You all know I like Keith Hill.

Maybe a bit too much.

But this 'he nearly killed our club' is b.llocks.

Without the groundwork that Keith put in with the players (Wiseman, Dawson, Golbourne, Dagnall) then they wouldn't have had the opportunity to prosper under Flitcroft. He got tactics wrong. He got PR wrong. He got a load of stuff wrong. But by giving these players an opportunity and persevering when many wanted shut - Wiseman & Dagnall especially - he made them better players.

He's gone, he did a lot of work along with Flitcroft that his mate will hopefully be able to take advantage of. Move on.

 

There has been good and bad from all our recent managers, Flicker aint had his bad yet, hope its a long time coming.

 

You've got to say, in terms of recruitment, he's probably the best manager we've had for a long time.

 

how do you know it was Keith and not Flicker that said to sign those players? Do you know this?

 

I thought the manager took responsibility for everything?

Because if it's the assistant our performance and signings since January is all down to Micky Mellon.

 

Disagree.

Flicker has got the best out of Wiseman (when Hill should have rested the lad instead of keeping him in firing line ie. versus Blackburn, which ultimately got Hill the sack).....and also out of Dagnall, who started scoring in Leeds game and has been excellent under Flicker.

Maybe we can allocate some credit to Hill for buying the players, but he certainly didn't get the best out of them.

 

keith hill hasnt been our manager for nearly 5 months now, who gives a flying fvck, move on chaps

 

There's no doubt for me that Keith Hill is a great coach. He has a fantastic eye for a player too. It was his ability to 'manage' which let him down, like you say his tactics were wrong and once he found himself in a hole it was too late to dig himself out. Rochdale are in good hands though and I think Keith will be a better manager after his experience with us.

 

Other than signing the players and getting nothing out of them, what groundwork did he do?

 

You've misunderstood my post.

It's not about getting the best out of them - it was about giving them experience, persevering and allowing mistakes which has made them better players than when they first joined. Flitcroft has tweaked the tactics and now coupled in to their development these past 12 months they've done better.

 

I'll never stop praising him (and Flicker, who was the major recruiter I'm led to believe) for recruitment. It was brave, bold and we're now reaping the rewards. But I won't suggest he made them better players.

I will also though, credit him for the work ethic he installed. And for getting the best out of O'Brien, Gray, Steele and Butterfield. Who had all suffered under the previous manager.

But I think Flitcroft has learned from Keith's mistakes, gathered new ideas from Mickey and Martin etc, as well as retaining (possibly improving) that ethos of hard graft and endeavour.

Keith brought Flicker with him - massive credit there.

Well done, Keith. I still love you. You gret Boltonian barmpot.

 

You're deliberately missing the point.

 

Who, me?

It's more than likely.

 

So by making them into worse players he was ultimately making them into better players? That sounds like summat he would say actually.

 

No mate, Conan.

My point is when he signed them they weren't Championship players but by continuing to play them and showing patience they now are. That's what developing people in general is about - you allow them to make mistakes and then they tend not to make them in future. That's what we're seeing with the likes of Wiseman - his experience (which Keith gave him) has helped him under Flitcroft.

 

I'm tired of hearing it too. Keith had a paranoid dislike of Bobby Hassell, that's well known - but Bobby himself repeatedly says there was a contradiction between performances and results and the margins of defeat were very fine under Keith.

People have a primitive need for a hate figure in their lives. They don't realise it, but they do. Which is why some are now turning on the Directorate, in the absence of unfavourable manager. This is before anything has been discussed or made public.

 

I see your point, and it's an agreeable one.

But had we stuck with Keith we'd have probably been relegated by Easter. Would that have helped their progression? Wiseman et al.

It's a bit like saying Davey losing all those games before Robins took over, helped those players and thus helped Robins.

 

Wiseman is a better player under Flitcroft

Etuhu is a better player under Flitcroft

Dagnall is a better player under Flitcroft

Flitcroft also gave us O'Grady.


Flitcroft is our manager (hopefully) move on Dyson.

 

You're very right in a lot of what you say there, Paul.

But I'll be going to a handful of Rochdale games next season where possible. Can't get enough of Keith. He intrigues and infuriates me in equal measures.

The Hassell thing is what killed my love for him. Not many believed it, or chose to ignore it. But I reckon I'd have kept defending Keith right up until his sacking if that episode had never occurred.

It's like someone moving into your house, a lodger or summat, and kicking your 10 year old dog because you love it so much..

 

Just leave it dys, as you say move on. Tis fair getting tedious.