Is Gordon Strachan getting a fair crack of the whip at Celtic?

Two questions are dominating Scottish football right now. Can Rangers do the quadruple? Should Celtic sack Gordon Strachan?

The answer to the first is simple - wait and see what happens. Gordon Strachan’s tenure at Celtic was never going to be easy for the Edinburgh-born 51-year-old. Immediate disadvantages for Strachan saw him take over the reigns at Parkhead from the Saint-like Martin O’Neill without having any sort of Celtic background whatsoever.

O’Neill had also left a fairly aged first team and the Celtic board were about to embark on a financial plan to cut costs and finally balance the books in the East end of Glasgow. Henrik Larsson was long gone and Chris Sutton, Alan Thompson and the rest were on their way out.

It was a daunting task for Strachan, and the abuse he has received from a large number of myopic Celtic fans and a very unforgiving Scottish media has been relentless. He has, however, responded well.

Strachan’s handling of the media in Scotland is either viewed as smug, sarcastic and completely humourless; or it is seen as a lesson to the hacks not to go down certain ridiculous avenues. On numerous occasions Strachan has instructed the dribbling journalists that he will only answer questions on the forthcoming game (not too much to ask) yet is bombarded with questions about his future at the club.

Being a manager of either Celtic or Rangers brings very different pressures and high expectations, and Strachan knew this when accepting the job. However I must back Strachan on his stance with the media. He is courteous and polite when asked about football matters relevant but gets angry and treats other such ridiculous questions with disdain, and rightly so.

Two SPL titles, a Scottish Cup and a League Cup in his first two seasons is not a bad return. Progress to the last 16 in the Champions League for the first time in Celtic’s history of the modern version isn’t too bad either.

Considering many things, those two league titles were won at a canter. Were Celtic so much better than the rest? Yes and no. Rangers were simply awful and Hearts, for some reason, imploded when looking like worthy challengers. I suppose that’s what happens when you allow a schizophrenic, paranoid Russian-born Lithuanian run riot in Edinburgh. R.I.P Hearts.

It’s been a truly difficult time to judge Strachan properly. There was no challenge in his first two seasons and even the style of football was not what Celtic fans wanted to see. The trouble with winning is that while you do it means that the criticism when you don’t is riotously outlandish. Luck? I don’t know. You cannot be lucky to win the league.

The opposition may be poor but you still have to grind out results. The 8-1-1 formation is very popular in Scotland when playing Celtic at home or away. So popular that Rangers have adopted it this season. Adapting from that every week to tackling Manchester United on a Wednesday night must be an absolute nightmare for Strachan. The jump in class is as big as the Pacific Ocean.

Yes, Strachan has made some pretty awful signings (Thomas Graveson, Lee Naylor) but the majority have been okay and will get better. Celtic cannot match Man Utd or Chelsea. They can’t even match the amount that Birmingham City can spend.

Yet such is the fickle nature of the game that Celtic are expected to reach the last 16 or quarter-finals of the Champions League every season. No point touting the "Let us into the English Premier League" card because it won’t happen for a long, long time even if it ever does.

It is really this season that has brought everything to the forefront for Celtic fans. The ones who have wanted Strachan out from the beginning are saying "We told you he was useless" and the fans who backed him are suddenly looking at the glaring cracks in a new light.

Was Strachan’s job too easy because of the utter poor quality of the opposition? Martin O’Neill used to win all of his Champions League home games but not qualify. Was Strachan lucky again? As soon as Walter Smith came back to Rangers, Celtic lost the bottle for a fight because they had never had any under Strachan.

Did the inertia of the Celtic board, when at a financial and footballing advantage, cause the one member of the chasing pack to catch up? Whatever the conclusion to all of this (and there could be a very interesting one) Strachan is either on the verge of greatness as a Celtic manager (three titles in a row, first since Jock Stein) or he will be hounded out unfairly as a man who took Celtic to places they had never been but was ultimately not "Celtic minded.”

It’s taken until this late point for me to say it, but it is true. And I for one feel sorry for Strachan. In role reversal, had Strachan led Celtic to that UEFA Cup final in 2003 and O’Neill had led Celtic to the last 16 of Champions League this year and last, most Celtic fans would now say that Strachan’s achievement was good but O’Neill’s better.

To reach the final was indeed great, but Celtic lost and no one else will remember that. It was the spirit of the adventure that caught everyone up in the euphoria of that run. Celtic had never been close to that for decades.

Is it possible that Wee Gordon was/is the wrong manager at the right time to be in charge of a financially sound football giant?