|
|
Post by iblue on Nov 3, 2014 19:21:30 GMT 1
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 3, 2014 20:04:41 GMT 1
Just read that Iblue. No doubt others will say it means Taylor should go etc.
interesting that Crawley also rebuilt in the summer and have struggled. They also signed more experience than us with the likes of McLeod and Tomlin, who I bet are on higher wages than us.
Goes to show that blending a whole new team isn't easy and will take time.
|
|
|
|
Post by Big_Al on Nov 3, 2014 20:49:07 GMT 1
Agree with you hessisgod about Gregory going for experience rather young players with potential and can't see him jumping out of the fire at Crawlety and into the frying pan at Priestfield even if he was approached
|
|
|
|
Post by muppet on Nov 4, 2014 0:16:53 GMT 1
It's know wonder why managers stick with the norm and don't try anything different as they know if they do and it's isn't right immediately that they will be under pressure or sacked.
|
|
|
|
Post by ldb30 on Nov 4, 2014 11:06:43 GMT 1
Would the Gills faithful even be interested in Gregory?!!, i would sooner have Martin Allen back!!. Were going throw a sh**y spell,and hopefully it will pass sometime soon?!!... UTG's.....
|
|
|
|
Post by 1dannywestwood on Nov 4, 2014 15:27:59 GMT 1
Why have the pro Peter Taylor supporters got such a downer on Martin Allen and his reign. I know it was L2 but his team won our 1st title in donkeys years and gave every one something to cheer. As soon as he has a bad start in L1 gets the bullet. Yes he is a maverick but Scally signed him and knew that at the time. Taylor takes over and further into a new season is a disaster worse than Allens start. Every team needs experienced players, not just youngsters. Pulis had both, but only signed players who were battlers for the team. Taylor signs young players and loanees probably because they are cheap but is there really any quality. Scally seems to be biding his time until the land the Priestfield ground is ripe for housing development, no way can you spend nearly 10 years in Dubai and not find a serious potential investor. Anyone with serious money will want complete control and he has proved he cannot work with anyone for long. That is why we have PT because he is rare someone who is willing to work with Scally. If you dont show some ambition to improve your position in the league you will always go backwards. The slide can be rapid if you take your eye off the situation i.e Bristol Rovers, Torquay etc
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 4, 2014 16:28:29 GMT 1
I've not seen anything negative on this board about MA's time with us. I think the job he did in getting us out of league two is respected.
Personally, while I can understand Scally's decision to move on from Allen (we were struggling and had players not good enough for league one on very high wages and a horrid style of football), I wouldn't have sacked him. I wouldn't have parted company with Hess either before Allen was appointed as I think he'd done ok, even if he hadn't reached his target of promotion.
I rarely think it's a good idea to sack managers unless, like at the end of Stimson's reign or the short reign of Cooper, their position becomes untenable. There are plenty of stats out there that show that changing a manager rarely improves the fortunes of a team over the long term. A lot of the time, chairmen sack managers to divert attention from themselves and their own failure or lack of investment in the club.
A lot of people are prepared to give PT more time due to the focus on youth. If we were sitting in this league with an older side, I think he'd have gone by now.
I doubt the kids have been brought in because they are cheap. Do you really think Egan, who could have gone to Blackburn, is on low wages? I'd also be surprised if Norris was cheap as he'd been offered a deal by Brentford who have a larger budget than us. McGlashan had other offers, Loft was skipper at a rival league one side etc.
The notion we've done it all on the cheap is twaddle. People find it easier to believe our chairman does everything on the cheap and looks to cut costs because he is a businessman. The best business for scally would be a club in the championship, which would generate higher income and a better chance of a sale at a commanding profit.
|
|
|
|
Post by 1dannywestwood on Nov 4, 2014 16:51:34 GMT 1
Quotes like i would rather have MA back than Gregory come to mind. I know it is admirable and if it works heroic to try and get success with youngsters, but i guess at the moment its not working. If people are happy to watch youngsters lose more than they win, great , conference here we come. You can bet, that if we get relegated we will go back to getting experienced older players in. The idea that Scally wants us in the Championship is laughable, last time we were there the club after a year or two he stopped investing in the playing staff and the inevitable happened. Yes, Scally is a businessman, not a Gillingham fan that is why they are treading water in the lower leagues. If he had the club at heart, he would allow one of these alleged potential investors that he has had contact with over the years to help the club. The one manager that knew what to do was Pulis, you have to find gritty, determined team ethic players to get success. i.e Hess, Paul Smith etc. Yes, it wasnt pretty to watch sometimes, but neither has PT football been either some of the time this season
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 4, 2014 19:13:03 GMT 1
Why would scally not want us in the championship? It's more income for the club and therefore him. Why would he want us in the lower leagues?
The idea that the chairman would deliberately hold us back is plain daft.
He cut investment before to ensure that the club didn't go broke. We cannot spend what we don't have and the rules in the football league mean that however rich our chairman/investors are, there will be a limited amount they can spend, based on turnover.
|
|
|
|
Post by muppet on Nov 4, 2014 19:14:01 GMT 1
Agree with that pretty much Hess.
As to ps not investing in players after 1/2 years in the championship, he didn't have much choice as the TV money stopped and whereas other clubs had the big gates and other revenue steams that could pay for players we didn't.
|
|
|
|
Post by muppet on Nov 4, 2014 19:14:44 GMT 1
Sorry Hess posted same time, and agree again.
|
|
|
|
Post by gillsjan on Nov 4, 2014 19:37:18 GMT 1
I agree with your comments Hess and we know that behind the facade of Martin Allen there was a lot going on in the back room which many believe had a lot to do with MAs demise.
|
|
|
|
Post by muppet on Nov 4, 2014 22:03:16 GMT 1
We will never know, but i think we all know it wasnt just results that saw the end of ma
|
|
|
|
Post by swingfieldgill on Nov 5, 2014 16:34:17 GMT 1
These stories that PS wants to hold the Gills back by not investing in players remind me of the stories that used to go around when Dr Grossmark was chairman. I seem to remember that people thought that he didn't want promotion because he enjoyed a seat on the Div3 & 4 board.
What goes around comes around.
|
|
