|
Post by Ngard on Jan 12, 2014 20:07:23 GMT
Both of them articles, particularly the first one all focus and are central around his refusal to sign a contract thus causing his position to be untenable which is perfectly understandable. It's pretty selective reading to see the /main/ reason being something else.
You're misunderstanding the point anyway. Results wise which is what I was talking about he didn't fail at all at Motherwell. The only place he has failed on the pitch is Port Vale.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2014 20:09:15 GMT
RB, two newspapers? They are known to report accurate situations with an objective stance all the time!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2014 20:11:36 GMT
its time to draw a line under this now in the lord we trust
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2014 20:11:48 GMT
I'm more than happy with Lordy but the fact is before the recent run of home games his record was as bad as Gannon's who was sacked with what appears to be the blessing of several posters on this forum. I don't mind people having a different view but please back it up sensibly otherwise it just looks like a sad and bitter personal rant rather than a measured opinion. No disrespect meant but Lord has had to sort out Bogies social loafers and get new players in and is now achieving results. He had been in charge for a relatively short time and what he has done appears to be paying off. It's early days but I have confidence in him and wish him well. While Lord is rebuilding and achieving I don't see the need to bring JG back. Exactly how I see it and as I said in my first post in this thread I wouldn't want to see Lordy replaced unless it was with his blessing and saw him reunited with the rest of the record breaking dream team.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2014 20:12:35 GMT
|
|
|
Post by vicar on Jan 12, 2014 20:18:45 GMT
Both of them articles, particularly the first one all focus and are central around his refusal to sign a contract thus causing his position to be untenable which is perfectly understandable. It's pretty selective reading to see the /main/ reason being something else. You're misunderstanding the point anyway. Results wise which is what I was talking about he didn't fail at all at Motherwell. The only place he has failed on the pitch is Port Vale. Where he was never going to succeed anyway, Horsfield was too much "one of the lads" I'd imagine banter and drinking games would have been part of the culture.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2014 20:19:35 GMT
3 newspapers all adding to something that they don't like, sits with their readership and helps sell a few more copies?
You don't buy this kind of bollocks RB, it just sits with your argument is all. Gannon is the best manager we have had since Megson, fact. He has issues with man management that need working on, as whilst I back his judgement, there are better ways of dealing with wasters whilst they still have to do a job.
Lord deserves the time, but 3 out of four games do not make him a good manager. At times his tactics have been utterly terrible, but I could not sit here and say bring Gannon in now over him.
Gannon or Burr? The former every time because I know it matters to him, which is something that has been missing from all aspects of the club other than the fans for a good number of years!
|
|
|
Post by vicar on Jan 12, 2014 20:37:07 GMT
This board needs a poll function, I can't be bothered counting up which way this vote has gone.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2014 22:08:22 GMT
You don't buy this kind of bollocks RB, it just sits with your argument is all. Gannon is the best manager we have had since Megson, fact. He has issues with man management that need working on, as whilst I back his judgement, there are better ways of dealing with wasters whilst they still have to do a job. I don't see those two statements as contradictory really. First time round, he was the best manager we've had in a long time (I only started watching County in 2005, so can't really be more specific there). There were issues with falling out with people, but on field success meant it never became a problem. The problem is more that Jim has shown no sign of working on those man management skills since then, indeed in some respects, it seems to have got worse with every single job he's had subsequently. As I wrote in the last thread of this sort we had, would you take Paul Simpson back? The overall record isn't dissimilar - took club in dire straits towards it's best period in recent history 6-7 years ago - subsequent jobs weren't great, but not disastrous either (Motherwell/Shrewsbury) - absolute failure in one job (Preston (Championship) / Port Vale (Lge 2) - completely buggered by off field problems whilst at County and didn't stand a chance either way
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2014 22:21:59 GMT
Team sheet does not tell you where they played (i.e. Raynes up front), or what tactics were employed compared to games previous to that game though Dids. Did you go ? Can you remember it ? Cost the club a lotta money losing that game, and curiously enough it was that very day, before the game, that world war 3 broke out between the club board and team manager. The game was utterly ridiculous. Players out of position, formation not seen before, resulting in totally unexpected defeat, during a period when were actually quite good. Jim just stood and watched in a very unusual un-animated way with his arms crossed. Not his usually touch line body language at all...he actually looked like he didn't give a shit...and that aint Jim...normally he'd have been f'ing and jeffing watching such tat. Just all very co-incidental is all I am saying. How we'd kill for some of those players back now though ! I was there. I saw it and the team picked was more than capable. We were winning the game and got done on two counter attacks. It was the FA Cup as well. Guess what, it happens. It's quite a serious accusation you are making there with absolutely no evidence whatsoever to support it.
|
|
|
Post by since77 on Jan 12, 2014 22:38:19 GMT
Just pointing out the circumstances at the time, and how fall outs can maybe affect things...not suggesting match fixing or throwing games - please point out where I said that, but Jim wasn't himself that night. We cant afford fall outs that effect back room, management or players and unfortunately there is a history of that with Jim over various subjects at various clubs.
|
|
|
Post by suedehead on Jan 12, 2014 23:03:55 GMT
His problem under the trust is nobody would say no to him. Sorry they did, but he kept on asking, and eventually got his way. Is Fitzy going to say no to him this time when he wants what he should not have, and even if someone does say "No, Jim, we cant afford it" he goes on to spit his dummy out (Gillingham!). There are a couple in Fitzys group that would stand up to Jim, but not enough to win if it came to voting on stuff, as others are massive Jim yes men. It may start OK, but its undeniable he is a risk and things have an increased chance of going tits up with Jim there. We certainly cant afford another tits up and risks should be avoided, not just Jim...but overspending, false promises etc etc. Next owners have gotta make it work. My solution, welcome Fitzy and Co as owners along side Park and Bramhall, but encourage AL to stay, besides he is doing OK and we have had quite enough managerial changes, alternatively another group that can act quickly and wouldn't involve Jim at all, but not sure that's going to happen in the timescale required. That's the fault of the piss weak management of the time time, not Gannon. Jesus, how can that be put at his door? I don't doubt he's a pain in the arse at times but he's a great manager. All we need is someone with half a backbone to manage him.
|
|
|
Post by suedehead on Jan 12, 2014 23:06:06 GMT
And to say we deliberately to Gillingham is pathetic. So you reckon the players who turned out that night were complicit in this plan too?
I hate being a County fan at times, I really do.
|
|
|
Post by since77 on Jan 12, 2014 23:18:27 GMT
From above "please point out where I said that, but Jim wasn't himself that night"
|
|
|
Post by heatonhatter on Jan 13, 2014 7:36:19 GMT
I'm more than happy with Lordy but the fact is before the recent run of home games his record was as bad as Gannon's who was sacked with what appears to be the blessing of several posters on this forum. I don't mind people having a different view but please back it up sensibly otherwise it just looks like a sad and bitter personal rant rather than a measured opinion. No disrespect meant but Lord has had to sort out Bogies social loafers and get new players in and is now achieving results. He had been in charge for a relatively short time and what he has done appears to be paying off. It's early days but I have confidence in him and wish him well. While Lord is rebuilding and achieving I don't see the need to bring JG back.
Given that your posts are giving a more and more distorted version of the truth, and your digs at people that disagree with you are getting more and more frequent, I've taken the time to produce some stats for you. Lordy's performance as manager is much better than Gannon's was last season.
Ignoring the games that Ian Bogie was in charge, Lordy has Won 7, Drawn 4 and Lost 5 in the league. That's a win percentage of 44% and a points per game of 1.56.
Up to this point last season, Gannon had Won 7, Drawn 7 and Lost 11. That's a win percentage of 28% and a points per game of 1.12.
That is one of the reasons I don't want to see Lordy replaced with Gannon. This is all ignoring the fact that Lordy has got some decent young players into the team, got us playing good football (albeit inconsistently) and turned around a woeful start to the season by his predecessor.
These are the facts. I'm not "sad and bitter". You, however, are deluded.
|
|