Sutton’s Latest Celtic Remarks Are Not Controversial, They Are Just Plain Dumb.

Chris Sutton. I love the guy but he tries too hard sometimes. He, like the rest of us, is pissed off about the transfer window. He has been accused of trying to be controversial with his latest remarks. Actually, some of them are just dumb.

The issue I have with his comments are the same ones I have with a few others; his willingness to blame Rodgers for two transfer window disasters.

Perhaps he can explain to me why, if it’s Rodgers in charge, we’ve not signed a single guaranteed started from a dozen players?

We all know that Rodgers has made mistakes, the main one being that he has been too accepting of the dreck Lawwell has pushed in his direction … but that’s the issue here, not the manager.

Sutton wants to know what has changed since Ange’s successful first two windows. If he gave it two seconds of thought I’m sure he could come up with the answer; we hired Mark Lawwell. There it is, just as simple as that. Then daddy Lawwell became chairman. Look at the timeline. It’s a perfect match. You don’t need to be a genius to work this out.

It most certainly is not the fault of the manager.

One of the things I’ve noticed in the last few weeks is just how few of our hacks are willing to point the finger of blame where it belongs.

They stumble around it as though they are in a minefield. The moment Peter Lawwell was no longer CEO our way of doing transfers dramatically changed for the better. Our current team has a half dozen blue chip players in it right now, all of whom were signed during that brief period where we did things differently.

No sooner was there a Lawwell running recruitment and another in the chairman’s office but we were back to the shoddy, shabby way of doing business which has characterised previous transfer windows. And some of us called this the moment Lawwell junior was appointed and again when his Lawwell senior was back in a major role.

It was depressingly predictable.

The only thing that wasn’t was the return of Rodgers himself, and a lot of us foolishly convinced ourselves that the board would not, could not, treat him in the same slapdash manner it had before. We convinced ourselves that he must have had assurances of full control and that the policy would be designed to fit him rather than have him bend to fit the policy, precisely the conditions under which he left in such disharmony last time.

Rodgers needs our support. We can all see how he is being treated, and he recognises that in the fans he has friends and allies which he will need if he’s to get his way.

There are issues here which are bigger than the manager, bigger than whether or not we win this league. There is the policy itself, and the cronyism and nepotism at the heart of the club … those things cannot be blamed on the man in the dugout. They exist entirely separate of him, and at some point we must have a reckoning with those who think this is appropriate.

I am surprised at Sutton though. He keeps a close eye on this club so he knows full well, or at least he should, that most fans are not angry with Rodgers but with those above his head. Quite how he has managed to turn this into the manager’s fault I do not know. This is the moment for backing Rodgers to the hilt, not sticking a knife in the guy and holding him responsible for the decisions that are taken over his head, and behind his back.

Where Sutton and others aren’t getting it is down to their continuing efforts to try and understand why Rodgers would have returned at all if it was clear that he was going to be restricted by the policy. I think it’s obvious that he wouldn’t have, so either he misunderstood the pitch or someone misled him and he didn’t query what he was being told.

Because of that my sympathy for his position is limited, and I think he should be fighting harder … but if they dig in their heels the only thing left to him is to quit and he’s given us, the fans, assurances that he won’t. So he has my full support, as he has from his first day back.

Sutton should be backing him. Sutton should be on his side here. I was so disappointed reading that this morning. He has gotten this one badly wrong.