Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Next manager - Ben Garner confirmed (p256)
Comments
-
Oh dear. I'll classify that as very borderline worrying. He may be right and our training under previous managers has been lacking, but I agree statements like that aren't encouraging and hopefully are based on some sort of data compared to other clubs rather than him just deciding to say something like that. How he is qualified to know this I concede is a bit of a red flag and let's hope it stops there...LouisMend said:
Not sure if this is covered by what you say but on our POTY podcast he told me that he has set a target for “10% more intensity” in trainingJac_52 said:MuttleyCAFC said:I haven't got an issue with the owner suggesting the style of football he wants to see us play and promising to back the manager in getting the players needed to achieve it. It becomes more worrying when it gets like Roland explaining football tactics to a manager who is an ex England international. If Sandgaard thinks he has discovered the secret of success in terms of a playing style it is worrying in the extreme. There are many different paths but his backing is needed. With limited resources the approach has to always be a pragmatic one based on what you have and how your best players play.
The problem is, I don't know which of these is correct and I doubt many of us do. There are lingering doubts about Sandgaard based on genuine clues. I would say not yet definitive but that in itself is worrying. And we should be open to this possibility.
I agree with this. The turning point for me would be if Sandgaard is issuing Roland-esque emails or trying to dictate how training sessions should go.
Currently I have no reason to think that this is the case and if anyone knows differently then they should be making it public very very quickly. Until then we have to accept that there is nothing wrong with an owner wanting a certain type of football and finding the staff to implement it.
“There are better facilities now at the training ground. We already have our medical and sports science team and I’m demanding next season that our training has to have a minimum of 10 per cent more intensity“2 -
Yeah, I've called dibs on the Steve Mildenhall jokes thanksoohaahmortimer said:
When Airman ‘likes’ that post it scares me , we’ve got another nutbag , let’s hope he’s more useful than that goalkeeping coach from Swindon’s nutsack .
1 -
Cawley sticking to his story0
-
How did he get to a nice clean number like 10? And how is it measured?Jac_52 said:
Oh dear. I'll classify that as very borderline worrying. He may be right and our training under previous managers has been lacking, but I agree statements like that aren't encouraging and hopefully are based on some sort of data compared to other clubs rather than him just deciding to say something like that. How he is qualified to know this I concede is a bit of a red flag and let's hope it stops there...LouisMend said:
Not sure if this is covered by what you say but on our POTY podcast he told me that he has set a target for “10% more intensity” in trainingJac_52 said:MuttleyCAFC said:I haven't got an issue with the owner suggesting the style of football he wants to see us play and promising to back the manager in getting the players needed to achieve it. It becomes more worrying when it gets like Roland explaining football tactics to a manager who is an ex England international. If Sandgaard thinks he has discovered the secret of success in terms of a playing style it is worrying in the extreme. There are many different paths but his backing is needed. With limited resources the approach has to always be a pragmatic one based on what you have and how your best players play.
The problem is, I don't know which of these is correct and I doubt many of us do. There are lingering doubts about Sandgaard based on genuine clues. I would say not yet definitive but that in itself is worrying. And we should be open to this possibility.
I agree with this. The turning point for me would be if Sandgaard is issuing Roland-esque emails or trying to dictate how training sessions should go.
Currently I have no reason to think that this is the case and if anyone knows differently then they should be making it public very very quickly. Until then we have to accept that there is nothing wrong with an owner wanting a certain type of football and finding the staff to implement it.
“There are better facilities now at the training ground. We already have our medical and sports science team and I’m demanding next season that our training has to have a minimum of 10 per cent more intensity“1 -
I have heard, as have others, that Garner has left Swindon today. That may not be right, but let's assume it is. That leaves 3 other possible scenarios.Henry Irving said:Thinking about it Cawley covers all the other South London and Surrey sides so has contacts within the selhurst club
So he may well know Garner already or have a very good link to him.
So his source may not be Swindon or Charlton but the horse itself.
It's a coincidence
Cawley is wrong, or at least premature
Thomas is lying
I think the first is so remote it's safe to rule it out. The other two options are a massive credibility issue, especially as they have both doubled down on it today. The most worrying thing imo is if Thomas has changed his mind because of a leak, or fan reaction. Neither are good.5 -
If I was filthy rich and bought a football club, I suspect I'd have a say in how we played. Lets face it we all fancy ourselves a bit as football geniuses, it would be really hard when you're coughing up millions every year to keep quiet.
Certainly at the manager recruitment stage, if I say liked attacking football or tiki-taka, I'd make sure that I appointed someone who played that way, and not someone who played a physical style and relied on set pieces.8 -
Yeah I totally agree with that.killerandflash said:If I was filthy rich and bought a football club, I suspect I'd have a say in how we played. Lets face it we all fancy ourselves a bit as football geniuses, it would be really hard when you're coughing up millions every year to keep quiet.
Certainly at the manager recruitment stage, if I say liked attacking football or tiki-taka, I'd make sure that I appointed someone who played that way, and not someone who played a physical style and relied on set pieces.
What I find worrying is commentating on training being 10% more intense. I know we don’t have any context into his thinking, but how has he judged that, what has he compared it to, and what does 10% more intense look like to him.It’s totally fine for him to say I don’t want a team to play one dimensional football, and putting a manager in place he thinks can achieve what he wants but then after that he can’t really talk to coaching processes etc.0 -
I'll give him the benefit of the doubt on that. It's completely unmessurable unless he wants them to do 110 meter sprints instead of 100 meter ones.LouisMend said:
Not sure if this is covered by what you say but on our POTY podcast he told me that he has set a target for “10% more intensity” in trainingJac_52 said:MuttleyCAFC said:I haven't got an issue with the owner suggesting the style of football he wants to see us play and promising to back the manager in getting the players needed to achieve it. It becomes more worrying when it gets like Roland explaining football tactics to a manager who is an ex England international. If Sandgaard thinks he has discovered the secret of success in terms of a playing style it is worrying in the extreme. There are many different paths but his backing is needed. With limited resources the approach has to always be a pragmatic one based on what you have and how your best players play.
The problem is, I don't know which of these is correct and I doubt many of us do. There are lingering doubts about Sandgaard based on genuine clues. I would say not yet definitive but that in itself is worrying. And we should be open to this possibility.
I agree with this. The turning point for me would be if Sandgaard is issuing Roland-esque emails or trying to dictate how training sessions should go.
Currently I have no reason to think that this is the case and if anyone knows differently then they should be making it public very very quickly. Until then we have to accept that there is nothing wrong with an owner wanting a certain type of football and finding the staff to implement it.
“There are better facilities now at the training ground. We already have our medical and sports science team and I’m demanding next season that our training has to have a minimum of 10 per cent more intensity so we train at a minimum level we see in the Championship. It’s all around we’re improving.“
We still don't have a fitness and conditioning coach do we?0 -
Lee Bowyer is leaving Brum after falling out with the board and is coming back to us .................. joke, stop panicking, I just wanted to give some contributors something else to get in a strop about, why we wait for the new manager to be appointed
0 -
I don’t think there is much doubt that Garner will soon be announced. Cawley doesn’t get too much wrong once he’s committed to tweeting something. I’d imagine the hold up is just some formalities at either CAFC, Swindon or with Ben Garner.thenewbie said:
Not remotelyIAgree said:So have we built up a coherent picture of what’ the hell is going on?5 - Sponsored links:
-
Yeah, this is where I’m at with it.ShootersHillGuru said:
I don’t think there is much doubt that Garner will soon be announced. Cawley doesn’t get too much wrong once he’s committed to tweeting something. I’d imagine the hold up is just some formalities at either CAFC, Swindon or with Ben Garner.thenewbie said:
Not remotelyIAgree said:So have we built up a coherent picture of what’ the hell is going on?
Which makes TS communications with @ButtleJR very strange indeed. I guess technically it could not be a lie as they could still be in the process of looking at candidates until it js all signed.1 -
Who resigns before ironing out the details of employmentShootersHillGuru said:
I don’t think there is much doubt that Garner will soon be announced. Cawley doesn’t get too much wrong once he’s committed to tweeting something. I’d imagine the hold up is just some formalities at either CAFC, Swindon or with Ben Garner.thenewbie said:
Not remotelyIAgree said:So have we built up a coherent picture of what’ the hell is going on?0 -
If that’s his nickname then fair play to the bloke. Respect.Henry Irving said:Thinking about it Cawley covers all the other South London and Surrey sides so has contacts within the selhurst club
So he may well know Garner already or have a very good link to him.
So his source may not be Swindon or Charlton but the horse itself.10 -
Especially when your resignation carries compensation issues either way.CafcSCP said:
Who resigns before ironing out the details of employmentShootersHillGuru said:
I don’t think there is much doubt that Garner will soon be announced. Cawley doesn’t get too much wrong once he’s committed to tweeting something. I’d imagine the hold up is just some formalities at either CAFC, Swindon or with Ben Garner.thenewbie said:
Not remotelyIAgree said:So have we built up a coherent picture of what’ the hell is going on?0 -
Cafc43v3r said:
I'll give him the benefit of the doubt on that. It's completely unmessurable unless he wants them to do 110 meter sprints instead of 100 meter ones.LouisMend said:
Not sure if this is covered by what you say but on our POTY podcast he told me that he has set a target for “10% more intensity” in trainingJac_52 said:MuttleyCAFC said:I haven't got an issue with the owner suggesting the style of football he wants to see us play and promising to back the manager in getting the players needed to achieve it. It becomes more worrying when it gets like Roland explaining football tactics to a manager who is an ex England international. If Sandgaard thinks he has discovered the secret of success in terms of a playing style it is worrying in the extreme. There are many different paths but his backing is needed. With limited resources the approach has to always be a pragmatic one based on what you have and how your best players play.
The problem is, I don't know which of these is correct and I doubt many of us do. There are lingering doubts about Sandgaard based on genuine clues. I would say not yet definitive but that in itself is worrying. And we should be open to this possibility.
I agree with this. The turning point for me would be if Sandgaard is issuing Roland-esque emails or trying to dictate how training sessions should go.
Currently I have no reason to think that this is the case and if anyone knows differently then they should be making it public very very quickly. Until then we have to accept that there is nothing wrong with an owner wanting a certain type of football and finding the staff to implement it.
“There are better facilities now at the training ground. We already have our medical and sports science team and I’m demanding next season that our training has to have a minimum of 10 per cent more intensity so we train at a minimum level we see in the Championship. It’s all around we’re improving.“
We still don't have a fitness and conditioning coach do we?
Seriously? How long has that been the case? Can't get my head round why a professional football club would not have such an integral role in place.1 -
wasn't it said not so long ago that bowyers training was too intensive?1
-
Because he didn't have a specialist coach he flogged them half to death because he was obsessed with how fit Leeds were. He didn't take into account that 70 year old Bielsa had spent 40 years doing it and it took him 3 years.superclive said:wasn't it said not so long ago that bowyers training was too intensive?
He thought he could do it in the now.0 -
Or that was not what TS said,Cafc43v3r said:
I have heard, as have others, that Garner has left Swindon today. That may not be right, but let's assume it is. That leaves 3 other possible scenarios.Henry Irving said:Thinking about it Cawley covers all the other South London and Surrey sides so has contacts within the selhurst club
So he may well know Garner already or have a very good link to him.
So his source may not be Swindon or Charlton but the horse itself.
It's a coincidence
Cawley is wrong, or at least premature
Thomas is lying
I think the first is so remote it's safe to rule it out. The other two options are a massive credibility issue, especially as they have both doubled down on it today. The most worrying thing imo is if Thomas has changed his mind because of a leak, or fan reaction. Neither are good.
Or Garner has agreed things with his agent but it has not yet been signed by us yet,
Or there is an issue with the contract,
Or TS needs to sign it,
Or TS did not brief Cawley and he got information from elsewhere and is indeed premature,
Or he has not left Swindon quite yet and hence it is not on their official site.
No need to be so dramatic and calling people liars. All it does is feed the negativity and drags the club down. Patience is a virtue when negotiating.7 -
Here's what the OS says we have on the medical/fitness side:RodneyCharltonTrotta said:Cafc43v3r said:
I'll give him the benefit of the doubt on that. It's completely unmessurable unless he wants them to do 110 meter sprints instead of 100 meter ones.LouisMend said:
Not sure if this is covered by what you say but on our POTY podcast he told me that he has set a target for “10% more intensity” in trainingJac_52 said:MuttleyCAFC said:I haven't got an issue with the owner suggesting the style of football he wants to see us play and promising to back the manager in getting the players needed to achieve it. It becomes more worrying when it gets like Roland explaining football tactics to a manager who is an ex England international. If Sandgaard thinks he has discovered the secret of success in terms of a playing style it is worrying in the extreme. There are many different paths but his backing is needed. With limited resources the approach has to always be a pragmatic one based on what you have and how your best players play.
The problem is, I don't know which of these is correct and I doubt many of us do. There are lingering doubts about Sandgaard based on genuine clues. I would say not yet definitive but that in itself is worrying. And we should be open to this possibility.
I agree with this. The turning point for me would be if Sandgaard is issuing Roland-esque emails or trying to dictate how training sessions should go.
Currently I have no reason to think that this is the case and if anyone knows differently then they should be making it public very very quickly. Until then we have to accept that there is nothing wrong with an owner wanting a certain type of football and finding the staff to implement it.
“There are better facilities now at the training ground. We already have our medical and sports science team and I’m demanding next season that our training has to have a minimum of 10 per cent more intensity so we train at a minimum level we see in the Championship. It’s all around we’re improving.“
We still don't have a fitness and conditioning coach do we?
Seriously? How long has that been the case? Can't get my head round why a professional football club would not have such an integral role in place.
https://www.cafc.co.uk/team/coaching-staffMen's First Team Head Physiotherapist: Adam Coe
Head of Physical Performance: Josh Hornby
Men's First-Team Sports Scientist: Ben Talbot
Men's First-Team Assistant Therapist: Steve Jackson
Club Doctor: Toby Longwill
2 -
I'll ask again, have you seen the messages Thomas is sending people on LinkedIn?Redrobo said:
Or that was not what TS said,Cafc43v3r said:
I have heard, as have others, that Garner has left Swindon today. That may not be right, but let's assume it is. That leaves 3 other possible scenarios.Henry Irving said:Thinking about it Cawley covers all the other South London and Surrey sides so has contacts within the selhurst club
So he may well know Garner already or have a very good link to him.
So his source may not be Swindon or Charlton but the horse itself.
It's a coincidence
Cawley is wrong, or at least premature
Thomas is lying
I think the first is so remote it's safe to rule it out. The other two options are a massive credibility issue, especially as they have both doubled down on it today. The most worrying thing imo is if Thomas has changed his mind because of a leak, or fan reaction. Neither are good.
Or Garner has agreed things with his agent but it has not yet been signed by us yet,
Or there is an issue with the contract,
Or TS needs to sign it,
Or TS did not brief Cawley and he got information from elsewhere and is indeed premature,
Or he has not left Swindon quite yet and hence it is not on their official site.
No need to be so dramatic and calling people liars. All it does is feed the negativity and drags the club down. Patience is a virtue when negotiating.
Because he is clearly saying they are still interviewing and that no one has been offered the job and he doesn't know where the story has come from. If you had seen them you would know. But you don't and your spinning your rose tinted veiw on it.
But negatively........
There is a difference between being negative for the sake of it and looking at facts, not speculation or interpretation.4 - Sponsored links:
-
Has it been confirmed that Ben Garner has resigned at Swindon ? I see their local paper saying he’s set to leave but that’s not quite the same although I expect it is.2
-
I always felt like he could, at times, be very bright and insightful and genuinely interesting to listen to when he talked about football. But he also was sometimes so steeped in his own ego and football cliches and norms that he got in his own way, much like his mentor Big Sam.Cafc43v3r said:
I know I am in a minority of 1 but really liked Karl Robinson.seth plum said:I once asked Karl Robinson if the players had ever read the Laws of Football. Quick as a flash he answered that most of them are too stupid to read.
He also had a system and was able to help identify and attract good players (JDS, JFC, Magennis, Fosu) and at times we played good football under him. He just didn't seem to be able to make adjustments over the course of a game and a season.3 -
Adam, Josh, Ben and Steve have all been with the club for years, all have progressed whether that’s because they were ready or were cheap options, I’m guessing the latter. Not knocking them, all good guys that love the club, we have gaps in that department and will continue to struggle with injury problems with no investment.Scoham said:
Here's what the OS says we have on the medical/fitness side:RodneyCharltonTrotta said:Cafc43v3r said:
I'll give him the benefit of the doubt on that. It's completely unmessurable unless he wants them to do 110 meter sprints instead of 100 meter ones.LouisMend said:
Not sure if this is covered by what you say but on our POTY podcast he told me that he has set a target for “10% more intensity” in trainingJac_52 said:MuttleyCAFC said:I haven't got an issue with the owner suggesting the style of football he wants to see us play and promising to back the manager in getting the players needed to achieve it. It becomes more worrying when it gets like Roland explaining football tactics to a manager who is an ex England international. If Sandgaard thinks he has discovered the secret of success in terms of a playing style it is worrying in the extreme. There are many different paths but his backing is needed. With limited resources the approach has to always be a pragmatic one based on what you have and how your best players play.
The problem is, I don't know which of these is correct and I doubt many of us do. There are lingering doubts about Sandgaard based on genuine clues. I would say not yet definitive but that in itself is worrying. And we should be open to this possibility.
I agree with this. The turning point for me would be if Sandgaard is issuing Roland-esque emails or trying to dictate how training sessions should go.
Currently I have no reason to think that this is the case and if anyone knows differently then they should be making it public very very quickly. Until then we have to accept that there is nothing wrong with an owner wanting a certain type of football and finding the staff to implement it.
“There are better facilities now at the training ground. We already have our medical and sports science team and I’m demanding next season that our training has to have a minimum of 10 per cent more intensity so we train at a minimum level we see in the Championship. It’s all around we’re improving.“
We still don't have a fitness and conditioning coach do we?
Seriously? How long has that been the case? Can't get my head round why a professional football club would not have such an integral role in place.
https://www.cafc.co.uk/team/coaching-staffMen's First Team Head Physiotherapist: Adam Coe
Head of Physical Performance: Josh Hornby
Men's First-Team Sports Scientist: Ben Talbot
Men's First-Team Assistant Therapist: Steve Jackson
Club Doctor: Toby Longwill
1 -
Didn’t mind Robinson but he left at the right time. Clearly he knows his stuff and we played some of our best football in recent years under him.5
-
Reports that we are
close to signing BG have fizzled out…
0 -
Wait, Joey Barton said he's shite?Swisdom said:People working in the game have praised him and his approach. People that have worked with him.A load of internet warriors haven’t heard of him so decide he’s shit because Joey Barton says so.I know who I would listen to
I am 100% Garner in now.4 -
Assuming it's simply because they're cheap that they're still here and then saying you're not knocking them is disingenuous.RedRobin said:
Adam, Josh, Ben and Steve have all been with the club for years, all have progressed whether that’s because they were ready or were cheap options, I’m guessing the latter. Not knocking them, all good guys that love the club, we have gaps in that department and will continue to struggle with injury problems with no investment.Scoham said:
Here's what the OS says we have on the medical/fitness side:RodneyCharltonTrotta said:Cafc43v3r said:
I'll give him the benefit of the doubt on that. It's completely unmessurable unless he wants them to do 110 meter sprints instead of 100 meter ones.LouisMend said:
Not sure if this is covered by what you say but on our POTY podcast he told me that he has set a target for “10% more intensity” in trainingJac_52 said:MuttleyCAFC said:I haven't got an issue with the owner suggesting the style of football he wants to see us play and promising to back the manager in getting the players needed to achieve it. It becomes more worrying when it gets like Roland explaining football tactics to a manager who is an ex England international. If Sandgaard thinks he has discovered the secret of success in terms of a playing style it is worrying in the extreme. There are many different paths but his backing is needed. With limited resources the approach has to always be a pragmatic one based on what you have and how your best players play.
The problem is, I don't know which of these is correct and I doubt many of us do. There are lingering doubts about Sandgaard based on genuine clues. I would say not yet definitive but that in itself is worrying. And we should be open to this possibility.
I agree with this. The turning point for me would be if Sandgaard is issuing Roland-esque emails or trying to dictate how training sessions should go.
Currently I have no reason to think that this is the case and if anyone knows differently then they should be making it public very very quickly. Until then we have to accept that there is nothing wrong with an owner wanting a certain type of football and finding the staff to implement it.
“There are better facilities now at the training ground. We already have our medical and sports science team and I’m demanding next season that our training has to have a minimum of 10 per cent more intensity so we train at a minimum level we see in the Championship. It’s all around we’re improving.“
We still don't have a fitness and conditioning coach do we?
Seriously? How long has that been the case? Can't get my head round why a professional football club would not have such an integral role in place.
https://www.cafc.co.uk/team/coaching-staffMen's First Team Head Physiotherapist: Adam Coe
Head of Physical Performance: Josh Hornby
Men's First-Team Sports Scientist: Ben Talbot
Men's First-Team Assistant Therapist: Steve Jackson
Club Doctor: Toby Longwill
My assumption would be that they have continued to develop their abilities and broaden their skill sets. Maybe they're qualified to the point they need to be for us right now.1 -
My reckoning, given the slightly unclear picture, is that this story broke from the Swindon end, via contacts that Cawley may have in that area.
Hasn’t it been rumoured before that since the regime change, Cawley’s club insider is no longer so reliable / left the club altogether?
All leads me to thinking this is Swindon saying “if you’re gonna do it, do it… pay up the compo and stop messing about so we can bring in a replacement”.
Far off or no? What do we think?2 -
Going by TS seemingly denying Garner has been appointed and the Taylor interview posted earlier, my hunch is Taylor is still in the frame unless the interview is a few days old.2
-
ShootersHillGuru said:
I don’t think there is much doubt that Garner will soon be announced. Cawley doesn’t get too much wrong once he’s committed to tweeting something. I’d imagine the hold up is just some formalities at either CAFC, Swindon or with Ben Garner.thenewbie said:
Not remotelyIAgree said:So have we built up a coherent picture of what’ the hell is going on?
If he's not our next manager lots of people will have moaned about nothing. That's normal on here anyway...3
