wakefield-oldham Posted May 1, 2009 Share Posted May 1, 2009 If your getting rid you doing it in Jan or you do it in May... Not with nine games to go.... well to me that means the tta were thinking more about the welfare of the club rather than a last ditch effort to get us promoted....if so i thank them for that.....might be a bleesing in disguise we didnt go up....this team would have to be dessimated to 2 players for next season in championship and with the budget on offer which imo wouldnt have been much more than the one we are going to get in this league,,then the task would have been impossible Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boundaryblue80 Posted May 1, 2009 Share Posted May 1, 2009 (edited) Was it all Sheridans fault ? I dont think for a second it was... Yet he paid the price.... Current problems didnt go away when Joe joined the club... Tells me a lot that... Did Shez even bring the two biggest trouble causers to the club ? I know he didnt bring in Hughes... Who brought in Windass ?? Also when you read some of the stuff suggested on here....aka club officals covering up acts which could of led to Hughes going back to prision...if true ( and I have no idea if the claim made was true or not) this would say the problems run deeper... Look back over history at the managers who've spoken up about not being able to do their job properly coz of "meddling." If this was the case with Shez, he should've spoken up. I would've had more respect for him in the end than I have now. As for... "Was it all Sheridans fault ? I dont think for a second it was... Yet he paid the price.... Current problems didnt go away when Joe joined the club... Tells me a lot that..." YES it was...they were his players. He brought them in...there's no getting about this. If they let him down...then tough, he brought them here. On leaving, they realised they weren't so cushdy anymore...but also knew Joe would probably not be here next season so why should they bother. A few wks ago I posted a "who really wants to go up post"...I still can't see who apart from the odd one like Taylor and Eardley etc. That's where the real issue was...Gregan comfy, Allott in a warm pond etc etc etc. But these were Shez's players...that's all it ever should comes back to ultimately. And as I've said...if they weren't all his players coz of meddling...then he should've spoke up coz either way, he's lost his job. Edited May 1, 2009 by boundaryblue80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted May 1, 2009 Share Posted May 1, 2009 well to me that means the tta were thinking more about the welfare of the club rather than a last ditch effort to get us promoted....if so i thank them for that.....might be a bleesing in disguise we didnt go up....this team would have to be dessimated to 2 players for next season in championship and with the budget on offer which imo wouldnt have been much more than the one we are going to get in this league,,then the task would have been impossible omg... This has to be the worse (and funniest) thing I have reaed today... I will leave you to your opinion,... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted May 1, 2009 Share Posted May 1, 2009 (edited) Look back over history at the managers who've spoken up about not being able to do their job properly coz of "meddling." If this was the case with Shez, he should've spoken up. I would've had more respect for him in the end than I have now. As for... "Was it all Sheridans fault ? I dont think for a second it was... Yet he paid the price.... Current problems didnt go away when Joe joined the club... Tells me a lot that..." YES it was...they were his players. He brought them in...there's no getting about this. If they let him down...then tough, he brought them here. On leaving, they realised they weren't so cushdy anymore...but also knew Joe would probably not be here next season so why should they bother. A few wks ago I posted a "who really wants to go up post"...I still can't see who apart from the odd one like Taylor and Eardley etc. That's where the real issue was...Gregan comfy, Allott in a warm pond etc etc etc. But these were Shez's players...that's all it ever should comes back to ultimately. And as I've said...if they weren't coz of meddling...then he should've spoke up. I would not describe Hughes as Shezs player... Not even nearly... and I dont know who brough in Windass but after reading some of his comments in the press it makes me wonder... Two players that seriously undermind shez if reports are true... But I do take your point about he should of spoke up.... Edited May 1, 2009 by oafc0000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wakefield-oldham Posted May 1, 2009 Share Posted May 1, 2009 omg... This has to be the worse (and funniest) thing I have reaed today... I will leave you to your opinion,... why Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boundaryblue80 Posted May 1, 2009 Share Posted May 1, 2009 I would not describe Hughes as Shezs player... Not even nearly... and I dont know who brough in Windass but after reading some of his comments in the press it makes me wonder... Two players that seriously undermind shez if reports are true... But I do take your point about he should of spoke up.... Agree on Hughes...but I also think Shez thought Xmas had come early by being offered him. As for Windass, again, I don't think he was a Shez signing (from what I've been told). With his Blog, we knew what we were taking on. It could be that Shez didn't ever want him or if he did, that his hands became a bit tied up due to Windass' celeb status (last one to seek this, Chris Hall, got rocketed by Shez.) Like we both agree, he should've said no. But to be honest, I worried more about the Seb Hines' and Jan Budtz's of Shez's final weeks than of the Windass' or Doggygate etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boundaryblue80 Posted May 1, 2009 Share Posted May 1, 2009 (edited) I would not describe Hughes as Shezs player... Not even nearly... and I dont know who brough in Windass but after reading some of his comments in the press it makes me wonder... Two players that seriously undermind shez if reports are true... But I do take your point about he should of spoke up.... Agree on Hughes...but I also think Shez thought Xmas had come early by being offered him. As for Windass, again, I don't think he was a Shez signing (from what I've been told). With his Blog, we knew what we were taking on. It could be that Shez didn't ever want him or if he did, that his hands became a bit tied up due to Windass' celeb status (last one to seek this, Chris Hall, got rocketed by Shez.) Like we both agree, he should've said no or spoke up. But to be honest, I worried more about the Seb Hines' and Jan Budtz's of Shez's final weeks than of the Windass' and lack of speaking out. Edited May 1, 2009 by boundaryblue80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsslatic Posted May 1, 2009 Share Posted May 1, 2009 moderated moderated Ever thought that perhaps your, and other people's, perceptions of Joe may be influenced by his golden reputation he had with you when he first came in? One of the most annoying things about Shez's departure was the comments on here that Joe had nothing to lose - that if we were to get back into the playoffs it would be a 'miracle', and if we didn't, then it was Shez's fault. It was a tall order, yes. But Joe was brought in with the task of getting us back into the playoffs, and he and many of us else believed he could do it. He failed to win either of his first two games, and then it was time to 'clear the decks'...though, I do remember when he did that that he said he hadn't given up on promotion, that we could still put a run together without Hughes. The long and short of it that Joe's 'good job' has been done off-the-pitch, and was work that when he came in was planned for being done in the summer. In terms of results, Joe Royle has failed. He had his targets, and he didn't meet them. Love, xx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lags Posted May 1, 2009 Share Posted May 1, 2009 Ever thought that perhaps your, and other people's, perceptions of Joe may be influenced by his golden reputation he had with you when he first came in? One of the most annoying things about Shez's departure was the comments on here that Joe had nothing to lose - that if we were to get back into the playoffs it would be a 'miracle', and if we didn't, then it was Shez's fault. It was a tall order, yes. But Joe was brought in with the task of getting us back into the playoffs, and he and many of us else believed he could do it. He failed to win either of his first two games, and then it was time to 'clear the decks'...though, I do remember when he did that that he said he hadn't given up on promotion, that we could still put a run together without Hughes. The long and short of it that Joe's 'good job' has been done off-the-pitch, and was work that when he came in was planned for being done in the summer. In terms of results, Joe Royle has failed. He had his targets, and he didn't meet them. Love, xx No. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted May 1, 2009 Share Posted May 1, 2009 Ever thought that perhaps your, and other people's, perceptions of Joe may be influenced by his golden reputation he had with you when he first came in? One of the most annoying things about Shez's departure was the comments on here that Joe had nothing to lose - that if we were to get back into the playoffs it would be a 'miracle', and if we didn't, then it was Shez's fault. It was a tall order, yes. But Joe was brought in with the task of getting us back into the playoffs, and he and many of us else believed he could do it. He failed to win either of his first two games, and then it was time to 'clear the decks'...though, I do remember when he did that that he said he hadn't given up on promotion, that we could still put a run together without Hughes. The long and short of it that Joe's 'good job' has been done off-the-pitch, and was work that when he came in was planned for being done in the summer. In terms of results, Joe Royle has failed. He had his targets, and he didn't meet them. Love, xx Anyone who expected Joe to come in and pull out white rabbits really needs to have words with themselves.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsslatic Posted May 1, 2009 Share Posted May 1, 2009 Anyone who expected Joe to come in and pull out white rabbits really needs to have words with themselves.... 1. Whether pulling a side one point of the playoffs back into them was a 'white rabbit' act is debatable. 2. More importantly, it's not about expectation. Even if a driver isn't expected to pass their test, if they take it and don't pass, then they have failed...regardless of expectation. It doesn't matter what people expected Joe to do...he was tasked with getting us back into the playoffs, and he hasn't done that. On pitch, that's a failure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorrro Posted May 1, 2009 Share Posted May 1, 2009 I'm just happy that the Sheridan era is over. It was nice to see Royle come back, but it was always unlikely that we'd make the play offs. Onwards and upwards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoytonBlueLad Posted May 1, 2009 Share Posted May 1, 2009 I'm just happy that the Sheridan era is over. It was nice to see Royle come back, but it was always unlikely that we'd make the play offs. Onwards and upwards. This. Joe deserves no grief. He came in as a favour for 9 games. He made all the right sounds of course he did, he had to. Is there anyone better we could have got at such short notice? I don't think so. He was on a loser with this lot. These players have been nothing short of :censored: for too long now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
singe Posted May 1, 2009 Share Posted May 1, 2009 (edited) The fact that the players did not perform once Joe had come in, and performed like they had for the preceeding 3 months speaks far more about the players than Joe Royle. I am of the opinion that Gus Hiddink culd not have done much more. Edited May 1, 2009 by singe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaticsPete Posted May 1, 2009 Share Posted May 1, 2009 1. Whether pulling a side one point of the playoffs back into them was a 'white rabbit' act is debatable. 2. More importantly, it's not about expectation. Even if a driver isn't expected to pass their test, if they take it and don't pass, then they have failed...regardless of expectation. It doesn't matter what people expected Joe to do...he was tasked with getting us back into the playoffs, and he hasn't done that. On pitch, that's a failure. Failure is not doing the best that can be done with the resources and in a given situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_latics Posted May 1, 2009 Share Posted May 1, 2009 Failure is not doing the best that can be done with the resources and in a given situation. Cheese is a much maligned fruit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted May 1, 2009 Share Posted May 1, 2009 Failure is not doing the best that can be done with the resources and in a given situation. Well said... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsslatic Posted May 1, 2009 Share Posted May 1, 2009 Failure is not doing the best that can be done with the resources and in a given situation. And there lies the debate. I think we could and should have done better with the team we have and within the context Joe was given before the Tranmere game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsslatic Posted May 1, 2009 Share Posted May 1, 2009 No. Really? So if Dave Penney had come in after the MK game and hadn't won any games but had shipped out the big earners then people would have been crying into their beer if he didn't get the job full time? People are less willing to criticise Joe's on-field 'achievements' since his second arrival because of what he did just under 20 years ago. If it had been any other manager then assessments of his reign would have been different. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoytonBlueLad Posted May 1, 2009 Share Posted May 1, 2009 Really? So if Dave Penney had come in after the MK game and hadn't won any games but had shipped out the big earners then people would have been crying into their beer if he didn't get the job full time? People are less willing to criticise Joe's on-field 'achievements' since his second arrival because of what he did just under 20 years ago. If it had been any other manager then assessments of his reign would have been different. And he deserves that. It's called respect. He's earned it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsslatic Posted May 1, 2009 Share Posted May 1, 2009 And he deserves that. It's called respect. He's earned it. But the initial question was 'how good was JR 2nd time around?'...so independently of previous achievements, and based solely on his current tenure...not very. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoytonBlueLad Posted May 1, 2009 Share Posted May 1, 2009 But the initial question was 'how good was JR 2nd time around?'...so independently of previous achievements, and based solely on his current tenure...not very. Yep. It's been :censored:. It really has. They were on a total downer since Christmas though. Would anyone else have done more? I've seen a lot of us this season, much more than previous years. They just aren't good enough. That's it. Bringing Joe in was a last throw of the dice. Just maybe that shower we call our team could be inspired by him. They weren't though and I seriously do doubt anyone else would have done much better. Still, if you think people will suddenly turn on Joe and start berating him, then you're not going to find many joining you at all. The blame lies at the feet of 33 players we have used this season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaticsPete Posted May 1, 2009 Share Posted May 1, 2009 (edited) And there lies the debate. I think we could and should have done better with the team we have and within the context Joe was given before the Tranmere game. But I don't so we're not any nearer are we? I think you've made a point but you're not going to change anyone's mind Edit:. Deleted double negative! Edited May 1, 2009 by LaticsPete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lookers_Carl Posted May 1, 2009 Share Posted May 1, 2009 Right lads/lasses Have had to do some cleaning up as some people may have noticed. Let me reiterate that personal attacks are against OWTB Board Rules. Debate the point as much as you like but please do it without the petty namecalling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lags Posted May 1, 2009 Share Posted May 1, 2009 (edited) Really? So if Dave Penney had come in after the MK game and hadn't won any games but had shipped out the big earners then people would have been crying into their beer if he didn't get the job full time? People are less willing to criticise Joe's on-field 'achievements' since his second arrival because of what he did just under 20 years ago. If it had been any other manager then assessments of his reign would have been different. You cannot speak for people and what they would have done. You asked me the question and I replied. Had Penney come in 8 games ago, lost the first two then cleared the decks like joe I'd have said he's started the tidy up ready for next season. Oddly the same I am saying about Joe. Edited May 1, 2009 by Lags Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.