|
| |  Posted 30/04/2008 21:09:32 | |
| 
Used to be SB, you know
Group: Moderators
Last Login: 11/05/2008 11:18:44
Posts: 5,942, Visits: 7,569 |
| King Of The Kippax (30/04/2008)
beer (30/04/2008)
City is not primarily dependent on Sven.
City is dependent on Thaksin investing into the team.
So if Sven is fired/or leaves and Thaksin gets Scolari orsome other successful coach and continues to investthen it will be no problem.
But if Sven leaves and Thaksin has lost interest in City/football generally or can't get his money unfrozen then City will have to take two steps backwards.Sven has done a good job there is no reason for him to be sacked. Sven used Frank's money well last summer and i'd much rather have him than Fat Phil who's an international manager. Yes it would be okay if we had a new manager and we were successful next season, but it's really harsh on Sven and alot of City fans feel sorry for him because he's done nothing wrong and has been a great manager for our team. Agreed. This whole situation* is of great concern to me for several reasons, quite apart from the footballing reasons of the potential for Sven to actually take the team places: (1) it offends my inherent sense of what is right and wrong, when someone who meets their target can be told they are not the right man for the job* - I wasn't Sven's greatest fan when he took over but there's no way you can say he's done a bad job if he has done what was asked of him (2) the effect of this on the players, some of whom came to City because of Sven*, and who seem to fully support Sven - OK, they can't really come out and say otherwise right now, but in general over the season it's mostly been praise for Sven, and reports of the news being met with anger* is never good, and (3) the apparent short-term view of Thaksin in not seeing the bigger picture*, which is a dramatic improvement in both play and league position in his first year - what's to say the next manager would be given any more time to get things 'right'? So whether or not Sven is able to take us to the Champions League in years to come is almost a moot point. Will any manager be given the time to achieve this, realistically? How will changing managers again accelerate the process, when they will want to mould the team to their taste? Shouldn't Sven at least be given the opportunity, having been hired in the first place, to show that he is not up to the job before being jettisoned? The comparisons with Romanov, while a touch premature right now, are a distinct worry. *if true 
Keeper of the heretic's fork of doom. |
| |
| | | Posted 01/05/2008 08:39:02 | |
| 
Premiership Poster
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 02/05/2008 20:29:16
Posts: 5,898, Visits: 5,427 |
| beer (30/04/2008)
King Of The Kippax (30/04/2008)
beer (30/04/2008)
King Of The Kippax (30/04/2008)
beer (30/04/2008)
City is not primarily dependent on Sven.
City is dependent on Thaksin investing into the team.
So if Sven is fired/or leaves and Thaksin gets Scolari orsome other successful coach and continues to investthen it will be no problem.
But if Sven leaves and Thaksin has lost interest in City/football generally or can't get his money unfrozen then City will have to take two steps backwards.
Sven has done a good job there is no reason for him to be sacked. Sven used Frank's money well last summer and i'd much rather have him than Fat Phil who's an international manager. Yes it would be okay if we had a new manager and we were successful next season, but it's really harsh on Sven and alot of City fans feel sorry for him because he's done nothing wrong and has been a great manager for our team.
yes, true. But it is not decisive for City.
Just think of Thaksin investing big for next season and gettin the team better or Thaksin not investing big in City and players like Richards are sold.
Thaksin could do real dumb things (in my opinion)like sellin Richards and then buying Ronaldinho for the money.
I agree it would be good but i really want Sven to be the man to spend his money. Also the way we play under Sven is great 
As things have developed in the media i think Ronnie was Thaksin's choice and Sven didn't want him. Thaksin has to learn that he has to take a back seat and let the manager make these kind of decisions. Sven is a world class manager and is knows what is best for the team. Yes, Thaksin wants to make money and really do you blame him? I don't agree with his methods but after pilling money into the club you'd expect some back. But this will only be achieved by letting Sven run the team and taking us where we deserve to be.
I also would like Sven to continue to build the team( and playing with two strikers more often 
For Thaksin and these other billionaires owning a premier league football club is a ego and pr thing. I don't think Roman made much money with Chelsea.
 This entire thread is fraught with ridiculous statements but I thought I'd jump on ths one, Chelsea last year made an operating loss of £74.8m. Roman hasnt made a single penny with the chavs whereas the likes of 'snal and utd both report profits.
_________________________________________________________________________________
~ Listen to the tales and romanticise, how we follow the path of the hero. |
| |
| | | Posted 01/05/2008 08:50:41 | |
| 
Premiership Poster
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 02/05/2008 16:21:58
Posts: 6,185, Visits: 4,437 |
| you're both talking out of your arse
--------------------------------------------------We're on a mission from God |
| |
| | | Posted 01/05/2008 09:49:23 | |
| 
Premiership Poster
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 15/05/2008 15:09:48
Posts: 10,675, Visits: 4,888 |
| Timpblue (01/05/2008)
you're both talking out of your arseI'm not going to read the thread, but I really like the succinctness of the Timps, so I'm going to blindly side with Timps here. Also, it suits my shitty hungover mood.
-------------------
up, charm, top, down, strange, bottom |
| |
|
|