RobertT
Offline
Posts: 11833
|
|
« Reply #45 on: Saturday, May 20, 2006, 10:20:31 » |
|
Reg, everything you say is correct and valid...but...
CCP can be right in saying King cocked-up, even if he knows jack about the club over the past 4 years or so. King can both have been a success at one point but then also have cocked it up in the last 2-3 months of his tenure (and that is all CCP would have seen), It is perfectly feasible to be cock-up something after being good at if for a while - success isn't constant and nor is performance. Other players have already hinted at shambolic pre season arrangements etc.
CCP has no reason to dislike King, he was convinced by the man to come here and spent less than a few months working under him. I don't see why we have to judge the whole period as one thing or the other, why not judge his recent performance?
I've never been a person who liked King, right from the beginning, but I've always been able to accept results and the like as a measure of his success and then failure.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Simon Pieman
Original Wanker
Offline
Posts: 36319
|
|
« Reply #46 on: Saturday, May 20, 2006, 11:24:12 » |
|
..then any sane person, like BWB will judge King a success. Any one who thought King a success cannot be sane Same as Nicho then
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Ben Wah Balls
Offline
Posts: 5972
|
|
« Reply #47 on: Saturday, May 20, 2006, 11:59:55 » |
|
Better budget maybe? Players were brought in.
So why was it miraculously suddenly available to Iffy....I don't remember any rich benefactor suddenly pumping money in when Iffy was appointed ?? He wasn't, in reality he just made sure a side that could have stayed up didn't. We finished 5 points adrift, it wasn't that close.
My point was which you chose to ignore (as always where King is concerned 'Yawn') that we would have been relegated by Christmas - at least we still had a fighting chance with 2/3 games left.... I didn't choose to ignore it, you didn't make that point. It's nonsense anyway, we wouldn't have been down by Christmas had King stayed, all the evidence shows we wouldn't even have been relegated.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
DiV
Has also heard this
Offline
Posts: 32436
Joseph McLaughlin
|
|
« Reply #48 on: Saturday, May 20, 2006, 12:06:41 » |
|
Better budget maybe? Players were brought in.
So why was it miraculously suddenly available to Iffy....I don't remember any rich benefactor suddenly pumping money in when Iffy was appointed ?? He wasn't, in reality he just made sure a side that could have stayed up didn't. We finished 5 points adrift, it wasn't that close.
My point was which you chose to ignore (as always where King is concerned 'Yawn') that we would have been relegated by Christmas - at least we still had a fighting chance with 2/3 games left.... I didn't choose to ignore it, you didn't make that point. It's nonsense anyway, we wouldn't have been down by Christmas had King stayed, all the evidence shows we wouldn't even have been relegated. what evidence?
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Ben Wah Balls
Offline
Posts: 5972
|
|
« Reply #49 on: Saturday, May 20, 2006, 12:10:07 » |
|
Better budget maybe? Players were brought in.
So why was it miraculously suddenly available to Iffy....I don't remember any rich benefactor suddenly pumping money in when Iffy was appointed ?? He wasn't, in reality he just made sure a side that could have stayed up didn't. We finished 5 points adrift, it wasn't that close.
My point was which you chose to ignore (as always where King is concerned 'Yawn') that we would have been relegated by Christmas - at least we still had a fighting chance with 2/3 games left.... I didn't choose to ignore it, you didn't make that point. It's nonsense anyway, we wouldn't have been down by Christmas had King stayed, all the evidence shows we wouldn't even have been relegated. what evidence? We'd been on longer losing runs than 5 games before under King and still finished in the top half, one season even making the playoffs after losing 5 in a row - there's nothing to suggest it couldn't have happened again. The 5 games we lost were all by one goal when King was suffering with Gout, I'm sure we would have turned it around.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
DiV
Has also heard this
Offline
Posts: 32436
Joseph McLaughlin
|
|
« Reply #50 on: Saturday, May 20, 2006, 12:16:14 » |
|
Better budget maybe? Players were brought in.
So why was it miraculously suddenly available to Iffy....I don't remember any rich benefactor suddenly pumping money in when Iffy was appointed ?? He wasn't, in reality he just made sure a side that could have stayed up didn't. We finished 5 points adrift, it wasn't that close.
My point was which you chose to ignore (as always where King is concerned 'Yawn') that we would have been relegated by Christmas - at least we still had a fighting chance with 2/3 games left.... I didn't choose to ignore it, you didn't make that point. It's nonsense anyway, we wouldn't have been down by Christmas had King stayed, all the evidence shows we wouldn't even have been relegated. what evidence? We'd been on longer losing runs than 5 games before under King and still finished in the top half, one season even making the playoffs after losing 5 in a row - there's nothing to suggest it couldn't have happened again. The 5 games we lost were all by one goal when King was suffering with Gout, I'm sure we would have turned it around. I dont think we would have turned it around, because King has lost the dressing room. He hadnt during previous bad spells but he had this time. Once a manager looses the dressing room, then in my opinion there is no way back. King had lost the dressing room, the players body language said as much, plus a number of players have said they lost all faith in King....and now CCP has said it publically. If he hadnt of lost the dressing room maybe he would have turned it around, but this time....no chance!
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Ben Wah Balls
Offline
Posts: 5972
|
|
« Reply #51 on: Saturday, May 20, 2006, 12:37:53 » |
|
Other players have said differently though. After King was sacked O'Hanlon said "We were all behind him it’s just that we weren’t getting the results for him". Now he may have changed his tune once Iffy was manager but most players realise that it's best to publically support the current manager but he had no reason to say that if he didn't think it once King had left.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Mister Lorenzo
Dirk Diggler
Offline
Posts: 238
|
|
« Reply #52 on: Saturday, May 20, 2006, 14:28:04 » |
|
Other players have said differently though. After King was sacked O'Hanlon said "We were all behind him it’s just that we weren’t getting the results for him". Now he may have changed his tune once Iffy was manager but most players realise that it's best to publically support the current manager but he had no reason to say that if he didn't think it once King had left.
Whatever way you look at it King had to go - he'd lost respect from all quaters, publically slagging off the fans and players plus singling out individual players for criticism - hardly the makings of a manager about to turn the corner as far as results are concerned.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
DiV
Has also heard this
Offline
Posts: 32436
Joseph McLaughlin
|
|
« Reply #53 on: Saturday, May 20, 2006, 14:41:41 » |
|
Other players have said differently though. After King was sacked O'Hanlon said "We were all behind him it’s just that we weren’t getting the results for him". Now he may have changed his tune once Iffy was manager but most players realise that it's best to publically support the current manager but he had no reason to say that if he didn't think it once King had left. Of course thats what Sean O'Hanlon told the paper
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Reg Smeeton
Walking Encyclopaedia
Offline
Posts: 34913
|
|
« Reply #54 on: Saturday, May 20, 2006, 15:04:49 » |
|
Reg, everything you say is correct and valid...but...
CCP can be right in saying King cocked-up, even if he knows jack about the club over the past 4 years or so. King can both have been a success at one point but then also have cocked it up in the last 2-3 months of his tenure (and that is all CCP would have seen), It is perfectly feasible to be cock-up something after being good at if for a while - success isn't constant and nor is performance. Other players have already hinted at shambolic pre season arrangements etc.
CCP has no reason to dislike King, he was convinced by the man to come here and spent less than a few months working under him. I don't see why we have to judge the whole period as one thing or the other, why not judge his recent performance?
I've never been a person who liked King, right from the beginning, but I've always been able to accept results and the like as a measure of his success and then failure. This circular argument crops up from time to time...on the one hand you have the KOB who see King as the spawn of the Devil, and on the other the rationialsts who see King as a competent manager, who held the line for us at a time when it would have been all too easy, as the Scum have proved to head to the Conference. Unfortunately, its a circular argument, because the flat earthers (KOB), insist on backing their opinions with statements like the earth is flat because I heard a rumour to that effect from a 19 year old kid. Whereas the rationalists, point to the available evidence that the Earth is indeed round. The flat earthers, then retrench, waiting for the next opportunity to air their view, happily unaffected by any logic, and so it goes on and on and on and on and on.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
red macca
|
|
« Reply #55 on: Saturday, May 20, 2006, 15:36:35 » |
|
Reg, everything you say is correct and valid...but...
CCP can be right in saying King cocked-up, even if he knows jack about the club over the past 4 years or so. King can both have been a success at one point but then also have cocked it up in the last 2-3 months of his tenure (and that is all CCP would have seen), It is perfectly feasible to be cock-up something after being good at if for a while - success isn't constant and nor is performance. Other players have already hinted at shambolic pre season arrangements etc.
CCP has no reason to dislike King, he was convinced by the man to come here and spent less than a few months working under him. I don't see why we have to judge the whole period as one thing or the other, why not judge his recent performance?
I've never been a person who liked King, right from the beginning, but I've always been able to accept results and the like as a measure of his success and then failure. This circular argument crops up from time to time...on the one hand you have the KOB who see King as the spawn of the Devil, and on the other the rationialsts who see King as a competent manager, who held the line for us at a time when it would have been all too easy, as the Scum have proved to head to the Conference. Unfortunately, its a circular argument, because the flat earthers (KOB), insist on backing their opinions with statements like the earth is flat because I heard a rumour to that effect from a 19 year old kid. Whereas the rationalists, point to the available evidence that the Earth is indeed round. The flat earthers, then retrench, waiting for the next opportunity to air their view, happily unaffected by any logic, and so it goes on and on and on and on and on. so basically your saying your right again then??
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Mister Lorenzo
Dirk Diggler
Offline
Posts: 238
|
|
« Reply #56 on: Saturday, May 20, 2006, 15:41:14 » |
|
This circular argument crops up from time to time...on the one hand you have the KOB who see King as the spawn of the Devil, and on the other the rationialsts who see King as a competent manager, who held the line for us at a time when it would have been all too easy, as the Scum have proved to head to the Conference.
Unfortunately, its a circular argument, because the flat earthers (KOB), insist on backing their opinions with statements like the earth is flat because I heard a rumour to that effect from a 19 year old kid.
Whereas the rationalists, point to the available evidence that the Earth is indeed round.
The flat earthers, then retrench, waiting for the next opportunity to air their view, happily unaffected by any logic, and so it goes on and on and on and on and on.
No the rationalists have their heads stuck so far in the sand they can't see the blindingly obvious.....
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Reg Smeeton
Walking Encyclopaedia
Offline
Posts: 34913
|
|
« Reply #57 on: Saturday, May 20, 2006, 16:08:28 » |
|
so basically your saying your right again then? No BWB is right.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
magnum150
|
|
« Reply #58 on: Saturday, May 20, 2006, 16:09:05 » |
|
To end the argument here, Kingys best attribute was Sam Parkin. Take Parkin out of the team in all the time King was in charge and what would you have had. Mid-table? Relegation battlers?
Even with Sam we had some poor games, Notts county away in the LDV?
King is an excellent scout and probably an even better salesman if you look at some of the players who have been lured through the CG doors recently.
I don't think he could have saved us from relegation with the current squad.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
red macca
|
|
« Reply #59 on: Saturday, May 20, 2006, 16:09:52 » |
|
so basically your saying your right again then? No BWB is right. well he obviously isnt because im sure ccp and the others have more of a idea what king was like than any of us
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|