|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on Feb 8, 2021 9:52:52 GMT
The bottom line is also known as the crack of the arse. Joking aside, probably the worst board decision I have witnessed is the choice to not back Graham Coughlan when in a strong promotion position and shoehorn Ben Garner in and undo all his hard work in the name of attractive football. I know it’s history now but we would’ve been relegated if not for Cougjlsn and who dismantles a winning team like that? Unbelievable really but something isn’t quite right at the top. Is this a fact, now, that we didn't back Coughlan even though he left before the window opened? |
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on Feb 8, 2021 9:53:51 GMT
“We weren’t in relegation form when Garner was fired” 1 point from last 4 games 12 points from 11 games all season No matter how you look at that, that’s relegation form. Never mind if we look at his entire record, the fact that he took the 4th best team in L1 and made them the worst. Then, when he was backed an unbelievable amount, he could only take them from being the worst in the league to 5th worst in the league. If you think that’s success and good, then I genuinely would question if you’re a Rovers fan, which I do not say lightly. If you just count the games he won then he has a 100% record, which was promotion form. |
|
|
|
Post by bridgwatergas on Feb 8, 2021 9:55:20 GMT
I’m going to leave it here with one final post as it’s now the build up to a must win game on Tuesday. My final position is that regardless of the previous managers faults, whether you liked him or disliked him. If you can get over the loss of form at the end of last season or not. If you think the recruitment was good, bad, indifferent or that Garner loves LBs and hates strikers. That’s your prerogative. But make no mistake. When BG was sacked we were not in relegation form, we were not in the relegation places and we were improving as a team. Unbeaten against teams around us and below us. We now have a team that is on the verge of relegation. Awful form, not won in 9 games and changed in terms of formation and personnel on a weekly basis. We have lost or drawn to teams around us and below us. We ship goals like the titanic ships in water and can’t score for toffee. Changing manager when we did was one of the worst board level decisions I have ever witnessed. If we go down it’s due to the boards decision to sack a manager and down to Tisdale due to performance and results. That is the bottom line here. I know your stance is unpopular on here but I'm 100% with you. I believe Garner was building something and there was always going to be bumpsnon the way especially when you totally overhaul a squad. He was bought in to do this and people wanted immediate results but it dosent work like that history has shown it. If Garner was still here I believe we would be sat mid table and not to threatened with relegation. The board jumped too quickly they lost patience as they expected immediate results and now we are left with PT not knowing what system to play not knowing his best players and talking absolute drivel in his interviews. |
|
|
|
Post by o2o2bo2ba on Feb 8, 2021 9:59:00 GMT
That is the bottom line here. The bottom line is we were promotion material when BG took over, and left fighting relegation when BG left. His assembled squad just isn't good enough compared to last season up until December. He should have been sacked after Southend away. BG has put us back years. And destroyed 5 years of improving hard work. It's as disengenuous to consider Rodman a right back as it is to consider Alfie one (which he was played under BG). I suppose that means we had 4 RWB under BG? 5 under PT if you include Ehmer?! Tisdale should stay and be given just as many matches as BG had, but for me this isn't unconditional. CarltsBG is correct...our form and performances are woeful, much like they were this time last year actually, under BG. If we go down, Tis has to go. That's my line. Everyone draws theirs. But, if Tis can use his experience and gain momentum, he definitely deserves to be given at least one transfer window to prove his worth in this division. |
|
henry
Reserve Team
Posts: 365
|
Post by henry on Feb 8, 2021 10:03:23 GMT
Joking aside, probably the worst board decision I have witnessed is the choice to not back Graham Coughlan when in a strong promotion position and shoehorn Ben Garner in and undo all his hard work in the name of attractive football. I know it’s history now but we would’ve been relegated if not for Cougjlsn and who dismantles a winning team like that? Unbelievable really but something isn’t quite right at the top. Is this a fact, now, that we didn't back Coughlan even though he left before the window opened? Fact? Who knows but I think it is common knowledge in certain circles and from what Coghlan hinted at the time that there was no money for strengthening the squad and a major factor in him leaving for Mansfield. Basically the board wouldn’t back him. Which does contradict slightly the appointment of Garner and his dismantlling and rebuilding. Nothing added up at the time and still doesn’t. |
|
|
|
Post by o2o2bo2ba on Feb 8, 2021 10:08:15 GMT
I’m going to leave it here with one final post as it’s now the build up to a must win game on Tuesday. My final position is that regardless of the previous managers faults, whether you liked him or disliked him. If you can get over the loss of form at the end of last season or not. If you think the recruitment was good, bad, indifferent or that Garner loves LBs and hates strikers. That’s your prerogative. But make no mistake. When BG was sacked we were not in relegation form, we were not in the relegation places and we were improving as a team. Unbeaten against teams around us and below us. We now have a team that is on the verge of relegation. Awful form, not won in 9 games and changed in terms of formation and personnel on a weekly basis. We have lost or drawn to teams around us and below us. We ship goals like the titanic ships in water and can’t score for toffee. Changing manager when we did was one of the worst board level decisions I have ever witnessed. If we go down it’s due to the boards decision to sack a manager and down to Tisdale due to performance and results. That is the bottom line here. I know your stance is unpopular on here but I'm 100% with you. I believe Garner was building something and there was always going to be bumpsnon the way especially when you totally overhaul a squad. He was bought in to do this and people wanted immediate results but it dosent work like that history has shown it. If Garner was still here I believe we would be sat mid table and not to threatened with relegation. The board jumped too quickly they lost patience as they expected immediate results and now we are left with PT not knowing what system to play not knowing his best players and talking absolute drivel in his interviews. Respect it's your opinion, but after investing time and money following (when we were allowed to) I completely 100% disagree. If you were at Southend, you surely would be thinking differently. It wasn't a "not my squad" debate, it was the " I'm scratching my beard watching a car crash happen in front of me and have no idea how to make affective change" .... and then make like for like subs, and feed us b s in post match by blaming officials. Or the pitch. Or the weather. Or the journey. Or injuries. In essence, under BG we didn't deserve anything out of the games we have lost. Mainly because we were sussed... |
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on Feb 8, 2021 10:18:30 GMT
I’m going to leave it here with one final post as it’s now the build up to a must win game on Tuesday. My final position is that regardless of the previous managers faults, whether you liked him or disliked him. If you can get over the loss of form at the end of last season or not. If you think the recruitment was good, bad, indifferent or that Garner loves LBs and hates strikers. That’s your prerogative. But make no mistake. When BG was sacked we were not in relegation form, we were not in the relegation places and we were improving as a team. Unbeaten against teams around us and below us. We now have a team that is on the verge of relegation. Awful form, not won in 9 games and changed in terms of formation and personnel on a weekly basis. We have lost or drawn to teams around us and below us. We ship goals like the titanic ships in water and can’t score for toffee. Changing manager when we did was one of the worst board level decisions I have ever witnessed. If we go down it’s due to the boards decision to sack a manager and down to Tisdale due to performance and results. That is the bottom line here. I know your stance is unpopular on here but I'm 100% with you. I believe Garner was building something and there was always going to be bumpsnon the way especially when you totally overhaul a squad. He was bought in to do this and people wanted immediate results but it dosent work like that history has shown it. If Garner was still here I believe we would be sat mid table and not to threatened with relegation. The board jumped too quickly they lost patience as they expected immediate results and now we are left with PT not knowing what system to play not knowing his best players and talking absolute drivel in his interviews. I don't think this belief is necessarily that unpopular. I think it's the way the bloke has proven it beyond any doubt, bottom line, that it's a fact, over and over again, is the unpopular bit. In any case, I'd rather have PT talking drivel than BG crying his eyes out over refereeing decisions. |
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on Feb 8, 2021 10:20:06 GMT
Is this a fact, now, that we didn't back Coughlan even though he left before the window opened? Fact? Who knows but I think it is common knowledge in certain circles and from what Coghlan hinted at the time that there was no money for strengthening the squad and a major factor in him leaving for Mansfield. Basically the board wouldn’t back him. Which does contradict slightly the appointment of Garner and his dismantlling and rebuilding. Nothing added up at the time and still doesn’t. Exactly, the facts contradict what Coughlan hinted at. Coughlan hinted at a lot of things, but ultimately he proved himself untrustworthy. And when a manager says they're not backed, generally, istm, it doesn't mean they were given nothing, it usually means they weren't given exactly what they wanted. |
|
|
|
Post by axegas on Feb 8, 2021 10:36:33 GMT
Fact? Who knows but I think it is common knowledge in certain circles and from what Coghlan hinted at the time that there was no money for strengthening the squad and a major factor in him leaving for Mansfield. Basically the board wouldn’t back him. Which does contradict slightly the appointment of Garner and his dismantlling and rebuilding. Nothing added up at the time and still doesn’t. Exactly, the facts contradict what Coughlan hinted at. Coughlan hinted at a lot of things, but ultimately he proved himself untrustworthy. And when a manager says they're not backed, generally, istm, it doesn't mean they were given nothing, it usually means they weren't given exactly what they wanted. I seem to remember the surprise at the amount of backing that Garner got in that window, too. Didn’t we end up making seven signings and keeping JCH? |
|
|
|
Post by Gassy on Feb 8, 2021 10:41:47 GMT
What I find odd is Carlts suggesting recruitment was also down to TW, when Garner himself took responsibility (by announcement through the LMA) of transfers, building the squad and lowering the age so successfully.
So who’s right, Garner in here or Garner on there?
|
|
henry
Reserve Team
Posts: 365
|
Post by henry on Feb 8, 2021 11:06:41 GMT
Fact? Who knows but I think it is common knowledge in certain circles and from what Coghlan hinted at the time that there was no money for strengthening the squad and a major factor in him leaving for Mansfield. Basically the board wouldn’t back him. Which does contradict slightly the appointment of Garner and his dismantlling and rebuilding. Nothing added up at the time and still doesn’t. Exactly, the facts contradict what Coughlan hinted at. Coughlan hinted at a lot of things, but ultimately he proved himself untrustworthy. And when a manager says they're not backed, generally, istm, it doesn't mean they were given nothing, it usually means they weren't given exactly what they wanted. If that what it seems to you then so be it but that doesn’t sit right with me. |
|
henry
Reserve Team
Posts: 365
|
Post by henry on Feb 8, 2021 11:08:31 GMT
Exactly, the facts contradict what Coughlan hinted at. Coughlan hinted at a lot of things, but ultimately he proved himself untrustworthy. And when a manager says they're not backed, generally, istm, it doesn't mean they were given nothing, it usually means they weren't given exactly what they wanted. I seem to remember the surprise at the amount of backing that Garner got in that window, too. Didn’t we end up making seven signings and keeping JCH? You could put that down to the board wanting Coughlen out and Garner in to implement this new image the club wanted of playing attractive football which further strengthens my view on the whole sorry debacle. |
|
|
|
Post by gasandelectricity on Feb 8, 2021 12:15:09 GMT
I don’t think the investment in Garner proves that the board were willing to back GC. I think the truth is somewhere in between and TWs comments on an interview with one of his previous aides in the summer (can’t remember who - DC also played for them) seemed to back that sort of view up.
Widdrington himself said the board didn’t want to bring in more players in the mould of Tom Davies, JCH, Abu Ogogo. They wanted to bring in more talented players on the ball.
Very feasible that GC didn’t agree with that and that there was a bit of a stalemate. However, the club was prepared to back BG style players.
Which hasn’t worked out very well at all...
Give me a squad of Tom Davies and Abu Ogogo style players all week. They might be ‘sh**’ but they’ll lay their bodies down on the ground for you.
|
|
|
|
Post by bluebiro on Feb 8, 2021 13:16:50 GMT
I’m going to leave it here with one final post as it’s now the build up to a must win game on Tuesday. My final position is that regardless of the previous managers faults, whether you liked him or disliked him. If you can get over the loss of form at the end of last season or not. If you think the recruitment was good, bad, indifferent or that Garner loves LBs and hates strikers. That’s your prerogative. But make no mistake. When BG was sacked we were not in relegation form, we were not in the relegation places and we were improving as a team. Unbeaten against teams around us and below us. We now have a team that is on the verge of relegation. Awful form, not won in 9 games and changed in terms of formation and personnel on a weekly basis. We have lost or drawn to teams around us and below us. We ship goals like the titanic ships in water and can’t score for toffee. Changing manager when we did was one of the worst board level decisions I have ever witnessed. If we go down it’s due to the boards decision to sack a manager and down to Tisdale due to performance and results. That is the bottom line here. one.of the worst board level decisions that have ever been witnessed in any field let alone football was appointing garner |
|
|
|
Post by justin blue on Feb 8, 2021 14:44:51 GMT
I’m going to leave it here with one final post as it’s now the build up to a must win game on Tuesday. My final position is that regardless of the previous managers faults, whether you liked him or disliked him. If you can get over the loss of form at the end of last season or not. If you think the recruitment was good, bad, indifferent or that Garner loves LBs and hates strikers. That’s your prerogative. But make no mistake. When BG was sacked we were not in relegation form, we were not in the relegation places and we were improving as a team. Unbeaten against teams around us and below us. We now have a team that is on the verge of relegation. Awful form, not won in 9 games and changed in terms of formation and personnel on a weekly basis. We have lost or drawn to teams around us and below us. We ship goals like the titanic ships in water and can’t score for toffee. Changing manager when we did was one of the worst board level decisions I have ever witnessed. If we go down it’s due to the boards decision to sack a manager and down to Tisdale due to performance and results. That is the bottom line here. I have some sympathy with your position. Though I think BG was lucky to even be still in the job, results had improved and the fleetwood result was almost completely down to awful goalkeeping, so he was unlucky there. On the other hand the few good results Garner got had a fair slice of luck about them with penalties and teams finishing with ten men. Personally At that time I would have given Garner another game or two. However taking his tenure as a whole he should have been sent packing long before he was. |
|
|
|
Post by carlts2020 on Feb 8, 2021 15:10:45 GMT
I’m going to leave it here with one final post as it’s now the build up to a must win game on Tuesday. My final position is that regardless of the previous managers faults, whether you liked him or disliked him. If you can get over the loss of form at the end of last season or not. If you think the recruitment was good, bad, indifferent or that Garner loves LBs and hates strikers. That’s your prerogative. But make no mistake. When BG was sacked we were not in relegation form, we were not in the relegation places and we were improving as a team. Unbeaten against teams around us and below us. We now have a team that is on the verge of relegation. Awful form, not won in 9 games and changed in terms of formation and personnel on a weekly basis. We have lost or drawn to teams around us and below us. We ship goals like the titanic ships in water and can’t score for toffee. Changing manager when we did was one of the worst board level decisions I have ever witnessed. If we go down it’s due to the boards decision to sack a manager and down to Tisdale due to performance and results. That is the bottom line here. one.of the worst board level decisions that have ever been witnessed in any field let alone football was appointing garner FYI this was PTs record in the league at MK Dons. His last role before we appointed him: 16 Games W 4 D 1 L 11 goals against 25 goals for 13 Points 13 PPM 0.81 PTs current league record for Rovers: 14 Games W 3 D 3 L 8 goals against 22 goals for 13 Points 12 PPM 0.86 In 30 games since the start of the 19/20 season he has won 7. Out of 90 possible points PT has accumulated 25. That is 0.27 Points per match at league one level. We sacked Garner on a total average of 0.35. Considering we sacked Garner when he was on a run of 1.38 PPG, his best run of points, you can probably see why I am so insistent it was a horrendous error of judgement by the board. I’m genuinely not having a dig at PT but he is quite clearly out of his depth in league one. He has a great record in lower leagues and that can never be taken away or disrespected. What was the appointment based on? This is current performance for a manager with 700 games under his belt. It’s utter negligence by the board. |
|
|
|
Post by gasandelectricity on Feb 8, 2021 15:32:51 GMT
one.of the worst board level decisions that have ever been witnessed in any field let alone football was appointing garner FYI this was PTs record in the league at MK Dons. His last role before we appointed him: 16 Games W 4 D 1 L 11 goals against 25 goals for 13 Points 13 PPM 0.81 PTs current league record for Rovers: 14 Games W 3 D 3 L 8 goals against 22 goals for 13 Points 12 PPM 0.86 In 30 games since the start of the 19/20 season he has won 7. Out of 90 possible points PT has accumulated 25. That is 0.27 Points per match at league one level. We sacked Garner on a total average of 0.35. Considering we sacked Garner when he was on a run of 1.38 PPG, his best run of points, you can probably see why I am so insistent it was a horrendous error of judgement by the board. I’m genuinely not having a dig at PT but he is quite clearly out of his depth in league one. He has a great record in lower leagues and that can never be taken away or disrespected. What was the appointment based on? This is current performance for a manager with 700 games under his belt. It’s utter negligence by the board. If you stopped comparing him to BG you’d probably get a lot more sympathy to your cause. Those stats don’t look good but neither did BGs and that’s why he got the chop. He’s gone. Sad times for you, good for me because I didn’t believe in him. |
|
|
|
Post by carlts2020 on Feb 8, 2021 15:36:42 GMT
There is no cause or a requirement for sympathy.
The quality of our board time and time again fail the club.
At the time of BG sacking look at the available managers with decent, recent League one records.
The option was retain BG and stick to the plan or hire someone capable and current at league one level.
The stat comparison is to show two things - at the point of sacking BG the decision was wrong and the hiring process was a joke and is proving so and is likely to take us down.
|
|
|
|
Post by bluebiro on Feb 8, 2021 15:43:53 GMT
one.of the worst board level decisions that have ever been witnessed in any field let alone football was appointing garner FYI this was PTs record in the league at MK Dons. His last role before we appointed him: 16 Games W 4 D 1 L 11 goals against 25 goals for 13 Points 13 PPM 0.81 PTs current league record for Rovers: 14 Games W 3 D 3 L 8 goals against 22 goals for 13 Points 12 PPM 0.86 In 30 games since the start of the 19/20 season he has won 7. Out of 90 possible points PT has accumulated 25. That is 0.27 Points per match at league one level. We sacked Garner on a total average of 0.35. Considering we sacked Garner when he was on a run of 1.38 PPG, his best run of points, you can probably see why I am so insistent it was a horrendous error of judgement by the board. I’m genuinely not having a dig at PT but he is quite clearly out of his depth in league one. He has a great record in lower leagues and that can never be taken away or disrespected. What was the appointment based on? This is current performance for a manager with 700 games under his belt. It’s utter negligence by the board. unfair to compare stats with garner. The guy had a 100 percent win record as draws and losses never counted. |
|
|
|
Post by o2o2bo2ba on Feb 8, 2021 17:42:02 GMT
There is no cause or a requirement for sympathy. The quality of our board time and time again fail the club. At the time of BG sacking look at the available managers with decent, recent League one records. The option was retain BG and stick to the plan or hire someone capable and current at league one level. The stat comparison is to show two things - at the point of sacking BG the decision was wrong and the hiring process was a joke and is proving so and is likely to take us down. At the point of sacking BG, the decision was indeed wrong - it should have been implemented months before. The point you're missing (conveniently) is football management isn't just about stats alone. BG is responsible for turning a potentially promotion team into what we now know is relegation material. |
|
