I thought it was agreed manager had to approve signings? If AN wanted them to tear up their recruitment approach then can't just buckle. Shambles
If that's the case, the I don't blame him. The timing is horrific and I think he should have told Stoke he would speak to them next week, but if the club is breaking promises then I can understand his reasoning and am starting to worry this new regime isn't much better than the last
KLD should be binning him off and getting someone who is experienced in running a football club. There are worrying signs around how this club is being run and the success on the pitch shouldn't mask that
He was on a rolling contract. He was free to speak to other clubs and personally dont blame him for talking to other clubs if interested If he was offered a better deal so be it. I know what I would have done given the same circumstances He has improved things on the field and led us to promotion I am disappointed but there's no hard feelings from me
I'm not sure we know the club have broken promises to him, otherwise everyone wouldn't have been so confident last night that this wouldn't happen.
As it stands, our current owner is showing signs of being incapable of running a football team - it was obvious to every man and his dog that we needed to tie AN down to a long term deal (without release clauses) the day after we got promoted. Instead he let things drift along like a bird with it's head in the sand. Club seems to be taking the same approach with Ross Stewart
Ransom? He has a contract worth twelve months. The club allow him, by contract, to talk to any club he wants to at any time. That's not ransom . He isn't particularly valued, so he's going somewhere else. I've done it myself before, a few times when I was around his age.
Absolutely correct. The team needs our undying support. Let's get behind them and roar them home to victory. Then after the final whistle, let Speakman know that we won't accept a yes man and we expect an appointment within 3 days, not 3 weeks.
yes obviously. thats not my point. my point is none of us can pretend to KNOW what happened to lead to this, considering as recently as this morning everyone thought t wouldn't happen if we were breaking promises last week then people wouldn't have been as surprised by this, and wouldn't be posting that it was never going to happen yesterday
End of the day if they giving him 3-4 years in a game when you can easily be unemployed there’s logic on a human level. Short deal and our fans reputation of turning in the gaffers, rightly so in most instances of course, you ain’t ever secure at Sunderland. He knew the terms though and was the most universally liked we have had in many years. He really had a chance of doing something here he won’t ever do at Stoke. It’s baffling. We will live and we aren’t in the forty wilderness now. He absolutely wasn’t offered a longer deal, Speakman was open about why the club will favour rolling terms.
his employment status is a lot less secure with a 4 year deal at stoke than it is with a 1 year deal here. sure - he's entitled to a much bigger pay out now if they sack him, then he'd have got if we had, But stoke are more likely to sack Alex Neil this season / summer than Sunderland were.
That has come from an ITK on here. The guy is rightly believed on everything else and he's usually right so his word is good enough for me.
AN took the job knowing the conditions/restrictions. Possible promotion and repercussions will have been discussed. If the club has broken any promises made then I dont blame him for leaving. If he's wanted changes to some condition or other hes already shook hands on, couldnt get it, and that's why he's off, that's down to him. If he's agreed to conditions he doesnt really agree with, aiming to bugger off when he can, that's down to him.
Stoke does seem to be a bit of a managerial graveyard since they got rid of Pulis. I like AN, but this feels like a betrayal. Something must have gone horribly wrong behind the scenes to cause this
