by Gulliball » 27 Aug 2015, 15:20
Sacking him whilst on sick leave would probably be the main sore point. Saying it was performance based to make it legal might also have stung.
At the time (and there were polls on this very website) the vast majority of fans wanted Knill to get the permanent job, and only a handful wanted to wait for Ling. The prevalent view (including those 'in the know', which helped it to spread) was that Ling was an alcoholic, which made Knill coming in, offering his services for free and saving us from relegation on the final day, a much more attractive prospect for the future.
With hindsight it is easy to look back, with Knill's permanent tenure being such a disaster, and wish we had kept Ling (not many fans wanted this at the time, but no-one knew the truth). Those who had access to the full situation should have the accountability for doing the right thing, which they did not, by any measure at all.
Sacking him whilst on sick leave would probably be the main sore point. Saying it was performance based to make it legal might also have stung.
At the time (and there were polls on this very website) the vast majority of fans wanted Knill to get the permanent job, and only a handful wanted to wait for Ling. The prevalent view (including those 'in the know', which helped it to spread) was that Ling was an alcoholic, which made Knill coming in, offering his services for free and saving us from relegation on the final day, a much more attractive prospect for the future.
With hindsight it is easy to look back, with Knill's permanent tenure being such a disaster, and wish we had kept Ling (not many fans wanted this at the time, but no-one knew the truth). Those who had access to the full situation should have the accountability for doing the right thing, which they did not, by any measure at all.