Jump to content
IGNORED

Twentyman vs. Ashton Match Thread


One Team

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, bcfcfinker said:

Football has moved on from days of old, it's become very professional, it is corporate and business like. This is the consequence of success. And with it brings the MA's of the world, with accusations of undesirable traits this world brings. Maybe some of the people who have axes to grind don't have what it takes to make it in this world? Maybe they don't like the change in the status quo? Only they will know and the rest of us have to witness the death throws of a dying breed or has beens and people who can't make it themselves?

Unsure about a lot of your post but this bit- as well as the massive injuries- but on this thread, is quite true. There will be a Mark Ashton or equivalent at many clubs.

Football. Great Sport, lot of good people in it- but a lot about the Industry that perhaps isn't so great. Great Sport, lot of good people- as an Industry, a lot that isn't fantastic IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Unsure about a lot of your post but this bit- as well as the massive injuries- but on this thread, is quite true. There will be a Mark Ashton or equivalent at many clubs.

Football. Great sport, lot of good people in it- but a lot about the Industry that perhaps isn't so great. Great sport, lot of good people- as an Industry, a lot that isn't fantastic IMO.

I can live with this sort of critique/opinion.

It's a personal opinion but not bogged down by personal insults.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, bcfcfinker said:

So the proof you've given is an out of date message?

So you don't accept what I told you i.e. the Spire continue to do work for the NHS till at least March 2021?

Or are you going to try and weasel your way out of what you said, yeah but, no but?

If you choose not to answer, that will speak volumes.

 

9 hours ago, Harry said:

You seem rather keen for an argument, for whatever reason. I simply stated that private hospitals resumed private appointments in the autumn, you said no, Spire Bristol didn’t until Dec, and I then proved it with a notification of reopening from last September (ie autumn). 
As I said, there are some private hospitals doing some NHS work, mainly in London, but clearly you also believe the Spire in Bristol is also doing so, which may well be the case. 
Anyway, it’s a pointless discussion - the point is, why are we sending our players to Solihull for scans. It would be nothing to do with NHS patients being seen at the Spire. 

Just to add to your argument, my Dad had something done on the NHS around October/November last year, which was done at a private hospital. In Bristol. Fact.

Apologies. You may continue your argument :whistle:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Taz said:

 

Just to add to your argument, my Dad had something done on the NHS around October/November last year, which was done at a private hospital. In Bristol. Fact.

Apologies. You may continue your argument :whistle:

FFS Lee, who do you think you are, coming in hot like that, throwing facts out willy nilly? ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 25/01/2021 at 22:07, Sheltons Army said:

( Like you I’m yet to be convinced Walsh is our key to something better Tone )

(like you - I also think he will be gone in the summer )


But it appears Holden thought so 

Not only has he said so himself but Ashton again alluded to Holdens plans in the Gregor Interview about shaping our midfield around Williams and Walsh and hence why we sold Morrell , released Smith etc

Its not , shall we say joined up thinking 

Is this not exactly joined up thinking? You have a plan about who you want to keep and that informs your decision about who you are willing to let go. The two decisions are, shall we say, joined.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, bcfcfinker said:

Oh dear, the pot calling the kettle black.

You claimed to be intrigued about the Solihull decision, claiming some insight about private health being 'handed back in the Autumn and it was indicated that you were mistaken. You decided to keep the argument going with an outdated screen shot that does not reflect what actually takes place on the ground.

It appears the fluid (we have to sneak in a few MAisms on a MA thread) nature of Covid has been ignored, the possibility that things are dynamic, and that possibly this screen shotted statement was subject to change before the proverbial ink even dried, incorrect and not even sourced from the Spire. We are not talking about the stuff that comes out about MA which tends to be nothing more than opinion and personal insults. This information is from people who actually work at Spire and not from someone who merely acquainted with the private hospital arena, what ever that means. This information is verifiable, and is not subject to someones opinion. And now we are to the point that this has become a pointless discussion, having established the maybe the mere presentation of screen shots proves nothing, other than some people are easily deceived because they rely on single sources of information or don't check verifiable sources (that everyone has access to, rather than 'I've got this mate who...')

The bottom line is, this was a club decision and I personally don't care why this was done because it's non news. However this is a post about MA, so some people want to be baffled by this decision and don't care that there might well be rational reasons for it. If MA wasn't involved, in all probability, this wouldn't even raise an eyebrow.

BTW
I took the liberty of reading some of your early stuff. It appears that you had a very poor opinion about Cotts, to the point of saying 'I'll stick my neck out and say that Cotterill doesn't have personality.He has bluff and bluster and very little substance. And I will stand by that.(a post from Jan 28th 2014). Was your personal opinion correct in this case? As with all things OTIB, a mountain can be created out of even the most benign molehill.

When you stop masquerading personal opinions as the truth, you might even get engagement from me. Alas, I don't think you give a toss about my opinion so we will continue with your Trump approach to life and I'll continue to take the piss.

Shelton, feel free to comment because 'that's the way to do it.' but maybe you think 'oh no it's not'

Ok, let’s break this down a bit more. I wasn’t too keen to get into too much detail as everyone bar you and I probably couldn’t care less and it’s a bit of a derailment from the thread. But here goes. 
 

-You commented that the Bristol Spire was incredibly busy with NHS patients, implying to me that this may be the reason City wouldn’t use it (ie, as they weren’t taking private patients because they were overwhelmed with NHS treatment). That was what I’d assumed since it was the discussion point (ie city using the services). 
-I replied that most private hospitals are offering a full private service, having fully reopened in September. 
-You said I was lying because you say they reopened on Xmas eve. 
-I evidenced the September date, but you say it’s an out of date screenshot. 
 

Ok. My company work with the private hospitals every day. We book people into hospitals for private insurance treatment so we speak to the hospitals every single day. Last summer, all private hospitals were essentially handed over to the NHS to take patients for non-covid treatment. However, some private services continued, such as cancer treatment. Through summer, as the NHS burden eased, private hospitals gradually started having capacity to reopen to other private services (ie mri’s, hip ops, knee replacements etc). The hospitals were FULLY handed back in September. 
Now, this doesn’t mean that there are no nhs patients in private hospitals. That regularly happens anyway, so long as the private hospital has the capacity (and other factors such as the type of treatment, the local trust, the length of the waiting list in your local trust etc). So, with Spire hospitals for example, you can be seen for a hip operation even if you are nhs, so long as the hospital has the capacity to deliver that treatment outside of its private paying customer obligations. It happens, but it’s expensive for the nhs, as they have to the private hospital. 
So in @Taz example, this is something that regularly happens anyway, if there is capacity (and a need within the local trust) the private hospital can take nhs patients. 
During lockdown 1, some private treatment continued but hospitals were seeing mostly nhs patients to help the load. In September they fully reopened, and simply went back to the model where they can accept nhs as long as there is capacity. 
So yes, you are correct that nhs treatment is still being carried out in private hospitals - that’s normal. But it isn’t to the detriment of any private healthcare. So, for example, if City used the Spire Bristol for scans, then they would still be able to do so, over and above any nhs treatment - remember, nhs still get access (at cost) but only if there’s capacity (which there nearly always is). 
 

So, when you say that I am mistaken that private hospitals were handed back in September, claiming that my screenshot is out of date, I can confirm to you that is a screenshot from a communication from BUPA back in September, advising us that all treatments are now available and all private hospitals had fully reopened to private patients. It’s not a made up or out of date screenshot. It’s an official communication from BUPA. They advise us of this, as we speak to the hospitals every single day to book people in for treatment. So I know exactly when they fully reopened, and it was September, not Xmas eve. Yes, they were still taking nhs patients, but they were fully reopened to private insurance treatment. 
 

I was personally on a call with the CEO of BUPA just last week, and he confirmed that whilst there was increasing strain on the nhs, all private hospitals were still offering full services, although some in London were now beginning to take more nhs patients than normal, which might begin to have an impact on private services. 
All this still means that, if the Spire in Bristol was needed for a private scan for a paying football club, then it could be. So, your friend who works there may very well be seeing more nhs patients, but it would be within agreed capacity for the hospital, at agreed cost to the nhs and not to the detriment of any private services. 
 

Hope that cleared that up. Anyway, I think most people aren’t interested in this, so that’s my final comments on the matter, you may reply if you wish but I have nothing further to add. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there not just a simple explanation regarding Solihullgate that doesn`t involve conspiracy theories:

Chris Brunt gets injured

Chris Brunt gets driven back to his home in the West Midlands

The club say `Chris, you need to get a scan`

Chris Brunt says `OK, but can I get it done up here rather than come all the way back to Bristol? There`s a really good clinic just up the road from me in Solihull that I`ve used before`

The club say `Yep. That`s fine, just let us know when you`ve sorted it`

End of story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Lanterne Rouge said:

Is there not just a simple explanation regarding Solihullgate that doesn`t involve conspiracy theories:

Chris Brunt gets injured

Chris Brunt gets driven back to his home in the West Midlands

The club say `Chris, you need to get a scan`

Chris Brunt says `OK, but can I get it done up here rather than come all the way back to Bristol? There`s a really good clinic just up the road from me in Solihull that I`ve used before`

The club say `Yep. That`s fine, just let us know when you`ve sorted it`

End of story.

Except that Ashton said  "all scans" have to go to Solihull. ie all the injured players not just Brunt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, red panda said:

'kin hell.  Is this still going on?  Can someone please change the thread title to "Utterly pointless squabble about minute details of private health care offerings - nothing to see here"?  Ta

The received wisdom is, I believe, if you're not interested in the topic... don't click on it, don't read it, and don't reply on it.

 

You're welcome ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 26/01/2021 at 11:32, Harry said:

 

 

Not the same John Williams in Solihull. 
So definitely not the ‘Club Doctor’ link. 

0E8286B0-AE7E-4B8D-8E42-0342D4C5C4DF.jpeg

sorry to drag you back in after your long post on page 11(for me)

but that's one hell of a boner he's got there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, phantom said:

Your post is even more out of date than Harry's.

9 hours ago, Harry said:

Ok, let’s break this down a bit more. I wasn’t too keen to get into too much detail as everyone bar you and I probably couldn’t care less and it’s a bit of a derailment from the thread. But here goes. 
 

-You commented that the Bristol Spire was incredibly busy with NHS patients, implying to me that this may be the reason City wouldn’t use it (ie, as they weren’t taking private patients because they were overwhelmed with NHS treatment). That was what I’d assumed since it was the discussion point (ie city using the services). 
-I replied that most private hospitals are offering a full private service, having fully reopened in September. 
-You said I was lying because you say they reopened on Xmas eve. 
-I evidenced the September date, but you say it’s an out of date screenshot. 
 

Ok. My company work with the private hospitals every day. We book people into hospitals for private insurance treatment so we speak to the hospitals every single day. Last summer, all private hospitals were essentially handed over to the NHS to take patients for non-covid treatment. However, some private services continued, such as cancer treatment. Through summer, as the NHS burden eased, private hospitals gradually started having capacity to reopen to other private services (ie mri’s, hip ops, knee replacements etc). The hospitals were FULLY handed back in September. 
Now, this doesn’t mean that there are no nhs patients in private hospitals. That regularly happens anyway, so long as the private hospital has the capacity (and other factors such as the type of treatment, the local trust, the length of the waiting list in your local trust etc). So, with Spire hospitals for example, you can be seen for a hip operation even if you are nhs, so long as the hospital has the capacity to deliver that treatment outside of its private paying customer obligations. It happens, but it’s expensive for the nhs, as they have to the private hospital. 
So in @Taz example, this is something that regularly happens anyway, if there is capacity (and a need within the local trust) the private hospital can take nhs patients. 
During lockdown 1, some private treatment continued but hospitals were seeing mostly nhs patients to help the load. In September they fully reopened, and simply went back to the model where they can accept nhs as long as there is capacity. 
So yes, you are correct that nhs treatment is still being carried out in private hospitals - that’s normal. But it isn’t to the detriment of any private healthcare. So, for example, if City used the Spire Bristol for scans, then they would still be able to do so, over and above any nhs treatment - remember, nhs still get access (at cost) but only if there’s capacity (which there nearly always is). 
 

So, when you say that I am mistaken that private hospitals were handed back in September, claiming that my screenshot is out of date, I can confirm to you that is a screenshot from a communication from BUPA back in September, advising us that all treatments are now available and all private hospitals had fully reopened to private patients. It’s not a made up or out of date screenshot. It’s an official communication from BUPA. They advise us of this, as we speak to the hospitals every single day to book people in for treatment. So I know exactly when they fully reopened, and it was September, not Xmas eve. Yes, they were still taking nhs patients, but they were fully reopened to private insurance treatment. 
 

I was personally on a call with the CEO of BUPA just last week, and he confirmed that whilst there was increasing strain on the nhs, all private hospitals were still offering full services, although some in London were now beginning to take more nhs patients than normal, which might begin to have an impact on private services. 
All this still means that, if the Spire in Bristol was needed for a private scan for a paying football club, then it could be. So, your friend who works there may very well be seeing more nhs patients, but it would be within agreed capacity for the hospital, at agreed cost to the nhs and not to the detriment of any private services. 
 

Hope that cleared that up. Anyway, I think most people aren’t interested in this, so that’s my final comments on the matter, you may reply if you wish but I have nothing further to add. 

So much for this being a pointless conversation.

Why are you talking about Bupa, the screen shot relates to the Spire?
I don't know anything about Bupa or have I claimed that I do.
Well-done for bringing this new information to the conversation.
I take everything you say about Bupa at face value.

My knowledge about the Spire comes from the wife, a registered nurse who's been working there for a few years.
She's obviously imagining the whole thing and doesn't know what she's talking about?
She must also be imagining the NHS email address she was given due to the 'hand over'. Damn the NHS for not keeping her in the loop.
That pesky consultant I know complaining about their private work drying up, he's obviously a victim of some grand Spire/NHS conspiracy where actually there is plenty of work not available but there is.
Thanks for putting me right.

Not only are you ITK with everything to do with City, you're also ITK with the inner workings of the Spire and all of the private health industry.
Damn, I'm just dazzled by by how many pies you have your fingers in
I think you should get a few of your contacts together, have a whip round, buy City and take us to the Prem and Europe.
You clearly have the talent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Harry said:

I was personally on a call with the CEO of BUPA just last week, and he confirmed that whilst there was increasing strain on the nhs, all private hospitals were still offering full services, although some in London were now beginning to take more nhs patients than normal, which might begin to have an impact on private services. 

All this still means that, if the Spire in Bristol was needed for a private scan for a paying football club, then it could be. So, your friend who works there may very well be seeing more nhs patients, but it would be within agreed capacity for the hospital, at agreed cost to the nhs and not to the detriment of any private services. 
 

Hope that cleared that up. Anyway, I think most people aren’t interested in this, so that’s my final comments on the matter, you may reply if you wish but I have nothing further to add. 

I’m impressed that you were speaking directly to the CEO of BUPA - not often people so senior take one to one calls like that, especially when they’ve only been in post for three weeks.  Did you speak in English or Spanish?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, The Dolman Pragmatist said:

I’m impressed that you were speaking directly to the CEO of BUPA - not often people so senior take one to one calls like that, especially when they’ve only been in post for three weeks.  Did you speak in English or Spanish?

U.K., not Group. Smart Alec. And who said it was 1:1? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, bcfcfinker said:

Your post is even more out of date than Harry's.

So much for this being a pointless conversation.

Why are you talking about Bupa, the screen shot relates to the Spire?
I don't know anything about Bupa or have I claimed that I do.
Well-done for bringing this new information to the conversation.
I take everything you say about Bupa at face value.

My knowledge about the Spire comes from the wife, a registered nurse who's been working there for a few years.
She's obviously imagining the whole thing and doesn't know what she's talking about?
She must also be imagining the NHS email address she was given due to the 'hand over'. Damn the NHS for not keeping her in the loop.
That pesky consultant I know complaining about their private work drying up, he's obviously a victim of some grand Spire/NHS conspiracy where actually there is plenty of work not available but there is.
Thanks for putting me right.

Not only are you ITK with everything to do with City, you're also ITK with the inner workings of the Spire and all of the private health industry.
Damn, I'm just dazzled by by how many pies you have your fingers in
I think you should get a few of your contacts together, have a whip round, buy City and take us to the Prem and Europe.
You clearly have the talent.

People with BUPA cover can and frequently do have their treatment at Spire hospitals. That’s the BUPA link, and they are the ones who directly instruct us as to what hospitals are open or not. 
Anyway, I promised to move away from this subject as most people are not interested. Happy for you to DM me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, CodeRed said:

The received wisdom is, I believe, if you're not interested in the topic... don't click on it, don't read it, and don't reply on it.

 

You're welcome ?

But I am interested in the topic, i.e. Twentyman vs Ashton, i.e. all you can see before clicking on the thread.  The received wisdom is, I believe, if you're interested in the topic ... do click on it, do read it, and do reply to it.

You're welcome too.  Please don't try to be smart, as you're not very good at it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Harry said:

People with BUPA cover can and frequently do have their treatment at Spire hospitals. That’s the BUPA link, and they are the ones who directly instruct us as to what hospitals are open or not. 
Anyway, I promised to move away from this subject as most people are not interested. Happy for you to DM me. 

Hallelujah, praise to the OTIB gods

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 26/01/2021 at 17:32, bcfcfinker said:

My view on Mark Ashton.

I find the 'hate' some have for the fella amusing.
It's almost as if he's kicked some kids sand castle over, been getting rather familiar with someone's wife and generally pissed someone off personally.
With some on this site, this seems to be the case and we are not getting an honest appraisal of the fella but an out pouring of their grief, all very unbiased of course.
We've got the sock puppets, who do exist, whether anyone cares to admit it or not.
There are of course the echo chambers that are created every time his name is mentioned.
And the remainder, who have their own reasons for disliking him.

Defend him, call out the absurdness of it all, go against received wisdom on MA and the results are either banal comments, trotting out of MA's past 'wrong doings' (superficial off course with no acknowledgement of any of his past successes) or other shallow reasoning that you are completely wrong etc.

Personally, I really don't give a shit about him, however, I feel compelled to point out the absurdity of some of the thinking about him.
The reason I don't give a shit about him?
I don't know him personally and don't buy into the mutterings of a few on OTIB who clearly want to be offended by him.
He does not play on the pitch, he does not set up the team, he does not train the team etc. He has a minimal affect on results (he can have an effect indirectly through getting players in, but all said and done, he does not set up the team - he is the suit who does all the wheeling and dealing in the background, which appears to offend some people for some reason or other). If I am wrong on this front, then logically, if City are doing well, that means he gets credit when the team are doing well, which is clearly absurd.

The continuous glossing over of injuries, the Covid situation etc. points to people who have a personal narrative against MA or don't want to consider these issues as being contributory factors for poor performance.

When he's accused of being a liar, deceitful, and a myriad of other names that paint him as a thoroughly unpleasant person, these are all personal insults. It's all rather teenagerish and reminds me of one ex POTUS. Scratch the surface on some of the postings and maybe this is a reflection of the poster?

And for those aficionados of all things that are wrong about City, there is a creep towards blaming SL, the man who clearly is responsible for City playing so poorly (I've looked really hard and I haven't seen his name on the team list), is feathering his nest and has lost his focus because he has dealing in other sports now. Quite astounding if you think about it and reeks of people who would cut their noses off to spite their faces just to be proved 'right' or points to secret gas heads at heart?

Football has moved on from days of old, it's become very professional, it is corporate and business like. This is the consequence of success. And with it brings the MA's of the world, with accusations of undesirable traits this world brings. Maybe some of the people who have axes to grind don't have what it takes to make it in this world? Maybe they don't like the change in the status quo? Only they will know and the rest of us have to witness the death throws of a dying breed or has beens and people who can't make it themselves?

The most important bit for me is giving a shit about signings, contracts, head coach recruitment and rationale behind the injury crisis.

If you don't give a shir about Ashton I presume you're perfectly satisfied with the Chris Brunt signing, Diedhiou leaving on a free and the bizarre 2 month JC recruitment process?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, mozo said:

The most important bit for me is giving a shit about signings, contracts, head coach recruitment and rationale behind the injury crisis.

If you don't give a shir about Ashton I presume you're perfectly satisfied with the Chris Brunt signing, Diedhiou leaving on a free and the bizarre 2 month JC recruitment process?

I will free write and let anyone who wants to rake over my thoughts, criticise etc.

Four parts to my response.

Part 1, to respond to the 'I don't give a shit'
MA does many of the things you've indicated i.e. signings, contracts, head coach recruitment. I'm not sure how he's involved in the injury crisis?
He has done some good work on this front and some questionable work. I'm simply being honest when I say I don't give a shit about this element of football, it just does not interest me. If people want to find intrigue, paint pictures of political shenanigans and air their own biases on how well they think it's all being done, they can fill their boots. 

Part 2, how I see MA
Once MA has done his bit, in my view, what is left is the team: the manager, the coaching staff, the players etc.

Fair enough, MA is responsible for the recruitment, but he is not responsible for how the team works together, the results, the performance or how the team plays. Ultimately, that is the managers responsibility. And it must be said that there are some Championship managers do a lot more with similar 'resources' than City do.

In my view, MA is neither particularly good or bad at his job. He is typical.
In the modern football business, a MA is required because the owners on the whole are not football people.
If City was to get another MA, they are likely to cost the same or more (such is the nature of football) with no guarantee of an improvement.
If City was to eject MA with no replacement, then SL/JL/or those close take over decision making. I think we've seen where that takes us.
Even though I don't give a shit about what MA does, in my view, he's the safe bet for the foreseeable future because his skills are required.

Part 3, the covid debacle and MA
If Covid hadn't have happened, I suspect that LJ would still be here.
If Covid wasn't devastating football finances, I suspect we'd have picked up some well known journeyman manager.
There are so many ifs.
Ultimately, it is MA who pushed LJ out of the door (some on this forum liked this decision) and he made the unpopular decision to recruit DH (are the people who were pleased with the first decision also the people who are most vocal about MA?).
As much as I was miffed about DH's selection as manager by MA, with hindsight it was probably a sound decision in the current climate.

Part 4, MA the scape goat
Some of the blame being laid at the feet of MA is quite fanciful i.e. in some eyes, he's responsible for all the bad results, players playing shit, the injury crisis (Ok, I'm taking the piss), he should have had a magic crystal ball to know that some of his decisions would be poor etc. The conspiracies being spun are quite astounding, opinion is presented as truth, spurious evidence (which if the surface is scratched, turns out to be someone else's opinion, go figure) produced, etc. This is not argument, it's teddies being thrown out of the pram and grown men and women sulking.

In my view, most of what MA is being blamed for is not his responsibility.

That lies at DH's feet.
And if injuries are taken into account, DH actually isn't doing to bad a job.
Yes the football is turgid on occasion, the playing stats are poor and his tactical acumen questionable.
But, he's doing his job with the resources available.
And despite what some think, City have to compete with every team in the league for resources, play within FFP rules, money does not grow on trees (yes, again I'm taking the piss) and not everyone wants to come to City (do some players really worry about the accent their kids might grow up with?). And don't forget the leeching agents.

Now if anyone wants to rake over what I've said, disagree etc. Fill your boots. I can't guarantee I'll respond because there comes a point where I think a thread has been absolutely beaten to death. I'm aware that there are some who want to kick the body about a bit more to confirm it's dead, burn it, rake through the ashes just to make sure there is nothing left and finally keep the ashes in an urn so that it can be paraded around once in a while.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bcfcfinker said:

I will free write and let anyone who wants to rake over my thoughts, criticise etc.

Four parts to my response.

Part 1, to respond to the 'I don't give a shit'
MA does many of the things you've indicated i.e. signings, contracts, head coach recruitment. I'm not sure how he's involved in the injury crisis?
He has done some good work on this front and some questionable work. I'm simply being honest when I say I don't give a shit about this element of football, it just does not interest me. If people want to find intrigue, paint pictures of political shenanigans and air their own biases on how well they think it's all being done, they can fill their boots. 

Part 2, how I see MA
Once MA has done his bit, in my view, what is left is the team: the manager, the coaching staff, the players etc.

Fair enough, MA is responsible for the recruitment, but he is not responsible for how the team works together, the results, the performance or how the team plays. Ultimately, that is the managers responsibility. And it must be said that there are some Championship managers do a lot more with similar 'resources' than City do.

In my view, MA is neither particularly good or bad at his job. He is typical.
In the modern football business, a MA is required because the owners on the whole are not football people.
If City was to get another MA, they are likely to cost the same or more (such is the nature of football) with no guarantee of an improvement.
If City was to eject MA with no replacement, then SL/JL/or those close take over decision making. I think we've seen where that takes us.
Even though I don't give a shit about what MA does, in my view, he's the safe bet for the foreseeable future because his skills are required.

Part 3, the covid debacle and MA
If Covid hadn't have happened, I suspect that LJ would still be here.
If Covid wasn't devastating football finances, I suspect we'd have picked up some well known journeyman manager.
There are so many ifs.
Ultimately, it is MA who pushed LJ out of the door (some on this forum liked this decision) and he made the unpopular decision to recruit DH (are the people who were pleased with the first decision also the people who are most vocal about MA?).
As much as I was miffed about DH's selection as manager by MA, with hindsight it was probably a sound decision in the current climate.

Part 4, MA the scape goat
Some of the blame being laid at the feet of MA is quite fanciful i.e. in some eyes, he's responsible for all the bad results, players playing shit, the injury crisis (Ok, I'm taking the piss), he should have had a magic crystal ball to know that some of his decisions would be poor etc. The conspiracies being spun are quite astounding, opinion is presented as truth, spurious evidence (which if the surface is scratched, turns out to be someone else's opinion, go figure) produced, etc. This is not argument, it's teddies being thrown out of the pram and grown men and women sulking.

In my view, most of what MA is being blamed for is not his responsibility.

That lies at DH's feet.
And if injuries are taken into account, DH actually isn't doing to bad a job.
Yes the football is turgid on occasion, the playing stats are poor and his tactical acumen questionable.
But, he's doing his job with the resources available.
And despite what some think, City have to compete with every team in the league for resources, play within FFP rules, money does not grow on trees (yes, again I'm taking the piss) and not everyone wants to come to City (do some players really worry about the accent their kids might grow up with?). And don't forget the leeching agents.

Now if anyone wants to rake over what I've said, disagree etc. Fill your boots. I can't guarantee I'll respond because there comes a point where I think a thread has been absolutely beaten to death. I'm aware that there are some who want to kick the body about a bit more to confirm it's dead, burn it, rake through the ashes just to make sure there is nothing left and finally keep the ashes in an urn so that it can be paraded around once in a while.

My only real comment on this is that the critical analysis of recruitment....it’s my biggest bug-bear with our set-up (you may have guessed that ?).  As you suggest, it seems to be a simple exchange of responsibilities and accountabilities....I’ve got you the player....he’s yours now.

I’m sure it’s not as black and white as that, but what we appear to see in the period from summer 2016 onwards is little measure of the success of what has happened in recruitment, other than league position  and transfer profit in the accounts.  Whilst they are useful measures, I’d suggest they are too high level and in some cases irrelevant.  We should be evaluating every signing brought in and deciding overall whether we’ve been good enough.  There are obvious successes, but the opposite too.

Does one Webster cancel out five Watkins?  Many will point to the accounts, but I look at how many appearances, injuries, etc.  I’m not saying there is a formula, but with the bottom falling out of the transfer market, now is the time to evaluate / re-evaluate how we measure success of recruitment and how we are going to measure it going forward, aligned to our recruitment strategy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

My only real comment on this is that the critical analysis of recruitment....it’s my biggest bug-bear with our set-up (you may have guessed that ?).  As you suggest, it seems to be a simple exchange of responsibilities and accountabilities....I’ve got you the player....he’s yours now.

I’m sure it’s not as black and white as that, but what we appear to see in the period from summer 2016 onwards is little measure of the success of what has happened in recruitment, other than league position  and transfer profit in the accounts.  Whilst they are useful measures, I’d suggest they are too high level and in some cases irrelevant.  We should be evaluating every signing brought in and deciding overall whether we’ve been good enough.  There are obvious successes, but the opposite too.

Does one Webster cancel out five Watkins?  Many will point to the accounts, but I look at how many appearances, injuries, etc.  I’m not saying there is a formula, but with the bottom falling out of the transfer market, now is the time to evaluate / re-evaluate how we measure success of recruitment and how we are going to measure it going forward, aligned to our recruitment strategy.

I'd suggest there is a formula, City just haven't found it (yet, but I'm hopeful).

LJ being given the push, Covid, no income from fans, add the mass uncertainty across football as a whole etc., all the hallmarks of up shit creek without a paddle. Now is not the time for pointing fingers or making big changes because City's record for making the right decision in calmer times might be seen as poor, do some of this during Covid times, things could be catastrophic. I simply don't know the way forward at the moment and I'd suggest posters on this forum don't know either.

I'd like to see someone wave a magic wand, have gold dust in their shit (I'd mine if necessary) and someone to just generally make everything all right. Being a City supporter, knowing our record, etc., I look on through my fingers sometimes and think WTF.

BTW, the analytics stuff you mentioned, that would be a good place to start I think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, bcfcfinker said:

I will free write and let anyone who wants to rake over my thoughts, criticise etc.

Four parts to my response.

Part 1, to respond to the 'I don't give a shit'
MA does many of the things you've indicated i.e. signings, contracts, head coach recruitment. I'm not sure how he's involved in the injury crisis?
He has done some good work on this front and some questionable work. I'm simply being honest when I say I don't give a shit about this element of football, it just does not interest me. If people want to find intrigue, paint pictures of political shenanigans and air their own biases on how well they think it's all being done, they can fill their boots. 

Part 2, how I see MA
Once MA has done his bit, in my view, what is left is the team: the manager, the coaching staff, the players etc.

Fair enough, MA is responsible for the recruitment, but he is not responsible for how the team works together, the results, the performance or how the team plays. Ultimately, that is the managers responsibility. And it must be said that there are some Championship managers do a lot more with similar 'resources' than City do.

In my view, MA is neither particularly good or bad at his job. He is typical.
In the modern football business, a MA is required because the owners on the whole are not football people.
If City was to get another MA, they are likely to cost the same or more (such is the nature of football) with no guarantee of an improvement.
If City was to eject MA with no replacement, then SL/JL/or those close take over decision making. I think we've seen where that takes us.
Even though I don't give a shit about what MA does, in my view, he's the safe bet for the foreseeable future because his skills are required.

Part 3, the covid debacle and MA
If Covid hadn't have happened, I suspect that LJ would still be here.
If Covid wasn't devastating football finances, I suspect we'd have picked up some well known journeyman manager.
There are so many ifs.
Ultimately, it is MA who pushed LJ out of the door (some on this forum liked this decision) and he made the unpopular decision to recruit DH (are the people who were pleased with the first decision also the people who are most vocal about MA?).
As much as I was miffed about DH's selection as manager by MA, with hindsight it was probably a sound decision in the current climate.

Part 4, MA the scape goat
Some of the blame being laid at the feet of MA is quite fanciful i.e. in some eyes, he's responsible for all the bad results, players playing shit, the injury crisis (Ok, I'm taking the piss), he should have had a magic crystal ball to know that some of his decisions would be poor etc. The conspiracies being spun are quite astounding, opinion is presented as truth, spurious evidence (which if the surface is scratched, turns out to be someone else's opinion, go figure) produced, etc. This is not argument, it's teddies being thrown out of the pram and grown men and women sulking.

In my view, most of what MA is being blamed for is not his responsibility.

That lies at DH's feet.
And if injuries are taken into account, DH actually isn't doing to bad a job.
Yes the football is turgid on occasion, the playing stats are poor and his tactical acumen questionable.
But, he's doing his job with the resources available.
And despite what some think, City have to compete with every team in the league for resources, play within FFP rules, money does not grow on trees (yes, again I'm taking the piss) and not everyone wants to come to City (do some players really worry about the accent their kids might grow up with?). And don't forget the leeching agents.

Now if anyone wants to rake over what I've said, disagree etc. Fill your boots. I can't guarantee I'll respond because there comes a point where I think a thread has been absolutely beaten to death. I'm aware that there are some who want to kick the body about a bit more to confirm it's dead, burn it, rake through the ashes just to make sure there is nothing left and finally keep the ashes in an urn so that it can be paraded around once in a while.

My views are a bit different to yours but I like how you broke down your thinking ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 26/01/2021 at 15:30, Major Isewater said:

The club, whilst having eye watering losses , are on a pretty even keel .
 

We aren’t in danger of busting the FFP rules and losing points.

We aren’t gambling with the club’s future by buying players during this window or giving out big new contracts to existing players. Prudence is the word , it’s not sexy but now is not the time to be risking all on that one player , risking upsetting the other players into the bargain.

We are no longer push overs in the transfer market which is down to MA. 

Ashton appears to be guiding the ship well.

He has got very good deals for a lot of our outgoing players with add ons in most cases that have bolstered the coffers: think Flint or Reid .

Moved on players that would have stuck before; Szmodics, Pack, Engval.

Could he do better ?

He would be the first to admit that there is always room for improvement.

He comes across as smarmy I agree but he is working well for the club . 

Don’t think anyone argues that he’s good at negotiating . My concern is he’s completely in charge of recruitment when we should have a DOF for that . The three players you mentioned are proof of this . We’ll take szmodics as a example . He was signed along with Palmer in the same window . We also had pato at the club . Three no 10 type players. At that time we were playing 442 . Wheres the joined up thinking in those signings ? When we didn’t have a plan or system on how to play them. If it’s true that the manager has a final say then Ashton should be holding him to account and saying . Why do you want another of these players considering the system you play . If it’s a case of ashton’s recruitment team are preparing a list and LJ  had a pick of them , then that’s a ridiculous way of doing it . Ashton is answerable to that. The majority of signings under ashtons tenure have been poor at best  . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For some city supporters no matter what Ashton does or says from now on he's always going to be the anti-christ with conspiracy theories about everything he says and does. 

While he has made quite a few mistakes he hasn't been all bad though and while he's been here we've raked in some big fees when we've sold players which historically we've always been bad at. I'm sure there's plenty of people like him in the business side of football so no matter what you think of him as a person you'd rather have Ashton dealing with them than Tinman or Scotty Murray!      

He does give off the persona though of being a smarmy David Brent-esque suit who would stab you in the back to get a promotion over you at work if you worked with him.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Twentyman v Lansdown

This is the one I want to hear.

I believe the last serious "battle" had a tetchy SL saying things such as "I've put a lot of my money into this football club"

To which many of us instantly started thinking, well proportionately speaking,  so have I Steve and for a lot longer (GT, I remember said something similar back, in defence of us fans)

Come on R Bristol . Twentyman talks to Steve Lansdown. Let it happen

SOON

****, how lucky are we to have Geoff Twentyman? The guy is sooooo good at his job.

 

 

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...