Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 65
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

It's not as if the name matters. 

In sensible organisations, after so many “failed appointments “, it would be those doing the recruitment that were got rid of.  Naturally this doesn’t apply at Latics .    We have a monkey wi

It would be nice if the club put forward their reasons for sacking Kewell - performances/results, what was it? In what areas did the club feel he underachieved?   It would also be nice if th

June. Then bring in a load of shit players, and then appoint someone with a couple of weeks to go before the start of the season then sack him in December. Bring in a few more shit players in the January window.

Then repeat cycle, more of less. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dave_Og said:

It's not as if the name matters. 

Dave, the odds for Keith Curle have tumbled from 3-1 to 1-4 really quuickly, what sort of value and colume of odds for a small market like Oldham manager would it take to do that? Is it potentially a csae of a few bets jsut following the movement or is it so significant it's very likely?

Link to post
Share on other sites

For those of you who like your stats. I know the 2 clubs are completely different animals but they are professional football clubs at the end of the day.

 

Since Lee Johnson left in 2015 we have had 13 different managers

 

Since Bill Shankley was appointed Liverpool Manager in 1959 they have had 12 further different Managers.

Edited by GlossopLatic
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, singe said:

Dave, the odds for Keith Curle have tumbled from 3-1 to 1-4 really quuickly, what sort of value and colume of odds for a small market like Oldham manager would it take to do that? Is it potentially a csae of a few bets jsut following the movement or is it so significant it's very likely?

Pennies. You'd make a lot more money laying favourites in those markets than backing them. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, GlossopLatic said:

For those of you who like your stats. I know the 2 clubs are completely different animals but they are professional football clubs at the end of the day.

 

Since Lee Johnson left in 2015 we have had 13 different managers

 

Since Bill Shankley was appointed Liverpool Manager in 1959 they have had 12 further different Managers.

The other stat doing the rounds:

 

1970 - 1994 Two managers

1994 - 2021 Thirty-two managers

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Complete and utter irrelevance who the incoming manager is/ will be. 

 

The owners have proved themselves time and again incapable of effective recruitment, each time they name a manager/coach  its the same old rhetoric, they knew the individual, he had great pedigree in football etc etc. None has lasted a full season..........says it all about the club really 

 

Just a never ending circus of madness, sickening    

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, TheBigDog said:

The other stat doing the rounds:

 

1970 - 1994 Two managers

1994 - 2021 Thirty-two managers

 

It's as if continuity in the dugout and stable leadership plays a part in a clubs success isn't it.

Edited by GlossopLatic
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, GlossopLatic said:

 

It's as if continuity in the dugout and stable leadership plays a part in a clubs success isn't it.

 

7 minutes ago, TheBigDog said:

The other stat doing the rounds:

 

1970 - 1994 Two managers

1994 - 2021 Thirty-two managers

 

Give the next manager a 24 years contract.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The DOF model isn’t an issue. 
 

Sacking poorly performing coaches isn’t an issue. 
 

Having inept and woeful decision makers who aren’t accountable is a massive issue. 
 

Continually hiring poor coaches, with poor records is a massive issue. 
 

The recruitment of players this season has been far better this season than what it was, (still not great) and until they hire a decent coach they’re just pissing in the wind. 
 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Dave_Og said:

Pennies. You'd make a lot more money laying favourites in those markets than backing them. 

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, League one forever said:

The DOF model isn’t an issue. 
 

Sacking poorly performing coaches isn’t an issue. 
 

Having inept and woeful decision makers who aren’t accountable is a massive issue. 
 

Continually hiring poor coaches, with poor records is a massive issue. 
 

The recruitment of players this season has been far better this season than what it was, (still not great) and until they hire a decent coach they’re just pissing in the wind. 
 

 

You keep making the same point (over and over again) that a decent coach could make all the difference.

 

It's not just the coach- it's the circus in charge of the club stopping us being successful.  Why won't you accept that? 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, oafc 123 said:

You keep making the same point (over and over again) that a decent coach could make all the difference.

 

It's not just the coach- it's the circus in charge of the club stopping us being successful.  Why won't you accept that? 

 

 

You obviously read my post in great detail. . . 😂😂

 

Why can’t you accept a different point of view on a forum without getting upset about it? Be easier to ignore me surely? 


 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, League one forever said:

You obviously read my post in great detail. . . 😂😂

 

Why can’t you accept a different point of view on a forum without getting upset about it? Be easier to ignore me surely? 


 

 

Sorry if I sounded that way.  I'm just fed up like the rest of us and struggle to see any positives.  I hope you are right 👍

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

We are seeing the problem with nepotism. With a brother in charge of recruitment, there cannot be an issue there! So it has to be the coach doesn’t it.

 

We hear Karl saying we have a top ten squad. That will only be his “opinion” arrived at in discussions with our real leader Mo.  By implication the coach is under performing. There is no other conclusion in their minds. So of course the coach has to go rather then the Sporting Director.

 

HK I suspect knew this, probably the under performance has been discussed.  Hence HKs comments that actually we were favourite to go down and the conclusion if you accept this, is that the coach had added value.

 

If this was the first time this had occurred, we may follow Mo’s logic.  The problem is that EVERY coach has “failed” and there has been lots.  Surely everyone can see more likely truth is that the one sporting Director has failed to recruit a team.

 

Brother Mo won’t be going so we the real Oldham Athletic are f- - ked.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

In sensible organisations, after so many “failed appointments “, it would be those doing the recruitment that were got rid of. 
Naturally this doesn’t apply at Latics . 
 

We have a monkey will type the works of Shakespeare approach. Given enough tries and time there’ll be an appointment that works. However, none of us has that much time to live. 

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, LaticsPete said:

In sensible organisations, after so many “failed appointments “, it would be those doing the recruitment that were got rid of. 
Naturally this doesn’t apply at Latics . 
 

We have a monkey will type the works of Shakespeare approach. Given enough tries and time there’ll be an appointment that works. However, none of us has that much time to live. 

Pete, how true your comments are.   Last night I said to my good lady " I am 73 years old, I fear that in my life that is left, I will not see any stability at the club, and I see no prospect of even a modicum of success " . A sickening thought. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Pidge said:

We are seeing the problem with nepotism. With a brother in charge of recruitment, there cannot be an issue there! So it has to be the coach doesn’t it.

 

We hear Karl saying we have a top ten squad. That will only be his “opinion” arrived at in discussions with our real leader Mo.  By implication the coach is under performing. There is no other conclusion in their minds. So of course the coach has to go rather then the Sporting Director.

 

HK I suspect knew this, probably the under performance has been discussed.  Hence HKs comments that actually we were favourite to go down and the conclusion if you accept this, is that the coach had added value.

 

If this was the first time this had occurred, we may follow Mo’s logic.  The problem is that EVERY coach has “failed” and there has been lots.  Surely everyone can see more likely truth is that the one sporting Director has failed to recruit a team.

 

Brother Mo won’t be going so we the real Oldham Athletic are f- - ked.

Totally agree. Nobody will succeed under these pillocks unless Mo stops recruiting, he has no football experience at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Emcee_Latic said:

Totally agree. Nobody will succeed under these pillocks unless Mo stops recruiting, he has no football experience at all.

I think he once played in the French equivalent of the Evo-Stick South Division Six. That's experience, isn't it? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...