Barry Sanchez Posted 2 April, 2013 Share Posted 2 April, 2013 Leslie "Charlton" Reed should not be anywhere near a football club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dig Dig Posted 2 April, 2013 Author Share Posted 2 April, 2013 Leslie "Charlton" Reed should not be anywhere near a football club. He's done well for us though. What specifically has he done which you don't like? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barry Sanchez Posted 2 April, 2013 Share Posted 2 April, 2013 The fact he is near a football club, the fact he has some say on our transfers, the fact he has some control in our football club, put it another way what has he done in football at club level to deserve the post? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wiggles31 Posted 2 April, 2013 Share Posted 2 April, 2013 I majorly doubt Cortese has ever picked the team or come close to doing so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beancounter saint Posted 2 April, 2013 Share Posted 2 April, 2013 The fact he is near a football club, the fact he has some say on our transfers, the fact he has some control in our football club, put it another way what has he done in football at club level to deserve the post? Maybe, just maybe, his performance at Southampton is justifying his post! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wiggles31 Posted 2 April, 2013 Share Posted 2 April, 2013 Another symptom of the SWF paranoia. People need to take their meds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shurlock Posted 2 April, 2013 Share Posted 2 April, 2013 (edited) I assume Nik Nak still picks the team. We were told on very good authority -from distinguished posters with impeccable ITK credentials- that we would get a foreign, relative no-mark so that it would be easier to pass on instructions etc. No egos, no conflicts of personality - just Nik Nak and Leslie doing their thing. Edited 2 April, 2013 by shurlock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 2 April, 2013 Share Posted 2 April, 2013 I assume Nik Nak still picks the team. We were told on very good authority -from distinguished posters with impeccable ITK credentials- that we would get a foreign, relative no-mark so that it would be easier to pass on instructions etc. No egos, no conflicts of personality - just Nik Nak and Leslie doing their thing. Wasnt wrong was i (as usual). What did we get? A Foreigner who no one had heard of outside of Spain and Argentina, sacked in his only management job. Although i'm sure someone on here will know eveything about him before he joined and that he was amazing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dig Dig Posted 2 April, 2013 Author Share Posted 2 April, 2013 The fact he is near a football club, the fact he has some say on our transfers, the fact he has some control in our football club, put it another way what has he done in football at club level to deserve the post? If it weren't for his spell as Charlton manager, the majority of us wouldn't have ever heard of Les Reed and would have no issues in his position at the club. Prior to his role as manager, his experience in academy and infrastructure development is why he has his job at Saints and I would argue that as we are progressing in all areas which are under his remit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shurlock Posted 2 April, 2013 Share Posted 2 April, 2013 Wasnt wrong was i (as usual). What did we get? A Foreigner who no one had heard of outside of Spain and Argentina, sacked in his only management job. Although i'm sure someone on here will know eveything about him before he joined and that he was amazing. So does Cortese still pick the team? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 2 April, 2013 Share Posted 2 April, 2013 So does Cortese still pick the team? He rates MP, he didn't rate Adkins. You've got to agree i was right, i said we'd end up with a relatively unknown foreigner and what did we end up with? Thank you for reminding me of this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KelvinsRightGlove Posted 2 April, 2013 Share Posted 2 April, 2013 He rates MP, he didn't rate Adkins. You've got to agree i was right, i said we'd end up with a relatively unknown foreigner and what did we end up with? Thank you for reminding me of this. It's not all that unsurprising. It's quite a Cortese type appointment. Especially if you buy into the idea that Cortese, and Cortese alone picks the transfer targets. Which as far as I can tell, is in many cases based on "I haven't heard of them, so it must be all Cortese". I'm not saying you wern't told something, just that it wasn't exactly beyond peoples imaginations to put the two together. Can you not see how people would question the truth in what you say when you also completely fabricate things like Guly's 15 min contract clause? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shurlock Posted 2 April, 2013 Share Posted 2 April, 2013 He rates MP, he didn't rate Adkins. You've got to agree i was right, i said we'd end up with a relatively unknown foreigner and what did we end up with? Thank you for reminding me of this. You said he would go for an unknown person so that it would be easier for Nik Nak and Leslie to carry on dictating instructions, formations whatever. Puppet on a string was the abiding image from your posts. He got his man, so does Cortese still pick the team? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintSteve Posted 2 April, 2013 Share Posted 2 April, 2013 He rates MP, he didn't rate Adkins. You've got to agree i was right, i said we'd end up with a relatively unknown foreigner and what did we end up with? Thank you for reminding me of this. MP is not an 'unknown foreigner' unless ur talking about your lack of knowledge. He was seen as the most up and coming European coach - we are lucky to have him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VectisSaint Posted 2 April, 2013 Share Posted 2 April, 2013 Actually I think I can draw that conclusion. Cortese/Reed were in negotitations for Ramirez and Adkins plainly knew nothing about the player early on, or about the state of the transfer. His comments were something like "from the sounds of it he's a good player"; he'd quite obviously not been party to any detailed analysis whatsoever. I don't know why some people think that's an attack on the club that they have to defend. Lowe brought in Crouch and Niemi over his managers' heads, so it can work. Strachan didn't want Niemi (think he wanted Craig Gordon) but Lowe refused and got his man. It happens, sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. But its fair game to criticise when it doesn't work, just as one would citicise a manager for a poor signing. Who is attacking (or defending) the club, certainly not me. I thought it was only the WUMs and trolls on here that thought the world of SFC was black and white and that you either attacked or defended the club. In reality 99% of those left on here do nothing of the sort, but can actually see that things are done little differently by Saints than by most other clubs at this level. Managers knowing inside out every player transfer deal down to the last detail is a way of the long past, and no longer relevant in the world of international transfers. The transfer committee almost certainly agreed that an attacking midfielder/creative player would be what Saints needed, without necessarily naming names, or perhaps there was a list of 3 or 4 potential candidates. NC then went and did as was agreed and negotiated with a target. Do you really think Adkins was upset when he found out that Ramirez was looking to be on his way. Like many others he had probably seen him play in the Olympics and seen a burgeoning talent, or perhaps he had seen him on one of the football manager games and noted his stats were quite good. Whatever, NA is not the straight talker that some would suggest - he wasn't lying, but being economical with the truth, his stock in trade. As I said a world of difference between finding the type of player that manager identified and choosing the team on a weekly basis. Still if you want to believe NA knew nothing about Ramirez then you are welcome to your opinion, if you cannot see that there is more than black and white then so be it, in reality there are many (50 at least) shades of grey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToreSF Posted 2 April, 2013 Share Posted 2 April, 2013 I'm 100% sure Cortese doesn't pick the team. Neither does Reed, or anyone else other than Pochettino. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Charlie Posted 2 April, 2013 Share Posted 2 April, 2013 I'd suggest that there is still influence from above, the inclusion of JWP as an inapropriate sub at times suggests there is pressure to get as many academy products into the first team as possible. There is probably more harmony now though, as MP has been picked to specifically play a certain way. JWP earns his place on merit. If there were calls to bring more academy players in then Stephems and Chambers would have been on the bench by now. Plus, MP strikes me as the kind of guy who wouldnt put someone on for the sake of a quota. NC equally isnt stupid clearly - theres a difference between giving young players a chance and being told you have to bring one on in every game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearsy Posted 2 April, 2013 Share Posted 2 April, 2013 MP is not an 'unknown foreigner' unless ur talking about your lack of knowledge. He was seen as the most up and coming European coach - we are lucky to have him. it's amazing how the most up & coming european coach was out of work and no-one was suggesting him for manager. Probably they thought he was too good for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sour Mash Posted 2 April, 2013 Share Posted 2 April, 2013 JWP earns his place on merit. If there were calls to bring more academy players in then Stephems and Chambers would have been on the bench by now. Plus, MP strikes me as the kind of guy who wouldnt put someone on for the sake of a quota. NC equally isnt stupid clearly - theres a difference between giving young players a chance and being told you have to bring one on in every game. You thought JWP was the right sub against QPR and Norwich? He definitely wasn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shurlock Posted 2 April, 2013 Share Posted 2 April, 2013 You thought JWP was the right sub against QPR and Norwich? He definitely wasn't. Not sure. I still dont think he's ready to play; but we're stretched in the middle of the park. We used to bring Davis on to provide fresh legs and tighten things up -CM is probably one of the most tiring jobs under MP- but now Davis starting, we don't have any cover. Lallana, Punch, Ramirez are all too forward-minded to do that job. Will be interesting to see what happens in the summer. Another box-to-box CM is a must IMO. If we don't strengthen and JWP continues to get the nod, it might just say something about wider club policy (as you suggest). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sour Mash Posted 2 April, 2013 Share Posted 2 April, 2013 Not sure. I still dont think he's ready to play; but we're stretched in the middle of the park. We used to bring Davis on to provide fresh legs and tighten things up -CM is probably one of the most tiring jobs under MP- but now Davis starting, we don't have any cover. Lallana, Punch, Ramirez are all too forward-minded to do that job. Will be interesting to see what happens in the summer. Another box-to-box CM is a must IMO. If we don't strengthen and JWP continues to get the nod, it might just say something about wider club policy (as you suggest). Bringing JWP for Ramirez completely killed our momentum (we were running the game and only team that looked like scoring) at Norwich. He offered nothing in terms of increasing our chances of a breakthrough and goal against QPR. They were weird subs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shurlock Posted 2 April, 2013 Share Posted 2 April, 2013 Bringing JWP for Ramirez completely killed our momentum (we were running the game and only team that looked like scoring) at Norwich. He offered nothing in terms of increasing our chances of a breakthrough and goal against QPR. They were weird subs. Agree Norwich was an odd one, though Ramirez, from looking bright in the first half, faded in the second. Against Chelsea, we tried to give the fullbacks a bit more cover - and he was the closest to a defensive option we had. Even Fox was later brought on to tighten LM. Chaplow was clearly loaned out to give JPW a chance (even though Chaplow currently offers more than JWP imo). Whether that means JWP has to see match time is another matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LostBoys Posted 2 April, 2013 Share Posted 2 April, 2013 Well..... does he? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KelvinsRightGlove Posted 2 April, 2013 Share Posted 2 April, 2013 I'm sorry, but linking a strange substitution to influence from above over team selection just smacks of paranoid conspiracy theory to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sour Mash Posted 2 April, 2013 Share Posted 2 April, 2013 Agree Norwich was an odd one, though Ramirez, from looking bright in the first half, faded in the second. Against Chelsea, we tried to give the fullbacks a bit more cover - and he was the closest to a defensive option we had. Even Fox was later brought on to tighten LM. Chaplow was clearly loaned out to give JPW a chance (even though Chaplow currently offers more than JWP imo). Whether that means JWP has to see match time is another matter. Didn't have a problem with him coming on against Chelsea, just QPR &Norwich. I'd have Chaplow or Guly ahead of him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leicestersaint Posted 2 April, 2013 Share Posted 2 April, 2013 MP does what he is told. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustMike Posted 2 April, 2013 Share Posted 2 April, 2013 Didn't have a problem with him coming on against Chelsea, just QPR &Norwich. I'd have Chaplow or Guly ahead of him. why is it ok for him to come on v chelsea but not qpr or norwich? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leicestersaint Posted 2 April, 2013 Share Posted 2 April, 2013 MP is not an 'unknown foreigner' unless ur talking about your lack of knowledge. He was seen as the most up and coming European coach - we are lucky to have him. Very strange view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sour Mash Posted 2 April, 2013 Share Posted 2 April, 2013 why is it ok for him to come on v chelsea but not qpr or norwich? We were chasing a goal and going forward against Norwich and QPR. We were doing tons of chasing and closing down against Chelsea. Very different scenarios. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom & Gerry Posted 2 April, 2013 Share Posted 2 April, 2013 Historically.....there are many cases of Chairman .." buying a player " without consulting his manager.... I recall Gordon Strachan arriving at the same time as Agustin Delgado..and when asked about the signing said (politely)....." it was a done deal when I'd arrived ". The yoghurt quote came later. Although, there are disputes about exactly who we are speaking about?.....it seems that several of our summer signings were made by " the Committee " and without reference to NA. If we assume that we "sourced " players who would" fit our formation," then I'm sure NC would have asked NA why he wasn't using player A, B or C. ...whilst NA persisted with his " own favourites". The "enforced " signing of Boruc was long overdue, and I still cannot understand why NA persisted with Gazzaniga when it was obvious to many that he was nowhere near the "real thing ".[/QUOTE] Because Boruc wasn't fit and KD had been rubbish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 2 April, 2013 Share Posted 2 April, 2013 Its threads/posts like this that remind me why its not worth the £5 any more... thinly veiled agenda driven critique masquerading as opinion... Never understood the obsession with who has influence over the playing side - check out the systems abroad and see 'coach gets on with using players at his disposal purchased by presdients and committees' - only in this country where the tradition amongst the old school seems to be that the only coach the manager is interested in was the one he booked for team travel... brown envelopes and returning to former clubs/agents to pick up their favoured players... reminds me of Redknapp at West Ham when he transferred some 120+ players in his time there with only a handful ever making a first team appearance....( with one standing out, some swedish player - West Ham paying close to 3 mil, the Swedish club getting about 800k... the rest? (ref. Tom Bower; Broken Dreams) and how many transfers at Pompey on stupid money? Yet the media and some fans seem happy that this should be perectly acceptable and that the manager should have the full say in these matters... why does this idea of the 'traditional manager' still have such a hold over so many? Out dated bolox IMHO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hamilton Saint Posted 2 April, 2013 Share Posted 2 April, 2013 "still"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stepgar Posted 2 April, 2013 Share Posted 2 April, 2013 Sh*t thread. Sh*t post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
musesaint Posted 2 April, 2013 Share Posted 2 April, 2013 Give it a rest ? Of course he isn't picking the team Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kraken Posted 2 April, 2013 Share Posted 2 April, 2013 (edited) Who is attacking (or defending) the club, certainly not me. I thought it was only the WUMs and trolls on here that thought the world of SFC was black and white and that you either attacked or defended the club. In reality 99% of those left on here do nothing of the sort, but can actually see that things are done little differently by Saints than by most other clubs at this level. Managers knowing inside out every player transfer deal down to the last detail is a way of the long past, and no longer relevant in the world of international transfers. The transfer committee almost certainly agreed that an attacking midfielder/creative player would be what Saints needed, without necessarily naming names, or perhaps there was a list of 3 or 4 potential candidates. NC then went and did as was agreed and negotiated with a target. Do you really think Adkins was upset when he found out that Ramirez was looking to be on his way. Like many others he had probably seen him play in the Olympics and seen a burgeoning talent, or perhaps he had seen him on one of the football manager games and noted his stats were quite good. Whatever, NA is not the straight talker that some would suggest - he wasn't lying, but being economical with the truth, his stock in trade. And you accuse me of only looking in black and white. Is that what I said? I even pointed out that Lowe got in Niemi and Crouch over the managers' heads, and that it can work. Odd comment. As I said a world of difference between finding the type of player that manager identified and choosing the team on a weekly basis. Still if you want to believe NA knew nothing about Ramirez then you are welcome to your opinion, if you cannot see that there is more than black and white then so be it, in reality there are many (50 at least) shades of grey. Many thanks for your gracious acceptance that I can have an opinion all of my own. But if you look carefully, I wasn't commenting on Cortese picking the team in that post, only on the he and the committee seemed to have chosen players seemingly without much managerial input. But if you choose to disregard the words said by Adkins and attribute a slightly alternative meaning to them of your own volition, then I of course fully endorse your right to hold that viewpoint. Edited 2 April, 2013 by The Kraken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 2 April, 2013 Share Posted 2 April, 2013 MP is not an 'unknown foreigner' unless ur talking about your lack of knowledge. He was seen as the most up and coming European coach - we are lucky to have him. Had you heard of him before he joined us? I think the general consensus was he was most famous for giving away a penalty against in England. Not that I'm saying he is a bad appointment, I'm sure people will now rewrite history and make him out to be a household name that we fought off top European clubs to snare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now