IndefatigableStick or Twist?
Could another possible scenario be Knighthead twist.
As venture capitalists they might already feel that all the agro and negativity that Rooneys' appointment has brought, they've had enough. Cut their losses and sell us on.
Just a thought.
Although I'm totally against the Rooney appointment and the manner in which it was done, all this constant whinging and bellyaching from the fan base must make them wonder if its worth the hassle.
I'd like to think they're not a big a bunch of drama queens as some Blues fans (not you H)
I think Rooney needs time - It will become obvious during that time whether it was a crazy appointment such as Zola or not. We still have that time this season so lets bear with it.
What i can't fathom though is the talk about giving him transfer windows, and having his own players. We have just had an almighty overhaul of the squad, we know there are still some more players we would want to switch but we virtually signed a new team. If we are using the Technical Director signs the players logic, which i thought was what commonly accepted is what we are doing, why does Rooney get his own players ? and what difference would it make ? Again it seems to be commonly accepted that Eustace wasn't going to last so surely the players signed were for the new manager / ethos of the team. If they weren't then what the hell were Cook/Gardner playing at ? We have seen the benefits of constant change (none) so we surely aren't going down that route again too ?
You make some very good points there.
The Knighthead buy-out is a massive reason for optimism ... but not just optimism about being fantastic and great things and the shiny stuff that most fans at other clubs want - a lot of the optimism is also relief - relief that we may be entering some sort of period of stability and certainty
I know not everybody likes stats but they can often support what your eyes tell you
Since the change we're having fewer shots, fewer shots on target, fewer chances, fewer 'expected goals' (yes I know lots don't like it), we concede more chances, we're conceding far more shots, and conceding far more goals
We're having less possession, winning fewer tackles, making fewer passes, though we are playing the same percentage of long balls.
Obviously it's a small sample size and fixtures have not been easy, so hopefully things improve over time, they need to.
Bloody hell !!
That makes for grim reading. So glad i've got FAITH (in Rooney) to fall back on
Robert Hopkinsđź‘ŤI think Rooney needs time - It will become obvious during that time whether it was a crazy appointment such as Zola or not. We still have that time this season so lets bear with it.
What i can't fathom though is the talk about giving him transfer windows, and having his own players. We have just had an almighty overhaul of the squad, we know there are still some more players we would want to switch but we virtually signed a new team. If we are using the Technical Director signs the players logic, which i thought was what commonly accepted is what we are doing, why does Rooney get his own players ? and what difference would it make ? Again it seems to be commonly accepted that Eustace wasn't going to last so surely the players signed were for the new manager / ethos of the team. If they weren't then what the hell were Cook/Gardner playing at ? We have seen the benefits of constant change (none) so we surely aren't going down that route again too ?
QuokkasskipCould also have got something against Hull and Southampton and beat Ipswichto balance thingsExactly this
There is only a plan similar to what I lay out for my lads u10 team.
Press the ball, high up the pitch… be positive and play forward
No idea our defensive plan?
It’s a shambles at the moment and that is down to the manager.
Hope it changes but he looks clueless and result and more importantly performances show that.
Could of lost all games by 4/5 goals (apart from Ipswich)
This is not the time to panic. Ok, none of us really wanted Rooney but we have to give him time.
I am still of the opinion that I think we would have struggled in these 5 games anyway and that everyone would have been calling for Eustace’s head.
I believe the way WR is trying to play is the way forward but it’s not going to happen overnight.
I believe he had been naive in thinking that we can change so quickly but that’s not a sackable offence.
I also think no manager can legislate for the kind of basic defensive mistakes we are making, such as not being goal side of your man (Burke twice on Saturday) and also full backs allowing crosses in, numerous times in the last 5 games.
With Buchanan and Laird in there, I don’t think we will make these basic errors. We are also missing Anderson, who has been very good for us all season.
What we do have now though, is massive pressure on the team to beat Sheffield Wednesday. I believe the village idiots will be out in force if we don’t manage a win. I’m still behind Rooney and will be for the foreseeable future because we really can’t change the manager again.
El MayorI'd like to think they're not a big a bunch of drama queens as some Blues fans (not you H)
In a section of your article entitled 'Toxicity' you say -
I’m loathe to get into the arguments about the removal of John Eustace as head coach and appointment of Wayne Rooney to the manager role. There are such entrenched positions already about these two decisions that it’s difficult to discuss them without allegations of “bedwetting” or “happy clapping”
plus at the end of that paragraph -
It might not be fair, but life isn’t fair – and I think we need to be a bit more grown up and accept this. The biggest factor I think in all this toxicity is the sheer bluntness of the words used when the public announcement of Eustace’s sacking was made. People might deny it, but I think words have a lot of power.
It's unfortunate that you say these wise words in your article then decide to post the type of comment quoted at the top.
This is not the time to panic. Ok, none of us really wanted Rooney but we have to give him time.
I am still of the opinion that I think we would have struggled in these 5 games anyway and that everyone would have been calling for Eustace’s head.
I believe the way WR is trying to play is the way forward but it’s not going to happen overnight.
I believe he had been naive in thinking that we can change so quickly but that’s not a sackable offence.
I also think no manager can legislate for the kind of basic defensive mistakes we are making, such as not being goal side of your man (Burke twice on Saturday) and also full backs allowing crosses in, numerous times in the last 5 games.
With Buchanan and Laird in there, I don’t think we will make these basic errors. We are also missing Anderson, who has been very good for us all season.
What we do have now though, is massive pressure on the team to beat Sheffield Wednesday. I believe the village idiots will be out in force if we don’t manage a win. I’m still behind Rooney and will be for the foreseeable future because we really can’t change the manager again.
Remember Bielik's bullet header past his own keeper earlier in the season ? Didn't stop us getting to 6th
WR BlueEl MayorI'd like to think they're not a big a bunch of drama queens as some Blues fans (not you H)
In a section of your article entitled 'Toxicity' you say -
I’m loathe to get into the arguments about the removal of John Eustace as head coach and appointment of Wayne Rooney to the manager role. There are such entrenched positions already about these two decisions that it’s difficult to discuss them without allegations of “bedwetting” or “happy clapping”
plus at the end of that paragraph -
It might not be fair, but life isn’t fair – and I think we need to be a bit more grown up and accept this. The biggest factor I think in all this toxicity is the sheer bluntness of the words used when the public announcement of Eustace’s sacking was made. People might deny it, but I think words have a lot of power.
It's unfortunate that you say these wise words in your article then decide to post the type of comment quoted at the top.
Not sure what you're driving at there mate
El MayorI'd like to think they're not a big a bunch of drama queens as some Blues fans (not you H)
In a section of your article entitled 'Toxicity' you say -
I’m loathe to get into the arguments about the removal of John Eustace as head coach and appointment of Wayne Rooney to the manager role. There are such entrenched positions already about these two decisions that it’s difficult to discuss them without allegations of “bedwetting” or “happy clapping”
plus at the end of that paragraph -
It might not be fair, but life isn’t fair – and I think we need to be a bit more grown up and accept this. The biggest factor I think in all this toxicity is the sheer bluntness of the words used when the public announcement of Eustace’s sacking was made. People might deny it, but I think words have a lot of power.
It's unfortunate that you say these wise words in your article then decide to post the type of comment quoted at the top.
What’s wrong with the comment at the top?
Robert Hopkinsđź‘ŤI think Rooney needs time - It will become obvious during that time whether it was a crazy appointment such as Zola or not. We still have that time this season so lets bear with it.
What i can't fathom though is the talk about giving him transfer windows, and having his own players. We have just had an almighty overhaul of the squad, we know there are still some more players we would want to switch but we virtually signed a new team. If we are using the Technical Director signs the players logic, which i thought was what commonly accepted is what we are doing, why does Rooney get his own players ? and what difference would it make ? Again it seems to be commonly accepted that Eustace wasn't going to last so surely the players signed were for the new manager / ethos of the team. If they weren't then what the hell were Cook/Gardner playing at ? We have seen the benefits of constant change (none) so we surely aren't going down that route again too ?
Barely played, half of em. We e had second choice full backs playing, then a right back at left back. Tyler who? Keshi who?
If you ain't got the right shots in the locker it could be "charge of the light brigade" style leadership. Or donkeys led by donkeys?
But we got 1 point. 4 or 5 would be, like, 3 or 4 more!
I think we would probably both agree that the discussion is better when people discuss the actual issues (even if they disagree) rather than when it descends to name-calling, particularly if we aim those names at general unspecified groups rather than specific individuals.
Your article subhead points out that 'the reaction online has become ever more toxic' and you make various points about the nature of the debate, one of which I quoted above -
There are such entrenched positions already about these two decisions that it’s difficult to discuss them without allegations of “bedwetting” or “happy clapping”.
This sounds like you think that discussion is a good thing but that it's not so good when it descends to ad-hominem, or when it gets polarised and all that is left is a binary choice of two extreme viewpoints with exaggerated descriptions and everybody has to be shoehorned under one of these labels - so you can't be positive without being labelled a happy clapper and you can't be critical without being labelled a bed-wetter. If that's what you meant, then I agree.
Hence, me saying that it's unfortunate that your latest contribution on here was to label 'some Blues fans' as 'drama queens' in response to the post that you quoted in the manner that you did. Especially considering the other things you said in your article (which I quoted) which suggest that you understand the power of words and how they can affect a debate - especially when you are seen as something of an opinion-former around these parts.