Blake and co

kirsikka

kirsikka

UTC Legend
There's a lot to digest from today's news, most of it focused around Parker.

The fact is, Parker's behaviour over the past few weeks has been really poor and his comments on Saturday were reprehensible for a supposed professional. He should be deflecting attention from his players and trying to create a group that want to fight for each other. He did the absolute opposite.

As @SlowDownDerek has pointed out, people that previously backed him turned on him after that and I suspect, barring a miraculous run of results, his days were numbered whatever.

Looking beyond Parker though, @Neil Dawson gets a lot of stick for his incessant criticism of those in charge at the club but there surely is a question to answer here for them.

To lose one manger just before the transfer window closes may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose two looks like carelessness.

That isn't normal, and as much as Parker may have forced the issue it should never have come to that. Either they let him go on too long and should have removed him a few weeks ago when he started going off on one in the press, or they should have made it abundantly clear that wasn't acceptable.

Instead they're left looking foolish and with most of the media laying into them for sacking a manager for defeats against Man City, Arsenal and Liverpool, when that isn't the reason at all. They're also left bringing in a manager who will have just missed out on preseason preparation and the transfer window.

I don't have enough information to comment on the entirety of their tenure but this is not a good look for them. Especially given it came about with a man they so publicly chased for so long.

JT was a failed appointment. JW was a failed appointment. SP was a success in getting us up but then a clusterfuck when we got here. I'd imagine they're under some pressure to get the next one right.

In the positive column, they've shown they aren't afraid to stand up to a manager. So whoever comes in will know that when they say 'this is the budget, and this is what we are trying to achieve', they mean it. Which I hope bodes well for the long term health of the club.

Questions, questions, questions...
 
A lot is made of a managerial change relative to the transfer window but I don't understand that thought process. A manager whether in work or not is unlikely to have a shopping list of players suitable for every club and budget. If they had I doubt they would be given full control of the chequebook to bring them in.

In Parker's case in your own words, it's been a problem "over the past few weeks" but also that the board "should have removed him a few weeks ago". The second a manager gives a ropey interview they should be sacked on the spot? Anything else is poor management?

Missing pre-season is a real shame for the new manager but for the board to act to meet that deadline would require some minority report technology. It would also, rightly, really rile up the support base sacking a manager for no reason. Instead of the four games it would be "rewarded promotion with the sack" headlines.
 
No, not as soon as he gives a ropey interview. I struggle to believe that publicly was the first time he raised it though. So it would already have been discussed internally.

If the club have a clear and defined strategy on what we're doing and he's refusing to accept that then sit him down and say 'This is how it is. Do you want to work within those parameters? If not better we both move on'.

That could have been repeated after his previous complaints.

Instead he complained, moaned and then, after Saturday, laid into the players by saying they weren't good enough. It shouldn't reach that stage. I don't recall another instance of a manager saying that about his players.
 
kirsikka said:
There's a lot to digest from today's news, most of it focused around Parker.

The fact is, Parker's behaviour over the past few weeks has been really poor and his comments on Saturday were reprehensible for a supposed professional. He should be deflecting attention from his players and trying to create a group that want to fight for each other. He did the absolute opposite.

As @SlowDownDerek has pointed out, people that previously backed him turned on him after that and I suspect, barring a miraculous run of results, his days were numbered whatever.

Looking beyond Parker though, @Neil Dawson gets a lot of stick for his incessant criticism of those in charge at the club but there surely is a question to answer here for them.

To lose one manger just before the transfer window closes may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose two looks like carelessness.

That isn't normal, and as much as Parker may have forced the issue it should never have come to that. Either they let him go on too long and should have removed him a few weeks ago when he started going off on one in the press, or they should have made it abundantly clear that wasn't acceptable.

Instead they're left looking foolish and with most of the media laying into them for sacking a manager for defeats against Man City, Arsenal and Liverpool, when that isn't the reason at all. They're also left bringing in a manager who will have just missed out on preseason preparation and the transfer window.

I don't have enough information to comment on the entirety of their tenure but this is not a good look for them. Especially given it came about with a man they so publicly chased for so long.

JT was a failed appointment. JW was a failed appointment. SP was a success in getting us up but then a clusterfuck when we got here. I'd imagine they're under some pressure to get the next one right.

In the positive column, they've shown they aren't afraid to stand up to a manager. So whoever comes in will know that when they say 'this is the budget, and this is what we are trying to achieve', they mean it. Which I hope bodes well for the long term health of the club.

Questions, questions, questions...
Click to expand...

I'm starting to think that Max is quite knee-jerk when he makes his mind up about things. None of this suggests to me that it's anyone else's decision other than his.

Whatever the truth though I think the focus will now shift to the decision makers and ultimately Max. If he's trying to run on a tight budget then people will only accept us being dross if there is genuine improvements happening off the pitch. Even then I'm not sure they can continue keeping fans constantly in the dark like they always have done. That might work when Eddie is working miracles or when we're going for promotion but he will start to lose the fanbase if he's not careful. Then everything could get very toxic very quickly.
 
Spot on. As others keep pointing out it’s Max’s money so he must be happy with them… it’s mystifying. Their handling of the sackings the timings of those sackings and their ineptitude in the original appointments reflect the amateur position of their background for the jobs they do.

Those people on here who manage or lead people. Imagine telling your boss you wanted the second huge compensation payment in 18months because of your ineptitude in recruitment. The pay outs to JT and Parker will be a whole lot more than Forest are about to sign Willy Boly for….

Still maybe this time the penny will drop for Max. Maybe it will drop for the small North Korean collective on here. Like I used to say with Tindall some things need to play out before the ultra biased get it.
 
kirsikka said:
There's a lot to digest from today's news, most of it focused around Parker.

The fact is, Parker's behaviour over the past few weeks has been really poor and his comments on Saturday were reprehensible for a supposed professional. He should be deflecting attention from his players and trying to create a group that want to fight for each other. He did the absolute opposite.

As @SlowDownDerek has pointed out, people that previously backed him turned on him after that and I suspect, barring a miraculous run of results, his days were numbered whatever.

Looking beyond Parker though, @Neil Dawson gets a lot of stick for his incessant criticism of those in charge at the club but there surely is a question to answer here for them.

To lose one manger just before the transfer window closes may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose two looks like carelessness.

That isn't normal, and as much as Parker may have forced the issue it should never have come to that. Either they let him go on too long and should have removed him a few weeks ago when he started going off on one in the press, or they should have made it abundantly clear that wasn't acceptable.

Instead they're left looking foolish and with most of the media laying into them for sacking a manager for defeats against Man City, Arsenal and Liverpool, when that isn't the reason at all. They're also left bringing in a manager who will have just missed out on preseason preparation and the transfer window.

I don't have enough information to comment on the entirety of their tenure but this is not a good look for them. Especially given it came about with a man they so publicly chased for so long.

JT was a failed appointment. JW was a failed appointment. SP was a success in getting us up but then a clusterfuck when we got here. I'd imagine they're under some pressure to get the next one right.

In the positive column, they've shown they aren't afraid to stand up to a manager. So whoever comes in will know that when they say 'this is the budget, and this is what we are trying to achieve', they mean it. Which I hope bodes well for the long term health of the club.

Questions, questions, questions...
Click to expand...
Agree with all of this except I don't think JW can be fairly labelled as a failed appointment.
 
Neil Dawson said:
Spot on. As others keep pointing out it’s Max’s money so he must be happy with them… it’s mystifying. Their handling of the sackings the timings of those sackings and their ineptitude in the original appointments reflect the amateur position of their background for the jobs they do.

Those people on here who manage or lead people. Imagine telling your boss you wanted the second huge compensation payment in 18months because of your ineptitude in recruitment. The pay outs to JT and Parker will be a whole lot more than Forest are about to sign Willy Boly for….

Still maybe this time the penny will drop for Max. Maybe it will drop for the small North Korean collective on here. Like I used to say with Tindall some things need to play out before the ultra biased get it.
Click to expand...

How come the famous £200m Parker secured didn't feature in this post? Looks like their recruitment is massively in profit from where I'm stood.
 
nd9cherry said:
Question
£3.2 million spent on Ringwood Towns ground...why?? and why the need for Community Development away from Canford
Click to expand...

Also it has been mentioned our Ladies side/s play there.

Taken from the thread re Long Lane.

The £3.2 million project has been boosted by funding from the Football Foundation, New Forest District Council and Ringwood & District Round Table.

The significant investment into the Long Lane development represents an opportunity to develop an excellent sporting and social facility for the town of Ringwood and the surrounding area, where the site will continue to be the home of all teams associated to Ringwood Town and enable AFC Bournemouth’s Community Sports Trust to run a number of community programmes from the site.
 
kirsikka said:
No, not as soon as he gives a ropey interview. I struggle to believe that publicly was the first time he raised it though. So it would already have been discussed internally.

If the club have a clear and defined strategy on what we're doing and he's refusing to accept that then sit him down and say 'This is how it is. Do you want to work within those parameters? If not better we both move on'.

That could have been repeated after his previous complaints.

Instead he complained, moaned and then, after Saturday, laid into the players by saying they weren't good enough. It shouldn't reach that stage. I don't recall another instance of a manager saying that about his players.
Click to expand...

I agree that it's unlikely the board learned of his opinions in a press interview but I imagine the tension between the manager wanting to improve the squad and the board wanting to balance the books is not that unusual. I suspect that after the first set of public comments during pre-season something was said and forgiven but like you say the recent comments are unprecedented. I don't recall Arsenal and City interviews being that controversial although I confess that I don't pay them much attention.

I think there's a clear and defined strategy, certainly seems like it as a fan. It's felt like that since the relegation and it cannot be reasonably argued that Parker was somehow oblivious to it.
 
I agree they should share some flak and reflect on it all. Waiting a year to get Parker only to sack him after a year is not a good look.

A misalignment on club strategy, going from being signed up to the project to then falling out, is another pointer towards poor communication at the club. Not the first hint at this I've felt.

Where I do differ from some is that I can also see some good that Blake and co have done. Relegation, realising value from that squad, and then rebuilding the squad, could have gone a whole lot worse than it did.

Many clubs have not managed to do what Demin, Blake, Hughes, Tindall, Woodgate, Parker (all to varying degrees of credit) have managed in the last 2 years or so in rebuilding since relegation.

The next appointment has to be sound though, or else a lot of work is thrown away. I hope Blake and co get it right.
 
northstandmark said:
I agree they should share some flak and reflect on it all. Waiting a year to get Parker only to sack him after a year is not a good look.

A misalignment on club strategy, going from being signed up to the project to then falling out, is another pointer towards poor communication at the club. Not the first hint at this I've felt.

Where I do differ from some is that I can also see some good that Blake and co have done. Relegation, realising value from that squad, and then rebuilding the squad, could have gone a whole lot worse than it did.

Many clubs have not managed to do what Demin, Blake, Hughes, Tindall, Woodgate, Parker (all to varying degrees of credit) have managed in the last 2 years or so in rebuilding since relegation.

The next appointment has to be sound though, or else a lot of work is thrown away. I hope Blake and co get it right.
Click to expand...

Definitely a lot riding on this next decision. Trouble is if Demin genuinely wants to do it on the cheap then survival is quite unlikely anyway so whoever they pick will struggle. I guess that won't convince Neil and Co but unlike them Max will know how good or bad a job they've done based on the remit he's given them.
 
SlowDownDerek said:
Definitely a lot riding on this next decision. Trouble is if Demin genuinely wants to do it on the cheap then survival is quite unlikely anyway so whoever they pick will struggle. I guess that won't convince Neil and Co but unlike them Max will know how good or bad a job they've done based on the remit he's given them.
Click to expand...

I suppose need to define “on the cheap”

No doubt top players who have signed new contracts will have competitive salary uplifts

Promotion meant we had to make extra transfer payments for likes of Moore, christie and dembele

Plus we have bought senesi and travernier

The last two points probably add up to £30m with no outgoings to net off. What was our average net investment in the prem each season - maybe wasn’t too far north of that net of sales like moussett, ritchie etc although a couple of seasons signings like ake and lerma would have pushed up the average
 
AFCBade said:
I suppose need to define “on the cheap”

No doubt top players who have signed new contracts will have competitive salary uplifts

Promotion meant we had to make extra transfer payments for likes of Moore, christie and dembele

Plus we have bought senesi and travernier

The last two points probably add up to £30m with no outgoings to net off. What was our average net investment in the prem each season - maybe wasn’t too far north of that net of sales like moussett, ritchie etc although a couple of seasons signings like ake and lerma would have pushed up the average
Click to expand...

I suppose I'd define it in terms of the average spend for promoted sides. We're certainly going to be more Norwich than Fulham or Forest you'd think.
 
SlowDownDerek said:
I suppose I'd define it in terms of the average spend for promoted sides. We're certainly going to be more Norwich than Fulham or Forest you'd think.
Click to expand...

Fair point and would agree…was more trying to understand our net spend this year vs our spend in the past 5 prem seasons; how far below the normal average on a net basis bearing in mind the sentiment is that we are still trying to buy this window
 
Sleepy Cherry said:
Absolutely not. He got us into the play offs, and that was an achievement. It's not his fault what happened against Brentford.
Click to expand...

The argument is that he failed to avoid Brentford until the final given the poor run of games at the end ie 1 win in last 5 at key end of the season. Should have got to Wembley final and we had a chance of beating Brentford in a one off.

He did well overall I think - wheels were starting to one off albeit return to full fitness of danjuma certainly helped him
 
AFCBade said:
The argument is that he failed to avoid Brentford until the final given the poor run of games at the end ie 1 win in last 5 at key end of the season. Should have got to Wembley final and we had a chance of beating Brentford in a one off
Click to expand...

Yeah but we were better than them until calamity struck, which would be harsh to pin on him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

;