- Print Topic - Archive

I listened with great joy to Alan Buckley before the game on Tuesday night. He spoke wonderfully about his philosophy on the game, I particularly enjoyed him saying if he was in charge he’d fine Hanson £100 every time he turned his back and started running so we could launch the ball.

He was then asked if he’d been interested in a director of football position and he confirmed he would be. Is this such a silly suggestion? For me it would say we are Grimsby Town and whoever the manager is, this is how we want to play football.
Growing up outside the town whenever I mentioned to people that I supported Town, it was always “they always play good football” “we always get played off the park there” it’s not something people say anymore. We are unlikely to be a top flight side, we are unlikely to win a cup, surely our ambition should be to play football and entertain from our youth team to our first team.

Risking red x's but who cares ... Best post and idea for a long while on here Sir Alan as director of football, I had pleasure of supporting town whilst he was here, and would love to see him involved, do the right thing Mr Fenty.

JF has said they are thinking of going down the route of a director of football to have continuity, and I can't think of anyone better than Sir Alan. Newport have Lawrence and they are performing way better than us with less supporters. Not so keen on their footballing style but the principle is a sound one. I think we should have gone down this route a long time ago personally but the board finally seem to be realising that we can't keep chopping and changing the set up every 12 to 18 months.

What does a Director of Football do? Genuine question.

Quoted from headingly_mariner

I listened with great joy to Alan Buckley before the game on Tuesday night. He spoke wonderfully about his philosophy on the game, I particularly enjoyed him saying if he was in charge he’d fine Hanson £100 every time he turned his back and started running so we could launch the ball.

He was then asked if he’d been interested in a director of football position and he confirmed he would be. Is this such a silly suggestion? For me it would say we are Grimsby Town and whoever the manager is, this is how we want to play football.
Growing up outside the town whenever I mentioned to people that I supported Town, it was always “they always play good football” “we always get played off the park there” it’s not something people say anymore. We are unlikely to be a top flight side, we are unlikely to win a cup, surely our ambition should be to play football and entertain from our youth team to our first team.

Twenty minutes uninterrupted chat with Matt Dean in the run up to the kick off. It was the best football conversation I have ever heard on RH, and was indeed a pleasure to listen to. As has already been mentioned on here, his recommendation for the manager’s job was Danny Wilson on account of his experience and past success. He felt we should be very wary of taking on a young, inexperienced manager from non-league, and before anyone accuses him of hypocrisy on the grounds that he himself came to Grimsby from Kettering, the fact is that he took Walsall to promotion and a League Cup semi- final as player- manager before he ever went there. As regards the quality of his Town teams, the football correspondent of the Independent newspaper wrote that Grimsby were the only team in the English game that played in the style of the then all conquering AC Milan. I also remember David Pleat saying on the radio that Paul Groves should have been in the England team. If Lennie Lawrence can do a job for Newport, you’d have thought that Alan could make a useful contribution at Grimsby.

We dont need a Director of Football, but we do need Buckley at the training ground for a few weeks teaching them how to pass and move.

He seems the perfect fit to me, managed over 1000 games (just like Lennie Lawrence), lives locally, available, knowlegable, clear footballing philosophy.

If we're looking at creating long term continuity away from day to day management who better are we likely to get.

Oops! For some reason, the quote from Headingley Mariner didn’t appear in inverted commas as it should have done. Obviously, my reply is the bottom para.

I think if you look at international football, all of the top nations have a footballing philosophy. The Germans will play the same formation from the youth teams right up to the first team, As do the French to Spanish and now do England.

Having a clear footballing philosophy from the ground up prepares you for players for the first team. Having somebody to oversee that is the way the modern game is going both at club and international level. I can think of nobody better to do that than Alan Buckley, not just because he knows the club and he is local, but he has that wealth of experience he can aid somebody.

A really good example of how this has been done is in Northern Ireland. Joe McAree at Dungannon Swift was a player, manager and now oversees the whole footballing operations of the club, making sure all youth teams play in exactly the same way as the first team, because you never know when these players may be called upon.

Quoted from Abdul19

What does a Director of Football do? Genuine question.

I'm not sure. At premiership clubs, they seem to be in charge of which players get bought, which seems like a daft idea that the manager doesn't choose who plays for him.

If it's to do with recommending a new manager and Danny Wilson is the best idea he has, then I think he's a bit too out of touch with the current game

Nobody is a greater admirer of Alan Buckley than me.

When you see previous matches on our twitter feed, I could weep with joy at the quality of football, and also weep at our current position.

As with players we sign, and most other things, we are years too late, to get the very best out of this idea.

However, I still think it IS a good idea to try to kick start an identity and a way of playing (and more importantly winning) matches.

A head coach who agrees with Buckley, and a determination to play the Grimsby way would be a great start.

Winning is what matters, but I think we have more chance of that with this idea than random managers with different approaches.

We have tried everything else, and Buckley is due some recognition, so why not?

Quoted from pen penfras

I'm not sure. At premiership clubs, they seem to be in charge of which players get bought, which seems like a daft idea that the manager doesn't choose who plays for him.

If it's to do with recommending a new manager and Danny Wilson is the best idea he has, then I think he's a bit too out of touch with the current game

With all due respect and the best will in the world, the board don't exactly have much footballing knowledge to pick a manager do they?

Clubs seem to define the job according to the person they give it to. Norwich have Stuart Webber as Sporting Director but he does not Interfere on the playing side although Daniel Farke is called head coach.

I think the point with Buckley is that he is a figurehead for so many fans. Even just being involved at the club would have some effect if only psychological.

Quoted from pen penfras

I'm not sure. At premiership clubs, they seem to be in charge of which players get bought, which seems like a daft idea that the manager doesn't choose who plays for him.

If it's to do with recommending a new manager and Danny Wilson is the best idea he has, then I think he's a bit too out of touch with the current game

I think you present a great point that Alan Buckley is off the pace of the modern game, that was clearly obvious during his third spell as the manager. But you could say the same about Lenny Lawrence. Not being a manager for a considerable length of time etc.

However, I’ll make the same point I made 10 years ago when Mike Neil left, having somebody with a deep footballing knowledge both of the industry and of the role you are appointing is invaluable.

Having a director of football at our level would be much like having an assistant manager, but he is somebody who can link the first team to the youth team to the non-footballing side of the football club i.e. the board of directors. I think it would be worth knowing what exactly Lenny Lawrence does with Newport because it appears to be working.

Lawrence's title is 'First Team Management Consultant'.

Quoted from Wrawby_Mariner

I think you present a great point that Alan Buckley is off the pace of the modern game, that was clearly obvious during his third spell as the manager. But you could say the same about Lenny Lawrence. Not being a manager for a considerable length of time etc.

However, I’ll make the same point I made 10 years ago when Mike Neil left, having somebody with a deep footballing knowledge both of the industry and of the role you are appointing is invaluable.

Having a director of football at our level would be much like having an assistant manager, but he is somebody who can link the first team to the youth team to the non-footballing side of the football club i.e. the board of directors. I think it would be worth knowing what exactly Lenny Lawrence does with Newport because it appears to be working.

Just for a bit of balance on his last spell, he took one of poorest and cheapest squads to a Wembley final in the season before he was was sacked after 6 games. He also brought players into the squad that went on to play consistently at a higher level that the club did not speculate to keep, thinking particularly about Paterson and Hird. Tactically he was still very sound and made the best of players who were excrement, thinking in particular of Tom Newey who went from useless fullback to very decent ball playing centre half. The season we finished 16th saw a 7 game winning run and our form petered out as the play offs became too much of a stretch.

Quoted from TheRonRaffertyFanClub

Clubs seem to define the job according to the person they give it to. Norwich have Stuart Webber as Sporting Director but he does not Interfere on the playing side although Daniel Farke is called head coach.

I think the point with Buckley is that he is a figurehead for so many fans. Even just being involved at the club would have some effect if only psychological.

Maybe Sir Alan would do it for pocket money, so to speak, which would suit the club finances,but it would be good if he could have an input. He could also be a conduit between the playing side and the board.

I think we do need to do something interesting, to give the fans renewed hope.

If Limbrick might be the answer, if he likes the Buckley mantra of passing football, then job done.

Give him a job as director of tactics and training

Even if Sir Alan is deemed to be off the pace with modern football, just have him on the training ground teaching his pass and move philosophy, he might not be up to date with HR and all the modern PC but in the end football is basically about keeping the ball and putting it in the opponents goal, simples.

My only gripe with A.B is that he has almost become a parody of himself, when you listen to his co-commentary he is so pro "pass and move" its almost to the detriment of anything else..like scoring goals for instance.
There have been games where we have comfortably won and his post match comments would be almost derogatory because the goals weren't fashioned from pass and move style.
Even when the opposition have the ball and passing backwards, sideways in their own half he oozes enthusiasm just because they are keeping the ball even if they are posing no threat at all...."they played the better football"....but they lost 4-0 Alan??

His part one team for me was sensational, maybe because of what we had been served by Lyons and Roberts before him but that football was his best for me, his part two team very succesful, by part 3 his way was not suited to that era but he wouldnt budge from it.

Quoted from moosey_club

My only gripe with A.B is that he has almost become a parody of himself, when you listen to his co-commentary he is so pro "pass and move" its almost to the detriment of anything else..like scoring goals for instance.
There have been games where we have comfortably won and his post match comments would be almost derogatory because the goals weren't fashioned from pass and move style.
Even when the opposition have the ball and passing backwards, sideways in their own half he oozes enthusiasm just because they are keeping the ball even if they are posing no threat at all...."they played the better football"....but they lost 4-0 Alan??

His part one team for me was sensational, maybe because of what we had been served by Lyons and Roberts before him but that football was his best for me, his part two team very succesful, by part 3 his way was not suited to that era but he wouldnt budge from it.

If his only contribution was to increase off the ball movement by 20% then he could be Lord God of all Creation for me. It’s the aspect of the game that virtually every team we’ve played this season has been better than us. Green and Rose have been particularly poor and our midfield have been pretty woeful in making supporting runs.

Quoted from MuddyWaters

If his only contribution was to increase off the ball movement by 20% then he could be Lord God of all Creation for me. It’s the aspect of the game that virtually every team we’ve played this season has been better than us. Green and Rose have been particularly poor and our midfield have been pretty woeful in making supporting runs.

but is that something that can be coached into players at this level ? that to a certain point comes naturally to players, Podge is one of those players that reads where the ball is going to go, that isnt coached. I am not saying we dont need some assistance but just as a Director of Football and a setter of our philosophy then pass and move for pass and moves sake isn't what anyone wants....pass and move with purpose however... YES please.

Just use the spanking new portakabin as a cinema and show the highlights video from Buckley Part 1, Roly, John and all and say right lads...as of now thats what we want.

Quoted from moosey_club

My only gripe with A.B is that he has almost become a parody of himself, when you listen to his co-commentary he is so pro "pass and move" its almost to the detriment of anything else..like scoring goals for instance.
There have been games where we have comfortably won and his post match comments would be almost derogatory because the goals weren't fashioned from pass and move style.
Even when the opposition have the ball and passing backwards, sideways in their own half he oozes enthusiasm just because they are keeping the ball even if they are posing no threat at all...."they played the better football"....but they lost 4-0 Alan??

His part one team for me was sensational, maybe because of what we had been served by Lyons and Roberts before him but that football was his best for me, his part two team very succesful, by part 3 his way was not suited to that era but he wouldnt budge from it.

I don’t think there was much wrong with his ideas in his Mk3 days, it was more that he was out of touch with things like the transfer market and some of his signings were therefore pretty dire. They were incapable of playing any sort of football let alone “pass and move”. That situation will not have improved and I cannot see any players responding well to an old fella on the training ground telling them how to play. So his influence would presumably be with the coach as an adviser on the playing side and as a rallying point for fans, especially those who have been absent.

I would welcome back Buckley in some capacity but not as director of football, probably more of a consultant/advisor like Lennie Lawrence is at Newport.

I think Director of Football can mean literally anything. For our particular definition see Fenty at the AGM, why couldn't Buckley fulfil that criteria Davec?

It would be great, if the Board could approach Sir Alan and ask him who he would like to be team coach - for Sir Alan to be able 'pass on' his football philosophy (and help) that 'team coach'.

This 'Sir Alan team' would then need to appoint 'people' to scout games in all parts of the country to bring to their attention players, likely to fit their criteria for playing - prior to signing them. The 'scouting people' would need to be given training by Sir Alan for the 'type' of players needed.

'I should volunteer for the North West' :).

Who is responsible for signing players now? Is it done purely off the internet - players without clubs?

I have mixed views on Buckley's third spell.

Looking back, his squad had very little quality in it. I remember us playing a 5-3-1-1 formation with Till just behind North. It was quite radical for Buckley who, as we all know, stuck to 4-4-2. But he got the best out of a very average bunch of players - and I remember a game against Barnet which we won 5-0 and we had Bennett, Hegarty, North and Taylor on the pitch. The future looked good.

I also remember us playing Chester off the park but Kevin Ellison had a worldie and he alone beat us 3-1 that day. A few hours later and Buckley was sacked. In the context of how we'd started that season, and how we finished the previous, it perhaps wasn't a surprise. But on the back of that particular performance, it was harsh in the extreme as he certainly had the players playing for him.

I don't really know what a DoF does, but it's clear this football club needs to re-establish an identity. I've been doing a bit of work recently for my company, helping them define their vision statement. Town could do with one, so that everyone - whether you're on the board, in the stands, on the pitch, coaching the youth teams... we all know where we're headed, what we want to achieve and how we're going to do it.

Interesting....

https://www.pafc.co.uk/news/2019/november/director-of-football/

GIVE HIM A JOB. FULL STOP- P.S. what time will you be round to look after the grandkids Alan-supper in the oven.

Sir Alan could be a club ambassador easily but not Director of Football
He’s been out of the professional game for two long and his later transfer dealings were awful. In fact his dealings anywhere other than GTFC were poor
Remember he thought Haywood and Hope were going to be good

Quoted from buckstown

Sir Alan could be a club ambassador easily but not Director of Football
He’s been out of the professional game for two long and his later transfer dealings were awful. In fact his dealings anywhere other than GTFC were poor
Remember he thought Haywood and Hope were going to be good

...... and Jamie Clarke.

Director of football is someone who usually finds / signs players for the club on behalf of the manager. Other clubs may use this role as something else though.

As a go-between. In other cases, the role of the director of football may include control over transfer dealings and targets and aspects outside coaching and squad selection, which are handled by the manager. ... The director of football is answerable to the board but there to assist the manager.

For Christ's sake no. He is pushing seventy. He has had his time and in his 3rd stint proved he was past it. Bloody fishy always living in the past. I blame the happy clappers

You can pick shite players out of any team we've had in the last 20 years, I think people are judging stint 3 through the lens of stints 1 and 2, rather than what else happened at our club that decade.

For example Anthony Williams and Ronnie Bull under Slade 1;
Beagrie and Harkins under Roger;
Pick any number of players under Newell but Colgan, Linwood and Leary stand out to me;
Tommy Wright, Forecast and Hudson under Woods;
Even recently look how shite Slades recruitment was.

There were some good points in amongst the bad during Buckleys later spell e.g. his willingness to blood young players, his willingness to work within a very tight budget (didn't we make record profits that year?), and unlike what before and after (except under Slade 1) we never looked disorganised on the pitch.

What I'm getting at is that I don't think Buckleys third stint as manager should particularly colour our view of whether he'd make a decent director of football or not, he wouldn't be doing any of the day to day management stuff, but rather working on setting a consistent framework within which all aspects of the playing sides are expected to operate.

Maybe we should ask the new manager (when he eventually joins) if he’d like a Director of football?

I remember something similar when Buckley was manager with the idea of Lawrie Mc coming in and if I recall rightly Sir Alan wasn’t impressed!!!

Quoted from Swansea_Mariner

You can pick shite players out of any team we've had in the last 20 years, I think people are judging stint 3 through the lens of stints 1 and 2, rather than what else happened at our club that decade.

For example Anthony Williams and Ronnie Bull under Slade 1;
Beagrie and Harkins under Roger;
Pick any number of players under Newell but Colgan, Linwood and Leary stand out to me;
Tommy Wright, Forecast and Hudson under Woods;
Even recently look how shite Slades recruitment was.

There were some good points in amongst the bad during Buckleys later spell e.g. his willingness to blood young players, his willingness to work within a very tight budget (didn't we make record profits that year?), and unlike what before and after (except under Slade 1) we never looked disorganised on the pitch.

What I'm getting at is that I don't think Buckleys third stint as manager should particularly colour our view of whether he'd make a decent director of football or not, he wouldn't be doing any of the day to day management stuff, but rather working on setting a consistent framework within which all aspects of the playing sides are expected to operate.

Maybe not but if you look at his 2 previous appointments at Rochdale and Lincoln prior to his Mk3 stint with us, then that would indicate a decline in his approach. Don't get me wrong , I thought his achievements in his first 2 stints with us were amazing but football styles, tactics and support moves on.

Quoted from moosey_club

My only gripe with A.B is that he has almost become a parody of himself, when you listen to his co-commentary he is so pro "pass and move" its almost to the detriment of anything else..like scoring goals for instance.
There have been games where we have comfortably won and his post match comments would be almost derogatory because the goals weren't fashioned from pass and move style.
Even when the opposition have the ball and passing backwards, sideways in their own half he oozes enthusiasm just because they are keeping the ball even if they are posing no threat at all...."they played the better football"....but they lost 4-0 Alan??

His part one team for me was sensational, maybe because of what we had been served by Lyons and Roberts before him but that football was his best for me, his part two team very succesful, by part 3 his way was not suited to that era but he wouldnt budge from it.

Totally agree!

Quoted from Swansea_Mariner

You can pick shite players out of any team we've had in the last 20 years, I think people are judging stint 3 through the lens of stints 1 and 2, rather than what else happened at our club that decade.

For example Anthony Williams and Ronnie Bull under Slade 1;
Beagrie and Harkins under Roger;
Pick any number of players under Newell but Colgan, Linwood and Leary stand out to me;
Tommy Wright, Forecast and Hudson under Woods;
Even recently look how shite Slades recruitment was.

There were some good points in amongst the bad during Buckleys later spell e.g. his willingness to blood young players, his willingness to work within a very tight budget (didn't we make record profits that year?), and unlike what before and after (except under Slade 1) we never looked disorganised on the pitch.

What I'm getting at is that I don't think Buckleys third stint as manager should particularly colour our view of whether he'd make a decent director of football or not, he wouldn't be doing any of the day to day management stuff, but rather working on setting a consistent framework within which all aspects of the playing sides are expected to operate.

I 'ran the rule' last week over Gary Harkins at Partick Thistle - did appear very overweight - a point not missed by Penicuik Athletic fans, who chanted 'you f** b******'. He was taken off at half time and replaced by a much leaner Kenny Miller. Decided not to recommend Gary to GTFC on this occasion.

[img]https://images.app.goo.gl/opwsDdTLuxzVf6Fm9[/img]

Sir Alan should have 2 roles,

1. To advise AL its up to AL how much he listens to him but his advice would be helpful.

2. To sit in on the interviews of future managers and advise the boards on his thoughts.

As above, with you all the way Pete :)

I would love him to be associated with the club again.

Isn't this a lovely little Buckley lovefest. I appreciate what Alan did for our club back in the day but he hasn't managed at this level for 11 years and unfortunately in my view that would mean that he's probably past his sell by date. I like the idea of a director of football to bring continuity throughout the club, whether changing players or management, but do feel that we really need someone who has more up to date experience.
Not dissing AB at all but the past should be left in the past and we should be looking to the future now.

Quoted from dicko995

As above, with you all the way Pete :)

Don't you just love it when it has gone to the next page :)

Regarding the Buckley Mk III era, I think it failed because the game had moved on so much in the years since he had last managed. Specifically, players have become much bigger, quicker and fitter since the Mk II days. Something he didn't seem to understand and in the Mk III era, we were often outmuscled and outpaced before we could get close to playing better football than the opposition.

Look at footage of the halcyon days of Rees, Gilbert, Childs, Woods etc and you'll see some fantastic football, but you'll also see vast open spaces which weren't covered by the athleticism of modern day players.

Ultimately, I don't think lower division footballers have the ability or the time and space to play as the early Buckley teams did. At the top level, the standard of play can be incredible but the only thing that has really dripped down to the 4th division is the increased fitness and athleticism of the modern era.

Definitely agree about the vast open spaces of Buckley mk 1 era maringer. Loads of times on highlights u would see great swathes of space down the sides of pitches that wouldn't be available now. And that was when teams all played 442 so should have had more cover wide than nowadays. The arhleticism of players nowadays doesnt allow that sort of space so easily and often

Quoted from grimsby pete

Sir Alan should have 2 roles,

1. To advise AL its up to AL how much he listens to him but his advice would be helpful.

2. To sit in on the interviews of future managers and advise the boards on his thoughts.

What would concern me in point 2 is that AB would view any applicant on his own playing ethos and things have moved on a lot since he last managed.

Quoted from grimsby pete

Sir Alan should have 2 roles,

1. To advise AL its up to AL how much he listens to him but his advice would be helpful.

2. To sit in on the interviews of future managers and advise the boards on his thoughts.

What would concern me in point 2 is that AB would view any applicant on his own playing ethos and things have moved on a lot since he last managed.

Quoted from rancido

What would concern me in point 2 is that AB would view any applicant on his own playing ethos and things have moved on a lot since he last managed.

Keeping it on the deck, passing and moving keeps the likes of Man City and Barcelona up there so maybe not that much.

For the record, Lennie Lawrence last managed in 2005, before Buckley III and is having an effect with Newport. Regardless of whether it be Buckley or anyone else and their job title, someone to guide a young manager could be what is needed.

Quoted from SomeSanity

For the record, Lennie Lawrence last managed in 2005, before Buckley III and is having an effect with Newport. Regardless of whether it be Buckley or anyone else and their job title, someone to guide a young manager could be what is needed.

Exactly, a modern coach with modern techniques would be doing all the day to day work just as happens at Newport.

As far as I'm concerned in a role like this you'd want the most experienced candidate you could find, someone with decades in the game.

Doesn't have to be Buckley but surely you'd want someone of a similar ilk.

I'd like to see AB as an honarary member of the GTFC boardroom if the takeover happens. I wouldn't like him to get involved with the dying embers of a long standing regime, he'd be much more useful as part of a fresh start. More of a footballing advisory role rather than a hands on Director Of Football. Some of his principles still hold weight today and whatever you say about him, he's a shrewd operator and extremely good at man management, not just players, he does have a gift of knowing what makes people tick. One to one he's very engaging and he has the knack of not saying too many words, but when he speaks, people listen. We need more football people on the board in the future..

Quoted from Bigdog

I'd like to see AB as an honarary member of the GTFC boardroom if the takeover happens. I wouldn't like him to get involved with the dying embers of a long standing regime, he'd be much more useful as part of a fresh start. More of a footballing advisory role rather than a hands on Director Of Football. Some of his principles still hold weight today and whatever you say about him, he's a shrewd operator and extremely good at man management, not just players, he does have a gift of knowing what makes people tick. One to one he's very engaging and he has the knack of not saying too many words, but when he speaks, people listen. We need more football people on the board in the future..

Good idea.

One would have to be exceptionally arrogant/stupid/footballing-wise to imagine you knew more about the game than a guy who managed over 1,000 FL games.
And never got relegated.

An honorary board role would make sense - good to have the voice of a true football person at that level of oversight in the club.

Less sure on Director of Football, at least I would think that is a strategic and long term planning role and may not match Buckley’s skill set. I don’t know him well enough to comment.

The wider challenge for.building a pass and move ethos throughout the club would be whether we could recruit (and hold on to) the kind of youth talent that has the technical ability to cope with and play through the intensity of pressing we see in league 1/2 football today.

I think our present to medium term reality is that we certainly can't afford to buy that talent in and getting a reputation for playing young and rising players might be out best way of competing with the big academies and a system that is stacked against clubs like ours.

Buckley has god like status with the majority on here I'd say and although that was tarnished somewhat with his 3rd stint, we can all remember those halcyon days.

Now, what I wouldn't want to see is him made a scapegoat when things don't go to plan for a manager by the board (sic) and the blame is firmly laid at his door. The man should be given the front door key to the findus/stones/youngs and be used in a role by the club for supporters to regale in his life in football.