Gloomy Gull wrote:
CH was not "brought in" because that would suggest that he was working elsewhere in the organisation and the Board decided that he should be moved into a new role.
CH APPLIED for the job, he (presumably) WANTED to take the job, he CHOSE to accept the offer made to undertake the role in PREFERENCE to an alternative role at Northampton (or so we are led to believe).
He MUST take responsibility for the current debacle - if he thought this job was too hard and was concerned he would/may not succeed then he should not have APPLIED for the bloody role in the first instance - if he took the job believing in his own ability to achieve at it but cannot make a difference - who is supposed to take responsibility for that - Knill (for the "dross" he left behind) ?? Surely not.
The buck stops at the door of the candidate who convinced the Board he was the right man for the job ............or did the Board somehow blackmail him into taking the job.
All this "it's not his fault", he "was left a lot of rubbish" etc.etc - is cr*p.
He should be a man and admit he is out of his depth and was from day 1.
If you had applied for and accepted a managerial position in the working real world and failed at it, would your employers accept the excuse that I was left with a load of sh1t that I could do nothing with ......unless you have a particularly philanthropic employer I doubt you would be seen as completely blameless as you had been employed because YOU convinced the employer that YOU could make a difference and improve on what was already there. Otherwise why employ someone new>
Chris has got some excuses and mitigating factors but by and large gloomy gull........
I think this is a reasonable and fair post and pretty much the manner in which I think too. He should get a fair crack of the whip next season if he is to stay and then we'll see what we have. The portents aren't good though. The conference is a bloodbath and if you aren't ruthless you'll get some nasty surprises. A bit like we have under CH thus far I'm sad to say.
Strangely enough it was Pope Gregory the 9th inviting me for drinks aboard his steam yacht, the saucy sue currently wintering in montego bay with the England cricket team and the Balanese Goddess of plenty.
Gloomy Gull wrote:
CH was not "brought in" because that would suggest that he was working elsewhere in the organisation and the Board decided that he should be moved into a new role.
CH APPLIED for the job, he (presumably) WANTED to take the job, he CHOSE to accept the offer made to undertake the role in PREFERENCE to an alternative role at Northampton (or so we are led to believe).
He MUST take responsibility for the current debacle - if he thought this job was too hard and was concerned he would/may not succeed then he should not have APPLIED for the bloody role in the first instance - if he took the job believing in his own ability to achieve at it but cannot make a difference - who is supposed to take responsibility for that - Knill (for the "dross" he left behind) ?? Surely not.
The buck stops at the door of the candidate who convinced the Board he was the right man for the job ............or did the Board somehow blackmail him into taking the job.
All this "it's not his fault", he "was left a lot of rubbish" etc.etc - is cr*p.
He should be a man and admit he is out of his depth and was from day 1.
If you had applied for and accepted a managerial position in the working real world and failed at it, would your employers accept the excuse that I was left with a load of sh1t that I could do nothing with ......unless you have a particularly philanthropic employer I doubt you would be seen as completely blameless as you had been employed because YOU convinced the employer that YOU could make a difference and improve on what was already there. Otherwise why employ someone new>
by hector » Today, 19:36
My theory, and that is all it is and I may be way off the mark, is that the club may well have been considering a mentor arrangement with CH but that CH was the long-term target.
Had Northampton not been in the frame, I suspect TUFC would have had a great deal more bargaining power in terms of what role they were prepared to offer CH. It could have been 'start at no.2 and take over at the end of the season.'
I suspect that would not have seemed as attractive as a no.1 slot at Northampton, if CH, as rumoured, was offered the post there. So with another club interested, he was obviously in a position to demand terms a little more proactively than he might have been able to had TUFC been the only club interested.
There seemed to be suggestion in the press and certainly there was rumour of a Sturrock/Hargreaves partnership, so I was a little surprised at that the time, that no old head came in with him.
I do not believe there is anyone at TUFC deliberately messing up - I suspect they have tried their best to salvage things - but I just feel they are misguided. A proper recruitment process for a new manager seemed to happen after Buckle left and there were one or two decent candidates amongst the contenders, yet this didn't happen when Ling was sacked and neither was the lesson learnt again when Knill was sacked.
The club were determined to go for CH, without, it would appear, really scrutinising whether or not he was the best man for the job - without considering other options. They heeded the call of the gut, that many of the fanbase who don't think, appear to draw inspiration from, and went for it. It would be the same fans as used to call for Martyn Rogers or Sean Joyce - who don't see beyond the county of Devon for answers - yet one of those linked when Ling got the job, John Hughes, is now managing in the Scottish Premiership.
Our history is littered with opportunities missed when it comes to appointing managers - Bateson passed up on Mickey Adams and Gary Megson, because he felt Eddie May and Wes Saunders would be better options. It seems, historically, that those who run TUFC, take the easy option, appoint people they know, regardless of how good or poor they are, whilst often the most imaginative appointments e.g. O'Farrell, Knowles, Rosenior, work out to be our best compared to the easy, known options: Compton, Saunders.
Some good posts there gents with some very good points and I am very much in agreement with you both.
You are my torquay, my only torquay, you make me happy when skies are grey, you'll never know, just, how much i love you, so don't take my torquay away.
(laa, laa, - laaaa, - la, la, - laa, laa, - laaaa, - la, la. - la,la,la,la,la, - la,la,la,la....).
On the evidence of CH managerial skills, do we bring in "experienced help" to help and mentor him for the start of next season?
CANCEL THAT
Do we really want to start next season with Chris Hargreaves? His demonstration with lack of discipline, attitude and general having a clue is worrying for next season all ready.
For everyone who says its knills team dont blame CH. look at Northampton and Portsmouth. They change managers bring in a few loans and they have improved.
CH takes over and we was just outside and we fall so badly and were not even close to safety. Ch has his mates and even they cant do it for him.
Would like a new manager with experience, even if its lots of experience of the conference and can build us a good side. Even with us going down we still should have a decent budget for the conference.
Im just afraid if CH is to stay his mates will keep there places in the side and there not good enough for us now, they wont be good enough for the top of league below
Chris .......do you think Bodin is international quality?
Chris .......what do you consider that Bodin consistently brings to the game each week (step overs aside)?
Chris.......Bodin as a striker -- discuss.
Chris......what has happened to Chappel?
Chris.....why do you not have a recognised penalty taker, who trains at taking penalties, in the team?
Chris......if you do, WHY did you allow one who was "up for it" take the responsibility and not impose your managerial rule on the decision making.
Chris......why do you play a striker from Spurs in a winger position then take him off "because they were double teaming him"?
Chris......what did you see in the players, before you took the job, that convinced you that you could make them perform better, and where has that vision gone?
Chris......why don't you let Hodges take over the manager responsibilities for the rest of the season? - at least he has managed a team in difficulty before.
