CiderHider Posted August 5, 2011 Report Share Posted August 5, 2011 thats a mute point I'm saying nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SJC Posted August 5, 2011 Report Share Posted August 5, 2011 It has got nothing to do with "poor Keith" It is about finding a balanced view on the situation and accepting that there were some very challenging circumstances at the club last season and Keith Millen has done a pretty good job when you consider it all. Nobody wrote off the season either. Take away the first 11 games of the season and look at our form for the remaining 35 and we're pretty close to the play-offs. Considering the injuries, financial restraints and imbalanced squad left by the previous two managers that's quite the achievement. Coppell in my mind will go down with Tony Pulis as the most harmful influence on this club in my time watching BCFC. Edit; I forgot to add, SJC. You're one of my favourite posters to read on here and whilst I disagree with you on the subject of Millen and Coppell I usually agree with the rest of your posts. Im actually using my phone and for some reason can't quote what you've said within quoting me, so I'll do my best to summarise. The point I was trying to make when said 'Batman' was that Coppell is a good manager who would have, along with Keith, put the players through a professional pre-season. If we had of employed some rubbish, out of their depth person (represented by my reference to the caped crusader!) then given the shortness of the stint there would still have been little reason to blame footballing underachievement on a seasons scale on that person. It is initially understandable and acceptable for an incoming manager to struggle, but my issue is that I see our early struggles as being caused by Millen's indecision rather than than Coppell's influence. We chopped and changed not only personel but formation too. I seem to remember us going to Fratton Park and playing well in what appeared to be a 3-5-2 setup, only to abandon it soon after. We've gone 4-4-2, 4-3-3 and frequently retreated to 4-5-1 on taking a lead. Injuries were tough early on, but unless you are suggesting gross negligence, Coppell and his team cannot be accountable for that - if injury dictated the selection of Coppell's signings then so be it, I can't currently check that out and csnt remember. Millen was the orchestrator of his own doom at the beginning, not Coppell, in my opinion. I did something recently where I looked at our season in blocks of ten since Millen's first game, projected finishing positions were something like 24th, 1st, 24th, 2nd with a couple of wins and losses left over. When I reflect on last season I think our finishing position represents Millen having done a satisfactory job. The manner in which we got there, and more so my own lack of belief in whatever it was Millen was trying to implant into the team leaves me with s negative, rather than positive, tinge. As far as I can recall I never called for him to be sacked although I think there was probably a case for it after the home defeat to Norwich, the game which I believe Millen himself had labelled 'must win'. The players didn't seem to be responding, we seemed unorganised and poorly drilled, it was as if the players met up on game day and didn't see each other in-between. I disagree on your comment regarding big three Coppell signings, apologies for wrong end of stick regarding other two. If every player in our squad was fit and playing to their potential at least two of the Coppell three would start. Cisse certainly, Stewart probably alongside Fontaine and, if not, Spence alongside Fontaine with Hunt at right back. All my opinion clearly and where we are right now with what has gone before it I wouldn't start any of them tomorrow. But I believe, ability wise, they are all either first XI or very close to it. I believe I do very much have a balanced view, infect in my opinion it is those who cannot see how little time Coppell was with us who lack balance. The balanced view is that Keith picked up where he left off a couple of months earlier, with some new faces who he may or may not have rated. He was tactically indecisive which saw us struggle, returned to players he knew casting aside those he did not (besides his signings clearly), results picked up. Great, let's push on. Results bombed, then picked up when Maynard returned. We finished the season satisfactorally placed if a little below par. We now have a clean slate, last year was his learning curve. I've been largely encouraged by his conduct through the summer and think he will benefit from lowered expectation this season - which is fine, personally I'd be happy with mid table, dogfight avoiding, obscurity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spudski Posted August 5, 2011 Report Share Posted August 5, 2011 thats a mute point as both people who made those calls (Laycock and Lansdown) are no longer chairman The point i was trying to make without being so direct, was that it is all too easy for us to blame managers when things aren't going well, and there doesn't seem to be enough balance in blaming the players and the board. They are top of the tree when things are going well, but i feel there is a certain inbalance when things are going wrong...and it is always the manager who gets it in the neck, never those who appointed him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Portland Bill Posted August 5, 2011 Report Share Posted August 5, 2011 I expect that their response will be "what do you expect him to say". My response would be, I expected YOU to say that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted August 5, 2011 Report Share Posted August 5, 2011 My response would be, I expected YOU to say that. Wow, I bet the countries top journos are worried for their lively hoods, which university did you learn such wit?. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan Tansley Posted August 5, 2011 Report Share Posted August 5, 2011 Out of interest Jordan...and not wishing to raise an arguement, but as you seem a level headed young man, do you blame the appointments of Tony Pulis and Steve Coppell as harmful to the Club or the men themselves? If the former...Surely those that made the appointments should shoulder some of, if not the majority of the blame. It was their judgement based on what they knew of these managers, that they thought these managers were suitable for the Club at the time. Based on both their histories it was a gamble...that backfired. In regard to Pulis the blame lies squarely at John Laycocks feet. How someone could employ a blue to the core tosspot like him when Davidson had Moyes, a city legend, lined up is criminal. It was inevitable from word go what was going to happen and I still believe to this day the man was trying to harm this club. Coppell was only a bad decision with the benefit of hindsight. I remember being on the end of a lot of stick (no change there then) for asking if Coppell was a bottler... This board was unanimous in it's support for the appointment of Coppell and it went badly badly wrong. Difficult to blame Lansdown for that IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glynriley Posted August 5, 2011 Report Share Posted August 5, 2011 Scott Davidson was chairman when Pulis was appointed wasn't he? Surely he had the casting vote? Cant really remember what happened , I thought Peter Taylor was favourite at the time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spudski Posted August 5, 2011 Report Share Posted August 5, 2011 Scott Davidson still sits in the Platinum seating at most home matches. Must be a weird feeling turning around and looking at where he used to sit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spudski Posted August 5, 2011 Report Share Posted August 5, 2011 In regard to Pulis the blame lies squarely at John Laycocks feet. How someone could employ a blue to the core tosspot like him when Davidson had Moyes, a city legend, lined up is criminal. It was inevitable from word go what was going to happen and I still believe to this day the man was trying to harm this club. Coppell was only a bad decision with the benefit of hindsight. I remember being on the end of a lot of stick (no change there then) for asking if Coppell was a bottler... This board was unanimous in it's support for the appointment of Coppell and it went badly badly wrong. Difficult to blame Lansdown for that IMO. Interesting views... I agree with your second paragraph though. Hindsight is a wonderful thing. Although i still think there maybe something in SC saying there was too much interferance from above. Who knows.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan Tansley Posted August 5, 2011 Report Share Posted August 5, 2011 Interesting views... I agree with your second paragraph though. Hindsight is a wonderful thing. Although i still think there maybe something in SC saying there was too much interferance from above. Who knows.... In a desperate attempt to regain some credibility. The interview with keys and Gray showed his true, weasely colours... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Portland Bill Posted August 6, 2011 Report Share Posted August 6, 2011 Wow, I bet the countries top journos are worried for their lively hoods, which university did you learn such wit?. Glad you liked it, here's another for you, Its called sarcasm I learnt that off of you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marshy Posted August 6, 2011 Report Share Posted August 6, 2011 Monkeh, on 05 August 2011 - 02:37 PM, said: thats a mute point Teddy Wong said I'm saying nothing. Old Zen master he say Those who say do not know Those who know do not say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superjack Posted August 6, 2011 Report Share Posted August 6, 2011 Monkeh, on 05 August 2011 - 02:37 PM, said: thats a mute point Teddy Wong said I'm saying nothing. Old Zen master he say Those who say do not know Those who know do not say. That Old Zen master knows nothing, or he'd keep his mouth shut.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bristolcitysweden Posted August 6, 2011 Report Share Posted August 6, 2011 When Coppell was signed people were more than happy to give him three seasons to turn things around so why not the same for Keith? I'm genuinly worried about that we have not replaced Caulker. I don't think Nyatanga and Carey are good enough and if Wilson or Spence can't fill the gap beside Fontaine we will soon be forced to an emergency loan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted August 6, 2011 Report Share Posted August 6, 2011 When Coppell was signed people were more than happy to give him three seasons to turn things around so why not the same for Keith? I'm genuinly worried about that we have not replaced Caulker. I don't think Nyatanga and Carey are good enough and if Wilson or Spence can't fill the gap beside Fontaine we will soon be forced to an emergency loan. Because in practicality it never works like that. GJ would never have been afforded the time he was had he not got us promoted in his first full season. The strange thing is that KM is upbeat about our chances but even his biggest fans on here are'nt, KM says no excuses but his biggest fans on here are already trotting out excuses before a ball has been kicked. I am wrongly accused as being anti Millen, but I am upbeat and I believe that the NM situation will be sorted out to our benefit because the club has said so and I believe that although I don't share KM's view totally on our chances over the season I believe that there will be significant improvement because the manager has said so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.