The Manager Debacle

[Downbeat Bee]

Will we ever hear what really happened with the criteria, who the interviewers went for, who scuppered the deal?

I'm not entirely sure how the blame should be apportioned but I think the whole thing ended up as a farce.

 

[fencer/bee]

wot again... surely not

 

[Downbeat Bee]

It's not 100% clear to me

KD seemed a lot more expansive about his criteria than anyone has been since

 

[hubble]

Would Scott have got the job if the gang of four had left the appointment for another week? I don't think so.

 

[Downbeat Bee]

Would Scott have got the job if the gang of four had left the appointment for another week? I don't think so.

Did the gang of four ever want him to get the job?

 

[hubble]

Even if Scott did keep us up he is not the answer in the long run. It's getting to the point where I hope we keep getting beaten. If that happens things would have to change in the boadroom. Sometimes you have to reach rock bottom before things get better.

 

['Ayes B]

What I dont understand is that the gang of four did the interviews and drew up a shortlist.

One would presume that the package on offer would have been discussed with those being interviewed.

So how come someone who applied for the job, and was a preferred candidate after two interviews, declined the invitation or am I missing something?

 

[wanderer paul]

I can only assume that a six-month clause was put in place at the last minute and that several interviewees didn't want to sign a contract with that stipulation on it......????????? who knows...........

 

[Simon T]

I'm not sure what exactly happened but I believe the interview committee made their recommendation and then somebody else said he didn't agree and it was either going to be Roland Rat (who'd got him out of the brown stuff before) or the current fellow.

 

[ashvalebee]

as I understand it everyone who applied for the job was told that one of the conditions of the contract was to keep us up, if this did not happen, we could let the manager and his assistant go without paying any compensation at the end of the season, what braincell did the use when they conducted the interviews, couldn,t run a **ss up in a brewery.

 

[Stanley]

as I understand it everyone who applied for the job was told that one of the conditions of the contract was to keep us up, if this did not happen, we could let the manager and his assistant go without paying any compensation at the end of the season, .

It has been insinuated that this was the sticking point for Patterson..but if he already knew about it he has no cause for complaint surely.

 

[abee]

It has been insinuated that this was the sticking point for Patterson..but if he already knew about it he has no cause for complaint surely.

The statement by ashvalebee and upon which you base your post is incorrect.

 

[Simon C]

It has been insinuated that this was the sticking point for Patterson..but if he already knew about it he has no cause for complaint surely.

I don't think thats true, whatever the sticking point was, the interview with Patterson in the Oxford Mail suggests he didn't know about it until he was negotiating terms with us.

 

[Stuardo]

Even if Scott did keep us up he is not the answer in the long run. It's getting to the point where I hope we keep getting beaten. If that happens things would have to change in the boadroom. Sometimes you have to reach rock bottom before things get better.

so you don't think we were rock bottom when Noades threatened to put the club into administration then?

put aside any mistakes that may have been made for a second - the person to pin the blame on for this is Noades and his crew. How ironic that we will come full circle - in the year that he joined and supposedly "funded" the club we were in League Two. By the time he gets his money out we are likely to be in League Two - but just with 20x the amount of debt.

I wish this could be like Dallas and we could wake up and find out that Bobby hadn't died after all.

So, do not forget Noades' role in this!

 

[west london bee]

so you don't think we were rock bottom when Noades threatened to put the club into administration then?

NO, WE WERE NOWHERE NEAR THE MESS WE ARE IN NOW!

Noades' threat to put us into administration was just that, a threat.

Back then we didn't have the huge debt we are in now,
We had a squad of players capable of playing in League 1,
And we also had a manager who wasn't completely out of his depth.

This is a dire time for our club.
Drastic changes need to be made now, today!
The first cahnge being getting rid of Fitzgerald as manager.

 

[West Wilts Bee]

NO, WE WERE NOWHERE NEAR THE MESS WE ARE IN NOW!

Noades' threat to put us into administration was just that, a threat.

Back then we didn't have the huge debt we are in now,
We had a squad of players capable of playing in League 1,
And we also had a manager who wasn't completely out of his depth.

This is a dire time for our club.
Drastic changes need to be made now, today!
The first cahnge being getting rid of Fitzgerald as manager.

Have you seen what he has to work with (fitz)

 

[Gee Bee]

as I understand it everyone who applied for the job was told that one of the conditions of the contract was to keep us up, if this did not happen, we could let the manager and his assistant go without paying any compensation at the end of the season, what braincell did the use when they conducted the interviews, couldn,t run a **ss up in a brewery.

Assuming all this is true of course. Which it isn't.

 

[Brickie Chap]

Ask KD or GD what really happened....neither of those would mislead anyone...would they lol

 

[Alan D]

What really worries me about the whole process is that after all the faffing around we were only going to appoint the youth team coach of a non league side as our manager.

Is our stock so low, that all we can attract is unproven people who are trying to cut their teeth in football management. Even Northampton can attract Parkinson to an interview.

 

[Gee Bee]

What really worries me about the whole process is that after all the faffing around we were only going to appoint the youth team coach of a non league side as our manager.

Is our stock so low, that all we can attract is unproven people who are trying to cut their teeth in football management. Even Northampton can attract Parkinson to an interview.

Well there were some experienced men who were spoken to, however they were all out of work and many for good reason.
A couple of years back Parkinson would have been considered a young manager trying to cut his teeth in management. So you have to start somewhere.
Northampton is closer to where Parkinson wants to stay, and they no doubt have more funds available to him than we could offer.

 

[Downbeat Bee]

Is our stock so low, that all we can attract is unproven people who are trying to cut their teeth in football management. Even Northampton can attract Parkinson to an interview.

Yeah it is more than a worry

 

[Ace Face]

Did the gang of four gain the agreement of the BFC Board that Patterson was the right man and it was only a case of failing to agree contract terms?

Did the board veto a contract agreed with Patterson?

Was Patterson unwilling to accept any clause of dismissal if we went down under his leadership?

 

[Downbeat Bee]

Did the gang of four gain the agreement of the BFC Board that Patterson was the right man and it was only a case of failing to agree contract terms?

Did the board veto a contract agreed with Patterson?

Was Patterson unwilling to accept any clause of dismissal if we went down under his leadership?

The sort of questions I'd like an answer to

 

[Brickie Chap]

Did the gang of four gain the agreement of the BFC Board that Patterson was the right man and it was only a case of failing to agree contract terms?

Did the board veto a contract agreed with Patterson?

Was Patterson unwilling to accept any clause of dismissal if we went down under his leadership?

....I see the liars of BU and BFC are already starting to put out their bullshit to cover their backs and blacken one of the interviewing panels name...

What did we ever do to deserve such utter *****

 

[Banana]

....I see the liars of BU and BFC are already starting to put out their bullshit to cover their backs and blacken one of the interviewing panels name...

What did we ever do to deserve such utter *****

Where is this please?

 

[Brickie Chap]

Where is this please?

Nah, lets have the window licking wannabees from The Griffin post some of the utter bullshit 'someone' has started to spread...

 

[Banana]

Nah, lets have the window licking wannabees from The Griffin post some of the utter bullshit 'someone' has started to spread...

I've not heard it - so can't help you.

 

[Nick Hester]

Nah, lets have the window licking wannabees from The Griffin post some of the utter bullshit 'someone' has started to spread...

Yep - I've heard the same one Brickie..They were always going to have to find a scapegoat and this one has sunk to an all time low... what a sad club we support....

 

[Nurse Betty]

Yep - I've heard the same one Brickie..They were always going to have to find a scapegoat and this one has sunk to an all time low... what a sad club we support....

I too don't have a clue what you and Brickie are going on about.

Even if you don't want to say who from BU has started scapegoating someone, can you please say what you have heard?

Hang on - we're not talking about the theory that by splashing the news of Patterson's imminent appointment on the GPG that Banana's organ ruined the deal, are we? Or are we? Because that is utter drivel imo.

 

[roddy]

so you don't think we were rock bottom when Noades threatened to put the club into administration then?

put aside any mistakes that may have been made for a second - the person to pin the blame on for this is Noades and his crew. How ironic that we will come full circle - in the year that he joined and supposedly "funded" the club we were in League Two. By the time he gets his money out we are likely to be in League Two - but just with 20x the amount of debt.

I wish this could be like Dallas and we could wake up and find out that Bobby hadn't died after all.

So, do not forget Noades' role in this!

No it was Lange who started all this.

 

[Mr Cynical]

According to the Richmond Times KD appears oblivious to any concerns the fans may have regarding the way the recruitment of a new manager was handled..

Perhaps a poll might help focus his mind?

Something simple like; Are you happy with the way the club handled the process of advertising/interviewing and appointing a new manager in the wake of Leroy's departure?

Does anyone fancy putting one up? I haven't a clue how to TBH...

 

[Nick Hester]

Hang on - we're not talking about the theory that by splashing the news of Patterson's imminent appointment on the GPG that Banana's organ ruined the deal, are we? Or are we? Because that is utter drivel imo.

Correct 'utter drivel'...

Would like to hear the 'official' line as to why Patterson didn't get the job at the eleventh hour though from the club...just to see if the rumour I heard re scapegoating is going to be used for the reason....

 

[SmiffyBee]

FACTS

No-one else wanted the job, or would accept our offer of pay package.

Therefore, there was only one choice


I THINK

 

[Jimbo]

I am intrigued by Brickie and Greenholme's posts , you pair of little teases!

The damage done to the club in this decision is huge. BU, the board and everyone considered to be involved are tarnished.

When will someone involved stand up and be honest about what's gone on? Or will we all just have to wait for the snide gossip to come our way? - as per usual.

 

[Brickie Chap]

Did someone call...

 

[dazmk]

Patterson was offered a two and a half year deal and was told that during that period if he was sacked he would get two months money. This reason he didn't sign is quite clear, he was on better money at oxford and his position is very secure there. Would you leave a job for less money and the threat of the sack?


daz

 

[JBN]

In summary

1) A group of 4 directors were tasked with interviewing and recommending a new manager.

2) Interviews took place, loads of scientific info was used

3) Some managers crawled out the woodwork and claimed to have been dumped by BFC despite not being interviewed in order to increase their stock or massage their own egos.

4) One particular candidate, who had done loads of home work, seen the Bees on several occassions and had notes on all or most of the first team squad, together with a battle plan, blew the interview panel away.

5) The group of 4 were over ruled in their choice.

So the famed group of four were obviously over ruled. Which offers three options.
1) Were the group of 4, realy a group of 4
2) Was the decission made outside the room, by one bloke sitting in his office watching telly?
3) Am I way off the mark?

 

[Jimbo]

In summary

1) A group of 4 directors were tasked with interviewing and recommending a new manager.

2) Interviews took place, loads of scientific info was used

3) Some managers crawled out the woodwork and claimed to have been dumped by BFC despite not being interviewed in order to increase their stock or massage their own egos.

4) One particular candidate, who had done loads of home work, seen the Bees on several occassions and had notes on all or most of the first team squad, together with a battle plan, blew the interview panel away.

5) The group of 4 were over ruled in their choice.

So the famed group of four were obviously over ruled. Which offers three options.
1) Were the group of 4, realy a group of 4
2) Was the decission made outside the room, by one bloke sitting in his office watching telly?
3) Am I way off the mark?

I would add; why were they over ruled? (if indeed they were)

 

[Stuardo]

No it was Lange who started all this.

true!

but he was an amateur in comparison...rofl

 

[McBee]

I haven't too many complaints with the way it was handled.
Admittedly, it was a bit of an anticlimax when Fitz got the job, but they had little option.

When it became clear we wern't going to get a proven quality manager of the Parkinson, Ternant and even ffs Curbishley mould, the board decided that if they were going to have to take a risk on an unproven, they were going to do it on their terms, which meant they wouldn't have to pay the earth to sack them, if the worst happened.

This put everybody off apart from Fitz. Fitz got the job and if he improves the team and keeps us up, he'll keep it, if the team stay sh*te, he'll become Youth Team manager again no doubt, at little cost to the club.

The whole way through KD kept everyone informed and i don't think can be blamed for the lack of good candidates showing an interest in the job with the budget/playing squad available to them.

 

[JBN]

With all due respect McBee, I don't think you realy understand what happened in the appointing of Fitz.

 

[McBee]

None taken JBN, but i don't think i'm too far off the mark to the logic in it am i??

Ultimately, the lack of finances and decent candidates available meant we were left with Fitz and even he understands he was last choice.
I know that there was offers made to others, but again it came down to finance and clauses to why they felt it wasn't for them.

What part have i misunderstood, or aren't aware of?

 

[alexinho]

With all due respect McBee, I don't think you realy understand what happened in the appointing of Fitz.

Can you clarify then instead of permitting this thread to become yet another one in which those who like to think that they are in the know fail to allow anyone who might be interested to become at all enlightened on the matter? I have read the whole thread, and apart from some hugely cryptic hints, which do nothing other than afford a facade of being informed to their poster, it contains no useful information whatsoever.

 

[SmiffyBee]

With all due respect McBee, I don't think you realy understand what happened in the appointing of Fitz.

Surely with no official details released, or likely to be, his guess is as good as your guess ?

 

[Nick Hester]

In summary

1) A group of 4 directors were tasked with interviewing and recommending a new manager.

2) Interviews took place, loads of scientific info was used

3) Some managers crawled out the woodwork and claimed to have been dumped by BFC despite not being interviewed in order to increase their stock or massage their own egos.

4) One particular candidate, who had done loads of home work, seen the Bees on several occassions and had notes on all or most of the first team squad, together with a battle plan, blew the interview panel away.

5) The group of 4 were over ruled in their choice.

So the famed group of four were obviously over ruled. Which offers three options.
1) Were the group of 4, realy a group of 4
2) Was the decission made outside the room, by one bloke sitting in his office watching telly?
3) Am I way off the mark?

You've obviously been talking to someone... reveal where you got that from?

 

[kevalutonbee]

Do you reckon we might get the information if somebody requested it under the Freedom of Information Act?

 

[JBN]

I cannot disagree with the theory. I too thought it a foregone conclussion that Fitz would be appointed and was somewhat suprised when the gang of of 4 was set up.

McBees opening line was the spark though.

It seemed to me that it was a complete and utter waste of time money and effort to set up an interview panel to interview and assess candidates and then over rule the "panels" recomendation.

I am fairly certain that the panel was over ruled and I don't belive it was a wage issue or length of contract issue on Pattersons part.

 

[alexinho]

In summary

1) A group of 4 directors were tasked with interviewing and recommending a new manager.

2) Interviews took place, loads of scientific info was used

3) Some managers crawled out the woodwork and claimed to have been dumped by BFC despite not being interviewed in order to increase their stock or massage their own egos.

4) One particular candidate, who had done loads of home work, seen the Bees on several occassions and had notes on all or most of the first team squad, together with a battle plan, blew the interview panel away.

5) The group of 4 were over ruled in their choice.

So the famed group of four were obviously over ruled. Which offers three options.
1) Were the group of 4, realy a group of 4
2) Was the decission made outside the room, by one bloke sitting in his office watching telly?
3) Am I way off the mark?

Your argument basically boils down to 'The group of 4 were over ruled in their choice... So the group of four were over ruled'. Since you will not reveal any evidence to suggest that this is at all true (or how you leapt the considerable distance to this conclusion) your post is nothing but another piece of gossip, and does nothing at all other than spread distrust and rancour amongst the fans at a time when quite frankly it is not needed.

 

[jlove]

Your argument ... is not needed.

Eloquently put!

 

[alexinho]

Eloquently put!

lol