In over 50 years I have seen nothing more disgraceful at NCFC...

[CambridgeCanary 0]

[quote user="jelltex"]I seem to remember Ken brown being sacked just as brutally. even still the timing of the sacking was a joke, quite what the board was hoping to achieve by that is beyond me, other than to destabilise the team. There is a story behind this for sure. The football club should not be a retirement home for former players, legend or not.[/quote]

I was thinking the same thing.  I remember chanting "Chase out" at the game following Ken''s dismissal.  It was a shameful time irrspective of the halcyon days which followed.

[ron obvious 1,502]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="BlyBlyBabes"]

.... than the brutal way in which Bryan Gunn was treated. And just think how Butterworth, Crook, Deehan and the players - especially those he brought in must be feeling.

This is not the Norwich way Miss Smith. You must go now.

I was rather underwhelmed by the original appointment of Bryan Gunn. But once Team Gunn emerged with the addition of the other former Carrow Road stalwarts I thought why not give it a go and wish them good luck. The psychological mess and loan policy left by Roeder was always likely to lead to relegation, so when Gunn was confirmed as manager, allowed to do a little housecleaning, throw out the loans policy, bring in 12 new players etc I thought Team Gunn would be given a few months to prove themselves.

I suspect that stagefright, bad luck and panic fed on each other against Colchester and the the Yeovil result was more a true reflection of the quality of the team. Surely there were no clues in the pre-season build-up which would have predicted imminent catastrope, which supports this theory.

No. Panic took over after Colchester, and McNally and Bowker saw their main chance - and Smith acquiesced in the vain hope that they would rescue her from the pending firestorm.

Ken Brown is bemused. I am bemused, embarrassed and angry. No matter how hard or difficult things are this is just not the way to do things.

Fire Gunn by all means if that is the considered solution.

But not in this brutal and unfair manner. I mean, by what kind of judgement do you give a man (a team really) a new contract, allow him to restructure the squad, bring in 12 new players etc and then fire him (them? as they must be almost as culpable mustn''t they?) after a freak  1-7 followed by a good 4-0 against comparable opposition.

And still the majority will not admit that their Empress has no clothes!

All I will say in summary is that there are ways to do things - and brutality and public humiliation are NOT the way. And the buck stops at the top.

And that''s the way I see it.

Nuff said.

One love.

OTBC

 

 

 

[/quote].The problem with this post is that it is as confused and sentimental as

some of the decisions taken by the old board over the last few years.

It also betrays a lack of knowledge of the club''s history.

Not the Norwich way? Take the reign of Watling. Four managers in just

over five years. All fired. Reid after just five months. Swindin after

seven months. Hard to get more brutal than that. Or the sacking (or did

he walk out?) of Saunders by South. Either way it was brutal.

"This is not the Norwich way Miss Smith."

Oh but it is. Or, at least, it used to be. And if we have at last moved

away from decisions overly influenced by sentimentality then that is

all for the good.

As for: "There are ways to do things - and brutality and public

humiliation are NOT the way." This makes no sense. How exactly do you

sack someone in the public eye without humiliating them? It cannot be

done. It is by its nature a humiliating event.

If Gunn had not wanted to be humiliated then he should not have decided to try to become a football manager.

[/quote]Spot on PC.The way the club has been going there wouldn''t have been anything to manage soon. I think McNally is a practical man - not brutal, but pragmatic. I''m sure he''s as kind to children & orphans as the next man. But trying to deny reality just means everyone getting hurt.It''s all a lottery, but I reckon the odds on success just shortened.

[Nexus_Canary 1,016]

and the way Hucks was fired and un-ceremoniously removed wasnt unfair ?Gunn is a proffesional, this is football, he should have seen and thought about this when he accepted the job.I have to admit that i belive they should have given him the Exeter match before firing him and I got a txt saying Gunn gone while in a field in Derby so was a little confused for my festival !

[Jumpers for Goalposts 0]

[quote user="BlyBlyBabes"]

.... than the brutal way in which Bryan Gunn was treated. And just think how Butterworth, Crook, Deehan and the players - especially those he brought in must be feeling.

This is not the Norwich way Miss Smith. You must go now.

I was rather underwhelmed by the original appointment of Bryan Gunn. But once Team Gunn emerged with the addition of the other former Carrow Road stalwarts I thought why not give it a go and wish them good luck. The psychological mess and loan policy left by Roeder was always likely to lead to relegation, so when Gunn was confirmed as manager, allowed to do a little housecleaning, throw out the loans policy, bring in 12 new players etc I thought Team Gunn would be given a few months to prove themselves.

I suspect that stagefright, bad luck and panic fed on each other against Colchester and the the Yeovil result was more a true reflection of the quality of the team. Surely there were no clues in the pre-season build-up which would have predicted imminent catastrope, which supports this theory.

No. Panic took over after Colchester, and McNally and Bowker saw their main chance - and Smith acquiesced in the vain hope that they would rescue her from the pending firestorm.

Ken Brown is bemused. I am bemused, embarrassed and angry. No matter how hard or difficult things are this is just not the way to do things.

Fire Gunn by all means if that is the considered solution.

But not in this brutal and unfair manner. I mean, by what kind of judgement do you give a man (a team really) a new contract, allow him to restructure the squad, bring in 12 new players etc and then fire him (them? as they must be almost as culpable mustn''t they?) after a freak  1-7 followed by a good 4-0 against comparable opposition.

And still the majority will not admit that their Empress has no clothes!

All I will say in summary is that there are ways to do things - and brutality and public humiliation are NOT the way. And the buck stops at the top.

And that''s the way I see it.

Nuff said.

One love.

OTBC

 

 

 

[/quote]

Unfortunately, the Colchester result cannot be glossed over that easily. It may well have been a freak result, but, more importantly it brings into question Gunn''s tactics, team selection, quality of signings, man management and motivational ability. Quite simply, Gunn was not up to job, as he proved last season.

The Board got it wrong when it placed him in temporary charge in January, and, they got it wrong aqain when they offered him the job in the Summer.

McNally deserves credit for trying to put this right and turn us back into a football club.

[sgncfc 1,227]

[quote user="ron obvious"][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="BlyBlyBabes"]

.... than the brutal way in which Bryan Gunn was treated. And just think how Butterworth, Crook, Deehan and the players - especially those he brought in must be feeling.

This is not the Norwich way Miss Smith. You must go now.

I was rather underwhelmed by the original appointment of Bryan Gunn. But once Team Gunn emerged with the addition of the other former Carrow Road stalwarts I thought why not give it a go and wish them good luck. The psychological mess and loan policy left by Roeder was always likely to lead to relegation, so when Gunn was confirmed as manager, allowed to do a little housecleaning, throw out the loans policy, bring in 12 new players etc I thought Team Gunn would be given a few months to prove themselves.

I suspect that stagefright, bad luck and panic fed on each other against Colchester and the the Yeovil result was more a true reflection of the quality of the team. Surely there were no clues in the pre-season build-up which would have predicted imminent catastrope, which supports this theory.

No. Panic took over after Colchester, and McNally and Bowker saw their main chance - and Smith acquiesced in the vain hope that they would rescue her from the pending firestorm.

Ken Brown is bemused. I am bemused, embarrassed and angry. No matter how hard or difficult things are this is just not the way to do things.

Fire Gunn by all means if that is the considered solution.

But not in this brutal and unfair manner. I mean, by what kind of judgement do you give a man (a team really) a new contract, allow him to restructure the squad, bring in 12 new players etc and then fire him (them? as they must be almost as culpable mustn''t they?) after a freak  1-7 followed by a good 4-0 against comparable opposition.

And still the majority will not admit that their Empress has no clothes!

All I will say in summary is that there are ways to do things - and brutality and public humiliation are NOT the way. And the buck stops at the top.

And that''s the way I see it.

Nuff said.

One love.

OTBC

 

 

 

[/quote]
.

The problem with this post is that it is as confused and sentimental as some of the decisions taken by the old board over the last few years. It also betrays a lack of knowledge of the club''s history.

Not the Norwich way? Take the reign of Watling. Four managers in just over five years. All fired. Reid after just five months. Swindin after seven months. Hard to get more brutal than that. Or the sacking (or did he walk out?) of Saunders by South. Either way it was brutal.

"This is not the Norwich way Miss Smith."

Oh but it is. Or, at least, it used to be. And if we have at last moved away from decisions overly influenced by sentimentality then that is all for the good.

As for: "There are ways to do things - and brutality and public humiliation are NOT the way." This makes no sense. How exactly do you sack someone in the public eye without humiliating them? It cannot be done. It is by its nature a humiliating event.

If Gunn had not wanted to be humiliated then he should not have decided to try to become a football manager.



[/quote]

Spot on PC.

The way the club has been going there wouldn''t have been anything to manage soon. I think McNally is a practical man - not brutal, but pragmatic. I''m sure he''s as kind to children & orphans as the next man. But trying to deny reality just means everyone getting hurt.

It''s all a lottery, but I reckon the odds on success just shortened.




[/quote]

 

Other posters have pointed out how ruthless we used to be i.e Ken Brown. Better men than Gunn chose to fall on their sword when they saw that they either couldn''t do the job or wouldn''t be allowed to (O''Neill, Grant, Saunders etc). Gunny should have held his hands up in May after Charlton and admitted he couldn''t hack it and gone back to his old job. I have some sympathy with him over the timing but it was inevitable after the Colchester game - lets not forget this was our worst home result in over 100 years. How bad does it have to get before the manager has to go?

[Im Dicky Too 0]

I agree with Billabong''s post completely. The club seemed to have finally stabilised itself... albeit at a level that it didn’t want to be at (Div 1), but we were entering a new season with a fresh management team, and a seemingly strong squad of our own players. Now they have had the carpet pulled from under their feet, and we are floundering again.

Nobody was complaining about the summer signings, and nobody was complaining about the pre-season results.

I accept that 1-7 was unacceptable, but we will never know if it was a one-off, freak result. The performance and result against Yoevil would suggest that it was. Sacking Gunn probably cost us a couple of points against Exeter!

If they wanted to go for a knee-jerk, panic fuelled decision and sack Gunn after the Colchester game, then fine. But if it was not appropriate to do it then, how could it be appropriate after a 4-0 away victory?

Lambert is probably a good manager, and should do well for Norwich in this league at least, and I hope that he does. However, I am also confident that Gunn and his team would have done equally well, and of course, as a Norwich fan aware of our history, I would prefer to have Gunn at the helm.

Bryan Gunn IS a Norwich legend, and he always will be. Those of you who dispute this should look in the record books where the achievements of the team he played for are clear to see. Indeed, it is the success of the players of his era which makes us feel like underachievers now. This is why it was reassuring to have three players from that era leading the club... who could you trust more than three guys who genuinely love the club?

 

These are sad times at Norwich City.

And, to confound it all, it is doubtful that we will see Huckerby back in yellow again!

[canary cherub 1]

[quote user="Tangible Fixed Assets anyone"]

The club could not afford to give Gunn more time.

[/quote]

Exactly.  

Let''s say we got to the end of October and it clearly wasn''t working.  By then Norwich City would be bruised fruit, so who''d want to come here - not Paul Lambert that''s for sure - and if history is anything to go by we''d be competing against 2 or 3 Champ clubs also looking for new managers.

Doing it now could make the difference between an immediate return to the Champ and becoming a fixture in League 1 until we go bust.  Now was the right time to get the right man, and let''s hope he delivers.  But the alternative - to wait and see - was a far bigger risk imo.

Provided Lambert proves to be a better manager than Gunn, what''s to lose?

 

[Binky 0]

[quote user="Nexus_Canary"]and the way Hucks was fired and un-ceremoniously removed wasnt unfair ?Gunn is a proffesional, this is football, he should have seen and thought about this when he accepted the job.I have to admit that i believe they should have given him the Exeter match before firing him and I got a txt saying Gunn gone while in a field in Derby so was a little confused for my festival ![/quote]Then you are contradicting yourself Nexus. BBB''s thread is not about Gunn not deserving the sack. The thread is about the manner and timing of his sacking. If they had sacked him after Colchester it would have been very brutal but quite understandable. (The majority shareholders would still have looked stupid though having only recently appointed him and given him full rein on recruiting). But to do it over the telephone, away from home less than 24 hrs before the next match had kicked off smacks of panic that the man might just have had another good result after Yeovil. Those (eg Mr Chops) who say Gunn had to go may well be right. But this thread''s original implication that there had to be a better way to wield the axe is undoubtedly right IMO.

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="Binky"][quote user="Nexus_Canary"]and the way Hucks was fired and un-ceremoniously removed wasnt unfair ?

Gunn is a proffesional, this is football, he should have seen and thought about this when he accepted the job.

I have to admit that i believe they should have given him the Exeter match before firing him and I got a txt saying Gunn gone while in a field in Derby so was a little confused for my festival !
[/quote]

Then you are contradicting yourself Nexus. BBB''s thread is not about Gunn not deserving the sack. The thread is about the manner and timing of his sacking. If they had sacked him after Colchester it would have been very brutal but quite understandable. (The majority shareholders would still have looked stupid though having only recently appointed him and given him full rein on recruiting). But to do it over the telephone, away from home less than 24 hrs before the next match had kicked off smacks of panic that the man might just have had another good result after Yeovil. Those (eg Mr Chops) who say Gunn had to go may well be right. But this thread''s original implication that there had to be a better way to wield the axe is undoubtedly right IMO.
[/quote]

Heres a scenario for you:

I thought there was a board meeting on Sunday? 

Decide to ditch Gunn on Sunday but keep it quiet until a replacement is organised.

Story leaked to the Daily Mirror forcing the club to announce the sacking on Friday.

 

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

BTW. the Sunday I refer to is the day after the Colchester defeat. The team had the look (v Colchester) that they showed when they lost against Burnley at home and Worthy got the boot.

[First Wazzock 902]

[quote user="BlyBlyBabes"][quote user="1st Wazzock"][quote user="BlyBlyBabes"]

[quote user="Mister Chops"]Don''t know about 50 years, but In over 30 years I have seen nothing more disgraceful at NCFC than the last three competitive matches - Reading at home, Charlton away, Colchester at home.  Gunn had to go.
[/quote]

That''s not the point of this thread.

And you know it.

OTBC

 

[/quote]

But he''s right though, the world and his wife watched these three games and were appalled.

[/quote]

I agree too Wazzy, but the comment is still off point.

I would be more interested in replies from the two of you to my views expressed in the post.

OTBC 

[/quote]

It is difficult.

Damned if you do and damned if you don''t.

I think most people would agree with the fact that Gunn was not the man for the job, the football was abysmal, and therefore should not have been offered a contract, but he was.

I felt he should have been offered the option to resign (jump rather than be pushed - I don''t know if he was given that chance), that would have been more dignified. Gunn''s status as a club legend is not in doubt though.

On the other hand you have got to admire the way it looks as if it is going to be. No more pussyfooting around go and get what we need to get the job done.

Gunn deserved this to be handled better than it was, but perhaps this shows that we are dropping the ''nice little old Norwich'' tag.

[whoareyou? 0]

It''s about time someone running the club showed some balls. Maybe at last we have that man.

Sentiment is sure way to relegation!

[Beauseant 0]

[quote user="1st Wazzock"][quote user="BlyBlyBabes"][quote user="1st Wazzock"][quote user="BlyBlyBabes"]

[quote user="Mister Chops"]Don''t know about 50 years, but In over 30 years I have seen nothing more disgraceful at NCFC than the last three competitive matches - Reading at home, Charlton away, Colchester at home.  Gunn had to go.
[/quote]

That''s not the point of this thread.

And you know it.

OTBC

 

[/quote]

But he''s right though, the world and his wife watched these three games and were appalled.

[/quote]

I agree too Wazzy, but the comment is still off point.

I would be more interested in replies from the two of you to my views expressed in the post.

OTBC 

[/quote]

It is difficult.

Damned if you do and damned if you don''t.

I think most people would agree with the fact that Gunn was not the man for the job, the football was abysmal, and therefore should not have been offered a contract, but he was.

I felt he should have been offered the option to resign (jump rather than be pushed - I don''t know if he was given that chance), that would have been more dignified. Gunn''s status as a club legend is not in doubt though.

On the other hand you have got to admire the way it looks as if it is going to be. No more pussyfooting around go and get what we need to get the job done.

Gunn deserved this to be handled better than it was, but perhaps this shows that we are dropping the ''nice little old Norwich'' tag.

[/quote]

 

I agree with all of that Wazzy. The only problem is that had he been asked to resign and refused we would have then had a real mess which the press would have made a huge meal of ,as it would have surely leaked out.The whole "bleed green and yellow" thing has been an absolute disaster, and may well have cost us our Championship status. For me it couldn''t end soon enough and we at last look like a professional outfit again.

One further point. I can''t be bothered to trawl through old threads, but I wonder how many of those who so eagerly heralded the "keep it in the Norwich family" approach were among those subsequently demanding Gunny''s sacking?

[gazzathegreat 0]

Sorry Bly, can''t agree on two counts.

First, no one really knows the exact timeline of all of this. I tend to think along the lines of TFA and the board meeting followed by a decision to sack him and the news somehow leaked out, however I suspect we will never know. Let''s face it, the flies on the wall at NCFC boardroom level could write several best sellers. Gunn, being in football all this time, and crucially being around while the managers around him were disposed of, knew only too well what may lay in store for him. Still he took on the job and failed. For the sake of the club, it was only a matter of time before he went.

Secondly, we need to toughen up. That''s fans, players (especially players), management and the board. Too long (and in parallel with our decline) has been this little family club stuff, which has contributed to a great proportion of supporters'' lowered expectations (very convenient to explain away our lack of progress and the regular "We can''t compete with" - insert smaller club in same league a la Doncaster of recent years). We have had many instances of reasons and examples that only those "who bleed yellow and green" can be successful here.

Well truly Bly, the only part of NCFC which truly bleeds yellow and green is the long suffering support, and how we have wept in recent years over missed opportunity, mediocre playing squads, inadequate management from top to bottom.

Gunn was a great player for us, and to a much lesser extent he has worked as an ambassador for NCFC and found us new investment and new business opportunities. But he was no manager and it was always going to end in tears. Frankly I was moved to tears far more witnessing the matches as Chops described. Simply it''s difficult to terminate anyone''s employment in a nice way. But that''s the trouble isn''t it. We are known for being nice. And just where has that got us?

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

[quote user=gazzathegreat]Sorry Bly, can''t agree on two counts. First, no one really knows the exact timeline of all of this. I tend to think along the lines of TFA and the board meeting followed by a decision to sack him and the news somehow leaked out, however I suspect we will never know. Let''s face it, the flies on the wall at NCFC boardroom level could write several best sellers. Gunn, being in football all this time, and crucially being around while the managers around him were disposed of, knew only too well what may lay in store for him. Still he took on the job and failed. For the sake of the club, it was only a matter of time before he went. Secondly, we need to toughen up. That''s fans, players (especially players), management and the board. Too long (and in parallel with our decline) has been this little family club stuff, which has contributed to a great proportion of supporters'' lowered expectations (very convenient to explain away our lack of progress and the regular "We can''t compete with" - insert smaller club in same league a la Doncaster of recent years). We have had many instances of reasons and examples that only those "who bleed yellow and green" can be successful here. Well truly Bly, the only part of NCFC which truly bleeds yellow and green is the long suffering support, and how we have wept in recent years over missed opportunity, mediocre playing squads, inadequate management from top to bottom. Gunn was a great player for us, and to a much lesser extent he has worked as an ambassador for NCFC and found us new investment and new business opportunities. But he was no manager and it was always going to end in tears. Frankly I was moved to tears far more witnessing the matches as Chops described. Simply it''s difficult to terminate anyone''s employment in a nice way. But that''s the trouble isn''t it. We are known for being nice. And just where has that got us[//quote]

Have you read Yelverton Yellows piece earlier in this thread?

OTBC

[corbs 0]

Sorry to be predictable, but i agree with much of the original post, apart from the references to Delia. Seems to me that the ''Delia outers'' have got what they wanted, namely a ruthless Board decision, far removed from the ''caring, community'' Club so casually derided recently by some. I am well known for my view that Bryan was not ready for the Job, but I watched the video link of Paul Lambert without the usual flicker of hope and excitement (when a new Manager comes in). In the 35 years or so since I have been attending Carrow Road every season, I have never felt quite so uneasy about being a fan. The humiliation of Fulham, Charlton, and Colchester were one thing, but the timing and manner of Gunn''s departure has left me feeling a shade queasy and shamed. I just do not want to be associated with our Club at present. A few months ago I was ''re-deployed'' by a new ruthless Manager at work, and despite the fact that this galvanised me to successfully land a dream job, which I started yesterday in London SW1; I still feel anger at the ''light -weights'' that made the original decision. Bryan, good luck, you are a winner (European Cup Medal).

[Mello Yello 2,289]

[quote user="corbs"]Sorry to be predictable, but i agree with much of the original post, apart from the references to Delia. Seems to me that the ''Delia outers'' have got what they wanted, namely a ruthless Board decision, far removed from the ''caring, community'' Club so casually derided recently by some. I am well known for my view that Bryan was not ready for the Job, but I watched the video link of Paul Lambert without the usual flicker of hope and excitement (when a new Manager comes in). In the 35 years or so since I have been attending Carrow Road every season, I have never felt quite so uneasy about being a fan. The humiliation of Fulham, Charlton, and Colchester were one thing, but the timing and manner of Gunn''s departure has left me feeling a shade queasy and shamed. I just do not want to be associated with our Club at present. A few months ago I was ''re-deployed'' by a new ruthless Manager at work, and despite the fact that this galvanised me to successfully land a dream job, which I started yesterday in London SW1; I still feel anger at the ''light -weights'' that made the original decision. Bryan, good luck, you are a winner (European Cup Medal).[/quote]

BOO HOO [:''(]

[barclay seats 4849 0]

[quote user="BlyBlyBabes"]

.... than the brutal way in which Bryan Gunn was treated. And just think how Butterworth, Crook, Deehan and the players - especially those he brought in must be feeling.

This is not the Norwich way Miss Smith. You must go now.

I was rather underwhelmed by the original appointment of Bryan Gunn. But once Team Gunn emerged with the addition of the other former Carrow Road stalwarts I thought why not give it a go and wish them good luck. The psychological mess and loan policy left by Roeder was always likely to lead to relegation, so when Gunn was confirmed as manager, allowed to do a little housecleaning, throw out the loans policy, bring in 12 new players etc I thought Team Gunn would be given a few months to prove themselves.

I suspect that stagefright, bad luck and panic fed on each other against Colchester and the the Yeovil result was more a true reflection of the quality of the team. Surely there were no clues in the pre-season build-up which would have predicted imminent catastrope, which supports this theory.

No. Panic took over after Colchester, and McNally and Bowker saw their main chance - and Smith acquiesced in the vain hope that they would rescue her from the pending firestorm.

Ken Brown is bemused. I am bemused, embarrassed and angry. No matter how hard or difficult things are this is just not the way to do things.

Fire Gunn by all means if that is the considered solution.

But not in this brutal and unfair manner. I mean, by what kind of judgement do you give a man (a team really) a new contract, allow him to restructure the squad, bring in 12 new players etc and then fire him (them? as they must be almost as culpable mustn''t they?) after a freak  1-7 followed by a good 4-0 against comparable opposition.

And still the majority will not admit that their Empress has no clothes!

All I will say in summary is that there are ways to do things - and brutality and public humiliation are NOT the way. And the buck stops at the top.

And that''s the way I see it.

Nuff said.

One love.

OTBC

 

 

 

[/quote]

Really ???????? Nothing more disgraceful ??? Don''t you go to the games ???? That is more disgraceful by a long way......a fu**ing long way! 

[liquid_football 0]

The real disgrace was back in May when it was announced Gunn was to become our manager on a permanent basis. You would have thought that the preceding 18 games, capitulation when it really mattered and relegation under his initial tenure as well as a lack of any form of previous managerial CV would have been quite enough. His appointment in the first place was highly questionable, but on the second occasion it was simply ridiculous.

The buck must stop with S&J. Was it arrogance or incompetence to appoint Gunn before a new board was in place? Either way it was a truly appalling decision and has led us to the embarrassing events of the last week. Whilst he''s a great guy, he clearly doesn''t have the potential to become a great manager - anybody (minus Barry from Taverham) could have pointed that out, and that’s without the benefit of hindsight (per the NCISA meeting at St Andrews Hall). So it must have been patently obvious to a man of McNally''s ‘footballing’/commercial calibre who had to work with him on a day to day basis, long before the shambles of the Colchester game. He knew that Gunn had to go and it had to be as soon as possible.

In my opinion it was the correct decision to relieve Gunn of his duties, and whilst the timing was unfortunate it just had to be done. The most important thing is that the decision was made in the best interests of the club. The interests of Bryan Gunn, Ian Butterworth or Ian Crook regrettably had to come second, legends or otherwise. It is a shame that it had to come down to this, but you can’t blame that on McNally and the rest of the incoming board members. They were put into this situation, and were forced to act accordingly. Specifically, Delia & Michael are the only ones who can be blamed in all of this sorry situation - although I''m sure they would be quick to shirk any responsibility.

There was nothing disgraceful about the sacking or the timing, only his appointment in the first place.