The OTIB derby - Sunderland vs Lincoln match day thread

[E.G.Red]

22 minutes ago, Lrrr said:

Sacking him without giving him a summer window would be pathetic, as a club and their fans they need to realise they don’t have a god given right to walk the league. Their culture of sack, sack, sack won’t get them out the league without luck 

Well he's got 16 players OOC , so it will be interesting what happens in the transfer window.  

[cidered abroad]

55 minutes ago, JonDolman said:

There are also lots of Sunderland fans supporting Lee. He came to the club in mid December and has improved them overall. Getting into playoffs and missing loads of good chances in both games so a bit of bad luck, but I'm not saying the better team didn't win.

Didn't he win that football league cup too? It felt a great achievement for us didn't it when Cotts won it. Well it did to me anyway.

That Sunderland side don't seem to have much quality imo. Surprised he didn't bring on Jones on the wing. Thought he looked good earlier in the season.

They didn't really have much down their right and once Lincoln managed to cope with McGeady, probably because of the Lincoln tactical changes and subs at half time and a big drop in Sunderland's intensity. It then looked like Sunderland didn't really have any quality and could only pump balls into the box from deep with McGeady quiet all 2nd half. But even then they still had numerous chances.

I bet they regret loaning Embleton out to Blackpool. Looked decent, but then he was playing in a better team at Blackpool.

Dion Sanderson seems to have been a big loss for them. Not sure if maybe McCloughlin is too, as him being available with Sanderson alongside Wright would then allow O'Nien to play in midfield where they probably could have done with a bit more quality.

Not sure who the answer would be in who to bring in to replace Lee. He took over a pretty poor side imo. League one has improved a lot in quality over the years. Lincoln got in some quality loans, clearly look like they had the more talented players 2nd half. Sunderland big and strong but lack pace and lack quality when they get the ball down. 

I think promotion would have been an amazing achievement with that squad, so I struggle to see how it's an awful failure not achieving that goal. Am I underrating that Sunderland squad? 

Would you like a black cat for your birthday?

[1960maaan]

1 hour ago, Fordy62 said:

I really think they’d be better off sacking him, but it’d perhaps be a little ridiculous if they did. 

Ha, sounds slightly strange, but I know exactly what you mean.
I honestly think to progress they might be better getting shot, but for continuity he surely needs a preseason to see if he can get them up.
Looking from the outside they seem an easier proposition than Sheff Utd did. 

[Red Exile]

2 hours ago, BTRFTG said:

Those who still see WeeLee as football's great saviour do not do so based on anything he's done or will ever do. They do so because to accept they were made to look foolish, duped, when investing their own emotional attachment in such an obvious loser, well, that's embarrassing.

@BTRFTG nails it.

Lee Johnson is toxic on here not so much because of his managerial record but because of the devotion of his followers. He wasn't up to the job. Only got it because he was his Dad's son. Despite all the indulgence of our owner he left the place worse than he found it. That's the reality. Some saw it, and called it on here long ago.

I pity Sunderland's supporters. 

[Phileas Fogg]

2 hours ago, Robbored said:

I didn’t see any strengths in his game. I can’t recall a telling pass or thru ball nor a crunching tackle  - the things all good midfielders do. He was also lightweight largely due to his stature and games often passed him by.

I don’t think you pay an awful lot of attention to football really 

[Phileas Fogg]

12 minutes ago, Red Exile said:

@BTRFTG nails it.

Lee Johnson is toxic on here not so much because of his managerial record but because of the devotion of his followers. He wasn't up to the job. Only got it because he was his Dad's son. Despite all the indulgence of our owner he left the place worse than he found it. That's the reality. Some saw it, and called it on here long ago.

I pity Sunderland's supporters. 

He doesn’t have any ‘devoted followers’ on here - I don’t recall anyone still suggesting he should be our manager. 

Conversely what he does have are a group of our own supporters who still actively make threads about him, proactively seek out negative opinions from Sunderland fans or footage that paints him in a bad light. That’s incredible devotion to a man they don’t like very much and hasn’t been here for a year.

[Robbored]

4 minutes ago, Phileas Fogg said:

I don’t think you pay an awful lot of attention to football really 

Of that era Marvin Elliot was a good example of my decent midfielder. He and Noble were were excellent. 

[italian dave]

17 minutes ago, Red Exile said:

@BTRFTG nails it.

Lee Johnson is toxic on here not so much because of his managerial record but because of the devotion of his followers. He wasn't up to the job. Only got it because he was his Dad's son. Despite all the indulgence of our owner he left the place worse than he found it. That's the reality. Some saw it, and called it on here long ago.

I pity Sunderland's supporters. 

In summary, there are two views of him and his record: the 'toxic' one being the one you don't agree with. That's balanced, eh?

It's a perfectly reasonable viewpoint that he was a decent - if unspectacular - player for us, and the he arrived at a club yo-yoing between second a third tiers, and left us as an established second tier club. That's not about "devotion".

If there's any toxicity around now it's the obsessive dislike, bordering on hatred, that causes his detractors to constantly follow his progress and to wallow in any perceived failure. Who keeps starting threads on him? 

[Red Exile]

10 minutes ago, italian dave said:

In summary, there are two views of him and his record: the 'toxic' one being the one you don't agree with. That's balanced, eh?

It's a perfectly reasonable viewpoint that he was a decent - if unspectacular - player for us, and the he arrived at a club yo-yoing between second a third tiers, and left us as an established second tier club. That's not about "devotion".

If there's any toxicity around now it's the obsessive dislike, bordering on hatred, that causes his detractors to constantly follow his progress and to wallow in any perceived failure. Who keeps starting threads on him? 

I don't have a balanced view of Lee Johnson's time as our manager. He shouldn't have been given the job and should have been shown the door long before he was. 'Hate' doesn't come into it - 'irritating' and 'out of his depth' will do for me.

Wasted years have left the playing side of the club a shambles. I can't begin to understand why anyone defends the man.

 

 

[italian dave]

25 minutes ago, Red Exile said:

I don't have a balanced view of Lee Johnson's time as our manager. He shouldn't have been given the job and should have been shown the door long before he was. 'Hate' doesn't come into it - 'irritating' and 'out of his depth' will do for me.

Wasted years have left the playing side of the club a shambles. I can't begin to understand why anyone defends the man.

 

 

That's fair enough. I respect the view. I don't agree with it..but I'm not calling you 'toxic' on the back of it. Whereas my equally legitimate view is one that you do characterise as 'toxic'. 

There's a gulf between us, reflected in the fanbase as a whole (well, on here anyway), but I object not to your having your view but to defining anyone who opposes it as being the 'toxic' ones.

[lenred]

1 hour ago, Phileas Fogg said:

He doesn’t have any ‘devoted followers’ on here - I don’t recall anyone still suggesting he should be our manager. 

Conversely what he does have are a group of our own supporters who still actively make threads about him, proactively seek out negative opinions from Sunderland fans or footage that paints him in a bad light. That’s incredible devotion to a man they don’t like very much and hasn’t been here for a year.

I don’t see the issue with people being interested in former managers personally. Cotts gets a lot of posts about him still and no one seems to moan about that.  As I see it , the LJ era is still very much at the forefront of many peoples minds as it’s only recently that his team have been completely gone with the Holden phase being seen as an extension of LJ’s by many I’d imagine.  
It was 4 years plus - a bloody long time to just instantly forget.  LJ is always going to polarise opinion - the reasons for which we all know - and apart from the personal jibes which I don’t agree with at all, I don’t see why people get so bent out of shape about it.  He has, rightly or wrongly, been a massive part of our recent history, a time when many people felt we should’ve kicked on to better things and we haven’t.  He remains a totally relevant debate and discussion point to many and rightly so imho. 

[Phileas Fogg]

5 minutes ago, lenred said:

I don’t see the issue with people being interested in former managers personally. Cotts gets a lot of posts about him still and no one seems to moan about that.  As I see it , the LJ era is still very much at the forefront of many peoples minds as it’s only recently that his team have been completely gone with the Holden phase being seen as an extension of LJ’s by many I’d imagine.  
It was 4 years plus - a bloody long time to just instantly forget.  LJ is always going to polarise opinion - the reasons for which we all know - and apart from the personal jibes which I don’t agree with at all, I don’t see why people get so bent out of shape about it.  He has, rightly or wrongly, been a massive part of our recent history, a time when many people felt we should’ve kicked on to better things and we haven’t.  He remains a totally relevant debate and discussion point to many and rightly so imho. 

I think discussion is fine, it’s just when it gets personal that it goes OTT. I don’t think people get ‘bent out of shape’ about it as such, just find it bemusing. 

In short - we’ve basically made exactly the same point !

[Sturny]

I think it’s quite simple really.
 

Some find his failings validating because they were previously gunned down on here. And some can’t bare it because they were defending him all over this forum for years  we all know who they are! 
 

I don’t recall seeing people defend MA on here for some of the personal abuse? I wonder why... 

[Phileas Fogg]

2 minutes ago, Sturny said:

I think it’s quite simple really.
 

Some find his failings validating because they were previously gunned down on here. And some can’t bare it because they were defending him all over this forum for years  we all know who they are! 
 

I don’t recall seeing people defend MA on here for some of the personal abuse? I wonder why... 

There might be something in the first part if there were people who thought we shouldn’t have sacked him. I don’t think I’ve read anyone say that on here. People seem unanimous it was the right time for him to go so it’s not a case of blinkered unfaltering loyalty just for the sake of being stubborn. 

I think a big difference with Ashton is the general feeling that he may not have necessarily had the best intentions of the club at heart. The way he appears to have engineered the Ipswich thing evidences that as it would’ve been in the works for a while. I reckon that’s probably the reason why so few defend him when he gets similar stick. Johnson clearly did try his best throughout. 

[Bristol Oil Services]

7 hours ago, HitchinRed said:

 be apportioned between him and Ashton. 

However, no-one since has got any better out of this bunch of players than LJ did, and in my book, that shows that he wasn’t as bad a manager as many people think.

LJ didn't didn't manage this bunch of players in this specific season just gone though. This season just gone being an exceptionally unusual and challenging season, during a pandemic, with talk of slashing players' wages and so on, a season played in empty grounds, with no volatile supporters to give any half-hearted players the hurry-along or sharp reminders as to what they are here for.

Lee never had a full season of that. 

And he didn't manage any season here with his CEO turning his thoughts elsewhere (as far as we know).

And nor did he manage a bunch of players running down their contracts here and wanting away. He had one or two of those, but never a "bunch." Like we've had this season.

It cannot be over-stated how unusual and difficult this last particular season has been.

It's also worth reminding ourselves the direction of travel under Lee before SL fired him; we were going backwards and downwards by the end with Lee, playing turgid, unwatchable football. 

 

No-one will get anything more out of this bunch because this bunch are being disbanded and many told to jog on. 

[Sturny]

18 minutes ago, Phileas Fogg said:

There might be something in the first part if there were people who thought we shouldn’t have sacked him. I don’t think I’ve read anyone say that on here. People seem unanimous it was the right time for him to go so it’s not a case of blinkered unfaltering loyalty just for the sake of being stubborn. 

I think a big difference with Ashton is the general feeling that he may not have necessarily had the best intentions of the club at heart. The way he appears to have engineered the Ipswich thing evidences that as it would’ve been in the works for a while. I reckon that’s probably the reason why so few defend him when he gets similar stick. Johnson clearly did try his best throughout. 

Not so sure about that one, I know people who were very much in that camp. It was fear of being “wrong” and are still eager to jump at the defence. And equally those posting his failings are eager to show they are now “right” 
 

The part about MA is spot on, that was the situation. In a way it backs up my opinion that some of those defending/attacking LJ now clearly have an agenda at stake and wouldn’t defend MA the same way, especially when it comes to personal comments. Feels like there’s cases of double standards going on. It’s like they have some sort of silly selective self righteous attitude. 

[Red Exile]

49 minutes ago, italian dave said:

That's fair enough. I respect the view. I don't agree with it..but I'm not calling you 'toxic' on the back of it. Whereas my equally legitimate view is one that you do characterise as 'toxic'. 

There's a gulf between us, reflected in the fanbase as a whole (well, on here anyway), but I object not to your having your view but to defining anyone who opposes it as being the 'toxic' ones.

You either misunderstand or misrepresent me - I'm saying that Lee Johnson is a 'toxic' topic - it poisons the discourse on here. I'm not saying that those with a more favourable view of him that mine have 'toxic' views.

He was a divisive appointment. When things were going well that division was buried. It resurfaced long before he left. Indeed I'd suggest that SL revelled in it - Lee was his man, and the plebs who didn't appreciate SL and his boy Lee could do one, it was SL's club and he could stick with his mate's son if he wanted to....and did.

I spent a long time on here arguing LJ was out of his depth, many posters told me he would come good. He didn't.  He was a poisonous influence on our club, toxic. One of our poorest managerial appointments.

 

[lenred]

44 minutes ago, Phileas Fogg said:

I think discussion is fine, it’s just when it gets personal that it goes OTT. I don’t think people get ‘bent out of shape’ about it as such, just find it bemusing. 

In short - we’ve basically made exactly the same point !

Plenty of posters on here get irate at people bemoaning LJ’s time here. You only have to look at this thread for starters. As for finding it ‘bemusing’ to discuss him, I don’t know why you or others would be - he’s been the most integral part or our most recent history, a history many of us are incredibly disappointed with.  Not sure what there’s to be bemused about but guess that’s your prerogative but surely people just need to ignore the post if it’s an issue? 

[Red Exile]

30 minutes ago, Phileas Fogg said:

There might be something in the first part if there were people who thought we shouldn’t have sacked him. I don’t think I’ve read anyone say that on here. People seem unanimous it was the right time for him to go so it’s not a case of blinkered unfaltering loyalty just for the sake of being stubborn. 

People might have accepted he should have been sacked when he was. I was amongst those arguing for him to be sacked long before that. There were plenty of blinkered unfalteringly loyal devotees of the cult of LJ who'd shoot us down...he was going to come good and lead us to glory! 

I'll be honest, whilst it's far from front of mind at the moment I'm mildly enjoying being proved right...pathetic and childish as that might be! 

[Fordy62]

LJ presided over the unprecedented golden period where we spent money like it was going out of fashion. It’s easy to resent that he only got that opportunity owing to his relationship with SL. 

[italian dave]

10 minutes ago, Red Exile said:

You either misunderstand or misrepresent me - I'm saying that Lee Johnson is a 'toxic' topic - it poisons the discourse on here. I'm not saying that those with a more favourable view of him that mine have 'toxic' views.

He was a divisive appointment. When things were going well that division was buried. It resurfaced long before he left. Indeed I'd suggest that SL revelled in it - Lee was his man, and the plebs who didn't appreciate SL and his boy Lee could do one, it was SL's club and he could stick with his mate's son if he wanted to....and did.

I spent a long time on here arguing LJ was out of his depth, many posters told me he would come good. He didn't.  He was a poisonous influence on our club, toxic. One of our poorest managerial appointments.

 

You see, I'd argue that's what toxic is bandying around expressions like "unfalteringly loyal devotees of the cult of Johnson", "poisonous"; what's toxic is the way the man is hounded on here a year after he's left; posters who jump on every opportunity to lambast him - despite the fact that he moved on ages ago.

It's no great achievement to be right about the fact that a manager's reign at any club will end in a sacking and in tears. It's pretty predictable.

I'm not a devotee of any cult: I don't take a view generally on whether should be sacked: others know far far more about what goes on behind the scenes, what the factors are that determine decisions that affect the manager and the club generally. As long as a manager has the club's interests at heart then he has my support. There have only been two I can recall who I felt haven't (Pulis and Osman) so other than those two I've always wished any manager well while they've been in charge...and afterwards. If you think that makes me the devotee of a cult, so be it. As Ive said above, nothing suggests to me that LJ didn't have the clubs best interest at heart and did his best for the club. And if you think that a managerial appointment who left us in a significantly stronger league position when he left than when he arrived is "poor" in comparison to others, including those who've overseen relegation, then that just seems like an odd way of defining 'poor' to me.

[italian dave]

4 minutes ago, Fordy62 said:

LJ presided over the unprecedented golden period where we spent money like it was going out of fashion. It’s easy to resent that he only got that opportunity owing to his relationship with SL. 

And I'm actually not sure that it did him any favours. 

[Phileas Fogg]

23 minutes ago, lenred said:

Plenty of posters on here get irate at people bemoaning LJ’s time here. You only have to look at this thread for starters. As for finding it ‘bemusing’ to discuss him, I don’t know why you or others would be - he’s been the most integral part or our most recent history, a history many of us are incredibly disappointed with.  Not sure what there’s to be bemused about but guess that’s your prerogative but surely people just need to ignore the post if it’s an issue? 

No, I think you've misunderstood what I was saying. Obviously people are going to discuss him and that's fine, I'm doing it myself.

What I and seemingly many of others find bemusing is the personal nature of the stick and the willing him to fail. That is a bit far in my opinion. If people want to do that, that's their prerogative but it's a bit of a strange thing to do IMO. 

[lenred]

4 minutes ago, italian dave said:

You see, I'd argue that's what toxic is bandying around expressions like "unfalteringly loyal devotees of the cult of Johnson", "poisonous"; what's toxic is the way the man is hounded on here a year after he's left; posters who jump on every opportunity to lambast him - despite the fact that he moved on ages ago.

It's no great achievement to be right about the fact that a manager's reign at any club will end in a sacking and in tears. It's pretty predictable.

I'm not a devotee of any cult: I don't take a view generally on whether should be sacked: others know far far more about what goes on behind the scenes, what the factors are that determine decisions that affect the manager and the club generally. As long as a manager has the club's interests at heart then he has my support. There have only been two I can recall who I felt haven't (Pulis and Osman) so other than those two I've always wished any manager well while they've been in charge...and afterwards. If you think that makes me the devotee of a cult, so be it. As Ive said above, nothing suggests to me that LJ didn't have the clubs best interest at heart and did his best for the club. And if you think that a managerial appointment who left us in a significantly stronger league position when he left than when he arrived is "poor" in comparison to others, including those who've overseen relegation, then that just seems like an odd way of defining 'poor' to me.

Not as straightforward as that though imho, given the far larger investment LJ enjoyed.  All been done to death though.  

[lenred]

5 minutes ago, Phileas Fogg said:

No, I think you've misunderstood what I was saying. Obviously people are going to discuss him and that's fine, I'm doing it myself.

What I and seemingly many of others find bemusing is the personal nature of the stick and the willing him to fail. That is a bit far in my opinion. If people want to do that, that's their prerogative but it's a bit of a strange thing to do IMO. 

Guessing those ‘willing him to fail’ (think that’s a bit strong tbf in the main but take the point) will do so as it vindicates the very strong feelings shown by many on here that he was given far far far too long at City.  And again I see no issues with that. As I’ve said the personal stuff is unnecessary but on the whole it’s just strong debate and there has always been those with blinkers on shall we say, on both sides, just got to shut them out. 

[Phileas Fogg]

20 minutes ago, Red Exile said:

People might have accepted he should have been sacked when he was. I was amongst those arguing for him to be sacked long before that. There were plenty of blinkered unfalteringly loyal devotees of the cult of LJ who'd shoot us down...he was going to come good and lead us to glory! 

I'll be honest, whilst it's far from front of mind at the moment I'm mildly enjoying being proved right...pathetic and childish as that might be! 

That last line did make me smile, but I don't think there were these 'blinkered unfaltering loyal devotees of the cult of LJ' you speak of - that assumes people take arguments on OTIB to a ridiculous level of seriousness. It's like you want to believe that existed and if you say it enough times it'll make it true!

As with any manager, you'll get people who'll broadly support him and those that will never really back him. We're even seeing that with Pearson. That was largely the case with Johnson but as he's such a divisive figure with a long connection to the club it enhanced that to a different level altogether. 

As @italian dave said above, I'm not sure that a manager leaving the club after 4 years proves anyone right though. 

It will be interesting to see what happens with him at Sunderland and if he keeps his job. If he loses his job I'm not sure where he'd go really. He may have to take on a much smaller club for a while. 

[Fordy62]

Sky know how we feel on OTIB...

[Phileas Fogg]

3 minutes ago, lenred said:

Guessing those ‘willing him to fail’ (think that’s a bit strong tbf in the main but take the point) will do so as it vindicates the very strong feelings shown by many on here that he was given far far far too long at City.  And again I see no issues with that. As I’ve said the personal stuff is unnecessary but on the whole it’s just strong debate and there has always been those with blinkers on shall we say, on both sides, just got to shut them out. 

Good post, I think we're broadly in agreement.

Also, it's difficult to know (in the context of a written forum post) how much of it is genuine dislike of Johnson and how much is sort of pantomime hyperbolic Neil Warnock "Colin" stuff. I'm sure even @Fordy62 would have a drink and chat with LJ if he happened to see him in a pub. 

[lenred]

1 minute ago, Phileas Fogg said:

Agreed, I think we're broadly in agreement.

Also, it's difficult to know (in the context of a written forum post) how much of it is genuine dislike of Johnson and how much is sort of pantomime hyperbolic Neil Warnock "Colin" stuff. I'm sure even @Fordy62 would have a drink and chat with LJ if he happened to see him in a pub. 

I think everyone must know deep down how much he wanted it to work and that he had the club at his heart so I’m guessing 99% would stop and have a pint and a chat with him. But I guess whilst he remains in such a high profile role at a massive club such as Sunderland he will still be discussed at some length on here, rightly or wrongly. Maybe when he’s finally at Yeovil it’ll die down! 

 

[Red Exile]

16 minutes ago, italian dave said:

You see, I'd argue that's what toxic is bandying around expressions like "unfalteringly loyal devotees of the cult of Johnson", "poisonous"; what's toxic is the way the man is hounded on here a year after he's left; posters who jump on every opportunity to lambast him - despite the fact that he moved on ages ago.

It's no great achievement to be right about the fact that a manager's reign at any club will end in a sacking and in tears. It's pretty predictable.

I'm not a devotee of any cult: I don't take a view generally on whether should be sacked: others know far far more about what goes on behind the scenes, what the factors are that determine decisions that affect the manager and the club generally. As long as a manager has the club's interests at heart then he has my support. There have only been two I can recall who I felt haven't (Pulis and Osman) so other than those two I've always wished any manager well while they've been in charge...and afterwards. If you think that makes me the devotee of a cult, so be it. As Ive said above, nothing suggests to me that LJ didn't have the clubs best interest at heart and did his best for the club. And if you think that a managerial appointment who left us in a significantly stronger league position when he left than when he arrived is "poor" in comparison to others, including those who've overseen relegation, then that just seems like an odd way of defining 'poor' to me.

Fair enough. We'll have to agree to differ.