Hmm. So he isn't just blindly following the 'party line' as determined by the board? Or is there some nuance I'm missing?
It just does not surprise me that Lennon reiterates the view if the board. He did not have to say anything substantive.....but he did.
RB - I don't wish to make things more awkward for you as it appears that your views have been 'attacked' from all sides on this forum (or should I say the relatively small number of posters on this topic, on this forum!) and from what I understand of this issue, I am in agreement with your stance on it. However, it seems to me that Neil Lennon's position is a 'curious' one - could you elaborate on your take in this regard? By the way, it also seems to me that since Neil Lennon's passionate displays on the sidelines have been 'curtailed', the team has displayed less passion on the pitch!
You're skirting around directly answering my question here Is Lennon one of the 'patsies' you dismiss so readily?
I'm not skirting the issue. I don't know the answer so I cannot say with any degree of certainty. It would be hypocritical of me to start guessing. I can say with absolute certainty that the position of the manager of Celtic Football club (which incidentally has softened since the article posted here) reflecting that of his pay masters is not exactly a revelation.
Prior to his appointment, Lennon went around on these roadshows with Lawwell sat like a naughty schoolboy. It was a softening up process for us before his appointment. Lennon has commented that he has been getting advice from our absentee billionaire majority shareholder on his touchline behaviour. Last week Zenden told us the coaching staff wanted him but the board didn't. It isn't unusual for the"higher ups" to veto moves for players but it does call in to question just how much authority he has. On the available evidence, we know for certain that his behaviour has been curbed by DD and we understand that his signing policy is dictated not only by budgetry constraints, but by the veto of the board. If that makes him a shield for the failings of the board I don't know. To extrapolate further than that is a minefield that I don't know that anyone could navigate accurately. It is fair to say that it isn't surprising that he reflects the view of the board.
RB - As far as I'm concerned, that's fair enough. Like the rest of us in life, who are dependent upon our employers for a job. our pay masters call the shots!
Yes. It would be something if he had said anything else. He could have skirted the issue though, like the players have been instructed to. I am not going to be too critical though as I don't expect him to manage the football side, not be mentally dextrous to avoid questions.
So you're not convinced one way or another that his personal opinion of IRA chanting is one of disapproval as you think he might simply be playing along with the official line. Presumably then you view everything Neil Lennon says with a certain amount of scepticism or at least uncertainty as to his motives? Or is it just where he disagrees with your viewpoint?
AP - Don't you think you're being somewhat disingenuous here yourself? (Or maybe that's what your 'whistler' at the end is meant to convey? )
