26 Aug 2026 18:11:03
At the start of the window I said on here that people should be prepared to being disappointed, as the board were the same and their strategy would be the same. I stand by that.
26 Aug 2026 19:35:31
Baur did not replace engles so the midfield was weaker and effectively we lost the game there.
26 Aug 2026 20:14:51
Yes a get that but the board wer t playing last night every player let us down to b 4 up and lose is a disgrace. ALl av seen today is Calmac said this n that he shouldve done his talking on the park, he should be dropped from playing in Europe yrs ago.
26 Aug 2026 20:37:47
100% Troy. Captain liability.
I’m sick of him.
26 Aug 2026 20:41:25
Good for you WeeJoe. I kinda get the impression your glad we got put out last night so you can say a big told you all so.
26 Aug 2026 20:48:08
Going through is against joes narrative, there hasn’t been a lot of negatives around Celtic last few weeks, just Joe ……but he’s right, depending on what happens between now and end window there will be plenty of others with him, and if that’s there opinion who can say there wrong, I don’t agree but certainly not me.
26 Aug 2026 20:51:50
I’m not saying the manager or players don’t have to shoulder some responsibility, but they were both badly let down by the board, as were we.
We were told that lessons would be learned, yet here we are, crashing out of the CL yet again because we failed to address obvious deficiencies in the squad before the qualifiers.
GK - sub-par
CB - sub-par
No cover at LB
No CDM
We sold our best midfielder before the tie and didn’t replace him.
We didn’t sell Hatate last summer, and he has been shocking since.
None of that is down to the players or the manager.
I mentioned before the tie that the board were yet again taking a massive gamble by failing to address these deficiencies before the qualifiers. I can’t say I’m surprised to see history repeating itself.
There’s a saying: doing the same thing over and over again while expecting a different result is the definition of insanity.
At some point, the board have to take responsibility for repeatedly putting the manager and players in this position and, ultimately, letting the fans down as well.
26 Aug 2026 21:12:29
Selling Engels for £22m was excellent piece of business and a wouldn’t say HE needs replaced a would say a far better calibre of player should’ve been brought in his position.
26 Aug 2026 21:18:15
100% rubbish, to be 4-0, we should have parked the bus, shut up shop, it's all down to bad tactics, it was all bad management, I like Martin, but he got it wrong, nothing at all to do with board.
26 Aug 2026 22:27:39
That is the point Troy, no one was brought in to improve the position and it left us severely weakened in a critical position, which was one of the main factors for us losing the game.
No one is saying that it was not a good fee, only that it had a massive consequence in doing so. The board knew months ago that he was likely to be leaving, as did we. So why was a suitable replacement not brought in to cover the void his sale left?
26 Aug 2026 22:32:57
We got into the position of 4-0 up with 65 mins to go. By chance or luck but we got there.
With 65 mins to go were the board getting a pat on the back and being told well done? No the players and management were.
Fast forward 65 mins then another 30 mins and it's all the boards fault. COME ON!
If we'd have got through the players and management would have alll got a big pat on the back and 40m for the club. Just because we never got through that same thought process doesn't turn to the board and make it their fault we didn't get through.
OK we could argue we were a couple of additions light. But those players on that pitch were good enough to get us 5 goals in front and should have been good enough to hold a 4-0 lead
The board can't legislate for a horrendous Nygren either back pass to the keeper or a pass to McGregor either way it was from just outside the halfway line and a blind pass.
The board can't legislate for Trusty who stands a 6ft3 getting bullied off the ball for the 2nd
The board can't legislate for 3 goals being scored from outside the box.
No that's all on the players and desire to win your duals and get out to players, press and be aggressive instead of being passive.
Now this boards not perfect not by a long chalk. But let's not build a narrative that last night was on them.
No that was on the players, management and tactics.
26 Aug 2026 22:45:17
Troy, you said Engels needed replaced by a better calibre player. Well we didn’t replace him with ANYONE. What part of that plan was an upgrade?
27 Aug 2026 05:00:32
I think you're conflating two separate arguments. I've already acknowledged that the manager and players have to shoulder part of the responsibility for what happened. The collapse was absolutely on the pitch and there were individual errors, poor defending and questionable tactical decisions. But that doesn't mean the board should escape criticism for the position we found ourselves in.
Yes, the players and manager deserve enormous credit for getting us 4-0 up in the first place. They were the ones who put us in that position, and if we'd held on, we'd rightly have praised them to the heavens. But that cuts both ways. The board don't get to claim credit for the success while distancing themselves from the obvious weaknesses in the squad that have been apparent since the season started.
The midfield and defence have been glaringly short of quality and depth. That's not something that suddenly became apparent last night. It's been obvious for weeks. If the board had addressed those deficiencies, we'd have been better equipped to manage a game when the momentum shifted.
And yes, Nygren's pass was horrendous. Trusty getting bullied for the second goal was poor. Three goals from outside the box shouldn't happen and wouldn't have happened with a better keeper between the sticks, so why didn't we have a first choice GK in place, despite knowing we needed one 6 months ago? Players have to win their individual battles, defend properly and show the desire and aggression required at that level. I'm not disputing any of that but we have known this crop of players have lacked that long before the match, that is on the board for not addressing it and selling Engels and making it worse.
But the argument that "the board can't legislate for individual mistakes" misses the bigger point. Boards don't legislate for individual mistakes; they build squads capable of absorbing them. They provide the manager with enough quality, depth and balance to cope when things go wrong.
You say that if we'd gone through, the players and management would have received the praise and the club would have received £40m. Absolutely. And rightly so. But if we'd gone through despite having glaring weaknesses in midfield and defence, that wouldn't suddenly mean the board had done everything right. It would mean the players and manager had overcome those deficiencies.
Getting to 4-0 with a huge slice of luck doesn't erase the deficiencies. In fact, it highlighted the issue: we had 65 minutes to protect a four goal advantage and still weren't equipped to manage the game when things turned against us.
So no, I'm not saying "last night was all the board's fault". It wasn't. The players, manager and tactics deserve plenty of criticism.
But saying it's only on the players, management and tactics is just as simplistic.
The players and manager are responsible for what happened on the pitch. The board are responsible for constructing the squad that went onto that pitch. Both things can be true.
And when the weaknesses in that squad have been glaringly obvious since the start of the season, it's perfectly reasonable to ask why they weren't addressed before we reached the biggest game of the season. Don't you agree?