Littlemoor Lad

19 minutes ago, nzlatic said:

Am I going mad? I could swear down that 2 or 3 weeks ago the general consensus on here was that we needed a winger, a right back and a central midfielder.

 

We've since had the first 2 and now the rumour is the 3rd is coming in. But because we've lost a couple of games we shouldn't be signing these players? I don't get it.

He's overstepped the mark on spending and it hasn't been balanced has it?

Not even using the player's he's brought in, so why sign more, so they can end up the same?

5 minutes ago, yarddog73 said:

We can't buy another player every time we lose a game of football, I keep hearing these players we are bringing in are better but I haven't seen any evidence yet, Unsworths getting a bit David O'Leary for me, can't coach what he's got so is always asking for more, bet there isn't a manager in our League whose had his backing yet apparently we still need to give him more time.

Fully agree,

Should be made to get the best out of what he's been given and it's more than enough for a new manager 

3 minutes ago, Bobledgersheart said:

If only everything in life was that certain. 

It can only be one or the other

That's for certain 

40 minutes ago, Bobledgersheart said:

Only 3 points the difference if we win

Lose and we won't catch them

Just now, True Tic said:

In true Latics Fashion we will win it 

 

 

then lose the game after 

The game after could be just as tough but right now I'd take that, keeping them within touching distance as opposed to losing and them being out of sight

3 hours ago, BP1960 said:

 

Chesterfield fans say their defence is poor, so maybe we will throw the kitchen sink at them a come away with a resounding win. 

Could we see that policy adopted?

 

 

Fight fire with fire, then leave ourselves wide open and get absolutely battered,

Ofcourse the manager knows inside we really can't lose this, yet it's against a far better side than the previous two who've seen us off.

He's got himself a massive dilemma, that would have been cushioned by a win against Halifax,

That wily old fox Paul Cook will out think him and in a hostile environment, we could cave in, put it this way, I don't feel confident and I'd be over the moon with a point or three here.

1 hour ago, deyres42 said:

If the manager is so bad then why are you expecting anything?

If a manager's that bad,

Why on earth would he be taken on in the first place? But saying that, he wasn't a manager at all, this makes it even more of a gamble.

Demotion to the boot room if this continues 

21 minutes ago, mcfluff1985 said:

Quaking in my slippers

I won't be the first or last matey 

1 minute ago, mcfluff1985 said:

Maybe you should raise this with Age Concern or the police seen as you feel he's been duped out of his money. Maybe buckets outside the next home game?

Way past your bed time 

Goodnight 

8 minutes ago, mcfluff1985 said:

Can't believe the latest talk is being started by @Littlemoor Lad that poor old Frank is too old and naive to know what's best for himself. he's being taken advantage of. Hes soft in the head and has been manipulated to spend his pittance of a pension on Oldham Athletic. 

 

Don't half chat some you fella.

 

I'm pretty sure that him and his family are savvy enough to know they ain't making shit all out of this football club and can make their own minds up about where to spend their money.

 

Making outline he's too scared and timid to say no to big, bad David Unsworth.

 

Absolute joke comments 

We'll see just how it pans out but I'm sure you'll be the very first to hold up your hand and that would be in keeping with your persona.

Ofcourse, I hope I'm wrong and we win every game from now to the end of the season (without Frank having to bankroll it) 

3 minutes ago, whittles left foot said:

For somebody who has posted how he deals in stocks and shares you show remarkable little knowledge about how football clubs are run.

 

Bad management, no fans

No fans, no income

No income, no club

It's exactly the same as shares

1 minute ago, mcfluff1985 said:

No. I'll own my mistake 

Big you 

1 minute ago, whittles left foot said:

There is nothing bizarre about it-my comment was he never looked like scoring on Saturday despite the goals flying in and he never looked like scoring on Tuesday.

No boo boy here just passing comments after you slagging off a player who can actually find the net whilst bigging up a player who cannot. 

 

He really should be doing far better and nobody on here can ever question that

1 minute ago, whittles left foot said:

So I may be presuming here but our new owner has considerable more money than you by using his business acumen YET you think he is making the wrong decisions based upon a few football results.

I don't doubt it but just an observation from someone who hates money being wasted,

If he sees it as right, that's his decision, it wouldn't be mine.

3 minutes ago, LightDN123 said:

This is football, you don’t join the industry to make money. 

You most certainly don't join it to lose it either,

There comes a time when any club needs to atleast break even and become self supporting, you can guess the rest.

Just now, PeteG said:

Don't disagree with you, I don't believe Unsworth is the man to bring any long term success, I wouldn't have appointed him in the first place but he was always coming once the Royles were involved.

Well, they too must also decide whether their investment is safe or not?

If the manager was a stock in my share portfolio, I'd of sold out last year and cut my losses

That's me talking, not a big business man who should know better

Just now, LightDN123 said:

I get what you are trying to say. But it’s pretty naive to suggest Frank and Co have only planned to fund the club for the period of one manager. They are here for the long haul. 

I've invested money most of my working life and the gravy train only lasts as long as your capital,

You'll have heard the term, Nobody ever got rich by wasting money?

Well, that about sums it up!

7 minutes ago, PeteG said:

I don't think there is an open cheque book in all fairness. With the exception of Norwood we aren't talking vast sums, certainly not to the levels of Wrexham but certainly in the top 2 in this division and that's what it boils down to. The league is crap and we are under achieving and it's either poor recruitment or the manager, possibly a combination of the 2. 

Nobody has had this kind of backing for many a year and it's obviously wasted on him but as he's here to stay, I'm more concerned about money being frittered away, leaving whoever takes over the car crash left, zero opportunity to put it right.

That's all.

2 minutes ago, nzlatic said:

Not really. I’m afraid I still find it patronising to suggest that Frank and the Rothwell family are being taken advantage of presumably by someone acting in bad faith? They’ve assembled what appears to be a very experienced and competent board to manage their investment. 

I'll end on this because you want to have the last word 

Bad faith NO

Incompetence YES

4 minutes ago, nzlatic said:

You’ve lost me now. Are you saying he’s being scammed or swindled in some way?

Are you for real?

Let's make it simple for you

Taken advantage of

Does that help?

16 minutes ago, PeteG said:

The problem is, I don't believe the recruitment department has done a very good job so far, whether that's down to them or the manager, I don't know. The squad looks unbalanced to me, we've got too many strikers, i've already made the point elsewhere about getting Raglan after we signed Hobson and they tried to shoe horn all 3 CB's in 1st game up. Lack of a RB, which fair enough has been rectified but should have been done earlier as well as addressing the midfield. I honestly don't believe the recruitment is all that it's cracked up to be. We have signed Reid and Willoughby who have barely had a look in. Honestly think we should have a settled, preferred system and recruit the players to fit that not just think he's a good player who's available, let's get him. It certainly looks like a scatter gun approach at the moment and is a continuation of last season.

Should never have been given an open chequebook in the first place,

Considering he was a decent defender at a very high level, you'd of thought that he'd get that absolutely spot on before moving into other area's.

Simple really and he of all people should know it, stop the other team scoring and there's no way they can beat you 

Future manager's contract:

Right, you've 5 game's to prove yourself worthy to manage this great club,

We'll allow you 2 losses but we expect 9 points from 15 

The next 5 game's will need to yield atleast 8 point's from the 15 and so on.

Anyone applying that doesn't understand this or think it achievable, need not apply!

10 minutes ago, nzlatic said:

I’ve not said anything about his money?

 

He’s a successful businessman and talk of him being taken for a ride is patronising in my opinion. 

You obviously haven't lost money through being taken for a ride

Maybe you should try it and then come back to me with some sense

5 minutes ago, deyres42 said:

Does the next manager get 5 games as well then?

Yes

If he's a loser

2 minutes ago, LightDN123 said:

Yeah I appreciate that. They also can’t be seen to be nice to him when they see him and then criticise him on the pod. 
Ultimately, results will determine the outcome. If we want automatic, if the results don’t go our way the next two games, we pull the trigger. 

In that event they wouldn't get a peep out of him ever again,

No doubts being over 60,  I could tell him to his face and he'd be more respectful of my opinion