02-05-2026, 10:13 AM
(02-05-2026, 09:57 AM)fuzzbox Wrote: I'm betting the manager he sort of, but doesn't quote was Mowbray as that is who he had a relationship with in his evening mail years. Assuming that, this is quite old news about a manager who under-performed, but was also quite angry by the end (probably rightfully, in hindsight). Who knows what they didn't want him to see on the whiteboard in the recruitment board, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was the search for hhis replacement.
The fallout between playouts is a prominent part of the article, yet at the same time he says it's not important and it's what you would expect. So why is it in this story? A story in its own right, fair enough, but why is it in this one? Paragraphs are donated to this and the misery of being around a losing club, yet, in an effort to appear fair minded, he says this is always the case at a losing club. He's put it in to add colour to the image he wants of a club in disarray. It's easy to argue that this indicative of at least something that is not in in disarray. If it was, they would be playing 'leapfrog' and having a great time.
There's plenty that suggests that it was right for Nestor to go and he even uses the obvious emotional manipulation of linking him unfairly to the greats we all respect to paint the picture. But if has been sacked (at last) isn't this a good thing? It's not easy to sack a friend (and I'm assuming his other mate who Nestor appointed - the one whose only experience was in failed internet media companies) but he's done it.
Is it any surprise that no-one knew where Nestor was when he already knew he was getting the chop? Again, that's not a signal of a club in disarray, that's more likely the natural, if petulant, reaction of an employee thinking bollocks to this, I'm getting back to my home in florida on the first plane out, I'm certainly not going to sit there and explain about the management appointment I had little hand in. And what was that about a 'dishevelled' Patel? I suppose it's open to interpretation and might not be an exaggeration purely to fit a point, but he didn't look anything close to dishevelled to me...
There's the implication that we use data to make ALL our decision making, except for 'linkedin interviews' and how stupid this is. Does anybody really believe that is all we do? Data analysis was mentioned in the takeover as a USP for the process to give us an edge. Most people were never convinced by that, but that's not to say that's all we were ever going to do. It's a deliberately false impression.
Similarly with the 'linkedin' answers, what does this really mean? People speak well, but that's not important? What's the alternative? What does it really mean, anyway? That's the beauty of made-up phrases, you can bend them to mean anything you want.
Ramsey, whether you like him (thats him over there by himself) or not (that's everyone else) has more to his career than a couple of seasons in the MSL. CL knows this, but chooses to omit most of his experience. It may (probably?) turn out to be a bad appointment, but at least give the full information on why he was chosen. If he need the information, maybe he could refer back to his own podcast where he previously endorsed him!
In short, a complete hatchet job from someone who clearly has an agenda. He's toxic to the club and I would be amazed if his contacts are anything more than similarly toxic people and previous managers and players from the time when he was important on the local sports scene.
OK Fuzz, that's about 500 words assassinating Chris Lepkowski. Now write a few about how we find ourselves in the Championship relegation zone if everything is going well down at The Hawthorns. Lepo's comments ring true to me. All journos add a slant to their reporting, but that doesn't discredit them totally. The club is in a mess, and sniping at people who comment or report on it doesn't achieve a damn thing.