Jump to content
IGNORED

Today's Pre Match Presser

Tomo

By Tomo
in Football Chat

 Share

Recommended Posts

Glen hump

Glen hump

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, phantom said:

Straws being grasped at desperately here, if he was unwell they couldn't sack him, nobody can sack someone based on ill health

Buying too much into sound bites that the club have released recently

It's no secret internally NPs days have been numbered but the axe started swinging after the Leeds fixture

The Coventry win buggered things up for them, he was a gonna if he didn’t win that game, was just a matter of time 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Marina's Rolls Royce

Marina's Rolls Royce

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, phantom said:

Straws being grasped at desperately here, if he was unwell they couldn't sack him, nobody can sack someone based on ill health

Buying too much into sound bites that the club have released recently

It's no secret internally NPs days have been numbered but the axe started swinging after the Leeds fixture

Of course not but any club can sack any Manager at any time- they never need an excuse they just do it and have to pay the remainder of the contract. It's how football works. My point is that they may have hid behind the results which elsewhere I stated, if so, was a "damn lie". The results were not bad enough in isolation.

I don't buy into soundbites coming out of BCFC or OTIB. I have an opinion and genuinely don't give a flying fig if it isn't a popular one, adheres to the narrative or gets 'likes' or 'facepalms'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Glen hump

Glen hump

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Marina's Rolls Royce said:

Of course not but any club can sack any Manager at any time- they never need an excuse they just do it and have to pay the remainder of the contract. It's how football works. My point is that they may have hid behind the results which elsewhere I stated, if so, was a "damn lie". The results were not bad enough in isolation.

I don't buy into soundbites coming out of BCFC or OTIB. I have an opinion and genuinely don't give a flying fig if it isn't a popular one, adheres to the narrative or gets 'likes' or 'facepalms'.

Fair play, opinions are like arseholes 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zuni

Zuni

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, phantom said:

Straws being grasped at desperately here, if he was unwell they couldn't sack him, nobody can sack someone based on ill health

Buying too much into sound bites that the club have released recently

It's no secret internally NPs days have been numbered but the axe started swinging after the Leeds fixture

This was the issue they had before, wanted to get rid but had to pull back last minute re- health issues. They have had to wait for a different "trigger" to move him on, possibly performance related.

Again, I reference the day of the Radio Bristol interview by Gould that was hastily arranged and the media being summoned to the HPC.

Interesting day that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Son of Fred

Son of Fred

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, JP Hampton said:

Yeah imagine having three of the most significant, coach, trainer and medic, gone in the blink of an eye must be very difficult for the players too. 

Indeed- it's all very well (and fair enough in many ways) to say they're well paid professionals..

Bottom line is they're human,just like everyone else.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr Popodopolous

Mr Popodopolous

Posted
Posted

Rumours or not, for the injury list to rise from 6 to 8 after an International break is quite something.

Naismith and Williams joined the list ahead of the Coventry game and were not on International duty so that can't be attributed either.

While McCrorie, Tanner, Atkinson, Vyner, Benarous all remained out and were medium to long term.

Wells was injured at Leeds and remained so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Merrick's Marvels

Merrick's Marvels

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

I did chuckle when he said that….but it got lost amongst all the other stuff that was in that interview.

I found it staggering and completely unsurprising all that the same time.

Maybe staggering because he said it out loud, unsurprising because it just confirmed how useless they are at the football side of things.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
pongo88

pongo88

Posted
Posted
37 minutes ago, CyderInACan said:

Given Jon's faculties, I'd imagine he's googled "Agents" and is currently getting loads of return calls from Thomas Cook & Lunn Polly! 

………..and then the answer “computer says no”

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Charlie BCFC

Charlie BCFC

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Rumours or not, for the injury list to rise from 6 to 8 after an International break is quite something.

Naismith and Williams joined the list ahead of the Coventry game and were not on International duty so that can't be attributed either.

While McCrorie, Tanner, Atkinson, Vyner, Benarous all remained out and were medium to long term.

Wells was injured at Leeds and remained so.

Definitely backs up what @Bcfcshags was saying around why Rennie went. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
REDOXO

REDOXO

Posted
Posted
38 minutes ago, phantom said:

Straws being grasped at desperately here, if he was unwell they couldn't sack him, nobody can sack someone based on ill health

Buying too much into sound bites that the club have released recently

It's no secret internally NPs days have been numbered but the axe started swinging after the Leeds fixture

If he was getting his contract paid up then the ill health is irrelevant to his dismissal and the only reason said publicly was results. 
 

Most of us are ordinary employees that have protections under law. 
 

However what has gone on here is scum baggery of mammoth proportions. Coming from the owner, the son, the other board member and if true (allegedly) Brian T 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Bard

The Bard

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Rumours or not, for the injury list to rise from 6 to 8 after an International break is quite something.

Naismith and Williams joined the list ahead of the Coventry game and were not on International duty so that can't be attributed either.

While McCrorie, Tanner, Atkinson, Vyner, Benarous all remained out and were medium to long term.

Wells was injured at Leeds and remained so.

Think you've nailed the pretext for the sacking right there.

Tinnion referenced fitness without specifically saying this was the reason.

Given this period is when the rumours about Pearson being removed started in earnest, they would've been watching intently for anything that they could point at as justification for sacking. Having negligent assistants could be used. 

As someone said, the Coventry result probably scuppered their plans.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
petehinton

petehinton

Posted
Posted
33 minutes ago, Zuni said:

This was the issue they had before, wanted to get rid but had to pull back last minute re- health issues. They have had to wait for a different "trigger" to move him on, possibly performance related.

Again, I reference the day of the Radio Bristol interview by Gould that was hastily arranged and the media being summoned to the HPC.

Interesting day that.

Which interview is this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Glen hump

Glen hump

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, REDOXO said:

If he was getting his contract paid up then the ill health is irrelevant to his dismissal and the only reason said publicly was results. 
 

Most of us are ordinary employees that have protections under law. 
 

However what has gone on here is scum baggery of mammoth proportions. Coming from the owner, the son, the other board member and if true (allegedly) Brian T 

Think Brian’s interview gave the game away, he was really uncomfortable, think he knew he’d been rumbled 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Davefevs

Davefevs

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Rumours or not, for the injury list to rise from 6 to 8 after an International break is quite something.

Naismith and Williams joined the list ahead of the Coventry game and were not on International duty so that can't be attributed either.

While McCrorie, Tanner, Atkinson, Vyner, Benarous all remained out and were medium to long term.

Wells was injured at Leeds and remained so.

Naismith was injured at Leeds, calf tightened in last 5-10 minutes.  Heard about it earlyish in international break, so not something that happened on return.  I think some posters alluded to it without saying so during the break, because they’d heard the same.

This is a simple example of how a bit of “information” (mis-information - who knows), gets put out there and people start making 2+2 calculations.

Thats not having a go at you Mr P. btw, it’s just how these things work.  And it’s fine to question based on new information, the problem is being able to tell what is truthful and what isn’t.

  • Thanks 1
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.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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