Slow News Day (again)

[UpTheLeagueFox]

Neil Moxley, the journalist who wrote the piece is a Birmingham fan, married to a Cov fan and is one of the better journalists on the Midlands patch.

I think he was well justified in having a pop at the owners for going behind the manager's back to sound out Harry - which they did, although not directly with Harry, I'm led to believe.

He's not a Leicester City hater I can assure you of that.

[flowwolf]

Hid did have a point though our owners never denied that they had made contact with Redknapp why was that ? It's because they did and no doubt the Mail had proof of it. Personally I don't trust the owners as far as I can spit , Nigel and the team are on a role at the moment and long may that last but if he doesn't keep it up or we have a bit of a dip I have no doubts what so ever what the knee jerk owners will do.

[Mark_w]

Neil Moxley, the journalist who wrote the piece is a Birmingham fan, married to a Cov fan and is one of the better journalists on the Midlands patch.

I think he was well justified in having a pop at the owners for going behind the manager's back to sound out Harry - which they did, although not directly with Harry, I'm led to believe.

He's not a Leicester City hater I can assure you of that.

All your average FoxesTalk poster read.

[Haydos]

Neil Moxley, the journalist who wrote the piece is a Birmingham fan, married to a Cov fan and is one of the better journalists on the Midlands patch.

I think he was well justified in having a pop at the owners for going behind the manager's back to sound out Harry - which they did, although not directly with Harry, I'm led to believe.

He's not a Leicester City hater I can assure you of that.

I don't think it's the article as it is the way he constantly digs at us and the owners like a petulant child. It's poorly written and just sounds like he's written it to piss us, as fans, off.

[Out Foxed]

I'm an easy going guy, but that article makes me want to bang the writer out....and i'm only half way through

[_Fatboyslow_]

The article just sums up 'journalism'

This article sums up the Daily Mail

[MooseBreath]

Hid did have a point though our owners never denied that they had made contact with Redknapp why was that ? It's because they did and no doubt the Mail had proof of it. Personally I don't trust the owners as far as I can spit , Nigel and the team are on a role at the moment and long may that last but if he doesn't keep it up or we have a bit of a dip I have no doubts what so ever what the knee jerk owners will do.

Well they are foreign so they obviously know nothing about football and will definitely make bad decisions. We should only allow white English owners. Only white English people can be trusted and only white English people know anything about football. Come to think of it, only white English people know anything about anything really. Every other race and nationality is just a waste of resources. stormfront4eva.

[flowwolf]

Oh dear Moosebrain until you mentioned it I had no idea our owners were as you put it " Foreign " I only mention our owners . Hold your skirt down you knickers are showing . :D :D

Stick to the point please , are you saying that getting rid of Erickson was not a knee jerk reaction ? and are you saying that you don't believe any contact was made by them direct or indirect to Harry Redknapp ?

If so i'm all ears and ready to be corrected. If on the other hand you want to rant on about racial prejudice when none has been shown, Then be my guest you will only make yourself appear silly.

[_Fatboyslow_]

Hid did have a point though our owners never denied that they had made contact with Redknapp why was that ? It's because they did and no doubt the Mail had proof of it.

If anyone had proof surely they would have used it? Emails room bookings anything, but nothing came out. How can you comment on something that is pure fiction. As for SGE's departure a knee jerk would have been sacking him within 24 hours of the defeat. Not at a meeting the Monday evening after the game. Don't forget the papers the that week end, they were full of it, I recall reading SGE himself telling the team that after a performance like that it would not be a suprise for the manager not to be talking to the team. ie sacked gone

[flowwolf]

Thanks fatboy for a proper reply. The thing is they came out in answer to all the speculation regarding Redknapp yet did not once mention his name or deny that they had had any contact with him, which in my book would have been the correct thing to do if you are going to reply at all. If the Redknapp story had been pure fiction surely that was the time to silence the rumours by saying this is pure fiction we have never had any contact with Harry Redknapp or anyone else in relation to our current managers job, but they did not why was that ? I think they feared the Mail knew more than they were comfortable with, after all nothing stays quite in football behind the scenes .

As for the knee jerk reaction to sacking Erickson I think sacking any manager after 13 games into a season would be termed knee jerk by most people.

[_Fatboyslow_]

Re Del Boy: the owners don't answer to the media and in the statement they made that clear. It is my view that they felt they had no case to answer.

Re SGE; was he sacked or did he quit ?

[MooseBreath]

Oh dear Moosebrain until you mentioned it I had no idea our owners were as you put it " Foreign " I only mention our owners . Hold your skirt down you knickers are showing . :D :D

Stick to the point please , are you saying that getting rid of Erickson was not a knee jerk reaction ? and are you saying that you don't believe any contact was made by them direct or indirect to Harry Redknapp ?

If so i'm all ears and ready to be corrected. If on the other hand you want to rant on about racial prejudice when none has been shown, Then be my guest you will only make yourself appear silly.

Sacking sven wasn't a knee jerk. We had been crap for a while and not getting any better. Sacking him was the right decision made at the right time. What about sousa? Was that knee jerk for you? I think everyone agrees that sacking him was the right decision at the right time. Appointing Pearson was also the right decision. So far so good, yet still the owners come in for criticism.

As for redknapp, I really don't care whether they spoke to him or not. As I've said before, the owners are not married to Nigel Pearson, it is a professional relationship not a romantic one. It doesn't matter if the owners date other men, all that matters is that the right decisions are made at the right time.

[THEBIGJOHNSTEADER;]

Sacking sven wasn't a knee jerk. We had been crap for a while and not getting any better. Sacking him was the right decision made at the right time. What about sousa? Was that knee jerk for you? I think everyone agrees that sacking him was the right decision at the right time. Appointing Pearson was also the right decision. So far so good, yet still the owners come in for criticism.

As for redknapp, I really don't care whether they spoke to him or not. As I've said before, the owners are not married to Nigel Pearson, it is a professional relationship not a romantic one. It doesn't matter if the owners date other men, all that matters is that the right decisions are made at the right time.

The way I read the situation. Nigel and the owners are happily married, but Nigel doesnt swallow and has stopped shaving his genitals. This has become an issue for the owners even though Nige is perfect in every other sense, so they frequent Redknapp when on business trips. Redknapp is the beautiful Russian prostitute they hook up with after dining at China Tang at the Dorchester. To be fair to Arry the old leather faced cvnt, he does look as if his face has been slapped with a few cocks the miserable wrinkled fvck

[flowwolf]

Sacking sven wasn't a knee jerk. We had been crap for a while and not getting any better. Sacking him was the right decision made at the right time. What about sousa? Was that knee jerk for you? I think everyone agrees that sacking him was the right decision at the right time. Appointing Pearson was also the right decision. So far so good, yet still the owners come in for criticism.

As for redknapp, I really don't care whether they spoke to him or not. As I've said before, the owners are not married to Nigel Pearson, it is a professional relationship not a romantic one. It doesn't matter if the owners date other men, all that matters is that the right decisions are made at the right time.

Ah no mention of your racial prejudice rant then ? You don't care if they spoke to Redknapp or not , Well if I were Pearson I bloody well would be and neither is HE married to the owners. How would you feel if your boss was actively seeking your replacement behind your back ? suppose you would just shrug your shoulders and say " that's business" of course you would not , you would think what a load of shifty two faced bastards and in a nut shell that is what they are.

[darko2k7]

Love how some people are taking what the daily mail ! says as gospel over our very own owners who have only made one mistake ( according to some ) by sacking Sven since they have been here . What else have they done wrong in the time they have been here ? How does one supposedly knee jerk reaction( IMO it wasn't) make them knee jerk owners?

There is NO PROOF that they did or did not talk to harry , otherwise the mail would have shown us all it . But they haven't, they have just written more childish crap with no proof or content to it.

But what am i thinking the daily mail never lies do they !

[MooseBreath]

Ah no mention of your racial prejudice rant then ? You don't care if they spoke to Redknapp or not , Well if I were Pearson I bloody well would be and neither is HE married to the owners. How would you feel if your boss was actively seeking your replacement behind your back ? suppose you would just shrug your shoulders and say " that's business" of course you would not , you would think what a load of shifty two faced bastards and in a nut shell that is what they are.

How doyou know they were actively seeking a replacement (clue - you don't)? If they did meet (unconfirmed), how do you know it wasn't redknapp or agent who set it up (you dont). Do you say no to meeting him and ruin your chances of appointing him should you need to in future? No, you meet him, humour the guy and get yourself a good backup plan should it be needed. It isn't needed at the moment, so we're not using it. Nothing wrong with what they've done (unconfirmed) here at all imo

[_Fatboyslow_]

Moose The Truth Is Out There and I want to Believe., Trust No one and only belive what you see

[Captain...]

How doyou know they were actively seeking a replacement (clue - you don't)? If they did meet (unconfirmed), how do you know it wasn't redknapp or agent who set it up (you dont). Do you say no to meeting him and ruin your chances of appointing him should you need to in future? No, you meet him, humour the guy and get yourself a good backup plan should it be needed. It isn't needed at the moment, so we're not using it. Nothing wrong with what they've done (unconfirmed) here at all imo

...and who says that the meeting was about the manager's job, there are a number of other roles that Redknapp could play at the club in a part time or advisory capacity, such as he is doing at Bournemouth, or at least was for a while. Having Redknapp on board in some capacity could be advantageous to the club, but it may undermine Nige.

It does seem likely that some enquiries were made, but who spoke to who about what and on who's backing is not clear.

[indierich06]

Ah no mention of your racial prejudice rant then ? You don't care if they spoke to Redknapp or not , Well if I were Pearson I bloody well would be and neither is HE married to the owners. How would you feel if your boss was actively seeking your replacement behind your back ? suppose you would just shrug your shoulders and say " that's business" of course you would not , you would think what a load of shifty two faced bastards and in a nut shell that is what they are.

I don't know, I think there's a difference between 'actively seeking your replacement' and preparing for a situation where you might have to make a managerial change. At the time, reults were pretty poor - now I'm not saying that I wanted Pearson to be sacked and I'm certainly not saying that I would want Redknapp in charge at this club - I've made my feelings pretty clear on both of those subjects in other threads. But what if we'd lost these last 5 games on the spin and it had left us in the relegation zone? I'd still be behind Pearson, but most on here would be baying for blood. The owners would be looking down the barrel of another failed season and they'd probably want to get back on track as soon as possible.

When they sacked Sven, they got their fingers burnt - they thought they'd get MON back at the club, but he wasn't interested - they aren't going to make the same mistake again. This leads me to believe that they were merely sounding out a potential replacement as a contingency. I would be more pissed off if they sacked Pearson without a second thought as to who would replace him as that would be absolutely ludicrous.

To run a business responsibly, you need to look at results and take stock of your position constantly. The personnel at the club are just that, they're not bigger than the club itself. If results are going your way - fantastic. But when results start to slide, you need to reevaluate your position and plan for a worst case scenario. Not doing so would be completely irresponsible.

I'm sure this club and the vast majority of other clubs sound out managerial replacements before they sack their current manager - it's common sense. The trouble is, when you do it with somebody as high profile as Harry Redknapp, you run the risk of media exposure, which has happened in this case.

I'm not the owners' biggest fan, but I can't criticise them for wanting to be prepared for a worst case scenario - it would be wildly irresponsible if they weren't.

[flowwolf]

I don't know, I think there's a difference between 'actively seeking your replacement' and preparing for a situation where you might have to make a managerial change. At the time, reults were pretty poor - now I'm not saying that I wanted Pearson to be sacked and I'm certainly not saying that I would want Redknapp in charge at this club - I've made my feelings pretty clear on both of those subjects in other threads. But what if we'd lost these last 5 games on the spin and it had left us in the relegation zone? I'd still be behind Pearson, but most on here would be baying for blood. The owners would be looking down the barrel of another failed season and they'd probably want to get back on track as soon as possible.

When they sacked Sven, they got their fingers burnt - they thought they'd get MON back at the club, but he wasn't interested - they aren't going to make the same mistake again. This leads me to believe that they were merely sounding out a potential replacement as a contingency. I would be more pissed off if they sacked Pearson without a second thought as to who would replace him as that would be absolutely ludicrous.

To run a business responsibly, you need to look at results and take stock of your position constantly. The personnel at the club are just that, they're not bigger than the club itself. If results are going your way - fantastic. But when results start to slide, you need to reevaluate your position and plan for a worst case scenario. Not doing so would be completely irresponsible.

I'm sure this club and the vast majority of other clubs sound out managerial replacements before they sack their current manager - it's common sense. The trouble is, when you do it with somebody as high profile as Harry Redknapp, you run the risk of media exposure, which has happened in this case.

I'm not the owners' biggest fan, but I can't criticise them for wanting to be prepared for a worst case scenario - it would be wildly irresponsible if they weren't.

Yes I understand what you mean but the fans have been crying out for stability after years of knee jerk reactions and ridiculous merry go round decisions , yet after only a handful of games this season they have been at it again going behind the managers back and showing no patience whatsoever. Sod them they will be the ruin of this club.