David Martindale is never one to dress things up, and his view ahead of Livingston’s home meeting with Celtic was direct and considered.
Celtic arrive at the match under scrutiny. A difficult run earlier in the season, a change in management, and wider tension around the club have all shaped the conversation.
Performances have been picked apart, often result by result, with little patience shown for transition.
Martindale’s comments stood out because they came from a manager preparing to face Celtic, not from someone with a vested interest in defending them.
His focus was on what he has seen on the pitch rather than the wider debate.
Rather than dismissing Celtic’s problems, he framed them as part of a process.
In doing so, he pushed back against the idea that the team have lost their quality or direction under Nancy.
He said: (RecordSport), “I think the opinions on Wilfried have been pretty harsh. He has taken over a pretty strong group that Martin O’Neill left and he obviously wanted to put his imprint on the team as quickly as possible.
“It has taken the team a couple of games to get to grips with that but I think you can see the improvement, game by game.
“And on Sunday against Aberdeen they created a lot of chances, there was good rotations, so I think you can now see Wilfried’s blueprint coming out in the team.
“I am not having the narrative that is being created around Celtic right now. Yeah, they are probably underperforming in their eyes and not where they want to be as a club, but they are still a very good football team.”
Martindale’s defence of Nancy was measured rather than emotional. He did not claim Celtic are the finished article. He pointed instead to signs of progress that are easy to miss when focus stays on results alone.
His reference to improvement game by game reflected what many have seen recently. Celtic have created chances, controlled spells, and looked more settled in their shape. Those details matter when judging a team still adapting to a new approach.
The Aberdeen match was an obvious reference point. Celtic’s attacking play was clear, even if the scoreline remained tight for long spells. Martindale highlighted movement and structure rather than outcomes, which speaks to how coaches often assess opponents.
By rejecting the current narrative around Celtic, he also set a warning for his own side. Livingston will not be facing a broken team. They will be facing players who remain confident in their ability and capable of controlling games.
That respect does not mean fear. Martindale has taken points off Celtic sides before, and Livingston’s approach at home is rarely passive. His comments suggested preparation rather than acceptance.
For Celtic, the remarks offer validation from outside the club. They reinforce the idea that progress does not always align neatly with league position or headlines.
For supporters, hearing a rival manager speak positively may land differently. Some will welcome it. Others will see it as irrelevant. What matters is how Celtic respond on the pitch.
The fixture now becomes another test of whether the improvement Martindale referenced can be sustained away from home. Games like this often demand patience and control rather than moments of chaos.
Nancy’s blueprint, as described, is beginning to show. Livingston will attempt to disrupt it. How Celtic handle that challenge will shape the next phase of the discussion.
Martindale’s words do not lower the pressure. They reframe it. Celtic remain a strong side in his view, and strong sides are expected to prove it, regardless of narrative.
