Keith's Record

36 defeats in 68 games. Nothing more needs to be said.

 

I hope that this is the last thing you will say on the matter then.

 

Ill add a question;

How does that appalling record give you faith he is actually building anything.

 

I could start with some fatuous reply that in order to build something you must first dig yourself a hole. Or I could simply extol the virtues of patience, but I will not do that either. I suspect that there is nothing that I could say to you at this point that would have any effect at all on your opinion, so I will not do even that. I will simply say that I have no evidence that Keith is building anything at this point. What I do have is a conviction that the club has had too many managers, and the last 10 changes have made no difference. So what evidence do you have, that having spent £250k on dismissing Keith Hill, this time will be significantly different to the previous ten.

 

So getting rid of Hart and getting Ritchie as manager did nothing for the club? REALLY? That is what you REALLY THINK?

I am sure we got promoted!!! I must be imagining things.

 

The most recent change has made a big difference in my opinion. I do agree that there is no evidence that Keith is building anything but there is a wealth evidence which suggests otherwise.

 

If Ritchie was the success that you believe, why was he sacked. Look, you may be able to argue that the odd manager here or there was better than the previous one, but in the end, they were all sacked bar Robins who walked and was out of work for 15 months. Why were they sacked? Because the fans wanted it, that's why.

 

Who wanted Ritchie to go, besides Simon Davey and Patrick Cryne ?
If promotion is not a success in your eyes, what is?

 

I am not aware of any evidence suggesting otherwise. I am aware of a string of poor results and a very poor league position, but to suggest this means he is not building anything is purely circumstantial. It is like saying that because there is a wooden fence around a building site, there is no building going on. You are just not aware whether there is or not.

 

There would be a chance that a new manager would make us harder to beat.

But I'm with you in a broad sense that chopping the manager would be pointless without change at the top too.

I also though continue to believe that Keef is a legend in his own mind and nowhere else.

 

I did not want Ritchie to go. I enjoyed the football played by Ritchie's team and thought he did well to get us promoted with a team that was not exceptional. I do not call for managers to go. The only exceptions were Spackman and McSeveney. I am simply pointing out the facts, and the fact in this case is that Ritchie was sacked. I can also remember a lot of dissatisfaction on here, and accusations that he had the money to spend but would not spend it. It would not surprise me if Cryne and co left Ritchie to take the blame to distract supporters from the real reason (lack of finance). Just as I would not be surprised if Hill is the patsy in this case. After all, with a lynch mob about, it is best to keep your head down.

 

He was sacked because he wasn't the owners man. End of.

 

Virtually no fans wanted either Robins or Ritchie sacking.

 

Ah, so you are more aware than the rest of us?

Enlighten us then please?

 

Lets face it, you're sucking Keef off

 

My opinion on Keith statements to the press is this.

Sometimes he says things to distract attention from the players.
Sometimes he says things to prevent the opposition from knowing his tactics, team shape or injury situation.
After the games he is emotionally involved in what has happened and is struggling to control his emotions.
Sometimes he says things from the heart, and in spite of supporters saying they respect someone who speaks from the heart, in the end, it depends on whether we have won or lost as to how these things are received.

90% of what Keith says is waffle, just as 90% of what every manager says is waffle. Some practice hard at giving an interview and saying absolutely nothing to offend anyone. Keith is not one of these, and to me, that earns him some credit.

 

No, I am not aware of any evidence one way or another, and that is my point.

 

then why say it ? change the record ffs

 

Well I beg to differ as we showed a little progress under robins but our small thinking, small time board made his position untenable at the time

 

So there we have it, I disagree with your opinion, so I have to be insulted.

Unlike the lynch mob that you go around with, I have my own opinions, and the courage of my convictions to stand by them, even in the face of opposition.