Jump to content

Les Reed - has and will have NOTHING to do with the first team

Thedelldays

By Thedelldays,
in The Saints

 Share

Recommended Posts

sadoldgit

sadoldgit

Posted
Posted
Your volte farce is gobsmcking.

 

NC is OK to interfere in first team affairs??????

 

UNFECKINGBELIEVABLE.

 

I have heard it all now. Really, good job I have a belly because I haven't laughed this much since I acquired one...

 

Out of interest, are all Chaimen extended the same courtesy, including our previous one?

 

What do you mean? Don't you recall the amount of posts on here slagging off a previous manager for supposedly getting involved in team affairs. But all of a sudden it is okay because you approve of this CEO and you didn't the other???

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fowllyd

Fowllyd

Posted
Posted
So it is okay to believe one bit of gossip is not true and another is? AP has been beaten with all kinds of rumour, are you going to defend him in the same way?

 

And where exactly did Minsk say he DID believe any particular piece of gossip to be true? You've read a pretty hefty novel between the lines of his post there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thedelldays

Thedelldays

Posted
  • Author
Posted
What do you mean? Don't you recall the amount of posts on here slagging off a previous manager for supposedly getting involved in team affairs. But all of a sudden it is okay because you approve of this CEO and you didn't the other???

again..you want the same treatment for everyone...but wont (i suspect)do this yourself.

 

like I asked before..would you welcome back kenwyne jones with such a welcome as you would give MLT...or would you be as happy to see kevin phillips come back as much as you would say, peter crouch

 

would you afford lowe or even (forbid) cortese the same courtesy as ted bates (god rest his soul)..?

in the interests of fairness and treating everyone the same and all that...?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
itchen

itchen

Posted
Posted
Your volte farce is gobsmcking.

 

NC is OK to interfere in first team affairs??????

 

UNFECKINGBELIEVABLE.

 

I have heard it all now. Really, good job I have a belly because I haven't laughed this much since I acquired one...

 

Out of interest, are all Chaimen extended the same courtesy, including our previous one?

 

I'm not one who generally agrees with Alpine but what he said isn't quite that outrageous. While chairmen should not get involved directly in team selection I find it had to believe that any of them don't from time-to-time ask their managers why they made certain decisions about players. But we don't know if there was such a text or, if there was, how it was phrased and what its purpose was.

 

I still don't know why Pardew was sacked. It doesn't seem to have made the team any better. Until the club or Pardew come out and tell us why then I still think it was probably the wrong thing to do. But that doesn't mean I'm going to believe every half-arsed rumour designed to show Cortese in a poor light.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Legod Third Coming

Legod Third Coming

Posted
Posted
How did he interfere ? By asking a question (allegedly) ?

 

BURN HIM...

 

If Lowe had asked that question, you would have created merry hell. And rightly.

 

The Chairman's role is to employ a manager and support him. Period.

 

And to fire him if it doesn't work out. Otherwise, he should be managing the team...

 

If the text is true, there's not a manager alive who will work with Cortese long term. Personally, I doubt it's remotely true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thedelldays

Thedelldays

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I'm not one who generally agrees with Alpine but what he said isn't quite that outrageous. While chairmen should not get involved directly in team selection I find it had to believe that any of them don't from time-to-time ask their managers why they made certain decisions about players. But we don't know if there was such a text or, if there was, how it was phrased and what its purpose was.

 

I still don't know why Pardew was sacked. It doesn't seem to have made the team any better. Until the club or Pardew come out and tell us why then I still think it was probably the wrong thing to do. But that doesn't mean I'm going to believe every half-arsed rumour designed to show Cortese in a poor light.

 

pardew himself said on goals on sunday last season that Markus himself used to ask questions about tactics and subs etc....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sadoldgit

sadoldgit

Posted
Posted
If Lowe had asked that question, you would have created merry hell. And rightly.

 

The Chairman's role is to employ a manager and support him. Period.

 

And to fire him if it doesn't work out. Otherwise, he should be managing the team...

 

If the text is true, there's not a manager alive who will work with Cortese long term. Personally, I doubt it's remotely true.

 

It may well not be true, but how can you be sure? From what we have hard so far I would say it was possible. Certainly Up & Aways post makes it sound like it is something that he might do.

 

Something wasn't right between Cortese and Pardew. It usually comes down to the manager feeling that he is not being allowed to manage. May of may not be the case but generally if managers are getting 100% support from their CEO you don't get this problem.

 

There seemed to be issiues over priorities last year. Pardew said he was keen to win something for the club and the fans as we had been starved of success. If Cortses was 100% focuseed on promotion you can see where the rift started.

 

All conjecture of course but really, why get rid of a manager who did a good job last year and was trying to build on that this year? It doesn't make sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sadoldgit

sadoldgit

Posted
Posted
pardew himself said on goals on sunday last season that Markus himself used to ask questions about tactics and subs etc....

 

YOu know very well there is a difference between asking questions and asking you to justify yourself and your decisions. In the article the inference was that NC was oversteeping the mark in APs view. As has been said, if Lowe had done the same you would be all over him like a rash.

 

Still, it is all conjecture isn't it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CanadaSaint

CanadaSaint

Posted
Posted
bet its quite common

 

Damn right it's common.

 

Successful chairmen/presidents hire the right people and then get the hell out of their way so that they can do their job.

 

However, they also reserve the right to ask questions and even intervene if they have reservations or if they feel the corporate philosophy is not being properly implemented.

 

That's their job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thedelldays

Thedelldays

Posted
  • Author
Posted
YOu know very well there is a difference between asking questions and asking you to justify yourself and your decisions. In the article the inference was that NC was oversteeping the mark in APs view. As has been said, if Lowe had done the same you would be all over him like a rash.

 

Still, it is all conjecture isn't it?

 

lowe has nothing to do with this...for your info..I thought lowe was not all bad...just got it (or helped in a major way) spectacularly wrong in his last few years...

 

you harp on about level treatment...I will ask again, will you look back on lowe and ted bates with the same level of enthusiasm..?...being "fair" and "equal" and all that

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thedelldays

Thedelldays

Posted
  • Author
Posted
whats this?

 

on the saints player...way before the game, they were talking to the cherries chairman and at one point they thought they were off air..

he said (cant remember his name) that he could not remember when howe went for the interview (yeah right) and how much of a big club we are etc...and that he talked howe around from commiting to them should he get the job.....and also said that adkins would "get that lot down the rd" promoted

 

then they went back "on air"

 

it was funny

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sadoldgit

sadoldgit

Posted
Posted
I heard that Eddie Howe turned the job down because he wanted full control of the football side so it would be interesting to know what the manager's role involves.

 

All comes back to the manager or coach issue that we used to have under Lowe. You can see why someone would want to come in and be manager as you would imagine you would have more control. A coach is....well, a coach.

 

We don't know what happened but it seems possible that Cortese and Pardew did not see eye to eye about Pardew's roll and the way he carried it out.

 

Anyone with the strength of character to take this club up will, you would think, want to do it their way.

 

Once upon a time the most important person at a club was the manager. Now it is the CEO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sadoldgit

sadoldgit

Posted
Posted
lowe has nothing to do with this...for your info..I thought lowe was not all bad...just got it (or helped in a major way) spectacularly wrong in his last few years...

 

you harp on about level treatment...I will ask again, will you look back on lowe and ted bates with the same level of enthusiasm..?...being "fair" and "equal" and all that

 

Sorry DD I don't understand your point. I have already said that if this forum had been around in the 70s McMenemy would have been crucified in the year we were in the 2nd division. I don't slag off managers so my treatment of LM would be the same as the treatment I have given Pardew, JP Wotte Burley etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sadoldgit

sadoldgit

Posted
Posted
or..pardew could have been trying to have it away with a players missus..? maybe..who knows..who cares if it is true..

 

I care because I would like to know the real reason the CEO got rid of a perfectly decent manager. In case you hadn't noticed, we have lost every game since.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sadoldgit

sadoldgit

Posted
Posted
Damn right it's common.

 

Successful chairmen/presidents hire the right people and then get the hell out of their way so that they can do their job.

 

However, they also reserve the right to ask questions and even intervene if they have reservations or if they feel the corporate philosophy is not being properly implemented.

 

That's their job.

 

Is it Corporate Policy to buy a player the manager might not fancy then phone up and ask why he wasn't playing? Wasn't this one of the reasons that people hated Lowe so much, because of interferrance with team affairs (allegedly).

 

You can see a scenario where there is a meeting to talk through the game and decisions made. If this happened as reported it sounds like it was taken in a different way by the manager.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CanadaSaint

CanadaSaint

Posted
Posted
Is it Corporate Policy to buy a player the manager might not fancy then phone up and ask why he wasn't playing? Wasn't this one of the reasons that people hated Lowe so much, because of interferrance with team affairs (allegedly).

 

You can see a scenario where there is a meeting to talk through the game and decisions made. If this happened as reported it sounds like it was taken in a different way by the manager.

 

If that happened as speculated (not reported, but speculated) I would view it as a clear indication that the chairman had lost faith in the manager's ability and/or willingness to properly implement the corporate philosophy.

 

Of course it's not an ideal situation but you're looking at a single alleged event and jumping to conclusions that you're in no position to reach - because you weren't there to see the relationship unravel.

 

And when that relationship unravels, when the chairman loses faith in the manager, there's only one winner.

 

Cortese has his flaws but I think he reached the correct decision, as time (defined as more than two weeks) will tell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
aintforever

aintforever

Posted
Posted
howe went for an interview.....wanted to go should the chance be given but was talked around in staying another season with the cherries...hence the "howe turns down saints"...

 

Howe wouldn't not take the job just because his chairman didn't want him to, he would have had his reasons. I have no doubt Mitchell would have tried to talk him into staying. My source has been friends with Howe since he was at school, and told me Wednesday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sadoldgit

sadoldgit

Posted
Posted
i just made it up..but if enough people mention it, it will become a fact (on SWF)..

 

That is post of the problem, it is easy to post something on here and have some people take it as gospel if it suite their agenda.

 

But lets look at the rumour. If it was true, why did they other 2 get sacked as well unless they were banging her too?

 

This has been going on for a while. You don't have to be ITK to see that Pardew and Cortese are not best buddies. There has probably been one row too many and Cortese has done now what he probably wanted to do last season and sack him.

 

Conjecture yes, but more probable I would think than the sh*gging story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
merrimd

merrimd

Posted
Posted
Is it Corporate Policy to buy a player the manager might not fancy then phone up and ask why he wasn't playing? Wasn't this one of the reasons that people hated Lowe so much, because of interferrance with team affairs (allegedly).

 

You can see a scenario where there is a meeting to talk through the game and decisions made. If this happened as reported it sounds like it was taken in a different way by the manager.

 

Hows this for an explanation.

 

AP gets on NC's case, badgering him for the money to sign a Brazillian CM from italy. NC is reluctant to sanction loan. AP presses, insisting the player is Pele but with a tackle. NC is still not convinced. AP jumps up and down saying without this loan, the team will not get promoted. NC folds, says fine, if this player is the player you reckon, get him in. Player comes in, plays last 5 mins of an easy win. After game, NC just asks why this world beater only got 5 mins. Dont think that is particularly unreasonable, nor would I think it is particularly unusual.

 

Seeing as noone has the slightest fecking idea what went on, it seems rather bizarre to use it to beat him with!

Link to comment
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
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...