Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
CANARYKING

AN's legacy

Recommended Posts

The longer this pre season rumbles on the more you realise what a mess we are in. We have players on big contracts who are usually injured, out on loan or simply in the background doing bugger all for their large pay packets. Now we have a fire sale of our best players being sold for peanuts and are scrapping the barrel for foreigners who have no idea of the Championship etc. Why did he buy Andreu ( wouldn''t know him if he walked in my front door ) McGovern, not good enough, and as for Wildshut .......

Webber and Co. have a massive task to dig us out of this hole, be interesting what they have to say at next weeks fan''s forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Couldn''t agree more CanaryKing. We are in one enormous mess which thank goodness we are finally taking steps to rectify. It''s going to be one hell of a task and in my opinion is going to take some time for us to get us back on track of being promotion candidates. If we can''t get shot of Naismith and Jarvis with their millstone wages this season then next year, without any parachute payments, will be even worse.

The decision to carry on with AN for as long as we did was so obviously wrong (LCD excepted) and was a total disaster. It has ended up with the Board squandering a wonderful opportunity.

After all that doom-saying I do think though that going through this transitional phase could be exciting, with new blood both on and off the pitch. As for success, not likely for some time I''m afraid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Hairy Canary"]Couldn''t agree more CanaryKing. We are in one enormous mess which thank goodness we are finally taking steps to rectify. It''s going to be one hell of a task and in my opinion is going to take some time for us to get us back on track of being promotion candidates. If we can''t get shot of Naismith and Jarvis with their millstone wages this season then next year, without any parachute payments, will be even worse.

The decision to carry on with AN for as long as we did was so obviously wrong (LDC excepted) and was a total disaster. It has ended up with the Board squandering a wonderful opportunity.

After all that doom-saying I do think though that going through this transitional phase could be exciting, with new blood both on and off the pitch. As for success, not likely for some time I''m afraid.[/quote]

Funny, I suppose it''s the way I think, but I was the same with Hughton......but with both Hughton and Neil, the board were simply giving both of them what they thought was the best chance for them to succeed - and this is what I supported.  I would far rather we as supporters actually supported the decisions made and tried to get behind the managers than be like we have been in some matches - actually shouting down the manager in tight matches, which seems crazy to me - and it happened with both Hughton and Neil, at times when positivity was needed.   I applaud the attempts to allow Hughton and Neil to work their way through the problems.  Hughton has proved his ability at Brighton and AN will do the same wherever he ends up, so it was no disgrace to let them try and see it through.  My only complaint with the board with Hughton was not seeing it through to the end of the season. With Neil, in the end, he had to go.  The pressures if being a football manager are great and if things go badly there are two ways it can go, either the manager works through it and comes out the other side or he is sacked. If some fns had had their way both the managers would have been sacked quite quickly, which would have meant new manager after new manager - and we could easily end up with two, three, four managers in a season - and for a club like ours that would be a financial absurdity. I just wish people could be a bit more understanding and try and support these managers when they are struggling - both Neil and Hughton were dignified and held their emotions in check well- and both had it in them to be successful.  Neil could imo have seen through the clearout this summer well imo - and he is known for bringing through the youngsters as he had with Jacob and Josh and in time would have done with Maddison and co.  His main problem was the senior pros and his inability to deal with them effectively - for me he lost his authoroty with them and he would have been much better with a young squad - which is what we will have next season.  All water under the bridge of course, but if you are in the board''s shoes, they stuck with their managers as long as they could - and for me that is commendable and will ensure that any future prospective manager will look at our club and think he will get a fair crack at the job - and that could have been a key factor in getting Farke in. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Lessingham Canary"]Havent seen Ed Balls name mentioned for a while, who was responsible for AN''s dealings post McNally ? [;)][/quote]A combination of Steve Stone and Jez Moxey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I too believe Neil would have been successful with a young squad. I fully expected him to go down this route... but when given the opportunity he still played the more experienced players.

The fans were on side, we wanted the likes of Canos, Maddison, Murphy & Pritchard to be playing.

So why did he choose to stick with the ageing pros who clearly were not up to it? He just seemed to shoot himself in the foot.

Perhaps he just wasn''t strong enough to drop them and deal with them in training? Weakness is not something he portrays in the media however.

Anyway the legacy of failed transfers and irresponsible spend lies with the board, not previous mangers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="lincoln canary Golden Coppel"]Anyway the legacy of failed transfers and irresponsible spend lies with the board, not previous mangers.[/quote]Complete and utter horse$hit.All along we''ve wanted the board to back our managers, and if the manager then identifies a player they want and tell the board that this is a priority for them, are you saying the board should just tell the manager to do one because they know better????When the board draws funding back, they get blasted for "Prudence before ambition", if they do provide the money to keep and sign high earners, they''re accused of "failed transfers and irresponsible spending", what a f**king joke...Very much sounds like they''re damned if they do and damned if they don''t in your eyes Lincoln - talk about a "no-win situation"!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It''s Neil''s own fault as he admitted he should have listened and got rid of older players sooner! That was always the problem imo with him that his way was the only way and always the right way

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="lharman7"]Sensational posting blue scum boys![/quote]

Oh great, another obnoxious moron with nothing but insults to contribute. Look at LDC''s excellent response which gives food for thought, despite the fact that I disagree with him.

Everyone who has a different opinion to you is not scum. Maybe as you mature you''ll work it out. Maybe not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AN''s failings for us was indeed to not go with his gut and have a clear-out in the hope they could make it as they were and save the money for after promotion. On paper he was right - the squad we had was easily good enough to compete for the title but it didn''t work out that way. He will do well, he''s clearly a good manager and I wish him well - just not against us of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Indy_Bones"][quote user="lincoln canary Golden Coppel"]Anyway the legacy of failed transfers and irresponsible spend lies with the board, not previous mangers.[/quote]Complete and utter horse$hit.All along we''ve wanted the board to back our managers, and if the manager then identifies a player they want and tell the board that this is a priority for them, are you saying the board should just tell the manager to do one because they know better????When the board draws funding back, they get blasted for "Prudence before ambition", if they do provide the money to keep and sign high earners, they''re accused of "failed transfers and irresponsible spending", what a f**king joke...Very much sounds like they''re damned if they do and damned if they don''t in your eyes Lincoln - talk about a "no-win situation"![/quote]

IB give it a rest.

The board are always accountable, that''s how it works. They sanction transfers, regardless of who identifies them.

Take the Wildshut transfer. The board knew they were close to sacking AN, yet allowed him to spend millions on a player at the last minute of a transfer window. However you choose to dress that up, it''s ultimately incompetence from the board.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So should the board appoint people to do recruitment and pick the team and then ignore them. Should they still be doing that now too?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="lincoln canary Golden Coppel"]IB give it a rest.[/quote]How about you give your miserablist, anti-board postings a rest instead?[quote]The board are always accountable, that''s how it works. They sanction transfers, regardless of who identifies them.

Take the Wildshut transfer. The board knew they were close to sacking AN, yet allowed him to spend millions on a player at the last minute of a transfer window. However you choose to dress that up, it''s ultimately incompetence from the board.[/quote]They don''t sanction a signing that could make difference to us being promoted - they''d be accused of writing the season off in Jan, they do make the signing and it''s classed as incompetence to allow it.Frankly I CBA to argue with someone whose clear anti-board agenda won''t see any sort of reason, and will simply blame them regardless of what they do (or don''t do for that matter).Maybe if you think our owners and board are so bad, how about you dump millions of your own cash in and show us how it''s done instead...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rarely happens but I agree with Indy Bones. The board gave the managers money, imagine how much stick they''d get if they''d refused to sign Wildschut and the manager complained? Their problem has always been sticking with managers longer than they should.

I''d mentioned before that the longer time goes on the worse Neil''s legacy looked. The amount of money wasted both in fees and wages (Jarvis being the most obvious example) has been staggering. Of his signings I''d argue only Nelson, Pinto and Pritchard have been out and out successes and one of them he refused to play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="king canary"]Rarely happens but I agree with Indy Bones. The board gave the managers money, imagine how much stick they''d get if they''d refused to sign Wildschut and the manager complained? Their problem has always been sticking with managers longer than they should.

I''d mentioned before that the longer time goes on the worse Neil''s legacy looked. The amount of money wasted both in fees and wages (Jarvis being the most obvious example) has been staggering. Of his signings I''d argue only Nelson, Pinto and Pritchard have been out and out successes and one of them he refused to play.[/quote]

The point is they sanctioned the transfer of Wildshut knowing in just a few week''s they''d probably be sacking the manager.

Giving the manager that amount of money to spend, when the board were clearly already questioning his ability, and talking of sacking him is irresponsible.

I am anti-board, correct IB. But for good reason, they''ve failed. They''ve had a couple of fantastic opportunities to stabilise this club in the premier league and messed it up. The way they are conducting this current fire sale suggests we''re currently in a right mess financially too.

Too slow to react, and too much room for sentiment. Look at Southampton, Bournemouth, Leicester, West Brom..... however way you look at it theses clubs have followed similar paths to Norwich in recent years, but whereas our trajectory and ambition stopped at promotion, theirs carried on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So should they not appoint a recruitment team? Or should they appoint them and over rule them? And should they still be doing that now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="nutty nigel"]So should they not appoint a recruitment team? Or should they appoint them and over rule them? And should they still be doing that now?[/quote]

I''m not sure what your point is?

Of course they should appoint a recruitment team. Over ruling isn''t the correct term, they should approve and sanction. If they don''t believe the deal to be right they don''t sanction the deal. It isn''t about over ruling.

And if the recruitment team fail, well the board carry the can.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
@lincoln

To not back your manager in the window as you might sack him later would be just as irresponsible. He should have been sacked in December before he had the chance to spend it but with him being in charge in January you have to back him.

I''m in the fence with the board as I''m unsure they learnt from previous mistakes but I can''t blame them for giving the man in charge the money to get his targets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok, so you''re saying they should employ puppets. Would it be in the t&cs of the recruitment team that the board decide who we sign? Absolute waste of money employing them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="nutty nigel"]Ok, so you''re saying they should employ puppets. Would it be in the t&cs of the recruitment team that the board decide who we sign? Absolute waste of money employing them.[/quote]

Puppets? No, what are you talking about? The recruitment team do more than just buy the player....

And as for your comment RE t&c''s, ridiculous! Are you suggesting that the recruitment team don''t expect to gain board approval prior to completing a transfer?!

Have you ever been to work?

"Stuart, who''s that new number 10 who''s just scored in front of the Barclay?"

"That''s Lionel Messi my dear Delia, we bought him on credit for 210 million euros"

"Oh right, lovely old job, carry on!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That''s a fairly facetious comment nutty - saying the board would give final approval on significant outgoings for the club is not saying the recruitment team would be puppets. What you''d hope is though is that the manager and now DoF would be trusted enough for it to not be an issue most of the time. Lincoln is arguing Neil shouldn''t have had that trust.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hairy Canary wrote the following post at 05/07/2017 6:22 PM:

 lharman7 wrote:
Sensational posting blue scum boys!

Oh great, another obnoxious moron with nothing but insults to contribute. Look at LDC''s excellent response which gives food for thought, despite the fact that I disagree with him.

Everyone who has a different opinion to you is not scum. Maybe as you mature you''ll work it out. Maybe not.

Maybe you and plenty of others could forget about the past failings and look towards one of the most significant changes our club has had in many a year. So sick of reading threads pointing the blame at our board or managers.

Get on board or bog off. Simple.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Of course I''ve been to work Lincoln. You like a nice clean bog when you''re spouting shat don''t you?

You''ll be pretty much on your own with the opinion that the board should decide who we sign? Most people would surely agree with them appointing people and letting them get on with it.

Kingo, I don''t know what that sort of argument is buddy. But I would think a strong argument would be that the board sanction the budget and the football department spend it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lincoln canary (& Golden Coppel) wrote the following post at 05/07/2017 8:31 PM:

 king canary wrote:
Rarely happens but I agree with Indy Bones. The board gave the managers money, imagine how much stick they''d get if they''d refused to sign Wildschut and the manager complained? Their problem has always been sticking with managers longer than they should.

I''d mentioned before that the longer time goes on the worse Neil''s legacy looked. The amount of money wasted both in fees and wages (Jarvis being the most obvious example) has been staggering. Of his signings I''d argue only Nelson, Pinto and Pritchard have been out and out successes and one of them he refused to play.

The point is they sanctioned the transfer of Wildshut knowing in just a few week''s they''d probably be sacking the manager.

Giving the manager that amount of money to spend, when the board were clearly already questioning his ability, and talking of sacking him is irresponsible.

This comment takes the cake on this thread.

Do you know or had inside information that the board were thinking of sacking AN ''just a few weeks'' before signing Wildschut?

Do you not think that the board were desperate for AN to be successful and sanctioned the transfer to give him the best opportunity to be?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No matter who has managed the club in recent times we have made some dubious appointments in terms of players and there have been 2 consistents during this time

You can''t help but feel the Stowmarket 2 are having a very negative impact on the club

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="lharman7"]Hairy Canary wrote the following post at 05/07/2017 6:22 PM:

 lharman7 wrote:
Sensational posting blue scum boys!

Oh great, another obnoxious moron with nothing but insults to contribute. Look at LDC''s excellent response which gives food for thought, despite the fact that I disagree with him.

Everyone who has a different opinion to you is not scum. Maybe as you mature you''ll work it out. Maybe not.

Maybe you and plenty of others could forget about the past failings and look towards one of the most significant changes our club has had in many a year. So sick of reading threads pointing the blame at our board or managers.

Get on board or bog off. Simple.[/quote]

Here''s the thing sonny, I don''t care how sick you are of reading posts that you don''t like. Hard cheese, people have different opinions to you and you need to grow up and put up a counter argument (ala LDC) or ignore them. Calling me blue scum is pathetic.

For the record I balanced my criticism of past decisions by saying quite clearly I was excited at seeing the new players.

So no I won''t be bogging off as you command. I''ll be there again next season cheering them on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Canary Top Hat wrote the following post at 05/07/2017 9:44 PM:

No matter who has managed the club in recent times we have made some dubious appointments in terms of players and there have been 2 consistents during this time

You can''t help but feel the Stowmarket 2 are having a very negative impact on the club

Maybe for someone as dull as yourself but for the majority of fans, negative to that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...