dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
Agree............
So we're Bury.
It was when you watched it. Tranmere were shite if you pardon my French.
Anyone know anything about Neil Moxley, is he a sky blues fan?
Thorn sacking is one of many strange decisions by Coventry
By NEIL MOXLEY
PUBLISHED: 11:06, 30 August 2012 | UPDATED: 11:12, 30 August 2012
There have been some strange decisions at Coventry City over the years.
Selling Highfield Road might have been one. Sacking Eric Black certainly fell into that category.
Current owners SISU handing over their cash to Ray Ranson? Ouch.
Dismissed: Andy Thorn was axed by Coventry after three league draws
And so it was with a resigned air of acceptance that it was business as unusual when news broke on Sunday lunchtime that Andy Thorn had been sacked.
Yes, after an unbeaten start to the season with his heavily-changed squad.
I accept that it must have been gut-wrenching to see a two-goal lead slip away at the Ricoh against Bury, just 24 hours before that decision was made.
Just as I accept it must have been galling to see a hatful of chances go begging at Yeovil.
And I know also that the performance - as admitted on Radio Five afterwards by goalscorer Kevin Kilbane - wasn't up to scratch against Dagenham and Redbridge.
But the good news is that the Sky Blues progressed in the Capital One Cup. And were able to beat Birmingham City on Tuesday night.
Five matches with the same players and undefeated to boot.
At a time when managers, we are told, are accountable through results, Thorn was in credit this season.
The players have been put through their paces in pre-season. Systems have been worked upon.
And with the sacking, all of that goes out of the window.
When Coventry City end their due diligence on their prospective manager, they are likely to have to adapt to the new guy's method of working. He may want to bring in his new players.
Another period of transition and change.
Now, I have no particular support for Thorn. He had a difficult job last year but I'm not convinced that relegation was a natural consequence for Coventry City when the campaign kicked off 12 months ago.
Thorn's record over 57 games was poor. Did it change that much over 60?
However, my problem is this: If you are going to back him during the close-season and allow him to bring in his own players, then surely he needs more than 270 minutes to put his plans into operation?
At this point, I know there will be supporters pointing to Bryan Gunn's sacking at Norwich City and Paul Lambert's subsequent appointment.
New squad: Thorn had several new players to manage
But the Canaries actually had played two matches - winning at Yeovil and then drawing at Exeter before the Scot's arrival was confirmed. Who knows what might have happened had Gunn stayed? And, ergo, had Thorn.
Off-the-field Tim Fisher, Coventry City's de facto chief executive, appears to be heading in the right direction. Negotiations with various parties over the rent, Ricoh Arena ownership issue and the city council are on-going.
But he needs to be mindful of the fact that of the 'big' clubs who have dropped into League One, only Leicester City have made it out at the first time of asking. Leeds United, Nottingham Forest, Charlton Athletic, the two Sheffield clubs - none of those jumped straight back into the Championship.
It is not an easy league to escape.
In fairness, Fisher suggested there were 'other factors' in the statement which followed Thorn's. One day, when the legalities have no doubt been sorted out, we might find the truth.
And, I suppose the point is this: If Coventry do end in the top six - as was the stated aim at the start of the season - then the board's decision will be vindicated.
If not, supporters will point to Thorn's sacking and ask why he wasn't given time.
As possibly we all expected prior to last Sunday's announcement, results will determine all come May next year.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...ing-strange--The-Midlander.html#ixzz2HKrvw7MJ
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
He seems to have been proven as being pretty inaccurate.
This. I was going to post this.
Ignore Grendel, he thinks AT was a bad manager and that the sun shines out of SISU's arse!
Do you know anything about I have never heard if him.
He seems to have a lot of knowledge on cov.
Would be nice if there is a national sports journalist out there who is a cov fan.
Yes, it has worked out for the better but it was very badly done, the whole handling of it has probably cost us promotion this season.Pretty much every now agrees it was right to ask Thorn, the thing they did wrong was dally about getting a replacement in. Having said that had they rushed the decision and brought someone in who hadn't had the impact Robins has had we'd be slamming them for rushing the appointment.
Yes, it has worked out for the better but it was very badly done, the whole handling of it has probably cost us promotion this season.
If we don't get in the top six. I have to fully agree with that.
Yes, it has worked out for the better but it was very badly done, the whole handling of it has probably cost us promotion this season.
Only because we should have done it far sooner
We could've made a knee jerk appointment, Dennis Wise, fans' choice and he applied, they could've played it safe, who knows, Wise could've been terrible! They took their time and got the right man, fair play!
At least it wasn't Right Said Fred!!
Should have been dealt with in the summer if they didn't think Thorn was the right man, when we weren't pissing away league points down the drain every weekWe could've made a knee jerk appointment, Dennis Wise, fans' choice and he applied, they could've played it safe, who knows, Wise could've been terrible! They took their time and got the right man, fair play!
Should have been dealt with in the summer if they didn't think Thorn was the right man, when we weren't pissing away league points down the drain every week
As I've said before, AT made promises to keep his job, but it soon became clear he weren't keeping his promises, so they sacked him. I could understand why they kept him on tbf.
In FM terms, when we got relegated, he kept his job, but he was in a 'very insecure' position. A 2-2 draw, from being 2-0 up, isn't the best way to convict the board you're the right man!
If you are prepared to sack a bloke after 3 draws, you really did not have full faith in him. And probably serious doubts if they are confirmed enough by 3 draws to sack him.
If that is the case you do it in the summer the new man signs his own players.
You also don't suffer 5 defeats on the trot whilst finding the new man. That IMO may cost you promotion.
i think we ought to evaluate the merits of the 'board',
& of course, their in depth knowledge of football,
or maybe joy would like to comment on her appointments,
? fit & proper owners ?
If you are prepared to sack a bloke after 3 draws, you really did not have full faith in him. And probably serious doubts if they are confirmed enough by 3 draws to sack him.
If that is the case you do it in the summer the new man signs his own players.
You also don't suffer 5 defeats on the trot whilst finding the new man. That IMO may cost you promotion.
But Shaw should've been able to get results during that period!
Again, AT made promises, which he didn't keep, and the board thinking back, knew they didn't back him the season just gone, backed him this season, thats probably why we only paid for 1 player, he didn't keep his promises, so he got sacked. Right thing to do IMO.
He was almost certainly moved on because of other factors than just results and it beggars belief that fisher got taken in that those areas would see any improvement.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?