Rjc70 wrote:Should have stuck by Ling.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a831e/a831eca4e3c5e3ce77c09f248287cef01b3a0972" alt="good post :goodpost:"
Rjc70 wrote:Should have stuck by Ling.
No, I don't actually. He didn't build the team, set up the losing culture that has only just been shaken off. He hasn't done very well but in my mind it is very clear that Alan Knill, his bloody awful signings, his crap football are what set the scene for our relegation.[/quote]SuperNickyWroe wrote: so you dont blame CH?
even though hes been here since January and signed some sh*t?
Whereas the experience of Alan Knill served us so well.SuperNickyWroe wrote: and there is the reason why he should never have got the job.
Bugger got that wrong! You were the passenger so didn't even need a bloody licence! Better go and get my medication nowstefano wrote: Your doctor for not providing the right treatment and not informing DVLA to revoke your licence
very good post.Scott Brehaut wrote:
im not blaming him entirely as you put it.yellowforever wrote:
I'm not disputing that, but blaming him entirely for making mistakes that pretty much every inexperienced manager makes is unfair. In this case, it is the boards fault for not going for a 'Sturrock' or someone of his experience, they should have been aware that there are ramifications that come with people who have done no more than a few media appearances and managing a reserve side.
I'm backing Hargreaves entirely for next season, even though it was my preference to see an experienced manager take over after Knill. He's shown enough that he's learnt from mistakes.
My feelings to thatRjc70 wrote:Should have stuck by Ling.
so you dont blame CH?hector wrote:
Yes, job well done by Knill setting us up to get relegated. It is his fault.
it did to keep us in the league at the end of last season when we could have gone down.hector wrote: Whereas the experience of Alan Knill served us so well.
SuperNickyWroe wrote: and there is the reason why he should never have got the job.
As for this, lets just take a look at the facts shall we? Chris was appointed on the 6th January, so his first game was Wimbledon away on the 11th Jan. Since then he has lead the team to a win on 7 occasions, a draw on 1, and losses on 12 occasions. So that's a total of 20 games.SuperNickyWroe wrote:
the fact that CH acutally played him in front of our top scorer perhaps?
get your head out of your ar*e.
Pea wrote:
As for this, lets just take a look at the facts shall we? Chris was appointed on the 6th January, so his first game was Wimbledon away on the 11th Jan. Since then he has lead the team to a win on 7 occasions, a draw on 1, and losses on 12 occasions. So that's a total of 20 games.
Lets look at Knill's track record shall we: Wins 4, draws 8, losses 12 (Not including cup matches) making a total of 24 games played.
Knill didn't secure his first win as manager until 5 games in, Hargeaves managed it in his first. CH has managed a team to get Torquay 28 points, Knill managed to get us 20. I think what I'm saying is pretty clear.
So, tell me again how CH is no good for Torquay...... :Oops:
**for those of you budding mathematicians going, that's only 44 of the 45 games we've played, I've not included the draw that JH got us.
For those pedants amongst us, she means GHPea wrote:
**for those of you budding mathematicians going, that's only 44 of the 45 games we've played, I've not included the draw that JH got us.
We ended up nearer relegation than when he took over. His record was hardly inspiring. The fact is, Knill did better with Ling's team than he did for the team he expensively assembled of his own.SuperNickyWroe wrote:
it did to keep us in the league at the end of last season when we could have gone down.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 77 guests