Don’t think I can be any more explicit.
It’s also not a case of dragging up and re litigating the past. It is the fact that because he is our CEO that people are defending the indefensible.
No more on this from me. If you are happy with him and what he represents fine, I am not.
Thanks for your reply, and I think it’s completely fair enough👍
BoyblueDon’t think I can be any more explicit.
It’s also not a case of dragging up and re litigating the past. It is the fact that because he is our CEO that people are defending the indefensible.
No more on this from me. If you are happy with him and what he represents fine, I am not.
We all have choices, Cook gets my full support - if you can't support him then that's your choice, you can exercise that choice in several ways. Get behind Knighthead, or don't. If you can't, bye bye.
I don’t think anyone’s defending what he said in those emails.
To beat the bloke with a stick over a decade old though? If we’re going to blacklist everybody from the club for something shitty they did over a decade ago we’re gonna have nobody to employ.
To be fair, at least one poster appeared to.
For what it's worth, I agree with your point about clemency. What worries me about Cook in regards to his role for us is the gaffs he's prone to. He said a lot of silly things at Man City in relation to the club and he's already done the same here. The statement regarding JE's sacking was poor and the "no fear" bollox caused all manor of confusion and derision. It could all have been handled so much easier: "We thank JE for his service but the club's vision no longer aligns with his."
It worries me that someone as experienced as him is still making such basic errors. Hopefully, he learns and we see a more thoughtful approach regarding our comms.
Fair, but I'm judging him on what he does here from now on. Rooney won't define him, Man City won't define him, what will though, is what he does next, at Blues.
All the rest of it is just so much hot air.
To be fair, at least one poster appeared to.
For what it's worth, I agree with your point about clemency. What worries me about Cook in regards to his role for us is the gaffs he's prone to. He said a lot of silly things at Man City in relation to the club and he's already done the same here. The statement regarding JE's sacking was poor and the "no fear" bollox caused all manor of confusion and derision. It could all have been handled so much easier: "We thank JE for his service but the club's vision no longer aligns with his."
It worries me that someone as experienced as him is still making such basic errors. Hopefully, he learns and we see a more thoughtful approach regarding our comms.
How it started
Our CEO doesn’t talk to us, there is no communication with the club.
How it’s going
Our CEO talks to us but I want him to use my words instead.
I’ve had to go back to see what happened back with Man City as I have limited capacity for the retention of football tittle tattle. This is how he put it after his resignation which seems a pretty reasonable take
[amp.theguardian.com]
What he did do was set the club on the trajectory that sees them where they are now. I can’t say I’m overjoyed at the petro state sports washing or other south East Asian dubious money streams (or gambling cash) that dominates our game myself. But if we’re going to question the morals around it I’d say most people are hypocrites if they wouldn’t recognise they would be overjoyed to have the success Man City fans have had, or Leicester come to that (very similar to original Thai owner of Man City in terms of source of money), or say to be where Newcastle are just now. Or Arsenal. Not sure our current overlord is any more morally culpable than the whole of world football, so seems a bit much to single him out.
Boyblue says he can’t support Cook because of the ‘taking the piss out of someone suffering from cancer’. I respect that’s at least consistent, rather than knocking him for it and then saying in fact he’s doing a stellar job. It wasn’t ‘at least one person’, it was one, not some person(s), that person being FB. He did it in his usual terse way, I’d say a bit exasperated to see the moral exasperation being expressed without any nuance. Oddly enough, I’d say FB is one of the most morally steadfast people on here though he’d no doubt tell me to feck off for
saying so.
So that’s about my rather big lot on Cook. Of course the bloke isn’t or shouldn’t be beyond criticism and however we look at the Rooney appointment it can’t be said not to have been a pretty major mis step. A bit of context about that is welcome, though, and if going ahead we recognise that sticking an ‘r’ in his name is a bit shit that is a small degree of progress. Hopefully none of our fans will abuse the next manager we get and call him a chunt if he loses his first home game or something as well.
If Knighthead didn’t see his value he’d likely be gone already.
Can we just draw a line under this and say Cook is a bit like a Man of the Match goalie ? Absolutley brilliant keeping everything out got kept the team in it, but dropped one clanger thater that lead to an own goal ? Man City it was the cancer thing at blues it was rooney. He puts his hands up deals with it and we all just move on ?
Super HansI don’t think anyone’s defending what he said in those emails.
To beat the bloke with a stick over a decade old though? If we’re going to blacklist everybody from the club for something shitty they did over a decade ago we’re gonna have nobody to employ.
At least one person on this very thread is defending it. But yeah, as I’ve said, he made the mistake, lost his job, and moved on. Shouldn’t prevent the bloke from working again, and Eustace / Rooney aside, he’s doing a good job with us
Apologies if this point has been made before, but it's perfectly possible that Knighthead, aka Wagner, was pushing hard for a high profile manager that would meet broader marketing objectives too, and that Cook did caveat the appointment as a high risk due to Rooney's inexperience and record. I'm not saying Cook isn't responsible for the decision, but I find it hard to believe he would not have been aware of the risk of the appointment and raised that, if only to cover himself. If that were the case then maybe Cook's main failing is not pushing back more himself against the appointment. Just a different take, might not be true at all.
i think its more likely than Knighthead rely on Cook for football related decisions as they are nowhere near experts themselves, and Cook dropped a bollock with grand ideas of Rooney, that didnt meet reality.
Knighthead obviously and rightly backed their newly appointed CEO, but it didnt work out, now Cook seems to have made a very sensible appointment to make up for it
I made a similar point on another thread yesterday we don't know who pushed for Rooney, we have all assumed it was Cook but none us know.