| Gill instead of Cook? 21:25 - Nov 29 with 1021 views | Keaneish |
I see folk are now citing Lambert would do better than Cook is at the moment or that Gill would be better. Let’s not go into Lambert as it’s a ridiculous conversation. Regarding Gill, his only foray into managing has been as Assistant Manager at Tranmere where he held the post for 3-months departing with a record of W0 D5 L5. After that he managed an 8th place finish from 12 in the under-23s development league so why would Gill be better than Cook? Cook has won 3 League titles, 3 cups and qualified for Europe on several occasions as well as reaching the FA Cup quarter final?
Gill on Lambert when he signed for us:
“He's brilliant with people and a vastly experienced manager who has worked at some big clubs and has travelled around to see how other people work. I'm sure he's a better manager now than he was at Norwich because he can't not be, given the experiences he's had.” - that aged well!
Gill had a reputation for bringing players through from the Scummers under-23s but who flourished under him in the 2-years he was here? I can’t think of any one. He has a good reputation but did we see him or Walker improve anyone? Our squad went backwards, not forwards. Look at Donacien’s improvement under Cook already as testament to player development.
Everyone cites Gill for the upturn in form toward the end of Lambert’s reign although Lambert is still officially credited with the wins against Hull and Doncaster. The fact that Gill was becoming ‘more influential’ was only because Taylor wasn’t involved for weeks due to his father’s death from dementia. Was Gill the orchestrator? We’ll never really know but to say Gill would be a better choice than Cook is a paper thin shout isn’t it?
TWTD, some perspective please while we wait for our wins - the shouts this week have been pretty baseless. [Post edited 30 Nov 2021 6:55]
|  |
| |  |
| Gill instead of Cook? on 22:01 - Nov 29 with 953 views | Chrisd |
Yeah, but because he won 3 games here, he’s the messiah apparently. Some of the logic on here at times I find utterly baffling. |  |
| |
| Gill instead of Cook? on 22:35 - Nov 29 with 891 views | jayessess |
Is this a ref to the entirely speculative post I made on the other thread? Bit OTT if so. |  |
| |
| Gill instead of Cook? on 06:41 - Nov 30 with 757 views | Keaneish |
| Gill instead of Cook? on 22:35 - Nov 29 by jayessess |
Is this a ref to the entirely speculative post I made on the other thread? Bit OTT if so. |
No I never read that. A few people have been drawing parallels for a while and I think this post gives it some better shape and perspective. | |
| |
| Gill instead of Cook? on 06:57 - Nov 30 with 729 views | wkj |
| Gill instead of Cook? on 22:01 - Nov 29 by Chrisd |
Yeah, but because he won 3 games here, he’s the messiah apparently. Some of the logic on here at times I find utterly baffling. |
Not a messiah, but there is no more proof that he wouldn't be a good manager than there is that he would be.
Matt Gill will be a football manager one day, and for my money based on how he conducts himself in interviews and how he performs as the caretaker here - I'm sure he'll do pretty well. |  |
| |
| Gill instead of Cook? on 07:36 - Nov 30 with 685 views | Keaneish |
| Gill instead of Cook? on 06:57 - Nov 30 by wkj |
Not a messiah, but there is no more proof that he wouldn't be a good manager than there is that he would be.
Matt Gill will be a football manager one day, and for my money based on how he conducts himself in interviews and how he performs as the caretaker here - I'm sure he'll do pretty well. |
In spite of what he’s achieved so far (as per my post) you’d have given him a shot over Cook back in March? I’m in agreement he’s well regarded and might well become a number one but to have given him the role over Cook back in March or even now for that matter…? | |
| |
| Gill instead of Cook? on 08:42 - Nov 30 with 619 views | jayessess |
| Gill instead of Cook? on 06:41 - Nov 30 by Keaneish |
No I never read that. A few people have been drawing parallels for a while and I think this post gives it some better shape and perspective. |
It's a bit of straw man, isn't it?
I don't think anyone's been arguing that Gill has a better record than Cook and certainly not that he's a better manager. The only suggestion I've seen is that we might have finished 2020-21 better with Gill (or any caretaker) because of the particular context. Hardly an out there suggestion, given just how badly we did do. [Post edited 30 Nov 2021 20:39]
| |
| |
| Gill instead of Cook? on 08:53 - Nov 30 with 597 views | thebooks |
I don’t think abyone’s arguing Gill should have been made manager.
It’s just the fact that he was able to get us playing well and around the play-offs by adopting a fairly simple 4-4-2.
The poinst (I think) are i) this league isn’t that challenging ii) one of our coaches was able to get a tune out of the previous set of players iii) Cook’s underperforming. Hardly controversial.
For me it also undermines the argument that we need to go through a seasons-long process in order to instill some form of “culture” or “identity” in order to beat teams like Accrington Stanley and Cambridge United. |  | | |
| Gill instead of Cook? on 09:06 - Nov 30 with 571 views | wkj |
| Gill instead of Cook? on 07:36 - Nov 30 by Keaneish |
In spite of what he’s achieved so far (as per my post) you’d have given him a shot over Cook back in March? I’m in agreement he’s well regarded and might well become a number one but to have given him the role over Cook back in March or even now for that matter…? |
Last season? I think having an interim manager on a season in the balance would have been interesting. It is easy to say all of this in hindsight of course.
The appointment of Cook was strange in a lot of ways - GC20 claiming they would have chosen him, but the narrative is that he was Evans' appointment.
I don't like switching managers during a season, not long-term appointments - so, I think it would have been interesting and far from obscene if we did give him an interim job last season. Would it have been better than Cook? That is a question that can't be answered; so I can't really say it would or would not have been my preference. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Gill instead of Cook? on 10:06 - Nov 30 with 465 views | Wickets |
Would Gill have made a good Assistant once PC new he could not get Richardson ? |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
