Decision vindicated?

[WolfOfWestStreet]

Yeah maybe I'm naieve, just sacking managers isn't my thing. I'm a a Cotts loyalist as well so my argument has bias. 

I'm also happy to have LJ in charge but you just can't go on chopping and changing all the time, but it guess that's another argument. 

But to say vindicated? What does that even mean ... We've won a few games, that's it. Unless LJ is photographed holding the championship trophy or playoff trophy in 18months he's going to get binned as well, and we're back to square one, again. 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, WolfOfWestStreet said:

I think Cotts should have been given more time. He deserved it.

what the board basically have now said is, regardless of performance, you've got a 4-5 months and that's it. 

I don't agree with shortermism in football, and the fact that everything that happens from now on is just another tool to bash cotterill with. It's not fair on a man that brought some fantastic times to this club.

anyway hopefully LJ gets the time to do something that Cotts wasn't afforded.

If a comparison is made with other clubs, I believe City shows tremendous patience with it's managers.

Deserved?
I could be inane and trot out some definition of an idiot, but let's just say, sometimes you have to put your pride to one side and think about what's important. If Cotts had done that, he'd still be here. I'm thankful for last season, but this season has just been disastrous under Cotts and he was writing cheques that his career couldn't afford.

As a City supporter, I get loyalty and I'm not a 'we've got to sack the manager' sort of person. My loyalty does not make me blind though.

He had to go.

As to LJ being the right person? I suspect we won't find that out till next season.
I always thought the team was good enough under Cotts, he just couldn't get the tactics right, so, LJ has inherited a good team and he can't help but succeed (for the rest of the season) as long as he makes the right changes to the tactics. He only becomes the City messiah if he takes us to the promised land (and that's only till such time as we look like we are in a precarious state ).

[Red-Robbo]

51 minutes ago, RedSA said:

 

I would again say it depends on the context of what is happening at the time. 

Are we improving? Are the right moves being made to progress us? Are there certain negative patterns of play/strategy that aren't being addressed? Are the team still with the him? Are the fans still with him? Is the relationship with the board good? The list goes on....

Just having a rule of 'I'm against shortermism so will stick with a manager regardless' or 'if the results aren't good then get him out' is too simplistic a view in my eyes. If its purely that performances aren't quite right/bad luck etc but lots of other things are in good shape then yes, I agree you should back the manager (although there could be caveats to that also). I'm not convinced that was the case with SC unfortunately. 

Don't disagree with any of that, RSA. 

Context is crucial and there's a difference between a temporary wobble and a terminal lack of ideas. 

If Lee can keep us up and put us in contention next season - against a load of wedged-up clubs receiving parachute payments,  he will really have shown some managerial chops.