Dalman told the press on Saturday evening that a meeting is to take place this Friday. Malky then decides to tell the press how he has tried to arrange a meeting today or tomorrow those meetings were declined so he then says i suppose it will be later in the week hmmmmm. Now either Malky wasnt told of this meeting or Dalman is a lying bugger and no meeting has been scheduled. IMO Malky wants his 2 million payment and the freedom to walk into the West Ham when it becomes available.
Cheers for that Eldon. Didn't read or hear that Strange then that Malky requested meeting yesterday or today then which were turned down, if a meeting was scheduled to take place at the end of the week, unless of course as you point out, no such meeting has been arranged. I'll be very surprised if Malky will still be in charge by the opening of the transfer window v
Amazing what gets overlooked sometimes huh. I would be surprised as well to see Malky still here after Sunday, The working relationship between the 2 has become irreparable and not matter what discussions take place its to late.
Is it just me or is Malky now trying to push things to ensure he gets sacked? His statement today about the fans' right to protest is firstly stating the obvious and secondly seems designed to wind up Tan even more particularly after his comments about meeting arrangements and effects of all this on the club. If Malky really wants to stay surely this is a time to keep his thoughts to himslf until the meeting occurs. It's getting a bit like Malky's wind up of the day and can only accelerate his departure.
It's certainly a possibility. However, he's the manager, and he's said nothing insulting regarding the owner. He's making a point and he's making it in a 'I've had a gutsful of this ****' way. I think he's right to do so; and he will have done whoever follows him (as looks likely, still, in my view) a big favour. Whilst it's true that VT is the owner and can 'do what he likes', he knows nothing about football and should leave the managing of the team to the manager. The mid season sacking of MM for 'footballing reasons' would be weak indeed. We're fairly well placed in a stupidly tight league. My view is that VT should either back him by giving him the funds to do what MM feels is necessary, or sack him. To hold on to him and not give him the funds needed is just stupid. If VT gives him what's needed, I'll change my mind about him and he'll go up in my estimation. Don't see that happening though.
Fair points Glam but it appears Malky's comments about wanting more players were the catalyst to take the whole thing to a crisis situation. Sometimes it is best to keep quiet and bide your time - unless you are trying to force an outcome. P.S. In using "you" I don't mean you personally. Honest.
Sorry, just seen similar comments on the Malky Press Conference thread. Should have read that before posting on this one.
Jck200: I get your point, we are truly dull. Nobody who has watched us at Norwich, Stoke or Palace away would want to repeat the experience - unless it was the alternative to chemical castrastion. Are we often entertaining - NO! I too am less and less impressed by Malky's stance in all this. He says we shouldn't wash our dirty linen in puiblic, and then proceeds to do it. I think that's called irony. I was thinking about joining in the protest, but am no longer sure that Malky does not have his own agenda now - and besides if we only got one point from the next three games the same people who will be protesting on Boxing Day will be calling for his head by January 2nd. Finally, too many people have confused the shirt colour with the manager's name and made it the same issue - to suit their own agenda. I want us to play in blue (which we inevitably will do again), I probably err on the side of keeping Malky - but I do not want Tan out at all costs. (I've been to Mansfield, Skunthorpe, Exeter, Preston, Torquay, Orient, Rotherham and Bury ....... These are also experiences I do not want to repeat. We played in blue in those days and to be honest, in any colour, it was krapp. As Pompey and Celtic have shown the punishments for administration now do not allow you to rebuild quickly as in the days of the Jacks, Leicester, Leeds etc.). Careful what you wish for.
Good post Iggy, not much I disagree with there. Too easy to side with MM, he is and has been very good for us, I would like him to stay, but he looks more the one with an agenda here, we already knew what Tan was like.
Not sure I'm saying much different to what I've been saying since this whole sorry mess started Glam, but fickle I can be, depending on results and gameplay.
What planet are some of you lot on? teams like yours and mine (Norwich) have no option but to play negative sometimes.We had about thirty shots on your goal and didn't score.You went away with a hard earned if maybe a trifle fortuitous point which in May could quite well see you survive.In my book that's a positive,ok it was boring but I don't blame either Cardiff or Malky for that.
I'll indulge him for you ITI .... West Ham (A) 12 shots Man City (H) 9 shots Everton (H) 4 shots Hull Tigers (A) 10 shots .............. need I go on ?
If rumours are to be believed and Tan had his way, we'd have a lot more shots on goal, most of them from our own half. Can't say I want boring football, but that may be what is needed to keep us up. If we stay in this division, a few more signings in the summer may see us able to be a bit more attacking. Hull are playing some attractive, go forward football as I type, unfortunately, they've just gone 3-2 down.
I missed the shots against Palace, Newcastle, Stoke and Arsenal to name but a few. The games mentioned are the ones where we attacked the complaint is about the games we rolled over and how many shots we had in those particular games. I am happy for you to give the full list so we can see where we got points and how many shots we had when we got no points. jck
With the exception of Palace, I don't think we 'rolled over' in any game this season. We mightn't have been that attacking, but I don't think an MM team would 'roll over'.
