| Next Manager betting on 16:06 - Dec 4 with 4940 views | PinnerPaul |
Betting seems pretty stagnant, probably means nothing imminent ...or not! |  | |  |
| Next Manager betting on 09:15 - Dec 5 with 4314 views | hertshoops |
I like it when it goes quiet, means the bookies have made their initial list of headline-grabbers and usual suspects they can rinse some money from, and run out of new ideas - meanwhile the actual contenders slip through unnoticed |  | | |
| Next Manager betting on 18:11 - Dec 5 with 3686 views | stainrods_elbow |
| Next Manager betting on 06:40 - Dec 1 by PlanetHonneywood |
This 'we won't be fooled again' by the next guy thinking needs to be reigned in a bit. Of course a bit of introspection is valid, but we mustn't tarnish candidates with the same brush.
Firstly, we will and, in all probability, we'll also hoodwink some other individual further down the road as well. Its in football's nature.
Now I and we don't know if in hiring Beale we didn't pull a few strokes, made some promises that once in post, we backtracked on. However, as has been honed in by each and everyone of us, is Beale's uncharacteristic slip in issuing his 'honesty and integrity' speech, when he clearly didn't intend to abide by such principles.
But of more significance I feel, we cannot go into a new relationship on the premise that the new bloke is going to be as slippery and duplicitous as the last bloke. To do would inevitably start the relationship on a bad footing.
It would be like assuming after a bad break-up, that the next partner will be as bigger bitch/bastard as the last one so I'm not going to trust them when, in fact, they might be the one.
We've seen Beale for what he's truly worth, and so has the rest of football. Who, in turn have seen QPR as a club in difficult times give their manager all the support they could. I'm sure there are many candidates who'll happily take that. And when they do, that person has to feel they are the one and not just the rebound candidate. |
I'd respectfully disagree. Beale is a turd, we'd all (or mostly all) agree on that, but I would argue we as a club need to reflect carefully on what his abortive appointment means for our clearly flawed recruitment process, given not only this debacle, but also the number of managers we've had (anything between six and ten, depending on who you read/count) since Saggy Chops left the building on one leg. It's basic psychodynamics that the outcome of any relationship always involves an intercourse between two or more parties, i.e. however excrementally corrupt Beale may be, it's more likely than not we've played out part in how this unseemly episode has played out through naivete, credulousness, or desperation. No one is ever a pure victim of anything.
Wouldn't it be lovely if our executive team had the honesty and transparency to come out and describe to us fans what they've learned about how to interview people, to do it better, and give us a fighting chance of getting it right? Do they not think for a moment they owe that much to us long-suffering fans? The whole business with Beale has made me utterly miserable to be a QPR fan. To repeat, when do any of our under-performing 'leaders' get as much a performance review?
Here are my counter-cultural suggestions:
1. Build in a minimum period of service that the contract engages on both sides - one season would be an absolute minimum - barring acts of God, inter-planetary collisions, or deaths in the family.
2. Have the pride and guts to prevent any club from approaching the manager without explicit permission, and make it clear that any breach is a sackable offence for gross misconduct. The dragging-on of the Wolves embarassment was shameful and avoidable.
3. Make sure the interviewer(s) questions the interviewee in depth and detail re their career plans on terms of the next 1/3/5/10 years, and ensure these answers are rigorously evaluated before any job offer is made.
These starting points are hardly rocket science (and wouldn't insulate us entirely from a repetition), but I expect instead Beale probably interviewed (or rather played) us for fools from the start (out Hughesing-Hughes)in a way that the club is too embarrassed to admit. People only play you when you allow yourself to be played, however, as I shockingly discovered this year after finding out my apparently nice-as-pie housemate was a malignant narcissist, and was forced to examine my own part in this (basically, not being suspicious enough of his 'nice guy' schtick as well as wanting the friendship too much). I could be wrong, but it seems incredible Beale's whole interview was a bare-faced act and then he started fluttering his eyelashes shortly after. More likely, the usual suspects just turned a blind eye to the signs, and contributed more than they want to say. [Post edited 5 Dec 2022 18:15]
|  |
| |
| Next Manager betting on 18:22 - Dec 5 with 3677 views | Wilkinswatercarrier |
| Next Manager betting on 18:11 - Dec 5 by stainrods_elbow |
I'd respectfully disagree. Beale is a turd, we'd all (or mostly all) agree on that, but I would argue we as a club need to reflect carefully on what his abortive appointment means for our clearly flawed recruitment process, given not only this debacle, but also the number of managers we've had (anything between six and ten, depending on who you read/count) since Saggy Chops left the building on one leg. It's basic psychodynamics that the outcome of any relationship always involves an intercourse between two or more parties, i.e. however excrementally corrupt Beale may be, it's more likely than not we've played out part in how this unseemly episode has played out through naivete, credulousness, or desperation. No one is ever a pure victim of anything.
Wouldn't it be lovely if our executive team had the honesty and transparency to come out and describe to us fans what they've learned about how to interview people, to do it better, and give us a fighting chance of getting it right? Do they not think for a moment they owe that much to us long-suffering fans? The whole business with Beale has made me utterly miserable to be a QPR fan. To repeat, when do any of our under-performing 'leaders' get as much a performance review?
Here are my counter-cultural suggestions:
1. Build in a minimum period of service that the contract engages on both sides - one season would be an absolute minimum - barring acts of God, inter-planetary collisions, or deaths in the family.
2. Have the pride and guts to prevent any club from approaching the manager without explicit permission, and make it clear that any breach is a sackable offence for gross misconduct. The dragging-on of the Wolves embarassment was shameful and avoidable.
3. Make sure the interviewer(s) questions the interviewee in depth and detail re their career plans on terms of the next 1/3/5/10 years, and ensure these answers are rigorously evaluated before any job offer is made.
These starting points are hardly rocket science (and wouldn't insulate us entirely from a repetition), but I expect instead Beale probably interviewed (or rather played) us for fools from the start (out Hughesing-Hughes)in a way that the club is too embarrassed to admit. People only play you when you allow yourself to be played, however, as I shockingly discovered this year after finding out my apparently nice-as-pie housemate was a malignant narcissist, and was forced to examine my own part in this (basically, not being suspicious enough of his 'nice guy' schtick as well as wanting the friendship too much). I could be wrong, but it seems incredible Beale's whole interview was a bare-faced act and then he started fluttering his eyelashes shortly after. More likely, the usual suspects just turned a blind eye to the signs, and contributed more than they want to say. [Post edited 5 Dec 2022 18:15]
|
Not sure you would want a minimum period of service. I'm assuming the manager couldn't leave during this period (doesn't that break employment law?), but that also means he couldn't be sacked should he be rubbish!
Unfortunately I don't think that is advisable. | | | |
| Next Manager betting on 18:47 - Dec 5 with 3507 views | stainrods_elbow |
| Next Manager betting on 18:22 - Dec 5 by Wilkinswatercarrier |
Not sure you would want a minimum period of service. I'm assuming the manager couldn't leave during this period (doesn't that break employment law?), but that also means he couldn't be sacked should he be rubbish!
Unfortunately I don't think that is advisable. |
If he turns out to be 'rubbish', to make what seems an obvious point, what would that say about the recruitment process? At the very least, if 'due diligence' on the club's side really is both due and diligent, and an anti-poaching clause (at least for the first season) is built in with a copper bottom, these two factors alone should go a long way to heading off a repetition.
Either Beale wasn't asked about his (very) short-term ambitions, or we fell for his lies. Either way, how we came to be so embarrassingly played should be thoroughly unpacked. | |
| |
| Next Manager betting on 20:21 - Dec 5 with 3313 views | silverbirch |
| Next Manager betting on 18:11 - Dec 5 by stainrods_elbow |
I'd respectfully disagree. Beale is a turd, we'd all (or mostly all) agree on that, but I would argue we as a club need to reflect carefully on what his abortive appointment means for our clearly flawed recruitment process, given not only this debacle, but also the number of managers we've had (anything between six and ten, depending on who you read/count) since Saggy Chops left the building on one leg. It's basic psychodynamics that the outcome of any relationship always involves an intercourse between two or more parties, i.e. however excrementally corrupt Beale may be, it's more likely than not we've played out part in how this unseemly episode has played out through naivete, credulousness, or desperation. No one is ever a pure victim of anything.
Wouldn't it be lovely if our executive team had the honesty and transparency to come out and describe to us fans what they've learned about how to interview people, to do it better, and give us a fighting chance of getting it right? Do they not think for a moment they owe that much to us long-suffering fans? The whole business with Beale has made me utterly miserable to be a QPR fan. To repeat, when do any of our under-performing 'leaders' get as much a performance review?
Here are my counter-cultural suggestions:
1. Build in a minimum period of service that the contract engages on both sides - one season would be an absolute minimum - barring acts of God, inter-planetary collisions, or deaths in the family.
2. Have the pride and guts to prevent any club from approaching the manager without explicit permission, and make it clear that any breach is a sackable offence for gross misconduct. The dragging-on of the Wolves embarassment was shameful and avoidable.
3. Make sure the interviewer(s) questions the interviewee in depth and detail re their career plans on terms of the next 1/3/5/10 years, and ensure these answers are rigorously evaluated before any job offer is made.
These starting points are hardly rocket science (and wouldn't insulate us entirely from a repetition), but I expect instead Beale probably interviewed (or rather played) us for fools from the start (out Hughesing-Hughes)in a way that the club is too embarrassed to admit. People only play you when you allow yourself to be played, however, as I shockingly discovered this year after finding out my apparently nice-as-pie housemate was a malignant narcissist, and was forced to examine my own part in this (basically, not being suspicious enough of his 'nice guy' schtick as well as wanting the friendship too much). I could be wrong, but it seems incredible Beale's whole interview was a bare-faced act and then he started fluttering his eyelashes shortly after. More likely, the usual suspects just turned a blind eye to the signs, and contributed more than they want to say. [Post edited 5 Dec 2022 18:15]
|
Clause 2 seems to be another way of saying “Let him join the other club and waive the £1.5m compensation” | | | |
| Next Manager betting on 20:55 - Dec 5 with 3165 views | robith |
The maximum Skybet would let me stake was £8.93. Oddly specific. Such a joke of a firm |  | | |
| Next Manager betting on 21:01 - Dec 5 with 3125 views | PlanetHonneywood |
| Next Manager betting on 18:11 - Dec 5 by stainrods_elbow |
I'd respectfully disagree. Beale is a turd, we'd all (or mostly all) agree on that, but I would argue we as a club need to reflect carefully on what his abortive appointment means for our clearly flawed recruitment process, given not only this debacle, but also the number of managers we've had (anything between six and ten, depending on who you read/count) since Saggy Chops left the building on one leg. It's basic psychodynamics that the outcome of any relationship always involves an intercourse between two or more parties, i.e. however excrementally corrupt Beale may be, it's more likely than not we've played out part in how this unseemly episode has played out through naivete, credulousness, or desperation. No one is ever a pure victim of anything.
Wouldn't it be lovely if our executive team had the honesty and transparency to come out and describe to us fans what they've learned about how to interview people, to do it better, and give us a fighting chance of getting it right? Do they not think for a moment they owe that much to us long-suffering fans? The whole business with Beale has made me utterly miserable to be a QPR fan. To repeat, when do any of our under-performing 'leaders' get as much a performance review?
Here are my counter-cultural suggestions:
1. Build in a minimum period of service that the contract engages on both sides - one season would be an absolute minimum - barring acts of God, inter-planetary collisions, or deaths in the family.
2. Have the pride and guts to prevent any club from approaching the manager without explicit permission, and make it clear that any breach is a sackable offence for gross misconduct. The dragging-on of the Wolves embarassment was shameful and avoidable.
3. Make sure the interviewer(s) questions the interviewee in depth and detail re their career plans on terms of the next 1/3/5/10 years, and ensure these answers are rigorously evaluated before any job offer is made.
These starting points are hardly rocket science (and wouldn't insulate us entirely from a repetition), but I expect instead Beale probably interviewed (or rather played) us for fools from the start (out Hughesing-Hughes)in a way that the club is too embarrassed to admit. People only play you when you allow yourself to be played, however, as I shockingly discovered this year after finding out my apparently nice-as-pie housemate was a malignant narcissist, and was forced to examine my own part in this (basically, not being suspicious enough of his 'nice guy' schtick as well as wanting the friendship too much). I could be wrong, but it seems incredible Beale's whole interview was a bare-faced act and then he started fluttering his eyelashes shortly after. More likely, the usual suspects just turned a blind eye to the signs, and contributed more than they want to say. [Post edited 5 Dec 2022 18:15]
|
...and that's probably why we sleep at night knowing you're not running our football club.
Clause 1 - dealt with by an earlier post above;
Clause 2 - (edit) also dealt with; and
Clause 3 - not sure what answers you'd like to see received, but seeing as football managers either move on or are moved on, you can probably work out for yourself the answer(s) that would be trotted out. How one would even begin to embarrass themselves by seeking to evaluate candidates' replies is beyond my thinking.
I'd also suggest that these clauses you'd want dealt with in an interview and enshrined in a contract would be as 'successful' in pursuit of friends and flatmate.
But prove me wrong and try them out, and come back to us then. Good luck! [Post edited 5 Dec 2022 21:28]
|  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Next Manager betting on 21:02 - Dec 5 with 3122 views | Mick_S |
| Next Manager betting on 20:55 - Dec 5 by robith |
The maximum Skybet would let me stake was £8.93. Oddly specific. Such a joke of a firm |
Mate, we’ll be having shirt/squad numbers like that soon. Maybe one for Forest, or is that done now? |  |
| Did I ever mention that I was in Minder? |
| |
| Next Manager betting on 21:28 - Dec 5 with 2987 views | QPR_Jim |
| Next Manager betting on 18:47 - Dec 5 by stainrods_elbow |
If he turns out to be 'rubbish', to make what seems an obvious point, what would that say about the recruitment process? At the very least, if 'due diligence' on the club's side really is both due and diligent, and an anti-poaching clause (at least for the first season) is built in with a copper bottom, these two factors alone should go a long way to heading off a repetition.
Either Beale wasn't asked about his (very) short-term ambitions, or we fell for his lies. Either way, how we came to be so embarrassingly played should be thoroughly unpacked. |
Well look at all the issues that hiring a successful manager has caused, it's made you utterly miserable to be a QPR fan.
So you want someone good but not good enough that anyone else could would want them. Your 3 points aren't practical and may limit the number of takers for the position anyway. |  | | |
| Next Manager betting on 21:35 - Dec 5 with 2957 views | davman |
| Next Manager betting on 21:01 - Dec 5 by PlanetHonneywood |
...and that's probably why we sleep at night knowing you're not running our football club.
Clause 1 - dealt with by an earlier post above;
Clause 2 - (edit) also dealt with; and
Clause 3 - not sure what answers you'd like to see received, but seeing as football managers either move on or are moved on, you can probably work out for yourself the answer(s) that would be trotted out. How one would even begin to embarrass themselves by seeking to evaluate candidates' replies is beyond my thinking.
I'd also suggest that these clauses you'd want dealt with in an interview and enshrined in a contract would be as 'successful' in pursuit of friends and flatmate.
But prove me wrong and try them out, and come back to us then. Good luck! [Post edited 5 Dec 2022 21:28]
|
... Exactly this, SE. I really admire your commitment to your belief that our board are universally inept by pointing out your simple plan, but as PH has pointed out, it is fundamentally flawed.
There is just so much more to running a football than pick the right manager, magicking up a transfer market where there are two or three clubs bidding multiple millions of pounds for average players and ensuring that every free transfer or loan works out. If only we could ignore FFP and find a new stadium, win every game, keep hold of the good managers and get millions of pounds in compo for the ones that don't work out.
In short, yes they have made mistakes and will continue to do so, but it a'int easy.
That said, if Clive is right and they have abandoned plans to stick within FFP, I'll join you in your Lynch Mob! |  |
| |
| Next Manager betting on 23:55 - Dec 5 with 2683 views | stainrods_elbow |
| Next Manager betting on 21:01 - Dec 5 by PlanetHonneywood |
...and that's probably why we sleep at night knowing you're not running our football club.
Clause 1 - dealt with by an earlier post above;
Clause 2 - (edit) also dealt with; and
Clause 3 - not sure what answers you'd like to see received, but seeing as football managers either move on or are moved on, you can probably work out for yourself the answer(s) that would be trotted out. How one would even begin to embarrass themselves by seeking to evaluate candidates' replies is beyond my thinking.
I'd also suggest that these clauses you'd want dealt with in an interview and enshrined in a contract would be as 'successful' in pursuit of friends and flatmate.
But prove me wrong and try them out, and come back to us then. Good luck! [Post edited 5 Dec 2022 21:28]
|
Uh huh - another anti-individual who says 'we' because he lacks both the humility and pride to say 'I', and just spouts patronising piffle that wilfully and supercilously misunderstands everything that's been said, while pretending that his own sins (that'd be smug superciliousness for starters) reside in another. Yawn!
PS Thanks again for the private messages of support - the fact that they're private tells its own story - to balance the one or two self-satisfied cultish types here. [Post edited 6 Dec 2022 0:37]
| |
| |
| Next Manager betting on 23:59 - Dec 5 with 2676 views | stainrods_elbow |
| Next Manager betting on 21:35 - Dec 5 by davman |
... Exactly this, SE. I really admire your commitment to your belief that our board are universally inept by pointing out your simple plan, but as PH has pointed out, it is fundamentally flawed.
There is just so much more to running a football than pick the right manager, magicking up a transfer market where there are two or three clubs bidding multiple millions of pounds for average players and ensuring that every free transfer or loan works out. If only we could ignore FFP and find a new stadium, win every game, keep hold of the good managers and get millions of pounds in compo for the ones that don't work out.
In short, yes they have made mistakes and will continue to do so, but it a'int easy.
That said, if Clive is right and they have abandoned plans to stick within FFP, I'll join you in your Lynch Mob! |
Thanks for putting words in my mouth about 'universal ineptitude', and whatever else inserts itself into your fantasy life in regard to my arguments in lieu of identifiable counter- arguments as opposed to puerile disdain/abuse. All I have really said is that scrutiny is warranted for our part as a club in recruiting Beale, and his contract/interview process was clearly flawed. If that's so inadmissible to a cultish just because it's me saying it, great, let's carry on as we have been for the last 10 years and hope somehow it all comes good. [Post edited 6 Dec 2022 0:47]
| |
| |
| Next Manager betting on 00:43 - Dec 6 with 2657 views | kensalriser |
Well this is another grand chapter in How to Win Friends and Influence People. Picking up some great tips. |  |
| |
| Next Manager betting on 01:02 - Dec 6 with 2642 views | PunteR |
| Next Manager betting on 23:55 - Dec 5 by stainrods_elbow |
Uh huh - another anti-individual who says 'we' because he lacks both the humility and pride to say 'I', and just spouts patronising piffle that wilfully and supercilously misunderstands everything that's been said, while pretending that his own sins (that'd be smug superciliousness for starters) reside in another. Yawn!
PS Thanks again for the private messages of support - the fact that they're private tells its own story - to balance the one or two self-satisfied cultish types here. [Post edited 6 Dec 2022 0:37]
|
Mate, are you OK?
Seriously.
I do get where you're coming from, and I'm pretty sure most QPR fans understand the frustration with following this club but for the sake of sanity most try and keep a bit of perspective on it and keep a lid on it. I'm not sure what you're trying to achieve?. You've been blocked by over half the posters on here which suggests to me your method of getting your point across is falling flat on its arse. |  |
| Occasional providers of half decent House music. |
| |
| Next Manager betting on 07:17 - Dec 6 with 2378 views | PlanetHonneywood |
| Next Manager betting on 23:55 - Dec 5 by stainrods_elbow |
Uh huh - another anti-individual who says 'we' because he lacks both the humility and pride to say 'I', and just spouts patronising piffle that wilfully and supercilously misunderstands everything that's been said, while pretending that his own sins (that'd be smug superciliousness for starters) reside in another. Yawn!
PS Thanks again for the private messages of support - the fact that they're private tells its own story - to balance the one or two self-satisfied cultish types here. [Post edited 6 Dec 2022 0:37]
|
Happy to clarify.
Recently 'I' un-ignored posters, whose ramblings 'I' perpetually found to be either plain wrong, daft, or a waste of my time should 'I' unfortunately read them. However well intended they may have been but hey, we've all been there.
Upon reading what 'I' thought was utter drivel, 'I' just could not help myself, and 'I' felt the need to point out the flaws in your thinking as 'I' saw them. Only thing is, 'I' merely joined a queue of posters whose views mirrored my own and 'I' suggest 'we' were all on the same page regarding what 'I'/'we' considered to be an ill conceived and nonsensical approach to appointing QPR's next manager.
Not sure whom among our brethren are sending messages of support to you. But if they are, I hope they are genuine and germane to your needs. | |
| |
| Next Manager betting on 07:25 - Dec 6 with 2347 views | Sakura |
I'm getting concerned the club or rather Les has made their decision. Who to appoint. It being Paul Hall
There really is no good reason this is taking so long.
Les has been very been open about wanting to give opportunities to black managers. Here we have an international manager at our club.
In my view Les is delaying it because he knows he can't give it to him yet. But, if we beat Burnley and then point or win against Preston and he will push for it to be given to Hall.
I hope I'm wrong because Les putting his concerns on these social issues before the interests of the club cost us massively in our key shot at promotion when Ramsey was in charge in our post relegation season. I'm worried he's going to do it again here with a squad that has a real shot at promotion
If he does appoint Hall and it doesn't go well Les needs to be sacked. He needs to put the Club first not his own personal crusade to balance racial equality in management positions
Again, hope I am wrong but the longer this goes on the more concerned I am my initial instincts this was the case are right. | | | |
| Next Manager betting on 07:37 - Dec 6 with 2321 views | PlanetHonneywood |
| Next Manager betting on 07:25 - Dec 6 by Sakura |
I'm getting concerned the club or rather Les has made their decision. Who to appoint. It being Paul Hall
There really is no good reason this is taking so long.
Les has been very been open about wanting to give opportunities to black managers. Here we have an international manager at our club.
In my view Les is delaying it because he knows he can't give it to him yet. But, if we beat Burnley and then point or win against Preston and he will push for it to be given to Hall.
I hope I'm wrong because Les putting his concerns on these social issues before the interests of the club cost us massively in our key shot at promotion when Ramsey was in charge in our post relegation season. I'm worried he's going to do it again here with a squad that has a real shot at promotion
If he does appoint Hall and it doesn't go well Les needs to be sacked. He needs to put the Club first not his own personal crusade to balance racial equality in management positions
Again, hope I am wrong but the longer this goes on the more concerned I am my initial instincts this was the case are right. |
Given the run we were on going into the WC, if a Hall-lead QPR beat high-flying Burnley and return with a point from Deepdale, I suspect there will be many calling for Hall to take charge.
Personally, whomever they appoint, I hope that person continues leading us into season 2023/24, with a broad church of support from the Rfosi. | |
| |
| Next Manager betting on 07:56 - Dec 6 with 2258 views | distortR |
| Next Manager betting on 00:43 - Dec 6 by kensalriser |
Well this is another grand chapter in How to Win Friends and Influence People. Picking up some great tips. |
Whoosh.............
 | | | |
| Next Manager betting on 08:30 - Dec 6 with 2139 views | Sakura |
| Next Manager betting on 07:37 - Dec 6 by PlanetHonneywood |
Given the run we were on going into the WC, if a Hall-lead QPR beat high-flying Burnley and return with a point from Deepdale, I suspect there will be many calling for Hall to take charge.
Personally, whomever they appoint, I hope that person continues leading us into season 2023/24, with a broad church of support from the Rfosi. |
Paul Hart could get 4 points plus from those two games. The players have the quality to do it. We are 6th in the league and have a good team
Can you explain why you think Paul Hall deserves it above other candidates. My concern is he isn't the best man for the job but he may get it because of Les wants to promote on skin colour
Ramsay was also a good coach but was quickly found to not be good enough and should never have been given the job
If we go through the same with Hall when he's picking up a team in the play offs. Then Les must be sacked for putting his personal politics before the club | | | |
| Next Manager betting on 08:31 - Dec 6 with 2136 views | Hunterhoop |
| Next Manager betting on 07:25 - Dec 6 by Sakura |
I'm getting concerned the club or rather Les has made their decision. Who to appoint. It being Paul Hall
There really is no good reason this is taking so long.
Les has been very been open about wanting to give opportunities to black managers. Here we have an international manager at our club.
In my view Les is delaying it because he knows he can't give it to him yet. But, if we beat Burnley and then point or win against Preston and he will push for it to be given to Hall.
I hope I'm wrong because Les putting his concerns on these social issues before the interests of the club cost us massively in our key shot at promotion when Ramsey was in charge in our post relegation season. I'm worried he's going to do it again here with a squad that has a real shot at promotion
If he does appoint Hall and it doesn't go well Les needs to be sacked. He needs to put the Club first not his own personal crusade to balance racial equality in management positions
Again, hope I am wrong but the longer this goes on the more concerned I am my initial instincts this was the case are right. |
Why not post that IF or WHEN it happens?
You’re basically having a pop at the DoF for a decision that hasn’t been officially made, you have no idea if it’s been made in private, all betting markets indicate that decision has not been made, and Swedish press indicate hasn’t been made either (as we’re supposedly interviewing that fella today). On top of that you seem to be forgetting Paul Hall is the Jamaica manager too, so might not want the job full time (or we might not want to buy him out of his contract).
Basically you’ve invented a scenario that hasn’t yet happened and probably won’t to bash the DoF.
Who needs enemies when you have supporters like these? |  | | |
| Next Manager betting on 08:48 - Dec 6 with 2071 views | PlanetHonneywood |
| Next Manager betting on 08:30 - Dec 6 by Sakura |
Paul Hart could get 4 points plus from those two games. The players have the quality to do it. We are 6th in the league and have a good team
Can you explain why you think Paul Hall deserves it above other candidates. My concern is he isn't the best man for the job but he may get it because of Les wants to promote on skin colour
Ramsay was also a good coach but was quickly found to not be good enough and should never have been given the job
If we go through the same with Hall when he's picking up a team in the play offs. Then Les must be sacked for putting his personal politics before the club |
Go back, read my post again, and once you do, then come back here and tell me exactly where I said Hall 'should' get the job?
(You should meet up with SE, you'd get on famously. He's currently looking for a flatmate too if you're in the market. FYI: expect a rigorous interview process about your short-, medium- and long-term plans.) | |
| |
| Next Manager betting on 09:25 - Dec 6 with 1940 views | Sakura |
| Next Manager betting on 08:31 - Dec 6 by Hunterhoop |
Why not post that IF or WHEN it happens?
You’re basically having a pop at the DoF for a decision that hasn’t been officially made, you have no idea if it’s been made in private, all betting markets indicate that decision has not been made, and Swedish press indicate hasn’t been made either (as we’re supposedly interviewing that fella today). On top of that you seem to be forgetting Paul Hall is the Jamaica manager too, so might not want the job full time (or we might not want to buy him out of his contract).
Basically you’ve invented a scenario that hasn’t yet happened and probably won’t to bash the DoF.
Who needs enemies when you have supporters like these? |
I want that problem to be averted. Prevention is better than cure type thing
A few years ago Tim Sherwood's name was linked very heavily with the job. Fan reaction to that very possibly had an influence in steering the club away from that disaster.
I'm making my point known on a public rangers discussion forum that I am concerned the route we are going. I've seen Les take us this route before and it went badly for the club. I want the best manager for the club.
I don't get the mentality of posters like yourself who jump straight to insults before they understand the other persons view point
Van Bronkhorst was sacked on 23rd November. Beale appointed on 28th but it was known right after.
That's why I'm suspicious/ fearful of them harming the club again by going this route. Then putting out noises through media channels like West London Sport to not expect a manager until after Burnley "because contracts" huh?! That makes no sense
I would say yours and Planet Hollywoods well meaning attitude is more harmful to the club.
I've said "if" Les goes that route again I will be against it. I am concerned he will go that route as he has form. And them teeing us up for a delayed appointment
I would be delighted if things picked up pace and someone like this Hammarby guy was appointed but the longer this goes on the more concerned I get
Rathe then getting aggy. Try and understand my viewpoint from the perspective that I want the best for the club. I've explained my concerns. Made known at this point it's a theory and nothing more
If I am wrong then it's no issue. I will just be pleased we went and appointed the best man for the job
Hopefully our fan base is more rational and sensible than you. Otherwise the clubs in trouble | | | |
| Next Manager betting on 09:26 - Dec 6 with 1933 views | Sakura |
| Next Manager betting on 08:48 - Dec 6 by PlanetHonneywood |
Go back, read my post again, and once you do, then come back here and tell me exactly where I said Hall 'should' get the job?
(You should meet up with SE, you'd get on famously. He's currently looking for a flatmate too if you're in the market. FYI: expect a rigorous interview process about your short-, medium- and long-term plans.) |
You implied support for it. I would view that appointment as being bad for our club. I would be against that.
But glad that from your sarky post I can take it to mean you also know appointing Hall isn't a credible appointment and doesn't stand up to scrutiny vs the other candidates which is why you chose not to do that
We can agree then Hall would be a bad appointment | | | |
| Next Manager betting on 09:48 - Dec 6 with 1866 views | dmm |
It might be a bit late on the day but, with Coventry yet again going through the mill, I wonder if we'd think about an approach for Mark Robins. He must be getting tired of all the nonsense that goes on there.
Compensation could rule us out though. He signed a new contract in May this year but no one seems to know how long the contract runs. |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
