Oh no, please don't do it, Stewart

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Nacho said:
I choose to believe what a couple of lads on here suggested that it was in Fletcher's contract that we had to play him if fit, or Coleman really is a ****ing idiot continuing to start him. And yes mistakes were made, many of them inexplicable.

To be fair it's more like Donald's saying that he won't rule him out rather than he's a top option, I don't think he'll be manager next season.
Click to expand...
This is my take on it too - Not ruling something out is not saying he's our number 1 contender - My guess is that he hasn't ruled anyone out.

Has he ruled out Pep Guardiola? No? Oh well he must be our new manager then!
 
  • Like
Reactions: jdsafc
jdsafc said:
I think they answered the question badly to the journo's, but reigned back on it when they spoke to Roker Report (or whoever it was) on the pod cast.

They seemed to be making the point that Coleman's previous contract with the substantial pay off if it ran in to season 2 was Short's arrangement with Coleman that Short terminated. This makes them at liberty to talk to Coleman if they want - he is a free agent.

For what its worth I hope they don't appoint him as I'm not a fan of going back over. However, I think they would benefit from talking to him about the dressing room culture that they are desperate to change
Click to expand...


The type of manager they described being after made me think of Keane! Nobody would hold the squad and team up to a higher standard than him.

I'd love to know who their top 3 choices are and who has applied for the job so far.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nads
marcusblackcat said:
This is my take on it too - Not ruling something out is not saying he's our number 1 contender - My guess is that he hasn't ruled anyone out.

Has he ruled out Pep Guardiola? No? Oh well he must be our new manager then!
Click to expand...


Haha. They did say he would be number 5 or 6 on their list. (Coleman not Pep! Just in case of any confusion ) so definitely not their top choice
 
dansafcman said:
The type of manager they described being after made me think of Keane! Nobody would hold the squad and team up to a higher standard than him.

I'd love to know who their top 3 choices are and who has applied for the job so far.
Click to expand...

Hmmm - the same Roy Keane who signed Chimbonda, Diouff and Cisse?

I have no idea who they fancy, but I think the journey is going to be fun to watch as all of the mercenaries get kicked out. Donald's sidekick Charlie Mc..... was very impressive. I bet he's got a picture of Rodwell on his dart board already
 
  • Like
Reactions: Honeybubblemountain, HoratioCarter, Dorset and 1 other person
jdsafc said:
Hmmm - the same Roy Keane who signed Chimbonda, Diouff and Cisse?

I have no idea who they fancy, but I think the journey is going to be fun to watch as all of the mercenaries get kicked out. Donald's sidekick Charlie Mc..... was very impressive. I bet he's got a picture of Rodwell on his dart board already
Click to expand...
I hope so he must be first on the chop list
 
jdsafc said:
Hmmm - the same Roy Keane who signed Chimbonda, Diouff and Cisse?

I have no idea who they fancy, but I think the journey is going to be fun to watch as all of the mercenaries get kicked out. Donald's sidekick Charlie Mc..... was very impressive. I bet he's got a picture of Rodwell on his dart board already
Click to expand...


With the contract that Rodwell is on there's not a chance of getting rid.

Paul Daniels and David Copperfield together couldn't get him to disappear.
 
jdsafc said:
Hmmm - the same Roy Keane who signed Chimbonda, Diouff and Cisse?

I have no idea who they fancy, but I think the journey is going to be fun to watch as all of the mercenaries get kicked out. Donald's sidekick Charlie Mc..... was very impressive. I bet he's got a picture of Rodwell on his dart board already
Click to expand...

Didn't mean to imply I wanted him back. Having said that, yes he did sign a couple of bad players, but overall brought in some decent players during his time here. I also remember him leaving 3 players behind when they turned up late for the team bus, which is what I meant by demanding high standards
 
polyphemus said:
With the contract that Rodwell is on there's not a chance of getting rid.

Paul Daniels and David Copperfield together couldn't get him to disappear.
Click to expand...

They said they wanted to get rid of the piss takers asap. I don't think they've overlooked him mate.
 
Having listened to the podcast I thinkSD was simply giving lip service to the Coleman return link. He mentioned 2 or 3 prospective managers are ahead of him in thier thoughts. That doesn't indicate to me that they are remotely serious about it and from CC's point of view he's knows without doubt he would only be a last resort. With all this in mind I think we can sleep easy knowing 5 at the back is in the past..... I ****ing hope so anyway.
 
jdsafc said:
Hmmm - the same Roy Keane who signed Chimbonda, Diouff and Cisse?

I have no idea who they fancy, but I think the journey is going to be fun to watch as all of the mercenaries get kicked out. Donald's sidekick Charlie Mc..... was very impressive. I bet he's got a picture of Rodwell on his dart board already
Click to expand...

Wasn’t he just. Brutal, strong, open.

I like that fella instantly.
 
Paperback Ruiter said:
Having listened to the podcast I thinkSD was simply giving lip service to the Coleman return link. He mentioned 2 or 3 prospective managers are ahead of him in thier thoughts. That doesn't indicate to me that they are remotely serious about it and from CC's point of view he's knows without doubt he would only be a last resort. With all this in mind I think we can sleep easy knowing 5 at the back is in the past..... I ****ing hope so anyway.
Click to expand...
Not sure why people are "anti" 5 at the back - we played 5 at the back earlier this season and won - we also played 5 at the back and lost 2-0 - both goals coming from set pieces (nothing to do with the 5 at the back - just ****e defending/goalkeeping)

There are a lot of managers playing 5 at the back now - although most play 2 up front which makes it a much better formation going forward. Seeing the end of 5 at the back with 1 up front - that I agree with - but just "5 at the back" - I have no problem with that
 
marcusblackcat said:
Not sure why people are "anti" 5 at the back - we played 5 at the back earlier this season and won - we also played 5 at the back and lost 2-0 - both goals coming from set pieces (nothing to do with the 5 at the back - just ****e defending/goalkeeping)

There are a lot of managers playing 5 at the back now - although most play 2 up front which makes it a much better formation going forward. Seeing the end of 5 at the back with 1 up front - that I agree with - but just "5 at the back" - I have no problem with that
Click to expand...

I'm not using any of our performances this year to analyse any formation, that's not fair to formations. I don't like 5 at the back because I believe you need brilliant players to for it to be effective in both attack and defence. I find either 442 or 433, basically a back four formation, allows for more balance across the pitch and width in attack. In my opinion 532 limits attacking options and outs a heavy emphasis on those upfront.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nads
Paperback Ruiter said:
I'm not using any of our performances this year to analyse any formation, that's not fair to formations. I don't like 5 at the back because I believe you need brilliant players to for it to be effective in both attack and defence. I find either 442 or 433, basically a back four formation, allows for more balance across the pitch and width in attack. In my opinion 532 limits attacking options and outs a heavy emphasis on those upfront.
Click to expand...
Didn;t mean that to sound like a dig mate - it wasn't - I've done quite a bit of coaching and a lot of the FA stuff is pushing towards 5 at the back which turns into a 3 now. At the level we'll be playing this season, we should have playuers capable of doing that.

That said - I also prefer 4 at the back! My point was that a lot of people blamed the 5 at the back for conceding goals when, in reality, it was more the fact that wer couldn't mark people from dead ball situations or our keepers threw the ball in the net or to the forward!
 
marcusblackcat said:
Didn;t mean that to sound like a dig mate - it wasn't - I've done quite a bit of coaching and a lot of the FA stuff is pushing towards 5 at the back which turns into a 3 now. At the level we'll be playing this season, we should have playuers capable of doing that.

That said - I also prefer 4 at the back! My point was that a lot of people blamed the 5 at the back for conceding goals when, in reality, it was more the fact that wer couldn't mark people from dead ball situations or our keepers threw the ball in the net or to the forward!
Click to expand...
I think you're back 3 have to be almost telekinetic and you're attacking players need to be deadly. Chelsea achieved it last year but even their own best player was bemoaning it after the Cup final.
As for our shower of ****e... I don't think we'd have conceded less last season if we'd played 4 at the back but I do think we had more goals in us than 532 allowed
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back