The Kraken

He's perhaps just the right man for the situation we're in now. I just hope he can have an immediate impact, otherwise our promotion campaign is going to be over before it even began. A couple of loan signings and a win or two is what we need in the next couple of weeks to get back on track.

Rubbish. Alpine was vocal about the fact that we hadn't signed these players by the end of June. Pretty much everyone agreed that the squad was short of two or three players; CM, RM and CF. These players were, quite rightly, expected to be in place by the start of the season at best, or the end of the transfer window at worst. Dean Wilkins has already stated that under AP they wanted to bring players in but "it just didn't happen". Why that is, whether it is a failing by Cortese or Pardew, no-one will know. But don't go trying to re-paint history, have another read of Alpine's transfer threads from the summer and you'll see that the bone of contention was when the signings were made by, not that they were necessary in the first place.

Just confirmed on South Today that photographers will now be allowed in St mary's as long as they follow normal procedures. Whatever that means.

I thought it was only one? And personally I can't see what either of them would have to gain from jumping ship and coming to manage us.

I've never had a ST but this year was wavering between getting my very first one; the lack of installment plan was the clincher for me to not get one. Yes, I could have got a credit card etc etc, and maybe I cut my nose off to spite my face, but I took the decision that if the club weren't going out of their way to entice customers then why should I. As it is I made the right decision as I've since got a new job that will mean I'll be out of the country for half the season anyway....

Started off lower East, progressed to the Milton, ended up sat in the Archers.

It's hard to say either way without being in posession of the facts; however, I tend to lean towards the suggestion of your last paragraph that Scunny are being unreasonable in their demands. As I previously said, Adkins would have a set compensation figure if he walked out on the club. It is up to SFC to match that figure in an agreement with Scunny. That we haven't done that would suggest that they are asking for a higher figure, which is unreasonable. In light of that, a manager who really wanted to leave would then talk to the club and explain it's that figure, whether SFC pay it or he does by buying out his contract. Whether that happens or not, I guess we'll see. I understand your point about him not wanting to be seen as walking out. But if the club insist on asking for significantly more money than it would receive if hee simply resigned, then I would expect him to bypass his principles and hand in his notice. But its all conjecture at this point, of course.

I don't disagree with his motives for not resigning; I just question his true desire. He will have a contracted "buy out" figure in his contract, whether it be a pre-determined figure or simply the amount of salary and term left on contract. So the method is there for him to leave and for his club to receive a set figure they previously agreed with him. Which leaves only two scenarios; he either doesn't think that figure is high enough and wants Sunny to get more; or SFC have told him he is personally liable for the severance figure if he quits. I personally don't believe the second one, which only really leaves the first one to base my opinion on, which is why I come back to the issue of Adkins' true desire to leave. If he really wanted the job here he has no need to depart from his principles; if the serverance figure was good enough when he signed his contract it should still be good enough now.

No worries! As much as I think Cortese has made a few poor decisions in the past, I think that (especially in light of the comments on the OS) that Scunny were trying to take us for a bit of a ride in asking for a bit too much compensation. Adkins is stuck between a rock and a hard place, as he obviously wants to leave but understands they will incur costs to replace him. And perhaps it's highlighted a slight lack of desire on his behalf if he won't resign and therefore let the club have whatever contracted severance pay they would then be due. Who knows? certainly not me.

A rolling contract only means that he always has a set term (usually 1 year) remaining on his contract at all times. So the compensation figure to buy himself out of the contract would be that one year.

Its all ifs, buts and maybes though. If they're asking for £4m then yes, I would expect his to resign as that is excessive. But if they are asking for a figure both they and him consider fair to replace him and we won't meet that, then his principles will suggest he will look out for his present employers and not leave them in the sh1t. And please explain my apparent confusion; Adkins is clearly on a contract and if he "resigns" he is considered in breach of contract. Therefore the club will be due a financial sum, but not from SFC, from him. That would be their "compensation" if he resigned. If SFC agreed compensation with Scunny directly, then they would terminate his contract on the agreement of both parties, therefore no breach of contract. But as I'm clearly confused, maybe you can tell me why I'm wrong with that?

Say it again if you like, but it can only go to tribunal if Adkins resigns. He refused to resign until compensation was agreed. So, with no compensation agreement and no resignation, there's nothing to go to tribunal for.

Why? It's exactly the same as if we were trying to sign a player from them. If our offer does not meet the valuation the club put on him (which will include their own costs it will take to replace him) then they are fully within their rights not to accept. And as Adkins apparently said he wouldn't resign until compensation was agreed, we either agree pay their amount or walk away.

It couldn't though. Adkins refused to resign until Scunny's compensation was agreed. For all we know Scunny were holding out for a stupid amount of money and Cortese refused to match it as he didn't think it worth the money.

You're assuming that he could just resign with no further consequences. The likelihood is that he is on a termed contract with Scunny, and one way or the other the club will be entitled to compensation for breach of contract. If he resigned, he would be liable to pay it, not us. There's many potential things that have happened here; we could have refused compensation full stop; we could have offered to pay the contractual amount on his behalf; or Scunny could be holding out for a much higher amount. As much as I think Cortese is a bit of a chump, I can't believe he'd refuse to pay any compensation, so I think there's a bit more to this. Wharton (Scunny's chairman) is a bit of a gobsh!te so it's no surprise to see the amount of quotes coming out from that end.

The Paul Lambert thing is a bit unfair. Yes, Lambert was largely unproven as a manager, but as a player he played at the very highest level. Adkins has the stigma of only being a physio before his current managerial position and is also largely unknown as a player. Adkins is a good appointment for this level of football. However, there are a lot of unanswered questions about how he will fare higher up, and with bigger name players. And given Cortese's statement about "managerial stability" it raises questions about Adkins' suitability here in the Championship and/or the Premier League, if we get that far.

Works fine for me.

The Bullard gamble didn't pay off and made him look very daft. But he's a great player and maybe thought that it was worth the risk. The on-pitch half time talk was a mistake, and I'm pretty sure he's admitted that since. For every manager you'll be able to point out flaws that they had; all managers have made bad decisions at some point. I just think that, for where we are and where we want to get to, Brown has all the traits needed for the job and is just the man we need to come in and straighten out our under-performing "stars".

Was beating Arsenal at the Emirates an accident? Beating Tottenham at WHL an accident? Winning a manager of the month award in the Premier League was some accident too.

OK; I've done some research. As I posted on another thread, I asked my Hull supporting mate, who has seen many games in their push to the Premier League, what he thought of Brown. His response: "Would be a great signing in my opinion. Tactically really strong and would bring a great assistant in Brian Horton who knows the lower leagues - no money to really spend so no stupid signings, just a good squad to work with." An I thoroughly agree with him, I think it would be a great appointment. What "research" have you done that suggests he would be bad selection for us?

As would I; in fact, Brown would be my (realistic) favourite choice for the role.

It matters to the extent of the calibre of manager we get in. Pardew is the measuring stick for that. If the new manager is deemed as weaker than our previous manager, then you can makea logical conclusion that our chances of promotion have been diminished. I'm making the point that we should be looking to recruit a manager of equal or better standing than Pardew. Adkins is a risk because, in terms of his qualifications, he comes in weaker than Pardew. Also weaker than Phil Brown, who scceeded in promotion to the Premier League. It's a use for comparison, nothing more.

Exactly as I see it. His managerial record reads as follows: Took over Sc*nthorpe December 2006 Season 2006/07: League 1, finished 1st. Season 2007/08: Champ, finished 23rd (relegated) Season 2008/09: League 1, finished 6th (promoted via playoffs) Season 2009/10: Champ, finished 19th. So his best achievement was finishing top of this division, but he was only manager of the side for half of that season, he inherited the team that Brian Laws left behind. he was then instantly relegated. His next promotion came after his team finished a full 20 points behind the league champions. And his team stayed in the Championship courtesy of finishing above the relegated clubs and Crystal Palace, who were docked 10 points for going into administration. It's hardly a resume to hold up as an example of complete success. I would consider this appointment very uninspiring, and in my eyes leaves us a lot worse off than we would have been with Pardew at the helm.

It's a fair enough point but I'm not entirely sure why you felt the need for an entirely new thread to share your insights on this.

Thoroughly underwhelmed if this is the case. A simple question of "are we better off with Terry Nutkins than we were with Pardew?" leaves me saying "absolutely not", every time. This is clearly the type of appoitment to appease Lou Reed and the development centre side of affairs; whether that will be to the detriment of the first team, time will tell.