Jump to content
IGNORED

The Return


Guest

Recommended Posts

Again - contradictions in the various lines being put out there.

Personally I think given the pretty good record DR had over previous seasons, that this "offence" of giving them a week off to rest, is hardly a sackable offence. Also In JE's case.

Especially when you scrutinise the details - who actually are we talking about getting injured since/during the international break? 

Williams - impact injury in training.

Naismith?

James - impact injury vs Ipswich 

So the reality is the difference between the line ups pre (Leeds) and post (Coventry) last international break was 2 players, Nays and Williams? Doesn't align with the story that the week off has caused more trouble. On the contrary, maybe the rest helped the recovery of others?? Weimann, Conway etc.

Hardly sackable...

Edited by Alessandro
  • Like 8
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Alessandro said:

Again - contradictions in the various lines being put out there.

Personally I think given the pretty good record DR had over previous seasons, that this "offence" of giving them a week off to rest, is hardly a sackable offence. Also In JE's case.

Especially when you scrutinise the details - who actually are we talking about getting injured since/during the international break? 

Williams - impact injury in training.

Naismith?

James - impact injury vs Ipswich 

So the reality is the difference between the line ups pre (Leeds) and post (Coventry) last international break was 2 players, Nays and Williams? Doesn't align with the story that the week off has caused more trouble. On the contrary, maybe the rest helped the recovery of others?? Weimann, Conway etc.

Hardly sackable...

I agree and I would imagine that they all have their own individual training plans personally tailored to their "numbers".

They're hardly likely to come back from a short term rest and immediately get into high intensity workloads. Light efforts gradually increasing I would have thought. Plus it's not the start of the season, so core fitness shouldn't be an issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

I said exactly the same on Sat night! Just because we've spoken to someone doesn't mean they're going to be appointed.

Subsequently been told that Rowett was never of interest to us so interested on @Bcfcshags thoughts on that. Perhaps the rumour wasn't true.

Haven’t heard anything on Rowett since my original post mate. I guess if he was the man it would all be pretty much done by now which is clearly isn’t. 
 

must admit il be relieved if you’ve herd he’s not of interest. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Alessandro said:

Again - contradictions in the various lines being put out there.

Personally I think given the pretty good record DR had over previous seasons, that this "offence" of giving them a week off to rest, is hardly a sackable offence. Also In JE's case.

Especially when you scrutinise the details - who actually are we talking about getting injured since/during the international break? 

Williams - impact injury in training.

Naismith?

James - impact injury vs Ipswich 

So the reality is the difference between the line ups pre (Leeds) and post (Coventry) last international break was 2 players, Nays and Williams? Doesn't align with the story that the week off has caused more trouble. On the contrary, maybe the rest helped the recovery of others?? Weimann, Conway etc.

Hardly sackable...

  Fair shout. Especially as 3 months training should (as is the universally accepted standard approach), be followed by a week off.  There’s no way those players wouldn’t have been given a programme of tailored, light exercise. Otherwise after every summer break all teams would be having the same problems. 
 
It sounds more likely that, that was a convenient excuse to get rid of them. 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Frenchay Red said:

I agree and I would imagine that they all have their own individual training plans personally tailored to their "numbers".

They're hardly likely to come back from a short term rest and immediately get into high intensity workloads. Light efforts gradually increasing I would have thought. Plus it's not the start of the season, so core fitness shouldn't be an issue.

 

4 minutes ago, JP Hampton said:

  Fair shout. Especially as 3 months training should (as is the universally accepted standard approach), be followed by a week off.  There’s no way those players wouldn’t have been given a programme of tailored, light exercise. Otherwise after every summer break all teams would be having the same problems. 
 
It sounds more likely that, that was a convenient excuse to get rid of them. 

Out of emojis - but absolutely this. ⬆️🔥

They wouldn't have all just gone on holiday - they would have been in the gym and light training.

It's the kind of thing you review and learn from, not fire good people for....

Edited by Alessandro
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Alessandro said:

Again - contradictions in the various lines being put out there.

Personally I think given the pretty good record DR had over previous seasons, that this "offence" of giving them a week off to rest, is hardly a sackable offence. Also In JE's case.

Especially when you scrutinise the details - who actually are we talking about getting injured since/during the international break? 

Williams - impact injury in training.

Naismith?

James - impact injury vs Ipswich 

So the reality is the difference between the line ups pre (Leeds) and post (Coventry) last international break was 2 players, Nays and Williams? Doesn't align with the story that the week off has caused more trouble. On the contrary, maybe the rest helped the recovery of others?? Weimann, Conway etc.

Hardly sackable...

It's called managing the players properly tinman needed to keep his nose out. This is why brown noses like him won't move this club forward.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Alessandro said:

Again - contradictions in the various lines being put out there.

Personally I think given the pretty good record DR had over previous seasons, that this "offence" of giving them a week off to rest, is hardly a sackable offence. Also In JE's case.

Especially when you scrutinise the details - who actually are we talking about getting injured since/during the international break? 

Williams - impact injury in training.

Naismith?

James - impact injury vs Ipswich 

So the reality is the difference between the line ups pre (Leeds) and post (Coventry) last international break was 2 players, Nays and Williams? Doesn't align with the story that the week off has caused more trouble. On the contrary, maybe the rest helped the recovery of others?? Weimann, Conway etc.

Hardly sackable...

Just to look at this from a different angle -

Previous Manager had to deal with a horrendous injury crisis, Rolls and the medical team blamed by just about everybody.

NP brings in his own "elite" medical team, injury pile up is at least as bad if not worse than before but not their fault.

Truth somewhere in the middle would be my guess.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Facepalm 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Zuni said:

Just to look at this from a different angle -

Previous Manager had to deal with a horrendous injury crisis, Rolls and the medical team blamed by just about everybody.

NP brings in his own "elite" medical team, injury pile up is at least as bad if not worse than before but not their fault.

Truth somewhere in the middle would be my guess.

As has been repeatedly stated, one set of injuries  were caused by in game contact the other injuries were not!

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Eddie Notgetinya said:

It can’t be Rowett - his teams don’t play how the hierarchy dictate they must  

And he doesn't strike me as a Yes man or someone happy to have Tinnion looking over his shoulder, day and night, going "Ooh, you don't wanna do it like that" like that annoying Harry Enfield character 

Edited by Merrick's Marvels
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Alessandro said:

 

Out of emojis - but absolutely this. ⬆️🔥

They wouldn't have all just gone on holiday - they would have been in the gym and light training.

It's the kind of thing you review and learn from, not fire good people for....

Was any of them on international duty? Did they pick up  injuries then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All I’ll add to this debate is that over the last few days I’ve had lots of tit-bits of info shared.  Some from reliable people, some not.  Some said to be from inside the club, some from the usual “I know the grandad of the bloke on the gate” type source.

There appears to be a “PR machine” out there imho creating a “back-story” that makes Nige’s sacking (and Rennie and Euell’s too) sound completely justified.  That’s not defending Nige nor defending the sackings, because the things I’ve heard from one person contradict someone else’s story, but still with a view to undermining Nige (and his team).

When the Chairman gives an interview without explanations, it allows that PR machine to create the reasons.  I’m sure there are some bits of truth in there, but if you create enough different negative stories / rumours, and push them out there, you’ll change the consensus of opinion, or at least start getting people to question it.

It all feels a bit convenient to me!

 

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 2
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, nebristolred said:

So we're not being told not Eustace, Rowett nor Williams. Interesting.

Had heard Williams and Manning were of interest. Perhaps they are going to go for someone more established and surprised at applications. Who knows, what a week! Totally unnecessary and unwelcome distraction from two winnable games. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Shauntaylor85 said:

Had heard Williams and Manning were of interest. Perhaps they are going to go for someone more established and surprised at applications. Who knows, what a week! Totally unnecessary and unwelcome distraction from two winnable games. 

Not sure williams in the running.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The whole thing feels to me like the sort of amateur night fiasco we more usually associate with goings on at our traditional rivals.

You sack one of the more respected managers in the game, who has delivered - or is in the process of delivering - on a tough brief - and enjoys huge popularity amongst your fan base. But then you can't get your story straight on why you've done it, you have no one credible to front up and take responsibility, you don't have anyone to replace him and can't convincingly explain the process or criteria for finding the replacement. Which you must anticipate will be a problem because you've got form in this area and it's happened many times before.

It's pathetic. Now I've often scratched my head on discovering someone perfectly rational and respectable is a Rovers supporter, asking myself how they can possibly want to be associated with such tinpot losers. I have a horrible creeping feeling that anyone looking from the outside at the Lansdown's Bristol City would conclude that we're not much better.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...