Are They For REAL????

[Jeff]

the posts I quoted.

The point I was making is that if MA isn't good enough and sacks him after a month, it's MM's mistake for appointing him in the first place.

 

[Real Sharapova]

the posts I quoted.

I was just asking you because I think if a chairman reacts quickly to a under performing manager it takes guts as its effectively admitting they made the mistake in the first place, whilst the easier way and often cheaper way is to keep the manager and hoping it turns around.

How long a manager should get in my view depends on how things are going, if we are bottom 3 after 10 games I would be very dissapointed and there would be justification for a sacking, been in the bottom 3 at that stage it is likely there will have been no more then 1 or 2 wins.

I'm with Macky.....:icon_eek::icon_roll

 

[Jeff]

I was just asking you because I think if a chairman reacts quickly to a under performing manager it takes guts as its effectively admitting they made the mistake in the first place, whilst the easier way and often cheaper way is to keep the manager and hoping it turns around.

How long a manager should get in my view depends on how things are going, if we are bottom 3 after 10 games I would be very dissapointed and there would be justification for a sacking, been in the bottom 3 at that stage it is likely there will have been no more then 1 or 2 wins.

Do you think O'Neill should have been sacked after only winning one of his first thirteen games?

And he was in a position where he took over a team that was doing well near the top of the table. MA has taken over a crap team and is having to rebuild it.

 

[alex]

Do you think O'Neill should have been sacked after only winning one of his first thirteen games?

And he was in a position where he took over a team that was doing well near the top of the table. MA has taken over a crap team and is having to rebuild it.

Back rub?

 

[Chrysalis]

Do you think O'Neill should have been sacked after only winning one of his first thirteen games?

And he was in a position where he took over a team that was doing well near the top of the table. MA has taken over a crap team and is having to rebuild it.

I would have gave o neil the rest of the season for different reasons. If he had gone onto the end of the season with that kind of form all the way I think he should have been sacked during the summer.

 

[Chrysalis]

The point I was making is that if MA isn't good enough and sacks him after a month, it's MM's mistake for appointing him in the first place.

Indeed I have also said twice now that I agree with that point.