Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Holden sacked?! (Ed. Yes - Confirmed)
Comments
-
Our start to the season is down to RD, TS, Holden and SE7 partners, everyone one of them has played a part in it.TS dicked around from the end of last year resulting in the club not being sold until well into the transfer window.Holden has been tactically inept and has failed to get points against weaker opposition.SE7 partners have failed to back Holden in the way they should have and have yet to put their money where their mouth is.
Roland is just the biggest c@nt of all. The moment he split the club from the ground, he opened us up to chancers.Where next - who f@cking knows!!18 -
I'm not unaware of the timing of his appointment or that Methven's management crew were installed until the deal appeared to fall through. Having re-read it, nothing I said seems to me to imply otherwise.PragueAddick said:
With great respect, Mr Peanuts, your first para. reads as if Methven and co. appointed him only in the close season and had no idea how -apparently - "tactically naive" he is. But that's not the case. Methven was in and around the club from December- when Holden and the others came in- through to February, and had a half-season to monitor results and take soundings. If he's really as bad as you paint him, you'd think Charlie- "I know football" - Methven would have spotted it, and have had a replacement lined up to take over as soon as the deal was done; so that at least said replacement could get some of his own choices in, and certainly influence the pre-season.PeanutsMolloy said:
I don't dispute he improved our performances after Garner-ball (it was a relatively obvious idea to "get the ball forward quicker", as DH described it) but, as I've said earlier, tactical naivety alone in the last 3 games (including first-rate impression of a stuffed dummy on the touchline at crucial moments and leaving clearly-knackered youngsters on for too long) and shockingly poor set-piece coaching in both boxes, is enough for me to be in no doubt it's right to replace DH now.PragueAddick said:
- Dean Holden was apparently recommended to TS by the current SMT. Effectively their choice, 8 months ago.
- He inherited a crap squad that was in chaos. Remember the Stockport cup humiliation?
- Admittedly the delay to the takeover completion didn't help to make a smooth well-planned pre-season.
- He has ONE fit senior striker. ONE!
- As of a week ago he had 10 -TEN - injured players.
- He has had to play two debutant 18 year olds in every game, for the simple reason that there were no better choices.
- He was told that he cannot bring more players in if he keeps picking the trash (Kirk, DJ , McG). Yes, I have a source for that. None of the trash was on the bench on Saturday.
So yeah, the "solution" to a poor start is to sack a manager you gave a three year contract to in March with a week to go of the window and irons supposedly in the fire, especially a striker.
As I've been saying for nigh on 30 years since I got involved in management recruitment: any idiot can sack someone. The difficult bit is getting in someone "better", especially if you keep being the same idiot each year or less.
"Someone challenge me on that?" © Charles Harry Finlayson Methven
He could have a fully-fit £30m squad and still potentially (probably IMO) not have the ability as a manager to get us promotion.
You're right he was SMT's choice but it's not unreasonable to assume they had to work within TS's budget and have his sign off. TS would have had to (and for a while did) live with the choice if the deal fell through.
So we shouldn't assume DH was ever their #1 choice or defines their budget for a new appointment.
We'll find out soon.
Given that, you haven't persuaded me at all that the timing of this isn't symptomatic of panic and breathtaking incompetence. Or possibly, as @sm above says, symptomatic of hedge-fund management mentality.
DH did well enough at for the remainder of last season though when looking like we might still have a run at the play offs, we still fell flat and finished poorly. Did you watch the game at Portman Road in April?
Persuading you of anything wasn't my purpose. All I was saying is that your assertion, that DH was effectively their choice, should be qualified by the fact that TS is hardly likely to have given them a blank cheque for the appointment. We don't know for sure but he was not necessarily ever their #1 choice.
2 -
Yes that's what I thought. Sack a manager and leave people to conclude he was the problem, and look as though you are taking decisive action at the same time. Happens all the time.Airman Brown said:PragueAddick said:
With great respect, Mr Peanuts, your first para. reads as if Methven and co. appointed him only in the close season and had no idea how -apparently - "tactically naive" he is. But that's not the case. Methven was in and around the club from December- when Holden and the others came in- through to February, and had a half-season to monitor results and take soundings. If he's really as bad as you paint him, you'd think Charlie- "I know football" - Methven would have spotted it, and have had a replacement lined up to take over as soon as the deal was done; so that at least said replacement could get some of his own choices in, and certainly influence the pre-season.PeanutsMolloy said:
I don't dispute he improved our performances after Garner-ball (it was a relatively obvious idea to "get the ball forward quicker", as DH described it) but, as I've said earlier, tactical naivety alone in the last 3 games (including first-rate impression of a stuffed dummy on the touchline at crucial moments and leaving clearly-knackered youngsters on for too long) and shockingly poor set-piece coaching in both boxes, is enough for me to be in no doubt it's right to replace DH now.PragueAddick said:
- Dean Holden was apparently recommended to TS by the current SMT. Effectively their choice, 8 months ago.
- He inherited a crap squad that was in chaos. Remember the Stockport cup humiliation?
- Admittedly the delay to the takeover completion didn't help to make a smooth well-planned pre-season.
- He has ONE fit senior striker. ONE!
- As of a week ago he had 10 -TEN - injured players.
- He has had to play two debutant 18 year olds in every game, for the simple reason that there were no better choices.
- He was told that he cannot bring more players in if he keeps picking the trash (Kirk, DJ , McG). Yes, I have a source for that. None of the trash was on the bench on Saturday.
So yeah, the "solution" to a poor start is to sack a manager you gave a three year contract to in March with a week to go of the window and irons supposedly in the fire, especially a striker.
As I've been saying for nigh on 30 years since I got involved in management recruitment: any idiot can sack someone. The difficult bit is getting in someone "better", especially if you keep being the same idiot each year or less.
"Someone challenge me on that?" © Charles Harry Finlayson Methven
He could have a fully-fit £30m squad and still potentially (probably IMO) not have the ability as a manager to get us promotion.
You're right he was SMT's choice but it's not unreasonable to assume they had to work within TS's budget and have his sign off. TS would have had to (and for a while did) live with the choice if the deal fell through.
So we shouldn't assume DH was ever their #1 choice or defines their budget for a new appointment.
We'll find out soon.
Given that, you haven't persuaded me at all that the timing of this isn't symptomatic of panic and breathtaking incompetence. Or possibly, as @sm above says, symptomatic of hedge-fund management mentality.
I think it’s primarily Charlie covering his arse and distancing his little gang from the worst start since 1990.1 -
Not really, it turns the heat up on them, I would say!Airman Brown said:PragueAddick said:
With great respect, Mr Peanuts, your first para. reads as if Methven and co. appointed him only in the close season and had no idea how -apparently - "tactically naive" he is. But that's not the case. Methven was in and around the club from December- when Holden and the others came in- through to February, and had a half-season to monitor results and take soundings. If he's really as bad as you paint him, you'd think Charlie- "I know football" - Methven would have spotted it, and have had a replacement lined up to take over as soon as the deal was done; so that at least said replacement could get some of his own choices in, and certainly influence the pre-season.PeanutsMolloy said:
I don't dispute he improved our performances after Garner-ball (it was a relatively obvious idea to "get the ball forward quicker", as DH described it) but, as I've said earlier, tactical naivety alone in the last 3 games (including first-rate impression of a stuffed dummy on the touchline at crucial moments and leaving clearly-knackered youngsters on for too long) and shockingly poor set-piece coaching in both boxes, is enough for me to be in no doubt it's right to replace DH now.PragueAddick said:
- Dean Holden was apparently recommended to TS by the current SMT. Effectively their choice, 8 months ago.
- He inherited a crap squad that was in chaos. Remember the Stockport cup humiliation?
- Admittedly the delay to the takeover completion didn't help to make a smooth well-planned pre-season.
- He has ONE fit senior striker. ONE!
- As of a week ago he had 10 -TEN - injured players.
- He has had to play two debutant 18 year olds in every game, for the simple reason that there were no better choices.
- He was told that he cannot bring more players in if he keeps picking the trash (Kirk, DJ , McG). Yes, I have a source for that. None of the trash was on the bench on Saturday.
So yeah, the "solution" to a poor start is to sack a manager you gave a three year contract to in March with a week to go of the window and irons supposedly in the fire, especially a striker.
As I've been saying for nigh on 30 years since I got involved in management recruitment: any idiot can sack someone. The difficult bit is getting in someone "better", especially if you keep being the same idiot each year or less.
"Someone challenge me on that?" © Charles Harry Finlayson Methven
He could have a fully-fit £30m squad and still potentially (probably IMO) not have the ability as a manager to get us promotion.
You're right he was SMT's choice but it's not unreasonable to assume they had to work within TS's budget and have his sign off. TS would have had to (and for a while did) live with the choice if the deal fell through.
So we shouldn't assume DH was ever their #1 choice or defines their budget for a new appointment.
We'll find out soon.
Given that, you haven't persuaded me at all that the timing of this isn't symptomatic of panic and breathtaking incompetence. Or possibly, as @sm above says, symptomatic of hedge-fund management mentality.
I think it’s primarily Charlie covering his arse and distancing his little gang from the worst start since 1990.1 -
With whom, though? They can look as if they are doing something if asked by the investors.DubaiCAFC said:
Not really, it turns the heat up on them, I would say!Airman Brown said:PragueAddick said:
With great respect, Mr Peanuts, your first para. reads as if Methven and co. appointed him only in the close season and had no idea how -apparently - "tactically naive" he is. But that's not the case. Methven was in and around the club from December- when Holden and the others came in- through to February, and had a half-season to monitor results and take soundings. If he's really as bad as you paint him, you'd think Charlie- "I know football" - Methven would have spotted it, and have had a replacement lined up to take over as soon as the deal was done; so that at least said replacement could get some of his own choices in, and certainly influence the pre-season.PeanutsMolloy said:
I don't dispute he improved our performances after Garner-ball (it was a relatively obvious idea to "get the ball forward quicker", as DH described it) but, as I've said earlier, tactical naivety alone in the last 3 games (including first-rate impression of a stuffed dummy on the touchline at crucial moments and leaving clearly-knackered youngsters on for too long) and shockingly poor set-piece coaching in both boxes, is enough for me to be in no doubt it's right to replace DH now.PragueAddick said:
- Dean Holden was apparently recommended to TS by the current SMT. Effectively their choice, 8 months ago.
- He inherited a crap squad that was in chaos. Remember the Stockport cup humiliation?
- Admittedly the delay to the takeover completion didn't help to make a smooth well-planned pre-season.
- He has ONE fit senior striker. ONE!
- As of a week ago he had 10 -TEN - injured players.
- He has had to play two debutant 18 year olds in every game, for the simple reason that there were no better choices.
- He was told that he cannot bring more players in if he keeps picking the trash (Kirk, DJ , McG). Yes, I have a source for that. None of the trash was on the bench on Saturday.
So yeah, the "solution" to a poor start is to sack a manager you gave a three year contract to in March with a week to go of the window and irons supposedly in the fire, especially a striker.
As I've been saying for nigh on 30 years since I got involved in management recruitment: any idiot can sack someone. The difficult bit is getting in someone "better", especially if you keep being the same idiot each year or less.
"Someone challenge me on that?" © Charles Harry Finlayson Methven
He could have a fully-fit £30m squad and still potentially (probably IMO) not have the ability as a manager to get us promotion.
You're right he was SMT's choice but it's not unreasonable to assume they had to work within TS's budget and have his sign off. TS would have had to (and for a while did) live with the choice if the deal fell through.
So we shouldn't assume DH was ever their #1 choice or defines their budget for a new appointment.
We'll find out soon.
Given that, you haven't persuaded me at all that the timing of this isn't symptomatic of panic and breathtaking incompetence. Or possibly, as @sm above says, symptomatic of hedge-fund management mentality.
I think it’s primarily Charlie covering his arse and distancing his little gang from the worst start since 1990.7 -
If there isn’t a Manager and back room team ready to come in immediately the decision to clear out the whole team is idiotic IMO40
-
Agree although it is quite a good negotiation tool to be able to say to a new man you can bring in whomever you like to work with.Redhenry said:If there isn’t a Manager and back room team ready to come in immediately the decision to clear out the whole team is idiotic IMO0 -
That’s why I used the word indication, see also hint or clue.bobmunro said:
Not sure the person who texted would necessarily have the real power - but would agree with your second part of the sentence.seth plum said:I would like to know which exact individual texted Dean Holden to sack him.
It would be an indication as to where the real power in the club lies, and also an indication as to who is a complete **** for choosing to or agreeing to do it that way.
You are a lovely man who works in Human Resources and I am glad you agree that your boss sacking you by text defines the character of the boss.
If Andy Scott or whoever did it on someone’s say so he should have refused. I can’t imagine you behaving that way.1 -
With the fans!Airman Brown said:
With whom, though? They can look as if they are doing something if asked by the investors.DubaiCAFC said:
Not really, it turns the heat up on them, I would say!Airman Brown said:PragueAddick said:
With great respect, Mr Peanuts, your first para. reads as if Methven and co. appointed him only in the close season and had no idea how -apparently - "tactically naive" he is. But that's not the case. Methven was in and around the club from December- when Holden and the others came in- through to February, and had a half-season to monitor results and take soundings. If he's really as bad as you paint him, you'd think Charlie- "I know football" - Methven would have spotted it, and have had a replacement lined up to take over as soon as the deal was done; so that at least said replacement could get some of his own choices in, and certainly influence the pre-season.PeanutsMolloy said:
I don't dispute he improved our performances after Garner-ball (it was a relatively obvious idea to "get the ball forward quicker", as DH described it) but, as I've said earlier, tactical naivety alone in the last 3 games (including first-rate impression of a stuffed dummy on the touchline at crucial moments and leaving clearly-knackered youngsters on for too long) and shockingly poor set-piece coaching in both boxes, is enough for me to be in no doubt it's right to replace DH now.PragueAddick said:
- Dean Holden was apparently recommended to TS by the current SMT. Effectively their choice, 8 months ago.
- He inherited a crap squad that was in chaos. Remember the Stockport cup humiliation?
- Admittedly the delay to the takeover completion didn't help to make a smooth well-planned pre-season.
- He has ONE fit senior striker. ONE!
- As of a week ago he had 10 -TEN - injured players.
- He has had to play two debutant 18 year olds in every game, for the simple reason that there were no better choices.
- He was told that he cannot bring more players in if he keeps picking the trash (Kirk, DJ , McG). Yes, I have a source for that. None of the trash was on the bench on Saturday.
So yeah, the "solution" to a poor start is to sack a manager you gave a three year contract to in March with a week to go of the window and irons supposedly in the fire, especially a striker.
As I've been saying for nigh on 30 years since I got involved in management recruitment: any idiot can sack someone. The difficult bit is getting in someone "better", especially if you keep being the same idiot each year or less.
"Someone challenge me on that?" © Charles Harry Finlayson Methven
He could have a fully-fit £30m squad and still potentially (probably IMO) not have the ability as a manager to get us promotion.
You're right he was SMT's choice but it's not unreasonable to assume they had to work within TS's budget and have his sign off. TS would have had to (and for a while did) live with the choice if the deal fell through.
So we shouldn't assume DH was ever their #1 choice or defines their budget for a new appointment.
We'll find out soon.
Given that, you haven't persuaded me at all that the timing of this isn't symptomatic of panic and breathtaking incompetence. Or possibly, as @sm above says, symptomatic of hedge-fund management mentality.
I think it’s primarily Charlie covering his arse and distancing his little gang from the worst start since 1990.
0 -
Covering his arse and putting all the blame at Holden's door. It's not a trick you can get away with too often. Can't make my mind up if the replacement will be the least-cost option or another Methven acolyte. Either way, they will have their work cut-out making us competitive with the state of this squad.DubaiCAFC said:
Not really, it turns the heat up on them, I would say!Airman Brown said:PragueAddick said:
With great respect, Mr Peanuts, your first para. reads as if Methven and co. appointed him only in the close season and had no idea how -apparently - "tactically naive" he is. But that's not the case. Methven was in and around the club from December- when Holden and the others came in- through to February, and had a half-season to monitor results and take soundings. If he's really as bad as you paint him, you'd think Charlie- "I know football" - Methven would have spotted it, and have had a replacement lined up to take over as soon as the deal was done; so that at least said replacement could get some of his own choices in, and certainly influence the pre-season.PeanutsMolloy said:
I don't dispute he improved our performances after Garner-ball (it was a relatively obvious idea to "get the ball forward quicker", as DH described it) but, as I've said earlier, tactical naivety alone in the last 3 games (including first-rate impression of a stuffed dummy on the touchline at crucial moments and leaving clearly-knackered youngsters on for too long) and shockingly poor set-piece coaching in both boxes, is enough for me to be in no doubt it's right to replace DH now.PragueAddick said:
- Dean Holden was apparently recommended to TS by the current SMT. Effectively their choice, 8 months ago.
- He inherited a crap squad that was in chaos. Remember the Stockport cup humiliation?
- Admittedly the delay to the takeover completion didn't help to make a smooth well-planned pre-season.
- He has ONE fit senior striker. ONE!
- As of a week ago he had 10 -TEN - injured players.
- He has had to play two debutant 18 year olds in every game, for the simple reason that there were no better choices.
- He was told that he cannot bring more players in if he keeps picking the trash (Kirk, DJ , McG). Yes, I have a source for that. None of the trash was on the bench on Saturday.
So yeah, the "solution" to a poor start is to sack a manager you gave a three year contract to in March with a week to go of the window and irons supposedly in the fire, especially a striker.
As I've been saying for nigh on 30 years since I got involved in management recruitment: any idiot can sack someone. The difficult bit is getting in someone "better", especially if you keep being the same idiot each year or less.
"Someone challenge me on that?" © Charles Harry Finlayson Methven
He could have a fully-fit £30m squad and still potentially (probably IMO) not have the ability as a manager to get us promotion.
You're right he was SMT's choice but it's not unreasonable to assume they had to work within TS's budget and have his sign off. TS would have had to (and for a while did) live with the choice if the deal fell through.
So we shouldn't assume DH was ever their #1 choice or defines their budget for a new appointment.
We'll find out soon.
Given that, you haven't persuaded me at all that the timing of this isn't symptomatic of panic and breathtaking incompetence. Or possibly, as @sm above says, symptomatic of hedge-fund management mentality.
I think it’s primarily Charlie covering his arse and distancing his little gang from the worst start since 1990.1 - Sponsored links:
-
We should be careful with this becoming an accepted truth, it lets SE7 Partners off the hook and gives them a convenient excuse if this season turns into a disaster.Themightyath2 said:Our start to the season is down to RD, TS, Holden and SE7 partners, everyone one of them has played a part in it.TS dicked around from the end of last year resulting in the club not being sold until well into the transfer window.Holden has been tactically inept and has failed to get points against weaker opposition.SE7 partners have failed to back Holden in the way they should have and have yet to put their money where their mouth is.
Roland is just the biggest c@nt of all. The moment he split the club from the ground, he opened us up to chancers.Where next - who f@cking knows!!
The takeover was completed on the 21st of July, however by that point we had signed Isted, Jones (both signed 01/07), May (07/07) and Camara. So clearly SE7 Partners were able to operate in the transfer market before the takeover was formally completed, so we shouldn’t allow them to claim that TS allegedly messing around impacted recruitment in any significant way.19 -
Surely you can only be sacked by your line manager, they can't ask their assistant to do it for them? I assume DH reported into Scott, so must've been him who sent the message. But who knows with Charlton tbhseth plum said:
That’s why I used the word indication, see also hint or clue.bobmunro said:
Not sure the person who texted would necessarily have the real power - but would agree with your second part of the sentence.seth plum said:I would like to know which exact individual texted Dean Holden to sack him.
It would be an indication as to where the real power in the club lies, and also an indication as to who is a complete **** for choosing to or agreeing to do it that way.
You are a lovely man who works in Human Resources and I am glad you agree that your boss sacking you by text defines the character of the boss.
If Andy Scott or whoever did it on someone’s say so he should have refused. I can’t imagine you behaving that way.
Edit. Or I spose Charlie delegated it down to whoever he thought suitable. Can't imagine him having the balls to send it himself.0 -
I would say it turns up the pressure, Holden was his man, recruitment hasn't been great, and if this appointment of a new manager isn't great, it heats up more pressure!Cardinal Sin said:
Covering his arse and putting all the blame at Holden's door. It's not a trick you can get away with too often. Can't make my mind up if the replacement will be the least-cost option or another Methven acolyte. Either way, they will have their work cut-out making us competitive with the state of this squad.DubaiCAFC said:
Not really, it turns the heat up on them, I would say!Airman Brown said:PragueAddick said:
With great respect, Mr Peanuts, your first para. reads as if Methven and co. appointed him only in the close season and had no idea how -apparently - "tactically naive" he is. But that's not the case. Methven was in and around the club from December- when Holden and the others came in- through to February, and had a half-season to monitor results and take soundings. If he's really as bad as you paint him, you'd think Charlie- "I know football" - Methven would have spotted it, and have had a replacement lined up to take over as soon as the deal was done; so that at least said replacement could get some of his own choices in, and certainly influence the pre-season.PeanutsMolloy said:
I don't dispute he improved our performances after Garner-ball (it was a relatively obvious idea to "get the ball forward quicker", as DH described it) but, as I've said earlier, tactical naivety alone in the last 3 games (including first-rate impression of a stuffed dummy on the touchline at crucial moments and leaving clearly-knackered youngsters on for too long) and shockingly poor set-piece coaching in both boxes, is enough for me to be in no doubt it's right to replace DH now.PragueAddick said:
- Dean Holden was apparently recommended to TS by the current SMT. Effectively their choice, 8 months ago.
- He inherited a crap squad that was in chaos. Remember the Stockport cup humiliation?
- Admittedly the delay to the takeover completion didn't help to make a smooth well-planned pre-season.
- He has ONE fit senior striker. ONE!
- As of a week ago he had 10 -TEN - injured players.
- He has had to play two debutant 18 year olds in every game, for the simple reason that there were no better choices.
- He was told that he cannot bring more players in if he keeps picking the trash (Kirk, DJ , McG). Yes, I have a source for that. None of the trash was on the bench on Saturday.
So yeah, the "solution" to a poor start is to sack a manager you gave a three year contract to in March with a week to go of the window and irons supposedly in the fire, especially a striker.
As I've been saying for nigh on 30 years since I got involved in management recruitment: any idiot can sack someone. The difficult bit is getting in someone "better", especially if you keep being the same idiot each year or less.
"Someone challenge me on that?" © Charles Harry Finlayson Methven
He could have a fully-fit £30m squad and still potentially (probably IMO) not have the ability as a manager to get us promotion.
You're right he was SMT's choice but it's not unreasonable to assume they had to work within TS's budget and have his sign off. TS would have had to (and for a while did) live with the choice if the deal fell through.
So we shouldn't assume DH was ever their #1 choice or defines their budget for a new appointment.
We'll find out soon.
Given that, you haven't persuaded me at all that the timing of this isn't symptomatic of panic and breathtaking incompetence. Or possibly, as @sm above says, symptomatic of hedge-fund management mentality.
I think it’s primarily Charlie covering his arse and distancing his little gang from the worst start since 1990.
Not sure I get the arse covering.. everyone can see the short fall, manager that had run out of ideas, and recruitment that hasn't been the best so far! But the recruitment is still better than last summer!0 -
Hands up who is utterly fucking bored with it all?
Same old same old.35 -
Better recruitment than last year is an extremely low bar. By your own admission it hasn’t been good enough this year.DubaiCAFC said:
I would say it turns up the pressure, Holden was his man, recruitment hasn't been great, and if this appointment of a new manager isn't great, it heats up more pressure!Cardinal Sin said:
Covering his arse and putting all the blame at Holden's door. It's not a trick you can get away with too often. Can't make my mind up if the replacement will be the least-cost option or another Methven acolyte. Either way, they will have their work cut-out making us competitive with the state of this squad.DubaiCAFC said:
Not really, it turns the heat up on them, I would say!Airman Brown said:PragueAddick said:
With great respect, Mr Peanuts, your first para. reads as if Methven and co. appointed him only in the close season and had no idea how -apparently - "tactically naive" he is. But that's not the case. Methven was in and around the club from December- when Holden and the others came in- through to February, and had a half-season to monitor results and take soundings. If he's really as bad as you paint him, you'd think Charlie- "I know football" - Methven would have spotted it, and have had a replacement lined up to take over as soon as the deal was done; so that at least said replacement could get some of his own choices in, and certainly influence the pre-season.PeanutsMolloy said:
I don't dispute he improved our performances after Garner-ball (it was a relatively obvious idea to "get the ball forward quicker", as DH described it) but, as I've said earlier, tactical naivety alone in the last 3 games (including first-rate impression of a stuffed dummy on the touchline at crucial moments and leaving clearly-knackered youngsters on for too long) and shockingly poor set-piece coaching in both boxes, is enough for me to be in no doubt it's right to replace DH now.PragueAddick said:
- Dean Holden was apparently recommended to TS by the current SMT. Effectively their choice, 8 months ago.
- He inherited a crap squad that was in chaos. Remember the Stockport cup humiliation?
- Admittedly the delay to the takeover completion didn't help to make a smooth well-planned pre-season.
- He has ONE fit senior striker. ONE!
- As of a week ago he had 10 -TEN - injured players.
- He has had to play two debutant 18 year olds in every game, for the simple reason that there were no better choices.
- He was told that he cannot bring more players in if he keeps picking the trash (Kirk, DJ , McG). Yes, I have a source for that. None of the trash was on the bench on Saturday.
So yeah, the "solution" to a poor start is to sack a manager you gave a three year contract to in March with a week to go of the window and irons supposedly in the fire, especially a striker.
As I've been saying for nigh on 30 years since I got involved in management recruitment: any idiot can sack someone. The difficult bit is getting in someone "better", especially if you keep being the same idiot each year or less.
"Someone challenge me on that?" © Charles Harry Finlayson Methven
He could have a fully-fit £30m squad and still potentially (probably IMO) not have the ability as a manager to get us promotion.
You're right he was SMT's choice but it's not unreasonable to assume they had to work within TS's budget and have his sign off. TS would have had to (and for a while did) live with the choice if the deal fell through.
So we shouldn't assume DH was ever their #1 choice or defines their budget for a new appointment.
We'll find out soon.
Given that, you haven't persuaded me at all that the timing of this isn't symptomatic of panic and breathtaking incompetence. Or possibly, as @sm above says, symptomatic of hedge-fund management mentality.
I think it’s primarily Charlie covering his arse and distancing his little gang from the worst start since 1990.
Not sure I get the arse covering.. everyone can see the short fall, manager that had run out of ideas, and recruitment that hasn't been the best so far! But the recruitment is still better than last summer!2 -
All depends on who you are trying to impress, but as has been said elsewhere, there wasn't a huge fan movement for a new manager. Holden was being criticised for some weird tactical stuff, but was also being cut some slack as almost nobody thought he had been given a great squad of players, and he was also struggling with a long injury list.Airman Brown said:
With whom, though? They can look as if they are doing something if asked by the investors.DubaiCAFC said:
Not really, it turns the heat up on them, I would say!Airman Brown said:PragueAddick said:
With great respect, Mr Peanuts, your first para. reads as if Methven and co. appointed him only in the close season and had no idea how -apparently - "tactically naive" he is. But that's not the case. Methven was in and around the club from December- when Holden and the others came in- through to February, and had a half-season to monitor results and take soundings. If he's really as bad as you paint him, you'd think Charlie- "I know football" - Methven would have spotted it, and have had a replacement lined up to take over as soon as the deal was done; so that at least said replacement could get some of his own choices in, and certainly influence the pre-season.PeanutsMolloy said:
I don't dispute he improved our performances after Garner-ball (it was a relatively obvious idea to "get the ball forward quicker", as DH described it) but, as I've said earlier, tactical naivety alone in the last 3 games (including first-rate impression of a stuffed dummy on the touchline at crucial moments and leaving clearly-knackered youngsters on for too long) and shockingly poor set-piece coaching in both boxes, is enough for me to be in no doubt it's right to replace DH now.PragueAddick said:
- Dean Holden was apparently recommended to TS by the current SMT. Effectively their choice, 8 months ago.
- He inherited a crap squad that was in chaos. Remember the Stockport cup humiliation?
- Admittedly the delay to the takeover completion didn't help to make a smooth well-planned pre-season.
- He has ONE fit senior striker. ONE!
- As of a week ago he had 10 -TEN - injured players.
- He has had to play two debutant 18 year olds in every game, for the simple reason that there were no better choices.
- He was told that he cannot bring more players in if he keeps picking the trash (Kirk, DJ , McG). Yes, I have a source for that. None of the trash was on the bench on Saturday.
So yeah, the "solution" to a poor start is to sack a manager you gave a three year contract to in March with a week to go of the window and irons supposedly in the fire, especially a striker.
As I've been saying for nigh on 30 years since I got involved in management recruitment: any idiot can sack someone. The difficult bit is getting in someone "better", especially if you keep being the same idiot each year or less.
"Someone challenge me on that?" © Charles Harry Finlayson Methven
He could have a fully-fit £30m squad and still potentially (probably IMO) not have the ability as a manager to get us promotion.
You're right he was SMT's choice but it's not unreasonable to assume they had to work within TS's budget and have his sign off. TS would have had to (and for a while did) live with the choice if the deal fell through.
So we shouldn't assume DH was ever their #1 choice or defines their budget for a new appointment.
We'll find out soon.
Given that, you haven't persuaded me at all that the timing of this isn't symptomatic of panic and breathtaking incompetence. Or possibly, as @sm above says, symptomatic of hedge-fund management mentality.
I think it’s primarily Charlie covering his arse and distancing his little gang from the worst start since 1990.
Sacking Holden by the owners implicitly says he wasn't good enough for their aspirations and they logically should be trying to get a better option in. Failure to do that will be a statement that they are expecting to get results from as little spending as possible, and the fans will be unlikely to see that as a promise of a bright future.2 -
Don’t agree here. The overall squad is currently weaker than it was last year in my opinion.DubaiCAFC said:
I would say it turns up the pressure, Holden was his man, recruitment hasn't been great, and if this appointment of a new manager isn't great, it heats up more pressure!Cardinal Sin said:
Covering his arse and putting all the blame at Holden's door. It's not a trick you can get away with too often. Can't make my mind up if the replacement will be the least-cost option or another Methven acolyte. Either way, they will have their work cut-out making us competitive with the state of this squad.DubaiCAFC said:
Not really, it turns the heat up on them, I would say!Airman Brown said:PragueAddick said:
With great respect, Mr Peanuts, your first para. reads as if Methven and co. appointed him only in the close season and had no idea how -apparently - "tactically naive" he is. But that's not the case. Methven was in and around the club from December- when Holden and the others came in- through to February, and had a half-season to monitor results and take soundings. If he's really as bad as you paint him, you'd think Charlie- "I know football" - Methven would have spotted it, and have had a replacement lined up to take over as soon as the deal was done; so that at least said replacement could get some of his own choices in, and certainly influence the pre-season.PeanutsMolloy said:
I don't dispute he improved our performances after Garner-ball (it was a relatively obvious idea to "get the ball forward quicker", as DH described it) but, as I've said earlier, tactical naivety alone in the last 3 games (including first-rate impression of a stuffed dummy on the touchline at crucial moments and leaving clearly-knackered youngsters on for too long) and shockingly poor set-piece coaching in both boxes, is enough for me to be in no doubt it's right to replace DH now.PragueAddick said:
- Dean Holden was apparently recommended to TS by the current SMT. Effectively their choice, 8 months ago.
- He inherited a crap squad that was in chaos. Remember the Stockport cup humiliation?
- Admittedly the delay to the takeover completion didn't help to make a smooth well-planned pre-season.
- He has ONE fit senior striker. ONE!
- As of a week ago he had 10 -TEN - injured players.
- He has had to play two debutant 18 year olds in every game, for the simple reason that there were no better choices.
- He was told that he cannot bring more players in if he keeps picking the trash (Kirk, DJ , McG). Yes, I have a source for that. None of the trash was on the bench on Saturday.
So yeah, the "solution" to a poor start is to sack a manager you gave a three year contract to in March with a week to go of the window and irons supposedly in the fire, especially a striker.
As I've been saying for nigh on 30 years since I got involved in management recruitment: any idiot can sack someone. The difficult bit is getting in someone "better", especially if you keep being the same idiot each year or less.
"Someone challenge me on that?" © Charles Harry Finlayson Methven
He could have a fully-fit £30m squad and still potentially (probably IMO) not have the ability as a manager to get us promotion.
You're right he was SMT's choice but it's not unreasonable to assume they had to work within TS's budget and have his sign off. TS would have had to (and for a while did) live with the choice if the deal fell through.
So we shouldn't assume DH was ever their #1 choice or defines their budget for a new appointment.
We'll find out soon.
Given that, you haven't persuaded me at all that the timing of this isn't symptomatic of panic and breathtaking incompetence. Or possibly, as @sm above says, symptomatic of hedge-fund management mentality.
I think it’s primarily Charlie covering his arse and distancing his little gang from the worst start since 1990.
Not sure I get the arse covering.. everyone can see the short fall, manager that had run out of ideas, and recruitment that hasn't been the best so far! But the recruitment is still better than last summer!
2 -
Personally, I’d like to see Chris Powell given another crack of the whip. After the Duchatelet debacle, he’s got unfinished business. Anyone else is just going to divide the support. The club is in a right old mess. We’ve had a shocking start to the season. Holden was out of his depth and that was proved by his tactics and team selection on Saturday. Now is the time to get behind Jason Pearce and I’m hoping Chris Powell in the near future. Only five games in but the season is still salvable.3
-
Cheers Dad, I actually did on this adviceoohaahmortimer said:Get some sleep Braziliance
0 -
Now Lee Johnson has been ruled out, why were we so against him, was this some sort of snowball effect going on?
Bloke seems pretty friendly, managed some decent sized clubs, decent win rate at most of the clubs managed and got a promotion on his CV. So what was the big deal, saw a lot of people tweeting they'll boycott or it will be the final straw etc, where does that kind of anger/hatred come from?0 - Sponsored links:
-
Charlie and his SMT are milking the club for personal gain.
Wages, expenses, fees, consultancy - fuck knows what else.
THEY HAVE NOT PUT ANY MONEY INTO THE CLUB - they are a COST. Really important we remember that. I’d be surprised in CM was on anything less than 500k per year and that is why he is here. Thats also the game in town for SMT as they are all talentless chancers who are screwing the club.
If they were ANY good, why would they be with us?
As the Airman said, they will look busy in the eyes of the yanks. It will go on for as long as the yanks will cover running costs and when the money stops, then they will all be gone. Think of Farnell, Southall, Paul Elliott and all the other knobs that leech money out of football clubs.
This lot are no different - managerial chaos HELPS them screw more cash out of the club.
This lot are worse than all the previous owners combined, including that vile scumbag Roly.11 -
Pretty friendly... Karl Robinson called the police after Johnson headbutted Oxford's keeper in the tunnel at half-time.Braziliance said:Now Lee Johnson has been ruled out, why were we so against him, was this some sort of snowball effect going on?
Bloke seems pretty friendly, managed some decent sized clubs, decent win rate at most of the clubs managed and got a promotion on his CV. So what was the big deal, saw a lot of people tweeting they'll boycott or it will be the final straw etc, where does that kind of anger/hatred come from?
3 -
You don't have the career that Andy Scott has had by being a "talentless chancer"BigDiddy said:Charlie and his SMT are milking the club for personal gain.
Wages, expenses, fees, consultancy - fuck knows what else.
THEY HAVE NOT PUT ANY MONEY INTO THE CLUB - they are a COST. Really important we remember that. I’d be surprised in CM was on anything less than 500k per year and that is why he is here. Thats also the game in town for SMT as they are all talentless chancers who are screwing the club.
If they were ANY good, why would they be with us?
As the Airman said, they will look busy in the eyes of the yanks. It will go on for as long as the yanks will cover running costs and when the money stops, then they will all be gone. Think of Farnell, Southall, Paul Elliott and all the other knobs that leech money out of football clubs.
This lot are no different - managerial chaos HELPS them screw more cash out of the club.
This lot are worse than all the previous owners combined, including that vile scumbag Roly.4 -
Give it a rest.BigDiddy said:Charlie and his SMT are milking the club for personal gain.
Wages, expenses, fees, consultancy - fuck knows what else.
THEY HAVE NOT PUT ANY MONEY INTO THE CLUB - they are a COST. Really important we remember that. I’d be surprised in CM was on anything less than 500k per year and that is why he is here. Thats also the game in town for SMT as they are all talentless chancers who are screwing the club.
If they were ANY good, why would they be with us?
As the Airman said, they will look busy in the eyes of the yanks. It will go on for as long as the yanks will cover running costs and when the money stops, then they will all be gone. Think of Farnell, Southall, Paul Elliott and all the other knobs that leech money out of football clubs.
This lot are no different - managerial chaos HELPS them screw more cash out of the club.
This lot are worse than all the previous owners combined, including that vile scumbag Roly.11 -
Return of The Bo...🤔🤷♂️0
-
I think a lot will depend on who they bring in for me. DH for whatever reason was manager for our worst start in decades and although our current squad is light no way should we lose those games. It’s a results business and I don’t think he can moan after the debacle of Saturday. Hopefully Pearce will only be in charge for this weekend whatever the result as I would hate for him to be made manager as it’s too soon for him. If it’s just another journeyman 2nd rate manager then it will be obvious to all what is going on . If it’s a manager with proven history or one on the up then maybe the ownership didn’t want another 5 games down the pan. I still keep asking myself why they bought the club for 10-12 M if they are not going to follow through with investment. These people are not stupid enough to fall for the supposed pitch CM is rumoured to have spun them surely ? If so when you look at the clubs with American owners like Burnley etc trust us to have the only stupid ones5
-
-
Past careerProperCharlton said:
You don't have the career that Andy Scott has had by being a "talentless chancer"BigDiddy said:Charlie and his SMT are milking the club for personal gain.
Wages, expenses, fees, consultancy - fuck knows what else.
THEY HAVE NOT PUT ANY MONEY INTO THE CLUB - they are a COST. Really important we remember that. I’d be surprised in CM was on anything less than 500k per year and that is why he is here. Thats also the game in town for SMT as they are all talentless chancers who are screwing the club.
If they were ANY good, why would they be with us?
As the Airman said, they will look busy in the eyes of the yanks. It will go on for as long as the yanks will cover running costs and when the money stops, then they will all be gone. Think of Farnell, Southall, Paul Elliott and all the other knobs that leech money out of football clubs.
This lot are no different - managerial chaos HELPS them screw more cash out of the club.
This lot are worse than all the previous owners combined, including that vile scumbag Roly.4 -
Dean Holden was known to Methven and Scott from last season. He was given a 3 year contract by Methven and pals only a few months ago. That was picked up by Holden, who foolishly believed that he would be backed in the transfer market. This did not happen. Cue disatisfaction, loss of hope from Holden and him losing the plot tactically, and having his weaknesses as a coach / manager exposed.The utter rubbish plan of Methven and the tall tale he told the investors is behind the current fiasco. That and the staggering incompetence and delusion of the plan. Cost cutting, playing and selling youth to reduce losses. The £1m to 2m losses plan, without any significant investment, in league one will take Charlton to League 2 and the National League. the bad things we were told about Methven and his pals is so far proving to be true.Ipswich had sustained and significant backing to get to the Championship. This is not what Charlton are getting currently. Why the hell did Methven bother - apart from the consultancy fees. What is the point ? The only way the plan works to sell the club for more in the championship. On Methven's cost cutting plan, even in a weakened league is just never going to happen.What manager or team is going to manage with the level of cost cutting by Methven ? Maybe at very best lower midtable to avoiding relegation. That is before any decent youngster is sold off. This is what Methven has brought Charlton to. Duchatelet will be happy with the diminishing of the football club. Closer to the day when there won't be a club at the Valley.6
-
Is that something the new owners are currently proud of then?DubaiCAFC said:
I would say it turns up the pressure, Holden was his man, recruitment hasn't been great, and if this appointment of a new manager isn't great, it heats up more pressure!Cardinal Sin said:
Covering his arse and putting all the blame at Holden's door. It's not a trick you can get away with too often. Can't make my mind up if the replacement will be the least-cost option or another Methven acolyte. Either way, they will have their work cut-out making us competitive with the state of this squad.DubaiCAFC said:
Not really, it turns the heat up on them, I would say!Airman Brown said:PragueAddick said:
With great respect, Mr Peanuts, your first para. reads as if Methven and co. appointed him only in the close season and had no idea how -apparently - "tactically naive" he is. But that's not the case. Methven was in and around the club from December- when Holden and the others came in- through to February, and had a half-season to monitor results and take soundings. If he's really as bad as you paint him, you'd think Charlie- "I know football" - Methven would have spotted it, and have had a replacement lined up to take over as soon as the deal was done; so that at least said replacement could get some of his own choices in, and certainly influence the pre-season.PeanutsMolloy said:
I don't dispute he improved our performances after Garner-ball (it was a relatively obvious idea to "get the ball forward quicker", as DH described it) but, as I've said earlier, tactical naivety alone in the last 3 games (including first-rate impression of a stuffed dummy on the touchline at crucial moments and leaving clearly-knackered youngsters on for too long) and shockingly poor set-piece coaching in both boxes, is enough for me to be in no doubt it's right to replace DH now.PragueAddick said:
- Dean Holden was apparently recommended to TS by the current SMT. Effectively their choice, 8 months ago.
- He inherited a crap squad that was in chaos. Remember the Stockport cup humiliation?
- Admittedly the delay to the takeover completion didn't help to make a smooth well-planned pre-season.
- He has ONE fit senior striker. ONE!
- As of a week ago he had 10 -TEN - injured players.
- He has had to play two debutant 18 year olds in every game, for the simple reason that there were no better choices.
- He was told that he cannot bring more players in if he keeps picking the trash (Kirk, DJ , McG). Yes, I have a source for that. None of the trash was on the bench on Saturday.
So yeah, the "solution" to a poor start is to sack a manager you gave a three year contract to in March with a week to go of the window and irons supposedly in the fire, especially a striker.
As I've been saying for nigh on 30 years since I got involved in management recruitment: any idiot can sack someone. The difficult bit is getting in someone "better", especially if you keep being the same idiot each year or less.
"Someone challenge me on that?" © Charles Harry Finlayson Methven
He could have a fully-fit £30m squad and still potentially (probably IMO) not have the ability as a manager to get us promotion.
You're right he was SMT's choice but it's not unreasonable to assume they had to work within TS's budget and have his sign off. TS would have had to (and for a while did) live with the choice if the deal fell through.
So we shouldn't assume DH was ever their #1 choice or defines their budget for a new appointment.
We'll find out soon.
Given that, you haven't persuaded me at all that the timing of this isn't symptomatic of panic and breathtaking incompetence. Or possibly, as @sm above says, symptomatic of hedge-fund management mentality.
I think it’s primarily Charlie covering his arse and distancing his little gang from the worst start since 1990.
Not sure I get the arse covering.. everyone can see the short fall, manager that had run out of ideas, and recruitment that hasn't been the best so far! But the recruitment is still better than last summer!It doesn’t matter if it’s better than the mess of last season or the season before that. This season is where they are in control, and they did not do enough to help Holden (I’m not defending his poor choices in recent games, that’s a different matter) and are not doing enough to help us get out of this league.8
