Neil Lennon

It's the same contract we have used for well over a decade. Rodgers changed that when signing his 4 year deal but that is starting to look like a deal made between egomaniacs to make sure everybody got what they wanted.

 

Nah: sure we were paying off Mowbray for quite a while.

In any case, it shouldn’t be standard unless the appointment might carry a bit of risk (e.g. been out the game for a while, or it’s a first-job scenario).

 

12 months is fine cheer up and be happy.

 

To be honest, Sean, that’s not answering my question.

I know as well as anyone that we don’t live in an ideal world, but are you really telling me that this kind of contract seems acceptable with the money the club has available, and the comments PL made about Lenny. We’re talking about a guy who came in and made sure our season wasn’t going to be ruined by Rodgers’s exit. He deserves better, imo.

 

I almost vomited.

 

I’ll be happy when the board back the manager and when the majority of fans withhold praise for them (and maintain scrutiny on them) until they do.

 

Lenny wakes up every day with 12 months left on his contract. If the club wish to terminate that it will cost them a year's salary.

Rolling contract is a sound principal. Brendan Rodgers had no problem signing the same contract

 

If the 12 months was fine for other managers.

Then the 12 is fine for Lenny.

 

Hope for good times ahead with a Celtic legend.

 

No, I’m pretty certain a ‘rolling contract’ means that it merely ‘rolls on’ at the end of the 12 months, unless terminated at that point by either party.

Could be wrong.

 

Only for 12 months mind.

 

Keep trying.

 

To repeat, I don’t think we should let the board away with a lack of commitment by saying ‘they did it for others, so it’s ok’.

It might have been appropriate for Lennon’s first stint, but I don’t feel it was appropriate for Rodgers, nor now.

There’s protecting the club and minimising risk, and then there’s saying you have every confidence but doling out a contract that doesn’t reflect that.

 

Need to get 9, 10 and 11 first HH

 

Well it’s been happening for years.

 

To be honest I would like complete clarity on it myself but I'm sure I'm right.

 

My point being that it does not show conviction or backing from the board towards the man they supposedly is right for the job and they believe will bring us success.

He will be judged over the next 12 months and an assessment will be made as to if he will be given a new fixed term contract.

 

Smart *.

 

Aye, laugh it up. Wait and see what happens in summer.

I’ll be delighted to be proven wrong, and I’ll even look back at this and laugh at myself with you then, but I don’t get the sudden switch-off of scrutiny towards the board.

This is how they want us to act.