Search results

Experience maximises the chance of improved results, and that will fill the stadium.

IMHO experience is vital. Our board have publicly stated it is the key criterion in their selection process. No guarantees, of course, but an experienced manager should be able to quickly assess what he has, what he needs, develop a plan, implement it, improve results, and survive the drop...

So why, after his very poor start admittedly, did Steve Coppell steadily improve our results once appointed? Actually, I'll answer that, because he was an experienced manager who knew what was required and implemented his plan that so very nearly kept us up, despite Tinselhead's ridiculously...

No.

Spot on.

In a word, experience.

Indeed. But now is not the time for us to take a big gamble IMHO.

The list of inexperienced manager failures is longer (see above).

So do I, but this does not mean I should be manager, does it!?

Yes. The board definitely MUST learn this lesson.

You have to be a WUM!

Not really, all I'm saying is that a previous inexperienced manager started well, then things got progressively worse, and his sacking was then inevitable. May not be the case with Jones but, then again, it may... too much risk IMHO.

So you think he was a good manager then!?

It's proof it's a big gamble...

Tinselhead started with a win, then a draw, then about 10 losses and sacked. Be warned.

FFS. One win. Does NOT mean Jones should be our next permanent manager. However, credit where credit is due to Nathan and the players for tonight.