Northampton

[yarddog73]

Kellys start wasn't a bad one looking back, Croft missed an absolute sitter at Colchester to win it and we had a couple of great chances to win at Gigg Lane, we were the better team at Walsall and would have done at least as well last season if he hadn't had the snake waiting to pounce after half a dozen games.

[yarddog73]

It also wasn't Kellys fault the club got rid of Harvey against his wishes and the the players downing tools against Bradford and Peterborough.

[GlossopLatic]

Not silly in the context I put it in. If we have a 20 goal striker who has only reached 10 by xmas and then goes in the window because we can't hold our own water, never mind a half decent player, then we have 10 goals. If we have two 9 goal strikers who fly under the radar and don't get sold we have 18 goals at the end of the season.

Obviously a 20 goal striker is better but we'd have more chance of holding onto a greasy pig.

 

Didn't realise the front 3 had been so prolific back in 06. Good times......

 

I think the bigger issue is keeping hold of our best players and managers here.

 

If we climb up the league and get near the top people will take notice of our players and manager whether I don't think its possible to fly under the radar really. If we had 2 9 goal a season strikers and were up their we would be so on the back of a :censored: hot defence or midfield or manager. Someone would come calling for any of them in January. If we can build up some resolve to reject such offers or better still convince them they can achieve their ambitions here that will be the day we start moving forwards.

 

Also in 06 a lot of Andy Liddell's goals came from the penalty spot infact he never missed one. We call this Pav's law now but really it should be Liddells law as he was the first to suffer the Pens don't count treatment.

[GlossopLatic]

 

I can't take anyone seriously who thinks a manager should be sacked after game 1, 3, 5 or 7 games. Which is a good number of our fans and the Latics board, sadly.

 

I think Darren Kelly should have been sacked when he was.

 

Although to be fair he shouldn't have been hired in the first place, dragging it out any longer than it had would have been even more of a disaster

[deyres42]

It also wasn't Kellys fault the club got rid of Harvey against his wishes and the the players downing tools against Bradford and Peterborough.

And the chaotic training? Inability to sign players?

[Magic Mikey]

Not silly in the context I put it in. If we have a 20 goal striker who has only reached 10 by xmas and then goes in the window because we can't hold our own water, never mind a half decent player, then we have 10 goals. If we have two 9 goal strikers who fly under the radar and don't get sold we have 18 goals at the end of the season.

Obviously a 20 goal striker is better but we'd have more chance of holding onto a greasy pig.

 

Didn't realise the front 3 had been so prolific back in 06. Good times......

As proven by our attempts to get hold of Steve Evans

[RobOAFC]

Kellys card was marked when he reportedly asked Corney to get rid of TP.

 

He didn't have a clue how to sign players. With Corney taking more of a back seat, we'd probably have ended up signing players that Barry thinks are good.

 

He couldn't manage the team (was it on here it was mentioned Jones and Dunn asked him what he wanted them to do and he ignored them during a game?).

 

I'm sure a few people on here will have hired someone before and then after a couple of weeks said :censored: that was a mistake...

[pukka]

Kelly was better than David Dunnce

[boundaryblue80]

 

I think Darren Kelly should have been sacked when he was.

 

Although to be fair he shouldn't have been hired in the first place, dragging it out any longer than it had would have been even more of a disaster

In that case, I can't take you as seriously as I did.

 

Sacked after 5 unbeaten, followed by 1 defeat thanks to Forte nutting someone and then the players downing tools vs Posh. Same players who have now gone to the likes of Notts Co, Sheff Utd and Orient and are downing tools still.

 

Anyway.......

[boundaryblue80]

Kellys card was marked when he reportedly asked Corney to get rid of TP.

 

He didn't have a clue how to sign players. With Corney taking more of a back seat, we'd probably have ended up signing players that Barry thinks are good.

 

He couldn't manage the team (was it on here it was mentioned Jones and Dunn asked him what he wanted them to do and he ignored them during a game?).

 

I'm sure a few people on here will have hired someone before and then after a couple of weeks said :censored: that was a mistake...

 

And yet despite all that (which is just your opinion of what happened).......STILL went the first 5 league games of the season unbeaten. Not done that since...well, forever (only joking, I'm exaggerating but it feels like forever with us)

 

Look...fans will be forever split on the Darren Kelly era...which is ok, but I brought him up to show that SR is getting plenty of patience and there's nothing wrong with the problems that are there with the team so far, being freely discussed.

Edited August 18, 2016 by boundaryblue80

[GlossopLatic]

In that case, I can't take you as seriously as I did.

 

Sacked after 5 unbeaten, followed by 1 defeat thanks to Forte nutting someone and then the players downing tools vs Posh. Same players who have now gone to the likes of Notts Co, Sheff Utd and Orient and are downing tools still.

 

Anyway.......

 

And the same players who upped their game substantially when Sheridan arrived

 

Come on you can't tell me that keeping hold of Darren Kelly for any longer would have been anything other than bad for the club.

 

I know we should give managers time to prove themselves, I and by the looks of it everyone else on here is more than happy to do that for Robinson, but sometimes you have to cut your losses early and this was one of those more exceptional cases.

[NewBlue]

Football in general, instant success expected, loss of confidence/form not permitted.

It's true. Owners have brought it on themselves.

 

Manufacture of the fan to the customer.

[yarddog73]

We had to get rid of Kelly for one simple fact and that was Dunn along with Holden totally undermined him from the off, Dunn because he'd been promised the gig and Holden because he saw his arse because he didn't get the gig, all the :censored:e about his inability to do this and that are irrelevant because it was a picture painted to suit Dunn and Holdens agenda. If those two hadn't been around and Kelly retained Harvey we would of been fine last season the first five games were evidence of that.

[HarryBosch]

 

And yet despite all that (which is just your opinion of what happened).......STILL went the first 5 league games of the season unbeaten. Not done that since...well, forever (only joking, I'm exaggerating but it feels like forever with us)

 

Look...fans will be forever split on the Darren Kelly era...which is ok, but I brought him up to show that SR is getting plenty of patience and there's nothing wrong with the problems that are there with the team so far, being freely discussed.

 

I'd say SR is nowhere near needing any patience as things stand.

 

Yes, we could be doing better but, in many people eyes, are doing better than they expected, i.e. it could have been a lot worse.

 

That said, it could all change very quickly with a couple of losses and/or no wins or goals materialising over the next few games

 

I'm confident that won't happen though if we keep steadily progressing as we have been.

[deyres42]

We had to get rid of Kelly for one simple fact and that was Dunn along with Holden totally undermined him from the off, Dunn because he'd been promised the gig and Holden because he saw his arse because he didn't get the gig, all the :censored:e about his inability to do this and that are irrelevant because it was a picture painted to suit Dunn and Holdens agenda. If those two hadn't been around and Kelly retained Harvey we would of been fine last season the first five games were evidence of that.

Your best one yet ???

[palmer1]

We had to get rid of Kelly for one simple fact and that was Dunn along with Holden totally undermined him from the off, Dunn because he'd been promised the gig and Holden because he saw his arse because he didn't get the gig, all the :censored:e about his inability to do this and that are irrelevant because this is a picture painted to suit Yarddog73's fantasy. If those two hadn't been around and Kelly retained Harvey we would of won the league last season the first five games were evidence of that.

Fixed...

 

 

 

 

 

You should really type lol at the end so people can tell it's a joke. It is a joke right?......right!?

[the_mighty_bosh]

We had to get rid of Kelly for one simple fact and that was Dunn along with Holden totally undermined him from the off, Dunn because he'd been promised the gig and Holden because he saw his arse because he didn't get the gig, all the :censored:e about his inability to do this and that are irrelevant because it was a picture painted to suit Dunn and Holdens agenda. If those two hadn't been around and Kelly retained Harvey we would of been fine last season the first five games were evidence of that.

 

So there's no shades of grey involved here at all?

 

I didn't like the way Dunn was brought in and I'm not convinced that Kelly ever really stood a chance, but there is absolutely no way that it was solely Dunn/Holden who were to blame for Kelly's demise.

 

The board have to take the blame mostly for their handling of the whole affair. Whether they planned to install Dunn as manager when they signed him as a player or whether it was a "needs must" decision after they sacked Kelly, thinking that Dunn was a safe pair of hands after the poorly thought out decision to get Kelly in the first place was incompetent thinking throughout.

 

Getting rid of the only experienced first team coach at the club in Harvey was a ridiculous decision. But even if it was one of Dunn's terms when the club signed him (which I highly doubt) the board would still shoulder the blame for being weak for listening an idea that was clearly a bad one.

 

Us fans hold some responsibility for Kelly's position being untenable. I've never seen our fans being so scathing of a manager so early on in his reign after the defeat against Bradford. The only thing I could compare it too was when we lost 3-0 at Yeovil in Dave Penney's last game in charge (the fact that fans could be so passionately against a manager for a dead rubber showed that the writing was on the wall). Considering it was our first league defeat, that the fans were so clearly unconvinced (rightly or wrongly) showed that Kelly couldn't continue and the board had to step in as soon as they could.

 

Finally Kelly showed that things weren't fine with him in charge despite not losing in his first 5 league games. Cassidy was his marquee signing FFS! There were some very odd tactical decisions (Forte up front on his own, Philliskirk and Dunn as our midfield two against Posh). His interviews (while far from the most important thing) were entirely unconvincing. Promises of "attractive attacking football" with weren't showing any signs of being kept.

 

All of these things combined are why I feel a bit sorry for Kelly and think that he never stood a chance, but they're also why he had to go.

 

Also you can't seriously believe that our fans had a Dunn/Holden agenda?? Kelly, Dunn and Holden were all seen as being equally incapable managers.

[nzlatic]

We had to get rid of Kelly for one simple fact and that was Dunn along with Holden totally undermined him from the off, Dunn because he'd been promised the gig and Holden because he saw his arse because he didn't get the gig, all the :censored:e about his inability to do this and that are irrelevant because it was a picture painted to suit Dunn and Holdens agenda. If those two hadn't been around and Kelly retained Harvey we would of been fine last season the first five games were evidence of that.

That Kelly/Harvey dream ticket worked well at Halifax

[boundaryblue80]

 

I'd say SR is nowhere near needing any patience as things stand. - I agree. But people are painting it that discussing what isn't working so far as people not being patient.

 

Yes, we could be doing better but, in many people eyes, are doing better than they expected, i.e. it could have been a lot worse. - We could be doing better. We could be doing worse. I expected a win from the first 3 games though so for me, have underachieved. No biggie. 43 more games to go.

 

That said, it could all change very quickly with a couple of losses and/or no wins or goals materialising over the next few games - I agree.

 

I'm confident that won't happen though if we keep steadily progressing as we have been. - In defence we have progressed. In attack, we haven't. Infact, since the Wigan game you could say we have gone backwards. But it is early days.

[Stevie_J]

Kelly should never have got the job. Not for the first time, the board were trying to get away with appointing the cheapest candidate available; there was no other obvious reason for appointing someone as under-qualified and inarticulate.

 

However, before a ball had been kicked in anger, Kelly was already as good as gone. The board openly undermined him: Harvey was booted out; Dunn was brought in - and seemingly everyone knew from the off he was lined up to take over.

 

Appointing him was a gross error in judgment but not giving him any chance to show if he could do anything (and I don't think he would have, for the record) wasn't fair. I struggle to see how you can justify binning off a manager after a handful of games, particularly if the next move is to give the job to someone just as unqualified and just as stupid.

 

I didn't lose any sleep over it though as I thought he was a terrible appointment in the first place.

[boundaryblue80]

So there's no shades of grey involved here at all?

 

I didn't like the way Dunn was brought in and I'm not convinced that Kelly ever really stood a chance, but there is absolutely no way that it was solely Dunn/Holden who were to blame for Kelly's demise.

 

The board have to take the blame mostly for their handling of the whole affair. Whether they planned to install Dunn as manager when they signed him as a player or whether it was a "needs must" decision after they sacked Kelly, thinking that Dunn was a safe pair of hands after the poorly thought out decision to get Kelly in the first place was incompetent thinking throughout.

 

Getting rid of the only experienced first team coach at the club in Harvey was a ridiculous decision. But even if it was one of Dunn's terms when the club signed him (which I highly doubt) the board would still shoulder the blame for being weak for listening an idea that was clearly a bad one.

 

Us fans hold some responsibility for Kelly's position being untenable. I've never seen our fans being so scathing of a manager so early on in his reign after the defeat against Bradford. The only thing I could compare it too was when we lost 3-0 at Yeovil in Dave Penney's last game in charge (the fact that fans could be so passionately against a manager for a dead rubber showed that the writing was on the wall). Considering it was our first league defeat, that the fans were so clearly unconvinced (rightly or wrongly) showed that Kelly couldn't continue and the board had to step in as soon as they could.

 

Finally Kelly showed that things weren't fine with him in charge despite not losing in his first 5 league games. Cassidy was his marquee signing FFS! There were some very odd tactical decisions (Forte up front on his own, Philliskirk and Dunn as our midfield two against Posh). His interviews (while far from the most important thing) were entirely unconvincing. Promises of "attractive attacking football" with weren't showing any signs of being kept.

 

All of these things combined are why I feel a bit sorry for Kelly and think that he never stood a chance, but they're also why he had to go.

 

Also you can't seriously believe that our fans had a Dunn/Holden agenda?? Kelly, Dunn and Holden were all seen as being equally incapable managers.

 

Excellently put. Well done that man!

[mcfluff1985]

Not sure why we bite. Yarddog chats mainly :censored:e

[NewBlue]

The saddest part of the whole saga was losing the chance to watch Dunn rip up this division. The few times he played he put on a masterclass...

[palmer1]

The saddest part of the whole saga was losing the chance to watch Dunn rip up this division. The few times he played he put on a masterclass...[/quot

 

Yep!

 

Although a few nice touches and efforts on goal does not a masterclass make...

[boundaryblue80]

 

And the same players who upped their game substantially when Sheridan arrived

 

Come on you can't tell me that keeping hold of Darren Kelly for any longer would have been anything other than bad for the club.

 

I know we should give managers time to prove themselves, I and by the looks of it everyone else on here is more than happy to do that for Robinson, but sometimes you have to cut your losses early and this was one of those more exceptional cases.

 

Them early games were some of the worst atmospheres I've ever experienced at BP. The lack of support for a new manager was nothing short of disgusting in all areas. We will never know where it would've led but I don't think with the support SR is getting now, it would've been anything like as bad as it was under Dunn. We will never know. People quoting Halifax know nothing about what set up, constraints, deadwood that club had. I notice (with over half a season left) they got relegated with whoever managed them after Kelly also. His stint there after is totally irrelevant to his time at ours.

 

Do I think it would've worked out under Kelly? With support, who knows but it wouldn't have started out as bad as folk made it. I suspect it'd be quiet similar to now. Without it tho, 100% doomed to fail. Same with any manager.