Jump to content
canarybubbles

I wonder if Knapper would have the guts to resign if ...

Recommended Posts

... he recommended the removal of Wagner but the Board blocked it. To me, this seems quite likely with Zoe, Delia and Michael ganging up against him.

Easy for me to say he should, of course, because it wouldn't be me who faced legal action and financial consequences and an early career scuppered because of a reputation for being 'difficult'.

I suspect he already wishes he had never applied for the job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That thought crossed my mind and it probably would be the case had he more experience and earned a reputation.

I'm not sure there is a real glowing endorsement of Wagner and I would have thought Zoe is pretty pissed off with him as his incompetence pretty much led to her husband having to leave early. If Delia allows the drink to wear off and thinks about it calmly she'd probably come to the same conclusion rather than blame the fans.

We're pretty much waiting on Knapper here and as I said in another thread we'll just have to keep giving him a nudge in the right direction 😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Michael literally said in his interview "Let Ben decide".

I don't see how the club could be any clearer on how the manager is ultimately the SD's decision, as he would want it to be - he wouldn't have took the SD role here otherwise for starters, and we wouldn't have advertised it as the all-encompassing SD role (we did).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I assume that Knapper , like Webber , will have to have his proposal ratified by the board. Knapper isn’t on the executive board but is part of the executive senior team (referred to in part in the clubs website) which whilst this includes Zoe , she does sit on the main board so in theory Knapper reports into her? It’s a bit complex , but I didn’t think Knapper can just fire Wagner 

That said I can’t see the board stopping it happening . 
 

It’s a very odd set up at the moment . 

Edited by Graham Paddons Beard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Webber couldn't just fire Farke. It had to be ratified. But it was. Who on the board do people think would not ratify it? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Michael literally said in his interview "Let Ben decide".

I don't see how the club could be any clearer on how the manager is ultimately the SD's decision, as he would want it to be - he wouldn't have took the SD role here otherwise for starters, and we wouldn't have advertised it as the all-encompassing SD role (we did).

i see it as maybe not a total webbers job but more like Knapper at head with Adams doing technical and Zoe more contract side of things where the Board have to get involved etc 

But Knapper is Head of Football if you like and has final say but with more help than webber which is a good thing 

i imagine Knapper being a Stats man is not emotional type a facts man 

we have said before his Inexperience is maybe holding him back a little to make sure of everything before he makes the massive call ,

i have No doubt someone who spent 14 years at Arsenal knows Wagner is not the answer , 

i think the easy thing would be to come in a sack Wagner not doing so i hope is a sign Knapper will not be rushed and will make the right call when he wants ,

i would of course of sacked Wagner weeks ago but i do not know all the facts inside the club ,

But if Knapper is good at stats facts do not lie and he will know 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, nutty nigel said:

Webber couldn't just fire Farke. It had to be ratified. But it was. Who on the board do people think would not ratify it? 

This has been my problem since that day. The Farke sacking demonstrated that Webber had no-one  with any power to stop him. Did the board agree with him...or just go along with him?  I cannot believe that a rational board would agree to sack a manager only weeks into a four-year contract who had so much credit in the bank - and with any rational person seeing that it was the quality of the players, not the head coach that was the problem. 

You cannot have a club where the total power is with the SD. There HAS to be more to it than that - and that day proved that our owners, wonderful as they are and have been over the years, are out if their depth. 

Some will say they have always been out of their depth, but I will disagree strongly with that - I just think it got too big for them. 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The evidence that Wagner should go is overwhelming. The fact that Knapper can't see that is hugely concerning and one worries that if he can't or won't make that decision then what decisions can he make!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, lake district canary said:

This has been my problem since that day. The Farke sacking demonstrated that Webber had no-one  with any power to stop him. Did the board agree with him...or just go along with him?  I cannot believe that a rational board would agree to sack a manager only weeks into a four-year contract who had so much credit in the bank - and with any rational person seeing that it was the quality of the players, not the head coach that was the problem. 

You cannot have a club where the total power is with the SD. There HAS to be more to it than that - and that day proved that our owners, wonderful as they are and have been over the years, are out if their depth. 

Some will say they have always been out of their depth, but I will disagree strongly with that - I just think it got too big for them. 

McNally sacked Gunn ratified by the board. 

McNally sacked Hughton ratified by the board.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, canarybubbles said:

... he recommended the removal of Wagner but the Board blocked it. To me, this seems quite likely with Zoe, Delia and Michael ganging up against him.

Easy for me to say he should, of course, because it wouldn't be me who faced legal action and financial consequences and an early career scuppered because of a reputation for being 'difficult'.

I suspect he already wishes he had never applied for the job.

What is all this based on beyond a desire to wish or assume the very worst of our club at the moment? Honestly, it's well over the top.

Edited by Terminally Yellow
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Terminally Yellow said:

What is all this based on beyond a desire to wish to assume the very worst of our club at the moment? Honestly, it's well over the top.

Its weird that people clearly don't listen to the interviews, rant about them anyway and then create some other fantasy in their head and then create threads about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Capt. Pants said:

That thought crossed my mind and it probably would be the case had he more experience and earned a reputation.

I'm not sure there is a real glowing endorsement of Wagner and I would have thought Zoe is pretty pissed off with him as his incompetence pretty much led to her husband having to leave early. If Delia allows the drink to wear off and thinks about it calmly she'd probably come to the same conclusion rather than blame the fans.

We're pretty much waiting on Knapper here and as I said in another thread we'll just have to keep giving him a nudge in the right direction 😉

But he is under contract until March next year isn't he ??  Which implies he is getting paid until March next year.

If so, I would imagine she is delighted

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

McNally sacked Gunn ratified by the board. 

McNally sacked Hughton ratified by the board.

 

Yes , if Knapper says Wagner should go he will. 
As happened with Farke . 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Graham Paddons Beard said:

Yes , if Knapper says Wagner should go he will. 
As happened with Farke . 

Exactly this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, lake district canary said:

This has been my problem since that day. The Farke sacking demonstrated that Webber had no-one  with any power to stop him. Did the board agree with him...or just go along with him?  I cannot believe that a rational board would agree to sack a manager only weeks into a four-year contract who had so much credit in the bank - and with any rational person seeing that it was the quality of the players, not the head coach that was the problem. 

You cannot have a club where the total power is with the SD. There HAS to be more to it than that - and that day proved that our owners, wonderful as they are and have been over the years, are out if their depth. 

Some will say they have always been out of their depth, but I will disagree strongly with that - I just think it got too big for them

Football evolved, they didn't. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So can, I wonder, the Sporting Director tell the coach to employ different tactics or pick/drop certain players. We’ve heard a lot about Knapper’s analytical skills, so presumably he must have a decent idea of some of the things that Wagner is doing wrong. Can he insist that Wagner makes changes on Sunday? Or will it be the same old random sh#te again? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Capt. Pants said:

The evidence that Wagner should go is overwhelming. The fact that Knapper can't see that is hugely concerning and one worries that if he can't or won't make that decision then what decisions can he make!

The main hope imo is that they don't want to throw a new manager in for the Ipswich game, where we're going to be on a hiding to nothing.

 

5 minutes ago, Grando said:

So can, I wonder, the Sporting Director tell the coach to employ different tactics or pick/drop certain players. We’ve heard a lot about Knapper’s analytical skills, so presumably he must have a decent idea of some of the things that Wagner is doing wrong. Can he insist that Wagner makes changes on Sunday? Or will it be the same old random sh#te again? 

There's a number of ways a SD could tacitly make the coach pick certain players. Webber was smart with Farke to give him very little in positions where we had young players coming through. Jamal Lewis had Husband (not very good) and Stiepermann (not a left back) as competition. Godfrey and Omobamidele were both pencilled in as the 4th choice centre backs.

He could probably tell Wagner that if he wants to keep his job he should focus on putting out performances that will serve us well in the long run, instead of trying to prioritise results in the short term.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would anyone think Knapper is not running the show? Delia was getting stick on another thread for giving Webber too much autonomy! She literally can't win. Knapper will make the call, and I'm pretty confident he'll fire Wagner... he just needs to make sure it's definitely the right call and he has the right person lined up. Give him time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Based on the AGM interview it seems to me that it's Mark who's the biggest advocate in not changing the coach so often.  And he's got a point, with such a turnover in coaches we've not seen an improvement yet so the current problem is deeper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Worthy Nigelton said:

Why would anyone think Knapper is not running the show? Delia was getting stick on another thread for giving Webber too much autonomy! She literally can't win. Knapper will make the call, and I'm pretty confident he'll fire Wagner... he just needs to make sure it's definitely the right call and he has the right person lined up. Give him time.

Exactly. What is the point of sacking Wagner without the right replacement? Yes, we could put a caretaker in place but how would that help? We’re unlikely to go down, Wagner has managed to win two of our last three games with the restricted resources available, and we are unlikely to go up, so not much to lose. 
 

Both our old joint owners and the new one are clearly playing the long game, Attanasio said as much in the recent public comments.  Many posters on here seem unable to look between the last few and the next few games.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

11 hours ago, hogesar said:

Its weird that people clearly don't listen to the interviews, rant about them anyway and then create some other fantasy in their head and then create threads about it.

I started this thread, so I want to make one thing clear: I have never been in favour of, or argued for, an instant dismissal of Wagner. I think he almost certainly has to go at some point, but in general I agree with Knapper taking his time before he makes any final decision, especially about who will be Wagner's successor if he does go. A good decision is much more important here than a quick one.

I also accept that the scenario I created was speculation. The word IF was a clue.

You accuse me of not listening to the interviews. Have you? If so, what did you think of Delia's and Michael's contribution? Are you comfortable that they seem quite happy to trash 20% of the fanbase? Are you comfortable with their aggressive response to Southwell's very polite question about governance and club structure? Are you comfortable with their rudeness to a young man who had phrased his question very carefully and delicately because he clearly realised its sensitivity? Are you comfortable that when asked to speak about Webber and Knapper, she devoted a stretch of sentences to a hagiography of Webber before devoting one sentence to Knapper, almost like an afterthought?

Furthermore, what do you think was the reason for Delia's phone call to Wagner? Was it simply that she is such a sweet, kind human being and she wanted to offer him emotional support? Possibly. Or did she realise that this would make it more difficult for Knapper to dismiss Wagner if he wanted to, and therefore she was more likely to get what she wanted? Also possibly.

I know you think I'm a fool and a fantasist, Hogesar. I probably am. I certainly tend to overthink. But naivety is a form of folly and fantasy, too.

Edited by canarybubbles
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suspect a replacement for David Wagner is being or even has already been lined up.

They were hardly going to announce that at the meeting and although maybe it didn't amount to the full dreaded 'owner's endorsement' for the man, what else could they say?

The only thing that seems comparatively certain is that they have not decided to not embark upon the caretaker route.

The one danger I see in delay is that some players are clearly not progressing and possibly even regressing under the current wayward manner of team and game management. I've mentioned this before with respect to young Gibbs, but there are others, and probably more of them than the number of exceptions like Rowe.

 

Edited by BroadstairsR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, canarybubbles said:

 

I started this thread, so I want to make one thing clear: I have never been in favour of, or argued for, an instant dismissal of Wagner. I think he almost certainly has to go at some point, but in general I agree with Knapper taking his time before he makes any final decision, especially about who will be Wagner's successor if he does go. A good decision is much more important here than a quick one.

I also accept that the scenario I created was speculation. The word IF was a clue.

You accuse me of not listening to the interviews. Have you? If so, what did you think of Delia's and Michael's contribution? Are you comfortable that they seem quite happy to trash 20% of the fanbase? Are you comfortable with their aggressive response to Southwell's very polite question about governance and club structure? Are you comfortable with their rudeness to a young man who had phrased his question very carefully and delicately because he clearly realised its sensitivity? Are you comfortable that when asked to speak about Webber and Knapper, she devoted a stretch of sentences to a hagiography of Webber before devoting one sentence to Knapper, almost like an afterthought?

Furthermore, what do you think was the reason for Delia's phone call to Wagner? Was it simply that she is such a sweet, kind human being and she wanted to offer him emotional support? Possibly. Or did she realise that this would make it more difficult for Knapper to dismiss Wagner if he wanted to, and therefore she was more likely to get what she wanted? Also possibly.

I know you think I'm a fool and a fantasist, Hogesar. I probably am. I certainly tend to overthink. But naivety is a form of folly and fantasy, too.

Sorry there's a lot of questions but despite our disagreement you've put them across fairly so it's only right I reply the same.

I thought Delia and Michael's contribution was one of two Owners who were on their way sooner rather than later and dropped the guard a bit which meant they presented even more as fans rather than owners.

I dont think she should have went down the 20% route - where is the positive outcome from that? There isn't one. I suggest it's related to Webbers departure.

Re the answer to Southwell, whilst the answer was rubbish I don't think it was rude. When she said "you" have no Idea I thought it was quite clear she was referring to all those questioning governance. She has a bit of a point, there is always so much work that goes on inside any business that others don't see or don't understand.

I also thought the reality was she was asked about Webber and answered it. I then think its wrong to say too much about Knapper before he's done anything. Let's not big him up too much and heap more pressure on the guy. But all 3, DS MWJ and MA spoke positively about him.

Again, one of the biggest criticisms towards Delia is her emotional attachment to staff so it shouldn't be a surprise at all that she offered a call of encouragement. I dont see how that impacts Knapper at all, where ultimately its literally been confirmed by all 3 majority shareholders that it is his decision. And then he himself was pretty adamant in his stating that he didn't want to make a decision this early.

So I guess ultimately if you think all 4 of them are straight up lying in an AGM then you could have a point. But then we should ignore everything else they've said, shouldn't we?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t think it is something we will have to worry about but the hypothetical question asked is would he, I would say absolutely he would as by all accounts he has a great reputation in the game and would not be short of work. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Sorry there's a lot of questions but despite our disagreement you've put them across fairly so it's only right I reply the same.

I thought Delia and Michael's contribution was one of two Owners who were on their way sooner rather than later and dropped the guard a bit which meant they presented even more as fans rather than owners.

I dont think she should have went down the 20% route - where is the positive outcome from that? There isn't one. I suggest it's related to Webbers departure.

Re the answer to Southwell, whilst the answer was rubbish I don't think it was rude. When she said "you" have no Idea I thought it was quite clear she was referring to all those questioning governance. She has a bit of a point, there is always so much work that goes on inside any business that others don't see or don't understand.

I also thought the reality was she was asked about Webber and answered it. I then think its wrong to say too much about Knapper before he's done anything. Let's not big him up too much and heap more pressure on the guy. But all 3, DS MWJ and MA spoke positively about him.

Again, one of the biggest criticisms towards Delia is her emotional attachment to staff so it shouldn't be a surprise at all that she offered a call of encouragement. I dont see how that impacts Knapper at all, where ultimately its literally been confirmed by all 3 majority shareholders that it is his decision. And then he himself was pretty adamant in his stating that he didn't want to make a decision this early.

So I guess ultimately if you think all 4 of them are straight up lying in an AGM then you could have a point. But then we should ignore everything else they've said, shouldn't we?

Thank you for your detailed and considered reply - although we seem to have different opinions about almost everything, I appreciate that you play the ball, not the man. There's little in what you say here that I could disagree with.

I only want to add that I was impressed with MA in general, and specifically the number of times in these interviews where he has stressed his faith in Knapper - e.g. his 'Leave it to Ben' comment. I think this reflects his professionalism in contrast with Delia's amateurism - he realises that it's important to encourage the person who is the future rather than eulogise about the person who is the past.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, canarybubbles said:

Thank you for your detailed and considered reply - although we seem to have different opinions about almost everything, I appreciate that you play the ball, not the man. There's little in what you say here that I could disagree with.

I only want to add that I was impressed with MA in general, and specifically the number of times in these interviews where he has stressed his faith in Knapper - e.g. his 'Leave it to Ben' comment. I think this reflects his professionalism in contrast with Delia's amateurism - he realises that it's important to encourage the person who is the future rather than eulogise about the person who is the past.

Yes I think, unfortunately, DS and MWJ comments have kind of overshadowed the most important bit - our future is in the hands of MA who speaks with pretty solid conviction, determination and also an understanding of having to invest - I note in particular him saying Knapper is putting together a list for January for MA to look at to see what money is required. That has of course, never been an option for us under DS and MWJ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So having established that if Knapper recommends Wagner is sacked and that recommendation will be ratified, what is he actually waiting for? It seems overwhelmingly obvious that Wagner is not fit for purpose.

There needs to be collective responsibility and someone needs to give Knapper a little nudge and say are you really sure about this? 

I don't want to use the Binners as a stick but it's becoming increasingly likely Wagner will be the first ever manager to have been sacked having lost to Ipswich, because if we do lose there the reaction could be quite spectacular.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Yes I think, unfortunately, DS and MWJ comments have kind of overshadowed the most important bit - our future is in the hands of MA who speaks with pretty solid conviction, determination and also an understanding of having to invest - I note in particular him saying Knapper is putting together a list for January for MA to look at to see what money is required. That has of course, never been an option for us under DS and MWJ.

Wonder what he makes of their comments. Perhaps he’s not yet informed enough re the fan base to see that’s not the case. I suspect so. But I’d like to think he is - and that he isn’t so blasé 

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

×
×
  • Create New...