Today could be a turning point

[Gods]

If we could send Rowett and a thousand mouthy Millwall fans packing! That's the thought we have to tap in to.

[RF10]

If we don't win today I think he's gone.

[questionable]

Super 6 I’ve gone for a 3-1 win, in Farke we trust 👍👍

[questionable]

Mar 19, 2022 9:18:59 GMT RF10 said:

If we don't win today I think he's gone.

Surely he’s gone already, lots of players out of contract in the summer, seemingly players not playing for him, appalling in the transfer market, ST’s on sale. No way the owners can contemplate going forward with him at helm, no way at all (is there??)

[somersetstokie]

The thing is that whatever the Owners' view might be regarding keeping Michael, we are now looking at a situation where every match throws up the same questions and issues, as above. It has become a case that he must win this game or that game to save his job. This uncertainty cannot continue with every passing week, and someone must show clear leadership and say that they are willing to back the Manager. An outline plan or projection of a hoped for future would also be good. Even an acknowledgement that we are likely to be stuck in the championship for the long haul and this is our level would at least be a reality check.

[gingerninja]

Surely an emphatic win today and there's no way they would get rid, or has a decision be made already?

[HarryTheHat]

Today is irrelevant - we'd be 15th

He's had enough chances - get rid

[Rt Hon Reverend Luvpump]

I have to admit it’s been a struggle getting the enthusiasm to go today, as of last night with the nice weather I was going to the van instead!only the enthusiasm of my 13year old has persuaded me to go I really do hope this game is a turning point.

[pretzel]

A time to gain, a time to lose

[molemanstokie]

The hope is always there but every week is the same old dross. But what else am I gonna do on a Satdee afternoon? Just seen the stats that Rowett is still unbeaten against us (3W,2L). Also we haven't won in 9 while Millwall are unbeaten in 8.

[Mr_DaftBurger]

2-0 Stoke! Tinpot league, piss this...

[somersetstokie]

"There's nothing that we should fear in this League!"




Mind you we have got Home disadvantage.

[mickstupp]

I’m fully expecting us to lose again. It wouldn’t surprise me at all if this turns out to be MONs last game in charge.

[theonlooker]

A win today and we are all settled down again.

Come on lads, do it for your boss.

[jokker]

Mar 19, 2022 9:37:41 GMT somersetstokie said:

The thing is that whatever the Owners' view might be regarding keeping Michael, we are now looking at a situation where every match throws up the same questions and issues, as above. It has become a case that he must win this game or that game to save his job. This uncertainty cannot continue with every passing week, and someone must show clear leadership and say that they are willing to back the Manager. An outline plan or projection of a hoped for future would also be good. Even an acknowledgement that we are likely to be stuck in the championship for the long haul and this is our level would at least be a reality check.

You are seemingly aware that the board and some of the supporters don't think along the same lines, yet you then go on to assume that the fraction of the supporters that ask for his dismissal/standing down are asking the same as what the board are doing at some level. You refer to the "case" of must win games, which is now nearly exhausted, not even 'nearly' to some.

"The thing" is the board don't appear to have any such agenda. There is no distinct "uncertainty" on the table during the weekly lunch meetings, though there must of course be unhappiness all around, and sometimes O'Neill lets slip in his post-match interviews that he is frustrated (primarily by players), which might then indicate that not everything is hunky dory in the boardroom.

They would not go out and "say they are willing to back the manager", because it's bloody obvious that they are!!

Whether that is wise you will disagree with, but it's their owned club and it's the silent leadership that they prefer. If they stepped out of that approach, then it will almost certainly be seen as the very much dreaded vote of confidence. which would mean they would be pushed into an action that they'd really rather not take.

Peter Coates, as solitary chairman, quite liked to talk when the Guardian, BBC or the Sentinel called him up, perhaps not every time, but he still gave them a bit of his time, and he was quite good at having them in the palm of his hand, because it was well understood that he wouldn't talk about personnel questions as well as tactical questions which were not his affairs.

Clearly his son doesn't share that relative openness and doesn't appear to be replying to any football related calls. It's not difficult to understand why. He's burned his fingers not just once but several times with his statements at fan nights. The last few press releases, which already go back a couple of years, were mercilessly ridiculed, especially on the Oatcake, Facebook, and Sentinel discussion fora. Every little word that could be possibly be twisted to mean something else was twisted and then twisted again. I don't expect he reads any of those fora, but no doubt someone in the organisation does and refers the gist of it, and Caotes will not have liked what he heard. So that avenue has been closed good and tight.

Because it is, the board then don't have to answer to suggestions that they in all likelihood find absurd, because they would appear to have faith in the manager and the project that is theirs and theirs only. They don't need to project it to anybody, except maybe Denise. All they will do is let it slip that they understand fan frustration, and of course they are fans themselves.

[kidcrewbob]

Should a win today give him a reprieve then the board have learned nothing since the Hughes exit debacle. Like deja vu all over again.......

[The Toxic Avenger]

Mar 19, 2022 10:39:02 GMT jokker said:

Mar 19, 2022 9:37:41 GMT somersetstokie said:

The thing is that whatever the Owners' view might be regarding keeping Michael, we are now looking at a situation where every match throws up the same questions and issues, as above. It has become a case that he must win this game or that game to save his job. This uncertainty cannot continue with every passing week, and someone must show clear leadership and say that they are willing to back the Manager. An outline plan or projection of a hoped for future would also be good. Even an acknowledgement that we are likely to be stuck in the championship for the long haul and this is our level would at least be a reality check.

You are seemingly aware that the board and some of the supporters don't think along the same lines, yet you then go on to assume that the fraction of the supporters that ask for his dismissal/standing down are asking the same as what the board are doing at some level. You refer to the "case" of must win games, which is now nearly exhausted, not even 'nearly' to some.

"The thing" is the board don't appear to have any such agenda. There is no distinct "uncertainty" on the table during the weekly lunch meetings, though there must of course be unhappiness all around, and sometimes O'Neill lets slip in his post-match interviews that he is frustrated (primarily by players), which might then indicate that not everything is hunky dory in the boardroom.

They would not go out and "say they are willing to back the manager", because it's bloody obvious that they are!!

Whether that is wise you will disagree with, but it's their owned club and it's the silent leadership that they prefer. If they stepped out of that approach, then it will almost certainly be seen as the very much dreaded vote of confidence. which would mean they would be pushed into an action that they'd really rather not take.

Peter Coates, as solitary chairman, quite liked to talk when the Guardian, BBC or the Sentinel called him up, perhaps not every time, but he still gave them a bit of his time, and he was quite good at having them in the palm of his hand, because it was well understood that he wouldn't talk about personnel questions as well as tactical questions which were not his affairs.

Clearly his son doesn't share that relative openness and doesn't appear to be replying to any football related calls. It's not difficult to understand why. He's burned his fingers not just once but several times with his statements at fan nights. The last few press releases, which already go back a couple of years, were mercilessly ridiculed, especially on the Oatcake, Facebook, and Sentinel discussion fora. Every little word that could be possibly be twisted to mean something else was twisted and then twisted again. I don't expect he reads any of those fora, but no doubt someone in the organisation does and refers the gist of it, and Caotes will not have liked what he heard. So that avenue has been closed good and tight.

Because it is, the board then don't have to answer to suggestions that they in all likelihood find absurd, because they would appear to have faith in the manager and the project that is theirs and theirs only. They don't need to project it to anybody, except maybe Denise. All they will do is let it slip that they understand fan frustration, and of course they are fans themselves.

Cards on the table then Jokky, you’re saying that MON is going nowhere?

[somersetstokie]

Mar 19, 2022 10:39:02 GMT jokker said:

Mar 19, 2022 9:37:41 GMT somersetstokie said:

The thing is that whatever the Owners' view might be regarding keeping Michael, we are now looking at a situation where every match throws up the same questions and issues, as above. It has become a case that he must win this game or that game to save his job. This uncertainty cannot continue with every passing week, and someone must show clear leadership and say that they are willing to back the Manager. An outline plan or projection of a hoped for future would also be good. Even an acknowledgement that we are likely to be stuck in the championship for the long haul and this is our level would at least be a reality check.

You are seemingly aware that the board and some of the supporters don't think along the same lines, yet you then go on to assume that the fraction of the supporters that ask for his dismissal/standing down are asking the same as what the board are doing at some level. You refer to the "case" of must win games, which is now nearly exhausted, not even 'nearly' to some.

"The thing" is the board don't appear to have any such agenda. There is no distinct "uncertainty" on the table during the weekly lunch meetings, though there must of course be unhappiness all around, and sometimes O'Neill lets slip in his post-match interviews that he is frustrated (primarily by players), which might then indicate that not everything is hunky dory in the boardroom.

They would not go out and "say they are willing to back the manager", because it's bloody obvious that they are!!

Whether that is wise you will disagree with, but it's their owned club and it's the silent leadership that they prefer. If they stepped out of that approach, then it will almost certainly be seen as the very much dreaded vote of confidence. which would mean they would be pushed into an action that they'd really rather not take.

Peter Coates, as solitary chairman, quite liked to talk when the Guardian, BBC or the Sentinel called him up, perhaps not every time, but he still gave them a bit of his time, and he was quite good at having them in the palm of his hand, because it was well understood that he wouldn't talk about personnel questions as well as tactical questions which were not his affairs.

Clearly his son doesn't share that relative openness and doesn't appear to be replying to any football related calls. It's not difficult to understand why. He's burned his fingers not just once but several times with his statements at fan nights. The last few press releases, which already go back a couple of years, were mercilessly ridiculed, especially on the Oatcake, Facebook, and Sentinel discussion fora. Every little word that could be possibly be twisted to mean something else was twisted and then twisted again. I don't expect he reads any of those fora, but no doubt someone in the organisation does and refers the gist of it, and Caotes will not have liked what he heard. So that avenue has been closed good and tight.

Because it is, the board then don't have to answer to suggestions that they in all likelihood find absurd, because they would appear to have faith in the manager and the project that is theirs and theirs only. They don't need to project it to anybody, except maybe Denise. All they will do is let it slip that they understand fan frustration, and of course they are fans themselves.

My point is that in any business or even sporting situation uncertainty is not a good thing. You sometimes need to make positive statements about the viability of your position. Having manageable targets and goals is a prerequisite for progress. I think the least that should be said is that Michael is under contract until . . . and we expect him to remain in charge of the team going forward. Or not, as the case may be.

[Squeekster]

Mar 19, 2022 10:41:50 GMT The Toxic Avenger said:

Mar 19, 2022 10:39:02 GMT jokker said:

You are seemingly aware that the board and some of the supporters don't think along the same lines, yet you then go on to assume that the fraction of the supporters that ask for his dismissal/standing down are asking the same as what the board are doing at some level. You refer to the "case" of must win games, which is now nearly exhausted, not even 'nearly' to some.

"The thing" is the board don't appear to have any such agenda. There is no distinct "uncertainty" on the table during the weekly lunch meetings, though there must of course be unhappiness all around, and sometimes O'Neill lets slip in his post-match interviews that he is frustrated (primarily by players), which might then indicate that not everything is hunky dory in the boardroom.

They would not go out and "say they are willing to back the manager", because it's bloody obvious that they are!!

Whether that is wise you will disagree with, but it's their owned club and it's the silent leadership that they prefer. If they stepped out of that approach, then it will almost certainly be seen as the very much dreaded vote of confidence. which would mean they would be pushed into an action that they'd really rather not take.

Peter Coates, as solitary chairman, quite liked to talk when the Guardian, BBC or the Sentinel called him up, perhaps not every time, but he still gave them a bit of his time, and he was quite good at having them in the palm of his hand, because it was well understood that he wouldn't talk about personnel questions as well as tactical questions which were not his affairs.

Clearly his son doesn't share that relative openness and doesn't appear to be replying to any football related calls. It's not difficult to understand why. He's burned his fingers not just once but several times with his statements at fan nights. The last few press releases, which already go back a couple of years, were mercilessly ridiculed, especially on the Oatcake, Facebook, and Sentinel discussion fora. Every little word that could be possibly be twisted to mean something else was twisted and then twisted again. I don't expect he reads any of those fora, but no doubt someone in the organisation does and refers the gist of it, and Caotes will not have liked what he heard. So that avenue has been closed good and tight.

Because it is, the board then don't have to answer to suggestions that they in all likelihood find absurd, because they would appear to have faith in the manager and the project that is theirs and theirs only. They don't need to project it to anybody, except maybe Denise. All they will do is let it slip that they understand fan frustration, and of course they are fans themselves.

Cards on the table then Jokky, you’re saying that MON is going nowhere?

In his interview yesterday he was talking about the players leaving in the summer and that we need to address that so it seems he is at least for the moment planning for next season.

[sheds1862]

A turning point for what ?
Not particularly arsed about Rowett
Although better Swansea and we go 15th !!

[The Toxic Avenger]

Mar 19, 2022 10:50:46 GMT Squeekster said:

Mar 19, 2022 10:41:50 GMT The Toxic Avenger said:

Cards on the table then Jokky, you’re saying that MON is going nowhere?

In his interview yesterday he was talking about the players leaving in the summer and that we need to address that so it seems he is at least for the moment planning for next season.

He can’t do much else really, as of this moment that’s what he’s paid to do.

Another poor showing and result today though and it’s over.

In an ideal world today would be a turning point, the manager will, as Pulis so often did, stumble upon something that works and run with it and it’ll be the start of a turnaround.

I suspect things are too far gone for that though.

[Deleted]

Not interested in a few Millwall fans or Rowett myself just getting out of this losing streak. The danger is we take the lead of course 😄

[TinkerT]

Even if we win he should be sacked. Get farke in Monday morning and give him next week with the boys who aren't on international and get a good look at the players and who he wants to keep for next season. That's the plan anyway

[jokker]

Mar 19, 2022 10:50:34 GMT somersetstokie said:

Mar 19, 2022 10:39:02 GMT jokker said:

You are seemingly aware that the board and some of the supporters don't think along the same lines, yet you then go on to assume that the fraction of the supporters that ask for his dismissal/standing down are asking the same as what the board are doing at some level. You refer to the "case" of must win games, which is now nearly exhausted, not even 'nearly' to some.

"The thing" is the board don't appear to have any such agenda. There is no distinct "uncertainty" on the table during the weekly lunch meetings, though there must of course be unhappiness all around, and sometimes O'Neill lets slip in his post-match interviews that he is frustrated (primarily by players), which might then indicate that not everything is hunky dory in the boardroom.

They would not go out and "say they are willing to back the manager", because it's bloody obvious that they are!!

Whether that is wise you will disagree with, but it's their owned club and it's the silent leadership that they prefer. If they stepped out of that approach, then it will almost certainly be seen as the very much dreaded vote of confidence. which would mean they would be pushed into an action that they'd really rather not take.

Peter Coates, as solitary chairman, quite liked to talk when the Guardian, BBC or the Sentinel called him up, perhaps not every time, but he still gave them a bit of his time, and he was quite good at having them in the palm of his hand, because it was well understood that he wouldn't talk about personnel questions as well as tactical questions which were not his affairs.

Clearly his son doesn't share that relative openness and doesn't appear to be replying to any football related calls. It's not difficult to understand why. He's burned his fingers not just once but several times with his statements at fan nights. The last few press releases, which already go back a couple of years, were mercilessly ridiculed, especially on the Oatcake, Facebook, and Sentinel discussion fora. Every little word that could be possibly be twisted to mean something else was twisted and then twisted again. I don't expect he reads any of those fora, but no doubt someone in the organisation does and refers the gist of it, and Caotes will not have liked what he heard. So that avenue has been closed good and tight.

Because it is, the board then don't have to answer to suggestions that they in all likelihood find absurd, because they would appear to have faith in the manager and the project that is theirs and theirs only. They don't need to project it to anybody, except maybe Denise. All they will do is let it slip that they understand fan frustration, and of course they are fans themselves.

My point is that in any business or even sporting situation uncertainty is not a good thing. You sometimes need to make positive statements about the viability of your position. Having manageable targets and goals is a prerequisite for progress. I think the least that should be said is that Michael is under contract until . . . and we expect him to remain in charge of the team going forward. Or not, as the case may be.

There is "uncertainty" among a fraction of fans.
There is no uncertainty on the board with regards to how they do their business.
Or, at least the two other board members don't question how their brother-in-law and son finds his way in the role as (co-)chairman.

He's chosen a path that may not sit on page 1 of sport management, but it's what he's done.

Of course the length of somebody's contract is primarily a matter between him and his boss(es). Nonetheless there will always be speculation, so a while back the details were announced. MON's in the midddle of a four year contract, signed at the end of the season or in preseason after he kept the club up, which means there's still two years to run. Now I should probably stop at guessing what the board will do, but it's my feeling that for a number of reasons they are really loath to end any more contracts prematurely. But of they have a threshold, but it does not appear to have been entered just yet.

[fraybentos]

Mar 19, 2022 9:15:41 GMT Gods said:

If we could send Rowett and a thousand mouthy Millwall fans packing! That's the thought we have to tap in to.

Lets hope so and keep the Negative Nigel's quiet

[Roger Everyone]

It's a toss up between the garden wash and polish my old classic car ready for the summer or watch the match....

At least I will be happy when the car is polished or happy in the sun with some music on in the garden while I Potter about...

The match will probably mean another deflated afternoon and Back to work Monday with everyone asking how did Stoke get on at the weekend.. Getting peed off with saying we lost especially when they know the result anyway!

[JoeinOz]

Too late for turning points

[jokker]

Mar 19, 2022 10:40:39 GMT kidcrewbob said:

Should a win today give him a reprieve then the board have learned nothing since the Hughes exit debacle. Like deja vu all over again.......

Or maybe they've learned from past mistakes. Dropping Hughes in favour of Lambert, Rowett, and Jones, was perhaps not such a good idea. Their instinct was to keep him in the job, but they gave in to sentiment. You never should.

[LL Cool Dave]

Nailed on disappointing draw

[somersetstokie]

Reading back over the thread I went as far as the "turning point" headline and then suddenly thought of some of the performances by Vokes, and couldn't stop laughing.