by rollsy » 25 Dec 2009 06:26
by Barry the bird boggler » 25 Dec 2009 08:22
by NR_Royal » 25 Dec 2009 13:05
by 'lista » 25 Dec 2009 14:08
by (.)Boobies(.) » 25 Dec 2009 16:10
IdealSteve Coppell has hinted he would return to Reading as manager – if he was asked.
Dear God, please let this be true!
We could still make the playoffs with a little luck!!
by Doyler » 25 Dec 2009 20:38
by Royal Rother » 25 Dec 2009 21:46
by Sir Dodger Royal » 26 Dec 2009 10:38
by The Cube » 26 Dec 2009 13:40
If I was going to be asked to come back, I think I would have been by now. I haven’t had any contact – 100 per cent. I don’t expect to have contact now, so I won’t get into the hypotheticals about what I would do if I was asked. I have had my break and I do want to get back to work.
by Stooper » 26 Dec 2009 14:20
by Wimb » 27 Dec 2009 08:52
Stooper Coppell coming back would be like going out with your ex.
Even though he hasn't been with anyone else since, there's always a reason why you split and that'll be lurking in the back of your mind the whole time and the smallest argument will cause a bigger argument than it should.
by Ian Royal » 27 Dec 2009 19:23
by bcubed » 27 Dec 2009 19:41
by jeff4066 » 27 Dec 2009 22:28
Doyler Is that article by former EP reporter Nick Ive? He's done well for himself if he's landed a permanent job at The Mirror. No doubt the pay is in a different league to what he got at the EP.
by Wimb » 28 Dec 2009 10:30
Ian Royal Of course he would come back. Probably too soon for it this season.
It's more likely he'll come back in the summer with McDermott as his assistant and Gibbs as the third coach IMO.
Although by no means certain and if McDermott keeps us up relatively well then it would be harsh not to give him the job.
by Ian Royal » 28 Dec 2009 12:52
WimbIan Royal Of course he would come back. Probably too soon for it this season.
It's more likely he'll come back in the summer with McDermott as his assistant and Gibbs as the third coach IMO.
Although by no means certain and if McDermott keeps us up relatively well then it would be harsh not to give him the job.
Depends on your definition of 'relatively well' I thought the whole reason Rodgers got sacked was because we weren't in the top half/midtable area. Therefore unless BM has top half form over his tenure surely he has also failed?
by Royalwaster » 28 Dec 2009 13:09
by Ian Royal » 28 Dec 2009 13:20
Royalwaster What was the point of sacking BR then? Surely for him a 19th place or above would have been a good result on the same basis and at less cost as we'd not have had to pay out his severance payment? Now we'll end up paying BM an increased salary plus BR's severance. Just can't get my head around how that makes sense. Unless the board really thought we're better off without BR.
by Royal Rother » 28 Dec 2009 13:41
by Royalwaster » 28 Dec 2009 17:56
Ian RoyalRoyalwaster What was the point of sacking BR then? Surely for him a 19th place or above would have been a good result on the same basis and at less cost as we'd not have had to pay out his severance payment? Now we'll end up paying BM an increased salary plus BR's severance. Just can't get my head around how that makes sense. Unless the board really thought we're better off without BR.
Because Rodgers was failing and making obvious mistakes every week. McDermott only has to better the first half of the season by a small margin and we'll stay up. Rodgers' better pefermances and results still saw us threatened by relegation and there was no guarantee he'd improve us further and a fair chance things would deteriorate under him again.
The only real worry for me is if McAnuff stops performing without Rodgers.
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 44 guests