Jump to content
IGNORED

Steven Gerrard


Rocky

Recommended Posts

Just now, Marina's Rolls Royce said:

My point is that he was never formally offered the job so never formally turned it down as reported by McGregor.BCFC were just seeing who was potentially available. McGregor does NOT have the inside track on the boardroom discussions.

You mean : shock ! Horror ! Journos make shit up?

Thats their job

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Marina's Rolls Royce said:

My point is that he was never formally offered the job so never formally turned it down as reported by McGregor.BCFC were just seeing who was potentially available. McGregor does NOT have the inside track on the boardroom discussions.

He has other inside tracks though. Of course SG wasn't "formally" offered the job. When has that ever been suggested?

Fact is, sorry IMO, that we found out that SG was interested in a move back south of the border if the right opportunity arose and that BCFC *could" be such an opportunity. SG, not all that surprisingly, after being properly sounded out didn't fancy it. 

We tried, but it wasn't meant to be. Fine, move on. Appoint your second choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, castle red said:

Gerrard never going to happen, Houghton been on his hols ,deal done ,in over the weekend....

I do wonder if the Gerrard stuff was a bit of a smokescreen where, given his agent is well known to MA and others, all parties were happy to allow the story to run for a bit before 'rejecting' our interest once we got to a stage where we were close to an agreement with Hughton.

Our supposed interest in Gerrard also serves the purpose for him/his agent of putting the idea out there that he'd be open to a move back to England if the right job came up. That was probably never likely to be us but it could be a more high profile Championship or PL club. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Northern Red said:

I do wonder if the Gerrard stuff was a bit of a smokescreen where, given his agent is well known to MA and others, all parties were happy to allow the story to run for a bit before 'rejecting' our interest once we got to a stage where we were close to an agreement with Hughton.

Our supposed interest in Gerrard also serves the purpose for him/his agent of putting the idea out there that he'd be open to a move back to England if the right job came up. That was probably never likely to be us but it could be a more high profile Championship or PL club. 

Interesting and well-argued theory. However, say if Hughton was in fact no. 1 choice all along then why not get it done last week? Or the week before? Bloke's been out of work for a year. What did we have to gain from fabricating an interest in SG? 

Plus, I just think it completely stacks up that SL fancied Gerrard and the prestige that he would've brought to the football club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Interesting and well-argued theory. However, say if Hughton was in fact no. 1 choice all along then why not get it done last week? Or the week before? Bloke's been out of work for a year. What did we have to gain from fabricating an interest in SG? 

Plus, I just think it completely stacks up that SL fancied Gerrard and the prestige that he would've brought to the football club.

I think there probably was genuine interest on our part, for the reasons you state, however they'll have been aware that the chances of it happening were slim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Kid in the Riot said:

Interesting and well-argued theory. However, say if Hughton was in fact no. 1 choice all along then why not get it done last week? Or the week before? Bloke's been out of work for a year. What did we have to gain from fabricating an interest in SG? 

Plus, I just think it completely stacks up that SL fancied Gerrard and the prestige that he would've brought to the football club.

I get what you're saying about the above and your previous comment. If you look at EP's GMcG he has stated that a formal rejection was made to an offer- my contention is that a formal offer was never made but a "sounding out" is likely as you say.

I really believe, IMHO,  that SL genuinely wanted to look at several candidates and will have interviewed more than CH.

On a slightly different tangent- Birmingham seem to have also been interested in CH . They are perhaps a "bigger club" than us and it just goes to show that if CH does sign- how far we have come . Hell, 12 months ago- very few in the football world would expect CH to even consider little ol' Bristol City.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Marina's Rolls Royce said:

On a slightly different tangent- Birmingham seem to have also been interested in CH . They are perhaps a "bigger club" than us and it just goes to show that if CH does sign- how far we have come . Hell, 12 months ago- very few in the football world would expect CH to even consider little ol' Bristol City.

Maybe "were" a bigger club. Birmingham have really been clinging onto their C'ship status for a few years now. Memorably they survived on the last day a few years back at AG, when one goal from us would've sent them down. Their ground barely gets half-filled and the owners are unreliable. We're a bigger draw than them to CH right now, despite his history between Blues and CH. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Maybe "were" a bigger club. Birmingham have really been clinging onto their C'ship status for a few years now. Memorably they survived on the last day a few years back at AG, when one goal from us would've sent them down. Their ground barely gets half-filled and the owners are unreliable. We're a bigger draw than them to CH right now, despite his history between Blues and CH. 

 Still pisses me off though that a google search for bcfc comes up with those inbreds before us

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Maybe "were" a bigger club. Birmingham have really been clinging onto their C'ship status for a few years now. Memorably they survived on the last day a few years back at AG, when one goal from us would've sent them down. Their ground barely gets half-filled and the owners are unreliable. We're a bigger draw than them to CH right now, despite his history between Blues and CH. 

Birmingham are a bigger club than us tbh. Just we are better right now, have been for a few seasons, and certainly in a stronger position for a manager vs them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, castle red said:

Gerrard never chased  Houghton been tied up since Tuesday, wait till tomorrow.....

This is more likely the story. CH has been done and dusted for a while. He will want to bring in his own staff. 

SL/MA let the current team finish off the season, as they should. Let's not forget they will probably lose their jobs. There has to be human element to all of this. 

Our boardroom probably laughing at all the speculation and paper talk. 

SG was at most a polite enquiry. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Birmingham are a bigger club than us tbh. Just we are better right now, have been for a few seasons, and certainly in a stronger position for a manager vs them.

historically yes

Historically Bradford Park avenue were a bigger club then us

Once we get another sustained run in the top flight that will change

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Marina's Rolls Royce said:

Whatever the negativity there is about MA & SL that may be spread on these pages, I think it's hard to deny that BCFC act professionally and don't do their business in public. We do not have owners and a Board who wash their laundry in public- unlike so many Chairman.

Call me old fashioned but just about every Manager currently in a hot seat has, according to contractual law and FA rules,  seek permission to speak to a prospective new employer whilst a football club HAS to seek permission to approach an under contract Manager or face a "tapping up" charge.

So Gerrard has , according to the Mc Gregor, turned down the offer of a job at BCFC- with no interview and no permission from his parent Club.

REALLY?      REALLY?

So MA has had a private discussion with Gerrard without permission and Gerrard has turned down the approach without so much as a squeak from Glasgow Rangers Football Club? 

Come on, FFS ,Gregor Mc Click Bait- it may be that BCFC had made enquiries but as to a full offer of new Manager and full decline- this is just BS.

Gregor Mc Gregor is already beside himself that Talk Sport has released news that Houghton has accepted the position as he'd want a " I can exclusively report....." which he now can't claim . BCFC will make an announcement as and when they are ready and 100% not through a failing local paper that no one buys any more that relies mainly on click bait ( yes I'm guilty of clicking) .

I have no doubt that Gerrard was "sounded out" and may well have been a target but would have have to have had to go through a formal interview process which could ONLY happen with the permission of Rangers which 100% they would have denied.

The world has and is going mad but not that mad.

Gregor- please don't treat us as all daft but I'm sure we all understand how important it is to keep us clicking in these "unprecedented times" and help keep your job.

 

You are assuming we didn’t have permission. What makes you think we didnt have permission?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, WayOutWest said:

This is more likely the story. CH has been done and dusted for a while. He will want to bring in his own staff. 

SL/MA let the current team finish off the season, as they should. Let's not forget they will probably lose their jobs. There has to be human element to all of this. 

Our boardroom probably laughing at all the speculation and paper talk. 

SG was at most a polite enquiry. 

WOW, I think you are so near the reality ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Riaz said:

You are assuming we didn’t have permission. What makes you think we didnt have permission?

because past experience tells me that when an official approach is made and official permission granted - there is an official statement made by one or both clubs.( Blimey- am I @Robbored?)

Would Glasgow Rangers want to give permission to a Manager they covet and have just given a contract till 2024???? Whatever the thoughts on Scottish Football- Rangers are a mighty big club and ( I can only assume as the most likely scenario) that they'd politely resist any attempt of a seemingly less consequential mid table Club in the 2nd tier of English football and not regularly playing in Europe and tell us to do one.

Sometimes in football as well as life the most obvious scenario is also the most likely.

My further assumption is that Houghton was always the No1 target due to experience, character and cost ( In contract Managerial transfer compensation can be collosal) . The rest was white noise in a vacuum of news flow coming out of BS3.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Marina's Rolls Royce said:

because past experience tells me that when an official approach is made and official permission granted - there is an official statement made by one or both clubs.( Blimey- am I @Robbored?)

Would Glasgow Rangers want to give permission to a Manager they covet and have just given a contract till 2024???? Whatever the thoughts on Scottish Football- Rangers are a mighty big club and ( I can only assume as the most likely scenario) that they'd politely resist any attempt of a seemingly less consequential mid table Club in the 2nd tier of English football and not regularly playing in Europe and tell us to do one.

Sometimes in football as well as life the most obvious scenario is also the most likely.

My further assumption is that Houghton was always the No1 target due to experience, character and cost ( In contract Managerial transfer compensation can be collosal) . The rest was white noise in a vacuum of news flow coming out of BS3.

Nope.

Neither club has to make a statement.

And Rangers may have just given him permission to have just initial talks. “Are you interested” type conversation.

 

If Stevie G was telling them he is not interested at all, then this could easily of happened 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Riaz said:

Nope.

Neither club has to make a statement.

And Rangers may have just given him permission to have just initial talks. “Are you interested” type conversation.

 

If Stevie G was telling them he is not interested at all, then this could easily of happened 

There are several thousand posts around Steve G now. Does any one actually know what is genuine ? 

I hope he does come to us but so many threads and so many tangents and possibilities is getting confusing. 

It’s a bit like smoke and mirrors when the truth is being hidden 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No offence intended to the OP or those who have posted on this thread but I do think this thread rests a bit on an assumption that our club always does the right thing and goes by official channels, although we know other clubs don't.

But, in reality, we know that - for example - Cotterill must have been approached and virtually accepted the job before we had  sacked O'Driscoll so clearly we're a bit wilier than that. And I think one thing Mark Ashton brings to the club, which can be good or bad, is a lot more "sharkiness" than we had before. I don't think for a moment he's someone who always plays fair and I think that's something we've needed as I suspect we were a bit too soft a touch in negotiations in the past.

I don't see any reason not to believe that Gerrard was not our number one target, our interest was genuine and he was sounded out through unofficial channels. I imagine that is how things are often done, whether we like it or not. Similarly I think there is a misunderstanding in the belief that MacGregor has said he officially or formally turned it down. What I've read MacGregor say is that there were discussions and Gerrard has decided not to pursue them any further. That doesn't imply an official denial to me.

I understand why people want to convince themselves we're an ethical club that treat people fairly, follow the rules and that we've not been turned down by our preferred target. But I think a lot of that is based on wishful thinking rather than evidence. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, LondonBristolian said:

No offence intended to the OP or those who have posted on this thread but I do think this thread rests a bit on an assumption that our club always does the right thing and goes by official channels, although we know other clubs don't.

But, in reality, we know that - for example - Cotterill must have been approached and virtually accepted the job before we had  sacked O'Driscoll so clearly we're a bit wilier than that. And I think one thing Mark Ashton brings to the club, which can be good or bad, is a lot more "sharkiness" than we had before. I don't think for a moment he's someone who always plays fair and I think that's something we've needed as I suspect we were a bit too soft a touch in negotiations in the past.

I don't see any reason not to believe that Gerrard was not our number one target, our interest was genuine and he was sounded out through unofficial channels. I imagine that is how things are often done, whether we like it or not. Similarly I think there is a misunderstanding in the belief that MacGregor has said he officially or formally turned it down. What I've read MacGregor say is that there were discussions and Gerrard has decided not to pursue them any further. That doesn't imply an official denial to me.

I understand why people want to convince themselves we're an ethical club that treat people fairly, follow the rules and that we've not been turned down by our preferred target. But I think a lot of that is based on wishful thinking rather than evidence. 

Well said and it brings things back in to a bit more morality 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, City oz said:

There are several thousand posts around Steve G now. Does any one actually know what is genuine ? 

I hope he does come to us but so many threads and so many tangents and possibilities is getting confusing. 

It’s a bit like smoke and mirrors when the truth is being hidden 

Maybe it is!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Riaz said:

Nope.

Neither club has to make a statement.

And Rangers may have just given him permission to have just initial talks. “Are you interested” type conversation.

 

If Stevie G was telling them he is not interested at all, then this could easily of happened 

He may have a contractual clause that allows him to speak to any english club therefore by us sounding him out we wouldnt have done anything wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Monkeh said:

historically yes

Historically Bradford Park avenue were a bigger club then us

Once we get another sustained run in the top flight that will change

Agree historically. 

Given a quick search tells me Bradford Park Avenue got turfed aka voted out the League in 1970 I have to query the comparison. 

Number of years in the top two divisions an interesting comparison. Likewise major trophies, European seasons. 

By no means a mega club and we're clearly more attractive than Birmingham at this time but us a bigger club? Dunno about that!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...