henry
Reserve Team
Posts: 365
|
Post by henry on Mar 3, 2021 21:51:15 GMT
Scientific?! Of course it’s opinion based amongst other specifics like can he kick a ball properly. The manager picks a player from the list given if he sees fit if not then he will not give the go ahead for talks, makes common sense. I think we are saying the same thing in that ultimately it’s the manager who decides who to pursue or not and it isn’t based upon TW saying that this player should be signed because I think he’s good... Yes, I think we are but the major point is for me anyway, that a manager cannot be blamed , whoever he may be, for not signing a player he doesn’t think will work in his team that he has had recommended to him by our head of recruitment. Panic or last minute window buys usual end up being trouble in one way or another.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 3, 2021 21:51:49 GMT
It would be interesting to understand all those who are ‘blaming’ TW for poor recruitment to put down exactly what they believe the role Head of Recruitment actually covers and then also what they believe the managers role is..... from the way it’s coming across it seems like there is a sentiment that they believe the manager has / has had no involvement in player recruitment at all? Garner: Tommy go find me your list of all quick, powerful, tricky left wing backs that will cost very little and loads of potential Tommy: here’s one Mr Garner. It’s got loads of names, and I’ve gone to the trouble of highlighting my particular choices that fit the bill Garner: oh that’s a nice list. I’ll go with the one in green highlighted pen. I like green. Maybe I’ll have the one in orange, too. And keep an eye out for another one just in case. Tommy: That was easy. And that’s the crux of the issue as I don’t believe Tommy would highlight players - he would highlight each players strengths and development areas but as you’ve put - it’s still the manager who decides!? So ultimately it’s the manager that is accountable.....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 3, 2021 21:54:07 GMT
I think we are saying the same thing in that ultimately it’s the manager who decides who to pursue or not and it isn’t based upon TW saying that this player should be signed because I think he’s good... Yes, I think we are but the major point is for me anyway, that a manager cannot be blamed , whoever he may be, for not signing a player he doesn’t think will work in his team that he has had recommended to him by our head of recruitment. Panic or last minute window buys usual end up being trouble in one way or another. I agree.... all decisions rest with the manager in terms of signing or not signing and they base that on what they feel is right for the team, the squad and the club....
|
|
|
Post by kampucheagas on Mar 3, 2021 21:58:39 GMT
Yes, I think we are but the major point is for me anyway, that a manager cannot be blamed , whoever he may be, for not signing a player he doesn’t think will work in his team that he has had recommended to him by our head of recruitment. Panic or last minute window buys usual end up being trouble in one way or another. I agree.... all decisions rest with the manager in terms of signing or not signing and they base that on what they feel is right for the team, the squad and the club.... We could save buckets of cash by just sending the manager Pirates wishlist.
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Mar 3, 2021 22:04:13 GMT
I agree.... all decisions rest with the manager in terms of signing or not signing and they base that on what they feel is right for the team, the squad and the club.... We could save buckets of cash by just sending the manager Pirates wishlist. Or TW could save on the travelling expenses and just do all his scouting on YouTube?
|
|
henry
Reserve Team
Posts: 365
|
Post by henry on Mar 3, 2021 22:08:05 GMT
I agree.... all decisions rest with the manager in terms of signing or not signing and they base that on what they feel is right for the team, the squad and the club.... We could save buckets of cash by just sending the manager Pirates wishlist. Or TopperGas as he thinks he’s the Oracle of all things Rovers.
|
|
pirate
Forum Legend
Posts: 19,380
|
Post by pirate on Mar 3, 2021 22:09:58 GMT
That’s fair enough but whilst I respect your opinion/view as I believe you may have some involvement in scouting, without backing it up with something that will substantiate that it’s true, it’s hard for me (especially based upon my experience and knowledge of how HoR roles work) to see that it logically could be true? I can't substantiate that it's true, but I trust the information that was given to me.
|
|
pirate
Forum Legend
Posts: 19,380
|
Post by pirate on Mar 3, 2021 22:12:33 GMT
We could save buckets of cash by just sending the manager Pirates wishlist. Or TW could save on the travelling expenses and just do all his scouting on YouTube? Could have had the lad Jones from Weston for nothing instead of handing Weston their record transfer fee, having watched him in person before he had even made his competitive debut for the club. Just one example.
|
|
|
Post by axegas on Mar 3, 2021 22:17:48 GMT
Or TW could save on the travelling expenses and just do all his scouting on YouTube? Could have had the lad Jones from Weston for nothing instead of handing Weston their record transfer fee, having watched him in person before he had even made his competitive debut for the club. Just one example. Sort of glad we did though in a way, a club like Weston really need that money to help get through the pandemic.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 4, 2021 0:23:54 GMT
That’s fair enough but whilst I respect your opinion/view as I believe you may have some involvement in scouting, without backing it up with something that will substantiate that it’s true, it’s hard for me (especially based upon my experience and knowledge of how HoR roles work) to see that it logically could be true? I can't substantiate that it's true, but I trust the information that was given to me. Which is fair enough..... but without the ‘evidence’ it’s hearsay albeit I know and respect that you trust the person who passed you the information.... question is, who told them and are they trustworthy? I think it’s one of those where know will really know either way as it can’t be proven and depending on where you stand (and for some depending on what the last result was) you’ll either recruitment was atrocious or not and you’ll either blame it all on TW or not.... personally I don’t think our recruitment has been that bad - imbalanced in my opinion and naive for not going with 4 first team out and out strikers, but not bad. We don’t have a bad squad in the main. I blame this on the managers we’ve had and levy some criticism on TW and the board for not giving stronger guidance ....
|
|
pirate
Forum Legend
Posts: 19,380
|
Post by pirate on Mar 4, 2021 0:40:21 GMT
I can't substantiate that it's true, but I trust the information that was given to me. Which is fair enough..... but without the ‘evidence’ it’s hearsay albeit I know and respect that you trust the person who passed you the information.... question is, who told them and are they trustworthy? I think it’s one of those where know will really know either way as it can’t be proven and depending on where you stand (and for some depending on what the last result was) you’ll either recruitment was atrocious or not and you’ll either blame it all on TW or not.... personally I don’t think our recruitment has been that bad - imbalanced in my opinion and naive for not going with 4 first team out and out strikers, but not bad. We don’t have a bad squad in the main. I blame this on the managers we’ve had and levy some criticism on TW and the board for not giving stronger guidance .... I agree to some extent on the second paragraph, for me the striker situation is negligent. Many of us could see the options were inadequate and said so in the summer, unfortunately those in a position of power were seemingly of a different opinion. The failure to rectify the problem in January is even more galling. When you consider we are the second lowest goalscorers in the division, this is ultimately our undoing and could prove even more costly at the end of the season, but hopefully the worst case scenario doesn't happen.
|
|
|
Post by kampucheagas on Mar 4, 2021 7:36:21 GMT
So you think Widdrington did a good job in putting together his list? His list is based upon players stats and availability and cost etc? It’s scientific, not based upon opinion.... and that list is likely to contain multiple names from a whole variety of clubs....the manager picks who to go for and in what priority order.... Right. Right. I think, having slept on it, I now get it. Tommy just puts together a list of loads of players. With some nice stats to go with them. None of them are his choices, just a good old list. Maybe on some nice fancy paper but DEFINITELY not his choices. Make that clear. Jesus no wonder he didn’t want to be in the spotlight for long recently! Nice work if you can get it! No responsibility at all! Just create a list and it’s all the managers fault if the list wasn’t very good! No wonder we are doomed!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 4, 2021 8:35:34 GMT
His list is based upon players stats and availability and cost etc? It’s scientific, not based upon opinion.... and that list is likely to contain multiple names from a whole variety of clubs....the manager picks who to go for and in what priority order.... Right. Right. I think, having slept on it, I now get it. Tommy just puts together a list of loads of players. With some nice stats to go with them. None of them are his choices, just a good old list. Maybe on some nice fancy paper but DEFINITELY not his choices. Make that clear. Jesus no wonder he didn’t want to be in the spotlight for long recently! Nice work if you can get it! No responsibility at all! Just create a list and it’s all the managers fault if the list wasn’t very good! No wonder we are doomed! With the greatest of respect I’m not sure you do get it otherwise you wouldn’t belittle the role and activities his function performs in the way you have and you would understand why TW can’t be held accountable or solely accountable for the recruitment that’s been done. I’ll try and explain in a different way.... you have a vacancy on your team in the business you manage which has a specific skill set. So you contact your HR function and ask them to advertise and source potentially interested candidates. Through a combination of people applying and HR contacting people, you end up with 50 applications for that one role. HR sift through and remove those people who it’s clear don’t fit and leave just the strongest 10 CVs which they send through to you for you to review. You review and shortlist down to 5 you want to interview. You interview all 5 and then choose which one you want and inform HR. HR then contact the individual and negotiate the salary and agree terms of employment. The person agrees and then joins. Unfortunately after 6 months of working he isn’t fitting in as well as hoped and isn’t performing as well as expected. In this scenario, who is responsible for recruiting the individual and who’s ‘fault’ is it that someone has been recruited who potentially isn’t up to the job? HR, you or .....? In TWs case his function plays the role of HR in recruitment and that isn’t a ‘nice job if you can get it’! It’s just as difficult and time consuming etc.... and then it has the ongoing management of the individuals when it comes to contractual aspects... It’s clear that you are unhappy with the recruitment, but I think you’re pointing your frustration at the wrong person. The 2 people who were accountable for the current talented but imbalanced squad have now gone...
|
|
|
Post by kampucheagas on Mar 4, 2021 8:40:21 GMT
Right. Right. I think, having slept on it, I now get it. Tommy just puts together a list of loads of players. With some nice stats to go with them. None of them are his choices, just a good old list. Maybe on some nice fancy paper but DEFINITELY not his choices. Make that clear. Jesus no wonder he didn’t want to be in the spotlight for long recently! Nice work if you can get it! No responsibility at all! Just create a list and it’s all the managers fault if the list wasn’t very good! No wonder we are doomed! With the greatest of respect I’m not sure you do get it otherwise you wouldn’t belittle the role and activities his function performs in the way you have and you would understand why TW can’t be held accountable or solely accountable for the recruitment that’s been done. I’ll try and explain in a different way.... you have a vacancy on your team in the business you manage which has a specific skill set. So you contact your HR function and ask them to advertise and source potentially interested candidates. Through a combination of people applying and HR contacting people, you end up with 50 applications for that one role. HR sift through and remove those people who it’s clear don’t fit and leave just the strongest 10 CVs which they send through to you for you to review. You review and shortlist down to 5 you want to interview. You interview all 5 and then choose which one you want and inform HR. HR then contact the individual and negotiate the salary and agree terms of employment. The person agrees and then joins. Unfortunately after 6 months of working he isn’t fitting in as well as hoped and isn’t performing as well as expected. In this scenario, who is responsible for recruiting the individual and who’s ‘fault’ is it that someone has been recruited who potentially isn’t up to the job? HR, you or .....? In TWs case his function plays the role of HR in recruitment and that isn’t a ‘nice job if you can get it’! It’s just as difficult and time consuming etc.... and then it has the ongoing management of the individuals when it comes to contractual aspects... It’s clear that you are unhappy with the recruitment, but I think you’re pointing your frustration at the wrong person. The 2 people who were accountable for the current talented but imbalanced squad have now gone... You make good and valid points, my worry is that in your scenario TW is NEVER going to be questioned? I’m sure he works hard but at the end of the day he is head of recruitment. I’m pretty sure I could compile a list of players if asked, the question is are they any good?
|
|
|
Post by carlts2020 on Mar 4, 2021 8:44:56 GMT
Right. Right. I think, having slept on it, I now get it. Tommy just puts together a list of loads of players. With some nice stats to go with them. None of them are his choices, just a good old list. Maybe on some nice fancy paper but DEFINITELY not his choices. Make that clear. Jesus no wonder he didn’t want to be in the spotlight for long recently! Nice work if you can get it! No responsibility at all! Just create a list and it’s all the managers fault if the list wasn’t very good! No wonder we are doomed! With the greatest of respect I’m not sure you do get it otherwise you wouldn’t belittle the role and activities his function performs in the way you have and you would understand why TW can’t be held accountable or solely accountable for the recruitment that’s been done. I’ll try and explain in a different way.... you have a vacancy on your team in the business you manage which has a specific skill set. So you contact your HR function and ask them to advertise and source potentially interested candidates. Through a combination of people applying and HR contacting people, you end up with 50 applications for that one role. HR sift through and remove those people who it’s clear don’t fit and leave just the strongest 10 CVs which they send through to you for you to review. You review and shortlist down to 5 you want to interview. You interview all 5 and then choose which one you want and inform HR. HR then contact the individual and negotiate the salary and agree terms of employment. The person agrees and then joins. Unfortunately after 6 months of working he isn’t fitting in as well as hoped and isn’t performing as well as expected. In this scenario, who is responsible for recruiting the individual and who’s ‘fault’ is it that someone has been recruited who potentially isn’t up to the job? HR, you or .....? In TWs case his function plays the role of HR in recruitment and that isn’t a ‘nice job if you can get it’! It’s just as difficult and time consuming etc.... and then it has the ongoing management of the individuals when it comes to contractual aspects... It’s clear that you are unhappy with the recruitment, but I think you’re pointing your frustration at the wrong person. The 2 people who were accountable for the current talented but imbalanced squad have now gone... What happens if the list that comes back is of poor quality? Or you interview them and feel that none of them suit your criteria or have the right attitude. What if the manager puts players forward and is told no? We went into the season with 1 1/2 forwards (an unfit Daly and late signed Hanlan). We knew the situation 9 days before the window closed, to suggest TW put a list of forwards in front of BG and he said no is crazy. Additionally, it seems very reasonable and obvious that Tisdale took the job on the promise of a goal scoring number 9. If the club failed to get the targets requested it has to sit with the board.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 4, 2021 9:01:26 GMT
With the greatest of respect I’m not sure you do get it otherwise you wouldn’t belittle the role and activities his function performs in the way you have and you would understand why TW can’t be held accountable or solely accountable for the recruitment that’s been done. I’ll try and explain in a different way.... you have a vacancy on your team in the business you manage which has a specific skill set. So you contact your HR function and ask them to advertise and source potentially interested candidates. Through a combination of people applying and HR contacting people, you end up with 50 applications for that one role. HR sift through and remove those people who it’s clear don’t fit and leave just the strongest 10 CVs which they send through to you for you to review. You review and shortlist down to 5 you want to interview. You interview all 5 and then choose which one you want and inform HR. HR then contact the individual and negotiate the salary and agree terms of employment. The person agrees and then joins. Unfortunately after 6 months of working he isn’t fitting in as well as hoped and isn’t performing as well as expected. In this scenario, who is responsible for recruiting the individual and who’s ‘fault’ is it that someone has been recruited who potentially isn’t up to the job? HR, you or .....? In TWs case his function plays the role of HR in recruitment and that isn’t a ‘nice job if you can get it’! It’s just as difficult and time consuming etc.... and then it has the ongoing management of the individuals when it comes to contractual aspects... It’s clear that you are unhappy with the recruitment, but I think you’re pointing your frustration at the wrong person. The 2 people who were accountable for the current talented but imbalanced squad have now gone... You make good and valid points, my worry is that in your scenario TW is NEVER going to be questioned? I’m sure he works hard but at the end of the day he is head of recruitment. I’m pretty sure I could compile a list of players if asked, the question is are they any good? Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think no criticism can be levied towards TW as you’re right, his area is responsible for putting the list together in the first place and the manager can only select from that list. Therefore if it’s just poor candidates on the list then the manager has a choice - don’t take anyone, recruit the best from a bad bunch and hope for the best or send the list back saying it isn’t what he wants and look again.... but it’s still the managers choice but I’d expect the manager to feed back and report if the quality of support from the recruitment team isn’t good enough.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 4, 2021 9:14:19 GMT
With the greatest of respect I’m not sure you do get it otherwise you wouldn’t belittle the role and activities his function performs in the way you have and you would understand why TW can’t be held accountable or solely accountable for the recruitment that’s been done. I’ll try and explain in a different way.... you have a vacancy on your team in the business you manage which has a specific skill set. So you contact your HR function and ask them to advertise and source potentially interested candidates. Through a combination of people applying and HR contacting people, you end up with 50 applications for that one role. HR sift through and remove those people who it’s clear don’t fit and leave just the strongest 10 CVs which they send through to you for you to review. You review and shortlist down to 5 you want to interview. You interview all 5 and then choose which one you want and inform HR. HR then contact the individual and negotiate the salary and agree terms of employment. The person agrees and then joins. Unfortunately after 6 months of working he isn’t fitting in as well as hoped and isn’t performing as well as expected. In this scenario, who is responsible for recruiting the individual and who’s ‘fault’ is it that someone has been recruited who potentially isn’t up to the job? HR, you or .....? In TWs case his function plays the role of HR in recruitment and that isn’t a ‘nice job if you can get it’! It’s just as difficult and time consuming etc.... and then it has the ongoing management of the individuals when it comes to contractual aspects... It’s clear that you are unhappy with the recruitment, but I think you’re pointing your frustration at the wrong person. The 2 people who were accountable for the current talented but imbalanced squad have now gone... What happens if the list that comes back is of poor quality? Or you interview them and feel that none of them suit your criteria or have the right attitude. What if the manager puts players forward and is told no? We went into the season with 1 1/2 forwards (an unfit Daly and late signed Hanlan). We knew the situation 9 days before the window closed, to suggest TW put a list of forwards in front of BG and he said no is crazy. Additionally, it seems very reasonable and obvious that Tisdale took the job on the promise of a goal scoring number 9. If the club failed to get the targets requested it has to sit with the board. For me if the list is poor then the manager can feed that back and say look again it’s not good enough. It’s unlikely a manager would put a name forward and be told no unless a) the player is too expensive and we can’t afford them, b) they are unavailable or c) the player says they don’t want to come. Re the summer window and forwards, we know that we pursued targets but couldn’t get one for a variety of reasons - either not the right attributes that Garner wanted to compliment what he had, affordability as players were priced out in either fees or wages (Wael had been burned before on a couple of occasions overpaying for forwards - Nichols and Payne), they just didn’t want to move to us due to personal reasons or we were out bid by other teams.... Garner then did say he was happy to go with what he had.... The January window was a story of trying to get a certain type of striker and there were limited availability of that type of forward. We pursued the 2 most credible candidates and came close with Stockley but you can’t recruit want isn’t available or players that are outside your financial boundaries. Yes we probably could have recruited any striker or an unproven premiership/championship youngster but that isn’t what Tisdale wanted. He chose who he was going after and Gnaduillet messed us about and Stockley - despite agreeing verbally to join, he changed his heart at the last minute and chose Charlton. We got burned - January windows are notorious for it ......
|
|
|
Post by chewbacca on Mar 4, 2021 9:21:14 GMT
We're in a weird scenario where we don't currently know the process with regards to recruitment. I personally think, and I maybe wrong that the manager will ask Widdrington to draw up a list of players that fit x, y and z criteria. So, as an example, Garner may have asked Widdrington for a list of "Box to box midfielders aged 24 or under that I can develop", Widdrington then returned with a list and Garner signed 5 of them. With regards to this January, Tisdale asked for a list of "Strong, powerful strikers with experience and a good goalscoring record", Tisdale went for the one he knew and Rovers signed no one. Now, whatever happens between now and the end of the season lessons have to be learnt. In my opinion, we can't carry on in this current state of flip flopping our approach to the team, management and recruitment. The changes in style from Coughlan to Garner to Tisdale and onto Barton are stark and while the club push this Bristol Rovers DNA it is a nonsense. I don't think Widdrington has done a particularly good job, I also don't think any of the other board members have either. Whatever the outcome of this season be it safety, relegation and starting again with Barton or relegation and needing another new manager there needs to be a distinct plan which, they should be putting together now. I don't really trust those involved to be doing so.
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Mar 4, 2021 9:22:17 GMT
My understanding of the situation is recruitment is interdependent between (at least) the manager, Head of Recruitment and CEO.
The manager outlines his requirements.
TW takes that brief and using his team of scouts and whatever databases he uses, will then provide a selection of suitable players to match that brief.
The manager then assesses those players to see who he thinks will fit, whether that is playing style wise, personality wise (will he work with me, will he fit in with the other players), will he cost so much I have no budget left for any other positions.
The CEO will provide a budget to work with.
Negotiations will be between manager, Head of Recruitment, CEO, selling club, player (who in turn may need to speak with his family especiallyif it means relocation) and agent. At any point, talks could falter especially if other clubs are also interested.
Only then, will a player sign. If that player decides not to sign, then move on to option 2, 3 and so on.
Problems arise if the first choice decides late on not to sign and options 2 and 3 move elsewhere in the meantime, leaving us with a hasty decision to sign option 4 or 5, start again or move on.
Far too many moving parts to lay the blame at the door of one person, whether that is TW, manager or whomever.
|
|
|
Post by carlts2020 on Mar 4, 2021 9:26:18 GMT
What happens if the list that comes back is of poor quality? Or you interview them and feel that none of them suit your criteria or have the right attitude. What if the manager puts players forward and is told no? We went into the season with 1 1/2 forwards (an unfit Daly and late signed Hanlan). We knew the situation 9 days before the window closed, to suggest TW put a list of forwards in front of BG and he said no is crazy. Additionally, it seems very reasonable and obvious that Tisdale took the job on the promise of a goal scoring number 9. If the club failed to get the targets requested it has to sit with the board. For me if the list is poor then the manager can feed that back and say look again it’s not good enough. It’s unlikely a manager would put a name forward and be told no unless a) the player is too expensive and we can’t afford them, b) they are unavailable or c) the player says they don’t want to come. Re the summer window and forwards, we know that we pursued targets but couldn’t get one for a variety of reasons - either not the right attributes that Garner wanted to compliment what he had, affordability as players were priced out in either fees or wages (Wael had been burned before on a couple of occasions overpaying for forwards - Nichols and Payne), they just didn’t want to move to us due to personal reasons or we were out bid by other teams.... Garner then did say he was happy to go with what he had.... The January window was a story of trying to get a certain type of striker and there were limited availability of that type of forward. We pursued the 2 most credible candidates and came close with Stockley but you can’t recruit want isn’t available or players that are outside your financial boundaries. Yes we probably could have recruited any striker or an unproven premiership/championship youngster but that isn’t what Tisdale wanted. He chose who he was going after and Gnaduillet messed us about and Stockley - despite agreeing verbally to join, he changed his heart at the last minute and chose Charlton. We got burned - January windows are notorious for it ...... Garner said that when he had 3 fit strikers plus Walker. Then Ayunga got injured. Also there is conflicting reports that he wasn’t happy and wanted additional attackers. I also don’t buy that Tisdale only had two targets and we missed out. He was very upset at what he had been left with so to suggest he only put two, hard to attain targets forward doesn’t sit right with me.
|
|