83 days

[Shabby Russian]

I have no problem in the club taking as long as is necessary to make the right decision.

I do have a problem when they sack their current manager/head coach with 10 games left to go in the season (with a realistic chance of promotion still available) without a clear idea of who they wanted to take over or the competence to appoint their preferred replacement.

They were extremely fortunate that Shan did a competent job for them and that they have a second bite of the cherry to get the job done correctly. They would be under far more pressure if we had missed out on the play offs.

[Midget In A Pinstripe Suit]

WAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!

[SW4Baggie]

Better than 83 days with the wrong man

Nothing more than this can be said.

---

I have no problem in the club taking as long as is necessary to make the right decision.

I do have a problem when they sack their current manager/head coach with 10 games left to go in the season (with a realistic chance of promotion still available) without a clear idea of who they wanted to take over or the competence to appoint their preferred replacement.

They were extremely fortunate that Shan did a competent job for them and that they have a second bite of the cherry to get the job done correctly. They would be under far more pressure if we had missed out on the play offs.

Unfortunately, the way we'd played in the final 3-4 games of Moore's tenure, it looked very much like we wouldn't make the play-offs with him in charge. Add into that the instability being caused by Jones behind the scenes, and the will-he-wont-he plot with the Luton job and it was the right decision to dispense with Moore regardless. 

You say we got lucky that Shan stepped up, but it was very much his 3 wins from 3 which led to us delaying an appointment. Had he lost to Swansea and Blues (which lets face it, we could have!), I imagine we'd have rushed into an appointment.

[Babel]

Better than 83 days with the wrong man

Spot on.

+ Lots.  

Black
White
In fugxxx extremis?
The logic of better rudderless for 83 days presupposes we would have hired the wrong man on any day between 0 and 83, At the very least, and even for our basket of jellyheads, that's a stretch.

[billybassett]

Better than 83 days with the wrong man

Spot on.

Err... we had 83 days with the wrong man Shan. If he'd have been the right man we'd have been promoted.

[Shabby Russian]

Better than 83 days with the wrong man

Nothing more than this can be said.

---

I have no problem in the club taking as long as is necessary to make the right decision.

I do have a problem when they sack their current manager/head coach with 10 games left to go in the season (with a realistic chance of promotion still available) without a clear idea of who they wanted to take over or the competence to appoint their preferred replacement.

They were extremely fortunate that Shan did a competent job for them and that they have a second bite of the cherry to get the job done correctly. They would be under far more pressure if we had missed out on the play offs.

Unfortunately, the way we'd played in the final 3-4 games of Moore's tenure, it looked very much like we wouldn't make the play-offs with him in charge. Add into that the instability being caused by Jones behind the scenes, and the will-he-wont-he plot with the Luton job and it was the right decision to dispense with Moore regardless. 

You say we got lucky that Shan stepped up, but it was very much his 3 wins from 3 which led to us delaying an appointment. Had he lost to Swansea and Blues (which lets face it, we could have!), I imagine we'd have rushed into an appointment.

This is the most spurious argument that keeps getting repeated although there is no substansive evidence to back it up.

Of those games that you mention 2  (the only ones we lost) were against teams that finished above us. It's evidence that we were not going to get automatic promotion, but not that we would miss out on the play offs. We had shown consistent form against teams who were outside the top 6 and that from indicated that we would comfortably finish in the play offs. 

The only possible rational argument ifor sacking Moore was that the club had come to the decision that he was not the right man for the job and there was an alternative who was immediately available. If that was the case they failed to get that man.

[Spandaubaggie]

Better than 83 days with the wrong man

Spot on.

Err... we had 83 days with the wrong man Shan. If he'd have been the right man we'd have been promoted.

Very black and white. If your basis is Shan was a failure because we lost in a penalty shootout, without taking into account the backdrop of the circumstances of his appointment then I don't think I'll engage in debate with you.

[Remi_Moses]

Better than 83 days with the wrong man

Spot on.

Err... we had 83 days with the wrong man Shan. If he'd have been the right man we'd have been promoted.

Very black and white. If your basis is Shan was a failure because we lost in a penalty shootout, without taking into account the backdrop of the circumstances of his appointment then I don't think I'll engage in debate with you.

Hard to debate the truth sir - Shan should be treated with respect - he had just lost a friend who he admired of long standing and he stepped in at a moment's notice. Galvanized the squad for the last few games. And barring some cheating and dodgy referee we may well have won the play offs.

[Baggiejacko]

Pant pissing, foot stomping and snivelling fuckers aots as usual

[Squid]

Better than 83 days with the wrong man

Nothing more than this can be said.

---

I have no problem in the club taking as long as is necessary to make the right decision.

I do have a problem when they sack their current manager/head coach with 10 games left to go in the season (with a realistic chance of promotion still available) without a clear idea of who they wanted to take over or the competence to appoint their preferred replacement.

They were extremely fortunate that Shan did a competent job for them and that they have a second bite of the cherry to get the job done correctly. They would be under far more pressure if we had missed out on the play offs.

Unfortunately, the way we'd played in the final 3-4 games of Moore's tenure, it looked very much like we wouldn't make the play-offs with him in charge. Add into that the instability being caused by Jones behind the scenes, and the will-he-wont-he plot with the Luton job and it was the right decision to dispense with Moore regardless. 

You say we got lucky that Shan stepped up, but it was very much his 3 wins from 3 which led to us delaying an appointment. Had he lost to Swansea and Blues (which lets face it, we could have!), I imagine we'd have rushed into an appointment.

This is the most spurious argument that keeps getting repeated although there is no substansive evidence to back it up.

Of those games that you mention 2  (the only ones we lost) were against teams that finished above us. It's evidence that we were not going to get automatic promotion, but not that we would miss out on the play offs. We had shown consistent form against teams who were outside the top 6 and that from indicated that we would comfortably finish in the play offs. 

The only possible rational argument ifor sacking Moore was that the club had come to the decision that he was not the right man for the job and there was an alternative who was immediately available. If that was the case they failed to get that man.

Did you not see the Ipswich match? It was appalling. Then in the interview afterwards when DM didn't see anything wrong with it.

I was gutted when DM was sacked, it felt like the death of a dream to me and I still hold that with a better assistant, we could have got automatic.

But, I cannot argue with the board sacking DM then.