Does anybody still not blame the board. ?

[Atticus]

7 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said:

Lansdown has said he hasn't turned down any player.

Cotterill and Burt spent the summer pursuing unrealistic targets, not the board. The money was there to bring people in.- within the confines of FFP of course - and the idea that the board undid that behind the back of the manager and DOF - who attends board meetings incidentally - is fanciful. No way is Keith Dawe,  Jon Lansdown et al involved in negotiations over players' contracts other than setting an overall budget that Lansdown has indicated would allow us to.make a £9m bid.

To me, it seems like.people cannot bring themselves to believe that Cotterill - the hero of.last season - could be villain of this Yet he has failed at this level before. As euphoric as I was.in April, I said that this season would be the real test of the man. And unfortunately he's been found wanting. 

End of day. We are in a f###### mess right now. A lot more of a mess then before cotts was sacked imo.

We are over halfway through the jan window. No manager. Not looking like a manager will be with us soon. Board signing mediocre loan players.

Its the board that sacked a manager halfway through a transfer window seemingly out of the blue (to the point of allowing him to do the boro pre interview and "backing him" bidding £2mill for clough days earlier)

[TV Tom]

23 minutes ago, NickJ said:

Ok you've had your pop at me. Not sure why.

But can you answer the question?

Do you believe SC refused to buy players that could strengthen the squad?

That was the gist of your opening comment.

 

I'm not having a pop at you, I have no idea what happened in the summer or what happens behind the scenes, but I do assume that SC picked the team, system and substitutions which ultimately resulted is in winning only 4 games out of 26 or am I wrong?

[Atticus]

1 minute ago, harrys said:

I'm not having a pop at you, I have no idea what happened in the summer or what happens behind the scenes, but I do assume that SC picked the team, system and substitutions which ultimately resulted is in winning only 4 games out of 26 or am I wrong?

He can only work with the squad he has no?

Is it his fault Freeman hasn't shown up? Pack is a liability more often then not.

Board failed to back him properly imo.

[NickJ]

4 minutes ago, harrys said:

I'm not having a pop at you, I have no idea what happened in the summer or what happens behind the scenes, but I do assume that SC picked the team, system and substitutions which ultimately resulted is in winning only 4 games out of 26 or am I wrong?

Ducked the question again!!

Not being funny mate, but I'm not interested in your views on SC's team selection or formation or substitutions.

I'm just interested in your very opening comment:

"Cotterill dug his his own grave with his loyalty to players who are not up to it at this level,"

Again, for the fourth time, are you saying that Cotterill refused to buy better players?

 

[ciderup]

This witch hunt against SL winds me up. People say SL when they actually mean the board.

SL employs people to run the club for him, he doesn't actually do much himself apart from plough in wads of cash.

We all allegedly know that Pelling supposedly ****ed up the deals in the summer, not SL's fault. We know that MA is now employed to run the 'football side of the business', once again his actions are not SL's fault, the bloke is employed to run things FOR SL.

While he has the overall control / ownership, I think we need to think about who does what as employing people who are supposed to know what they are doing yet cock it up, is not the OWNERS fault, it's the fools beneath him that have cocked up!

Be careful what you wish for eh!

[citywest30]

Bobbob and NickJ, I've read this with much interest as, like most fans, was so incredibly frustrated that we didn't 'ride the wave' in the Summer. TM's post seemed to explain it well and I'd heard that it was not a good place to be working at in the Summer due to SC's mood, again fitting with TM's post.

Bob bob you have, admittedly by yourself, been cryptic over the reason for SL putting the 'brakes on' transfer dealings. So unless I'm reading this wrong it must have either a) been someone else's fault (who left in the summer) or b) very serious (possible financial) mistakes made in the deals that had we have gone through with them would have left us open to paying for it in the future (legally maybe? Or just FFP?) Am I on the right lines?

[spudski]

3 minutes ago, Atticus said:

He can only work with the squad he has no?

Is it his fault Freeman hasn't shown up? Pack is a liability more often then not.

Board failed to back him properly imo.

A lot of the squad SC brought in...Board backed him, otherwise bids for £millions wouldn't have been approved and accepted by teams.

It's obvious that the summer transfers went pete tong...for many reasons. Too complicated for various reasons. Board, SC, Accountants all to blame...massive mistakes.

But SC was backed afterwards...he chose to go after players that didn't want to come here.

He spat his dummy out too many times...he felt let down...instead of sucking it up and getting on with the job, he chose to show outwardly his frustrations and let it get to him.

It led to him going and Mr Ashton coming in...that's where the timing is.

 

 

[joe jordans teeth]

23 minutes ago, shelts said:

Who cares as long as we stay up and re group. Mistakes have been made off and on the pitch . Many questions left unanswered. We have a very good chance of staying up as I'm confident there are three worse teams than us. The business we do now in what's left of the window will decide the future of the club. Hang on its going to get bumpy!!

COYR

That's the attitude I like,who cares :laugh:,mistakes have been made constantly for god knows how many years,1 freak season and it's all forgotten,we will be in exactly the same boat in 3 years time,nobody never learns at this club

[citywest30]

@NickJ

@Bob Bob Super Bob

Sorry couldn't tag you in my post earlier so have done it in a separate one. Just wondered if you could shed some light on my interpretation of your 'understanding' a few posts above this one.

[desert]

You can argue this way and that about the disaster that was  the summer transfer window and the role of the suits and the role of the manager. 

You can blame Cotts for being stubborn about players and/ or naive tactically. 

But you can't blame Cotts for sacking the manager half way through a transfer window with no replacement lined up who would be well placed to hit the ground running and bring in players for a critical 4 months for this football club. There is no way that Pembo is the solution. If they thought he was they would have named him as manager until the end of the season from the start and provided some certainty. 

Since the final whistle  of the Preston game the nonsense and the lack of real decisive and effective  leadership at Ashton Gate has been a massive disappointment and signals a lack of vision and planning at boardroom level. The win against boro was down to the players and everybody but the board giving it a go. 

I like  and am grateful to SL for all he has done for this club. I just am at a loss to understand how and why you would invest £45M in a stadium and leave everything else to drift. It defies any logic.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Esmond Million's Bung]

3 hours ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

Fair enough m8 - all opinions

All I'd say is firstly you are taking Tetburys account as %100 accurate (And that's no dig at Tetburys who clearly has some contacts but as all we can only rely on a third party as we arnt directly involved !) - that's you're prerogative 

I'm not sure that you get or have thought about ' misunderstanding ' - it was as I heard it a serious matter potentially until it was found / deemed to be a misunderstanding and would have put a brake on activity.

To finish all Id say that I was told early in season what was alleged to have gone on

For numerous good sensible reasons I kept stum as it didn't make sense in a number of aspects

In amongst snippets of info and the public accounts, interviews of SC and SLs own words Tetburys posted clearly in confident belief - this fell in with what I'd been told with the obvious difference as to why any transfers were halted or interfered with.

(TBF if you take the info from Terbury as%100 nailed on fact then the board are massively to blame for the summers fiasco - or at least the start of it - It is not for me to say whether Tetbury is %100 with this ( Don't know the fella but clearly people trust his ' opinion ') or whether my opinion is accurate - it's a case of looking at all the evidence / info and making your own mind up  )

NickJ was mentioning knowing about the reasons for problems and a misunderstanding which I found particularly interesting and for me personally, the jigsaw pieces together

You also need to consider why did SL appear to go on speaking to press and moaning about small squad etc - it surprised me and were indications for me that the board felt that they 'owed' SC some latitude because of whatever had gone on

I had to be open minded about the original account I was given and read Tetburys and NickJs posts with interest , prepared to change my mind - and that allowed me without any agenda to see thro the fog a bit - try if you can (or can be arsed to !!  ) with a open mind not latching fully on any one piece of information - it's an interesting journey

 

I don't take anything that I here as 100%, I have heard many rumours about things that happened before the season started and if they were true again SL was wrong by not dealing with it properly as it occurred, i've heard early season rumours and more recent rumours and again some about SL and some about SC, the point is as the owner had the ultimate sanction but never used it until a couple of weeks ago and that could well prove to late in the day.

I have looked at everything people have said and have had several emails.

The reason I favour Tetbury's view is simple, it makes sense and it's the only thing that I have heard that does make sense, none of the other rumours IMO make sense, to me it explains the ridiculously nonsensical offers for Gray and Gayle, I couldn't understand them at the time but Tetbury's view makes me think that they were indeed total panic offers doomed to failure, it also makes sense as to why we are still struggling to get players even from league 1 to sign, they know something is not right at this club even now SC has gone.

and even if there is an element of truth in various parts of various rumours, the OP still holds true, the board and owner are ultimately to blame for this shitty season because they could have ended this farce months ago and chose not to.

 

[Esmond Million's Bung]

2 hours ago, harrys said:

Cotterill dug his his own grave with his loyalty to players who are not up to it at this level, his obstinance/arrogance of his 3-5-2 system and the poor timing of his substitutions, none of this has absolutely anything to do with Lansdown

Who signs the players? and who never signed any players?, SC could only pick the players in his squad because the owner never signed any.

[Esmond Million's Bung]

1 hour ago, spudski said:

A lot of the squad SC brought in...Board backed him, otherwise bids for £millions wouldn't have been approved and accepted by teams.

It's obvious that the summer transfers went pete tong...for many reasons. Too complicated for various reasons. Board, SC, Accountants all to blame...massive mistakes.

But SC was backed afterwards...he chose to go after players that didn't want to come here.

He spat his dummy out too many times...he felt let down...instead of sucking it up and getting on with the job, he chose to show outwardly his frustrations and let it get to him.

It led to him going and Mr Ashton coming in...that's where the timing is.

 

 

Yes firstly because Gray and Brentford and Maguire and Hull had already been ****** over by the club, the later offers for Gayle and Gray were total panic offers and the only winners were Brentford who by the time we had finished they almost doubled the original offer they had accepted from us in the first place.

and if as you are saying that the lack of signings was down to SC sulking then the board/SL still got it wrong for not sacking him over that and just to be clear when did your 'no manager could work with SL' mantra suddenly end?.

 

 

1 hour ago, Red-Robbo said:

Lansdown has said he hasn't turned down any player.

Cotterill and Burt spent the summer pursuing unrealistic targets, not the board. The money was there to bring people in.- within the confines of FFP of course - and the idea that the board undid that behind the back of the manager and DOF - who attends board meetings incidentally - is fanciful. No way is Keith Dawe,  Jon Lansdown et al involved in negotiations over players' contracts other than setting an overall budget that Lansdown has indicated would allow us to.make a £9m bid.

To me, it seems like.people cannot bring themselves to believe that Cotterill - the hero of.last season - could be villain of this Yet he has failed at this level before. As euphoric as I was.in April, I said that this season would be the real test of the man. And unfortunately he's been found wanting. 

The targets were made unrealistic by the way the club acted during the 'original' negotiations, forget about the heavily publicised 7 and 9 mil bids, that came a long time after and were blind panic.

As I said on another thread SL also said AG was not viable, so he's not always right in what he says.

As I have also said whatever the truth 'really' is, the board are still ultimately to blame because they could and should have dealt with this far earlier than they did and certainly between November and now they should at least have had a replacement lined up, there is a pretty rancid smell about the club and I think the UK football world at large can smell it and even promising players from league 1 know it and are not interested in us and that must go far deeper than just SC.

 

 

[spudski]

1 hour ago, Esmond Million's Bung said:

Yes firstly because Gray and Brentford and Maguire and Hull had already been ****** over by the club, the later offers for Gayle and Gray were total panic offers and the only winners were Brentford who by the time we had finished they almost doubled the original offer they had accepted from us in the first place.

and if as you are saying that the lack of signings was down to SC sulking then the board/SL still got it wrong for not sacking him over that and just to be clear when did your 'no manager could work with SL' mantra suddenly end?.

 

 

 

 

Where have I said lack of signings was down to him sulking EMB...that had nothing to do with lack of signings.

And again you twist things EMB...don't know why you continue doing that...I've never said no manager could work with SL. I've said managers would always struggle here to find longer term success, because we have had a lack of people at the club who run it properly. The managers come in and struggle, because they have had to deal with everything. The likes of Mr Ashton, and his position, is good for any incoming manager now....as it will take the pressure off other parts of running the football side of the club and allow the new coach to concentrate totally on making the team better.

Here's a scenario for you regarding your first statement...how do you know a certain manager didn't agree those deals, but they were over the budget he had been given...then when the Club found out it got pulled? Who's fault would that be? Who went mental, threw his weight about because he tried to pull a fast one and it backfired on him? Who left because working with someone who had such a short fuse became unhealthy? Who got the sack and Mr Ashton put in place pretty much the same time? Something worth considering...but I imagine you won't even consider it, because it doesn't fit in with your views?

I'm sorry...but there seems to be an element of fans who won't see it for what it is, because they don't want to hear it.

You know me EMB...I've never rated the Board for making the correct decisions football wise...but they are not totally to blame for what went wrong over the summer...it was a culmination of many things.

 

[Guest]

5 hours ago, spudski said:

A lot of the squad SC brought in...Board backed him, otherwise bids for £millions wouldn't have been approved and accepted by teams.

It's obvious that the summer transfers went pete tong...for many reasons. Too complicated for various reasons. Board, SC, Accountants all to blame...massive mistakes.

But SC was backed afterwards...he chose to go after players that didn't want to come here.

He spat his dummy out too many times...he felt let down...instead of sucking it up and getting on with the job, he chose to show outwardly his frustrations and let it get to him.

It led to him going and Mr Ashton coming in...that's where the timing is.

 

 

Lets clear this up shall we;

1st;  He didn't choose to go he was sacked by a phone call

2nd; As I see it bids were accepted but our current wage structure was unacceptable to the players, as that structure is one of the lowest in this division if not still 1st div rates? ...that is down to the boss SL and the board? unless someone KNOWS different??

[Red Army 87]

5 hours ago, ciderup said:

This witch hunt against SL winds me up. People say SL when they actually mean the board.

SL employs people to run the club for him, he doesn't actually do much himself apart from plough in wads of cash.

We all allegedly know that Pelling supposedly ****ed up the deals in the summer, not SL's fault. We know that MA is now employed to run the 'football side of the business', once again his actions are not SL's fault, the bloke is employed to run things FOR SL.

While he has the overall control / ownership, I think we need to think about who does what as employing people who are supposed to know what they are doing yet cock it up, is not the OWNERS fault, it's the fools beneath him that have cocked up!

Be careful what you wish for eh!

"People say SL when they actually mean the board"

I think this line needs to be plastered on the front page of this site to avoid anymore confusion. I've seen comments on other threads saying that we need new owners. No, the work happening at the moment with MA coming in and a more modern structure is what we need and is something we should have done in league 1 or sooner.

Look at the recent accounts, there's no way that SL wants anything other than the best for this club, unfortunately the people who run the club have a lot of learning to do.

I woke up this morning feeling like it was the end of the season and we had been relegated, based on all the negativity on here! We lost a game, but signs are since SC left that we are going back to basics and that will help us. People talk about it being another Millen situation with pemberton, but don't forget that Millen kept us up the season before Coppell arrived.

 

[CotswoldRed]

8 hours ago, Andy082005 said:

Agree with your last paragraph. Totally bizzare to sack him now with no plan B. Should have been sacked back in November and a new manager in place well before the transfer window opened.

Absolute joke 

Every action from the board says they had plan A and no plan B. Where in the plan did it say "If things aren't going right halfway through January...." 

If that was the plan surely it must have said somewhere "we'll need to approach managers in advance to sound them out so we can move quickly...." 

Let's not get bogged down in our love for either SL or SC, or anyone else - if this board was running any other business then the shareholders would be demanding an EGM and the dismissal of board members. 

[Vincent Vega]

3 minutes ago, CotswoldRed said:

Every action from the board says they had plan A and no plan B. Where in the plan did it say "If things aren't going right halfway through January...." 

If that was the plan surely it must have said somewhere "we'll need to approach managers in advance to sound them out so we can move quickly...." 

Let's not get bogged down in our love for either SL or SC, or anyone else - if this board was running any other business then the shareholders would be demanding an EGM and the dismissal of board members. 

This sums it up nicely

[BobBobSuperBob]

6 hours ago, citywest30 said:

@NickJ

@Bob Bob Super Bob

Sorry couldn't tag you in my post earlier so have done it in a separate one. Just wondered if you could shed some light on my interpretation of your 'understanding' a few posts above this one.

Hi citywest30 

Im sorry - I can't ,and won't purely because of its alleged (perceived initially)  nature and the fact , that as I understand ' what was thought might have happened hadn't at the end of the day' 

Mud sticks to people even if it transpires there is no basis to do so and thus a public forum is not the place to chuck this about.

I know that's infuriating

(Spudski has touched in it also)

I think it's easy to say that in the modern world of transfers, contracts , agents things can get complicated and messy , lots of people have a vested interest and things can appear to be something they are not.

[shelts]

6 hours ago, joe jordans teeth said:

That's the attitude I like,who cares :laugh:,mistakes have been made constantly for god knows how many years,1 freak season and it's all forgotten,we will be in exactly the same boat in 3 years time,nobody never learns at this club

Joe , I'm as fed up as you but unless I buy City , unlikely the Mrs would go mad, my attitude will be always the same. Same old , same old blah blah blah

[chinapig]

Incompetence has been the default setting in the running of BCFC for most of my 50 years following the club, with brief interludes of competence that are soon knocked on the head. IMO the wider football operation has only been strong once, under Alan Dicks. The unsung heroes were Tony Collins and John Sillett, who between them identified and developed the players that brought us the greatest period in our history. Think of the players who came through the youth system: Gow, Ritchie, Merrick, Collier, Rodgers, Whitehead, Tainton, Cashley, Mabbutt and the like and the players brought in for a pittance, like Cheesely, Drysdale, Sweeney, Gillies and Mann. The mistake was to effectively abandon the policy once we got promoted, deciding for instance that someone like Colin Lee (later Spurs and Chelsea!) wasn't good enough for us and splashing out on 'big name' players, good as the likes of Hunter and Cormack were, paying among the biggest wages in the top division and starting the downward spiral that almost destroyed us.

Since then it's been a largely amateur operation with no obvious, or at least consistent, strategy and structure run by a succession of people who couldn't hold a candle to Collins and Sillett.

Might have been different if Joe Jordan had stayed (and little or no attempt was made to persuade him to stay) and I would have him as head of football operations at a stroke. Appointing somebody to an executive position with, you know, actual football expertise, is so not Bristol City though.

Those of you who have not lived through 5 decades of this: be prepared for more of the same in a perpetual loop.

 

[Frenchay Red]

4 hours ago, spudski said:

Where have I said lack of signings was down to him sulking EMB...that had nothing to do with lack of signings.

And again you twist things EMB...don't know why you continue doing that...I've never said no manager could work with SL. I've said managers would always struggle here to find longer term success, because we have had a lack of people at the club who run it properly. The managers come in and struggle, because they have had to deal with everything. The likes of Mr Ashton, and his position, is good for any incoming manager now....as it will take the pressure off other parts of running the football side of the club and allow the new coach to concentrate totally on making the team better.

Here's a scenario for you regarding your first statement...how do you know a certain manager didn't agree those deals, but they were over the budget he had been given...then when the Club found out it got pulled? Who's fault would that be? Who went mental, threw his weight about because he tried to pull a fast one and it backfired on him? Who left because working with someone who had such a short fuse became unhealthy? Who got the sack and Mr Ashton put in place pretty much the same time? Something worth considering...but I imagine you won't even consider it, because it doesn't fit in with your views?

I'm sorry...but there seems to be an element of fans who won't see it for what it is, because they don't want to hear it.

You know me EMB...I've never rated the Board for making the correct decisions football wise...but they are not totally to blame for what went wrong over the summer...it was a culmination of many things.

 

Interesting synopsis, but doesn't totally make sense to me.

If Cotts agreed a deal to bring in Gray which was seen as exceeding his budget and was pulled, why did the club then publicly pursue the very same player at potentially greatly increased costs?

One thing is for sure, the behind the scenes goings on would make a fascinating drama/documentary!

[TV Tom]

7 hours ago, Atticus said:

He can only work with the squad he has no?

Is it his fault Freeman hasn't shown up? Pack is a liability more often then not.

Board failed to back him properly imo.

 

[Frenchay Red]

8 minutes ago, chinapig said:

Incompetence has been the default setting in the running of BCFC for most of my 50 years following the club, with brief interludes of competence that are soon knocked on the head. IMO the wider football operation has only been strong once, under Alan Dicks. The unsung heroes were Tony Collins and John Sillett, who between them identified and developed the players that brought us the greatest period in our history. Think of the players who came through the youth system: Gow, Ritchie, Merrick, Collier, Rodgers, Whitehead, Tainton, Cashley, Mabbutt and the like and the players brought in for a pittance, like Cheesely, Drysdale, Sweeney, Gillies and Mann. The mistake was to effectively abandon the policy once we got promoted, deciding for instance that someone like Colin Lee (later Spurs and Chelsea!) wasn't good enough for us and splashing out on 'big name' players, good as the likes of Hunter and Cormack were, paying among the biggest wages in the top division and starting the downward spiral that almost destroyed us.

Since then it's been a largely amateur operation with no obvious, or at least consistent, strategy and structure run by a succession of people who couldn't hold a candle to Collins and Sillett.

Might have been different if Joe Jordan had stayed (and little or no attempt was made to persuade him to stay) and I would have him as head of football operations at a stroke. Appointing somebody to an executive position with, you know, actual football expertise, is so not Bristol City though.

Those of you who have not lived through 5 decades of this: be prepared for more of the same in a perpetual loop.

 

You're lucky, 6 decades for me!

[BobBobSuperBob]

7 hours ago, citywest30 said:

Bobbob and NickJ, I've read this with much interest as, like most fans, was so incredibly frustrated that we didn't 'ride the wave' in the Summer. TM's post seemed to explain it well and I'd heard that it was not a good place to be working at in the Summer due to SC's mood, again fitting with TM's post.

Bob bob you have, admittedly by yourself, been cryptic over the reason for SL putting the 'brakes on' transfer dealings. So unless I'm reading this wrong it must have either a) been someone else's fault (who left in the summer) or b) very serious (possible financial) mistakes made in the deals that had we have gone through with them would have left us open to paying for it in the future (legally maybe? Or just FFP?) Am I on the right lines?

In trying to ease your frustration as much as I can

IMHO you are not too far from the mark with a and the general subject of b but not in terms of FFP as I understand it but more in how the proposed deals were  'formed'

As opposed to Tetburys Post I don't believe that the transfers were interfered with / brakes put on in an attempt to save money / wages and if I have it right SL / Board had little choice but to call a time out on activity ( If you read above NickJ agrees on this) and as such neither Board or SC were at fault at that point IMHO

This situation clearly want ideal but there was still time left in the window to move to different targets.

What happened to transfer activity / targets after Gayle , Gray had flown ( for whatever reason ) and the reaction / behaviour from then , of the significant figures is what's key for me and why we didn't pursue alternative targets is the second key question and moment and ultimately is what's hurting us now

 

[GodEmperor Palpatine]

9 hours ago, robin4ever said:

I like the fact I am a nutter , or related to SC , but nothing could be further from the truth. I am a fan who has been frustrated for many years. Then we get a manager who brings us exciting attacking football that was a pleasure to watch. After a great 18 months and ultimate success we refuse to build on the momentum and belief that the club has . Why why why ? I read so many opinions on here and some are so outrageous and laughable that I do get frustrated and probably don't put my points across as elequently as others. We really had an oppertunity to establish ourselves this season and continue with the rise of BCFC , but SL chose not too. Bottom line is that players will sign and come to us if the money is right. Kodjia came from France because we got in early and the finances offered to him were far greater than his French contract. He fell into our wage cap , but genuine championship players or championship potential players won't come , because we won't pay the going rate . I have never strayed from my opinions as have never had proof of the contrary . IMO if SC is not the man to take us forward then how on this earth can Pembo be ???? Shambles from last May onwards and so needless

The attacking football dried up and we were fast becoming a shambles on the pitch as well as off. What about the last 12 games? What about the humiliations against Derby, Burnley, Fulham, Rotherham, even Reading could've been if it wasn't for their woeful finishing. What about the fact we conceded 3+ goals in a quarter of our games? The GD? The amount of goals conceded? Even the goals have dried up... what was it 8 scored in his final 12? Even more bizarre was his post match interviews claiming we were the better side when it was quite evident we we were not, his refusal to take responsibility.

Cotterills stubbornness and rigidity cost him his job. He had options  via the loan players even if they were limited but he refused to play them and stuck with the same XI only being forced to change if there was an injury and suspension. It just seemed he was bluffing the board or sticking two fingers up at them yet it was hurting the clubs chances of building some kind of run or at least just picking up W's here and there. People can believe whatever they want, clearly TM has information secondhand but it just seemed totally one-sided to make SC as a martyr while the board & SL look like the villains. 

Believe me I'm no fan of the board either, clearly something has been brewing between SC and the board, the way he was sacked... ok managers get sacked left right and centre but just the mini statement by Dawe which was cold speaks volumes. They were right to sack him, 4 wins in 28 competitive games simply is unacceptable.. but the timing was wrong... he should've gone after the Derby game.

This is my opinion of course but you simply cant argue that the performances since Fulham have been poor at best and it was only getting worse

 

 

[citywest30]

34 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

Hi citywest30 

Im sorry - I can't ,and won't purely because of its alleged (perceived initially)  nature and the fact , that as I understand ' what was thought might have happened hadn't at the end of the day' 

Mud sticks to people even if it transpires there is no basis to do so and thus a public forum is not the place to chuck this about.

I know that's infuriating

(Spudski has touched in it also)

I think it's easy to say that in the modern world of transfers, contracts , agents things can get complicated and messy , lots of people have a vested interest and things can appear to be something they are not.

That's fair enough and I too would not reveal too much if I knew facts for the same reason but you have given a lot of suggestive comments which indicates something untoward going on and by being cryptic, it will inevitably to lead people to make their own assertions, like I have done.

I'm sure I'm not the only one who read it this way and am also sure if you hadn't wanted people to think what I have then you probably wouldn't have posted at all. As with everything, I'm sure there's two sides to this story and that there's an awful lot of grey in this situation. 

[TV Tom]

7 hours ago, NickJ said:

Ducked the question again!!

Not being funny mate, but I'm not interested in your views on SC's team selection or formation or substitutions.

I'm just interested in your very opening comment:

"Cotterill dug his his own grave with his loyalty to players who are not up to it at this level,"

Again, for the fourth time, are you saying that Cotterill refused to buy better players?

 

How the hell do I know if he refused to buy better players, I've been one of SC's biggest cheerleaders since the day he was appointed so I have absolutely no axe to grind with him (unlike others on this forum) but at the end of the day it was his 11 players on the pitch, his formation and his lack of imagination when it came to substitutions ( I know you are not interested in that but it is a forum after all)  I have no doubt that SC would of taken us down if not relieved of his duties because of his stubbornness in playing 3-5-2 and we now at least have a chance of nicking games now we are much tighter at the back like PNE have been doing all season, of course all of this is only my opinion  and nothing to get stroppy about

[BobBobSuperBob]

32 minutes ago, citywest30 said:

That's fair enough and I too would not reveal too much if I knew facts for the same reason but you have given a lot of suggestive comments which indicates something untoward going on and by being cryptic, it will inevitably to lead people to make their own assertions, like I have done.

I'm sure I'm not the only one who read it this way and am also sure if you hadn't wanted people to think what I have then you probably wouldn't have posted at all. As with everything, I'm sure there's two sides to this story and that there's an awful lot of grey in this situation. 

If I have I apologise as I have been attempting to do the exact opposite and provide some sort of possible explanation and balance to this , as virtually everyone blames either SL/Board OR SC where as far as I can see neither can be blamed (initially) for the initial summer problems

As regards 'something untoward' I make it absolutely clear I have no indication there was , or is , by any person

In life of course sometimes it can be perceived there is 'something untoward' in situations / scenarios , but when further examined it transpires that there wasn't 

Its the actions by both SC and the Board after the initial unfortunate misunderstanding that is the crux for me and I've put my thoughts / views on this earlier in thread

 

 

[redsquirrel]

if a couple of deals (hull,brentford) went wrong, does this then create like a sort of feedback (similar to ebay)  where a couple of negs seriously affects your credibility?