Why has Gibbo lost interest?

JM14 said:
I wouldnt say he has lost interest I just dont think he has a clue how to run a football club
Click to expand...

Agree he hasn't lost interest. However I'd argue he knows how to run a club from the financial side of things. Plus our infrastructure is great, credit to him for that.

But when it comes to footballing decisions he seems clueless. He thinks Tony Pulis is some sort of footballing guru FFS. Best decision he made in a decade was appointing Karanka and most suspect that was Kenyon more than Gibson behind that one.

It's a shame because his intentions are great and he's invested a lot into the club. But he's tarnishing his reputation with poor decision making and an obsession with jobs for the (local) boys.

I wouldn't change him. But I do wish he'd seek more advice or even delegate the decision making on that side of things.
 
Many people said “anyone but Pulis” and “get someone who’ll play attacking football”. He acted on that, but it’s not as easy at it sounds to deliver it. Woodgate’s first presser made it very clear how he wanted to play, but he can’t achieve it.

Woodgate was far from my choice but he won’t sack him one game after the season has resumed, as bad as it was.
 
It isn't anything to do with a lack of interest. He gambled by giving Monk and Pulis big funds to try and take us up and it didn't work out.

Although I'm sure he himself must be tempted to sack Woodgate and bring in somebody like Warnock, I think he's probably worried that we would still go down and then be in big trouble financially.

It's a risk I personally think we should take, but obviously Gibson must be feeling more cautious.
 
When your blindsided by a bizarre morality that you won’t sign any manager currently in work ( unlike the rest of the game) all you have left is never will be and has beens.

appoint a manager why will you sign another teams player but not their manager I’ll never understand this
 
zorro_mfc said:
When your blindsided by a bizarre morality that you won’t sign any manager currently in work ( unlike the rest of the game) all you have left is never will be and has beens.

appoint a manager why will you sign another teams player but not their manager I’ll never understand this
Click to expand...
Even when good managers (eg Jokanovic) were available he still appointed Woodgate, which is even more frustrating......
 
parmoboy said:
It isn't anything to do with a lack of interest. He gambled by giving Monk and Pulis big funds to try and take us up and it didn't work out.

Although I'm sure he himself must be tempted to sack Woodgate and bring in somebody like Warnock, I think he's probably worried that we would still go down and then be in big trouble financially.

It's a risk I personally think we should take, but obviously Gibson must be feeling more cautious.
Click to expand...

Would sacking woodgate and bringing in Warnock for 8 games actually cost that much? If the whole point of Woodgate is he’s cheap, he must be cheap to sack.
 
atypical_boro said:
Would sacking woodgate and bringing in Warnock for 8 games actually cost that much? If the whole point of Woodgate is he’s cheap, he must be cheap to sack.
Click to expand...

I'd imagine Warnock would expect a decent wage, and some sort of bonus for keeping us up, but again it would be worth it if he achieved this.
 
If Gibson really did search high and low and believed Woodgate was the outstanding candidate then he ought to stick with him.

Lots to unpick there of course......;)
 
Yes he searched all over Rockliffe, for thirty or forty minutes before he found Woodgate and appointed him.
 
festa5 said:
Agree he hasn't lost interest. However I'd argue he knows how to run a club from the financial side of things. Plus our infrastructure is great, credit to him for that.

But when it comes to footballing decisions he seems clueless. He thinks Tony Pulis is some sort of footballing guru FFS. Best decision he made in a decade was appointing Karanka and most suspect that was Kenyon more than Gibson behind that one.

It's a shame because his intentions are great and he's invested a lot into the club. But he's tarnishing his reputation with poor decision making and an obsession with jobs for the (local) boys.

I wouldn't change him. But I do wish he'd seek more advice or even delegate the decision making on that side of things.
Click to expand...
I've never understood why he never offered Kenyon a full time position. He was prominent during Fergie's reign at Man Utd, has obvious footballing connections both on and off the pitch.
Gibson should be at home smoking Cuban cigars and getting massages off of Thai women instead of running a football club. It's not like the money Bulkhaul makes him doesn't allow it.

Take a back seat, stump the money up and get someone in to run the club for him with a selection of targets to meet every 6-12 months. Meet a target, increase the pay. Sorted.

Oh and give Warnock a 2 year contract to rid the club of Deadwood players. No sentiments or jobs for the boys, let him clear the decks.
 
I agree Kenyon was the reason for our up turn a few years back . Gibson is living on past glories , does not like people who talk back at him ,re the Gazette ( who are now licking his backside ) . Can't see a way out , Gibson's club ,he can do what he wants , but his poor running of the club over the years are taking us back from where he took over Div 3 . Look at a well run club re Brentford .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top