JOIN THE PROTEST - SACK THE BOARD

[Royalee]

I find it totally unbelievable that after failing miserably and getting sacked, Royalee thinks Rodgers is comparable to Alex Ferguson..

I don't think he's comparable to Sir Alex you total moron, my point was that Sir Alex Ferguson was very nearly sacked and had the fans on his back after having a longer poor start than Rodgers compared to expectations.

[Royalee]

I'm sorry but they do. Scolari hadn't managed in European club football. He had a international reputation not one at club level. Which is why he was replaced with Hiddink who did.

Ferguson hadn't managed in English Football, which is a big step up from Scotland (even in those days, although the gap has of course widened). My point has nothing to do with any of this though, I was pointing out that people wrote off Ferguson after giving him a longer 'chance' than Rodgers, yet he came through it and proved them all wrong, which backs up my point that Rodgers did not have enough time to prove whether he was either good or bad.

[sandman]

I'm sorry but they do. Scolari hadn't managed in European club football. He had a international reputation not one at club level. Which is why he was replaced with Hiddink who did.

Ferguson hadn't managed in English Football, which is a big step up from Scotland (even in those days, although the gap has of course widened). My point has nothing to do with any of this though, I was pointing out that people wrote off Ferguson after giving him a longer 'chance' than Rodgers, yet he came through it and proved them all wrong, which backs up my point that Rodgers did not have enough time to prove whether he was either good or bad.

Fergie had beaten the Old Firm something that hasn't happened since and he had beaten one of the worlds biggest clubs in the cup winners cup. The gap wasn't a big step up as English clubs were banned from Europe and if anything it was a step down.You could also see the ban as a way for the United board to give Ferguson more time.

[Dorset-Knob]

Lots of hysteria and wild claims to support arguments in opposite directions that are equally impossible to prove either way.

Bottom line is that BR was perceived by the people who count, (his employers) as not being fit for purpose and they then took executive action to remedy the situation. This is a fact!

All the other stuff is matters of opinion and you seem to be arguing in absolutes. BR is gone, this is a fact!

At the end of the day I'm not entirely sure what the argument is really about anymore, and I'm certain that members of the flat earth society believe implicitly in their point of view and nothing could change that.

Royalee could be a genius and the only one to see the 'truth' but he would probably find himself in a minority camp of bitter and twisted frustration.

Some of the remarks you make would have BR walking on water and inventing cures for cancer in his spare time, he may have proved you right in the long term, but he did prove you wrong in real time, the only time any of us actually have, in fact!

[southstand67]

Surely common sense tells you to give the manager til Christmas and then take stock? Look at where the Team was, hovering above the relegation zone, poor results and the Manager spouting drivel about the positives in each game. This is a results business and Rodgers wasn't getting them.
I remember seeing an interview when he was managing Watford and how he was talking big. I thought then that he hadn't done anything to be bigging himself up. He was being compared to Mourinho, who although I found to be full of himself had every reason to be so. I get the feeling that had Mourinho been manager of Reading, he'd've done a better job than Rodgers. Rodgers was found out wasn't he? He could talk it, but couldn't walk it.

[Dirk Gently]

Bottom line is that BR was perceived by the people who count, (his employers) as not being fit for purpose and they then took executive action to remedy the situation. This is a fact!

Slightly more to it that that - although I agree compleetly with what you say, it's a case him being perceived by the people who count, (his employers) as not being fit for purpose, as you say - but also THERE NOT BEING ANY PROSPECT OF BEING ABLE TO CHANGE THAT SITUATION WITHIN A REASONABLE TIMESCALE.

[Ian Royal]

Bottom line is that BR was perceived by the people who count, (his employers) as not being fit for purpose and they then took executive action to remedy the situation. This is a fact!

Slightly more to it that that - although I agree compleetly with what you say, it's a case him being perceived by the people who count, (his employers) as not being fit for purpose, as you say - but also THERE NOT BEING ANY PROSPECT OF BEING ABLE TO CHANGE THAT SITUATION WITHIN A REASONABLE TIMESCALE.

Agree with this.

On Ferguson, I can't believe Royalee is still trying to make the comparison, despite the massive differences in experience, massive differences in future consequences of the type of failure faced and massive differences in circumstance of joining the club. What I mean by that is Ferguson came into a club who were already struggling two or three months into the season. Whereas (problems from previous season taken into account) Rodgers is the man who took us into the position we were in at the time of his sacking for that specific season.

It's also important to consider in the decision making progress that he had not carried himself in a way that fit with the club's reputation and beliefs on integrity and media handling.

Finally I find it hard to believe that Royalee is trying to justify his position by repeatedly stating that we weren't in the relegation zone when Rodgers left as if that is some kind of deal clincher. We seems to accept we're in a relegation fight now, yet we're in almost exactly the same position in the league.

No one is arguing we were in the relegation ZONE. They are arguing however, that it is quite obvious to all but apparently Rodgers and his staunch followers that we were in a relegation FIGHT. Things weren't going to magically click and see us move 6 places up the league to safety.

If only one good thing comes out of Rodgers sacking, it's that the club have acknowledged and accepted they are in a fight for survival in this decision. What cost us in the prem relegation season>? A belief that somehow everything would be ok because we were too good to go down. Well it doesn't work like that, somthing I was also guilty of. But I learnt from that mistake.

To avoid relegation, you have to acknowledge it's posibility and fight directly against it.

[Dirk Gently]

Bottom line is that BR was perceived by the people who count, (his employers) as not being fit for purpose and they then took executive action to remedy the situation. This is a fact!

Slightly more to it that that - although I agree compleetly with what you say, it's a case him being perceived by the people who count, (his employers) as not being fit for purpose, as you say - but also THERE NOT BEING ANY PROSPECT OF BEING ABLE TO CHANGE THAT SITUATION WITHIN A REASONABLE TIMESCALE.

Agree with this.

On Ferguson, I can't believe Royalee is still trying to make the comparison, despite the massive differences in experience, massive differences in future consequences of the type of failure faced and massive differences in circumstance of joining the club. What I mean by that is Ferguson came into a club who were already struggling two or three months into the season. Whereas (problems from previous season taken into account) Rodgers is the man who took us into the position we were in at the time of his sacking for that specific season.

The problem is that there's no way of knowing that for sure, though.

Because of relegation and because of what happend last year there were always going to be substantial financial cuts and we were always going to lose the "big names". So there was virtually no continuity from last season.

Surely any manager in the world would have struggled in those circumstances? The problem is that there's no way of knowing if BR did better or worse than anyone else would have done, and although we can "feel" he did worse than he should have done (because of the team's inconsistency and the Peterboro-style turnarounds) there's absolutley now way we can ever be sure. It's all opinion and supposition.

[Ian Royal]

True, but we can point to the quite clear mistakes.

I still believe strongly that whilst we should never have expected more than 12th this season, it was a massive opportunity to turn the club around make a new beginning, handled correctly we could have gone into the new season like a rocket with a huge confidence boost. That would have kept us clear of trouble early doors and allowed us to then develop th eexpereince and quality we needed.

Now in his defence Rodgers was unlucky with injuries to key players like Ingimarsson, Harper, Matejovsky, Hunt & Armstrong going in to the season. Although I don't think he made good choices in his signings. I think they were mostly good players, but not to get us out of the blocks. I just feel he took the wrong approach from the start.

His new start was about massive changes in style and methods which sapped any momentum we might have been able to go into the season with. Rather than a slow change of style and method, an evolution if you will. With focus being laid instead on positivity, flair and confidence for the young'uns who were always going to have to play a big part.

[Dirk Gently]

You're forgetting that he bet the house on getting Tommy Smith. But then Pompey stepped in .....

[Dorset-Knob]

You're forgetting that he bet the house on getting Tommy Smith. But then Pompey stepped in .....

and of course TS is carrying Pompey to the dizzy heights of nowheresville! I can't believe, much less prove that he would or would not have made any significant difference to Reading.

This is all still a waste of breath, the situation at Reading was poor, the manager carried the can, that's hardly revolutionary is it?

[Dirk Gently]

You're forgetting that he bet the house on getting Tommy Smith. But then Pompey stepped in .....

and of course TS is carrying Pompey to the dizzy heights of nowheresville! I can't believe, much less prove that he would or would not have made any significant difference to Reading.

This is all still a waste of breath, the situation at Reading was poor, the manager carried the can, that's hardly revolutionary is it?

Indeed, but the fact is that TS was absolutely integral to BR's plans - the players he bought and his whole style of play was based around TS. Losing him was a grievous blow.

[Alan Partridge]

You're forgetting that he bet the house on getting Tommy Smith. But then Pompey stepped in .....

and of course TS is carrying Pompey to the dizzy heights of nowheresville! I can't believe, much less prove that he would or would not have made any significant difference to Reading.

This is all still a waste of breath, the situation at Reading was poor, the manager carried the can, that's hardly revolutionary is it?

Indeed, but the fact is that TS was absolutely integral to BR's plans - the players he bought and his whole style of play was based around TS. Losing him was a grievous blow.

He may well have wanted him but to base a 'plan' and future strategy on someone who isn't even at the club is a bit daft.

[Dorset-Knob]

You're forgetting that he bet the house on getting Tommy Smith. But then Pompey stepped in .....

and of course TS is carrying Pompey to the dizzy heights of nowheresville! I can't believe, much less prove that he would or would not have made any significant difference to Reading.

This is all still a waste of breath, the situation at Reading was poor, the manager carried the can, that's hardly revolutionary is it?

Indeed, but the fact is that TS was absolutely integral to BR's plans - the players he bought and his whole style of play was based around TS. Losing him was a grievous blow.

Good job things turned out the way they did then! imagine having been in the mix for promotion and then losing the saviour to a hamstring strain, no plan 'B' and we'd of been fooked!

[Dirk Gently]

Indeed, but the fact is that TS was absolutely integral to BR's plans - the players he bought and his whole style of play was based around TS. Losing him was a grievous blow.

He may well have wanted him but to base a 'plan' and future strategy on someone who isn't even at the club is a bit daft.

Very ture - but in his defence he did have a promise from TS that he'd join him here.

[Ian Royal]

Indeed, but the fact is that TS was absolutely integral to BR's plans - the players he bought and his whole style of play was based around TS. Losing him was a grievous blow.

He may well have wanted him but to base a 'plan' and future strategy on someone who isn't even at the club is a bit daft.

Very ture - but in his defence he did have a promise from TS that he'd join him here.

I don't care if he had it written in blood, basing your season on one player is a terrible management choice and that one thing is worthy of a sacking on its own IMO.

Tommy Smith wasn't that good. He could have been injured, Russo could have held us to ransom for the hell of it... all sorts of things could have still ruined our season even if we got him!

Not to mention that having a promise from Smith is tapping up, something I want my club to have nothing to do with.

[Dirk Gently]

I'm not disputing any of that, just pointing out that BR was absolutley convinced that TS would join us, and when he didn't it was a massive blow to his strategy.

[Ian Royal]

I'm not disputing any of that, just pointing out that BR was absolutley convinced that TS would join us, and when he didn't it was a massive blow to his strategy.

Yet he didn't try and change that strategy for a dozen or so games. The man was calamitous and just buried his head in the sand and hoped once that transfer fell through.

[Dirk Gently]

Tommy Smith wasn't that good.

Now THAT is the most important point of all.
He is what, 30 years old? What is the wisdom of breaking the bank for a player with very limited mileage left?
This is a player who is just slightly above average, it's not like we're talking about Roberto Baggio, more of a Matt Holmes.
I don't think it makes sense to spend millions of pounds on players that are over 30 in the first place, but this guy just wasn't all that good. And I think his total lack of impact at Porfsmuff just proves that. He would probably have earnt insane wages as well, which would have limited our ability to sign other players.
I'm glad we did not sign him.

Perhaps it wasn't his sheer ability, it was the qualities that BR thought he'd bring to the team, maybe as an out-and-out striker, maybe as the legendary "link player" playing in the hole in BR's 4-2-3-1. So we're not talking about a Ronaldo-style player who does it all on his own, we're talking about someoen who complements everyone else and provides what they lack - picking a team rather than 11 individuals.

With a better, more experienced striker we'd have beaten Cardiff, Doncaster and Leicester (at least) and be comfortably mid-table, and BR would still be here.

[Dirk Gently]

With a better, more experienced striker we'd have beaten Cardiff, Doncaster and Leicester (at least) and be comfortably mid-table, and BR would still be here.

"..and if my aunt had bollocks she'd be my uncle"
or..
"if Rodgers was as good as some people on here claim he'd be manager of AC Milan while curing cancer on his spare time"

The guy is gone. We should move on now.

Agreed - I'm just trying to give some people explanations into what the history actually was and what BR was trying to do.