Jim Bentley Out

[Westgate Wanderer]

Bentley is driving us to flexit! Plan A doesn't work... errr plan b, c... oh we've equalised were going to get a point quick get more defenders on!!!

[mrpotatohead]

Although I'm a Jim fan, I can actually see both sides of the argument , and I think both sides have overstated their points for and against, the subject has become tedious.

As for it happening, this regime won't go to the expense of A. Getting rid of the manager
Or B. Giving the manager the tools to do his job.

Maybe they just want the land.

[BerlinWaller]

Although I'm a Jim fan, I can actually see both sides of the argument , and I think both sides have overstated their points for and against, the subject has become tedious.

As for it happening, this regime won't go to the expense of A. Getting rid of the manager
Or B. Giving the manager the tools to do his job.

Maybe they just want the land.

This another one of your I know something you don't posts?

[mrpotatohead]

Whatever

[redrobo]

Shows you how low are expectations are that some actually thought we played well in the second 45. Can't recall their goalkeeper being really troubled and didn't have to make a save to stop a certain goal. They played it on the deck with wing players who could and did beat their man. Mind you I understand that they did have at least 2 Chelsea youngsters in their starting 11.

I am really fearful of relegation and the end of EFL football because I just can't see us ever returning.

[Keith]

Thought we looked excellent in the second half and we battered Stevenage

Keith, you are somewhat deluded. I see comments from you like unlucky, played excellent that half, too good to go down etc. I don’t want Jim to go but never see all these excellent unlucky games/halves you see. Good sometimes yes but not excellent.

Chris, don't you all see comments like this one which I posted at half time?

Third from bottom as it currently stands. Not looking good. Stevenage are a decent side but we’re not matching them. Not enough intensity in our play, too many soft, unenforced errors. No quality up front, no real shots on target. We really need to play much better all over the pitch in the second half. I mentioned Mandeville having a ‘mare earlier, but Tutte & Cranston haven’t been playing to their recent standard either. Oates hasn’t done a great deal, Kev’s covered a lot of ground, but not done a lot either.

Hoping for a good response in the second half.

When we're not performing, I'll say so.
Also, the "too good to go down" comment was followed by question marks and What I meant by that is that we're clearly NOT too good to go down.

Regarding the management comment, I was trying to offer is some balance. Changing manager doesn't always result in an improvement, which is what the original comment said "teams around us changing managers and having success with it". I didn't think Stevenage deserved to win today, did you? I thought our second half performance was a good one. Stevenage were better than us in the first half, yet only had one half decent shot on target and the penalty. They are on the edge of the play-offs but (in my opinion) we were better than them by quite a distance in the second half.

[Keith]

Shows you how low are expectations are that some actually thought we played well in the second 45. Can't recall their goalkeeper being really troubled and didn't have to make a save to stop a certain goal. They played it on the deck with wing players who could and did beat their man. Mind you I understand that they did have at least 2 Chelsea youngsters in their starting 11.

I am really fearful of relegation and the end of EFL football because I just can't see us ever returning.

Not sure how Bennett missed the sitter, but you missed him, missing the sitter otherwise you could let me know! Did you think it was a penalty? I'll accept someone from your position in the ground saying the ball was out of play before the foul perhaps? Did you really think Stevenage deserved a win today? Relegation battle team against play-off chasing team?

[sandgrown]

Although I'm a Jim fan, I can actually see both sides of the argument , and I think both sides have overstated their points for and against, the subject has become tedious.
I always thought it was about the land

As for it happening, this regime won't go to the expense of A. Getting rid of the manager
Or B. Giving the manager the tools to do his job.

Maybe they just want the land.

It was always about the land
They only finance for two years
Then say we want our money back
No money, we'll take the land

[Slanester]

They are on the edge of the play-offs but (in my opinion) we were better than them by quite a distance in the second half.

Bloody hell, thought it was just me. Didn’t bother posting, as I couldn’t be ar$ed replying to the.....what game were you watching, deluded etc,etc.

[al1]

If Stevenage get to the play offs playing like that I will eat my hat!

[Westgate Wanderer]

I thought Cheatenage controlled the first half and could well have been well clear by half time. We had a better go in the second half but they kept having time outs and changing their play. Bennett did miss a sitter, not sure about the penalty appeal, did the ball go out before Mills was kicked? Soon after we equalised Jim threw on Kenyon for more defensive cover to try and keep a point! How many times do we try to settle for ONE point? Not good enough we should try to win games! As for management changes it hasn't worked for Notts County but is reaping dividends to once doomed Macclesfield! But of course there isn't anyone out there who would want to work for us, so how the hell did Sol Campbell get to Macclesfield?

[halfwayprawn]

If Stevenage get to the play offs playing like that I will eat my hat!

If they play teams like Morecambe,then start eating.

[MfcChris]

Thought we looked excellent in the second half and we battered Stevenage

Keith, you are somewhat deluded. I see comments from you like unlucky, played excellent that half, too good to go down etc. I don’t want Jim to go but never see all these excellent unlucky games/halves you see. Good sometimes yes but not excellent.

Chris, don't you all see comments like this one which I posted at half time?

Third from bottom as it currently stands. Not looking good. Stevenage are a decent side but we’re not matching them. Not enough intensity in our play, too many soft, unenforced errors. No quality up front, no real shots on target. We really need to play much better all over the pitch in the second half. I mentioned Mandeville having a ‘mare earlier, but Tutte & Cranston haven’t been playing to their recent standard either. Oates hasn’t done a great deal, Kev’s covered a lot of ground, but not done a lot either.

Hoping for a good response in the second half.

When we're not performing, I'll say so.
Also, the "too good to go down" comment was followed by question marks and What I meant by that is that we're clearly NOT too good to go down.

Regarding the management comment, I was trying to offer is some balance. Changing manager doesn't always result in an improvement, which is what the original comment said "teams around us changing managers and having success with it". I didn't think Stevenage deserved to win today, did you? I thought our second half performance was a good one. Stevenage were better than us in the first half, yet only had one half decent shot on target and the penalty. They are on the edge of the play-offs but (in my opinion) we were better than them by quite a distance in the second half.

I think 1-1 would have been fair and Yes I did think we played some good stuff and were better than them second half. This is different to excellent and battering them in my opinion.

[Phoenix Shrimp 2017]

Although I'm a Jim fan, I can actually see both sides of the argument , and I think both sides have overstated their points for and against, the subject has become tedious.
I always thought it was about the land

As for it happening, this regime won't go to the expense of A. Getting rid of the manager
Or B. Giving the manager the tools to do his job.

Maybe they just want the land.

It was always about the land
They only finance for two years
Then say we want our money black
No money, we'll take the land

I thought we'd covered this before that due to J B Christies covenant the land can only be used for sporting purposes (or similar). If this is the case how would they stand to profit from the land. Am I just being naive here, are there ways round such things?

[Morecambe Jack]

The Club doesn't even own the land.

[Gone_Shrimping]

I thought Cheatenage controlled the first half and could well have been well clear by half time. We had a better go in the second half but they kept having time outs and changing their play. Bennett did miss a sitter, not sure about the penalty appeal, did the ball go out before Mills was kicked? Soon after we equalised Jim threw on Kenyon for more defensive cover to try and keep a point! How many times do we try to settle for ONE point? Not good enough we should try to win games! As for management changes it hasn't worked for Notts County but is reaping dividends to once doomed Macclesfield! But of course there isn't anyone out there who would want to work for us, so how the hell did Sol Campbell get to Macclesfield?

Martin Allen ? I'll get my coat

[BerlinWaller]

Yes, Stevenage deserved the win. You can't kick in to some sort of gear for the second half and expect that to be enough to win a game. Playing ok for 45minutes against a team 9th in league 2 doesn't cut it for me. We were found out in 20minutes and had to change a system i presume we have worked on all week. Mills was playing as a number 10, Jordan as a left winger and Sutton as a right back after 20 minutes. Does that sound like a Manager in control? Smells like panic to me.

[Phil Anderer]

I've read a fair bit since yesterday about how much better we were in the second half, but I see it a little differently. Stevenage were all over us for the first 30, and it was only a matter of time before they scored. Then, bizarrely, instead of carrying on to score a hatful, they started playing like tw@ts and wasting time, not even trying to attack us. That's what left the space and time for a frankly poor Morecambe (Mills excepted) to get into the game and nearly get a point, which we only half-deserved because Cheatenage's time-wasting led them not to deserve a win. Please stop trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.

[Dirk]

Most of the time, people behave rationally. If you watch what people say and do, you'll understand their objectives:

1. Owners: Why buy a loss-making football club that you have no historical connection too? Why would they keep a manager who plays dull football and who loses? It doesn't look like the owners are in it as fans. Property 'development' was, and to a lesser extent, still is fashionable way of making money quickly with minimal effort. There are ways around covenants.

2. Players: have a strong incentive to win games of football; they want new contracts. However, as Manchester United shows, players can under-perform if they're asked to play negative tactics or are undermined by poor, demotivating managers.

3. Management: they're also judged by their results (normally). Some managers are more motivated than others though. Living over an hour's drive away from the training ground will almost certainly affect the frequency and duration of training sessions. Players get upset when training isn't up to scratch because the management team are not as committted as they are. This naturally affects team morale and fitness levels. Some managers genuinely love their clubs. They will walk for the good of 'their' club; it helps if you've got a good career record as a manager, you'll get work again. On the other hand, if your record has been consistently poor, you'll probably put your bank balance before the club, and cling-on for your benefit alone - it's just a job! And, nobody else will be hiring you after you get fired fro your current role because your record is terrible!

4. Luvvies: will support (3) because they don't pay to get in. Some get 'expenses', and others are even fortunate enough to be paid a wage for their 'work'. Luvvies will pursue their self-interest by supporting the current management team. They also get a kick out of being on the inside - social one upmanship games with paying fans

[BerlinWaller]

Great post Dirk, very well said. Point 4 may cause some outrage

[Westgate Wanderer]

Nice one Dirk, Point 1 possibile sadly. Agree with point 2 negative tactics. Point 3 our management always moans about training,(crapaldi previously said pub teams train harder) has it improved since Sammy? Loyalty to the club or bank balance? Kerching. Who would want our "over achiever"? Point 4 excellently put (take off the blinkers people)

[Slanester]

Most of the time, people behave rationally. If you watch what people say and do, you'll understand their objectives:

1. Owners: Why buy a loss-making football club that you have no historical connection too? Why would they keep a manager who plays dull football and who loses? It doesn't look like the owners are in it as fans. Property 'development' was, and to a lesser extent, still is fashionable way of making money quickly with minimal effort. There are ways around covenants.

2. Players: have a strong incentive to win games of football; they want new contracts. However, as Manchester United shows, players can under-perform if they're asked to play negative tactics or are undermined by poor, demotivating managers.

3. Management: they're also judged by their results (normally). Some managers are more motivated than others though. Living over an hour's drive away from the training ground will almost certainly affect the frequency and duration of training sessions. Players get upset when training isn't up to scratch because the management team are not as committted as they are. This naturally affects team morale and fitness levels. Some managers genuinely love their clubs. They will walk for the good of 'their' club; it helps if you've got a good career record as a manager, you'll get work again. On the other hand, if your record has been consistently poor, you'll probably put your bank balance before the club, and cling-on for your benefit alone - it's just a job! And, nobody else will be hiring you after you get fired fro your current role because your record is terrible!

4. Luvvies: will support (3) because they don't pay to get in. Some get 'expenses', and others are even fortunate enough to be paid a wage for their 'work'. Luvvies will pursue their self-interest by supporting the current management team. They also get a kick out of being on the inside - social one upmanship games with paying fans

Points 1 to 3, all carry some merit. Then you get to point 4, which looks to me like your real motivation for the whole post.
I support (3), as you put it, but don’t fit any of your criteria, along with I am sure, plenty more Shrimps fans. I buy my season ticket with hard earned, and attend as many away games as family life allows, paid again by hard earned. What interesting title would I come under?

[Keith]

3. Management: they're also judged by their results (normally). Some managers are more motivated than others though. Living over an hour's drive away from the training ground will almost certainly affect the frequency and duration of training sessions. Players get upset when training isn't up to scratch because the management team are not as committted as they are. This naturally affects team morale and fitness levels. Some managers genuinely love their clubs. They will walk for the good of 'their' club; it helps if you've got a good career record as a manager, you'll get work again. On the other hand, if your record has been consistently poor, you'll probably put your bank balance before the club, and cling-on for your benefit alone - it's just a job! And, nobody else will be hiring you after you get fired fro your current role because your record is terrible!

If anyone genuinely believes that Jim isn't motivated and doesn't love the club, then they really need to take themselves outside and give their head a wobble! After all the shit, metaphorically (having players released who he wanted to keep, players sold for a third of their value because we had bills to pay, players & staff, including himself, not being paid on multiple occasions...) or literally, picking it up off Turners Field before training could start because it is used for dog walking too, he at least deserves some respect, even if you don't rate him as a manager.

[Dirk]

Is it feasible for a full-time Football League manager to be effective and live a 140 mile round trip from their club's training ground? Jose mourinho got stick for not being committed because he chose to live in a city centre hotel for 2 years. Just imagine the abuse he would have got if he was still living 70 miles away from Old Trafford, 8 years after getting the job

[Gone_Shrimping]

Is it feasible for a full-time Football League manager to be effective and live a 140 mile round trip from their club's training ground? Jose mourinho got stick for not being committed because he chose to live in a city centre hotel for 2 years. Just imagine the abuse he would have got if he was still living 70 miles away from Old Trafford, 8 years after getting the job

I think the club insisted that Jim Harvey moved to the area around a year or so before he left the club. He bought a house in Bolton-le-Sands.