Board Out, Kelly Out, Stowell Out

[Melton Fox]

If you can't change your opinion based on experiences you're a fool.

 

[Real Sharapova]

Not entirely sure what you are getting at there...

I thought Kelly did a good job, but with practically the same players we have gone down hill rapidly.

So my opinion has changed. If you can't change your opinion based on experiences you're a fool.

But to berate those who made a decision that you were in agreement with at the time is, as Dour says, silly. That's all, no big deal.

 

[Redditch Fox]

17/02/06:

"if Kelly continues to do well, I can't see the point of bringing in another re-cycled failure from the group who are eternally seeking to be associated with vacancies. Unless we can appoint someone a bit special, it may well be best to let him carry on for the long term."
http://www.talkingballs.co.uk/showpost.php?p=188363&postcount=13


18/02/06:

"Kelly is doing really well - he has turned things round already - I hope that he really wants the job and goes on from here."
http://www.talkingballs.co.uk/showpost.php?p=188898&postcount=25


24/03/06:
"think there are too many cases where the same old failures as manager are recycled and so it's refreshing that RK (a new face in football managership) has been given a chance and is doing well - so far.

Many years ago at LCFC - a certain Matt Gillies emerged from the backroom to take over the manageship and took the club to greater success including top (briefly) of the first tier by Easter Tuesday1963 as well as FA Cup Finals etc....so it happens."
http://www.talkingballs.co.uk/showpost.php?p=202976&postcount=8


24/03/06:

"on the basis of turning over 2 points a match from quite a tricky position and not the easiest fixture, he deserves his chance for next season.

I hope that he isn't too much of a 'nice guys' - nice guys generally win nothing. But on the basis that we are hardly likely to be able to recruit a top draw manager, he seems the best option."
http://www.talkingballs.co.uk/showpost.php?p=202985&postcount=12

Thank you for your detailed research work.

I particularly appreciate that you have included the dates of my words of wisdom. You will have noticed that all your quotations date back to February/ March 2006.

What I have said now over many many months is that it was a mistake to appoint Kelly. I am very flattered by the significance that you attribute to my earlier comments - but actually it is the board who are responsible for appointments rather than myself and they were in a better position to make a judgement that he wasn't right for the job. By the end of season 2005/6 that had become widely obvious.

Finally - I think the ability to change one's mind in the face of evidence is a plus rather than a negative, and I am sorry that you have not yet altered your views on a number of pressing issues where you sontinue to carp about the MM initiative.

 

[Real Sharapova]

Finally - I think the ability to change one's mind in the face of evidence is a plus rather than a negative, and I am sorry that you have not yet altered your views on a number of pressing issues where you sontinue to carp about the MM initiative.

The " evidence " with regard to MM's bid and intentions is pretty thin on the ground I would say, which is why I am unable to join up with MM's glee club at the moment.

 

[bocadillo]

For the record, i too supported RKs appointment, but time has revealed it was the wrong choice.

It's already on the record that I supported Peter Taylor's appointment.
:icon_redf

 

[Feriol]

Its not a brainer.

Kelly did well in the immediate aftermath of Levein getting the push. That lasted a short time. The hapless board seized on that and gave him the permanent job. Since then - and well before the talk of MM taking over - Kelly's results have been consistent....consistently very poor. This is reflected in our league position which has been lowly for a long time.

All this is not very fair on Kelly. He has been put in a job to which he is unsuited. We dod not have a very strong squad....but I would have thought that most people believe that a better manager would get more out of them.

What I have said now over many many months is that it was a mistake to appoint Kelly. I am very flattered by the significance that you attribute to my earlier comments - but actually it is the board who are responsible for appointments rather than myself and they were in a better position to make a judgement that he wasn't right for the job. By the end of season 2005/6 that had become widely obvious.

Finally - I think the ability to change one's mind in the face of evidence is a plus rather than a negative, and I am sorry that you have not yet altered your views on a number of pressing issues where you sontinue to carp about the MM initiative.

i post you above comments in your defence, since you aknowledge RKs initial 'success' but that time has revealed his abilities.

i think the words in bold are harsh though, especially when you consider a lot of people, me and you included made the same mistake.

I did note from your comments that Jeff posted that your view like mine was that he deserved a chance, not that he 'was' a good manager. i don't think the board were wrong to give him that chance.

they would be wrong to allow him to continue once the decision has proven to be the wrong one.

 

[Feriol]

It's already on the record that I supported Peter Taylor's appointment.
:icon_redf

wanker :icon_wink

 

[newtonfox]

It's already on the record that I supported Peter Taylor's appointment.
:icon_redf

bloody hell you should be shot at dawn :icon_lol: :icon_lol:

 

[drew]

The board are hapless, not just for RK's appointment.

 

[SJN-Fox]

What I have said now over many many months is that it was a mistake to appoint Kelly.

No, I don't think it was a mistake to appoint Kelly, because at the time, the evidence suggested that he was the best man for the job.

Where the mistake has occured is not realising that given the lack of resources, lack of support and lack of experience (tactically or motivationally), he has taken the job as far as he can.

This time last year (almost) we realised that CL had done likewise and taken the club as far as he could and so we had a change of manager that resulted in an upturn in fortunes and a move away from the cliff edge.

A further mistake is about to be made if we don't find a replacement for RK whilst there's still time to make a difference.

 

[Yorkshire Vixen]

hindsight is wonderful

 

[SJN-Fox]

hindsight is wonderful

Looking back on it, you could be right.

 

[Redditch Fox]

But to berate those who made a decision that you were in agreement with at the time is, as Dour says, silly. That's all, no big deal.

Sorry RS - but you can usually do better than that.

Of course it's not silly!

It would be really silly to have continued to have thought in the face of all the evidence that Kelly is any good. People who are stuck in their opinions and can't respond to change are 'silly' - as you put it. Boc wasn't crazy to think that Peter Taylor was a bad appointment. As it happens I was never convinced right from the beginning but.....it was, at the time, seen as quite a logical appointment with one of the bid mistakes being that the board didn't provide any moderating influence on signings,

I never said that Kelly was a good manager...I said initially that he deserved a chance because there was not much quality accessible to us. He had his chance - he's demonstrated that he is about the worst manager in our history.

With great, great respect - the people who can't recognise the above are the silly ones.

 

[Real Sharapova]

Sorry RS - but you can usually do better than that.

Of course it's not silly!

It would be really silly to have continued to have thought in the face of all the evidence that Kelly is any good. People who are stuck in their opinions and can't respond to change are 'silly' - as you put it. Boc wasn't crazy to think that Peter Taylor was a bad appointment. As it happens I was never convinced right from the beginning but.....it was, at the time, seen as quite a logical appointment with one of the bid mistakes being that the board didn't provide any moderating influence on signings,

I never said that Kelly was a good manager...I said initially that he deserved a chance because there was not much quality accessible to us. He had his chance - he's demonstrated that he is about the worst manager in our history.

With great, great respect - the people who can't recognise the above are the silly ones.

When people say " with great respect " they usually mean quite the opposite.

 

[Redditch Fox]

When people say " with great respect " they usually mean quite the opposite.

RS - but I said "with great, great respect" and I am really not trying to be unpleasant about it.

We disagree on the matter - end of story.

It would have been better if those who have continued to think Kelly has some merit had been proved right - but sometimes you have to draw a line and I think MM (hopefully if it happens) will draw one although the timing is problematic for obvious reasons given how unattractive a proposition we are
at present.

 

[Real Sharapova]

RS - but I said "with great, great respect" and I am really not trying to be unpleasant about it.

I really wasn't trying to imply that.

 

[Lako42]

Who is this rob kelly fella everyone's on about all the time

 

[M17TT C]

It's got more substance than a word on the street.

However, TD hasn't got where he has by being a complete idiot. Maybe with MM as his boss, we might see a new TD that isn't working and creating ideas purely out of desperation.

I'm not over excited about it, but I am more than happy for him to prove himself

What about R.Kelly then?? TNBD has been in his job longer than he has, why not see if Kelly can prove himself with MM as his boss, then we might see a new R.Kelly.

 

[Lako42]

What about R.Kelly then?? TNBD has been in his job longer than he has, why not see if Kelly can prove himself with MM as his boss, then we might see a new R.Kelly.

yea but will he ever come out of the closet

 

[Jeff]

What I have said now over many many months is that it was a mistake to appoint Kelly. I am very flattered by the significance that you attribute to my earlier comments - but actually it is the board who are responsible for appointments rather than myself and they were in a better position to make a judgement that he wasn't right for the job. By the end of season 2005/6 that had become widely obvious.

Only a few matches before the end of season 2005/6 you were saying RK should have been given the job permanently, so what changed in a couple of games to make it so obviously the wrong decision by the end of the season - and if you believed that at the end of last season, why didn't you say so at the time?

Of course people can change their mind, I'm not criticising anyone for that. But you seem to be trying to change history by saying you were against the appointment in the first place, which is obviously not true, and by saying the board only appointed him to save money - when the majority of fans wanted him to be given the job and the board would have received loads of stick if they hadn't given him the job.