I warned you all...the negative man. I remember how bad he was last time, this time is no different. The team has no passion, no guts, no blood. If you are going to play like a league two side at least kick crap out of them! Actually that ^^^ is an insult to League Two sides. The only player who came away with any credit for me was Ehmer for at least nailing Clarke.
Terrible, spineless performance. With 20 minutes to go it looked like they were settling for the 1-0 defeat!
So now Taylor's gone (and the fitness coach) it really is all down to Malcolm the kit man for Saturday. Unless there's an announcement of a new manager coming next.....
I look at it this way, Malcolm will at least know how to deal with 11 flag poles, at least two of them will be up front!
I think this is a prelude to the new manager being announced as one of PT's roles was to help Pennock because of Pennock's lack of experience (that worked out well, didn't it?). But even if a new manager were announced this afternoon I think that Steve Lovell will still take charge on Saturday - usual story of the new manager waiting to see the players properly before he realises what he's taken on and making his own decisions. Ah well, at least PT's not the new manager. Although if the new one is Steve Evans ... no just hold that thought for a moment
Well I was not going to take the bait dangled by gio to put the record straight on the one figure with a little integrity left at Priestfield but since he has now gone I have to comment. There is little point in reiterating the fact that Taylor achieved 5 promotions with 4 different clubs. Nor is there merit in describing his quite amazing feat in raising Hull City from the lower regions of League 2 to the upper regions of the Championship in just three years. Similarly, it would be a waste to explain the high regard of his fellow managers which enabled him to be appointed England u21 manager not once, not twice but three times bequeathing a match record which dwarfs that of his successor Darren Southgate. Nor is it worth mention that he Got Leicester City to first place in the Premiership (yes I know it was only for a few weeks). Of course it is not worth reminding people that he was Caretaker Manager of England prior to Erricson or that in his playing days he was one of only a handful of players outside the top tier who played regularly for England. No the only point worth making is that just four years ago Gills were just about exactly in the same position as now with a squad of hasbeens. Taylor organised them into an ugly determined gang who avoided relegation quite comfortably. At that time I argued (tongue in cheek) that this warranted a statue at the Priestfield gates (Taylor not Scally). But, unbelievably, and using a completely different skill set, PT built from scratch a nucleus of youngsters, assembled on a shoestring who just got better and better. So much did they improve that in November and December 2014 they lost just two league games and reached the regional final of the paintpot trophy. So was he treated a hero? No Gills had to play table topping Bristol City two weeks running and lost them both so Scally sacked PT for Christmas. Two days later, PT's last two signings arrived to complete a final jigsaw piece in PT's squad. Then what happened? Gills played the finest football in years during 2015 scoring more goals than any other club in all four divisions. Foolish fans swallowed the tale that it was all down to the gang of four or the self important Jed. What they were seeing was the Taylor legacy, duly and rapidly destroyed by JED. Shame on Scally to try and deflect criticism correctly aimed at himself by blaming PT . Taylor is better off out of it. What did Peter Crouch say about Gillingham and the need to look in a mirror?
Bistol407 - my opinion, ( and it may not be totally correct ), is that any success that Gills had in the past, whilst Peter Taylor was present, was not entirely down to him ( Pulis !) - but let's not have any dispute about that - let's just concentrate on now - not a generation ago ! What is totally correct, is the dreadfully boring tactics that Taylor has employed. And not just this season. ( sorry - I couldn't help being nostalgic ). Even if we accept that our players do not have the greatest footballing talent, there is very little chance of Gills scoring all the time we're camped in our own 6 yard box - and playing hoofball with the opposition goalkeeper. Doncaster 0 goals Bradford 0 goals MK Dons 0 goals Oxford 0 goals Rochdale 0 goals Scunthorpe 0 goals Blackburn 0 goals Portsmouth 0 goals ............ That's 0 goals in 8 of our 12 games ! We may not get a lot out of our next two games -- but -- if Taylor was still in charge, there would be zero doubt that we wouldn't score. If Sky TV showed Peter Taylor football every week, the company would quickly be bust. Unfortunately for us, it is football at Gillingham that Taylor has broken. Just like brb, I do not want Taylor anywhere near GFC again. edit - I will agree that with you on the point that Scally is responsible for all the mess that has , is and will exist at GFC -all the time he's got his head stuck up his ar$e......... well, my philosophical mood didn't last long ! ok - if you want to discuss matters of 'yesterday' - my answer is - do you remember Taylor playing Kedwell in central defence and Cody McDonald as a wingback ? --Just how negative can you get ? It wouldn't have surprised me to see Taylor playing Eaves in goal - to try to stop him getting booked all the time ! ( yes- I know I'm being silly - but I'm being starved of football )
Maybe, just maybe Taylor is the magician that i'm yet to believe. But there is no doubting in his last two reigns his football has left me utterly depressed! and quite rightly it could be argued that Taylor was responsible for the quality that was built early 2015 but that is where my similarities end. My point being when it actually comes to assembling that squad in to a style of football ie such as we saw at the beginning of 2015, that is where Taylor fails and i'm still not convinced by any stretch of the imagination that the player unrest was entirely AP's fault either. In my eyes AP did one bad interview (Wright) - other than that my finger keeps pointing towards Taylor. I don't want a 1-0 to the Arsenal team, especially if it is 89 minutes with backs to the wall.
This will descend into a pantomime if I respond to Always's mythes. Suffice it to say that nobody could form a judgement on a caretaker manager in three games in which the few bits of quality in the squad (Eaves, Zukani, Martin, Lacey, Bingham, Garmston and others) were missing for all or most of the games. At least there is a bit more awareness of just how high a regard there is for Taylor amongst his fellow managers and the FA as illustrated by one of the best CVs in football. One other area of note is that, given that nobody could seriously judge PT over three games and he was only supposed to be caretaker anyway, his enforced departure has to be due to either; the new guy is lined up and wants a clear unchallenged landing OR Scally is opportunistically deflecting criticism of himself by using PT as the stooge, OR both. It looks like Evans on the way to me. This may not be so bad since nasty personalities fit in well at Priestfield ( Pullis, the Burnley guy who took over from Hessy in 2004 and did such a good job). Peter Crouch says they are all hillbillies at Priestfield anyway and I suppose you can have Scottish hillbillies.
Valid points bristol407 but may i ask some questions... 1. Do you not believe as director of football that Taylor had a lot more than three games to apply his influence? It's very difficult to define a DOF role and is often open to much debate, but one of the questionable roles is to stabilise the club as well has assisting a less experienced manager. 2. Why as DOF and regardless of supporter views on players, did Taylor not intervene in the departure of Cody and one especially for me, Dack? We have read previously views on that Taylor plays people out of position, i don't pretend to remember exact details but a few have been highlighted on this site. 3.Why was Taylor not the calming influence to stop players leaving? Now this may seem a repeat of question (2) but from a different angle, for example I believe he could have stepped in over the Wright affair and got manager and player to realise things could have been handled better. Also I'm not convinced and this is merely a personal view that Taylor in regards to Dack did not give the lad the encourage that i would expect from a senior figure. Now that last one could easily be blown out of the water by Dack if he chose to comment, it's just a gut feeling that I've got that the unrest was at a higher level and merely AP was the man to be shot at. 4. Do you believe the reason for Taylor's departure was because he wanted more time with the players? But through the media Taylor seemed voice that he would be gone within a week of the Blackburn game, so no surprise to me in him going, unless my brain made up that voice in my dreams. If he wanted more time why didn't he say so sooner and clearer in my view. One lasting thing grates on me with Taylor, it was reported he said that he had no time for applications from managers that applied before AP's departure (not his exact reported words). Yet my brain keeps reminding me he appeared on the scene around Martin Allen's departure. Deep down in side me it all smacks of two faced by the guy. I could be completely wrong but it's honestly how i feel about him, at least with Evans IF we got him, we know exactly what we are getting. He's an absolute wind-bag bag but i'd rather have that someone sneaking around sucking up to the boss, which is exactly the reason i loved MadDog, even if his youth policy sucked! ps. I only ask the questions because i would like to get your perspective on my thoughts.
Bristol407 Pantomime ! - well - GFC are doing a good impression of the back end of the horse ! ( and the football is similar to what comes out of that end !) I would like to draw your attention to Point No.1 of brb's post - I'm judging Taylor's brand of football on his latest 'offering.' It's bloody boring - and definitely ineffective in producing a goal - let alone a point ! --- and, yes, I will ask you to take into consideration all the other offences against ' entertaining ' football of which Taylor was guilty over the years at Gillingham. It might be a little early for panto season - but, I for one, am glad that ( regarding Taylor ), " he's behind us "
I have to disagree on one point Bristol, "the Burnley guy" Stan Ternent. Why people remember him fondly is unbelievable, his win rate over 25 games was 28% and relegation, he then went to Huddersfield with a win rate of 27.8%, he was at least consistent.
well brb, the honest answer has to be not sure. The DoF role varies hugely from one club to another. The wording at appointment time gives a clue when the press release said PT will oversee (not determine) football and also oversee recruitment. The key word is "oversee" which means "light touch" involvement to me. Key thing missing is reporting lines and it seems very clear that AP did not report to PT and sought advice only when he needed it. Quite frankly my own interpretation was that PT had low key engagement and low remuneration just to hang around as an insurance policy. If by now AP had proved a success then PT could drift off but if he proved a failure then PT would take over. If I was a cynic I might suggest that once Scally realised that PT was going to demand resources to strengthen the squad following his appointment, he quickly decided to axe someone who might cause embarrassment. On your point about Dack and Cody I doubt if PT could exert any influence. Nobody wanted Cody to go but he needed a 2 yr contract which was against Board policy. Everyone knew Dack had lost interest, exemplified by his behaviour near the end of the season and Scally was right to sell on for the most cash he could get before his value fell further. The right decision I think but the proceeds should have gone to supplement the budget. More likely it went into the legal budget to fight over pies and kitkat sales. What a waste! On Wright, AP and Josh had a row and AP was always obsessed with what he considered bad apples. Nobody was going to undernine the manager in this situation but Gills lost a real asset here. This business of playing people out of position is real nonsense. The manager's role is to get the best out of the team not to play people where they look prettiest. I can think of Hessy and Egan playing right back for the benefit of the team, Doug Loft playing centre half superbly and I cannot remember Kedwell playing there but I can understand this might have been exactly the right thing to do. Kedwell, in any case played centre back for all the opposition set pieces and was quite outstanding at clearing the high balls every match wherever he was selected to play. On being two faced I cannot see any evidence one way or the other but I am informed by a well informed guy who sits next to me at home games that MA was not sacked just for footballing reasons, he was sacked for footballing reasons AND other reasons.
Well Grumpy Thank you for the name which enabled me to look up his stats. W7, L7,D11. That is mid table form for a team that was sinking badly when he took over. Not really so bad and thrilling to watch i seem to remember.
I disagree about Ternent grumpy. We were an absolute SHAMBLES when he took over. He had basically nothing to work with, but he made us hard-to-beat and we were extremely unlucky to go down. Late goal from Cardiff in penultimate game followed by that awful freak goal in the last minute at the City Ground. 28% win ratio, but the loss ratio was also 28%. Far too many draws in the end, but not Ternent's fault, under Hessy we would've been down by March.
No offence meant always. By pantomime I mean there is no point in us going yes he is/no he isnt when you are so clearly wrong .
Well - you are definitely in the pantomime spirit - because you definitely made me laugh --- unlike The Gills who are making me cry. edit - I do realise that I should have replied; "Oh no I'm not! "
