Lillehamring

I rest my case.

Yawn. A typo - that's the best you've got?

I assure you it's nothing of the kind. The thing with this place is that it's possible to make a perfectly sensible post and have a good discussion, whilst at the same time knowing exactly what triggers the sheep and the bigots. I'm mean, it's so easy, it's not exactly satisfying - but there is a certain malicious joy to be taken watching all the poor boys jump to their keyboards to make the same old predictable attempts at reposts, at humour, at trying to show the forum heroes that they're in the club... it's just a bonus that one can do it at the same time as making an actual genuine post. It's a double headed sword, no pivot at all. Look back, you'll see exactly how it works

As mentioned in many other places - there is no one thing, person or reason for what has happened. I've moved on, sorry, i've no intention of going over all the old stuff again.

I never said i was the 'only' one with common sense. I simply said that my comments weren't pro-rudkin but pro-common sense - ie i looked at the facts and made i sensible comment based on facts rather than prejudice or following the mob. If this puts me in the minority, i have no problem with that - in fact, it's a relief and no great surprise.

Thank you - as i said, i've only responded to posters who have something useful to add, and who actually take the time to read and understand the point i'm making (even if they don't necessarily agree with it). FT is 95% morons, I took a break, but it feels like there's enough common sense here now to maintain a sensible discussion (even if one has to stepping stone over the mob).

Not if you only post on here to tease the morons ;)

I wouldn't call it a 'bug bear' - somebody raised the question about why fans have such a problem with seagrave, I made an observation of what I believed the cause was, and to qualify my point I compared it to the scapegoating that exists. So it's not fair to say it's a bug bear, just a different way to how i look at things; i'm really just talking about fan psychology, just relating behaviour that i've witnessed here and on other forums. - why does that rile you so much? But to answer (not argue) your first question: I don't have a problem with individuals being either criticised or commended for specific things that individual has done; and if people want to generalise and look for scapegoats, I disagree with that, but that's their prerogative to do so - as i say i'm simply discussing this phenomenon, not telling people what they should or shouldn't think- And I'm not arguing with anyone , as i say, i can emotionally detach to discuss the bigger picture. why suggest that i'm argumentative - i've only responded to people who have made a reasonable point, anyone trying to bait me i've ignored. Do you think that because someone has a different opinion to you, they're argumentative. And as for your (let's face it, it's a bit juvenile - i think you already know the answer and are just trying to get me 'argue') question about the premier league: the only thought i had back then was sheer unadulterated joy - personally, i don't seem to remember there being any kind of focus on the owners at that time, some on the recruitment team - deservedly so. But it was all about the players.

Nowhere did i say that you said "that would be the ONLY recommendation considered' and nowhere did i say that you said 'I would have to make that signing' over-defensive much.

I don't know if any of us know enough about the recruitment process to really judge - as i've said earlier, i think our position over the last few years (unsellable players, disinterested performances, PSR sh\t, etc etc) must have made sourcing and actually signing players a horrendous task, I'm sure that the recruitment team have identified a stream of decent suitable players only to be regularly and consistently turned down. The same can probably be said of managers - do we really think they wanted to employ steve cooper, knowing the risk of fan reaction? Probably not. When things were going well, we were signing great players; the next minute PSR meant that we couldn't afford to buy players (Lookman is a classic example), Rodgers downs tools, the players down tools, we're relegated and suddenly, that same recruitment team are left picking up any old crap they can get.... I certainly don't think seagrave is the reason for how our recruitment has changed since we opened the place.

That's a fair point. And i think that that anonymity and lack of communication (honestly, i do believe the club could have handled this much better) is part of the reason why he has been latched onto as a scapegoat. Certainly, he has a face that you want to punch, and is a very easy target, and one that doesn't even fight back or defend himself - i don't particularly care for him, if truth be told. However, I think my issue is this whole concept of 'finding someone to blame' - there are so many factors that have contributed to our position both internally within the management, but equally within the playing squad and, controversial as this is, with the fans themselves. but equally, a lot of our problems are due to the system and regulations within the sport that hamstring and restrict the development of clubs like us - as I say, personally, i'm at an age and state of mind where I can emotionally detach myself from game day misery and look at all the elements that have brought us to this point in our history - and, as such, I don't need to latch onto someone to blame - because, quite frankly, there isn't one single element, it's just a perfect storm, in the same way our success was - there's actually a sort of strange ying yang to the whole thing. For what it's worth, I hope our new owners do understand sport management better than KP, but at the same time I do believe that they'll inherit a better club, for all it's problems, than the one KP bought.

1. I'm not a business analysist and don't have access to the company accounts so my opinion on the first part is meaningless. 2. Yes, he should sell, probably should have done some time ago. 100%.

regarding your first comment - so, what? - As i said, i don't want to get into a debate about Rudkin. i'm only interested in discussing the psychology of fans looking for a scapegoat to ease their frustration. I simply referenced Rudkin as a comparison to fans attitude towards Seagrave. Seems like I can't mention the bloke without fans seeing it as an excuse to reignite the scapegoating, which i find rather amusing. your second comment - I've no idea what you mean, sorry. and i'm too old to be your son, youngfellermelad.

Yes he should and it hasn't helped us that he hasn't. However, I don't believe that the situation we are in is purely because of one element, that it is purely down to the actions of one individual. This is my point. We are not where we are JUST because of Rudkin, the players have not serially underperformed JUST because we moved to seagrave.

Each to their own - personally, i'd rather be realistic and look at the bigger picture than stamp my feet and say 'If it wasn't for Rudkin we'd be playing in europe right now' as many fans do.

Unless data and analytics reveals that these are the best options available to us? That's more to the point.

Maybe the reality of our situation was that that was the best we could get? All those players came with a good pedigree/reputation - you can't predict how a signing is going to perform. It's very easy in hindsight to label these as bad signings - but again the question is, as bad as they were, is it possible that they were as good as we could get. It's also very easy to hypothetically argue that fans would have done better. i suspect that if you go back to the individual threads of those players, there will be fans who have commended those signings. most fans, at least on here, have completely unrealistic ideas of players we can afford/attract. And, with respect, i don't think you understand my logic - apart from anything else how can something that doesn't exist (fan recruitment) with something that does exist (pro-recruitment) - that's your logic, not mine.

As i said, i don't want to get into a debate about rudkin. And i haven't personally collated a list of every ridiculous thing he's been blamed for, so i don't have specific examples to hand.

Because here on foxes talk for example we've consistently identified quality signings? we're not even capable of agreeing if a player is amazing or dreadful. And i can guarantee that any player mention in a fans forum has probably already been well researched by the club. the problem our 'pros' have had over the last five years is not the result of incompetence or a lack of recourses, it's because the shop we've been shopping in is føkking terrible - Anyone can " pick better players than this lot have" - but the problem is getting said players to sign for us, even if we can afford to bring them in. I genuinely can't believe i'm debating this with a person who thinks that 'playing' FM is an adequate qualification for having a job in a pro-sports requitement team. mental.

And once again the point is completely missed. I'm not pro-rudkin, i'm pro-common sense. I don't want to get into a debate about rudkin - but it is a fact that, as poor a DoF as he was, he sharees in the responsibilty for our decline, but... fans were blaming him for things that he literally had nothing to do with. This is my point about how fans look for simple explanations to explain complex problems. There were many many reasons for our decline, but because rudkin was bad at his job, fans adopted him as a figure to blame for almost every single problem, regardless of whether it was his remit or not. So, no, not-pro-rudkin, at all. In the same way they have adopted seagrave as a talisman of performance inadequacies. It's easier for people to rationalise all the personal, physical & psychological reasons why a player underperforms by churning out the old "segrave is just like a spa/hotel" etc.

Notwithstanding, the point is that we were doing it years ago, as were most clubs. Make no mistake, what brighton and sunderland are doing now is nothing new, they've just had a good run of success.

pretty sure we were doing data analytics when sunderland and brighton were dreaming of being as successful as us. and our whole recent success has been based on scouring foreign leagues - it's not a case that we've started to do it, it's the case that we're able to go back to doing it.

If i spent 500M on a football club the last thing in the world i would do is allow some randomly nominated fan to sit on the board and recommend transfers! How absurd - the amount of money and resources that go into recruitment and you suggest allowing a fan to stroll in and recommend some player that everyone's been talking about on a fan board! Yes, build a bond with the fans, but there are better ways to do it than that.

The fixation with Seagrave is the same as the fixation with Rudkin - a lot of our fans can't deal with the fact that what has happened is the result of many different factors, they need to have something to focus their anger on - Rudkin is most people's go-to scapegoat, his anonymity and the lack of actual understanding of his role makes it easy to blame him for everything relating to transfers, contracts etc - even things that have nothing to do with him, even now when he is no longer the DoF, fans on here are still quick to drag him out as the reson for anything they don't like. Likewise, seagrave has been set up as the scapegoat for the lack of energy and commitment of the players - rather than blaming the apathy of the players it is much easier to create this image of seagrave as the root of everything wrong with performance.

I think any of that stuff is outweighed by the positives we offer -such as the infrastructure and the profile of the club over the last 10 years. Anyone who comes in is going to change the squad, change the management. the squad is a detail that's constantly in flux. And i don't see how this squad represents a negative equity when at least half of it is pure profit.