|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Aug 29, 2021 9:37:14 GMT
I thought when BG was hired, with his coaching background and plan to play tippy-tappy and develop technical young players, it was a bold new plan (for Rovers, at least), and was encouraging and worth backing
I was a bit surprised by the timing of his exit, although the football had been a bit dreary and the results mediocre (and the manager interviews fairly horrific), but was pleased that Tis was his replacement - a bright bloke, with a long-term track record in the lower divisions, whose first few games introduced the zip and thrust which had been lacking.
But Tis' results were no better than BG's, and he seemed to rub the place up the wrong way. Pop said he'd need time, and wouldn't be given it, but I don't understand the context or rationale for that, especially given that Joeybag has been given time and budget, and has been much more critical of the whole place (with his 'cancer' comments etc)
I'm guessing that BG was a 'Board' hire, based on consultant inputs and 'business models' and a good interview when GC got the top job. He also might have offered insights into promising youngsters from the South East (where has happened with the Bristol Rovers academy in London now?)
Then Tis was local, available and experienced, and taken on when the leadership wavered on the BG bet (he also had the 'presence' which maybe BG lacked). But why were quick results required, and was he a Board hire, or a Wael hire, or other?
With hindsight, I'm thinking that Tis had quickly spotted the various fractures within the club, which unnerved all parties involved when he alluded to them, and that probably quickened his demise
Then JB's team offered both a high-profile leader (and Wael is thought to like a bit of celebrity stardust), and a bit of lower-league management experience, as well as the chance to replace the very fractious elements with a unified operational control - a 'one stop solution' which, given the probably impact on Starnes/Widders etc would seem to be a Wael hire rather than a broader Board hire
What do you think?
|
|
eppinggas
Administrator
Ian Alexander
Don't care
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 8,503 
|
Post by eppinggas on Aug 29, 2021 9:53:27 GMT
When Wael had his brain fart of an idea in appointing Barton, the Board were too spineless to argue against it.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 29, 2021 9:58:04 GMT
I was against Tis joining as I knew he would want to restructure and rebuild and that would take time, something us Gasheads don't give managers. He felt that if he was able to put his structure in place and then present his plans to the fanbase we would buy into it and give hime the time he needed.
Unfortunately he fell at the first hurdle with those already in place refusing to back down hence the personal attacks from the GK coach, who has since left for the second time, and the DOF.
He did enjoy last weeks result though.
|
|
|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Aug 29, 2021 10:01:30 GMT
I was against Tis joining as I knew he would want to restructure and rebuild and that would take time, something us Gasheads don't give managers. He felt that if he was able to put his structure in place and then present his plans to the fanbase we would buy into it and give hime the time he needed. Unfortunately he fell at the first hurdle with those already in place refusing to back down hence the personal attacks from the GK coach, who has since left for the second time, and the DOF. He did enjoy last weeks result though. that makes sense. Did he do the 'pre-work' which is enabled Wael to buy in to Joeybag's re-structuring plans then - a sort-of stalking horse? (ie Wael wouldn't accept it before, but will now) |
|
kingswood Polak
Without music life would be a mistake
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,353
|
Post by kingswood Polak on Aug 29, 2021 10:08:25 GMT
I thought when BG was hired, with his coaching background and plan to play tippy-tappy and develop technical young players, it was a bold new plan (for Rovers, at least), and was encouraging and worth backing I was a bit surprised by the timing of his exit, although the football had been a bit dreary and the results mediocre (and the manager interviews fairly horrific), but was pleased that Tis was his replacement - a bright bloke, with a long-term track record in the lower divisions, whose first few games introduced the zip and thrust which had been lacking. But Tis' results were no better than BG's, and he seemed to rub the place up the wrong way. Pop said he'd need time, and wouldn't be given it, but I don't understand the context or rationale for that, especially given that Joeybag has been given time and budget, and has been much more critical of the whole place (with his 'cancer' comments etc) I'm guessing that BG was a 'Board' hire, based on consultant inputs and 'business models' and a good interview when GC got the top job. He also might have offered insights into promising youngsters from the South East (where has happened with the Bristol Rovers academy in London now?) Then Tis was local, available and experienced, and taken on when the leadership wavered on the BG bet (he also had the 'presence' which maybe BG lacked). But why were quick results required, and was he a Board hire, or a Wael hire, or other? With hindsight, I'm thinking that Tis had quickly spotted the various fractures within the club, which unnerved all parties involved when he alluded to them, and that probably quickened his demise Then JB's team offered both a high-profile leader (and Wael is thought to like a bit of celebrity stardust), and a bit of lower-league management experience, as well as the chance to replace the very fractious elements with a unified operational control - a 'one stop solution' which, given the probably impact on Starnes/Widders etc would seem to be a Wael hire rather than a broader Board hire What do you think? I think that you have summarised this very well and I’m 100% positive of Barton is a Wael hire. |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 29, 2021 10:09:16 GMT
I was against Tis joining as I knew he would want to restructure and rebuild and that would take time, something us Gasheads don't give managers. He felt that if he was able to put his structure in place and then present his plans to the fanbase we would buy into it and give hime the time he needed. Unfortunately he fell at the first hurdle with those already in place refusing to back down hence the personal attacks from the GK coach, who has since left for the second time, and the DOF. He did enjoy last weeks result though. that makes sense. Did he do the 'pre-work' which is enabled Wael to buy in to Joeybag's re-structuring plans then - a sort-of stalking horse? (ie Wael wouldn't accept it before, but will now) Those thoughts have crossed my mind. It's as though Wael has thought, Tis said it and Joey has said it so they must be right. Maybe they both are but it's easy to destroy a structure, rebuilding it is a little more difficult and I don't think the latter has the ability. |
|
|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Aug 29, 2021 10:15:48 GMT
that makes sense. Did he do the 'pre-work' which is enabled Wael to buy in to Joeybag's re-structuring plans then - a sort-of stalking horse? (ie Wael wouldn't accept it before, but will now) Those thoughts have crossed my mind. It's as though Wael has thought, Tis said it and Joey has said it so they must be right. Maybe they both are but it's easy to destroy a structure, rebuilding it is a little more difficult and I don't think the latter has the ability. has anyone had any insight into what Tis' or Joeybag's 'future state' would look like, do you know? I felt with BG, we at least had an inkling - London youth, local youth, technical outlook etc |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 29, 2021 10:21:26 GMT
Those thoughts have crossed my mind. It's as though Wael has thought, Tis said it and Joey has said it so they must be right. Maybe they both are but it's easy to destroy a structure, rebuilding it is a little more difficult and I don't think the latter has the ability. has anyone had any insight into what Tis' or Joeybag's 'future state' would look like, do you know? I felt with BG, we at least had an inkling - London youth, local youth, technical outlook etc I don't have a clue and the reasons why I didn't think Tis was the right appointment were justified. As for JB, I think he will leave us up in the air and in a mess as well as in a league(s) lower than when he arrived. |
|
|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Aug 29, 2021 10:23:37 GMT
has anyone had any insight into what Tis' or Joeybag's 'future state' would look like, do you know? I felt with BG, we at least had an inkling - London youth, local youth, technical outlook etc I don't have a clue and the reasons why I didn't think Tis was the right appointment were justified. As for JB, I think he will leave us up in the air and in a mess as well as in a league(s) lower than when he arrived. in the recent jargon, 'me too' |
|
|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Aug 29, 2021 10:30:59 GMT
I've just re-read what Mark Little (whose body is frail, but mind is strong it would seem) said back in August...
It seemed to me that in certain ways the club was dysfunctional. Garner made decisions for players to leave, but the club was unable to move them on anywhere, and he wasn’t able to get some of his targets. Do you think the club let him down?
When you say the “club”, that’s such a broad term.
You used the word “dysfunctional”. There wasn’t a team of men that were all working together to get it all over the line. That was not there for the time I was there.
I don’t think you can blame the owner, either. From what I’ve heard, he’s been absolutely superb.
You would need your CEO, your director of football, your recruitment department and your manager and coaches all working together to go in the same direction, but that never happened the whole time I was there, so there was something dysfunctional going on.
Obviously the manager gets it in the neck, the manager gets the sack, but the other thing is if the players aren’t performing then it’s on the manager’s head. I think it’s portrayed unfairly.
And when you get four managers in a short space of time, there’s four groups of players in that building who might not every manager’s cup of tea.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 29, 2021 10:34:54 GMT
I've just re-read what Mark Little (whose body is frail, but mind is strong it would seem) said back in August... It seemed to me that in certain ways the club was dysfunctional. Garner made decisions for players to leave, but the club was unable to move them on anywhere, and he wasn’t able to get some of his targets. Do you think the club let him down?When you say the “club”, that’s such a broad term. You used the word “dysfunctional”. There wasn’t a team of men that were all working together to get it all over the line. That was not there for the time I was there. I don’t think you can blame the owner, either. From what I’ve heard, he’s been absolutely superb. You would need your CEO, your director of football, your recruitment department and your manager and coaches all working together to go in the same direction, but that never happened the whole time I was there, so there was something dysfunctional going on. Obviously the manager gets it in the neck, the manager gets the sack, but the other thing is if the players aren’t performing then it’s on the manager’s head. I think it’s portrayed unfairly. And when you get four managers in a short space of time, there’s four groups of players in that building who might not every manager’s cup of tea. Just as we both thought then but this time from somebody on the inside. |
|
kingswood Polak
Without music life would be a mistake
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,353
|
Post by kingswood Polak on Aug 29, 2021 11:09:57 GMT
I've just re-read what Mark Little (whose body is frail, but mind is strong it would seem) said back in August... It seemed to me that in certain ways the club was dysfunctional. Garner made decisions for players to leave, but the club was unable to move them on anywhere, and he wasn’t able to get some of his targets. Do you think the club let him down?When you say the “club”, that’s such a broad term. You used the word “dysfunctional”. There wasn’t a team of men that were all working together to get it all over the line. That was not there for the time I was there. I don’t think you can blame the owner, either. From what I’ve heard, he’s been absolutely superb. You would need your CEO, your director of football, your recruitment department and your manager and coaches all working together to go in the same direction, but that never happened the whole time I was there, so there was something dysfunctional going on. Obviously the manager gets it in the neck, the manager gets the sack, but the other thing is if the players aren’t performing then it’s on the manager’s head. I think it’s portrayed unfairly. And when you get four managers in a short space of time, there’s four groups of players in that building who might not every manager’s cup of tea. My own perspective is that it’s the manager who is calling the shots and with an owner who is beguiled by him, I could add anyone with celebrity status and my view is Wael needs someone, unlike Starnes, who has the fortitude to confront Barton and his Mersey mafia. Surely, Wael has to wake from this torpor(sp) state. We really need an owner who is visible at games and gets back to talking to fans and not retreat into his bunker and write the occasional letter. I think Wael was very easy to talk to and easily accessible,when he first came to us. I’d like to see that same behaviour once again |
|
kingswood Polak
Without music life would be a mistake
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,353
|
Post by kingswood Polak on Aug 29, 2021 11:17:06 GMT
I've just re-read what Mark Little (whose body is frail, but mind is strong it would seem) said back in August... It seemed to me that in certain ways the club was dysfunctional. Garner made decisions for players to leave, but the club was unable to move them on anywhere, and he wasn’t able to get some of his targets. Do you think the club let him down?When you say the “club”, that’s such a broad term. You used the word “dysfunctional”. There wasn’t a team of men that were all working together to get it all over the line. That was not there for the time I was there. I don’t think you can blame the owner, either. From what I’ve heard, he’s been absolutely superb. You would need your CEO, your director of football, your recruitment department and your manager and coaches all working together to go in the same direction, but that never happened the whole time I was there, so there was something dysfunctional going on. Obviously the manager gets it in the neck, the manager gets the sack, but the other thing is if the players aren’t performing then it’s on the manager’s head. I think it’s portrayed unfairly. And when you get four managers in a short space of time, there’s four groups of players in that building who might not every manager’s cup of tea. Just as we both thought then but this time from somebody on the inside. One thing that surprised me by Little’s expose was that we have had all previous leavers or sold / loaned , on NDA’s so I was,pleasantly, surprised to hear this and from someone who was here. |
|
o2o2bo2ba
Joined: August 2014
Posts: 7,022
Member is Online
|
Post by o2o2bo2ba on Aug 30, 2021 18:48:51 GMT
Nice op from napab...
I have no proof of this, but this is my opinion based on completely nothing!:
I think DC upset the equilibrium, began to believe too much in his abilities of tinkering and (latterly) thought himself above the club.... playing and continue to play TN was a clue to this and the studying of his badges appeared to change things...... anyhoos......when the decision was made mutually, it was the best time for every party to move on. We were heading for relegation...
.... and I think BG was being groomed then.
What nobody could predict, was the way and style GC took the reigns and hit the ground running.
I was at Sunderland on his first match, we silenced them with our attacking prowess that even Stephan Payne hit the bar last few minutes!? From then on, we went on runs and completely over performed beyond most expectations....right up to Ipswich away. Where we had belief. But, who the flip flops was GC? Maybe it wasn't enough profile? Well, one signing (Mark Little) apart, every one of his signings made contributions....can we say that for subsequent managers? Or, previous for that matter?
....and of course we have an owner hypnotised with Chelsea and Premier theoretical bullsh*tters that charmed him when opportunity arose. So, someone took their opportunity quickly:
BG was a disaster from start to finish. Allowing JCH to leave without replacement was top of the list of mistakes. The only thing I admire was the releasing of TN, but at least BG gave him a chance.
When BG was removed, we had no credible alternative, so PT took on something he was way out his depth of. And didn't last long. A captain writing an apology letter? Under his watch?
We are where we are..... unfortunately, I authorised pre season 2020, unless we remove BG before the transfer window I fear we would be pegged back years (much to the horror of some of you, some of whom wanted BG this season too!?) and it appears this is coming to fruition.
JAB deserves a transfer window and some backing i m o, to see what he can do for us.
I can't argue with his outs....but his ins, or replacements are jury out for me.
If JAB can be as wily and charming as early mid DC; as inspirational and motivational as GC; as everything opposite BG; and as stylish as PT, who knows what can be achieved?
All I'm pretty sure as I've ever been is: it's going to get worse before better, and BG has set us back years. It will be years before we seriously challenge for Championship football again.....but that's just the way I see it.
|
|
|
|
Post by emperorsuperbus on Aug 30, 2021 19:21:10 GMT
I've just re-read what Mark Little (whose body is frail, but mind is strong it would seem) said back in August... It seemed to me that in certain ways the club was dysfunctional. Garner made decisions for players to leave, but the club was unable to move them on anywhere, and he wasn’t able to get some of his targets. Do you think the club let him down?When you say the “club”, that’s such a broad term. You used the word “dysfunctional”. There wasn’t a team of men that were all working together to get it all over the line. That was not there for the time I was there. I don’t think you can blame the owner, either. From what I’ve heard, he’s been absolutely superb. You would need your CEO, your director of football, your recruitment department and your manager and coaches all working together to go in the same direction, but that never happened the whole time I was there, so there was something dysfunctional going on. Obviously the manager gets it in the neck, the manager gets the sack, but the other thing is if the players aren’t performing then it’s on the manager’s head. I think it’s portrayed unfairly. And when you get four managers in a short space of time, there’s four groups of players in that building who might not every manager’s cup of tea. My own perspective is that it’s the manager who is calling the shots and with an owner who is beguiled by him, I could add anyone with celebrity status and my view is Wael needs someone, unlike Starnes, who has the fortitude to confront Barton and his Mersey mafia. Surely, Wael has to wake from this torpor(sp) state. We really need an owner who is visible at games and gets back to talking to fans and not retreat into his bunker and write the occasional letter. I think Wael was very easy to talk to and easily accessible,when he first came to us. I’d like to see that same behaviour once again “Surely, Wael has to wake from this torpor”  |
|
|
|
Post by mangogas15 on Aug 30, 2021 21:10:14 GMT
I thought when BG was hired, with his coaching background and plan to play tippy-tappy and develop technical young players, it was a bold new plan (for Rovers, at least), and was encouraging and worth backing I was a bit surprised by the timing of his exit, although the football had been a bit dreary and the results mediocre (and the manager interviews fairly horrific), but was pleased that Tis was his replacement - a bright bloke, with a long-term track record in the lower divisions, whose first few games introduced the zip and thrust which had been lacking. But Tis' results were no better than BG's, and he seemed to rub the place up the wrong way. Pop said he'd need time, and wouldn't be given it, but I don't understand the context or rationale for that, especially given that Joeybag has been given time and budget, and has been much more critical of the whole place (with his 'cancer' comments etc) I'm guessing that BG was a 'Board' hire, based on consultant inputs and 'business models' and a good interview when GC got the top job. He also might have offered insights into promising youngsters from the South East (where has happened with the Bristol Rovers academy in London now?) Then Tis was local, available and experienced, and taken on when the leadership wavered on the BG bet (he also had the 'presence' which maybe BG lacked). But why were quick results required, and was he a Board hire, or a Wael hire, or other? With hindsight, I'm thinking that Tis had quickly spotted the various fractures within the club, which unnerved all parties involved when he alluded to them, and that probably quickened his demise Then JB's team offered both a high-profile leader (and Wael is thought to like a bit of celebrity stardust), and a bit of lower-league management experience, as well as the chance to replace the very fractious elements with a unified operational control - a 'one stop solution' which, given the probably impact on Starnes/Widders etc would seem to be a Wael hire rather than a broader Board hire What do you think? Excellent thread. BG was a brave appointment but one they nearly did a year earlier if you remember. They were gonna do it and he was such the antithesis of Coughlan that it was under more pressure to succeed when we sat in 4th place L1. He was fired 10 games too early, had he gone another 10 games and been mid table I would have stuck with him. We had not long won 2 away games at Shrewsbury and Lincoln, yet a heavy home defeat seemed to be the trigger, or a rigid points target after said 10 games. In hindsight it was a boll*cks decision, none of the players he brought in had not responded to him if you get my drift. We certainly weren't in the bottom 4. Tisdale started poorly but we certainly looked better after wins against Wimbledon, Blackpool and Plymouth, as well as a great win v Darlington. No way this group of players were going down. Wheels came off, a moment springs to mind. A Josh Grant mistake home to Charlton in a game we were competing in, where he left the ball at the near post, goes straight in from a corner. This affected morale and performances as well as confidence and everything seemed to spin from there. I am not blaming Grant. Tisdale is to blame for the relegation. No plans apart from Stockley who was not signed on 1st Jan. No plan b, brought everyone down with his rumoured demeanour and obsessive focus on the wrong things. The Accrington game was the nadir. It could have worked under him, but we were suddenly flirting with relegation and he had not signed a striker to support Hanlan. Worse still he had slagged Hanlan off after a game. Barton comes in and was not good enough to keep us up with someone else's squad. I don't blame Barton. He brings a circus with him and is not great for our brand and reputation, but it's still early days and he should be given a chance at least til December. |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 31, 2021 9:57:47 GMT
When Ben left and when Tisdale left, were we adrift at the foot of the table? No. It's Coco Barton's fault we got relegated.
|
|
|
|
Post by mangogas15 on Aug 31, 2021 10:40:30 GMT
When Ben left and when Tisdale left, were we adrift at the foot of the table? No. It's Coco Barton's fault we got relegated. Like i said he wasn't good enough to keep us up with someone else's squad. I do believe his mindset is lacking in some areas, he does blame when he could learn not to. He could have adapted his game to try to get the best out of that group, but ultimately I will never blame anyone fully apart from Paul Tisdale who had the Jan window. |
|
|
|
Post by chelt_gas on Aug 31, 2021 11:00:07 GMT
Barton insulted every single supporter by giving up on the players he inherited within weeks of taking the job.
Barton let down the players and staff he inherited by giving them up within weeks of taking the job.
The guy isn’t ruthless or tough. He’s a charlatan blinded to his own failures as a man manager and as a football strategist.
|
|
|
|
Post by mangogas15 on Aug 31, 2021 14:34:54 GMT
Barton insulted every single supporter by giving up on the players he inherited within weeks of taking the job. Barton let down the players and staff he inherited by giving them up within weeks of taking the job. The guy isn’t ruthless or tough. He’s a charlatan blinded to his own failures as a man manager and as a football strategist. Yeah kind of agree, in that whatever he tried to do to try to get the desired reaction required for us to stay up did not work. It's circus that comes with him unfortunately. |
|
