We have been waiting a long time but I really think the GLF is just around the corner. MJ needs a longer contract though he is the catalyst which is driving our thrust upwards. I would like to see a three year deal.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHbfZiE1D50

(icon_biggrin)

Quoted from fivestarfish

We have been waiting a long time but I really think the GLF is just around the corner. MJ needs a longer contract though he is the catalyst which is driving our thrust upwards. I would like to see a three year deal.

You would give him a 3 year contract,

I will raise that to a 4 year contract,

Any other bids ?   ;)

He has a perpetual contract in effect.

Maybe it's just me but I get the impression Limbrick more than plays his part in the management team so let's not forget him.

Jolley and Limbrick! What a team! May they be in Grimsby as long as Ferguson was at Man U. Or even longer...

I'd also add a minimum fee release to give the club compensation

Whilst I understand the merits of rolling contracts they do nothing to a) show potential staff and players proper backing of the man in charge or b) put off would be suitors.

I’d give him a 3 year deal everyday if the week. If it goes wrong that’s the risk you take, well worth it though.

Quoted from Mikey_345

I’d give him a 3 year deal everyday of the week.

so in one week he'd have a 21 year contract!

Quoted from Southwark Mariner

so in one week he'd have a 21 year contract!

Problem with that? 😂😂

Quoted from Southwark Mariner

so in one week he'd have a 21 year contract!

And towards the end of the contract Mr Fenty still keeps banging on about relocating to Peaks Parkway   8)

[img]https://chineseposters.net/images/e13-701.jpg[/img]

More red cards than little red books

Quoted from Mikey_345

Whilst I understand the merits of rolling contracts they do nothing to a) show potential staff and players proper backing of the man in charge or b) put off would be suitors.

I’d give him a 3 year deal everyday if the week. If it goes wrong that’s the risk you take, well worth it though.

Totally agree with this - MJ has transformed the most important part of the club and we are playing Grimsby Town football again. People talk about 'risk & reward' - everyone saw MJ as a risk and he's now proving to have been a risk worth taking. Time the board rewarded him with a longer deal, not only for his benefit but to protect themselves from other clubs who will soon begin to notice the effect he's having.

Quoted from MuddyWaters

Totally agree with this - MJ has transformed the most important part of the club and we are playing Grimsby Town football again. People talk about 'risk & reward' - everyone saw MJ as a risk and he's now proving to have been a risk worth taking. Time the board rewarded him with a longer deal, not only for his benefit but to protect themselves from other clubs who will soon begin to notice the effect he's having.

But maybe MJ likes the flexibility he has with his present rolling contract? We don't know what kind of conversations MJ has with JF and for all we know the subject might have already been raised.

Quoted from rancido

But maybe MJ likes the flexibility he has with his present rolling contract? We don't know what kind of conversations MJ has with JF and for all we know the subject might have already been raised.

Technically you're right, but some how you're missing something. Unless you know something we don't?

Quoted from rancido

But maybe MJ likes the flexibility he has with his present rolling contract? We don't know what kind of conversations MJ has with JF and for all we know the subject might have already been raised.

Well, personally I wouldn't be too impressed if another club came & poached him, Anthony or both on the cheap.

Quoted from MuddyWaters

Well, personally I wouldn't be too impressed if another club came & poached him, Anthony or both on the cheap.

Couldn't agree more. Those horrible pair down the A46 are reputed to have £300,000 bounty!

Quoted from norfuk mariner

Couldn't agree more. Those horrible pair down the A46 are reputed to have £300,000 bounty!

Gimps fans always quote £1million buy out clause for the golden pair.

Quoted from GrimRob

[img]https://chineseposters.net/images/e13-701.jpg[/img]

More red cards than little red books

Good vibe going here Rob don’t lower the tone with an ideology of death 🤨

Edit- Ha leap of faith! Joust woke up ☺️

Quoted from norfuk mariner

Couldn't agree more. Those horrible pair down the A46 are reputed to have a £300,000 bounty!

Fck me how much ??  ..is it made from an ultra rare species of coconut and equally rare cocoa beans ?

Re the thread title - at Northampton in late Nov we went bottom during that game.

2 months later we have improved by exactly half a division.  This has been achieved with numerous injuries and red cards.

Next season we could become the Div2 Leicester City by building on our impressive results at the end of the previous season and taking the division by storm.

We’re currently mid table and just beat a team who were trying not to get injured / tired ahead of their big cup game.

I would leave all talk of the new deal till we see where we finish this season. The management team are doing a good job but let’s not go over board.

Quoted from KingstonMariner

Technically you're right, but some how you're missing something. Unless you know something we don't?

Sorry but I can't see what I'm missing. We fans don't know what's going on in the background and it takes two to strike a deal. I know no more than anybody else but just taking a different view on the subject. I'm not saying this is a reason but JF and the club have had their fingers burned in the past by offering long contracts and then having to cough up big money when form dips. We also had the fiasco when the club announced a new contract to Slade when he was here the first time. Whoever was at fault it never happened and the club was left with " egg on its face " when Slade left to another club . I obviously support " The Black And White " but not everything in life is like that and that's how I see things. I maybe a cynic but at least it helps having to avoid the pain when things go " t*ts up "!

Quoted from TownSNAFU5

Re the thread title - at Northampton in late Nov we went bottom during that game.

2 months later we have improved by exactly half a division.  This has been achieved with numerous injuries and red cards.

Next season we could become the Div2 Leicester City by building on our impressive results at the end of the previous season and taking the division by storm.

Don’t think we did go bottom? There were 4 teams below us for the whole game.

Quoted from Grantley

Don’t think we did go bottom? There were 4 teams below us for the whole game.

Yeah, we definitely didn't go bottom. Macc would have been about 10 points behind us after that match.

Quoted from Son of Cod

Yeah, we definitely didn't go bottom. Macc would have been about 10 points behind us after that match.

'One point above 2nd from bottom' according to the match thread.

Quoted from Abdul19

'One point above 2nd from bottom' according to the match thread.

Just checked and we finished that match 4 points ahead of Notts County in 23rd, but they were beating Morecambe at a point when Northampton were beating us so that would have been correct yeah. Finished the match 9 points ahead of Macc though, so we never went bottom.

Quoted from rancido

Sorry but I can't see what I'm missing. We fans don't know what's going on in the background and it takes two to strike a deal. I know no more than anybody else but just taking a different view on the subject. I'm not saying this is a reason but JF and the club have had their fingers burned in the past by offering long contracts and then having to cough up big money when form dips. We also had the fiasco when the club announced a new contract to Slade when he was here the first time. Whoever was at fault it never happened and the club was left with " egg on its face " when Slade left to another club . I obviously support " The Black And White " but not everything in life is like that and that's how I see things. I maybe a cynic but at least it helps having to avoid the pain when things go " t*ts up "!

The point I'm making is, yeah, theoretically for all we know Fenty could have offered Jolley a longer fixed-term contract and Jolley might have turned it down because he wanted the flexibility to leave if a better offer came up. But being realistic, in his position when the contract was negotiated, not knowing if this thing will work out, could he take that risk? Unlikely.

It seems that you're suggesting this possibility because you're really supporting Fenty's position. As you've just done with the comment about the risk to the club of a longer commitment. True, it's all about balancing risks, and it seems the risk is swinging more in favour of Jolley so it's time to commit.

The other comment about the announcement of a new contract for Slade in 2006. Well, that's just digging up another (double) member-up on Fenty's watch isn't it. 1 - announcing a deal before it was done; 2 - not completing the deal with Slade, leading to the Cardiff fiasco. And maybe it'd been better not to leave that til the last minute. But it would have been best if you hadn't brought this subject up at all.

Quoted from KingstonMariner

The point I'm making is, yeah, theoretically for all we know Fenty could have offered Jolley a longer fixed-term contract and Jolley might have turned it down because he wanted the flexibility to leave if a better offer came up. But being realistic, in his position when the contract was negotiated, not knowing if this thing will work out, could he take that risk? Unlikely.

It seems that you're suggesting this possibility because you're really supporting Fenty's position. As you've just done with the comment about the risk to the club of a longer commitment. True, it's all about balancing risks, and it seems the risk is swinging more in favour of Jolley so it's time to commit.

The other comment about the announcement of a new contract for Slade in 2006. Well, that's just digging up another (double) member-up on Fenty's watch isn't it. 1 - announcing a deal before it was done; 2 - not completing the deal with Slade, leading to the Cardiff fiasco. And maybe it'd been better not to leave that til the last minute. But it would have been best if you hadn't brought this subject up at all.

I'm not supporting any position , certainly not JF's. Just pointing out some scenarios in the situation. Once again a poster thinks because I don't condemn JF then I must support him. Can't somebody just be neutral and point out both sides of the argument? But then again this is The Fishy and opinions must be polarised - no middle ground allowed here. As far as the Slade fiasco is concerned , it seems that you would rather blame JF than consider there was another side to the situation.

Quoted from Son of Cod

Just checked and we finished that match 4 points ahead of Notts County in 23rd, but they were beating Morecambe at a point when Northampton were beating us so that would have been correct yeah. Finished the match 9 points ahead of Macc though, so we never went bottom.

It'll end up being one of those great myths: like how we were on fire just before Laws smacked Ivano, how failing with a red card appeal automatically adds another game and how Podge always scores against us ;)

Quoted from rancido

I'm not supporting any position , certainly not JF's. Just pointing out some scenarios in the situation. Once again a poster thinks because I don't condemn JF then I must support him. Can't somebody just be neutral and point out both sides of the argument? But then again this is The Fishy and opinions must be polarised - no middle ground allowed here. As far as the Slade fiasco is concerned , it seems that you would rather blame JF than consider there was another side to the situation.

Remind me, what was the other side to the Slade fiasco?

PS and don't tar the whole Fishy with my views. Some of the others are quite reasonable by comparison to me.

Quoted from rancido

I'm not supporting any position , certainly not JF's. Just pointing out some scenarios in the situation. Once again a poster thinks because I don't condemn JF then I must support him. Can't somebody just be neutral and point out both sides of the argument? But then again this is The Fishy and opinions must be polarised - no middle ground allowed here. As far as the Slade fiasco is concerned , it seems that you would rather blame JF than consider there was another side to the situation.

The thing that remains glaringly obvious is that Slade in 2006 and Hurst in 2016 both left as soon as another club came calling. They are the only two managers that have been remotely successful since 2004 and I'm sure that Michael Jolley will also, in the future, have aspirations of working at a higher level.

Why, therefore, would you let the club's most important asset leave under his terms and not the club's? Isn't it just solid business practice to tie him in for as long as possible (if you believe in him, that is)?

Quoted from MuddyWaters

The thing that remains glaringly obvious is that Slade in 2006 and Hurst in 2016 both left as soon as another club came calling. They are the only two managers that have been remotely successful since 2004 and I'm sure that Michael Jolley will also, in the future, have aspirations of working at a higher level.

Why, therefore, would you let the club's most important asset leave under his terms and not the club's? Isn't it just solid business practice to tie him in for as long as possible (if you believe in him, that is)?

That's assuming he wants to be tied in to a longer contract. It may seem obvious to us that he would want that security but he might have a different vision for his future and anything other than a rolling contract doesn't fit in with that. Let's face it , you can't make him sign a different contract.
As far as Slade and Hurst were concerned I seem to recall they both went to higher division clubs.

Quoted from rancido

That's assuming he wants to be tied in to a longer contract. It may seem obvious to us that he would want that security but he might have a different vision for his future and anything other than a rolling contract doesn't fit in with that. Let's face it , you can't make him sign a different contract.
As far as Slade and Hurst were concerned I seem to recall they both went to higher division clubs.

Gawd we are never going to get anywhere with an attitude like that.

If the Board think he is the right man to bring their much vaunted "footballing fortune" then back him to the hilt. Offer him better a better deal, ask him, plead with him to be the man that takes us up the leagues and get us respected in the game again.

Get him tied up and make it difficult for other clubs for the next few years to undo any good work by snapping him up. Lincoln has done that with a management team who they believed would be good for the club, why cannot we do the same if indeed the club thinks he is the right man?

I think Bigdog continually makes the point that without a vision and blueprint any improvements will be short-lived if the club doesn't know what it wants and has a plan to deliver it. If the Board think Jolley is the first brick in a long term plan then let them show some intent.

The board have to ignore people like me who wanted him gone after the Morecambe home game and that series of defeats, but they have the advantage of seeing him every day and by now will have formed their impressions of whether he is the right man or not.

Quoted from Son of Cod

Just checked and we finished that match 4 points ahead of Notts County in 23rd, but they were beating Morecambe at a point when Northampton were beating us so that would have been correct yeah. Finished the match 9 points ahead of Macc though, so we never went bottom.

I've actually pulled something in my brain trying to work out the permutations of this.

Quoted from Meza

I'd also add a minimum fee release to give the club compensation

£2m should cover it nicely.....

The problem we have had in the past is that we have mostly got managerial appointments wrong, and subsequently the players they brought into the club were also wrong, meaning lots of pay offs over the years. Rolling contracts for managers, and short term contracts for players has come about because we have got our fingers burned too often paying for recruitment mistakes. This also leads to short term thinking and waiting for something to click, or "football fortune" as it's known.

We need to get away from this and build something long term. We have started giving players longer contracts, so maybe it's about time we started to do the same with managers, as we used to. If you believe you have the right man for the job, back your judgement and give a 2 year deal. JF says that rolling contracts protect both parties, and he's right, until some massive club like Shrewsbury come along and take your manager from you.

Given that J.F has made so many poor decisions by the laws of probability sooner of later he was going to make a good one.You know he has got your backside out of the fire ,so now reward him with contract he deserves.

Quoted from lew chaterleys lover

Gawd we are never going to get anywhere with an attitude like that.

If the Board think he is the right man to bring their much vaunted "footballing fortune" then back him to the hilt. Offer him better a better deal, ask him, plead with him to be the man that takes us up the leagues and get us respected in the game again.

Get him tied up and make it difficult for other clubs for the next few years to undo any good work by snapping him up. Lincoln has done that with a management team who they believed would be good for the club, why cannot we do the same if indeed the club thinks he is the right man?

I think Bigdog continually makes the point that without a vision and blueprint any improvements will be short-lived if the club doesn't know what it wants and has a plan to deliver it. If the Board think Jolley is the first brick in a long term plan then let them show some intent.

The board have to ignore people like me who wanted him gone after the Morecambe home game and that series of defeats, but they have the advantage of seeing him every day and by now will have formed their impressions of whether he is the right man or not.

It's nothing to do with " an attitude like that ". Ok , so maybe I'm playing " Devil's Advocate " here and I would love to get MJ on a contract of at least 2 years , preferably 3. All I pointed out was  maybe MJ doesn't want a change of arrangement. Once again a poster has not read properly what was posted or chose to interpret it in a different way.

Quoted from rancido

It's nothing to do with " an attitude like that ". Ok , so maybe I'm playing " Devil's Advocate " here and I would love to get MJ on a contract of at least 2 years , preferably 3. All I pointed out was  maybe MJ doesn't want a change of arrangement. Once again a poster has not read properly what was posted or chose to interpret it in a different way.

What difference does it make to MJ? Surely the certainty of a 3 year contract is better than only 6 months in terms of a pay-off if things go wrong? It cuts both ways. But then foresight has never been a priority for the GTFC board, has it?

If we new he was on a say 2 year contract, it might help with season ticket sales come July/August.........

Quoted from rancido

It's nothing to do with " an attitude like that ". Ok , so maybe I'm playing " Devil's Advocate " here and I would love to get MJ on a contract of at least 2 years , preferably 3. All I pointed out was  maybe MJ doesn't want a change of arrangement. Once again a poster has not read properly what was posted or chose to interpret it in a different way.

Probably because invariably in your case being Devil's Advocate involves agreeing with Fenty's take.

Quoted from KingstonMariner

Probably because invariably in your case being Devil's Advocate involves agreeing with Fenty's take.

FFS you still  don't get it do you! If you took the time to actually read my posts then you would know that I want JF to go as much as a lot of other posters on here. I have repeatedly stated on this site that I am no fan, supporter or any thing else that aligns with the man. BUT I am at least prepared to look at both sides of the situation unlike a lot of the posters on here. Like I said in another post it is impossible to be neutral on the subject of JF in the eyes of some posters on here.

Calm down dear

Quoted from rancido

FFS you still  don't get it do you! If you took the time to actually read my posts then you would know that I want JF to go as much as a lot of other posters on here. I have repeatedly stated on this site that I am no fan, supporter or any thing else that aligns with the man. BUT I am at least prepared to look at both sides of the situation unlike a lot of the posters on here. Like I said in another post it is impossible to be neutral on the subject of JF in the eyes of some posters on here.

Question is 'Do you think Michael Jolley's future at GTFC needs to be protected by tying him to a longer term contract?'

What the intercourse that has to do with being pro or anti John Fenty is beyond me.

Quoted from MuddyWaters

What difference does it make to MJ? Surely the certainty of a 3 year contract is better than only 6 months in terms of a pay-off if things go wrong? It cuts both ways. But then foresight has never been a priority for the GTFC board, has it?

He may want to keep his options open and be more free to move if and when the right suitor comes along.
I’m not saying he’s looking to move any time soon but if he’s confident and ambitious a less binding contract might suit him better.
Also if he’s tied down for 3 years maybe he would have less leverage when arguing/negotiating with the board for more budget for a particular target.

Quoted from AussieMariner

He may want to keep his options open and be more free to move if and when the right suitor comes along.
I’m not saying he’s looking to move any time soon but if he’s confident and ambitious a less binding contract might suit him better.
Also if he’s tied down for 3 years maybe he would have less leverage when arguing/negotiating with the board for more budget for a particular target.

He might. He might but I don't see Jolley as a gambler. He was pretty much unproven as a club manager when he joined so it could have easily gone mammaries up with no financial security. So odds are he would prefer a longer contract. As time goes on and he gets more established and builds his reputation, then his interests would be served by a shorter term contract. Which is precisely what people are concerned about. That's the point of maximum risk for the club.

Quoted from rancido

FFS you still  don't get it do you! If you took the time to actually read my posts then you would know that I want JF to go as much as a lot of other posters on here. I have repeatedly stated on this site that I am no fan, supporter or any thing else that aligns with the man. BUT I am at least prepared to look at both sides of the situation unlike a lot of the posters on here. Like I said in another post it is impossible to be neutral on the subject of JF in the eyes of some posters on here.

Nobody's questioning your right to be for, against or neutral. Just disagreeing with your point about the rolling contract. But if you what to play Devil's Advocate, and if you're perceived as always playing that role one way, you run the risk of being perceived as supporting a certain position.

Surely the point is that for all anyone on here knows he may already have been offered a longer term contract and turned it down to retain the flexibility of the rolling contract. At the end of the day it will be his decision to reject or accept such a deal and to be accusing the club of a failure to tie him down without knowing the facts is a bit short sighted.

Quoted from PrestwichMariner

Surely the point is that for all anyone on here knows he may already have been offered a longer term contract and turned it down to retain the flexibility of the rolling contract. At the end of the day it will be his decision to reject or accept such a deal and to be accusing the club of a failure to tie him down without knowing the facts is a bit short sighted.

Surely this is one of the key questions to be asked of Mr Fenty at the forthcoming Trust evening. Some of the issues previously mooted on the thread about the evening are now redundant. The recent euphoria has not diminished the need for the long term future of the club to be clarified and JF to be pressed to deal with the fans concerns including ownership

Quoted from MuddyWaters

Question is 'Do you think Michael Jolley's future at GTFC needs to be protected by tying him to a longer term contract?'

What the intercourse that has to do with being pro or anti John Fenty is beyond me.

Answer to question 1 - yes I do and have stated in a previous post.

Reply to question 2 - it was the person who replied to my post who mentioned JF, not me. Maybe accurately reading posts and replies is the reality that is beyond you?

Quoted from KingstonMariner

He might. He might but I don't see Jolley as a gambler. He was pretty much unproven as a club manager when he joined so it could have easily gone mammaries up with no financial security. So odds are he would prefer a longer contract. As time goes on and he gets more established and builds his reputation, then his interests would be served by a shorter term contract. Which is precisely what people are concerned about. That's the point of maximum risk for the club.

I would imagine his earlier career in the world of banking/finance especially as a fixed income trader would indicate he has a grounding in taking " calculated risks". Who knows , except MJ himself, how he sees his future progress. He is obviously ambitious and sees football management as his career ( he would hardly turn his back on what was obviously a highly lucrative career in banking if he didn't ). The point though is  does he see GTFC as stepping stone  so he can manage at a higher level with another club or does he want to achieve that same level with us ?

Quoted from KingstonMariner

He might. He might but I don't see Jolley as a gambler. He was pretty much unproven as a club manager when he joined so it could have easily gone mammaries up with no financial security. So odds are he would prefer a longer contract. As time goes on and he gets more established and builds his reputation, then his interests would be served by a shorter term contract. Which is precisely what people are concerned about. That's the point of maximum risk for the club.

Interesting how we draw different conclusions from the same information. I see the fact that he gave up a secure(ish) job in banking for the lottery of football management as a sign that he is a gambler.
He made it pretty clear in the Q&A session last week that he doesnt want to be in League 2 for too much longer so I think the only chance we have of keeping him is to give him the resources to take us up the leagues with him.
I guess the real question is whether JF and the board are gamblers......

I really like the way the team is shaping up.

Keepers:

Mckeown having a fantastic season, he went on a good 12 streak of games each one making two to three outstanding saves.
Russell is a nice backup, very professional.

Defense:

Hendrie on a long contract who has come in and done a swell job. The fact he signed a two-year contract shows he wants to be here which is great.
Recce-Hall Johnson who is a totally different player. Who knew he could play centre-back? Gives us good flexibility for positions.
Collins the prem vet, good leader perhaps his time is nearly up but still great at this level.
Harry Davies is another solid player, was the reason we went on that wining streak and is back from injury.
Matt Pollock shinned against Exeter away and can learn a lot from these players. One for the future.
Alex Whitmore the good counter to the standard League Two strike forces, still only 23!
Ludvig Ohman is quality at this level having come from the Swedish prem.
Seb Ring looks to be a skillful wing-back. This is the way the game is going and Jolley knows it.
Grayson, son of Simon Grayson, adds competition for places and is young, doesn't want to sit on the bench for Blackburn.

Midfield: We have not had a midfield this good in a while

Woolford, intelligent with the ball like Pringle to feed crosses and still gets stuck in.
Welsh, amazing how this guy hasn't had many games.
Harry Clifton has done excellently, hardworker and skillful with his passing. One most definitely for the future.
Hessenthaler seems a quality league one midfielder with the ball and without it, Mr Consistent.
Embleton is a gem at this level. Really like the assists this guy produces and the passing.
Akhem Rose has already got his first league goal, but is one for the future. Perhaps a loan is due for him.
Whitehouse, will be like a new signing when he returns. Solid league two midfilder too played many games for Lincoln since 2016.

Strikers:

Wes Thomas is simply a goalscorer. 9 this season and counting.
Harry Cardwell got his first league goal. Perhaps one to go out on loan, do like his work rate.
Kristian Dennis is a one to watch. If he can find his goal scoring form as he did at Chesterfield we'll be rocking.
Jordan Cook former Luton striker is a decent player. Good to have him back from injury.
Charles Vernham, considering his our assist machine says a lot that he didn't even get to play against Newport.

https://twitter.com/d3d4football/status/1092498369233211393

https://twitter.com/TommyBryan84/status/1092332995179098112

Jolley and Limbrick are making a solid foundation, maybe we can finally get a bit of consistency? One can dream! (I believe)

Quoted from AussieMariner

Interesting how we draw different conclusions from the same information. I see the fact that he gave up a secure(ish) job in banking for the lottery of football management as a sign that he is a gambler.
He made it pretty clear in the Q&A session last week that he doesnt want to be in League 2 for too much longer so I think the only chance we have of keeping him is to give him the resources to take us up the leagues with him.
I guess the real question is whether JF and the board are gamblers......

I see making that switch in career as not gambling. He didn't make the change because he thought he could make more money, or even necessarily he expected to become a high-level manager, he did it because he has a passion for the game and it came out of one of those life-changing moments when you question whether what you're doing is really what you want to be doing. He was switching to a field that he loved so regardless of the success in promotion/financial turns he was already on to a winner. And he had skills (and impressive qualifications) that he could fall back on should football not work out. So a calculated risk but with a massive safety net.

Rancido makes the point he was already making calculated risks in his previous career. But that's not the same as gambling.

And I think we know the board are not gamblers. They're not risk takers at all. To a man. Well not conscious risk-takers. They've often risked the well-being of the club. What's the phrase about spoiling the ship?

Funny how we never spoke of the skills that Russell Slade could transfer into football management from the classroom isn't it?  ;)

Quoted from rancido

Answer to question 1 - yes I do and have stated in a previous post.

Reply to question 2 - it was the person who replied to my post who mentioned JF, not me. Maybe accurately reading posts and replies is the reality that is beyond you?

Maybe discussing things on the level rather than pontificating from your moral high ground might get a less acerbic response.

I don't know if he's a gambler but I bet he's extremely ambitious.

Quoted from diehardmariner

Funny how we never spoke of the skills that Russell Slade could transfer into football management from the classroom isn't it?  ;)

He let the fans down,he let the team down,but more importantly he let himself down.

Quoted from KingstonMariner

I see making that switch in career as not gambling. He didn't make the change because he thought he could make more money, or even necessarily he expected to become a high-level manager, he did it because he has a passion for the game and it came out of one of those life-changing moments when you question whether what you're doing is really what you want to be doing. He was switching to a field that he loved so regardless of the success in promotion/financial turns he was already on to a winner. And he had skills (and impressive qualifications) that he could fall back on should football not work out. So a calculated risk but with a massive safety net.

Rancido makes the point he was already making calculated risks in his previous career. But that's not the same as gambling.

And I think we know the board are not gamblers. They're not risk takers at all. To a man. Well not conscious risk-takers. They've often risked the well-being of the club. What's the phrase about spoiling the ship?

MJ not a gambler? Ha. He’s married isn’t he? I rest my case.

Quoted from AussieMariner

MJ not a gambler? Ha. He’s married isn’t he? I rest my case.

Depends who had more money. If she did then he made a smart investment.  :)

Jolley has just come out and said the board tried to back him to the hilt in the transfer window........so now open contract talks announce they are open .....and us the fans will see how/what Jolley feels (unless of course the offers made are derisory)

This has aged well.


8)