Let me tell you about Order 227.
It may be one of the most infamous communiqués issued during the Second World War, and yet, surprisingly, few people are aware of its exact nature, its full content, and what it set out to do. It was issued by Joseph Stalin and the Soviet High Command to all its local and regional commanders engaged in the fight against Hitler’s Germany, and it completely transformed how the Soviets fought the war.
On the surface, it was an order to establish new battalions made up of the hardest prisoners in the penal system. These men were given minimal training and sent straight to the front, where their natural aggressiveness would, presumably, terrify the Germans. But Order 227 became known for something else.
Historians call that order “No Step Back,” and it was their way of codifying into policy that what Soviet strategists called “trading space for time” was over. See, what Hitler mistook for the disintegration of the Soviet army was actually, in part, strategy. The Soviets were willing to fall back and cede territory in the early phase of what they call the Great Patriotic War.
The idea was to retreat to consolidate their forces in designated locations and to allow the Germans to take the territory in front of those locations—temporarily. This had two primary effects.
First, it bought the Soviets time to organise their forces and decide exactly where and when to launch counter-offensives. And if you’ve studied the history of that conflict, you’ll know they became experts at picking the exact moment when the Germans were at their most vulnerable. This was especially effective in winter.
Second, it allowed the Germans to advance deep into Russia, creating long and complicated supply lines. Cutting those supply lines, and therefore cutting the Germans off from all support, was a key part of the Soviet counterattack strategy, and it was devastatingly effective.
Order 227 changed everything. One of its most notable sections reminded Soviet soldiers and commanders that they were not just trading space; they were trading Soviet citizens, villages, resources, and industry for time—and that was no longer acceptable. That section reads:
“Each commander, Red Army soldier, and political commissar should understand that our means are not limitless. The territory of the Soviet state is not a desert, but people – workers, peasants, intelligentsia, our fathers, mothers, wives, brothers, children. The territory of the USSR which the enemy has captured and aims to capture is bread and other products for the army, metal and fuel for industry, factories, plants supplying the army with arms and ammunition, railways.”
As sound a strategy as trading land for time had been, Stalin was right. Order 227 had brutal consequences. Those stories about Soviet commissars shooting retreating soldiers in the back? Undoubtedly true. But more than anything else, the order took the Soviets off the defensive and put them on the offensive. And I think it’s fair to say that Western European democracy survives today because of that decision—harsh, brutal, and uncompromising as the policy was.
That should be Brendan Rodgers’ policy for the summer. No more excuses. No more people defending the board of directors. No more allowing them to slither off the hook. If Rodgers is going to stay, then the summer has to see him backed to the fullest extent—not just to the degree the board deems necessary.
And that primarily means that Rodgers’ backing must involve the spending of actual money—an actual net spend—and an actual depletion of that vast, overflowing bank account.
No Step Back means no selling a key asset to fund the summer spending. Every key asset must be kept. We’ve sold enough players to enable managers to work. It is high time this board put proper money on the table. It is high time the manager got the support he needs.
Let me repeat what I said before this window opened: this squad doesn’t need a massive overhaul. The summer doesn’t have to involve six signings. Three or four signings will do—of the right quality, in the right areas of the pitch, starting with a blue-chip signing up front.
We don’t have to spend eight-figure sums on all four players—that’s unrealistic. But we do have to spend a significant sum on at least one—the striker we should have signed last month to give the manager what he needed.
One of my biggest concerns is that those expecting a summer spending spree will be sorely disappointed because any “spree” will likely begin with the sale of a key player first. That’s how this board operates. It’s the only way they want to fund a manager’s team-building plan. I can already see a scenario where we sell a key asset, then give the manager a fraction of the proceeds to reinvest.
Let me remind people—because I know many don’t want to acknowledge this—Brendan Rodgers hasn’t spent a penny of the resources available. Every single signing he has made, every player he has brought in, has been funded by sales.
The first transfer window—the absolute disaster in which Rodgers played no significant part—was entirely funded by the sale of Jota, and we still posted a profit. The surplus was so high that even the signing of Nicolas Kühn in January, and the loan signing of Adam Idah, barely made a dent in it.
This summer’s business was funded entirely by the sale of Matt O’Riley, and the club still posted a very healthy profit. And in this window? The one significant signing we made was funded by the sale of yet another key player.
So let me say it again—Brendan Rodgers has not spent any actual money. He has worked well within his budget, well within his financial footprint, for two full years. Whatever budget he had for his first window, it wasn’t spent. Whatever budget he had for his second, it wasn’t spent. Nor was it spent in his third or fourth windows.
So if this club insists on selling a key asset before giving Rodgers money to spend in the summer, it will be scandalous and unacceptable.
We are not facing an indomitable foe here. We are not pressed on all sides by financial constraints. UEFA’s financial sustainability regulations? We are well within their parameters. The wage cuts we made in January have only strengthened our position.
We do not need to take a step backwards to move forwards. We do not have to retreat any further than we already have. If this team is forced into selling another key asset before giving Rodgers money to spend, I will regard that as outright vandalism. I will regard it as corporate negligence from this board. I will regard it as the final stab in the back—the one that ensures Rodgers walks away.
It may already be too late. Four transfer windows of these constraints—four transfer windows of seeing his targets arrive late, if at all—may have convinced him that Celtic is a dead-end club, one that has reached its ceiling and does not want to push forward. A club that thinks it is safe behind its high walls. That is loser thinking, and Rodgers doesn’t have to hang around for it.
If we are going to keep him, we have to give him everything he needs in what will be his final year. If we don’t, it will be because the board has already given up on him, refused to let him build the team he wants, because they don’t think he’ll be here to finish the job. And if that’s their mindset, they can guarantee he won’t be.
Losing Rodgers because they won’t match his ambition would be the biggest step backwards of all. So that needs to be our watchword going forward—our own version of Order 227. No Step Back. We go forward from here. No compromises. No retreats.
Photo by Ian MacNicol/Getty Images
James I’m little older than you, but we both know the play book. If reasonable money is offered for Khun this board will bite the buyers hand off. We will pick up a player mid July or early August and then they will wait to see if we get through the champions league play-off. Only then will they sanction big money signings and we will pay a premium for leaving it late in the window. There has to be a separation of the football department, too many people think they know best.
I agree, for me the signing of Jota means that Kuhn is away in the summer which might be why the reports of us trying to bring in the young Danish winger surfaced. The CEO should be nowhere near the transfer negotiations, unless its to sign the cheque! What we need is a sporting director to work alongside Brendan. The process is straightforward, a transfer & wage budget is agreed for the upcoming season(with any outgoings added to it)Brendan identifies areas of the team he wants to strengthen, he provides Tisdale and recruitment team with the attributes the player should have. They in turn provide him with a list of options. Brendan signs off on them or says look again, once targets are agreed the sporting director negotiates the transfer. Its not a complicated process!
James, I commented on your previous article before reading this and was thinking along similar lines.
Our board’s continued modus operandi is to sell a key player, which then subsequently provides the transfer funds for that window.
As many have commented, it is time for clearer parameters to be in place for BR and his transfer budget. Taken completely away from the suits, and in the hands of, and under the watchful eye of our manager and his trusted football staff. A readily identifiable transfer budget, used in the correct manner, and on the players he requires!
Wishful thinking I know, but it’s the only way that we can start to see some salient business done on behalf of the people that matter…ie the manager and his squad.
We all know he was let down in January, regardless of opinions!
For us to retain him, he has to know that he has the highest level of backing, that will allow him to continually improve and progress our club in ALL competitions, especially Europe.
Anything less, is negligence and a complete dereliction of duty towards BR, the players and fans!
I really do yearn to see positive changes, but despite my natural optimism, this again, is more hope than expectation ! HH
Will never happen as long as Lawwell is connected to the Club.
I think by now the accepted wisdom is that Nicholson is just a ‘Stooge’, Lawwell’s Glove Puppet.
When Don Pedro resigned as CEO after the 10IAR fiasco the brief affair with McKay terrified the Powers that be on our Board. After his quick ‘Look, See’ at the running of the Club his suggestions for changes probably had the Board members running for cover and a mutual parting of the way was sought with a NDA most likely part of the severance.
After the inevitable ‘World wide’ search for a replacement Peter deemed that the most appropriate candidate had actually been hiding his light under a bushel in Celtic’s Legal Dept. Step forward Mikey Bhoy. He’s a Celtic fan don’tcha know.
As part of that same exhaustive World Wide search it was also, quite fortuitously discovered that the best person to fill the recently vacated Club Chairman’s post was non other than, after a self imposed period of Purgatory, the now Canonised
St Pedro of Parkheid.
Celtic will never change as long as San Pedro is around. Even when he does retire for good. His influence will still pervade the Club for years, it’s institutionalised. All the Senior Officials appointed by him and Board Members recruited by him will continue to run the Club in his likeness. Any future CEO appointed will have to accept the same strictures that McKay faced, don’t rock the boat and just keep the Bonuses and Dividends flowing.
SFA, agree with what you’re saying and there’s no doubt that D Mackay, was the clean broom that would have reinvigorated our club.
He was dismissed like a Mafia hit and we can only speculate why!!!
The other question that is asked so many times is why DD allows an elite manager,( that he welcomed back with open arms,) to be apparently undermined by the suits!
A communique release on some of these pertinent matters would be greatly welcomed by our fanbase !!!
Janes, you seem to be fixated by the notion that Brendan will leave at the end of his contract unless Celtic give him the funds required to buy the quality he desires. You may be right, but for now that is all hypothetical and I for one do not like suggestions that he may be dissatisfied and leave because of it.
We have a mainstream media who just love spinning yarns about our players being unhappy and looking for a move and we shouldn’t be giving them any encouragement, You have criticised them plenty in the past for doing just that.
My opinion on Brendan is purely hypothetical as well, wishful thinking even, but a bit more optimistic than your own. I see a happy bunny being back home where he belongs, he is in his element and I like to think that the bean counters will meet him half way and that he will remain with us for years to come winning trophy after trophy.
I do like a story with a happy ending 🙂
Johnny,
It remains to be seen whether our manager is happy to work under the current parameters?
If he is, then maybe his discontent is not as great, as it may appear.
However, we can all opine and speculate to the cows come home, but his recent interviews would suggest he’s not delighted by the recent transfer inertia!!!
Like yourself, I love a happy ending, so let’s hope our on field form continues to dazzle post Dundee match, and that we are moving up the gears at the requisite, and most important part of the season.
HH
I just want to say what a great wee read that was James,thanks.
The manager is on record as saying that the club will not hold on to players that wish to leave. I think it inevitable that will be the case come this summer. I think the more obvious candidate will be Hatate. He will have been more than 3 years at the club by then and will be hoping to play in a higher league.
That is the reality that Celtic face and how they have to manage as a trading club. Celtic provides a good playing environment for a period of time, but it is one where players will generally remain at for a limited period. Irrespective of the medals to be won, there is more cash to be acquired and an overall superior football environment available in bigger leagues. Ange Postecologue warned not to become too attached to individual players as their time would be fleeting. He could probably have said the same about managers.
Of course, with the money Celtic have available, it would be good to envisage having new recruits in before those leaving exit.
A very good point indeed JT…
Unfortunately these days the tail very much wags the dog when it comes to football players and managers and the players always win…
The days of managers in Glasgow dropping players to the reserves and say a return journey from utter hell all the way to Wick Acadamy and back are long gone….
Your point about having replacements in before the wannabe departed depart is excellent and most very valid indeed !
Unfortunately our business model as they call it will always prevent any managers building a side to go further into CL,we need to stop signing projects and try to promote our youth gaining experience from big signings,we are like a mouse on the wheel,same old,same old,we need to change,we will always sell and that’s OK if you’re replacing them with experience which we do not,for me if Rodgers doesn’t get backed he’s out.