End of season Hughton decision

[nutty nigel 7,513]

[quote user="Yorkshire Canary"]Well lets see where we are at the end of the seasons hall we. I hope we stay up and we may do so by the odd point. I would be amazed if he is not binned then before next season to the relief of many many supporters including huge numbers of the so called silent majority[/quote]

That still doesn''t alter the fact that Hughton is as resposible for the points we win just as much as the points we drop. The important thing is to finish the season in the highest position we can. That''s more important than who the manager is.

 

As for the silent majority...

 

If there is any such thing then how on earth do you or anyone else know what they want.

 

 

[T 190]

Some people seriously need to learn to think for themselves - it''s the only way to be able to grasp reality rather than just following the herd.

[Deptford Canary 0]

The board clearly think change is riskier than sticking with who and what we''ve got, but if we do stay up I''d bet my bottom dollar it will a close thing; premier league survival would be no mean feat in itself but not enough ultimately; hiughton leaves with his dignity, less compo to pay out and face saving all-round... But it constitutes a risky strategy in my view...

[The Butler 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="TIL 1010"][quote user="Jimbo Canary"][quote user="TIL 1010"]

Stop pussy footing around your ''mob'' reference and spell it out because I am unaware of a ''certain organisation'' offering assistance to anybody calling for Delia''s head. Who was leading this ''mob'' and what assistance was offered or given ?

 

 

 

[/quote]

 

Who has called for our Delia''s head Mr Til, its all new to me have I missed something?

[/quote]

That''s what I am trying to establish Jimbo. Read T''s posts on this thread.

[/quote]

 

Well I can remember an orgainsation that regularly published an anti-Delia blog on their web site....

 

 

[/quote]

Stirring the pot I think was your expression.

If you have time for that surely you have time to work out some simple figures.

Till will lend you a hand to count on .

[TIL 1010 4,722]

I will lend a couple of fingers to go with your ten then Nutty so that makes the twelve you will need. [;)]

[nutty nigel 7,513]

[quote user="The Butler"][quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="TIL 1010"][quote user="Jimbo Canary"][quote user="TIL 1010"]

Stop pussy footing around your ''mob'' reference and spell it out because I am unaware of a ''certain organisation'' offering assistance to anybody calling for Delia''s head. Who was leading this ''mob'' and what assistance was offered or given ?

 

 

 

[/quote]

 

Who has called for our Delia''s head Mr Til, its all new to me have I missed something?

[/quote]

That''s what I am trying to establish Jimbo. Read T''s posts on this thread.

[/quote]

 

Well I can remember an orgainsation that regularly published an anti-Delia blog on their web site....

 

 

[/quote]

Stirring the pot I think was your expression.

If you have time for that surely you have time to work out some simple figures.

Till will lend you a hand to count on .

[/quote]

 

And I can remember the Chairman of said organisation who stated "I can''t stand the devious duo" whilst encouraging people to believe Big Bob "was chased out for far less than they have done." Whatever it is he believes "they have done" was.

 

It''s 12m BTW. She told me.

 

 

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

Oh deep joy. This divisive bit of the past. Again. I understand why it has come up, because of an allegation that may or may not refer to a particular organisation. But perhaps once the allegation has been satisfactorily dealt with (which may or may not happen) can we please consign the subject to the dustbin of history?It is very much like the impenetrable Schleswig-Holstein Problem, which was only ever understood by three people. Of whom one had died and one had gone stark-raving mad - a reaction with which some of us, when faced with yet another reprise of the saga, might well understand.

[ron obvious 1,501]

Ah, but more pertinently, what about the Midlothian question? Reckon old Tam opened up a can of worms there.

Anyway, what''s all this got to do with the Noumenon??

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

[quote user="ron obvious"]Ah, but more pertinently, what about the Midlothian question? Reckon old Tam opened up a can of worms there.

Anyway, what''s all this got to do with the Noumenon??[/quote]You been read that there Popper again, Ron? Or is it Kant this time? Anyway, we can''t both quote Blake, so I will switch to another poet.

[ron obvious 1,501]

Schopenhauer, Purp (or at least as interpreted by Bryan Magee).

Giving me brain ache at the mo.

Still, I can always come here for some light relief. Not.

[Crafty Canary 495]

PurpleCanary wrote the following post at 06/02/2014 10:12 PM:

Oh deep joy. This divisive bit of the past. Again. I understand why it has come up, because of an allegation that may or may not refer to a particular organisation. But perhaps once the allegation has been satisfactorily dealt with (which may or may not happen) can we please consign the subject to the dustbin of history?

It is very much like the impenetrable Schleswig-Holstein Problem, which was only ever understood by three people. Of whom one had died and one had gone stark-raving mad - a reaction with which some of us, when faced with yet another reprise of the saga, might well understand.

A point well made, Purple especially as those criticising the ''anti Delia mob'' happened to vote no confidence in her and MWJ as directors of our club. They went remarkably quiet very quickly about the majority owners stepping down as directors.

[The Butler 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="The Butler"][quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="TIL 1010"][quote user="Jimbo Canary"][quote user="TIL 1010"]

Stop pussy footing around your ''mob'' reference and spell it out because I am unaware of a ''certain organisation'' offering assistance to anybody calling for Delia''s head. Who was leading this ''mob'' and what assistance was offered or given ?

 

 

 

[/quote]

 

Who has called for our Delia''s head Mr Til, its all new to me have I missed something?

[/quote]

That''s what I am trying to establish Jimbo. Read T''s posts on this thread.

[/quote]

 

Well I can remember an orgainsation that regularly published an anti-Delia blog on their web site....

 

 

[/quote]

Stirring the pot I think was your expression.

If you have time for that surely you have time to work out some simple figures.

Till will lend you a hand to count on .

[/quote]

 

And I can remember the Chairman of said organisation who stated "I can''t stand the devious duo" whilst encouraging people to believe Big Bob "was chased out for far less than they have done." Whatever it is he believes "they have done" was.

 

It''s 12m BTW. She told me.

 

 

[/quote]

That makes 2 that can''t count or decipher accounts.

In that e-mail Nutty she states that neither herself or Hubby wanted ambition with prudence (if that was the term)

Well in a 5 person board , 1 an employee another a PR figurehead, they let them dictate the policy!

Still as Purple says all water well gone down the wensum and time to move on to more vital issues.

I''m sure you and Tilly have far better discussions to have on the merits of Hughton[;)]

[The Butler 0]

As an aside Till haven''t you worked out who T is and why he has suddenly appeared again.

If you put your deer stalker on and think pressingly of someone who really liked NCISA when you were chairman you might get close[;)]

[Warren Hill 0]

Got it!!!!!

T for Tangible Fixed Assets Anyone?!!!!!

Ha!!!! Elementary.

[nutty nigel 7,513]

Perhaps it would be of more interest to work out why The Butler has suddenly appeared again....

 

 

[Bill 1,788]

" time to move on to more vital issues"

a be greatful that they are no longer problems

hooray for sanitisation

no more rises only spikes

results are out outcomes are in

and you cannot be accused of making a mistake as it''s an error of judgement

and poor old decision has now replaced with a shout *

"surely call, ed

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

[quote user="Dr Crafty Canary"]PurpleCanary wrote the following post at 06/02/2014 10:12 PM:

Oh deep joy. This divisive bit of the past. Again. I understand why it has come up, because of an allegation that may or may not refer to a particular organisation. But perhaps once the allegation has been satisfactorily dealt with (which may or may not happen) can we please consign the subject to the dustbin of history?

It is very much like the impenetrable Schleswig-Holstein Problem, which was only ever understood by three people. Of whom one had died and one had gone stark-raving mad - a reaction with which some of us, when faced with yet another reprise of the saga, might well understand.

A point well made, Purple especially as those criticising the ''anti Delia mob'' happened to vote no confidence in her and MWJ as directors of our club. They went remarkably quiet very quickly about the majority owners stepping down as directors.[/quote]Except that it will only be a point well made if that is the last time you refer to this now ancient and irrelevant piece of history.

[hertfordyellow 460]

I don''t get this argument that we have a good squad waiting to take the league by storm only Hughton is stopping this happening. I don''t see a squad brimming with top 10 quality. I see a bit of potential (that''s what we can afford to buy), some hardworkers and some that can be good on their day but are rarely fit. If we want to push on then the squad will have to be overhauled (As well as a new manager) to achieve this. We did spend some money true but in the grand scheme of things it was only enough to stay on equal grounds with other clubs of our size not to push up the league. Yes we bought 2 strikers for 13 million pounds, well West Ham spent 15 on a striker, Hull spent the same on 2 strikers, Southampton spent 12 on a striker, Swansea spent 11 on a striker, West Brom bought 2 6million pound strikers. We didn''t spend big i.e. much more the bottom 8, we just matched them.

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

[quote user="The Butler"]

As an aside Till haven''t you worked out who T is and why he has suddenly appeared again.

If you put your deer stalker on and think pressingly of someone who really liked NCISA when you were chairman you might get close[;)]

[/quote]Nice to have you back, TB. You may know something I don''t (almost certainly true) but if you are suggesting, as seems to be the case, that T is an alter ego for Tangible, I doubt that. I really do. It would have to be a long-running and complicated masquerade (and one overlapping with Tangible posting as his inimitable self). T has always seemed to be a genuine poster rather than the construct of someone''s imagination. Frankly, I think you are barking up the wrong T there...[:)]

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

[quote user="hertfordyellow"]I don''t get this argument that we have a good squad waiting to take the league by storm only Hughton is stopping this happening. I don''t see a squad brimming with top 10 quality. I see a bit of potential (that''s what we can afford to buy), some hardworkers and some that can be good on their day but are rarely fit. If we want to push on then the squad will have to be overhauled (As well as a new manager) to achieve this. We did spend some money true but in the grand scheme of things it was only enough to stay on equal grounds with other clubs of our size not to push up the league. Yes we bought 2 strikers for 13 million pounds, well West Ham spent 15 on a striker, Hull spent the same on 2 strikers, Southampton spent 12 on a striker, Swansea spent 11 on a striker, West Brom bought 2 6million pound strikers. We didn''t spend big i.e. much more the bottom 8, we just matched them.[/quote]As an aside, Hull have only just spent some money on goalscorers, West Brom failed to keep Lukaku, West Ham''s striker is only now playing (or not) and Southampton have offloaded their expensive acquisition.But the real point is that sensible fans didn''t expect up to push on to a higher finish than last season. Sensible fans only expected us to equal last season''s performance, precisely because other clubs also spent money.The sensible, finance-based worry is that we are not going to achieve that. That we will not repeat last season''s points tally of 44, and even if we don''t get relegated will finish closer in points terms to 18th than last season. All despite spending that should have seen us emulate 2012-13.

[The Butler 0]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="The Butler"]

As an aside Till haven''t you worked out who T is and why he has suddenly appeared again.

If you put your deer stalker on and think pressingly of someone who really liked NCISA when you were chairman you might get close[;)]

[/quote]

Nice to have you back, TB. You may know something I don''t (almost certainly true) but if you are suggesting, as seems to be the case, that T is an alter ego for Tangible, I doubt that. I really do. It would have to be a long-running and complicated masquerade (and one overlapping with Tangible posting as his inimitable self). T has always seemed to be a genuine poster rather than the construct of someone''s imagination. Frankly, I think you are barking up the wrong T there...[:)]
[/quote]

No No a thousand times NO!!

Not Tangy, that I am sure of .

Let Tilly work it out

[The Butler 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

Perhaps it would be of more interest to work out why The Butler has suddenly appeared again....

 

 

[/quote]

Only I haven''t Nutty

I helped you with a PC problem a week or three back.Or have you forgotten?

I post when I have time and IF I have something I think worth putting my oar in.

Have a good day

 

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

[quote user="The Butler"][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="The Butler"]

As an aside Till haven''t you worked out who T is and why he has suddenly appeared again.

If you put your deer stalker on and think pressingly of someone who really liked NCISA when you were chairman you might get close[;)]

[/quote]Nice to have you back, TB. You may know something I don''t (almost certainly true) but if you are suggesting, as seems to be the case, that T is an alter ego for Tangible, I doubt that. I really do. It would have to be a long-running and complicated masquerade (and one overlapping with Tangible posting as his inimitable self). T has always seemed to be a genuine poster rather than the construct of someone''s imagination. Frankly, I think you are barking up the wrong T there...[:)][/quote]

No No a thousand times NO!!

Not Tangy, that I am sure of .

Let Tilly work it out

[/quote]That did seem a bizarre notion![;)] But Tangible was the only person I could imagine you were thinking of. I am intrigued (still  a bit dubious) that you think T is an alter ego, because he/she has always seemed one of a kind, but you appear (not for the first time) to know more than I[*-)] do.

[hertfordyellow 460]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="hertfordyellow"]I don''t get this argument that we have a good squad waiting to take the league by storm only Hughton is stopping this happening. I don''t see a squad brimming with top 10 quality. I see a bit of potential (that''s what we can afford to buy), some hardworkers and some that can be good on their day but are rarely fit. If we want to push on then the squad will have to be overhauled (As well as a new manager) to achieve this. We did spend some money true but in the grand scheme of things it was only enough to stay on equal grounds with other clubs of our size not to push up the league. Yes we bought 2 strikers for 13 million pounds, well West Ham spent 15 on a striker, Hull spent the same on 2 strikers, Southampton spent 12 on a striker, Swansea spent 11 on a striker, West Brom bought 2 6million pound strikers. We didn''t spend big i.e. much more the bottom 8, we just matched them.[/quote]As an aside, Hull have only just spent some money on goalscorers, West Brom failed to keep Lukaku, West Ham''s striker is only now playing (or not) and Southampton have offloaded their expensive acquisition.But the real point is that sensible fans didn''t expect up to push on to a higher finish than last season. Sensible fans only expected us to equal last season''s performance, precisely because other clubs also spent money.The sensible, finance-based worry is that we are not going to achieve that. That we will not repeat last season''s points tally of 44, and even if we don''t get relegated will finish closer in points terms to 18th than last season. All despite spending that should have seen us emulate 2012-13.[/quote]I think it boils down to the fact that £8million on a signing in the Premiership is now achievable by everyone in the league and they are willing to pay it even on a punt rather than a guaranteed performer (Cardiff and Cornelius). Even Palace spent near that on the lad from Peterborough. Quite a few arguments start with "we spent 20-22 million we should be top half". Well who hasn''t spend 20 odd million in the league? It''s hard to comprehend because we have never spent like this before but 20 million is possibly the norm for relegation scrappers,  not for top 8 clubs.

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

[quote user="hertfordyellow"][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="hertfordyellow"]I don''t get this argument that we have a good squad waiting to take the league by storm only Hughton is stopping this happening. I don''t see a squad brimming with top 10 quality. I see a bit of potential (that''s what we can afford to buy), some hardworkers and some that can be good on their day but are rarely fit. If we want to push on then the squad will have to be overhauled (As well as a new manager) to achieve this. We did spend some money true but in the grand scheme of things it was only enough to stay on equal grounds with other clubs of our size not to push up the league. Yes we bought 2 strikers for 13 million pounds, well West Ham spent 15 on a striker, Hull spent the same on 2 strikers, Southampton spent 12 on a striker, Swansea spent 11 on a striker, West Brom bought 2 6million pound strikers. We didn''t spend big i.e. much more the bottom 8, we just matched them.[/quote]As an aside, Hull have only just spent some money on goalscorers, West Brom failed to keep Lukaku, West Ham''s striker is only now playing (or not) and Southampton have offloaded their expensive acquisition.But the real point is that sensible fans didn''t expect up to push on to a higher finish than last season. Sensible fans only expected us to equal last season''s performance, precisely because other clubs also spent money.The sensible, finance-based worry is that we are not going to achieve that. That we will not repeat last season''s points tally of 44, and even if we don''t get relegated will finish closer in points terms to 18th than last season. All despite spending that should have seen us emulate 2012-13.[/quote]I think it boils down to the fact that £8million on a signing in the Premiership is now achievable by everyone in the league and they are willing to pay it even on a punt rather than a guaranteed performer (Cardiff and Cornelius). Even Palace spent near that on the lad from Peterborough. Quite a few arguments start with "we spent 20-22 million we should be top half". Well who hasn''t spend 20 odd million in the league? It''s hard to comprehend because we have never spent like this before but 20 million is possibly the norm for relegation scrappers,  not for top 8 clubs.[/quote]It is a football forum. You will get all sorts of arguments. Some sensible. Some not. But I haven''t noticed that many as over-optimistic as that. At least not since Alan Bowkett said at the start of the season that he expected us to finish 10th or higher...

[hertfordyellow 460]

PurpleCanary - It is one of the many sticks used to beat Hughton though. You must recognise the kind of post i''m refering to? The OP seems to float the idea that once Hughton departs we will play much better and be more successful, I''m saying for that to happen a real revamp of the squad is needed too.

[nutty nigel 7,513]

[quote user="The Butler"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

Perhaps it would be of more interest to work out why The Butler has suddenly appeared again....

 

 

[/quote]

Only I haven''t Nutty

I helped you with a PC problem a week or three back.Or have you forgotten?

I post when I have time and IF I have something I think worth putting my oar in.

Have a good day

 

[/quote]

 

And T has probably posted more. But that didn''t stop you...

 

If you lived in a glass house you''d be in one hell of a draft...

 

[st]

 

 

[The Butler 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="The Butler"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

Perhaps it would be of more interest to work out why The Butler has suddenly appeared again....

 

 

[/quote]

Only I haven''t Nutty

I helped you with a PC problem a week or three back.Or have you forgotten?

I post when I have time and IF I have something I think worth putting my oar in.

Have a good day

 

[/quote]

 

And T has probably posted more. But that didn''t stop you...

 

If you lived in a glass house you''d be in one hell of a draft...

 

[st]

 

 

[/quote]

Well that''s a load of old enigmatic ****

If You have nothing to say why post?

What''s T''s posting got to do with anything and Greenhouses?

Go and have a lay down you will,I''m sure, feel much better then

And keep working on those figures

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

[quote user="hertfordyellow"]PurpleCanary - It is one of the many sticks used to beat Hughton though. You must recognise the kind of post i''m refering to? The OP seems to float the idea that once Hughton departs we will play much better and be more successful, I''m saying for that to happen a real revamp of the squad is needed too.[/quote]Oh, I have seen loads of posts like that. Written a few myself.  It is the consensus complaint, that Hughton is not getting as much out the squad as he should. That given the summer spending (which WAS the revamp) and given the weakness of all three teams coming up from the Championship, we should end up doing as well this season as last. We should be getting as many points per game as last season. In other words a point either side of 44. As things  stand not only will we will fall well short of 44 points, we will be in serious danger of relegation.That is the main complaint, but that is not at all the same as believing we should finish in the top half of the table, which is what you said many fans expected.

[hertfordyellow 460]

Purple - Agreed in most ways we won''t meet the standard of last year. To complain about not being as successful is valid but complaining about not kicking on to 10th for example I think isn''t valid.