LeazesMag 0 Posted February 14, 2006 Share Posted February 14, 2006 (edited) Is my question getting ignored then? 94460[/snapback] howay man Gol..I've said a few times if he makes another nonsensical appointment like fuckwit eg Bruce or Hoddle, then he's lost my support on football grounds. We all make mistakes but 2 major major ones like that is one too many ... However I would be very worried that we could easily end up with someone far far worse than Fred. Easily. As the vast majority out there are worse. In the real world, we would have to get one better, and those who ignore all the facts and think Fred is shit I would hope in the real world have a creditable and guaranteed improvement. Scan the posts, you'll find them...I don't duck straight questions...or give hindsight related answers However I don't consider a manager with a proven track record, or an up and coming one who looks like he might be a top manager to be anything other than sensible appointments in keeping with expectations of this club, or me as a supporter of it. We used to make regular shite ones, of nothing managers, who had won nothing or never would, like most other premiership clubs still do, but as I say that was before Shepherd and the Halls. Edited February 14, 2006 by LeazesMag Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig 6292 Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 For the record Leazes, Gullit didn't win the CWC at Chelsea, Vialli did! Anyway, this is all inconsequential - after all, one bad appointment doesn't make a bad chairman! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 (edited) For the record Leazes, Gullit didn't win the CWC at Chelsea, Vialli did! Anyway, this is all inconsequential - after all, one bad appointment doesn't make a bad chairman! 94490[/snapback] I know he did, just testing, but with Gullits team... absolutely, the same as one bad buy doesn't make a bad manager....or one bad post doesn't make a bad poster.... I'm still waiting for the dozens of chairman who are better than Shepherd and the realistic alternative you have in mind, that you would guarantee would spend more money on the club, input a long term "plan" [laughter] and appoint a nailed on guaranteed success as a manager.... Edited February 15, 2006 by LeazesMag Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig 6292 Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 So because we don't name a suitable alternative, Shepherd is automatically exonorated from any form of blame? In the same vein, if someone didn't(*) name a viable replacement for Souness, would that absolve him from blame for how shit we were? (*) note I say 'didn't' rather than 'can't'... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 (edited) So because we don't name a suitable alternative, Shepherd is automatically exonorated from any form of blame? In the same vein, if someone didn't(*) name a viable replacement for Souness, would that absolve him from blame for how shit we were? (*) note I say 'didn't' rather than 'can't'... 94500[/snapback] Sorry Craig, all of you who are saying Shepherd is shit simply can't come up with anything to substantiate anything to say that he isn't one of the top chairman in the country. The facts regarding ambition of the club, and criteria and standards of choosing managers have all been shown to be way above the level of the vast majority of clubs in this country, to ignore them is basically ignorant. You clearly have an agenda with Shepherd, and for some reason in spite of spending 50m quid this season, appear to think another few million which would otherwise be taken up in dividends will make a difference. What would you actually do with this extra few million quid a year BTW, do you want the club to spend more money, do you really think it should be necessary taking into account what is already being handed over ? And as you seem to think it's alright to apply hindsight, yet are unable to tell us what criteria YOU would apply when choosing managers, nor name a realistic nailed on success at the current time, [as Dalglish with his track record was just as likely to succeed as Hitzfeld is now], unless of course in a few years time the next manager, who you may agree with at the time, has also failed .... and you then say he was a shit appointment - pretty poor mate. The trouble is, I hope that in this instance myself and the others who realise Shepherd does his best for the club - while making mistakes like everyone does - aren't proved right when he goes and we end up with a chairman who runs the club like a tight financial business, and you look back when you realise what a shit chairman really is...although those who remember Westwood, McKeag etc, and refuse to look around at other clubs who already have one, shouldn't really need telling. And - despite your denials - you DID back Souness, therefore backed Shepherd appointing him, AND keeping him too long. Edited February 15, 2006 by LeazesMag Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweetleftpeg 0 Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 The bottom line is this; Fat Fred gets paid £500k a season to make decisions like this, not us. For that wage I'd expect him to make better decisions than he sometimes does, that's not too much to ask for I don't think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig 6292 Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 I have an agenda with Shepherd?? Fuck me gently! ....oh and I never backed Souness. But don't let your obstinateness get in the way of that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 The bottom line is this; Fat Fred gets paid £500k a season to make decisions like this, not us. For that wage I'd expect him to make better decisions than he sometimes does, that's not too much to ask for I don't think. 94528[/snapback] So, would you have been unhappy if Robson had been replaced by Ferguson or Wenger? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shearergol 0 Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 So because we don't name a suitable alternative, Shepherd is automatically exonorated from any form of blame? In the same vein, if someone didn't(*) name a viable replacement for Souness, would that absolve him from blame for how shit we were? (*) note I say 'didn't' rather than 'can't'... 94500[/snapback] Sorry Craig, all of you who are saying Shepherd is shit simply can't come up with anything to substantiate anything to say that he isn't one of the top chairman in the country. The facts regarding ambition of the club, and criteria and standards of choosing managers have all been shown to be way above the level of the vast majority of clubs in this country, to ignore them is basically ignorant. You clearly have an agenda with Shepherd, and for some reason in spite of spending 50m quid this season, appear to think another few million which would otherwise be taken up in dividends will make a difference. What would you actually do with this extra few million quid a year BTW, do you want the club to spend more money, do you really think it should be necessary taking into account what is already being handed over ? And as you seem to think it's alright to apply hindsight, yet are unable to tell us what criteria YOU would apply when choosing managers, nor name a realistic nailed on success at the current time, [as Dalglish with his track record was just as likely to succeed as Hitzfeld is now], unless of course in a few years time the next manager, who you may agree with at the time, has also failed .... and you then say he was a shit appointment - pretty poor mate. The trouble is, I hope that in this instance myself and the others who realise Shepherd does his best for the club - while making mistakes like everyone does - aren't proved right when he goes and we end up with a chairman who runs the club like a tight financial business, and you look back when you realise what a shit chairman really is...although those who remember Westwood, McKeag etc, and refuse to look around at other clubs who already have one, shouldn't really need telling. And - despite your denials - you DID back Souness, therefore backed Shepherd appointing him, AND keeping him too long. 94504[/snapback] And in turn, you DIDN'T back Souness, therefore not backing Shepherd appointing him, AND keeping him too long. Is this the only thing you've not backed him on then? Was the timing of Robson's dismissal correct? What about the backing of Souness over the Bellamy situation? Could Shepherd have stepped in and sorted it? I realise what you've said, about letting the manager get on with his job; but he had the power to stop Souness selling Bellamy, and he didn't exercise that power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweetleftpeg 0 Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 The bottom line is this; Fat Fred gets paid £500k a season to make decisions like this, not us. For that wage I'd expect him to make better decisions than he sometimes does, that's not too much to ask for I don't think. 94528[/snapback] So, would you have been unhappy if Robson had been replaced by Ferguson or Wenger? 94739[/snapback] Of course not. I diven't understand the question like. My point is he's payed alot of money to make decisions yet he's made a few shite ones, which makes him open to a slagging imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 The bottom line is this; Fat Fred gets paid £500k a season to make decisions like this, not us. For that wage I'd expect him to make better decisions than he sometimes does, that's not too much to ask for I don't think. 94528[/snapback] So, would you have been unhappy if Robson had been replaced by Ferguson or Wenger? 94739[/snapback] Of course not. I diven't understand the question like. My point is he's payed alot of money to make decisions yet he's made a few shite ones, which makes him open to a slagging imo. 94756[/snapback] Neither did I tbh, when I said to Leazes the timing of Robson's departure was wrong he asked me that so I assumed it MUST be relevent Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 (edited) So because we don't name a suitable alternative, Shepherd is automatically exonorated from any form of blame? In the same vein, if someone didn't(*) name a viable replacement for Souness, would that absolve him from blame for how shit we were? (*) note I say 'didn't' rather than 'can't'... 94500[/snapback] Sorry Craig, all of you who are saying Shepherd is shit simply can't come up with anything to substantiate anything to say that he isn't one of the top chairman in the country. The facts regarding ambition of the club, and criteria and standards of choosing managers have all been shown to be way above the level of the vast majority of clubs in this country, to ignore them is basically ignorant. You clearly have an agenda with Shepherd, and for some reason in spite of spending 50m quid this season, appear to think another few million which would otherwise be taken up in dividends will make a difference. What would you actually do with this extra few million quid a year BTW, do you want the club to spend more money, do you really think it should be necessary taking into account what is already being handed over ? And as you seem to think it's alright to apply hindsight, yet are unable to tell us what criteria YOU would apply when choosing managers, nor name a realistic nailed on success at the current time, [as Dalglish with his track record was just as likely to succeed as Hitzfeld is now], unless of course in a few years time the next manager, who you may agree with at the time, has also failed .... and you then say he was a shit appointment - pretty poor mate. The trouble is, I hope that in this instance myself and the others who realise Shepherd does his best for the club - while making mistakes like everyone does - aren't proved right when he goes and we end up with a chairman who runs the club like a tight financial business, and you look back when you realise what a shit chairman really is...although those who remember Westwood, McKeag etc, and refuse to look around at other clubs who already have one, shouldn't really need telling. And - despite your denials - you DID back Souness, therefore backed Shepherd appointing him, AND keeping him too long. 94504[/snapback] And in turn, you DIDN'T back Souness, therefore not backing Shepherd appointing him, AND keeping him too long. Is this the only thing you've not backed him on then? Was the timing of Robson's dismissal correct? What about the backing of Souness over the Bellamy situation? Could Shepherd have stepped in and sorted it? I realise what you've said, about letting the manager get on with his job; but he had the power to stop Souness selling Bellamy, and he didn't exercise that power. 94750[/snapback] All I've ever said, is he does what he is supposed to do well most of the time, sure he makes mistakes, who doesn't, but he puts the money we all pay back into buying top players for the club, and appoints managers who the board collectively think will bring success to the club. Its difficult to understand how some of you can't see this. Do you really, really think our managers need MORE money, do you actually WANT them to spend more money ? And why do you blame the chairman for the manager choosing to buy [and sell] players that the manager assessed ? The fact that he didn't stop the manager selling Bellamy meant he was doing what a chairman should do, my personal feelings about Bellamys playing ability don't come into it. Nor does yours, Craigs or anyone elses, he supports his manager to the hilt, and then if he fails he has to sack him. The point about Wenger is that, you say you would have been happy with Wenger taking over from Robson. The point of this is therefore that the TIMING of sacking Robson is irrelevant, its the replacement that counts. Its interesting these comments of Fred sacking managers early in the season being wrong, do you think Fred wanted to sack them early, do you think he [or us] expected or wanted a poor start to the season ? Do you think he should have left it until LATER in the season, or would you be saying now, like you are about Souness, he should have been binned EARLIER.... Sure some people think we should have someone else, but sometimes you have to be careful what you wish for, somehow I think a season or two watching or supporting about 16 of the other premiership clubs would sharp change your mind. In the end, no one knows how things are going to pan out sometimes, you have to react to situations as they happen if they don't go the way you hope or expect but I believe Fred has the good of the club at heart and wants success as much as me and you. Edited February 15, 2006 by LeazesMag Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 The timing of the sacking of Robson meant that the list of candidates available to succeed him was severely limited, therefore it's completely relevent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 The timing of the sacking of Robson meant that the list of candidates available to succeed him was severely limited, therefore it's completely relevent. 94824[/snapback] Did YOU expect to start that season poorly....what with KLUIVERT, and the other signings we made ..... Is there no end to this hindsight .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig 6292 Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 The timing of the sacking of Robson meant that the list of candidates available to succeed him was severely limited, therefore it's completely relevent. 94824[/snapback] Did YOU expect to start that season poorly....what with KLUIVERT, and the other signings we made ..... Is there no end to this hindsight .... 94828[/snapback] I echo Alex's: "The timing of the sacking of Robson meant that the list of candidates available to succeed him was severely limited, therefore it's completely relevent." At the time he was sacked, we all said that the timing couldn't have been worse - can hardly blame that on hindsight! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 The timing of the sacking of Robson meant that the list of candidates available to succeed him was severely limited, therefore it's completely relevent. 94824[/snapback] Did YOU expect to start that season poorly....what with KLUIVERT, and the other signings we made ..... Is there no end to this hindsight .... 94828[/snapback] I echo Alex's: "The timing of the sacking of Robson meant that the list of candidates available to succeed him was severely limited, therefore it's completely relevent." At the time he was sacked, we all said that the timing couldn't have been worse - can hardly blame that on hindsight! 94830[/snapback] On the contrary, you were all saying how great the signings in the summer had been, especially the fat Dutch twat and that we would be pushing for the Champions League again under Robson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 The timing of the sacking of Robson meant that the list of candidates available to succeed him was severely limited, therefore it's completely relevent. 94824[/snapback] Did YOU expect to start that season poorly....what with KLUIVERT, and the other signings we made ..... Is there no end to this hindsight .... 94828[/snapback] No, I didn't expect it to start as poorly as it did. However the signs were there that Robson was no longer taking the team forward, what with some questionable signings, falling from 3rd to 5th etc. Also, rumours were rife about players taking the piss out of him, doing what they wanted around the town etc. Shepherd had also publicly said Robson was going at the end of the season thus further undermining his authority. In addition to that, because of his age, Robson should never have been more than a stop-gap and contingency plans regarding his replacement should have been made. Probably involving Robson being given some sort of role as an ambassador for the club or whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 The timing of the sacking of Robson meant that the list of candidates available to succeed him was severely limited, therefore it's completely relevent. 94824[/snapback] Did YOU expect to start that season poorly....what with KLUIVERT, and the other signings we made ..... Is there no end to this hindsight .... 94828[/snapback] No, I didn't expect it to start as poorly as it did. thank you, end of story. However the signs were there that Robson was no longer taking the team forward, what with some questionable signings, falling from 3rd to 5th etc. Also, rumours were rife about players taking the piss out of him, doing what they wanted around the town etc. Shepherd had also publicly said Robson was going at the end of the season thus further undermining his authority. In addition to that, because of his age, Robson should never have been more than a stop-gap and contingency plans regarding his replacement should have been made. Probably involving Robson being given some sort of role as an ambassador for the club or whatever. 94834[/snapback] So you think we should have kept Robson until later....... But we should have sacked Souness earlier ..... fucking joke this. You talk to me about having a crystal ball, at least I don't look at it afterwards .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 I give up LM, I've said nothing of the sort, whenever anyone makes a relevent point you disagree with you put words into their mouth in order to back up your shaky argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 I give up LM, I've said nothing of the sort, whenever anyone makes a relevent point you disagree with you put words into their mouth in order to back up your shaky argument. 94838[/snapback] Its a stone cold FACT Alex, that most of you thought we had made good signings that summer that would get us moving forward again, so to claim that Shepherd was wrong to see how the season was going to pan out is simply untrue, he had to react to the situation when we made that poor start, either keep him and we may recover as we had done previously, or make a change. You can't have it both ways and simply say later what he should have done .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 Leazes, you're talking shite and making stuff up regarding what I've said (dunno about others) so I'm leaving it alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maggiespaws 0 Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 I have to say, I see Leazes point on this one. If you put hindsight aside, Dalglish at Blackburn had a good track record (not so good at Liverpool - but everyone has to cut their teeth). Gullit left Chelsea in a better position then when he started with him and looked like a manager who embraced modern working and training techniques. Robson's track record spoke for itself. No comment needed. Souness had some scottish success, but really, you could see form his record at Blackburn and Liverpool the he was never going to be a good appointment. Sheperd to my mind has done what a chairman should do. 1. Try to appoint a manager that will take the club forward 2. Back his manager (with both money and support) 3. Manage the clubs financial state and through investment etc strengthen the club He's done all 3 has he not? (again, ignoring hindsight) His fatal mistake was firing Robson without a suitable replacement. This meant that he had to settle for someone who did not meet point 1 - Souness. He had no way of knowing that Dalglish or Gullit would turn out the way they did. I know I didn't. There was no writing on the wall for those two. SJH put the club in the strongest position I think it's ever been in, so in that sense, FS inherited the golden egg. His job was to take that golden egg and turn it into a platinum one. Something I honestly believe he is trying to do. But it's not any easy task. In some ways, SJH had an easier one. If what he said in the brothel is actually true (we all know that sleazy journos like to take one comment and twist it into something else to make a story) then I have not forgiven him for that. It was inexcusable. But we don't have to love our chairman for him to do a good job though do we? I also agree that his timing has left a little to be desired. I didn't like the way he got rid of SBR and the bad position it forced us into. He's not perfect but I think there are worse chairmen out there we could be stuck with. The grass is not always greener - as we've found out with managers. He needs to get this next appt right as one mistake is forgivable, in business two is not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shearergol 0 Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 Most people (on whichever board it was) wanted Robson gone before the start of the season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 If the brothel story wasn't true there would have been legal action. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maggiespaws 0 Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 If the brothel story wasn't true there would have been legal action. 94873[/snapback] Ah yes - I'd forgotten about that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now