BobBobSuperBob Posted March 11, 2017 Report Share Posted March 11, 2017 1 minute ago, Mike Hunt-Hertz said: Collis 1 would choke on his quinoa latte. Thought BF had it all set out to be fair - Processes are the key Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exAtyeoMax Posted March 11, 2017 Report Share Posted March 11, 2017 2 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said: The only word I'd change Max - clear as day Then he keeps dabbling at bringing back an unfit , poor form ( Being unfit and driving to and fro Leicester every day - personal situation ????? Not helping ) , Tomlin back , desperate to draw on the outside chance of a moments magic 'Tomlingate' , and the fall out , may have been a defining point in our season , and what led up to it Yes, I'd question his assertion that Gary O'Neill is always first name on the team sheet. I don't believe that. For me, the alleged fallings out and pettiness is the absolute core of the problem. That's even before the game management… Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bat Fastard Posted March 11, 2017 Report Share Posted March 11, 2017 6 minutes ago, redapple said: Do you work for BT ? No - BF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bat Fastard Posted March 11, 2017 Report Share Posted March 11, 2017 16 minutes ago, The Joker said: Whoa!! hold yer horses fat boy, your talking two people here, their not affected by the sort of $hit and ridicule every city fan faces for just being a city fan every day, in work,neighbors, down the pub,kids in school, everywhere, stuff them two,they caused it and could have sorted it so it reflects back on the fans because they and they alone are responsible for turning this club into a laughing stock, bollox to em. I sympathise with our situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobBobSuperBob Posted March 11, 2017 Report Share Posted March 11, 2017 5 minutes ago, exAtyeoMax said: Yes, I'd question his assertion that Gary O'Neill is always first name on the team sheet. I don't believe that. For me, the alleged fallings out and pettiness is the absolute core of the problem. That's even before the game management… Totally agree on both points Personally I am comfortable in believing that the man he brought into be his 'eyes and ears on the pitch' (LJs words) had a major fall out / disagreement with LJ earlier in the season and that has always been my first real warning sign and concern (GON regarded in football as a good experienced pro) As I understand the ( alleged ) fall out was football related rather than personal but voiced in a strong manner suggesting GON was far from impressed with LJs methods / 'ideas' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrahamC Posted March 11, 2017 Report Share Posted March 11, 2017 50 minutes ago, Fordy62 said: I wonder just exactly what your definition of mentored is? i don't expect an answer to this by the way. My definition is guidance and support and it is something I have regularly done for colleagues throughout my career. It can also involve uncomfortable conversations about areas where they need to improve.. No apparent sign of this in BS3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid in the Riot Posted March 11, 2017 Report Share Posted March 11, 2017 10 minutes ago, GrahamC said: My definition is guidance and support and it is something I have regularly done for colleagues throughout my career. It can also involve uncomfortable conversations about areas where they need to improve.. No apparent sign of this in BS3. And if LJ is the result of SLs mentoring abilities then it goes to show we are ****** for the foreseeable future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
screech Posted March 11, 2017 Report Share Posted March 11, 2017 Who are the 19 staff. I can't think of them all. The list of them I can remember is below, from memory I have listed the level they have played at for the majority of their careers to try and make some sense of their abilities before they got here before we can point a finger at manager or staff. Scott Golbourne - Championship David Cotterill - Championship Garry O'Neil - Championship/Premier League Lee Tomlin - Championship/ League 1 Bailey Wright - Championship Adam Matthews - Championship/Premier League Jamie Patterson - Championship Jens Hegeler - Bundesliga Matt Taylor - League 1 Josh Brownhill - League 1 majority of games Hordur Magnusson - Serie B Milan Djuric - Serie B Gustav Engval - Swedish League Tammy Abraham - Chelsea Youth/ England u20 Callum O'Dowda - League 2 Fabien Giefer - Bundesliga If you were in business you would accept that 8 possibly 9 from the 16 above appointments were a gamble (Giefer/ O'Dowda /Abraham / Engval/Djuric / Magnusson / Brownhill / Taylor/ maybe Hegeler as the 9th) because they have no previous experience at championship level, however I have counted 11 of the 16 appointments from that list (Scott Golbourne / Garry O'Neil / Lee Tomlin / Adam Matthews / Jamie Patterson / Jens Hegeler / Matt Taylor / Josh Brownhill / Milan Djuric / Gustav Engval / Callum O'Dowda) that do not start regularly and only 2 of them that do start have championship experience (Cotterill / Wright) Looking at that list scares me how we can't make a side that should be happy playing at this level. A good core of championship experience brought in to fit around some inexperience at this level, the bonus is Magnusson and Abraham have shown they are up to playing in the championship from a worse starting point. When you add some of our players already here who were good in the league below there is no way we should be in this position, so I think the answer you arrive at is to blame the customers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrahamC Posted March 11, 2017 Report Share Posted March 11, 2017 Ekstrand, Lucic, De Girolamo, the lad Smith from Wrexham,Taylor Moore (at over a million,now on loan at Bury).. All brought in as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 11, 2017 Report Share Posted March 11, 2017 13 hours ago, NickJ said: And your manager recruited 19 staff, then admitted 16 of them were sub standard. What would you do? That is a misleading post to be honest. Some aka Tammy injured. Some were brought with the future in mind (Lucic and Moore) and Engvall well who the hell knows- oh and Ekstrand he came and went. I agree with the thrust of the post though- mismanagement of his own signings and he should be gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exAtyeoMax Posted March 11, 2017 Report Share Posted March 11, 2017 11 hours ago, Tears in rain said: Review the selection process first and foremost. If this requires a change then do so with aid of correct people (occupational psychologist) Maybe have a look at candidates who were applying and compare to the sub standard 16 on books now. Meeting with responsible person e.g. manager for bringing these people in and seeing the thought process etc behind it. That's taking his/her word for it in the first place. I'm not suggesting he/she is lying, but surely you should question if he/she is correct in their assertion. After all, 16 is rather a lot of 'mistakes' - then I'd question the selection process/agency/recruitment policy etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tears in rain Posted March 11, 2017 Report Share Posted March 11, 2017 1 minute ago, exAtyeoMax said: That's taking his/her word for it in the first place. I'm not suggesting he/she is lying, but surely you should question if he/she is correct in their assertion. After all, 16 is rather a lot of 'mistakes' - then I'd question the selection process/agency/recruitment policy etc. Yeah exactly that would be my first small steps before narrowing down to the issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Der no.2 Posted March 11, 2017 Report Share Posted March 11, 2017 13 minutes ago, exAtyeoMax said: That's taking his/her word for it in the first place. I'm not suggesting he/she is lying, but surely you should question if he/she is correct in their assertion. After all, 16 is rather a lot of 'mistakes' - then I'd question the selection process/agency/recruitment policy etc. Its not that we have 16 mistakes. LJ seems unable to motivate the players to be the best that they can be (aside from the formation issues). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exAtyeoMax Posted March 11, 2017 Report Share Posted March 11, 2017 3 minutes ago, Der no.2 said: Its not that we have 16 mistakes. LJ seems unable to motivate the players to be the best that they can be (aside from the formation issues). Yes, exactly. That is why I'd question the assertion that they were sub standard, in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickJ Posted March 16, 2017 Author Report Share Posted March 16, 2017 On 10/03/2017 at 21:11, GrahamC said: Probably depend on whether I had "mentored" him, offered him a mock interview before his first job and then kept in touch with him over the years with every intention of offering him a job he patently wasn't suitable for. Actually as we all know, this is utter bollocks, the correct answer is to sack the hapless clown months ago.. On 11/03/2017 at 09:30, Kid in the Riot said: Correct. @spudski told us 3 years ago that LJ would one day be BCFC manager. It was always a case of when not if. Very, very concerning comments. Looking back, even as Cotterill was about to win us the League One championship, @spudski was suggesting that Johnson would one day be a Bristol City manager. At such a time, Why? So, Another question. If you were the owner of a business, and a manager you had employed had performed unbelievably well over 18 months, pulling your shit business out of the shit, and making them the best in the business. Then for a relatively short period your manager begins to struggle (and let's not even go into the possibility that this was partly at least because the owner had meddled and not fully supported his manager after such a successful period). What would you do. Would you say to yourself, "this manager, who has in the main been unbelievably successful for the majority of his time at my organisation, needs my support, guidance and further training, because he has proved himself to be a good manager". OR would you say to yourself "I will sack my - in the main - unbelievably successful manager, and replace him with a manager who has been, at best, mediocre at the same level". Think about it. What would you do, with just those two choices? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olé Posted March 16, 2017 Report Share Posted March 16, 2017 18 minutes ago, NickJ said: Think about it. What would you do, with just those two choices? I'd c) create a badminton team Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.