brookfox Posted 6 March 2007 Posted 6 March 2007 Link apparently we've been denied again. Even with Mandy we can't sign anyone FFS I know he was linked with Stoke, but I wonder if it was Luke Moore?! I can't imagine these snubs are helping Kelly's long term future at the club. Would a player be as likely to snub us if for example Keegan was in charge? Given MM's aims, if I was him I'd want someone who can attract the top players to my club, and it might be starting to look like Kelly is not that person...
Phlashman Posted 6 March 2007 Posted 6 March 2007 I can't imagine these snubs are helping Kelly's long term future at the club. Would a player be as likely to snub us if for example Keegan was in charge? Given MM's aims, if I was him I'd want someone who can attract the top players to my club, and it might be starting to look like Kelly is not that person... I agree, though you've got to wonder if they are snubing the Manager, the Club, the League or even Leicestershire. Also I think these snubs might be a blessing in disguise, these are players who aren't exactly playing week in week out for their clubs at the moment and are lucky if they get called up to be on the bench. We're safe, we're not getting religated, we're not getting to the play-off and the rest of the result aren't too important. Time would be better spent re-establishing a scouting network, letting some of the youngster have a crack and planning for next season. I honestly think Kelly would be great if we had a director of football helping him with the transfers and scouting side of things, maybe a big name who can also help raise the profile of the club to possible new transfers.
Burnsy Posted 6 March 2007 Posted 6 March 2007 I reckon it was Trevor sinclair he was in the papers saying he wanted to stop and fight for his place at man city. O well his loss
Manwell Pablo Posted 6 March 2007 Posted 6 March 2007 I agree, though you've got to wonder if they are snubing the Manager, the Club, the League or even Leicestershire. Also I think these snubs might be a blessing in disguise, these are players who aren't exactly playing week in week out for their clubs at the moment and are lucky if they get called up to be on the bench. We're safe, we're not getting religated, we're not getting to the play-off and the rest of the result aren't too important. Time would be better spent re-establishing a scouting network, letting some of the youngster have a crack and planning for next season. I honestly think Kelly would be great if we had a director of football helping him with the transfers and scouting side of things, maybe a big name who can also help raise the profile of the club to possible new transfers. Oh do carm down, two players turn us down and we need to sack the manager in order to get better players in? See what happens in the summer.
lookwhaticando Posted 6 March 2007 Posted 6 March 2007 Oh do carm down, two players turn us down and we need to sack the manager in order to get better players in? See what happens in the summer. It's just more ammo for the Kelly Out brigade, I'm afraid.
Master Fox Posted 6 March 2007 Posted 6 March 2007 It's just more ammo for the Kelly Out brigade, I'm afraid. And we're not in short supply of that
Strokes Posted 6 March 2007 Posted 6 March 2007 Oh do carm down, two players turn us down and we need to sack the manager in order to get better players in? See what happens in the summer. Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him.Sack him. or not.
Phlashman Posted 6 March 2007 Posted 6 March 2007 I wasn't saying Kelly out. I was saying keep Kelly, but give him some support where he needs it.
Flexx Posted 6 March 2007 Posted 6 March 2007 Has anyone else noticed that Stowell is usually the one on the touchline shouting and encouraging the players, while Kelly is at the back doing nothing. Its like Sven and Steve McLaren were before. Get rid in the summer
FrankieWorthoYaggedMyWife Posted 6 March 2007 Posted 6 March 2007 Not every manager has to be on the touchline bollocking fcuk out of everrone all the time!!
Manwell Pablo Posted 6 March 2007 Posted 6 March 2007 Has anyone else noticed that Stowell is usually the one on the touchline shouting and encouraging the players, while Kelly is at the back doing nothing. Its like Sven and Steve McLaren were before. Get rid in the summer Yeah, what a great manager Mclaren is.
lookwhaticando Posted 6 March 2007 Posted 6 March 2007 Has anyone else noticed that Stowell is usually the one on the touchline shouting and encouraging the players, while Kelly is at the back doing nothing. Its like Sven and Steve McLaren were before. Get rid in the summer Sam Allardyce isn't even on the touchline for half the game... and his side are gunning for Europe again this year. Rafa Benitez likes to sit back and relax during a game... only getting up to bark the occasional order or to talk to a player during a break - and he's one of the most successful managers of the last 3 years in the Premiership. Steve Coppell is about the most inanimate manager the premier league has ever seen... Reading doing alright this season, too. So your point was...?
STUHILL Posted 6 March 2007 Posted 6 March 2007 And we're not in short supply of that ...Yeh what with the 6 match unbeaten run with average players and that...
Flexx Posted 6 March 2007 Posted 6 March 2007 Sam Allardyce isn't even on the touchline for half the game... and his side are gunning for Europe again this year. Rafa Benitez likes to sit back and relax during a game... only getting up to bark the occasional order or to talk to a player during a break - and he's one of the most successful managers of the last 3 years in the Premiership. Steve Coppell is about the most inanimate manager the premier league has ever seen... Reading doing alright this season, too. So your point was...? Well what does Kelly do which makes him a good manager? He picks the team, probably with the help of Stowell and some of the coaches. He attempts to sign decent players on loan which never actually happens. He stands on the touchline watching his assistant encouraging his players on. He gives the same old interview after every game. (We'll try and re-double our efforts on the training ground on monday etc.) He is basically a nice guy who is a coach at best. He hasn't had any previous experience managing, except being the assistant to Levein. (which isn't a lot of help). Kelly out
FrankieWorthoYaggedMyWife Posted 6 March 2007 Posted 6 March 2007 He hasn't had any previous experience managing, except being the assistant to Levein. (which isn't a lot of help). Kelly out Every single person in the world has to be inexperianced in what they do to start with don't they?
Flexx Posted 6 March 2007 Posted 6 March 2007 Every single person in the world has to be inexperianced in what they do to start with don't they? You would expect him to start off lower down the leagues though. Not many people go from being a journalist to a manager at an established Championship team do they.
FrankieWorthoYaggedMyWife Posted 6 March 2007 Posted 6 March 2007 Mourinho Has gone from translator to champions league winner in about 10 years! I do'nt give a fcuk what he used to do, the point is he is manager now and we are unbeaten in six games since the takeover has gone through! What more do you want him to do?
Flexx Posted 6 March 2007 Posted 6 March 2007 Mourinho Has gone from translator to champions league winner in about 10 years! I do'nt give a fcuk what he used to do, the point is he is manager now and we are unbeaten in six games since the takeover has gone through! What more do you want him to do? Resign
bold_fox Posted 6 March 2007 Posted 6 March 2007 You would expect him to start off lower down the leagues though. Not many people go from being a journalist to a manager at an established Championship team do they. Kelly became Youth Team Coach at Wolves. He then trained as a journalist (part time) at the Wolverhampton Express & Star, before returning to football, first back in the Wolves coaching set-up, then moving to Blackburn Rovers, Watford and then Leicester. (To make Manwell happy - Source - www.wikipedia.com) I think thats a pretty credible start for a relatively young manager. Give the bloke a chance. The only way that this club is going to be successful in the long term is if we structure and plan our future. First thing first is to sort the manager out. RK deserves a chance. All the players comment on how impressed they are with him, so has MM. So thats whats important at this stage isn't it ? Even if it takes another 2-3 years or so ?
lookwhaticando Posted 6 March 2007 Posted 6 March 2007 Well what does Kelly do which makes him a good manager? He picks the team, probably with the help of Stowell and some of the coaches. He attempts to sign decent players on loan which never actually happens. He stands on the touchline watching his assistant encouraging his players on. He gives the same old interview after every game. (We'll try and re-double our efforts on the training ground on monday etc.) He is basically a nice guy who is a coach at best. He hasn't had any previous experience managing, except being the assistant to Levein. (which isn't a lot of help). Kelly out So if we were in League Two, you'd demand an incoming manager had experience of the conference at the very least? Fair enough... you don't always get what you want, though. When we sacked Levein, we were in a bit of a mess... we had to pay him off (around two years' salary, no doubt) and we were already potless. While the board stumbled around trying to find a cheap and cheerful option at someone elses club, Rob Kelly was getting on with the business of results. His run of games suggested that he was perhaps capable of turning things around, possibly taking us forward - that's why he got the job. He's now got 56 games under his belt as manager (caretaker/temporary or otherwise) - for someone who was thrown into the deep end at a time of desperation and essentially unable to do anything drastic with the squad, he's not done too badly to manage a 37+% win rate in his first 56 games. So what if he stands on the touchline and gets his assistant to do the barking? That's no reason to want a manager out - as stated elsewhere it's not uncommon for the manager to observe and the assistant to bark - Carlos Quieroz does the mouth-work for Sir Alex a good deal of the time. So your argument against RK in that sense is quite weak, really. His attempted signings we don't know anything about. We don't know who we approached, and we certainly don't know why they rejected us. Are they trying to win back a place at their current club? Do they not like Leicester or the Club? Is RK the problem himself? We don't know... another flat argument. For all we know we could have approached Sir Alex about taking Alan Smith on - but Smith turned us down as he believes he's in with a shout, what with Larsson heading off imminently. What would you think of RK if he had approached Alan Smith? Would you complain that his targets are unrealistic? Doubtless some would complain if he didn't approach the likes of Smith - they'd say he had no vision, no eye for talent, no ambition etc etc. You want to know what makes him a good manager... but your examples of how he's not a good manager don't stand up on their own. There's better arguments for saying he's not a good manager, but you've singularly failed to name any of them.
FrankieWorthoYaggedMyWife Posted 6 March 2007 Posted 6 March 2007 So if we were in League Two, you'd demand an incoming manager had experience of the conference at the very least? Fair enough... you don't always get what you want, though. When we sacked Levein, we were in a bit of a mess... we had to pay him off (around two years' salary, no doubt) and we were already potless. While the board stumbled around trying to find a cheap and cheerful option at someone elses club, Rob Kelly was getting on with the business of results. His run of games suggested that he was perhaps capable of turning things around, possibly taking us forward - that's why he got the job. He's now got 56 games under his belt as manager (caretaker/temporary or otherwise) - for someone who was thrown into the deep end at a time of desperation and essentially unable to do anything drastic with the squad, he's not done too badly to manage a 37+% win rate in his first 56 games. So what if he stands on the touchline and gets his assistant to do the barking? That's no reason to want a manager out - as stated elsewhere it's not uncommon for the manager to observe and the assistant to bark - Carlos Quieroz does the mouth-work for Sir Alex a good deal of the time. So your argument against RK in that sense is quite weak, really. His attempted signings we don't know anything about. We don't know who we approached, and we certainly don't know why they rejected us. Are they trying to win back a place at their current club? Do they not like Leicester or the Club? Is RK the problem himself? We don't know... another flat argument. For all we know we could have approached Sir Alex about taking Alan Smith on - but Smith turned us down as he believes he's in with a shout, what with Larsson heading off imminently. What would you think of RK if he had approached Alan Smith? Would you complain that his targets are unrealistic? Doubtless some would complain if he didn't approach the likes of Smith - they'd say he had no vision, no eye for talent, no ambition etc etc. You want to know what makes him a good manager... but your examples of how he's not a good manager don't stand up on their own. There's better arguments for saying he's not a good manager, but you've singularly failed to name any of them. i agree with near enough the whole statement! Bizarre!!!!
The People's Hero Posted 6 March 2007 Posted 6 March 2007 Rob Kelly is not a winner. Winners are ruthless, they exude confidence and conviction. Seriously, he's just not a winner. Get rid.
lookwhaticando Posted 6 March 2007 Posted 6 March 2007 i agree with near enough the whole statement! Bizarre!!!! Niiiiiicce. Rob Kelly is not a winner. Winners are ruthless, they exude confidence and conviction. Seriously, he's just not a winner. Get rid. That's a slightly better argument.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.