Silvio Dante

9 minutes ago, kmpowell said:

It's nothing to do with a NDA, Nige will likely be under terms defined in his Compromise/Settlement agreement. 

Lansdown is too shred a man to allow any sacked employee to speak ill of him/BCFC etc over any period of time. As part of Nige's severance, in the agreement there would have been clauses to say that he is not able to speak negatively about BCFC and its employees, else they can seek damages and the return of any settlement figure given.

IMO, anyone expecting this to be a BCFC slagging match, is going to be highly disappointed. 

That is... unless Nige didn't agree to any sort of financial severance, nor sign any financial compensation package. If he didn't, then it could be guns loaded and ships ahoy....

To clarify, my point was that “technically” as he’s being paid his current contractual wage until it expires (as is normal for football managers when sacked unless they get another job at a higher or equal salary), he’s still bound by the terms of his prior contract, so my use of NDA was more around he’s being paid as if he’s an employee - so as you say, he can’t speak negatively about the club.

My gut is that in view of the time left on contract (c9 months) and Nige being in relatively poor health at the time (so unlikely to get a new job for a period), he’s likely to still be on the payroll as opposed to coming to any kind of severance in order to have the guaranteed income - and at the end of the contract, other than commercially sensitive information, all bets are off.

Taunton manager departs:

Interesting linked article re Bears and the club moving people from their seats:

1 hour ago, mozo said:

And likewise, there are a number of OTIB regulars that I could name that have been pretty busy posters after Manning's less convincing games, and yet have seemed to have lost their log ins during and after the indisputably decent performance v Norwich (and other games previously). Was the same under Nige who had his haters on here.

I've been backing Manning simply based on how I've interpreted the football, but I've written here many times that if I turn out to be wrong, I'll come on and say it. I think for some people, it's more important to pick a side and win an argument, than to present a fair assessment.

Same as it ever is. I use a very simple rule to comment on a performance - I have to have seen the game. That means post Sunderland (by consensus poor) I didn’t comment on specifics, post Middlesbrough away (by consensus great first half, rubbish second) I didn’t comment on specifics and post Norwich (by consensus very good) I’m not commenting on specifics!

The only aspect I’ll note from Norwich (and assuming the consensus is accurate) is the same point I made against Leicester - I’d have been happy to have a worse outcome if the performance level was as it was, as it’s totally about that (currently) for me.

6 minutes ago, Selred said:

I think there's a big difference between slagging off, and airing his side of the story.

Actually may make him more employable, if they understand the reasons of the departure.

I’d imagine the reasons for his departure and the relative standing of all parties are well known within football.

3 minutes ago, LondonBristolian said:

I always wonder if there was a hidden mental health component.

Coppell had quit Reading a year earlier and I remember the Secret Footballer - quite possibly Dave Kitson, who was back on loan at Reading in the last months of Coppell's tenure- talking about playing under a managerial legend who'd fallen out of love with the game.

I always felt him joining us was a final test to see if he could rediscover his love for management, which he obviously couldn't. I actually think a bit too much is made of the David James signing. Yes, Lansdown went all in for a player without talking to the manager but I'm not convinced most Championship managers would be that upset their Chairman buying the (then) England goalkeeper. I wonder if the issue was not so much Coppell being over-ruled so much as he saw it as a lower profile job with a bit less pressure and then suddenly found us under scrutiny by the media as a dark horses for promotion.

Probably a sensible reading of it overall.

The biggest piece here is that he clearly had major reservations over the job. It’s forgotten sometimes that he left Man City after something like a month as well, and if he doesn’t think something is right, he doesn’t (or didn’t) stay. 

3 minutes ago, spudski said:

SL was jizzing relentlessly at what Madjeski had achieved and wanted to replicate it.

Coppell chosen and David James made headlines which put City in the Red Tops. 

I remember people gushing about us being ' recognised'. 

 

Top phrase!

2 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

Sacked on 29 October 2023 right? So 6 months is 29 April 2024. Does this podcast come out after that date? 

6 months is a fairly common length of time in settlement agreements...it might be that he can say certain things from Monday onwards...?

(I may be guilty of stirring the pot a bit here)

My guess is that the NDA may run until the end of his contract as a minimum. Working this logically, managers if sacked still get paid until their contract cessation in football so I’d imagine if Nige says anything before June 30th (assuming that’s when his contract ends) there may be repercussions.

Coppell always struck me as a man who wasn’t necessarily in love with football, but when he was invested, he was all in.

I think that was one of the issues here - as I understand it SL pursued him and pursued him to a point where even though SC had reservations he said yes. There were major red flags though - IIRC he was to take over in the summer but rather than watch his new team he instead took in a Reading game.

It was a job he didn’t really want to do to start with, then when SL (and probably for the right reasons as he wanted to show us going for it) signed James over Coppells head it started getting even worse. We then have the horrible signings of Stewart and Hunt.

It was an awful appointment - not because of the manager, but because the manager didn’t want to do it. A part of me also thinks this is what has led to SL appointing lesser “names” other than Pearson subsequently- he got his fingers burnt. Maybe he feels we’re just not big enough to “buy” success to an extent and that’s driven a part of the strategy since.

Well somebody’s already asked the obvious:

2 hours ago, Lorenzos Only Goal said:

Although I'm far from impressed with Manning I think the upturn in results has earned him some breathing space.  That said I really hope the summer goes well, as I've got a bad feeling, if the first ten results of next season show some progress or signs of progress I'll be happy.  But signs of further regression and I think I might lose my shit.

Yeah, probably where I’m sitting. As I said the other day though, desperate situations (Liam needing to save his job) can lead to good outcomes. We saw it under Nige when there was an adjustment post WBA. He’s earnt the chance to take us into next season but the first 10-12 are massive - if he reverts to “pre Easter” type then he’s gone. And that’s again, not in results but in “intent” which has been the key thing over the last month.

30 minutes ago, Cole Not Gas said:

Do what? What would have impressed you in any manager having to take over a Pearson (basket) case 6 months ago? The summer will go well because the club (ie owners & senior, respected managers will back Liam) so you have no reason to have a bad feeling. And what the hell do you mean by regression? Since when, since Cotts or since Johnson? There has been zero regression since Pearson lef; the players are happier, the cup run, we beat or draw with top teams, we smash poor teams etc etc - sometimes the negativity of you (and others) posts is simply baffling. What regression can you possibly mean?

Attacking the post not the poster, this post is mental. Pearson didn’t leave a basket case - whatever side you sit on the debate the view is that we had a decent platform and the main contention is whether Liam needed/should be given the time to reshape the squad.

The board said he could progress this squad. I think that was nonsense based on his style as opposed to the squad, but that doesn’t make him a bad coach with a squad set up for him or Pearson a basket case. It means they talked shit. We know this. It’s now about how Liam manages the resources that he has.

2 minutes ago, mozo said:

Pearson used to talk about process too. Its obvious what they're saying; do the right stuff, and you'll get the right outcomes. But if the right outcomes don't happen all the time, don't give up on doing the right stuff.

Oh oh woh oh oh, oh oh woh oh oh, oh oh wow oh oh…

13 minutes ago, petehinton said:

Cov are literally taking the piss out of United now. 
 

Whatever happens, you’d imagine Ten Hag will be sacked very soon. 

I did see a couple of reports linking McKenna with them in the summer. Obviously would rely on Ipswich not going up as you’d imagine he’d want to finish the job there, but in the clubs current state and better jobs like Bayern and Liverpool being available Man U aren’t attractive to a Zidane or similar at the moment. 
 

They’ve tried everything else and he (ahem) knows the club from recently - it’s not totally fanciful

21 minutes ago, cityexile said:

Jay to score the winner…

With a towering header just to take the piss.

44 minutes ago, Ronnie Sinclair said:

Gateshead disqualified from the National League playoffs due to not meeting criteria - Solihull given a bye rather than Aldershot taking their place

Mental scenario. The team finishing 5th gets a bye to the semi finals while the team finishing 4th has to play an additional game. Efl have turned down Gateshead potential membership due to lack of security of tenure at their ground for the next 10 years, but even that seems odd when other clubs have moved having been evicted from stadiums (Cov) and kept membership. How many EFL clubs lease their stadium (and how many have less than 10 years till a break clause?)

What would be really embarrassing if we’d agreed a clause saying he had to be in the squad or we’d be penalised financially, then also agreed a clause saying we’d have to make the deal permanent if he was in more than 10 squads….

25 minutes ago, 1960maaan said:

I am amazed he's not been given a run in the U21s. When you think a few of the first team who actually play, notably Kahki , have had a run out for them just to get minutes. Training is one thing, but surely seeing him in a match would be good, even if it is one the U21.

Bit harsh. Hes not been great at times but giving him that nickname is OTT

16 hours ago, Silvio Dante said:

Bizarre old game at Yate. The Bluebells by far the dominant side from 1-90 and at 90 minutes led 3-1 after great finishes (and questionable keeping) - English-Brown and McCootie (2) with the goals. 
 

Then it turned to ratshit. Two very scrambled efforts in injury time gave Cribbs an undeserved 3-3 overall and ended Yates slim playoff chances. Can’t see Cribbs going up if that’s the normal standard, and positive signs for Yate next season if they keep the likes of the goalscorers and Guest.

Quoting myself - 528 at Yate yesterday. Weather, local game, City being miles away and Rovers dead rubber may impact but a great attendance and shows the potential.

6 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

Next week will be interesting. Rotherham will defend deep, disrupt the game and launch balls forward early. I want to see us beat these next week and put this “issue” of struggling against poor sides to bed with 7 points in three home games against lower ranked sides (plus the three points at Plymouth).

Realistically we won’t get a better opportunity to do so. I’ve been banging the drum of performance over results for some time, and although I didn’t watch yesterday, glad to see that we by common consensus played very well - and at this stage I’d rather that than a grubby 1-0 win.

As for Rotherham, although they may be a side of that nature, results to date indicate that they’re not the best at it. If you want to “learn” how to play against a team of that ilk at this level (notwithstanding the Evans factor) there won’t be a better opportunity to do so.

4 hours ago, The Constant Rabbit said:

Put him out of his misery and send him home.

 

It must be absolutely soul-destroying for the kid to be in this position.

 

It isn't his fault he isn't up to Championship standard - it's the people who offered him the loan thinking he was.

 

Terminate it so he at least can get himself something sorted for next season.

 

Feel for the kid tbh

Yeah - this.

I didn’t see yesterday (so can’t say if he was unlucky not to get on)and there is clearly a bit of ensuring we get results as opposed to trying those who “may” be ready to see if they are, but even with that consideration in mind, for DM not to touch the pitch for as long as he has can’t benefit anybody. 
 

If we sign him, unless it’s a free and for the U21s, everyone’s going to be sceptical on the value of that deal. And even then, if Westerlo are happy to lose him on a free it adds more questions.

It’s been a bad deal for all parties, and the way we’ve handled it with him on the bench and having no chance to get on in reality hasn’t been a great stance for us. We get out of this deal in two weeks, but the damage to DMs career long term may be bigger.

We should have let him go back at Easter, or played him in the U21s as a “shop window” for other clubs.

13 minutes ago, transfer reader said:

Fits with what pretty much every other team has said about them.

 

Their manager left after they lost to farm, but think that was due to personal reasons.

They haven't uploaded anything to their youtube since then either.

In a word, no.

About 100-130ish.

 

For context, Manor Farm have averaged 285 this season and the Cribbs average is 140ish boosted by a 550ish crowd when they played Farm at home.

Yate get about 230-250.

Of the Bristol area clubs below National South, and I know I’m biased, they’ve probably got the highest ceiling. Manor Farms ground is better currently but they’re hamstrung by proximity to City and the size of the Creek. Yate you’ve got the growing population, it’s enough outside of Bristol that you don’t lose huge fans to City/Rovers on a whim and it’s got decent space to expand. Could see them NLS with the right plans in 10-20 years and a favourable wind.

11 minutes ago, Betty Swallocks said:

Do they get many watching them on a regular basis? 

No idea. And for balance, Yate were an equally poor watch earlier in the season.

43 minutes ago, transfer reader said:

Cribbs are quite proud of being anti-football 

 

They were happy sharing this on their twitter after the write up of their Paulton game

Inherently were just biff-bang football today. 9 huge blokes trying to smack the ball up field as soon as possible but a bit shirty when they didn’t get their own way. Horrible team, not in kicking people but just in you couldn’t watch that on a regular basis.

Bizarre old game at Yate. The Bluebells by far the dominant side from 1-90 and at 90 minutes led 3-1 after great finishes (and questionable keeping) - English-Brown and McCootie (2) with the goals. 
 

Then it turned to ratshit. Two very scrambled efforts in injury time gave Cribbs an undeserved 3-3 overall and ended Yates slim playoff chances. Can’t see Cribbs going up if that’s the normal standard, and positive signs for Yate next season if they keep the likes of the goalscorers and Guest.

5 minutes ago, phantom said:

But we already know the priority is for the U21s to win their league at the moment so KL and Araoye aren't happening 

I honestly couldn't think of anyone else

Incorrect Phants. The 21s are 9th in their table and have as much chance of winning the league as Rovers do of theirs. The U18s lack of development at higher levels has been cached as trying to win their league which is just batshit crazy

2 minutes ago, GrahamC said:

Knight-Lebel has been on the bench over 30 times this season, so him.

Or Araoye.

Again, penny for his thoughts today. There is an argument which has been gone through over not playing him last week but the fact remains that instead of playing someone who had been on the bench for 30 games when a vacancy arose in his position, the head coach decided to move several players around and make us far less effective. That had to make him feel like crap.

Fast forward to today and he’s not involved full stop. The only way I can rationalise it is if he’s knocked on LMs door and said he’d rather play in the U21s than warm the bench and not get on. If that’s not the case then - at face value - it looks a horrible piece of man management of a young player.

And don’t get me started on Tinnion recalling Araoye as opposed to him finishing an excellent loan spell just to play in an irrelevant U21s game!