Jump to content

Is Adkins job untenable?

Turkish

By Turkish,
in The Saints

 Share

Recommended Posts

Turkish

Turkish

Posted
Posted

Despite the majority of fans wanting him to be give more time it seems that the momentum behind him not being here much longer increases by the day.

 

He looked a broken man on Saturday and virtually admitted he was on the way out when he said he didn't know how long he had left. There is a lack of public support for the club for a manager clearly feeling the strain. confirmation at the weekend from the manager that he is not fully In control of team affairs and transfers. As well as the now growing rumours he is set to be replaced by one of the two most despised managers in this clubs history.

 

The reality is that these rumours that been gathering momentum since promtion and Niges reaction to it when he talked about a parting of ways. It was said then all did not seem well between him and Cortese and rumours during the summer of verbal sackings and Cortese wanting to replace him with a bigger name have gathering pace since the season started. The Star ran the Redknapp story back in Spetember and it was dismissed as bullsh*t but this seems to be withering at pace.

 

Now before people accuse me of haing and agenda this isn't a pop at Cortese and I believe that Adkins should be given more time, but given his current position and the fact that it seems it's a case of when and not if, is he in an untenable position?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hypochondriac

hypochondriac

Posted
Posted
This needed a new thread why, exactly ?

 

Cortese's SFC NEVER comments on crap like this. A refusal to comment should not be interpreted as failure to back the manager.

 

Thing is if they are backing him then something needs to change. Can we bring in a new defensive coach? Be more flexible in our approach? I'm sure cortese is learning on this job too and I hope he can change things when he needs to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Turkish

Turkish

Posted
  • Author
Posted
You are not factoring in his animosity to the Echo. The comment about refusing to comment was a "f**k you" to the Echo that when picked up by other media outlets just looks odd without understanding the background.

 

I don't want to turn this into a Cortese bashing thread or about his relationship with the paper.

 

Given the factors currently going on at the club is his position untenable?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
miserableoldgit

miserableoldgit

Posted
Posted
Despite the majority of fans wanting him to be give more time it seems that the momentum behind him not being here much longer increases by the day.

 

He looked a broken man on Saturday and virtually admitted he was on the way out when he said he didn't know how long he had left. There is a lack of public support for the club for a manager clearly feeling the strain. confirmation at the weekend from the manager that he is not fully In control of team affairs and transfers. As well as the now growing rumours he is set to be replaced by one of the two most despised managers in this clubs history.

 

The reality is that these rumours that been gathering momentum since promtion and Niges reaction to it when he talked about a parting of ways. It was said then all did not seem well between him and Cortese and rumours during the summer of verbal sackings and Cortese wanting to replace him with a bigger name have gathering pace since the season started. The Star ran the Redknapp story back in Spetember and it was dismissed as bullsh*t but this seems to be withering at pace.

 

Now before people accuse me of haing and agenda this isn't a pop at Cortese and I believe that Adkins should be given more time, but given his current position and the fact that it seems it's a case of when and not if, is he in an untenable position?

 

 

Can please provide a link for NA confirming that he isn't in charge of team affairs? I must have missed it.

Sent from my HTC Desire S using Tapatalk 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites
shurlock

shurlock

Posted
Posted
I don't want to turn this into a Cortese bashing thread or about his relationship with the paper.

 

Given the factors currently going on at the club is his position untenable?

 

It's a results business. Nothing is set in stone to qualify as tenable or untenable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Turkish

Turkish

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Can please provide a link for NA confirming that he isn't in charge of team affairs? I must have missed it.

Sent from my HTC Desire S using Tapatalk 2

 

Read his interview on Saturday where he says he is doing his best to stick to the process at the club and we will play 4-3-3. Read Les Reids interview where he says Adkins job is to coach the team and he is in charge of recruitment and all th scouts report into him. Read Adam Blackmores prophetic blog. I can't be arsed to find the links, I'm sure you'll find them on here though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Turkish

Turkish

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Why is it untenable? Under Ted we used to finish third from bottom every alternate season, going months without a win. Lawrie got us relegated in his first season. Give Nigel a break and show some support for the Club.

 

What are you on about? I said th fans back him and I think he should be given more time?

 

And we are told this is the new Southampton. survival isn't success anymore, we've got European ambitions so 4th bottom won't do now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Turkish

Turkish

Posted
  • Author
Posted
If you think Cortese listens to all the gossip-mongerers and people with other agendas, then yes, it might be. On the other hand, I like to think he's got some common sense.

 

When asked on Saturday how long he's got he replied he didn't know.

 

That isn't gossip.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
miserableoldgit

miserableoldgit

Posted
Posted
Read his interview on Saturday where he says he is doing his best to stick to the process at the club and we will play 4-3-3. Read Les Reids interview where he says Adkins job is to coach the team and he is in charge of recruitment and all th scouts report into him. Read Adam Blackmores prophetic blog. I can't be arsed to find the links, I'm sure you'll find them on here though.

 

Ah. OK. So no actual confirmation from the manager then? Just more 2+2=? .

 

Sent from my HTC Desire S using Tapatalk 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Turkish

Turkish

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Ah. OK. So no actual confirmation from the manager then? Just more 2+2=? .

 

Sent from my HTC Desire S using Tapatalk 2

 

What are you expecting? A comment saying 'don't blame me for us losing, the chairman told me to play 4-3-3, I don't want to, if you want to blame anyone blame him'?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
shurlock

shurlock

Posted
Posted (edited)
What are you expecting? A comment saying 'don't blame me for us losing, the chairman told me to play 4-3-3, I don't want to, if you want to blame anyone blame him'?

 

So coz he doesn't say that, it means he's got a gun to his head and is forced to play 4-3-3? That's equally illogical.

Edited by shurlock
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Turkish

Turkish

Posted
  • Author
Posted
So coz he doesn't say that, it means he's got a gun to his head and is forced to play 4-3-3? That's equally illogical.

 

Not really. During the summer he spoke about having a number of formations to play. Last season he adapted tactics to suit the opposition. He didn't play 4-3-3 at all last season. He doesn't have the players to play it effectively this season. So unless he's had a vision from god that 4-3-3 is the only formation that could ever possibly work or is a totally incompetent manager who persists to pick a formation that isnt working and who has completely changed his management ethos which has served him so well in the past. Then you don't have to be a conspiracy theorist to work out the 'process he is doing his best to adhere to' and 'we will play 4-3-3' aren't nessasairly of his choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Turkish

Turkish

Posted
  • Author
Posted
But you are supporting your argument about NAs position being untenable by citing that comment.

 

That was just one of a number of factors. I do find the comment refusing to comment very strange.

 

And I'm not supporting that his position in untenable, just asking the question if it is or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sour Mash

Sour Mash

Posted
Posted
That was just one of a number of factors. I do find the comment refusing to comment very strange.

 

And I'm not supporting that his position in untenable, just asking the question if it is or not.

His position isn't untenable. We win on Sunday and everyone's happy again.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gemmel

Gemmel

Posted
Posted
is he in an untenable position?

 

Very much down to the him and also what if anything has been discussed internally.

 

One manager would find a particular situation untenable, another wouldn't.

 

All we know so far is what is in the press. It might be that Cortese has already assured Adkins he will be given the season (I doubt it) but we just don't know. Harry has been linked to half a dozen clubs since he left Spurs, so its almost obvious that he will be linked with us, given the situation we are in and the amount of press we are getting on the subject.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
miserableoldgit

miserableoldgit

Posted
Posted
What are you expecting? A comment saying 'don't blame me for us losing, the chairman told me to play 4-3-3, I don't want to, if you want to blame anyone blame him'?

"confirmation at the weekend from the manager that he is not fully In control of team affairs and transfers"

You obviously heard something like this over the week-end to say that NA "confirmed" this in his interview. What I heard was NA saying that all team selections etc were down to only him and that we would continue playing 4-3-3. You are obviously much more perceptive than me, being able to translate that into something different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Turkish

Turkish

Posted
  • Author
Posted
"confirmation at the weekend from the manager that he is not fully In control of team affairs and transfers"

You obviously heard something like this over the week-end to say that NA "confirmed" this in his interview. What I heard was NA saying that all team selections etc were down to only him and that we would continue playing 4-3-3. You are obviously much more perceptive than me, being able to translate that into something different.

 

Adkins said all summer it was important to have a number of systems. Now he he saying he will only play one way, that he is adhering to a process at the club. He's either incompetent, lying, had a vision or follow order. Which one do you think it is?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
shurlock

shurlock

Posted
Posted (edited)
Not really. During the summer he spoke about having a number of formations to play. Last season he adapted tactics to suit the opposition. He didn't play 4-3-3 at all last season. He doesn't have the players to play it effectively this season. So unless he's had a vision from god that 4-3-3 is the only formation that could ever possibly work or is a totally incompetent manager who persists to pick a formation that isnt working and who has completely changed his management ethos which has served him so well in the past. Then you don't have to be a conspiracy theorist to work out the 'process he is doing his best to adhere to' and 'we will play 4-3-3' aren't nessasairly of his choice.

 

I think NA loses far less sleep on formations than some on here do. He switched to 4-4-2 against Wigan and Fulham - arguably with not much success (Villa our greatest success was with a 4-3-3). Last year he was berated for playing a diamond.

 

All I know is that the football he played at Scunny isn't a million miles from what he's doing here i.e. an emphasis on passing, possession and width, so even if he's being encouraged to play 4-3-3, he shares it's basic principles.

 

But I would go further and say he believes in 4-3-3 and dominating midfield especially against higher quality opposition. When Scunny were promoted to the NPC, 4-3-3 was frequently employed. Indeed, it was the default formation.

 

http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/Bristol-City-v-S****horpe-United-S****horpe-spotlight/story-11247777-detail/story.html

 

Perhaps that's not very convenient for some on here...

Edited by shurlock
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Turkish

Turkish

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I think NA loses far less sleep on formations than some on here do. He switched things against Wigan and Fulham - arguably with not much success. Last year he was berated for playing a diamond.

 

All I know is that the football he played at Scunny isn't a million miles from what he's doing here i.e. an emphasis on passing, possession and width, so even if he's being encouraged to play 4-3-3, he shares it's basic principles.

 

But I would go further and say he believes in 4-3-3 and dominating midfield especially against higher quality opposition. When Scunny were promoted to the NPC in 2008, 4-3-3 was frequently employed.

 

http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/Bristol-City-v-S****horpe-United-S****horpe-spotlight/story-11247777-detail/story.html

 

Perhaps that's not very convenient for some on here...

 

Do what about him saying in the summer that we need a number of systems. Now saying he is following a process and we will only play one way - 'we will play 4-3-3'

Link to comment
Share on other sites
shurlock

shurlock

Posted
Posted (edited)
Do what about him saying in the summer that we need a number of systems. Now saying he is following a process and we will only play one way - 'we will play 4-3-3'

 

He has switched it and I'm sure he's switched it without any of us realising. Put the quote in context: it was a frustrated, defiant response to Blackmore who's been pursuing what is ultimately a red herring and not responsible for our problems. Blackmore and Adkins' relationship has hardly been a bed of roses - indeed, I get the sense that they can't stand each other.

As I say, 4-3-3 was the default formation when Scunny attempted to establish itself in championship for the second time and not get relegated (which they did) -analogous to the situation in which we find ourselves today.

Which is to say, Adkins believed in 4-3-3 long before he joined us and Cortese decided to stop noncing around in banking and takeover a football club.

Edited by shurlock
Link to comment
Share on other sites
miserableoldgit

miserableoldgit

Posted
Posted
Adkins said all summer it was important to have a number of systems. Now he he saying he will only play one way, that he is adhering to a process at the club. He's either incompetent, lying, had a vision or follow order. Which one do you think it is?

Again, where did he actually say this? He said that "... we will continue playing 4-3-3." Is that his policy? Is that NC`s policy? Is that AGREED club policy? Do you know, or are you as usual quoting "facts" again to suit your point of view.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Turkish

Turkish

Posted
  • Author
Posted
He has switched it and I'm sure he's switched it without any of us realising. Put the quote in context: it was a frustrated, defiant response to Blackmore who's been pursuing what is ultimately a red herring and not responsible for our problems. Blackmore and Adkins' relationship has hardly been a bed of roses - indeed, they can't stand each other.

As I say, 4-3-3 was the default formation when Scunny attempted to establish itself in championship and not get relegated -analogous to the situation in which we find ourselves today.

Which is to say, Adkins believed in 4-3-3 long before he joined us and Cortese decided to stop noncing around in banking and takeover a football club.

 

But chose not to play it up until preseason this season and not insists on it despite talking about needing several formations. How odd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Turkish

Turkish

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
Again, where did he actually say this? He said that "... we will continue playing 4-3-3." Is that his policy? Is that NC`s policy? Is that AGREED club policy? Do you know, or are you as usual quoting "facts" again to suit your point of view.

 

It's in his interview on Saturday.

 

Listen to it. He says and I quote 'there is a process at the football club we are doing our best to Adhere to, but it's about winning football matches'

 

"there is a brand of football the football club wants us to play but you've got to win"

 

Do you adhere to instructions or do you do you best to adhere to something you've decided yourself?

 

Here it is if you dont believe me

 

http://www.espn.co.uk/football/sport/story/175813.html

 

What was that you were saying about quoting FACTS?

Edited by Turkish
Link to comment
Share on other sites
doddisalegend

doddisalegend

Posted
Posted
Why is it untenable? Under Ted we used to finish third from bottom every alternate season, going months without a win. Lawrie got us relegated in his first season. Give Nigel a break and show some support for the Club.

 

Yes but back in those days relegation didn't lose you 60-80 million and players earned something akin to a normal working wage...once football clubs make it to the PL feeding trough their chairmen will do anything not to lose their money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
shurlock

shurlock

Posted
Posted
But chose not to play it up until preseason this season and not insists on it despite talking about needing several formations. How odd.

 

Why? New league, new challenge. He's known for tinkering. 4-3-3 helped Scunny stay up in the championship when he failed first time around - shock, horror, perhaps he's applying those lessons to us in the premiership. It's not like other formations have been any more successful.

What's odd about that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
miserableoldgit

miserableoldgit

Posted
Posted
It's in his interview on Saturday.

 

Listen to it. He says and I quote 'there is a process at the football club we are doing our best to Adhere to, but it's about winning football matches'

 

Do you adhere to instructions or do you do you best to adhere to something you've decided yourself?

Who said that they were instructions from above or something that NA decided himself? The third, and most likely option, IMHO, is that the whole management team sat down before the season started and agreed a process/system between them which NA is trying to adhere to, which is quite different to "confirmation at the weekend from the manager that he is not fully In control of team affairs and transfers". This is my opinion and I wouldn`t dream of saying "this is fact".

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Turkish

Turkish

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Who said that they were instructions from above or something that NA decided himself? The third, and most likely option, IMHO, is that the whole management team sat down before the season started and agreed a process/system between them which NA is trying to adhere to, which is quite different to "confirmation at the weekend from the manager that he is not fully In control of team affairs and transfers". This is my opinion and I wouldn`t dream of saying "this is fact".

 

Ahh okay, my mistake so when he said he was doing his best to adhere to the process, what he actually meant was he was doing his best to stick to what he had decided to do himself. Which is also completely at odds with what he said in the summer about needing to have a number of systems to play. It's all so clear now. We have one confused manager at the helm, i say get rid of him now in that case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
miserableoldgit

miserableoldgit

Posted
Posted
Ahh okay, my mistake so when he said he was doing his best to adhere to the process, what he actually meant was he was doing his best to stick to what he had decided to do himself. Which is also completely at odds with what he said in the summer about needing to have a number of systems to play. It's all so clear now. We have one confused manager at the helm, i say get rid of him now in that case.

If you read my post you will see that I indicated that IMHO NA was probably involved in a joint decision to agree a process/system, not that he decide himself. But O.K. you win. I have far better thing to do with my time than argue with someone with as much inside knowledge of the workings of the club as yourself. Iv`e got a yoghurt in the fridge that is going out of date.

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...