| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet 14:45 - Feb 16 with 11926 views | TalkingBlues |
for some time now. We often speak of "must win" games for the team, but I genuinely believe that Saturday is a "must win" for McKenna, anything less than 3 points against FGR and the powers that be start drawing up a list of managerial candidates (if they haven't already). It's the diligent and prudent thing to do, McKenna has had probably as much time and definitely more money at his disposal than previous managers, but has produced a run of results worse than those before him, runs that saw those managers sacked. Our owners are investing a lot of money on and off the pitch and they want results quickly, so will Ashton, before his job comes under scrutiny too. [Post edited 16 Feb 2023 14:45]
|  |
| |  |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 19:12 - Feb 16 with 1340 views | TalkingBlues |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 19:03 - Feb 16 by Swansea_Blue |
"A few posters seem to have an issue with this at the moment". That's a rather bold assertion. Do you have any evidence to back it up?  |
It's always the same with "The Groovy Gang", the same 4 or 5 posters turn up together to derail and disrupt, via obvious spin and insults.
No, I can't be bothered to provide evidence, we all know who are they are and the MO. | |
| |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 19:13 - Feb 16 with 1327 views | StokieBlue |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 19:03 - Feb 16 by Swansea_Blue |
"A few posters seem to have an issue with this at the moment". That's a rather bold assertion. Do you have any evidence to back it up? |
Yes, but I'll leave you to do your own research.
SB |  | | |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 19:20 - Feb 16 with 1290 views | Herbivore |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 19:07 - Feb 16 by TalkingBlues |
It's a mixture of a few articles, in his very first press conference he says he has a "healthy impatience" and wants promotion "immediately, this season" and they will provide plenty of funds to do so, in later articles that year, he admits that it seems unlikely (after a bad run) and says they want out of the league the following season (at the latest, says 3 seasons in this league is too long) but still holds out hope for the current season etc etc.
The whole gist of all the interviews he gives, is that Gamechanger want promotion yesterday and they are providing the infrastructure and the funds for players to do so "immediately" and they expect to see a return on that investment. We have seen first hand how they deal with a perceived failure to meet expectations (Paul Cook) after only 20 games and I don't see McKenna being treated any differently, this is a terrible run, having received another massive financial handout in January, the return has been a big drop in form and a move down the table, same as Cook. |
Repeating the phrase "same as Cook" ad nauseum doesn't make it any less bullsh!t, my feathered friend. |  |
| |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 20:06 - Feb 16 with 1216 views | TalkingBlues |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 19:20 - Feb 16 by Herbivore |
Repeating the phrase "same as Cook" ad nauseum doesn't make it any less bullsh!t, my feathered friend. |
We have very limited knowledge of Gamechanger and thus, I can only look to what they've said and done in the time they've owned us, for indication as to how they may act in the future.
Paul Cook was their number 1 target, they were very happy with his appointment, they backed him financially, but when things turned a bit South (we were 11 points from top spot at the time, but actually many more games left to turn it around) they sacked him.
I have seen nothing to believe that they will approach McKenna from any different perspective, they are business minded individuals who expect a return on their investments, instead they are seeing us slide massively, we are playing worse by the game (Cambridge awful first half, Wednesday awful first half, Rovers awful both halves, mid table overall form, 20th in the league over last 6 games away, leapfrogged in league and the possibility in a few games of falling out of the top 6 altogether) and the optics of what's happened over the last 3 or 4 months are very bad.
I have no view either way on whether he should be sacked, just trying to figure out how Gamechanger will view this run and I reckon it will be, dimly.
Another chance to respond with five words and an insult, crack on, or try and answer with what you think Gamechangers moves will be if this form continues, with evidence obviously, after all, you've uppied the post suggesting that's a "must have" to make a post on here. [Post edited 16 Feb 2023 20:06]
| |
| |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 20:13 - Feb 16 with 1202 views | StokieBlue |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 20:06 - Feb 16 by TalkingBlues |
We have very limited knowledge of Gamechanger and thus, I can only look to what they've said and done in the time they've owned us, for indication as to how they may act in the future.
Paul Cook was their number 1 target, they were very happy with his appointment, they backed him financially, but when things turned a bit South (we were 11 points from top spot at the time, but actually many more games left to turn it around) they sacked him.
I have seen nothing to believe that they will approach McKenna from any different perspective, they are business minded individuals who expect a return on their investments, instead they are seeing us slide massively, we are playing worse by the game (Cambridge awful first half, Wednesday awful first half, Rovers awful both halves, mid table overall form, 20th in the league over last 6 games away, leapfrogged in league and the possibility in a few games of falling out of the top 6 altogether) and the optics of what's happened over the last 3 or 4 months are very bad.
I have no view either way on whether he should be sacked, just trying to figure out how Gamechanger will view this run and I reckon it will be, dimly.
Another chance to respond with five words and an insult, crack on, or try and answer with what you think Gamechangers moves will be if this form continues, with evidence obviously, after all, you've uppied the post suggesting that's a "must have" to make a post on here. [Post edited 16 Feb 2023 20:06]
|
"Paul Cook was their number 1 target, they were very happy with his appointment"
I am really not sure this is true, opinion at the time seemed to indicate he was ME's man rather than GC or MA's and thus we moved onto McKenna.
Can you please provide a source showing he was GC number one target.
SB | | | |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 20:21 - Feb 16 with 1174 views | TalkingBlues |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 20:13 - Feb 16 by StokieBlue |
"Paul Cook was their number 1 target, they were very happy with his appointment"
I am really not sure this is true, opinion at the time seemed to indicate he was ME's man rather than GC or MA's and thus we moved onto McKenna.
Can you please provide a source showing he was GC number one target.
SB |
As per a lot of other stuff, it was in the very first press conference given by Mike O'Leary and Brett Johnson, Cook was number 1 on both ME's and Gamechanger's list of prospective managers. | |
| |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 20:22 - Feb 16 with 1158 views | mrfixit426 |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 19:07 - Feb 16 by TalkingBlues |
It's a mixture of a few articles, in his very first press conference he says he has a "healthy impatience" and wants promotion "immediately, this season" and they will provide plenty of funds to do so, in later articles that year, he admits that it seems unlikely (after a bad run) and says they want out of the league the following season (at the latest, says 3 seasons in this league is too long) but still holds out hope for the current season etc etc.
The whole gist of all the interviews he gives, is that Gamechanger want promotion yesterday and they are providing the infrastructure and the funds for players to do so "immediately" and they expect to see a return on that investment. We have seen first hand how they deal with a perceived failure to meet expectations (Paul Cook) after only 20 games and I don't see McKenna being treated any differently, this is a terrible run, having received another massive financial handout in January, the return has been a big drop in form and a move down the table, same as Cook. |
You've had a nghtmare here, fella.
I can't believe you're doubling down. |  | | |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 20:24 - Feb 16 with 1151 views | StokieBlue |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 20:21 - Feb 16 by TalkingBlues |
As per a lot of other stuff, it was in the very first press conference given by Mike O'Leary and Brett Johnson, Cook was number 1 on both ME's and Gamechanger's list of prospective managers. |
You really don't understand how this works do you?
You make a claim, someone asks for evidence, you provide evidence.
What you don't provide is another statement with no evidence.
It's really not hard.
SB | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 20:29 - Feb 16 with 1132 views | TalkingBlues |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 20:24 - Feb 16 by StokieBlue |
You really don't understand how this works do you?
You make a claim, someone asks for evidence, you provide evidence.
What you don't provide is another statement with no evidence.
It's really not hard.
SB |
Really? What’s the difference between that and refuting a claim “without evidence”? | |
| |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 20:31 - Feb 16 with 1128 views | StokieBlue |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 20:29 - Feb 16 by TalkingBlues |
Really? What’s the difference between that and refuting a claim “without evidence”? |
Because as discussed previously, the burden of proof is on the person who made the claim/assertion (which was you), not the person questioning that assertion (which was me/other posters).
Once again, it's really not hard.
Also worth noting that anything that may or may not have been said in a press conference can often be taken with a huge pinch of salt, actions are louder and the fact he was quickly gone should be quite an indicator.
SB [Post edited 16 Feb 2023 20:31]
| | | |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 20:32 - Feb 16 with 1123 views | TalkingBlues |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 20:22 - Feb 16 by mrfixit426 |
You've had a nghtmare here, fella.
I can't believe you're doubling down. |
Where’s your evidence?
TB | |
| |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 20:35 - Feb 16 with 1105 views | mrfixit426 |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 20:32 - Feb 16 by TalkingBlues |
Where’s your evidence?
TB |
Generously provided by yourself, spread all over the previous four pages in black and white. | | | |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 20:35 - Feb 16 with 1111 views | Coastalblue |
I'm astounded this has gone on for 4 pages, delusional or trolling is the only answer, why feed it? |  |
| |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 20:49 - Feb 16 with 1095 views | TalkingBlues |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 20:31 - Feb 16 by StokieBlue |
Because as discussed previously, the burden of proof is on the person who made the claim/assertion (which was you), not the person questioning that assertion (which was me/other posters).
Once again, it's really not hard.
Also worth noting that anything that may or may not have been said in a press conference can often be taken with a huge pinch of salt, actions are louder and the fact he was quickly gone should be quite an indicator.
SB [Post edited 16 Feb 2023 20:31]
|
This is a football forum, not a Court of law, there is no burden of proof on anybody. However, were we in a Court of law and you disputed a claim, you would be required to evidence it, so there’s no difference between the two, you just want everything on your own terms and I’m not prepared to do that. I specifically stated where the information could be found, go see it for yourself.
I’m not going to bother replying to the self invented “universal get out” that is your second paragraph. | |
| |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 20:54 - Feb 16 with 1084 views | Coastalblue |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 20:49 - Feb 16 by TalkingBlues |
This is a football forum, not a Court of law, there is no burden of proof on anybody. However, were we in a Court of law and you disputed a claim, you would be required to evidence it, so there’s no difference between the two, you just want everything on your own terms and I’m not prepared to do that. I specifically stated where the information could be found, go see it for yourself.
I’m not going to bother replying to the self invented “universal get out” that is your second paragraph. |
I think perhaps the point is that nobody else on here can find these links or supposed quotes?
Damn you've sucked me in, I feel dirty now. | |
| |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 20:55 - Feb 16 with 1082 views | StokieBlue |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 20:49 - Feb 16 by TalkingBlues |
This is a football forum, not a Court of law, there is no burden of proof on anybody. However, were we in a Court of law and you disputed a claim, you would be required to evidence it, so there’s no difference between the two, you just want everything on your own terms and I’m not prepared to do that. I specifically stated where the information could be found, go see it for yourself.
I’m not going to bother replying to the self invented “universal get out” that is your second paragraph. |
That's all nonsense.
"The term "burden of proof" is a party's duty to prove a disputed assertion or charge"
or, the preferable scientific usage:
"If a scientist claims that their theory can explain a certain natural phenomenon, then the burden of proof means that they need to provide evidence that supports this claim."
All that has been asked is you prove the positions you are taking when forcefully countering other posters.
It's not a good look to continually refuse to do that.
SB [Post edited 16 Feb 2023 21:02]
| | | |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 21:01 - Feb 16 with 1064 views | TalkingBlues |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 20:54 - Feb 16 by Coastalblue |
I think perhaps the point is that nobody else on here can find these links or supposed quotes?
Damn you've sucked me in, I feel dirty now. |
Lol, go and have a shower. | |
| |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 21:05 - Feb 16 with 1060 views | TalkingBlues |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 20:55 - Feb 16 by StokieBlue |
That's all nonsense.
"The term "burden of proof" is a party's duty to prove a disputed assertion or charge"
or, the preferable scientific usage:
"If a scientist claims that their theory can explain a certain natural phenomenon, then the burden of proof means that they need to provide evidence that supports this claim."
All that has been asked is you prove the positions you are taking when forcefully countering other posters.
It's not a good look to continually refuse to do that.
SB [Post edited 16 Feb 2023 21:02]
|
The only “forceful” activity, is your constant badgering for “evidence”. I pointed you specifically to the content, but you’re too lazy to look, or can’t be bothered and that’s fine. | |
| |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 22:51 - Feb 16 with 964 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 20:13 - Feb 16 by StokieBlue |
"Paul Cook was their number 1 target, they were very happy with his appointment"
I am really not sure this is true, opinion at the time seemed to indicate he was ME's man rather than GC or MA's and thus we moved onto McKenna.
Can you please provide a source showing he was GC number one target.
SB |
Mike O'Leary did say this (although that doesn't make it necessarily true - why upset the incumbent if you intend to keep him in charge? It may well have been true, though. I have no reason to doubt O'Leary's integrity).
https://www.eadt.co.uk/news/21281534.paul-cooks-takeover-worry-cancelled-todays-
"I could see the look in his eye when I walked in the room," said O'Leary. "He was thinking ‘crikey, new owners, does that mean I need a new job?’
"But as soon as he discovered he was also number one on our list when we were thinking about finding a new manager when we did buy this club he relaxed and he was very positive."
What is not reported at all anywhere is "Brett Johnson stating in multiple interviews (when we changed ownership) that the immediate target for 2020/2021 was top 6 and promotion by the following season, promotion was 100% the target for this season, especially given the massive investment they've made and all the backing McK has received."
In fact, reading that quote back makes no sense anyway as "when we changed ownership", no investment had been made to back McK at all. If they were prepared to give Cook 2 seasons, won't they be prepared to give McK two, especially if in the first one he achieves the first objective (top 6)? So, this dubious quote actually argues against the point the OP thinks he is making anyway! |  |
| |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 23:02 - Feb 16 with 923 views | reusersfreekicks |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 16:10 - Feb 16 by TalkingBlues |
The OP simply inferred my belief that Ashton and Gamechanger would be put in a position, if we do not achieve 3 points on Saturday, whereby the diligent course of action would be to think about possible successors to McKenna, given our poor run of form and the potential of it continuing. Frankly, I’d be amazed if the group hadn’t already discussed what’s going on and mooted the possibility of change. They took decisive, early action with Cook, after fewer games than our current run, that had actually yielded more points than McKenna has in the period, so why would there would be a different approach with McKenna? It’s a results orientated business. |
Cos Mckenna is 10 x more professional than Cook and is a miles better coach |  | | |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 23:07 - Feb 16 with 905 views | TheMoralMajority |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 15:40 - Feb 16 by TalkingBlues |
Quite possibly, though a lot of people thought Cook might get longer, sacked after a draw and 11th in the table, but a few disappointing results and he was Gamechangers top target for manager. I'd imagine it depends on what managers are around and nearby transfer windows etc. |
So. No one decided to pick up on this gem?
The point is that Paul Cook wasn't Gamechanger's man. He was Evans'. He got the boot and they did bring in their man. You may have seen him about. He's called Keiran McKenna.
Anyway. I look forward to more of your insights from the boardroom. |  |
| ...but do signatures really work? |
| |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 23:42 - Feb 16 with 841 views | TalkingBlues |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 23:07 - Feb 16 by TheMoralMajority |
So. No one decided to pick up on this gem?
The point is that Paul Cook wasn't Gamechanger's man. He was Evans'. He got the boot and they did bring in their man. You may have seen him about. He's called Keiran McKenna.
Anyway. I look forward to more of your insights from the boardroom. |
O’Leary specifically said, in the first press conference after the change of ownership had occurred, that they had discussed Cook with ME prior to his appointment and confirmed that Cook was number 1 on both of their lists for manager. The negotiations for the sale of the club had been going on for months and ME wouldn’t have appointed Cook, had Gamechanger not wanted him to, a matter of a few weeks before the change of ownership became official.
Please don’t let these minor details interrupt your abusive rant though. | |
| |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 23:47 - Feb 16 with 836 views | TheMoralMajority |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 23:42 - Feb 16 by TalkingBlues |
O’Leary specifically said, in the first press conference after the change of ownership had occurred, that they had discussed Cook with ME prior to his appointment and confirmed that Cook was number 1 on both of their lists for manager. The negotiations for the sale of the club had been going on for months and ME wouldn’t have appointed Cook, had Gamechanger not wanted him to, a matter of a few weeks before the change of ownership became official.
Please don’t let these minor details interrupt your abusive rant though. |
Yeah. Pretty sure that wasn't the reality of the situation.
But I'll step away seeing as how easily offended by words you appear to be. | |
| ...but do signatures really work? |
| |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 23:50 - Feb 16 with 834 views | TalkingBlues |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 22:51 - Feb 16 by Nthsuffolkblue |
Mike O'Leary did say this (although that doesn't make it necessarily true - why upset the incumbent if you intend to keep him in charge? It may well have been true, though. I have no reason to doubt O'Leary's integrity).
https://www.eadt.co.uk/news/21281534.paul-cooks-takeover-worry-cancelled-todays-
"I could see the look in his eye when I walked in the room," said O'Leary. "He was thinking ‘crikey, new owners, does that mean I need a new job?’
"But as soon as he discovered he was also number one on our list when we were thinking about finding a new manager when we did buy this club he relaxed and he was very positive."
What is not reported at all anywhere is "Brett Johnson stating in multiple interviews (when we changed ownership) that the immediate target for 2020/2021 was top 6 and promotion by the following season, promotion was 100% the target for this season, especially given the massive investment they've made and all the backing McK has received."
In fact, reading that quote back makes no sense anyway as "when we changed ownership", no investment had been made to back McK at all. If they were prepared to give Cook 2 seasons, won't they be prepared to give McK two, especially if in the first one he achieves the first objective (top 6)? So, this dubious quote actually argues against the point the OP thinks he is making anyway! |
The bit about all the backing for McK relates to this season, the target for this season being promotion, same as last season and the season before that. | |
| |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 23:54 - Feb 16 with 832 views | homer_123 |
| Ashton and our owners have been very quiet on 19:07 - Feb 16 by TalkingBlues |
It's a mixture of a few articles, in his very first press conference he says he has a "healthy impatience" and wants promotion "immediately, this season" and they will provide plenty of funds to do so, in later articles that year, he admits that it seems unlikely (after a bad run) and says they want out of the league the following season (at the latest, says 3 seasons in this league is too long) but still holds out hope for the current season etc etc.
The whole gist of all the interviews he gives, is that Gamechanger want promotion yesterday and they are providing the infrastructure and the funds for players to do so "immediately" and they expect to see a return on that investment. We have seen first hand how they deal with a perceived failure to meet expectations (Paul Cook) after only 20 games and I don't see McKenna being treated any differently, this is a terrible run, having received another massive financial handout in January, the return has been a big drop in form and a move down the table, same as Cook. |
Can you ping me those articles.
Nothing I can find is contrary to the link and interview I've provided.
Cheers. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
