01-03-2017, 16:42
My only worry is what this means in terms of the long-term survival of the club and what it says about Mr Carson's motives.
The position of Director of Football has only existed a few weeks. Like the previous position of Chief Executive its actual value to the club was minimal. If you haven't any other executives, why do you need a chief one; equally if you don't play any football, what's the Director direct?
My opinion of Turner has been regularly stated - he's travelled from over-rated and selfish goalkeeper, to moderate manager, to a behind-the-scenes manoeuverer? I wonder if his recent change of function has allowed past misdeeds to surface. This is very sudden and brutal unless something quite serious has happened.
If we are cost-cutting, why on earth are we still paying Matt Duke? We have next-to-no goalkeepers and a combination of Gordon Banks and Manuel Neuer couldn't fix Thorsten Stuckmann.
I'm glad to see Chris Turner go, feel we will be better without him, and really hope Mr Carson isn't just a man who looks good in a suit.
The position of Director of Football has only existed a few weeks. Like the previous position of Chief Executive its actual value to the club was minimal. If you haven't any other executives, why do you need a chief one; equally if you don't play any football, what's the Director direct?
My opinion of Turner has been regularly stated - he's travelled from over-rated and selfish goalkeeper, to moderate manager, to a behind-the-scenes manoeuverer? I wonder if his recent change of function has allowed past misdeeds to surface. This is very sudden and brutal unless something quite serious has happened.
If we are cost-cutting, why on earth are we still paying Matt Duke? We have next-to-no goalkeepers and a combination of Gordon Banks and Manuel Neuer couldn't fix Thorsten Stuckmann.
I'm glad to see Chris Turner go, feel we will be better without him, and really hope Mr Carson isn't just a man who looks good in a suit.