5 weeks, 7 games after SL told Geoff 20man the following:

[Major Isewater]

27 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Spotted it too. "I'm not 'hands on' at all" but speaks to the head coach before and after nearly every single game? That's quite hands on I would say. And like you suggest, our problems on the pitch are unsurprising if we have a novice manager bouncing ideas off an owner with no football coaching / management experience whatsoever.

What SL means is he doesn't take training ( Although He probably tells the coaches what to do ! ) 

[Merrick's Marvels]

3 hours ago, Dullmoan Tone said:

There's a really interesting paragraph in the transcript that I hadn't spotted before:

S.L: I’m not ‘hands on’ at all, on a Saturday I’ll often go and have a word with Lee before the game, but more often after the game and we’ll have a few words, and discuss what went right, what went wrong, and the positives that came out of the game and obviously the negatives in recent times, and I’ll normally have a conversation with him either on a Sunday evening or on a Monday evening when he’s had time to digest the game and gone through it.  But it’s only really to help, him, because I know you’ve been in management yourself, it’s a lonely position, you need somebody to bounce ideas off and I’m one of those people.

It makes you wonder what a chairman who probably has no coaching qualification / professional playing experience can offer? If the owner of my company reviewed every piece of work each week, I think I would describe him as hands on? 

It beggars belief, doesn't it, and had me spitting feathers.

A sounding board is a fine idea but instead of investing in a qualified professional to fill the role we have the exact opposite. Typical.  

"I'm not hands on"!! Is he deluded? A brassnecked hypocrite?

Epic fail.

[Jack Dawe]

31 minutes ago, Merrick's Marvels said:

It beggars belief, doesn't it, and had me spitting feathers.

A sounding board is a fine idea but instead of investing in a qualified professional to fill the role we have the exact opposite. Typical.  

"I'm not hands on"!! Is he deluded? A brassnecked hypocrite?

Epic fail.

I don't see it as wrong, or suspicious - not being privvy to the content on these meetings, who knows? - but saying that, there are people Lee can bounce ideas off, ie, Ashton, Pemberton and Dean "Jonah" Holden. And his dad, of course.

It wasn't long ago that it was felt that SL had backed off, lost interest, retreated to Guernsey. In the words of the phrase that says it all right now: he just can't win.

[Olé]

On 02/03/2017 at 08:55, Dullmoan Tone said:

There's a really interesting paragraph in the transcript that I hadn't spotted before:

S.L: I’m not ‘hands on’ at all, on a Saturday I’ll often go and have a word with Lee before the game, but more often after the game and we’ll have a few words, and discuss what went right, what went wrong, and the positives that came out of the game and obviously the negatives in recent times, and I’ll normally have a conversation with him either on a Sunday evening or on a Monday evening when he’s had time to digest the game and gone through it.  But it’s only really to help, him, because I know you’ve been in management yourself, it’s a lonely position, you need somebody to bounce ideas off and I’m one of those people.

It makes you wonder what a chairman who probably has no coaching qualification / professional playing experience can offer? If the owner of my company reviewed every piece of work each week, I think I would describe him as hands on? 

The concern is that the level of access afforded by LJ to SL is either explicitly or implicitly making the owner unusually reluctant to dispense with a manager where it may also reduce his access and influence to footballing matters. And that in of itself should raise some very very serious questions.

[The Dolman Pragmatist]

2 minutes ago, Olé said:

The concern is that the level of access afforded by LJ to SL is either explicitly or implicitly making the owner unusually reluctant to dispense with a manager where it may also reduce his access and influence to footballing matters. And that in of itself should raise some very very serious questions.

Sorry Rob, I always thought I was a reasonably bright lad, but I can't make head nor tail of what you're implying here.  Can you translate please?

[samo II]

12 minutes ago, The Dolman Pragmatist said:

Sorry Rob, I always thought I was a reasonably bright lad, but I can't make head nor tail of what you're implying here.  Can you translate please?

SL gets to influence footballing matters more directly with LJ in charge, due to their interpersonal relationship, and SL is loathe to sacrifice this, in case it is not the same with another manager/head coach. 

Was clear to me, and I share the concerns over SL (or any chairman) saying they debrief the manager on individual performances immediately post-game.  That doesn't seem appropriate to me; leave it to the chief executive and coaching staff.

BTW, DP; did you ever answer Olé's post that was made in response to your repeated request for "real debate" on footballing matters?  Would be interested to hear your thoughts, as Olé's points were very clearly articulated and compelling.

[Olé]

12 minutes ago, The Dolman Pragmatist said:

Sorry Rob, I always thought I was a reasonably bright lad, but I can't make head nor tail of what you're implying here.  Can you translate please?

I am desperately searching for good reasons for SL's continued position over LJ, which to me is untenable. I am trying to understand what SL is not willing to change, that so many others would at this point. He is quoted as describing a level of access and influence which I don't know how common it is but I feel certain is not guaranteed by every manager who the club might appoint, and I am asking whether that makes SL specifically reluctant to change things.

Two pre-empt 2 responses: a) Yes this is all well within SL's right and privilege as owner and benefactor of the club and good luck to him, but having made vague claims like 'everything is working well' I do worry he is spinning to hide his real motives and b) where I say influence, others may say that a sounding board is not 'influence', but in any senior management role, a good leader knows how to use soft skills to influence through an apparently passive role.