Match Day Thread Blackburn (A) 25/10/25 15:00

Who is reinventing history?

As usual, Lincoln and I were two of the only ones on here being close to realistic, and getting insulted for it:



and yes Lincoln and I were consistent that we needed more experience:




You happy clappers absolutely love to re-invent history every time you’re wrong. SR continue to fool most of you.

 

Yeah I get that. I do have a laugh in real life, I promise!

 

I can confirm. I have met Lincoln IRL for about 30-40 mins at St Mary's and did see numerous smiles and it was me who brought up SR

 

Lincoln isn’t even that negative, just realistic

just that 80% of Saints fans live in a weird positive bubble where everything is absolutely fine despite all the evidence

 

I have it on totalitarian authority that was a chance for Blackburn.

© Chilco

 

I agree here, but I’d also suggest we are pretty wealthy for this league. I don’t think we needed to take any gambles, but we have these mental ****s in charge who all think they’re the cleverest person in the room.

In fact maybe that is the actual issue in that they all feel they have to be cleverer than the others in the club.

If it were my decision right now, he’d be sacked already, Lallana in charge until we appoint a permanent manager.

 

The more I think about it, the more I realise that the most effective limb of SR is the PR team.

Time and time again, they make a change, mess it up, but put their hands up and say we know we’ve ****ed up, but we’re apologetic, reflective and now we’ll do this. In reality, it’s like ordering a meal at a restaurant, you send it back and they somehow bring a worse meal… but you get a £20 voucher so you forget the food and feel you have to go back there again, only to end up with the same issues.

If you keep on falling on your sword, eventually even the least attentive people will work out the illusion.

 

I’ve not said that I wasn’t wrong? I was. Perfectly fine to admit that. Where’s the reinvention?

And you’re saying you were happy with Röhl, but also preferred Still to Rohl? So saying you knew he was a fraud from the start is…well…fraudulent.

 

Do you two want to take this off the match day thread and over to the Will Still out thread?

 

I think we've found our next mod replacement.

 

Are you saying the ball going in the net doesn’t count as a chance?

 

And you most likely said the same about Pochettino. Some things work at one club, and not another. That's just football.

 

Well not always, I’m not sure I would.

What about a cross that is Crossed in and it goes in the goal.

It wasn’t a shot, as it was a pass, so it is less a chance and more luck.

I can see why people could think the opposite though. And I’m likely wrong btw, I guess I don’t always see things as clear cut as the majority.

Be interesting to see how people do view those sort of things perhaps.

 

Well it wasn't a pass, it was a cross - there's a difference.

 

I'd say it doesn't necessarily. Stewart's second at Bramall Lane certainly wasn't a chance for example.

 

It was Oldstockton who said it was a pass. I was just making fun of the ****e we find ourselves in. Wasn’t being so serious.

 

I have been 100% consistent from the start that we needed an experienced manager, with experience of doing well in the championship or premier league. Preferably getting a team promoted.

I even see Rohl as a gamble but at least he had championship experience.

We had months to prepare and bucket loads of cash compared to other sides. And still ****ed it up completely.

I knew nothing about Still really, other than he was highly rated in the game. Was hoping he was good but it seems like he was being carried by his players in his previous role, considering their success since he’s left.

 

And that's perfectly reasonable, Os. I don't understand why you couldn't just have said that, and then you wouldn't have been contradicting yourself. You seem to put great stock in being seen to be right (that's a social media problem, and particularly an X one). It looks very much like you were right on the experience front (a view that many people shared). But instead you said that it was a ridiculous appointment from the start and that wasn't with hindsight, which wasn't what you were saying at the time.

So just say that? Just say "I had concerns about him, but was excited by his potential - turns out it was another poor decision" or something along those lines, rather than pretending you were Mystic Meg all along. Nobody sensible cares whether you were right or wrong in the first place. I always, from day one, wanted Röhl, but was satisfied (if harbouring some concerns re experience) when Still was appointed, got caught up in the hype (as always) and have been seemingly proven wrong to have backed him. So what? It happens. You change your opinion given the data presented at the time. That's just being human.