Whatever .... it's too late now!
![Wink ;-)](./images/smilies/wink.gif)
thats a problem.hector wrote:I have felt sorry for Hargreaves. He was left a shambles by Knill. He changes the team around too much and it has almost become a bit of a joke about Hargreaves' tombola approach to picking the team but he has so much dross and mediocrity that I don't think there is much he can do.
Saying that, he hasn't helped himself either and there has been a bit of a groundswell against him recently and if there was a moment when it felt like the majority of fans turned against him, then it was today when the no.27 board was held up and our only threat, Shaq, a player on loan from Spurs, was substituted for a player who not long ago was on loan at Bideford.
The booing and the chants of 'that's why we're going down, that's why we're going down...' suggest CH has some work to do to win over many of the fans. He is perhaps in even a worse predicament than Knill, as there were some, misguided perhaps, who wanted to keep Knill and they will feel somewhat justified because Hargreaves has been even worse, without it occurirng to them that a Sturrock or Allen, may have clawed us clear.
Hargreaves has certainly been tainted. From people I talk to, most feel like they do not trust him to sign the right players or have any idea of what team/formation/approach he would adopt.
It is such a gamble - a gamble to stick with him (but I sense we have to) and to let him build a team, that could do badly and have to sack yet another manager, and a gamble to get rid (which I really do not see happening). He has only been here three months and I think he probably deserves a chance to build his own team first.
I don't think there is any basis at all for the board having made the wrong decision to sack Knill. One point clear at the time, but at one point we were further clear and we were in freefall under Knill. It's not like 1 point clear of the relegation zone is doing a good job.stefano wrote:Not an unreasonable post Hector. I thought he was barking to take the job in the first place. If you are right about him being given time to build his own team, then he has been here for 3 months without achieving anything other than abject failure and the finger should point at the people who decided to sack a manager 1 point adrift in a relegation battle with half a season to go and appoint him to be the saviour. Or did they not actually want a saviour? That has got to be a possibility. I have said before that I think CH has got all the attributes to be a good manager but thought at the time 'wrong club wrong time'.
Whatever .... it's too late now!
Fonda wrote:It's absolute fact to suggest we were in the relegation zone when Knill departed. So it's perhaps understandable to many that the board panicked and dispensed with him. At that point, it would have seemed a gamble to keep him. And with the pressure from the terraces, they did what they thought everybody wanted. But 1) we weren't in 'freefall' at the time they pulled the trigger. If anything, it looked like we'd bottomed out and had turned a bit of a corner. We won two games in December I think? Were much the better team against Exeter (and had Hawley taken an in any way acceptable penalty, might well have won that one too). He got fired after the absolute 'humiliation' of defeat at Argyle. A team it was seemingly forgotten historically we've lost to more often than not, and which was a difficult place to visit at the time. And 2) Quite apart from whether you believe the board was right or wrong to get rid of Knill - to then hand the job to a rookie, seemingly because he was very keen to have it and it would be popular with the kids on the Pop? The board didn't cover themselves in any glory and have paid the ultimate price.
Errrrrrrr..... Popular with the Football Manager generation maybe??Neal wrote:Can someone list the attributes that CH has to be a good manager
Users browsing this forum: standupsitdown and 74 guests