Search results

I meant over the overall sesaon. Taken together, we have been competitive overall, IMO. If you start analysing tings game-by-game, expecting him to justify his job on a "hand to mouth" basis, it's no surprise our turnover of managers has been so high. I'm arguing that we need to review...

Disagree. IMO only to a point. If we lose every game between now and May and finish in 21st, then clearly he'll be lucky o keep his job. But more realistically, if we've been competitive and within reasonable touch of the POs, that is acceptable given the years of mediocrity we have suffered.

Finishing lower than 7th is not unacceptable.

Yes but unless we're down below 15th I wouldn't even think of sacking him regardless. My expectations / requirements of a manager just are not as high as some others on here.

I don't think we have underachieved. You simply can't EXPECT us to succeed in a manager's first full season. There's no rush, give him a few years to figure out what works or not. It will do no good making him work against the clock. It's never worked before.

Why do you think that anyone could come in and have success in their first season with us? Other than MR, who has done that?

That doesn't affect how long we give MR.

Even if I agree with you that that wouldn't constitute failure, I do not see what such a failure should be sackable. That point has been made by others too but I see no reason why that past rend would continue if we fail to go up this season. We might just as well do a Portsmouth and go up in...

If we don't get promoted then that isn't a sackable offence. Being 20th is a sackable offence. Missing out by a few points in our first season-long spell of being in contention for promotion is not something that should see him sacked.

On a separate topic, why is it we seem to have so many players/trialists called Jordan??? Must have been a common name for boys around 2000!

Indeed, however my question above still applies. Given the environment and our track record with mangers, how likely is that someone would do better than 47% win ratio? So far, nobody has.

I don't agree with that and haven't seen any evidence to back it up. And yes my role has been similar during this time although as the years have gone on I have acquired extra responsibilities. I wouldn't be where I am today without that backing and arguably they wouldn't be able to recruit...

OK fair enough but I do think that a relevant question would be "given CCFC's history of manager recruitment, are we likely to get a manager with a higher win% than MR?"

I just don't see how he can be viewed as under-performing. Yes we've lost 3 in a row in the league but all teams go through bad patches. We've got no divine right to be top of the league but he's worked hard to ensure we're in contention and will in the play-off mix. It's not critical / urgent...

Sorry Captain but if you don't find those stats impressive then you won't get much better. Overall win% of 48% over two spells is brilliant. Even 47% this season will be very hard to beat if we recruit someone else. Just look at our other managers' records (ranked from highest win % to lowest)...

Arguably a lot more. I have been in my job for 10.5 years but I am still learning and have a lot to learn. At times I struggled but was supported rather than fired for under-performance. That made me a better employee and more valuable one than if I'd been fired and they'd had to train someone...

I wouldn't call that failure, I'd call that "being reasonably competitive". Even if I agreed with your definition of "failure", I wouldn't sack someone for narrowly (as implied by 8th place) missing the play-offs twice in a row. I'd give the guy two free seasons with no expectations, "a license...

The bigger debate is, should MR be sacked if we finish 8th this season and then 8th next season? Obviously not, IMO. If we finish 20th in either season, that's a very different matter but provided we're competitive I am happy to see him given the sort of time that Coleman was given, ideally...

I agree 100% but it's not just a squad that has to develop - he isn't going to get everything right and needs to be given time to learn his trade. He's not the finished article as a manager despite his experience at various clubs. I share yoru frustration when we seem so defensive when we need...

No i genuinely do not think it fanciful that staying down would be a disaster if we are competitive. 18 months is NOT long enough to judge a manager. Give him 3 years with license to fail for 2 of those. If he is still making the mistakes after 3 years then enough will be enough. It's not a mad...