|
Post by Tilly's Thighs on Oct 4, 2021 13:25:55 GMT
Not being allowed to sign someone (who costs money) and being blocked from signing someone isn't really the same. Eg did they say you can have 200 grand but you're not allowed to spend it on Piggott, or was it more like, we're just not prepared to fork out another £200,000? (on the assumption that is what it was gonna cost) Garner gave his name to the board in the summer when the opportunity to sign him for a reasonable fee was there. They didn't get the deal done and then he started the season in decent form and the price went up. Garner still wanted to get the deal done but the board said no. Would it be Starnes and Tommy who are primarily involved in getting the deal done, or the whole board? Never too sure how these things work.
|
|
|
Post by Gas Go Marching In on Oct 4, 2021 15:20:00 GMT
Their silence as we sink is deafening. But you'll always hear from them in the summer when season tickets need to be sold.
|
|
pirate
Forum Legend
Posts: 18,545
|
Post by pirate on Oct 4, 2021 15:39:08 GMT
The 7th game was a cup game vs Oxford on the 6th October, ten days before the window closed. Just read what he said again and he explicitly said he was sacked after 11 games so the 7 games must surely mean only league games.Something changed after 7 games he states so I don’t believe it was about a blocked signing he wanted.Much more likely is what Roverdrive said about Tisdale being approached,Garner would know that somebody else might be watching games prior to taking over as that apparently happened with him before Coggers was ousted.Anyway it’s all speculation and unless Garner clarifies exactly what he meant,then we’ll never know. It was the Piggott signing. 100%.
|
|
pirate
Forum Legend
Posts: 18,545
|
Post by pirate on Oct 4, 2021 15:39:48 GMT
Garner gave his name to the board in the summer when the opportunity to sign him for a reasonable fee was there. They didn't get the deal done and then he started the season in decent form and the price went up. Garner still wanted to get the deal done but the board said no. Would it be Starnes and Tommy who are primarily involved in getting the deal done, or the whole board? Never too sure how these things work. Starnes mostly.
|
|
pirate
Forum Legend
Posts: 18,545
|
Post by pirate on Oct 4, 2021 15:43:08 GMT
No, not involved in deep negotiations, but privy to knowledge of the deal. Of course I'm not going to name the person, you can believe me or not, I couldn't care less. No idea why other clubs sign him and I didn't say it was an easy deal to do, but the chance to sign him was there and the board failed to get the deal done. View AttachmentThe only fact we know for sure, is that he didn’t sign for any club. That fact alone, tells me it wasn’t really available. Add IMO someone else, would have brought him in. So even if Garner wanted him, I expect a lot of other managers did as well and I board managed to sign him. Or do you not think any other manager wanted him?? That suggests it’s not as simple as the board just blocking a move. Every other board that wanted him agreed. He was available. No doubt about it. You can believe what you want though, that's your prerogative.
|
|
|
Post by Gas Go Marching In on Oct 4, 2021 15:45:38 GMT
Would it be Starnes and Tommy who are primarily involved in getting the deal done, or the whole board? Never too sure how these things work. Starnes mostly. Talking about Starnes, when did we last hear from him? It seems a while...
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Oct 4, 2021 15:49:23 GMT
The 7th game was a cup game vs Oxford on the 6th October, ten days before the window closed. Just read what he said again and he explicitly said he was sacked after 11 games so the 7 games must surely mean only league games.Something changed after 7 games he states so I don’t believe it was about a blocked signing he wanted.Much more likely is what Roverdrive said about Tisdale being approached,Garner would know that somebody else might be watching games prior to taking over as that apparently happened with him before Coggers was ousted.Anyway it’s all speculation and unless Garner clarifies exactly what he meant,then we’ll never know. Garner simply said the "remit changed" which sounds like the board demanded he changed his approach, not that he found out Tisdale was watching from the stands?
|
|
|
Post by warehamgas on Oct 4, 2021 16:12:21 GMT
Around the 7th game mark was when he was blocked by the board from bringing in Piggott, who went on to score 20+ goals that season. The season started a month later last year so the dates tally. Seriously, was BG stopped from getting Pigott? Is this gaschat true or is it something that you believe happened or did it actually, undeniably happen (or rather not happen)? UTG!
|
|
|
Post by playtowin on Oct 4, 2021 16:23:06 GMT
Around the 7th game mark was when he was blocked by the board from bringing in Piggott, who went on to score 20+ goals that season. It was probably also about the point many were tired of 30 passes across the back line then hoof. So maybe he had been told to cut the tippy tappy and try to play in a rovers style of football. ? ? ?
|
|
|
Post by yattongas on Oct 4, 2021 16:31:37 GMT
Manger who couldn’t get the results needed makes excuses . 🙄
|
|
|
Post by lastminutewinner on Oct 4, 2021 16:39:22 GMT
Sounds like too many fingers in the pie at this club. Joey doesn't seem the type to take any interference but here we are losing every other game. Players with decent reputations come here and fail. Seems like whatever we do, we end up the loser.
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on Oct 4, 2021 16:40:36 GMT
Manger who couldn’t get the results needed makes excuses . 🙄 I saw it more as manager who has just utterly humiliated us tries to hint at why we've just been utterly humiliated.
|
|
|
Post by bodies on Oct 4, 2021 17:12:21 GMT
As an outsider looking in, I’d say it was almost certainly recruitment. He made a point, when asked about the difference in his time at Rovers and his start at Swindon, that him and Ben Chorley our DoF had total agreement on player recruitment.
|
|
|
Post by daniel300380 on Oct 4, 2021 17:16:34 GMT
The only fact we know for sure, is that he didn’t sign for any club. That fact alone, tells me it wasn’t really available. Add IMO someone else, would have brought him in. So even if Garner wanted him, I expect a lot of other managers did as well and I board managed to sign him. Or do you not think any other manager wanted him?? That suggests it’s not as simple as the board just blocking a move. Every other board that wanted him agreed. He was available. No doubt about it. You can believe what you want though, that's your prerogative. He was available, yet no club wanted to sign him. Weird IMO. Surprised you think nobody wanted him. Thought you rated him.
|
|
|
Post by yattongas on Oct 4, 2021 17:43:23 GMT
Manger who couldn’t get the results needed makes excuses . 🙄 I saw it more as manager who has just utterly humiliated us tries to hint at why we've just been utterly humiliated. And that….
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Oct 4, 2021 18:04:29 GMT
As an outsider looking in, I’d say it was almost certainly recruitment. He made a point, when asked about the difference in his time at Rovers and his start at Swindon, that him and Ben Chorley our DoF had total agreement on player recruitment. But why refer to the 7th game as if that date had some significance rather then his remit changed during the transfer window? Perhaps he was simply told that results needed to improve in the next few games or he'd be sacked?
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on Oct 4, 2021 18:06:44 GMT
As an outsider looking in, I’d say it was almost certainly recruitment. He made a point, when asked about the difference in his time at Rovers and his start at Swindon, that him and Ben Chorley our DoF had total agreement on player recruitment. But why refer to the 7th game as if that date had some significance rather then his remit changed during the transfer window? Perhaps he was simply told that results needed to improve in the next few games or he'd be sacked? Because that was the last game he won.
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Oct 4, 2021 20:37:21 GMT
But why refer to the 7th game as if that date had some significance rather then his remit changed during the transfer window? Perhaps he was simply told that results needed to improve in the next few games or he'd be sacked? Because that was the last game he won. Not sure what you mean by that response?
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on Oct 4, 2021 21:19:43 GMT
Because that was the last game he won. Not sure what you mean by that response? I'm just supposing that he's saying it all went wrong after 7 games coz that's when it literally started going wrong for his team, results-wise. Before that he got 10 points out of 12, so it wouldn't make sense to say it was going wrong before then. He might have it in his head that that was the moment it went wrong, even if that wasn't quite when the transfer window closed, or quite when Oztumer turned up, or quite when Piggott was missed, or quite when his remit changed, or quite when whatever happened happened.
|
|
pirate
Forum Legend
Posts: 18,545
|
Post by pirate on Oct 4, 2021 22:04:43 GMT
He was available. No doubt about it. You can believe what you want though, that's your prerogative. He was available, yet no club wanted to sign him. Weird IMO. Surprised you think nobody wanted him. Thought you rated him. Maybe other clubs weren't willing to spend the required fee considering the pandemic circumstances, however "modest" the fee might have been?
|
|