Peter Varney leaves Ebbsfleet....
Comments
-
ExactlyRiviera said:Everyone seems to hate Richard Murray but Varney a hero? My enduring memory of PV at CAFC is him doing an interview in the West Stand and proudly announcing he'd just given Les Reed a 3 or was it a five year contract!
Wait are you saying Les Reed is not our greatest manager since Mr Jimmy Seed.
Trust me in years to come the East Stand will be known as the Sir Les Reed stand.
I only hope(and pray) when this takeover is completed, the first thing the new owners do is sack Robbo and hire Les Reed2 -
Les Reed is extremely knowledgeable, has done a great job at Saints and is a really, really nice guy. He was offered the job and who can blame him for not having a go? However, he's not cut out to be a manager, even he'd admit that. Ultimately another bad decision by RM.28
-
And then completed the hat trick by employing Pardew.LargeAddick said:Les Reed is extremely knowledgeable, has done a great job at Saints and is a really, really nice guy. He was offered the job and who can blame him for not having a go? However, he's not cut out to be a manager, even he'd admit that. Ultimately another bad decision by RM.
0 -
was Les Reed actually given the job full time, I thought it was just temporary0
-
Southampton are struggling and after years of playing way above their weight, fans want Les Reed gone. Despite his managerial results here, what he has done at Saints is beyond doubt. What if we make Les Reed CAFC's "Sporting Director" under new ownership? Varney on the board and Les Reed heading up personnel decisions sounds a lot better than what we have now. Yes? No?3
-
It was defiantly announced on Sky by PV that he was a permanent replacement for Dowie and at least a 3 year contract. I never said it was PV' s decision but it is my only memory of him ever doing or saying anything on TV whilst at CAFC.creepyaddick said:was Les Reed actually given the job full time, I thought it was just temporary
5 -
Not quite, he infamously told Sky he had not seen Simon Jordan's comments on Ian Dowie because, "I don't watch children's television."Riviera said:
It was defiantly announced on Sky by PV that he was a permanent replacement for Dowie and at least a 3 year contract. I never said it was PV' s decision but it is my only memory of him ever doing or saying anything on TV whilst at CAFC.creepyaddick said:was Les Reed actually given the job full time, I thought it was just temporary
7 -
He said something about me once on TV, but I don’t want to go into it.Ormiston Addick said:
Not quite, he infamously told Sky he had not seen Simon Jordan's comments on Ian Dowie because, "I don't watch children's television."Riviera said:
It was defiantly announced on Sky by PV that he was a permanent replacement for Dowie and at least a 3 year contract. I never said it was PV' s decision but it is my only memory of him ever doing or saying anything on TV whilst at CAFC.creepyaddick said:was Les Reed actually given the job full time, I thought it was just temporary
4 -
Yes, and that was a big problem because it meant we lost him as a coach when his managerial period was over.creepyaddick said:was Les Reed actually given the job full time, I thought it was just temporary
2 - Sponsored links:
-
The squad was total shite he had to work with as well.
Anyone would have been a dead man walking.8 -
Which comes back round full circle to the decision by RM to let Curbs go instead of keeping him on one more year and spending the money Dowie was given.Charltonparklane said:The squad was total shite he had to work with as well.
Anyone would have been a dead man walking.7 -
Curbs never had that amount of money , why did dowie get so much? Didn’t Murray sign Hasslebaink complete waste of money spent on wages for that lazy fella7
-
I do remember that cringey press conference when he announced, whilst rubbing butt cheeks with jfh that this was the "third or fourth time I've tried to sign him but the first time I've been able to afford him", which we all knew to mean 'he's a bit shit now' and to be fair, he wasn't wrong...tonka said:Curbs never had that amount of money , why did dowie get so much? Didn’t Murray sign Hasslebaink complete waste of money spent on wages for that lazy fella
4 -
All Murray did that season is bang on about how important it was to stay in the Premier League because of the significant increase in TV revenue the following year. If it was that important why not keep Curbs on for another year - as he offered to - on the agreement he'd help find and / or mentor a successor and give him some money to spend for the first time.tonka said:Curbs never had that amount of money , why did dowie get so much? Didn’t Murray sign Hasslebaink complete waste of money spent on wages for that lazy fella
19 -
Dowie was given two years of transfer budget all at once.5
-
It was madness but you have to wonder where the rest of the plc board was while all this was going on. Murray only ever had a minority stake.13
-
It's depressing to reflect upon.Swisdom said:Dowie was given two years of transfer budget all at once.
Awful awful decision making throughout the club all very suddenly post the curbs era.
We really embarrassed ourselves and let the club down.
All after doing so much to get the club established in the premier league to begin with.
Really hate Murrary for that.
If the money just went to curbs while he was still in charge, we may have had a squad at least ok enough before going in to the 06/07 season....to then build upon that.
So unnecessarily shot ourselves in the foot with a big shotgun.
The dowie appointment was unbelievable and completely moronic.
Murrary never really truly cared I don't think.3 -
The only other time we had a real windfall was 2004 - Chelsea's Parker money - and we didn't do so well then. Jeffers, Murphy and Rommedahl come to mind, and there must be others. The one we didn't get - Kezman - was a bad miss.
I know - shoulda, woulda, coulda. Perhaps we've never consistently had enough money to learn how to spend it always wisely. And not just Dowie and Pardew either - who could forget record signing Neil Redfearn?
1 - Sponsored links:
-
Not sure why but thought I'd check out t'other forum and was disgusted by the whole lot on there... It's changed a lot since I was a member, they're all very aggressive.cafc_harry said:Angeldust who is known to be reliable has said that he was asked to step down as they found out about his involvement with us and the takeover, but wasn’t able to verify.
As has been said above I (kind of) hope it’s a case like his rather than health related, hope all is ok.
Anyway Angeldust's post said yesterday at 9:25am:
He also said this on Jan 3, 2018 at 10:23am. which I'll copy to the relevant thread...Angeldust said:For what it is worth, I was told something similar but have been unable to verify.
They also told me that his employer had been tipped off by either someone at Charlton or someone involved in one of the other bids for the club.
I just assumed he left for personal reasons?
But as you rightly said, the Ebsfleet statement does not seem fitting for the circumstance.Angeldust said:
And so this rumbles on. The situation as I understand it. Negotiations continue but the pace seems to have stalled somewhat for the Australian contingent. They have been chipping away for some time but question marks still remain regarding their ability to fully fund the acquisition. The passing of time has also given them the opportunity to mull over the kind of situation they would inherit, and I guess if funds are tight this may have created an ebb in interest somewhat. I am also lead to believe that they are becoming increasingly frustrated with the owner’s ambition to start a bidding war. So unless something dramatic changes I think the chances of Australian ownership are less likely.
There are apparently two other interested parties. The owner has had dealings with one of them before and they are trusted by him and his people. Whether that would be good for the club is largely unknown and I have no information if an offer has been made.
The final interest is a bit of a mystery. Capital is no issue by all accounts. However, I am told they are not prepared to pay a penny more than the price they see fit. At the start of negotiations that chasm was vast. Recent reports in the media that the owner would be willing to decrease his demands may be a signal that this group are in the box seat?0 -
that’s what happens when the admin is an out and out bully with the debate skills of Donald trumpDazzler21 said:
Not sure why but thought I'd check out t'other forum and was disgusted by the whole lot on there... It's changed a lot since I was a member, they're all very aggressive.cafc_harry said:Angeldust who is known to be reliable has said that he was asked to step down as they found out about his involvement with us and the takeover, but wasn’t able to verify.
As has been said above I (kind of) hope it’s a case like his rather than health related, hope all is ok.
Anyway Angeldust's post said yesterday at 9:25am:
He also said this on Jan 3, 2018 at 10:23am. which I'll copy to the relevant thread...Angeldust said:For what it is worth, I was told something similar but have been unable to verify.
They also told me that his employer had been tipped off by either someone at Charlton or someone involved in one of the other bids for the club.
I just assumed he left for personal reasons?
But as you rightly said, the Ebsfleet statement does not seem fitting for the circumstance.Angeldust said:
And so this rumbles on. The situation as I understand it. Negotiations continue but the pace seems to have stalled somewhat for the Australian contingent. They have been chipping away for some time but question marks still remain regarding their ability to fully fund the acquisition. The passing of time has also given them the opportunity to mull over the kind of situation they would inherit, and I guess if funds are tight this may have created an ebb in interest somewhat. I am also lead to believe that they are becoming increasingly frustrated with the owner’s ambition to start a bidding war. So unless something dramatic changes I think the chances of Australian ownership are less likely.
There are apparently two other interested parties. The owner has had dealings with one of them before and they are trusted by him and his people. Whether that would be good for the club is largely unknown and I have no information if an offer has been made.
The final interest is a bit of a mystery. Capital is no issue by all accounts. However, I am told they are not prepared to pay a penny more than the price they see fit. At the start of negotiations that chasm was vast. Recent reports in the media that the owner would be willing to decrease his demands may be a signal that this group are in the box seat?11 -
At the time though everyone was pretty pleased with those three signings from the Parker money and Murphy was a good player for us.GlassHalfFull said:
The only other time we had a real windfall was 2004 - Chelsea's Parker money - and we didn't do so well then. Jeffers, Murphy and Rommedahl come to mind, and there must be others. The one we didn't get - Kezman - was a bad miss.
I know - shoulda, woulda, coulda. Perhaps we've never consistently had enough money to learn how to spend it always wisely. And not just Dowie and Pardew either - who could forget record signing Neil Redfearn?
I doubt anyone ever thought signing Djimi Traore was a good idea.2 -
-
Pre season friendly 4-1 win he did.golfaddick said:9 -
Did Murphy and Parker not play together? My mind is shot....0
-
Had that in my head as 4 nilguinnessaddick said:
Pre season friendly 4-1 win he did.golfaddick said:1 -
They did not.Fumbluff said:Did Murphy and Parker not play together? My mind is shot....
Murphy was signed the summer after, with the Parker money.3 -
It was Murphy and Smertin in midfield I believe3
-
Me too!Charltonparklane said:
Had that in my head as 4 nilguinnessaddick said:
Pre season friendly 4-1 win he did.golfaddick said:0
