone is prepared to pay for them.

It is not clear that Peter Lawwell or the Celtic board recognise any of these key points. And that's a problem - perhaps a big one.

The John McGinn saga is one of the sorriest Celtic affairs of recent times, though by no means

without precedent.

Steven Fletcher and Kevin Thomson both spring to mind as players who the manager clearly wanted but who Lawwell either thought surplus to requirements or that he had a better-value alternative on hand.

With McGinn, you have read many unqualified opinions on the player's ability or lack of it - including from this blogger.

But a more expert opinion was apparently scorned - that of our manager Brendan Rodgers.

And, even if you have already declared McGinn of insufficient quality to get a game for Celtic, that should give you cause for concern.

The pluck of the Irish 

I have already put my  hands up to the fact that I was totally wrong about Brendan Rodgers before he took the reins at Celtic.

I could make excuses but the fact is that I didn't rate him as a candidate. And that causes me embarrassment. Because I really should have informed myself better, with a more open mind, and recognised just how good Brendan was and is.

We are extremely lucky to have him at Celtic and the shakers and movers at just about every switched-on club in Europe see that, too.

We have had a lot of excellent coaches in many ways but, in terms of being at the cutting edge of top-level football knowledge, I have no hesitation in saying that Brendan is our most outstanding manager since Jock Stein.

Anyone who reads this blog (and, if we can get the numbers, we might get a five-a-side team going) will, I hope,  realise that, while  not shy with my opinions, I rarely indulge in hyperbole.

But, as an admirer of Martin  O'Neill, Gordon Strachan, Neil Lennon and - yes - Ronny Deila, I have seen a level of coaching at Celtic that we would have been highly unlikely to have enjoyed had we not been a magical club who just happened to have a real Celtic man - a genuine one of our own - amongst the top tier of coaches.

The media will conveniently forget that the fantabulous Steven Gerrard, having played under Houllier, Eriksson, Capello and many more described our Brendan as the best one-to-one coach he had ever worked with.

But now, I fear, that's under threat.

3-5-7

When Brendan took over at Celtic, I listened to his interviews and he talked of having been "in a hurry", as young men usually are, in his earlier coaching career.

It was wonderful - let's not forget that he was made the bookies' second-favourite to be the next England manager within a couple of weeks of signing on at Celtic.

So, that, logically, brought the  numbers of 3, 5 and 7 to my mind.

If true to his word, he saw the Celtic job as lasting a minimum of three years - anything less would be consistent with a "man in a hurry", itching to get his next big opportunity.

As a coach and manager who has a reputation as seeing himself as a club-builder, five years would seem a more likely period in the job.

And, as Brendan has also said that he expects to be a coach for more than 20 years, a productive five years at Celtic seemed a solid prospect. Club-building, you see, involves player development with a view to the future.

To leave a club with a solid foundation for the future and to lay the groundwork for replacing a legendary captain over the next three or four years. Leaving something lasting.

For example, signing the player who Scott Brown himself praised to the heavens just a couple of weeks ago. Less secure players than Scott might have felt threatened by efforts to recruit a footballer who is so often compared to the great man himself.

But Scott signalled that there would be no tension between himself and John McGinn.

Can you see just how much McGinn was wanted by the football people at Celtic?

(For my part, I'll say that we might just have lost the captain of Celtic in 2021-2025).

My expectation was for a three-to-five-year tenure of Brendan. My wildest dreams were of seven years.

I dream of that no more.

Language, Timothy! 

Now, while the search facility offers copious evidence of my complaints against the Celtic board and Chief Executive - the vast majority of which I stand by - I am as sceptical of and hostile to the mainstream media shills who often do, in fact, mischievously sow the seeds of grief amongst Celtic supporters.

I've slagged almost all of them and, again I stand by almost all of it.

This week, the BBC's Chris McLaughlin was getting it for saying that the board were unhappy with Brendan's comments on the transfer window activity.

But, while I am decidedly NOT one of those "in the know" bloggers with impeccably-placed sources, dear reader, I do know a few things beyond the fiduciary duty of other clubs' executives (I know you read it, guys, because you parrot it occasionally with never a "chapeau".)

One of my interests is in the art of coaching, to which end I have read several biographies and autobiographies of football managers.

A recurring theme that I have noticed, from Alex Ferguson down (in the modern era) and from all the great Celtic managers is the importance of psychology.

And I can say, without fear of reasonable rebuke, that there is no manager in football more aware of the weight that his words carry than Brendan Rodgers.

(Trust me - you'll see this in other blogs, claiming that they always knew this.)

Now, remember that I don't know Brendan. If I did, I'd surely have trumpeted him from the heavens as the next Celtic boss.

But I do know, for example, that Brendan has studied neuro-linguistic programming for several years.

If you aren't aware of NLP, it can be roughly summarised as a practice attempting to achieve positive results through managing thought patterns through specific techniques, with a strong emphasis on language.

For example, when you make a silly mistake, do you say to yourself, "I'm so stupid", or something similar? Many of us do.

NLP theory says that the first voice we hear is our own and that we undermine our own confidence by using that language to ourselves.

Instead, why not say: "I made a mistake so I'll learn from it and do better the next time"?

Do you remember Jack Hendry after the Rosenborg match? (I don't believe that Brendan is educating players in NLP, but that they are echoing his positive language).

How often have you heard Brendan criticise the team or say anything negative about them?

How many times can you recall him saying, for example, "We didn't finish well enough" or "We didn't defend well"?

They are both negative statements, whereas "we could have scored more goals" and "we can defend better" are the sort of positive statements Brendan usually prefers.

On top of that, having been at one of the richest clubs in Europe, Brendan has had top-level media training.

That's partly why he is so adept at sidestepping the booby-trap questions that the media throw at him.

And the point of all of this is that Brendan is fully aware of the impact of his words.

So, when he chose to speak so negatively about transfer activity on the day his side had a vital Champions League qualifier with AEK, you better believe that he really is angry and that's not just another media fabrication.

I am confident that he will remain with us until the end of the season. Because, apart from anything else, he is on record as saying that managers should take new jobs before the season starts.

And, of course, in May he will have completed the minimum three-year period of a man not in a hurry.

Que sera, sera

But, dedicated to Celtic as Brendan is, he is also clearly conscious of his reputation and future aspirations.

For example, never mind the English Premier League, he is known to aspire to some day work in Spain.

He will not be so loyal to Celtic as to see his own reputation damaged due to the "Plan" of Peter Lawwell, who - let's not forget - gets a player-trading bonus each year and is therefore incentivised to favour selling over buying.

And the sad fact is that I doubt that Lawwell cares.

He has increasingly been allowed to run Celtic as he sees fit, seeing managers come and go, and using friendly "independent" Celtic bloggers to tell us that's just how it had to be.

He also knows that Neil Lennon and Steve Clarke would both likely jump at the chance to replace Brendan.

It's a remarkable fact that the last Celtic manager to be sacked was John Barnes.

It's equally remarkable that no Celtic manager since Barnes has resigned because he was lured away by a better offer.

Every single one has chucked it for different reasons that were never really made clear.

Time and time again, Celtic fans have thought we were on the road to something special, only to find that some unforeseen change had set us back.

Peter Lawwell and the board can keep Brendan Rodgers for the key five years and maybe longer if they want him.

But that will involve supporting him in his vision of building a strong Celtic for the future, not just pocketing the tens of millions of pounds that he has already made them.

So, do they want Brendan to remain at Celtic, continually building supporters' hopes in a manner that requires funding or do they want someone to make the most money out of the least possible investment while doing deals between Lawwell and his son, Mark, at Manchester City?

What is Peter's plan this time?
 --

Novo and Limmy: A handful of Celtic fans leave an open goal to critics

The season has started - fairly well for Celtic - and yet, the Scottish mainstream media are awash with negative stories about the club.

Same old, same old, you may say. But there are lessons to be learned from the actions of a few fans, that have given fuel to those who wish to incinerate our reputation as the best fans in the world.

The targets - who prefer  to be known as victims - are two men for whom I haven't the least time.

One - Nacho Novo - was a thoroughly unpleasant player who had such a desire for recognition that, long after he had hung up his well-used studs, he took to social media throwing the most vile of insults at Celtic and our fans.

The other, who prefers to be called "Daft Limmy" is the embodiment of a proudly non-intellectual underclass creating trash TV. Take Homer Simpson, drain him of charm or wit, give him a  Scottish accent and a TV show and you have Brian Limond.

He has his adherents, but then so do burgers made from mechanically-recovered meat, which you can at least make look like something roughly palatable.

So, how were these two men involved in dragging the name of Celtic through the dirt?

With a little help from "our friends", of course.

Firstly, we had the moron who decided it was funny to sing the cringe-worthy "May you die in your sleep, Nacho Novo," song.

That song was truly embarrassing when Novo was playing.

But, during a match you might make (very lame) excuses that it was all terracing banter, the sort of thing  that only comes out when people get carried away by the crowd and the atmosphere.

It still didn't make it acceptable but then again excuses are generally made for the unacceptable.

What kind of mind - or absence of the same - you must possess to wish to sing such a song to the person's face while going about his business, I would not care  to speculate.

In what circumstances would that be OK?

I could go through the plethora of reasons why there are none but that would be to insult anyone reading this as it surely needs no explanation.

Limmy

When we come to the "Limmy" incident, that's of an entirely different nature.

For those who don't know, on the day that Danny McGrain unfurled our seventh consecutive championship flag at Celtic Park, Limond tweeted that he thought Danny had died, having been electrocuted in his loft, adding, "Who am I thinking of?"

Some younger fans may not know that he was referring to Danny's teammate and friend, the late and much-loved Johnny Doyle who died in that tragic accident.

He was called out on his bad taste - his signature style - and, instead of apologising for the  genuine hurt and offence caused, he doubled-down, insisting that his comment was made out of innocent ignorance and attempting to moralise against his critics at the same time.

Limond, you see, (unlike his brother David who was sent to prison for orchestrating a campaign of harassment against a Celtic-supporting journalist),  knows nothing about the "Old Firm" and therefore, in Limmy World, he can say what he likes, even openly musing about the death of 68-year-old Danny on a day, which should have been all about honouring one of the greatest-ever Celtic players and Scottish sportsmen.

His "defence" was as risible as his sense of humour but he had got what he was seeking - a reaction to add to his notoriety, in much the same way as he "innocently" tweeted about assassinating Donald Trump.

"Opps! Ooh-err! What have I said? I didnae know. I'm awful, aren't I? It's your own fault if you're offended!"

This was as snivelling a performance of publicity-seeking as you were likely to find.

But then two or three people speculated - joked? - about Limmy being stabbed. Naturally, they were from Celtic-affiliated accounts.

The result was that The Herald's Martin Williams (the man who reported that Rangers had died and has spent six years trying to make up for it) was given the opportunity that he had been waiting for.

The story was not a doubly-inappropriate comment on the deaths of Danny McGrain and Johnny Doyle but how bad Celtic fans were threatening someone who Williams apparently considers a national treasure.

And it has allowed Limond to get all the publicity he was seeking and capitalise on what he knows is an  anti-Celtic sentiment in much of the Scottish mainstream media.

(There are specific questions to be asked about Williams but that is for another time.)

Novo and Limond's separate conducts are not mitigated in any way by the actions of fools who would do Celtic fans a favour by finding something to do with their time other than associating themselves with Celtic.

But, if some fans don't have a sufficient moral compass to guide them away from the unacceptable, then they might instead try some common sense or, at the very least, refuse to give our critics what they want.

It has taken countless thousands of Celtic fans to build our reputation.

It only takes a handful to damage it.