I'd say that will always be a 50:50 call, so just as easily going the other way, "see what's happened without me" approach.
Some of us have also been wondering. I really don't want to become a conspiracy theorist, yet I have been wondering. I posted two letters the other day. NC One genuine question I have is over Les Reed. Last week I asked if he was employed by NC. He was. So I ask if he is an NC man or a Les Reed man. When NC left, immediately there were noises about the manager going and then the players. Why no noise about "his football man" going too? Did he and NC have some differences? Was he just biding his time to step up for the power and limelight? Is he still an NC man? Might just be tripe, but I'd like to understand more a out their relationship.
On someone in their ear/someone stirring things up: I'd certainly buy that. But just as clear is that there are problems at the board level, because no matter the outside pressures you simply don't get half the bloody team voicing concerns to the media or outright begging for transfers if all's well on the home front. Some players may well be attempting to use those woes to their advantage, but now that we're at Lallana, Lovren, Fonte, Cork and possibly Shaw (I can't remember if he did) citing a total lack of communication from our leadership I think we're past the point of "they're just disloyal, we'll find someone more loyal and all will be rainbows".
Schad - which sort of links to my questions on les Reed. If he is an NC man, that could cause Board Room troubles, but they hang in to him because he is the only football man??
I agree on the second half; it could be that they anointed him 'the football man' because he was the only one left who could credibly be called such, and now have no one that can replace him internally with more credibility. Seems like they went into this with little understanding of the dynamic between Les and the players (or Les and the other staff, with the two coaches who've been sacked) or his personality, and have been caught totally flat-footed. There could be larger tensions within the board -- it would explain the whole business of no one answering calls -- but (and it's pure speculation) I'd imagine that would have more to do with conflicting expectations/roles than any loyalties to Cortese. Things like Les being resentful that they've put too much or his plate, or conversely feeling snubbed for the position of chairman, etc...those tend to be the really poisonous things in internecine office warfare.
he's been in football long enough that he'd surely not be beholden to NC to any significant degree. seems more likely that he'd have back stabbed NC and everyone on the NC bandwagon is deserting him and making trouble.
That could well be it Sotonist. So, going to my post previous to that one, he was just biding his time when it looked like it was going rocky for NC.
Maybe. Or maybe people still at the club who resent Reed are in constant contact with Cortese, bitching and moaning. I still get people from sites I used to manage, ringing me up to have a whinge about the new boss. It goes in one ear and out the other, but if I wanted to make use the information they give me to mischief I could.
the two scenarios can work together. reed takes the career opportunity to strike when NC's stock with the owners is low for any number of reasons not related to results on the pitch, the players and manager who were having their every want and need catered to by NC, as well as having sweet nothings whispered to them about winning the league, are not happy that the power now lies with the socially awkward party pooper. as many have pointed out, there seems little to gain for NC to precipitate trouble now, other than petty revenge. Kreuger seems to have been a misstep, only providing a smiling veneer over a regime that no longer has any representative chummy with the players.
It's about as sensible a suggestion as the one about all the papers actively seeking to dismantle us. Utter ****e. Hilarious as well, that some could be so paranoid.
the players are still tied to the club by contract. they do stand to win by destabilising the club and getting a move. they and their agents might well have misjudged the base stability level though. edit: i've not woken up properly. i read players in place of papers. i'm off to smash a coffee machine.
It might look like paranoia. But can you deny that the timing of these constant negative press releases at least look as if they are planned to cause maximum damage?
On the papers looking to destabilise us, they'll just run with whatever they are given by anyone, won't they. there's some mileage in the argument that those formerly on NC's teat will be deaf to our advances, so we've resorted to the express as a mouthpiece. The overwhelming sentiment among newspaper sources is apparently once again against us.
You're missing the point. The papers can be easily manipulated. Alistair Campbell was brilliant at it. So was Malcom Mclaren
No, you're missing the point. I'm talking about whether the papers want to destabilise the club, not whether people at the club want to destabilise the club using the papers.
Perfectly feasible too Archers. I said a few posts back that I can't help but wonder about the NC affect here.
