01-11-2016, 13:26
Morgan was a psycho on the pitch - fans love commitment ........ he needs committing ......... to our history at least.
Danny brought him to us I assume because he is a very different character to himself. Danny is a nice bloke, I've never heard Morgan accused of that. Unfortunately we are a football club, not a police interrogation unit.
I agree that Danny is ultimately responsible for the team's mentality, but earlier this very season our friend Dancing went out of his way to praise the spirit on view! But an influential bad egg can ruin everything - the trick to good management is to spot the problem and deal with it and even I have to wonder if Danny is of the stuff to do that kind of thing (you need either a nasty, or coldly professional streak).
I'm afraid I do blame the CEO and our Board, because we make the same mistakes as regards recruitment over and over again. For can't afford Novak's wages, read can't accede to Craig Davies's demands. What happens when you can't afford to score, you lose. I'm sure Danny did have an idea of what he was taking on last season, but he achieved our one aim - to stay up, BUT I doubt he'd taken into account the long-term effects of contracts wasted on players who were either down, or out, or even in SEB's case, both! As a club we consistently underestimate the level of player needed to keep us in Division One, so our budget falls short of the task.
Of course saving us even this season is possible and yes you can recruit on the cheap and succeed. Burton weren't big spenders, neither are Scunny and Bolton are in bigger financial trouble than Haiti. But the odds are against you in a series of gambles .......
All Danny's solutions involve Liddle and Morgan. I'm not agin a back three, except that it looks like a new way to resurrect Liddle - how many times can we roll away the stone? And more training, more time with a psycho checking out our durability - Eddie Jones creates fewer injuries in an England squad session! I still think ditch those two and expand the Hump's role and we'd be giving ourselves a fighting chance.
Danny brought him to us I assume because he is a very different character to himself. Danny is a nice bloke, I've never heard Morgan accused of that. Unfortunately we are a football club, not a police interrogation unit.
I agree that Danny is ultimately responsible for the team's mentality, but earlier this very season our friend Dancing went out of his way to praise the spirit on view! But an influential bad egg can ruin everything - the trick to good management is to spot the problem and deal with it and even I have to wonder if Danny is of the stuff to do that kind of thing (you need either a nasty, or coldly professional streak).
I'm afraid I do blame the CEO and our Board, because we make the same mistakes as regards recruitment over and over again. For can't afford Novak's wages, read can't accede to Craig Davies's demands. What happens when you can't afford to score, you lose. I'm sure Danny did have an idea of what he was taking on last season, but he achieved our one aim - to stay up, BUT I doubt he'd taken into account the long-term effects of contracts wasted on players who were either down, or out, or even in SEB's case, both! As a club we consistently underestimate the level of player needed to keep us in Division One, so our budget falls short of the task.
Of course saving us even this season is possible and yes you can recruit on the cheap and succeed. Burton weren't big spenders, neither are Scunny and Bolton are in bigger financial trouble than Haiti. But the odds are against you in a series of gambles .......
All Danny's solutions involve Liddle and Morgan. I'm not agin a back three, except that it looks like a new way to resurrect Liddle - how many times can we roll away the stone? And more training, more time with a psycho checking out our durability - Eddie Jones creates fewer injuries in an England squad session! I still think ditch those two and expand the Hump's role and we'd be giving ourselves a fighting chance.