I'd go with that mate, indeed it's very close to my current view on the situation. I like Bruce, and i hope he gets i right this summer, but 10-15 games is about right. If we aren't looking up at that stage, there will be no case for the defence.
must admitt, there's a lot of bickering going on, on this thread there's pro's and con's on both sides. bet them muppets up the road will love this thread, slagging each other off. we all want what's best for the club, no-one's right, no-one's wrong, it's all opinions. the man with the say is ellis shoet, let's support his choice. after all, we are sunderland FTM....
Irony??? It would only be ironic if I had spude personal abuse in your direction Cest. As I'm strong enough to resist lowering myself, I don't see anything ironic in my statement. commachio No problem with people disagreeing mate. It's the personal attacks on fellow SAFC fans that make us all look pathetic.
nee bother mate, it's actually an interesting thread, lots of different views and opinions, in fact one off the better one's we've had. but some off you are baffling me with ya posh words. let it roll on mate, it's only afternoon for you lot there. iv'e said my bit on the bruce situ. but there's lots of other valid points against. anyhow we all have one thing in common SAFC.
There is an awful lot of things that have gone wrong this season which need to be put right if we are going to progress. Having said that, I firmly believe that getting rid of Bruce is not the answer. To be honest there is not a lot of managers that are out there who are available that can match Bruce's experience, and I will back him as long as he is here.
could you expand on that please... never heard off him, where does he play, who does he play for, and is he any good... cheers..
Going back to Cest's original point - is it time to question SNQ in his role? IMO questioning any aspect of SAFC is open on forums. Just bear in mind that SNQ does not hire and fire. The Board does. But SNQ's recommendations of football matters must surely hold a big sway in voting. As somebody else said, I can see Ellis Short beefing up the Board with Kenyon types, while allowing SNQ to remain as chairman. A Kenyon type as Chairman would not give two ****s for The Foundation and the other soft stuff that SNQ excels at. The responsibility for success on the pitch is totally Bruce's and his staff. Now for the question of the incredible injury list. That is 90% of what ****ed us up after Jan. Bruce's possible magaerial or tactical weaknesses pale into comparison compared with that. SNQ has promised a full enquiry and he is not the soft ****e some of you may think he is. Optimistic and kind, yes. But I am 100% certain that he would push through replacing the entire medical / pysio staff if it appears that they gave bad advice to Bruce. And if Bruce reacted with "they stay or I go" then Bruce would go. If Bruce rode roughshod over medical advice, then that is another and very interesting picture altogether. Bruce asked for 3 years and I would give him that - or ditch him mid season if things go tits up again. Short has to sack him or back him. There is no halfway house. It's up to Short to determine to what extent and for how long. If Bruce goes, that may also be the point at which SNQ opts out. A Bruce failure would be a SNQ failure. No two ways about that. BTW, the poll on SMB shows 2:1 in favour of sacking Bruce now.
From an outsider's point of view, I think that it would be a huge mistake to get rid of Quinn. The question that I would ask is that, excluding what has happened on the pitch, are you happy with the way that the club is being run? Obviously it is Quinn's job to decide when it is time to change the manager, and I am sure that he must have had conversations with the owner regarding Bruce's future, but up until January you were looking like serious contenders for Europe and certainly a top 8 finish. On paper your squad looked very, very good. But the departure of Bent without a suitable replacement and the disasterous run of games have resulted in a situation where serious questions need to be asked regarding Bruce's ability as a manager. The question was asked earlier in the thread, would you give him another ã30 million to spend? I would say No. Throughout this season I have often thought that Steve Bruce seems to have aged by a good 10 years. He looks terrible and I honestly believe that the job is too big for him and too stressful. As Michael Caine said in The Eagle has Landed "Difficult decisions are the privelidge of rank" and I think that the time has come for Quinn to make one of those difficult decisions and get rid of Bruce. As a Newcastle fan I hope that Bruce stays, as when the pressure is on, he seems to wilt. If he stays I think that you may well have a similar season to this one, which has been similar to the last one. But it is Bruce who should take the responsibility for playing matters, not Quinn.
Good heavens a Mag that talks sense?? Obviously at the start of the season we were playing good football and winning, and SB was a 'good' manager. We then sold Bent and had a load of injuries, when this happened SB was not as good. This period showed a couple of faults with SB, one being we lacked a few gnarly older pros, who when the going got tough dug in and did not wilt, whereas our youngsters (as with JH ) were run into the ground and lost their edge, recruitment is down to SB! In too many games we simply did not turn up, SB particularly with his half-time team talks could not get the team motivated and 'up for it' and quite often the reverse happened. No doubt SB is a nice guy and it will be hard for Sir Naill to sack him (he has just been given a new contract!) bur it does seem foolishness to give him more new money to spend when at the best he is on probation for the first few games of the season. It must make sense to cut the knot now and get some new guy in (who I do not know???) who has the close season to sort the team out.
I apologise for daring to share my views - not a regular at games (geography and work) so I accept that my opinions are limited to what you can see on the TV..... My real concern is that people don`t stand back for a minute and look at the bigger picture, perhaps because you do get to all the games and a little carried away... The issue with SNQ and SB is straight forward to me 1. SNQ - whether he stays is a question for Ellis - Ellis has not made his cash by being scared of getting rid of people. If he feels that the footballing side of things has gone backwards he will do what he needs to do. SNQ is a real star but maybe a soft touch - Ellis will get rid if he feels he needs to and won`t in my view be swayed by anyone in terms of whether Bruce stays or goes 2. Bruce - I can`t think of a reason to keep him. He assembles a decent squad (the best we've had for a long time), he sells the top goal scorer when Welbeck (either number 2 or 3) and Campbell (number 4) are crocked without having lined up a replacement (have a look back at the posts at the time - everyone wanted someone and no-one wanted no-one...but what did we get). He then (for the second season on the bounce) either causes (as a result of the training systems used) or fails to remedy a huge slump in form. I know we have a decent side on the physio's table but there must be an underlying cause for it...didn't Man Utd want Welbeck back to rehab him at their place - why was that, didn't trust ours in my view. All sides suffer from a dip in form, ours is more of a mine shaft... Another problem I have with Bruce is that he can`t seem to find the strength of character to hold his hands up - the reason we don`t have a striker or that he can`t train properly until Friday as he doesn`t know who will be playing is down to him. For all of those who disagree please re-read your posts when we were "pushing for Europe" or when Bent left (Villa look like they have spent wisely now!) were they all ironic?? DOn`t think so So I agree with Cest (in part) get rid of SB; disagree in part as I believe Ellis is big enough to take the decision without any reference to any of us if he feels it right to do so. Anyway - we should remember that it's BigChris that gets the crap and ease of Cest a bit - think he makes some decent points
Without getting into the abuse thing, I agree with C'est re not rolling over and accepting the "this is how SAFC are" argument. As patient fans over many years, we deserve better from the board, the manager and the team. The only participants not to blame for this dross is the fans!
This point about Fergie being once up for the chop keeps getting mentioned. The difference between Ferguson and Bruce is that Fergie was already a proven top-line manager and worth backing. At Aberdeen, he took a bunch of unheard of kids (like Strachan, Black and Leighton!) and won a European trophy with them. That team of 'kids' beat Real Madrid fair and square. Bruce is a proven mid-table Prem manager at very best, and that isn't what Ellis is looking for. Man. U. didn't keep Ferguson out of charity. They kept him on the basis of hard evidence. We don't have that evidence.
I pass through Chester on my way to Sunderland, not much of a place at all. This must be what makes Cest ao miserable. In all the time I have been following SAFC I have very rarely met a happy fan ( I go back as far as 1954/55).
Chester le Street is a wonderful town which I visit quite regularly. As for Cestria, the one thing that I have learnt about him from the years on 606/not606, is that he does care deeply about the club, but when he gets a bee in his bonnet he gets a bout of tunnel vision and can't see past his own conclusions. I certainly don't agree with all of his standpoints over these issues, but if we all agreed about everything it would be a pretty boring world. What I don't like is when these debates turn into 'playground name-calling' rather than accept that opinions are going to be diverse; this just lowers the tone of the debate.
****ing hell and this from someone who comes form Stanley? A village not even good enough of a dump to call a ****hole? The irony of this comment is enormous.
