Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Martin Sandgaard taking on role in player recruitment, replacing Ged Roddy
Comments
-
Roddy has left the club full time is confirmed.9
-
I was in the 1%, KatrienChunes said:
Does it really matter? On paper he was a good appointment that 99% were happy with. It didn't work out. I don't see what value The Hindsight Inquest has here.ross1 said:
But did TS know enough about him, to appoint him, or did he ask someone's opinion, and if so, WHOLonelyNorthernAddick said:
Maybe Adkins was looking for a new job and saw the opportunity here when Bowyer was on his way out. Like a normal job application.ross1 said:
How did TS hear about Adkins and what made him think he was the answer without someone in his ear advising him ................. and who was that?Cafc43v3r said:
Adkins was not given the job on the nod and the wink from Roddy.Major said:PWR - so apologies if this has already been said:
My first thought (Note I didn't put 'I'm hearing'
) was that TS is probably pissed with Roddy because Adkins was a crap call and has cost him a packet. So he's sidelined him.
He has bought someone in he can trust. His Son will be his eyes and ears but he won't be calling the shots. How can he? Gallen will be the main man. Maybe JJ will have a say....?0 -
Thomas does contradict himself sometimes doesn't he. Although if that's the only criticism I am sure we can all live with that....clive said:1 -
Wow - so Roddy has been seen to internally be incapable of what he was hired for? @DOUCHER has mentioned this for a few weeks now. Glad following a review, that changes have been put in place. Shame we just bloody lost that first game under JJ but onwards and upwards with the wider picture.0
-
Clear that despite the vigorous defence of Roddy by some, based on his CV, his role has been identified as a problem and consequently he has been removed from it.
He’s been given a soft landing by Sandgaard but it’s pretty obvious there’s no real role for him going forward beyond advising on category one.20 -
Cawleys alway on the blower asking me whats happeningmendonca said:Wow - so Roddy has been seen to internally be incapable of what he was hired for? @DOUCHER has mentioned this for a few weeks now. Glad following a review, that changes have been put in place. Shame we just bloody lost that first game under JJ but onwards and upwards with the wider picture.10 -
FFS now what are we going to do for conspiracy theories.5
-
Sponsored links:
-
-
I need an invite to these garden parties with Lennie mate!DOUCHER said:
Cawleys alway on the blower asking me whats happeningmendonca said:Wow - so Roddy has been seen to internally be incapable of what he was hired for? @DOUCHER has mentioned this for a few weeks now. Glad following a review, that changes have been put in place. Shame we just bloody lost that first game under JJ but onwards and upwards with the wider picture.0 -
Anyway, good to see Roddy removed from his throne of skulls at sparrows lane, bad egg.
Staying on in a consultancy role in regards to the academy is clearly saving face, and that role he's set to take up with FIFA is just a coincidence. Added nothing, Sandgaards being very generous with what he says because he doesn't English well.
Man, I'm gonna miss this... Sob, cry, sob.1 -
Phew!ricky_otto said:0 -
simple - you have to play for our vets team - how old are you and what position do you play? If you're over 35 and don't play the Jan Molby role in midfield, you're in !!!mendonca said:
I need an invite to these garden parties with Lennie mate!DOUCHER said:
Cawleys alway on the blower asking me whats happeningmendonca said:Wow - so Roddy has been seen to internally be incapable of what he was hired for? @DOUCHER has mentioned this for a few weeks now. Glad following a review, that changes have been put in place. Shame we just bloody lost that first game under JJ but onwards and upwards with the wider picture.0 -
-
How many were vigorously defending him, saying he was not a problem for the summer recruitment issues amongst other stuff. Hardly anyone.Airman Brown said:Clear that despite the vigorous defence of Roddy by some, based on his CV, his role has been identified as a problem and consequently he has been removed from it.
He’s been given a soft landing by Sandgaard but it’s pretty obvious there’s no real role for him going forward beyond advising on category one.
Most just wanted to find out more if there was any truth behind him being a problem, rather than jump to conclusions.
Usually there is a reason someone is getting such bad press and I had a feeling that he was a problem. But he's not the same as the likes of Southall no way near. He's just someone who wasn't doing a good job most likely and possibly other things.
So you cant expect people to just see through everyone straight away and identify them as a problem.2 -
It still doesn't answer the questions of who's idea was Roddy's job and who's ideas was he implementing/try to implement.Airman Brown said:Clear that despite the vigorous defence of Roddy by some, based on his CV, his role has been identified as a problem and consequently he has been removed from it.
He’s been given a soft landing by Sandgaard but it’s pretty obvious there’s no real role for him going forward beyond advising on category one.
If the answer is Roddy to both, great draw a line under it and move on.2 -
Cafc43v3r said:
It still doesn't answer the questions of who's idea was Roddy's job and who's ideas was he implementing/try to implement.Airman Brown said:Clear that despite the vigorous defence of Roddy by some, based on his CV, his role has been identified as a problem and consequently he has been removed from it.
He’s been given a soft landing by Sandgaard but it’s pretty obvious there’s no real role for him going forward beyond advising on category one.
If the answer is Roddy to both, great draw a line under it and move on.
Which is, and has, always been the question.
Replacing someone with a bad CV with another to carry out those ideas if they're still around, won't really fix anything.0 -
when TS was looking for a club to purchase wasn't it Roddy who was advising him?Cafc43v3r said:
It still doesn't answer the questions of who's idea was Roddy's job and who's ideas was he implementing/try to implement.Airman Brown said:Clear that despite the vigorous defence of Roddy by some, based on his CV, his role has been identified as a problem and consequently he has been removed from it.
He’s been given a soft landing by Sandgaard but it’s pretty obvious there’s no real role for him going forward beyond advising on category one.
If the answer is Roddy to both, great draw a line under it and move on.2 -
Sponsored links:
-
Yes. Source, Roddy himself, on the CAST Zoom call in August.lancashire lad said:
when TS was looking for a club to purchase wasn't it Roddy who was advising him?Cafc43v3r said:
It still doesn't answer the questions of who's idea was Roddy's job and who's ideas was he implementing/try to implement.Airman Brown said:Clear that despite the vigorous defence of Roddy by some, based on his CV, his role has been identified as a problem and consequently he has been removed from it.
He’s been given a soft landing by Sandgaard but it’s pretty obvious there’s no real role for him going forward beyond advising on category one.
If the answer is Roddy to both, great draw a line under it and move on.1 -
Didn't Roddy actually say it was to fill in the "fit and proper" paper work. It was Mumford who was "looking" with Thomas wasn't it?PragueAddick said:
Yes. Source, Roddy himself, on the CAST Zoom call in August.lancashire lad said:
when TS was looking for a club to purchase wasn't it Roddy who was advising him?Cafc43v3r said:
It still doesn't answer the questions of who's idea was Roddy's job and who's ideas was he implementing/try to implement.Airman Brown said:Clear that despite the vigorous defence of Roddy by some, based on his CV, his role has been identified as a problem and consequently he has been removed from it.
He’s been given a soft landing by Sandgaard but it’s pretty obvious there’s no real role for him going forward beyond advising on category one.
If the answer is Roddy to both, great draw a line under it and move on.
Either way it still doesn't answer my question it just changes when that decision was made.
Edit 1:Q: Ged - who introduced you to Thomas Sandgaard and how did your recruitment to CAFC come about? Was there a recruitment process ?
GR: I was introduced to Thomas before he owned the club. He asked me to help him with some of the work around the Fit and Proper Persons Test. I was working for FIFA at the time, and I thought that was it. He later called me to come and meet him and asked me to work for him at the club. I was Thomas' appointment. He did his research on me as an individual.
https://www.castrust.org/2021/09/roddy-and-gallen-meet-the-fans-the-full-story/
Edit 2:
This seems like the right juncture to understand more about how Mumford and Sandgaard first crossed paths. Sandgaard ideally wanted to speak to someone who knew football but wasn’t entirely caught up in the small world of football. Thomas’ son asked for a recommendation from someone senior he knew at West Ham. They suggested Wayne. So out of the blue Thomas phoned up. This was back in June. “We had a long conversation. He told me what his plans and thoughts were. We immediately got on, on the phone. He came over and we had another long chat – we talked about football, I talked about myself, he talked about himself. We agreed – a bit of old school attitude – that we would see how it goes – see if we could get a club – let’s not make any plans – let’s see what works.” A gentleman’s agreement of sorts.
0 -
It's always sad when an absolute club legend moves on...
Ged who?0 -
Guessing Jacob will be released soon as well.soapy_jones said:It's always sad when an absolute club legend moves on...
Ged who?But not before he unveils Ged’s statue in the West Stand car park.0 -
I should be more specific but I wasn’t keen on naming an individual. Since you ask, @grapevine49 was the person who seemed to think Roddy’s CV put him beyond question by the likes us. Just as he told us earlier that we couldn’t expect to understand complex financial arrangements like ESI/ADBD and therefore question Southall and Nimer.UEAAddick said:
How many were vigorously defending him, saying he was not a problem for the summer recruitment issues amongst other stuff. Hardly anyone.Airman Brown said:Clear that despite the vigorous defence of Roddy by some, based on his CV, his role has been identified as a problem and consequently he has been removed from it.
He’s been given a soft landing by Sandgaard but it’s pretty obvious there’s no real role for him going forward beyond advising on category one.
Most just wanted to find out more if there was any truth behind him being a problem, rather than jump to conclusions.
Usually there is a reason someone is getting such bad press and I had a feeling that he was a problem. But he's not the same as the likes of Southall no way near. He's just someone who wasn't doing a good job most likely and possibly other things.
So you cant expect people to just see through everyone straight away and identify them as a problem.I do have a lot of respect for @grapevine49 so not looking for an argument, but he is no more the oracle than any of the rest of us. I think it is always worth looking under the bonnet.I completely agree that it was right to ask the questions about Roddy, based on some of the noises that came out of the training ground, but we didn’t know if he was to blame for the failings. I suggest we have a better idea now as no matter how it’s dressed up he has been removed.The other way of looking at it is that I’m sure TS wanted his own man at the training ground to report back. That was Roddy, it’s now Martin S, so GR is surplus to requirements. We will find out whether his category one input has been valuable in due course.8 -
I'm pleased that Sandgaard has now had the kind of clear-out that some of us advised a few months ago.
The one bit I'm interested in now is just how good Gallen's recruitment record is. I know there have been some real successes (Bielik, Cullen, Gallagher etc), but he has been responsible for some real donkeys too (Bogle, the various Smiths etc ... you can pick your own).
Has anyone done a full critique so that we can judge whether Sandgaard has gone far enough?1 -
That’s maybe a bit unfair because we’ve often been scrambling around in the bargain bin and had to take what we could get.Dave Rudd said:I'm pleased that Sandgaard has now had the kind of clear-out that some of us advised a few months ago.
The one bit I'm interested in now is just how good Gallen's recruitment record is. I know there have been some real successes (Bielik, Cullen, Gallagher etc), but he has been responsible for some real donkeys too (Bogle, the various Smiths etc ... you can pick your own).
Has anyone done a full critique so that we can judge whether Sandgaard has gone far enough?11 -
No recruitment is going to be perfect, I’d take Gallen record to date, and even those supposed duds from the summer look alright3
-
And no one gets it right 100% of the time.Airman Brown said:
That’s maybe a bit unfair because we’ve often been scrambling around in the bargain bin and had to take what we could get.Dave Rudd said:I'm pleased that Sandgaard has now had the kind of clear-out that some of us advised a few months ago.
The one bit I'm interested in now is just how good Gallen's recruitment record is. I know there have been some real successes (Bielik, Cullen, Gallagher etc), but he has been responsible for some real donkeys too (Bogle, the various Smiths etc ... you can pick your own).
Has anyone done a full critique so that we can judge whether Sandgaard has gone far enough?4
