WHO IS TO BLAME?

Who must take **most** of the blame for the continuing slump in fortunes of RFC?

John Madejski and his fellow directors
49
46%
Chief Exec Nigel Howe
10
9%
Director of football Nick(y) Hammond
11
10%
Steve Coppell
4
4%
Brendan Rodgers
17
16%
Nobody - we have just been incredibly unlucky
15
14%
 
Total votes: 106
User avatar
Harpers So Solid Crew
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 5273
Joined: 06 Jul 2004 08:39
Location: enjoying the money

Re: WHO IS TO BLAME?

by Harpers So Solid Crew » 30 Dec 2009 17:08

Baines Bloody hell you're an idiot, Ian.

Mags got it spot on IMO.



which post???

User avatar
Hoop Blah
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 13937
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 09:00
Location: I told you so.....

Re: WHO IS TO BLAME?

by Hoop Blah » 30 Dec 2009 17:13

The whole year inn The millions he wasted on bench warmers and the reliance on Coppell signings did not help


He was criticised on here for deliberately NOT playing Coppell signings at the start of the season! With a limit chance to bring in new players, and one spectaular cock up in the Smith saga, what else could he do?

The millions wasted being the one signing I take it? I don't know how much Cummings cost, but I don't think it would've been a significant amount in the general scheme of things...could be wrong there though. So thats Mills and Cummings plus a loan signing that he bought in and didn't start. His other signings have all come good haven't they?

Bertrand
Rasiack
McAnuff
Howard

As I think I said earlier today, all managers make errors in the transfer market, and I still think Mills will probably come good in the long term if given the chance and the right partner alongside him. Interesting point someone else made was that Mills may also have been someone the club had lined up already, so not totally a Rodgers purchase.

User avatar
RoyalBlue
Hob Nob Subscriber
Hob Nob Subscriber
Posts: 11950
Joined: 13 Apr 2004 22:39
Location: Developed a pathological hatred of snakes on 14/10/19

Re: WHO IS TO BLAME?

by RoyalBlue » 30 Dec 2009 17:19

Hoop Blah
The whole year inn The millions he wasted on bench warmers and the reliance on Coppell signings did not help


He was criticised on here for deliberately NOT playing Coppell signings at the start of the season! With a limit chance to bring in new players, and one spectaular cock up in the Smith saga, what else could he do?

The millions wasted being the one signing I take it? I don't know how much Cummings cost, but I don't think it would've been a significant amount in the general scheme of things...could be wrong there though. So thats Mills and Cummings plus a loan signing that he bought in and didn't start. His other signings have all come good haven't they?

Bertrand
Rasiack
McAnuff
Howard

As I think I said earlier today, all managers make errors in the transfer market, and I still think Mills will probably come good in the long term if given the chance and the right partner alongside him. Interesting point someone else made was that Mills may also have been someone the club had lined up already, so not totally a Rodgers purchase.


I still suspect a hidden 'cost' agenda behind the fact that Mills isn't playing. He was a damn good player with Doncaster and clearly McDermott and Hammond agreed with Rodgers that he was worth £2M. I'm sure Mills hasn't turned into a rubbish player overnight, yet Rodgers has moved on and still Mills doesn't get a game. So just how much more would the skin flint tight arse have to fork out if Mills makes some more appearances?

Expect more recouping of outlay and cutting of cloth when Mills moves out during the transfer window!

User avatar
The whole year inn
Hob Nob Subscriber
Hob Nob Subscriber
Posts: 2474
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 16:49
Location: Fred West >>>> Brendan Rodgers

Re: WHO IS TO BLAME?

by The whole year inn » 30 Dec 2009 17:19

Hoop Blah
The whole year inn The millions he wasted on bench warmers and the reliance on Coppell signings did not help


He was criticised on here for deliberately NOT playing Coppell signings at the start of the season! With a limit chance to bring in new players, and one spectaular cock up in the Smith saga, what else could he do?



The smith saga was his making - he acted like a total fool and we lost out on a good player due to his mouth

Mills - bench
Cummings - bench


It is hard not to sign a decent striker when you have money - just go through the scoring charts and anyone you sign will score goals

User avatar
Hoop Blah
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 13937
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 09:00
Location: I told you so.....

Re: WHO IS TO BLAME?

by Hoop Blah » 30 Dec 2009 17:25

The whole year inn
Hoop Blah
The whole year inn The millions he wasted on bench warmers and the reliance on Coppell signings did not help


He was criticised on here for deliberately NOT playing Coppell signings at the start of the season! With a limit chance to bring in new players, and one spectaular cock up in the Smith saga, what else could he do?



The smith saga was his making - he acted like a total fool and we lost out on a good player due to his mouth

Mills - bench
Cummings - bench


It is hard not to sign a decent striker when you have money - just go through the scoring charts and anyone you sign will score goals



It's really that easy is it? Fair enough, you've proved your point, I wonder why nobody else has thought of it!

Cummings was a big gaff, but Mills is a decent player. I don't think there is a problem with triggering additional payments, but I do think something is probably holding him back but I've no idea what.

The Smith saga was largely his fault yes. Totally argree, I don't think that's the be all and end all of the problems though do you? I think Smith would've made a pretty big diference to our form, but the handling of it and the fact we didn't have enough money to buy him when Rodgers put his foot in his mouth, means that isn't the reason we're in the position we are.


User avatar
facaldaqui
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 1937
Joined: 17 Dec 2004 05:10

Re: WHO IS TO BLAME?

by facaldaqui » 30 Dec 2009 17:29

Hoop Blah The losses to the squad were massive and that was from a squad that failed to win at home for 4 months, amassing a massive 20 points from the last 17 games. To take out a large chunk of that first team squad, including some of it's best players, and ask for much more than what was delivered is a bit unrealistic.


It didn't seem unrealistic at the time. It wasn't just the management but the fans who assumed we'd have to adjust our expectation to mid-table (which we might still achieve). It wasn't unrealistic and still isn't to expect the present squad to avoid relegation. However, the squad is worse than it need have been, given Rodgers's addition of the likes of Cummings, Mills, and O'Dea who've done a lot of bench warming, and the persistent lack of balance in the squad, particularly at right back. We needed to replace our promotion-capable players with mid-table-capable players and to make sure we had adequate cover in all positions. Rodgers had responsibility for that, but he lost faith in three of the players he brought in, and he didn't even always trust Rasiak to start or to last a whole game. As a result, the departures have had more of a reductive effect on the team than necessary.
Last edited by facaldaqui on 30 Dec 2009 17:36, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
The whole year inn
Hob Nob Subscriber
Hob Nob Subscriber
Posts: 2474
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 16:49
Location: Fred West >>>> Brendan Rodgers

Re: WHO IS TO BLAME?

by The whole year inn » 30 Dec 2009 17:36

Cummings was a big gaff

(Mills) holding him back but I've no idea what.

The Smith saga was largely his fault yes

------------------------------------------

all that in 5 months, and how much money spent? Why should JM let that go on?

User avatar
Hoop Blah
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 13937
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 09:00
Location: I told you so.....

Re: WHO IS TO BLAME?

by Hoop Blah » 30 Dec 2009 17:38

I think Rodgers set himself up a bit by not playing down the expectations a bit because I thought they were unrealistic at the time.

Mid-table would've been a good effort this season with all that's gone on. Avoiding relegation should've been a bare minimum ask I absolutely agree and personally I think we were reasonably well position to finish somewhere around the 14th-16th area with the way Rodgers was developing things.

The squad was a bit unbalanced yes, and Cummings was not the answer at right back I agree, but a lot of the balance was what Rodgers was left with.

Coppell seemed to be collecting average midfielders who couldn't get a game. They were all on contracts when Rodgers arrived so I'm not sure what he could do about that. We lacked forward and an ability to create chances. Rodgers tried to address the former (and bought in a forward with 6 goals this season) and solved the latter with the introduction of Sigurdsson from the depths of the squad and by the astute purchase of McAnuff.

User avatar
Hoop Blah
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 13937
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 09:00
Location: I told you so.....

Re: WHO IS TO BLAME?

by Hoop Blah » 30 Dec 2009 17:42

The whole year inn Cummings was a big gaff

(Mills) holding him back but I've no idea what.

The Smith saga was largely his fault yes

------------------------------------------

all that in 5 months, and how much money spent? Why should JM let that go on?


Personally I think he should've let it go because Rodgers was building a side that was playing some good football, creating a fair amount of chances, had done his first job of reducing the wage bill and bringing in decent fee's for the ourbound players, and was building a squad for the future.

He'd bought in 4 or 5 good players and made one cock up with Cummings. O'Dea apparently had issues off the pitch that were the reason we got him in the first place and I think Mills is a good player in the making.

I believe things were moving in the right direction and Rodgers was putting together a side that were at last looking like they could score a goal as opposed to the one who's remains he took over.


User avatar
The whole year inn
Hob Nob Subscriber
Hob Nob Subscriber
Posts: 2474
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 16:49
Location: Fred West >>>> Brendan Rodgers

Re: WHO IS TO BLAME?

by The whole year inn » 30 Dec 2009 17:43

Rodgers would still be in a job if he could keep his mouth shut and played his signings

AthleticoSpizz
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 25472
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 19:49
Location: A Hicks Hoof from Coley Park

Re: WHO IS TO BLAME?

by AthleticoSpizz » 30 Dec 2009 17:49

The whole year inn Rodgers would still be in a job if he could keep his mouth shut and played his signings

which also and once again turns the wheel a full circle..............why loan out better players than you are playing.

Mr Angry
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 6224
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 16:05
Location: South Oxfordshire

Re: WHO IS TO BLAME?

by Mr Angry » 30 Dec 2009 17:50

Whoever made the decision not to strengthen the squad during the Summer between our 2 seasons in the premier; I doubt that Hammond was to blame - it was either Sir Steve (over loyal to his existing squad) or SJM (why splash the cash when we finished 8th?).

Not replacing Sidwell, not bringing in a right winger, and not bringing in new players who would push the established players for the shirt (especially - but not exclusively - Shorey) were what stuffed us up as it was a policy that was always going to catch up on us; any of the above may well have gained us the extra point, or even helped to reduce the goal difference by the 2 which eventually relegated us.

User avatar
Harpers So Solid Crew
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 5273
Joined: 06 Jul 2004 08:39
Location: enjoying the money

Re: WHO IS TO BLAME?

by Harpers So Solid Crew » 30 Dec 2009 17:58

Happy New Year Mr A


AthleticoSpizz
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 25472
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 19:49
Location: A Hicks Hoof from Coley Park

Re: WHO IS TO BLAME?

by AthleticoSpizz » 30 Dec 2009 18:00

Mr Angry Whoever made the decision not to strengthen the squad during the Summer between our 2 seasons in the premier; I doubt that Hammond was to blame - it was either Sir Steve (over loyal to his existing squad) or SJM (why splash the cash when we finished 8th?).

Not replacing Sidwell, not bringing in a right winger, and not bringing in new players who would push the established players for the shirt (especially - but not exclusively - Shorey) were what stuffed us up as it was a policy that was always going to catch up on us; any of the above may well have gained us the extra point, or even helped to reduce the goal difference by the 2 which eventually relegated us.
and what a difference that extra point would've made to the sitution that we are in now!.

It was obvious for even the blind to see, that Sidders was never replaced with anybody remotely adequate at the time when it mattered. The poor chap had to cloth his kid etc etc.................. the cost is what we pay right now for not joining the mainstream Premier prices.

Tough call
Last edited by AthleticoSpizz on 30 Dec 2009 18:01, edited 1 time in total.

Mr Angry
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 6224
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 16:05
Location: South Oxfordshire

Re: WHO IS TO BLAME?

by Mr Angry » 30 Dec 2009 18:01

Harpers So Solid Crew Happy New Year Mr A


Reciprocated.

AthleticoSpizz
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 25472
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 19:49
Location: A Hicks Hoof from Coley Park

Re: WHO IS TO BLAME?

by AthleticoSpizz » 30 Dec 2009 18:05

Harpers So Solid Crew Happy New Year Mr A

Keep seasonal felicitations off of the team board :twisted:

Happy new year 2-0 and Mr A

User avatar
Smoking Kills Dancing Doe
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 2851
Joined: 18 Apr 2004 19:46

Re: WHO IS TO BLAME?

by Smoking Kills Dancing Doe » 30 Dec 2009 18:57

Hoop Blah
The whole year inn The millions he wasted on bench warmers and the reliance on Coppell signings did not help


He was criticised on here for deliberately NOT playing Coppell signings at the start of the season! With a limit chance to bring in new players, and one spectaular cock up in the Smith saga, what else could he do?

The millions wasted being the one signing I take it? I don't know how much Cummings cost, but I don't think it would've been a significant amount in the general scheme of things...could be wrong there though. So thats Mills and Cummings plus a loan signing that he bought in and didn't start. His other signings have all come good haven't they?

Bertrand
Rasiack
McAnuff
Howard

As I think I said earlier today, all managers make errors in the transfer market, and I still think Mills will probably come good in the long term if given the chance and the right partner alongside him. Interesting point someone else made was that Mills may also have been someone the club had lined up already, so not totally a Rodgers purchase.


What killed BR was the character of his signings. Mills, Cummings and espicially Howard we're said by BR to be really strong characters who could lead this side. In reality we got a little boy, a big time charlie and Howard The Coward. Espicially when Rosenior and Harper were shipped put for not having enough character.

User avatar
Smoking Kills Dancing Doe
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 2851
Joined: 18 Apr 2004 19:46

Re: WHO IS TO BLAME?

by Smoking Kills Dancing Doe » 30 Dec 2009 18:59

Mr Angry Whoever made the decision not to strengthen the squad during the Summer between our 2 seasons in the premier; I doubt that Hammond was to blame - it was either Sir Steve (over loyal to his existing squad) or SJM (why splash the cash when we finished 8th?).

Not replacing Sidwell, not bringing in a right winger, and not bringing in new players who would push the established players for the shirt (especially - but not exclusively - Shorey) were what stuffed us up as it was a policy that was always going to catch up on us; any of the above may well have gained us the extra point, or even helped to reduce the goal difference by the 2 which eventually relegated us.


The lump on my head still hasn't gone down from banging my head against a large brick wall that season. It's still a joke imo and why Coppell in my eyes un did all the great work he had done.

User avatar
Arch
Hob Nob Subscriber
Hob Nob Subscriber
Posts: 4082
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 23:35
Location: USA! USA! USA!

Re: WHO IS TO BLAME?

by Arch » 30 Dec 2009 19:03

Smoking Kills Dancing Doe
Mr Angry Whoever made the decision not to strengthen the squad during the Summer between our 2 seasons in the premier; I doubt that Hammond was to blame - it was either Sir Steve (over loyal to his existing squad) or SJM (why splash the cash when we finished 8th?).

Not replacing Sidwell, not bringing in a right winger, and not bringing in new players who would push the established players for the shirt (especially - but not exclusively - Shorey) were what stuffed us up as it was a policy that was always going to catch up on us; any of the above may well have gained us the extra point, or even helped to reduce the goal difference by the 2 which eventually relegated us.


The lump on my head still hasn't gone down from banging my head against a large brick wall that season. It's still a joke imo and why Coppell in my eyes un did all the great work he had done.

Coppell's great weakness was believing players would come good, whether it be Long, Oster, Marek, or whoever. Another weakness was not taking charge of transfer matters. He let himself be told Fae was the real deal on inadequate evidence.

User avatar
Smoking Kills Dancing Doe
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 2851
Joined: 18 Apr 2004 19:46

Re: WHO IS TO BLAME?

by Smoking Kills Dancing Doe » 30 Dec 2009 19:08

Arch
Smoking Kills Dancing Doe
Mr Angry Whoever made the decision not to strengthen the squad during the Summer between our 2 seasons in the premier; I doubt that Hammond was to blame - it was either Sir Steve (over loyal to his existing squad) or SJM (why splash the cash when we finished 8th?).

Not replacing Sidwell, not bringing in a right winger, and not bringing in new players who would push the established players for the shirt (especially - but not exclusively - Shorey) were what stuffed us up as it was a policy that was always going to catch up on us; any of the above may well have gained us the extra point, or even helped to reduce the goal difference by the 2 which eventually relegated us.


The lump on my head still hasn't gone down from banging my head against a large brick wall that season. It's still a joke imo and why Coppell in my eyes un did all the great work he had done.

Coppell's great weakness was believing players would come good, whether it be Long, Oster, Marek, or whoever. Another weakness was not taking charge of transfer matters. He let himself be told Fae was the real deal on inadequate evidence.


The people who recomended Fae didn't see him as 1st choice though. There were ment to be many other signings...

Best not to think about it, I need a lay down..

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 150 guests

It is currently 11 Jul 2025 23:54