The Kraken

In short, no. If it was anything but a footballing reason I believe the club are smart enough to put up a statement along the lines of "Alan Pardew and his staff are dsimissed with immediate effect, there will be no further comment on the matter". What we did do is publicise a displeasure for a management team in a professional and subtle way while expressing a desire for something better.

Yes, it has. You just don't want to see it. Why do you think it was a mutual termination? The club have said they looked at the management structure and hence evaluated the contracts of 3 football management staff and termed them inappropriate, so looked elsewhere. How is that a mutual termination?

You can read this when you get back then. I feel like I'm whacking my head against a wall anyway. The crazy thing is this: I think you're telling me to look at the facts, and not to jump to any conclusions. But you're then telling me not to believe the facts laid before me by the club, via a public statement, that it was a footballing decision. I'll re-iterate that; the club have said it was a footballing decision. They really have. You cherry picked a bit of the club statement, but look at it in its entirity; it is clearly a statement that says the club can find better elsewhere, and that is what they'll do. I find it utterly incredible that, in this thread, you choose to pick on me for reading things which apparently aren't there. Yet you have absolutely nothing to say about the people who still cling to the belief that AP and staff were sacked for gross misconduct. You have nothing to say about the rumours that persist about AP having ex-marital affairs with playing staff. And nothing to say about other accusations of transgressions by the management team. Yet me, taking a club statement fully on its merits, is cause for you to take issue. I'll admit, I'm thoroughly confused. Anyway, the weekend has landed.

And that is the perfect summary of the situation. I agree entirely.

It's all very good saying that now; why not say it before?

Don't forget it took West Ham and Alan Curbishley 17 months to come to an agreement over compensation for his termination of contract. This one is rapid in comparison.

There's just nothing I can do with hyperbole like that.

Well, we're going to have to agree to differ then. I believe they have given plenty of reason for the departure. I'll try and be clear for you my interpretation of what they've said, but this is exactly what I replied to you in a previous post (so much so that I've cut and pasted it). we've looked at our management team; we think our chances of promotion are better served with a different management team in charge We want the 1st team and the development centre to be an integrated unit. We want to bring in a new management team who can better achieve those aims. Seriously, that's all I'm reading from the club statement; that the club believed we would be much better served in achieving promotion by ditching our current management team and bringing in a new one. I'm genuinely confused as to why you're questioning my stance on it, and asking me not to "read more into it"? I'm only reading what's there. Is any of my analysis above wrong? The club clearly got rid of an existing management team, stated why, and brought someone else in who they clearly believe better helps them achieve their stated objectives.

Stop talking common sense.

No, of course I don't know for sure. But given that the club have effectively told me that they were, why should I disbelieve them?

I'm not reading more into it; in fact I'm one person advocating people NOT reading more into it. The statement says to me " We have targets of promotion; we've looked at our management team; we think our chances of promotion are better served with a different management team in charge; we want the 1st team and the development centre to be an integrated unit; we want to bring in a new management team who can better achieve those aims". I believe I'm reading nothing in to it apart from teh black and white of the information presented to me.

I was referring more to his first paragraph or two, more about the footballing reasons for sacking rather than foundationless personal accusations about AP. That said, I'm not sure there's too much difference between what Prof said and I did; he said AP et al were dimsissed for footballing reasons, which is what the club quotes backs up. I just believe that the club statement did indeed justify the action, and I believe was as honest as a club statement on a manager's dismissal needs to be.

The worse pitches in this league aren't ploughed fields. It was stated last season that we couldn't beat these teams away because of the state of the pitch, but it's not as if we passed the ball around like Arsenal, we were always quite a direct side. There will be some pitches worse than others, but we may even benefit from that as NA is trying to get us to play with more width, where the surface will be better than a congested middle. I think NA is also smart enough to realise that we will need to adapt our style of play slightly to whoever we are playing.

The "assumption" that Pardew was sacked for footballing reasons comes from the club's statement, where they said: “Following a review of the status in and around the first team, the club has decided that, to achieve its well-known targets, it is essential to make changes to the first-team management and coaching. These targets for sustained and significant progress embrace both the first team and the football development and support centre as integrated, co-operative units." "We recognise that frequent changes to the football management are unlikely to assist in the winning of trophies and promotions. "However, we are taking these steps to achieve our aims, which we share with all supporters, to get promoted this season, and secure long term stability and progress for our football operations." That's pretty clear to me. (Edited to add the full statement)

I'm not so sure. Both full backs were also always dropping off for a short ball, as was Fonte and on occasions Seaborne. Clearly Tranmere allowed us more space here and better teams will try to close us down more, but if there is a really strong desire to play it short its a real risk to go for a blitz to try and cut that out, as it leaves a big hole in behind.

Agreed. I find the desire by others to continually try to see more into the situation and refuse to believe the statements made by the club and the manager as quite weird. If there was a gross misconduct charge, why on earth would the club publicly lie to the national press? There is absolutely nothing to gain from the club lying about the reasons why 3 staff have had their contracts terminated. In fact, it would distinctly to the club's disadvantage to do so. The logical course in such an event would have seen Pardew, Downes and Murdoch sacked with no further comment made by the club. Often the case people will just believe what they want to believe, though.

Get what exactly? Pardew had his contract terminated by the club, and the club announced the reasons why (according to the statement, the decisions were taken to help the club "achieve its well-known targets" following "a review of the current status in and around the first team"). The club then enter a period of negotiation with Pardew to determine the terms of his compensation for termination of contract. What's not to get?

Are those not footballing reasons then?

Or maybe all those rumours were just rumours and AP and his staff were let go for footballing reasons after all.

I wasn't suggesting otherwise with regard to Adkins, though its clearly still early days and I'mnot getting over excited about a 2-0 defeat to Tranmere. But I think Pardew will use this as a stepping stone back up the league; he's a better manager than many give him credit for, not up there with the best, but he can rightly have pride in what he achieved with us IMO. Good luck to him, I always liked him as a manager and as a man.

I wouldn't bet against seeing him in a Championship or even lower Prem job before too long.

Indeed. He may be clueless with bronze but the bloke can definitely sculpt.

I was sat in the Chapel; the lovely Charlotte and Fenners were down in the Kingland/Chapel corner.

Over-reacting much? They are reporting on some transfer speculation surrounding one of our players. Big deal.

It doesn't make any sense for us to sell in January. None whatsoever. And especially not for £3m. Jonjo Shelvy has already been discussed, he went for £2m. And you only have to look at the like of Daniel Sturridge, who let his contract expire at Man City to go to Chelsea. His fee at tribunal was set at a total of £6.5m (£3.5m up front, £0.5m on 10, 20 30, 40 games, £1m on 1st England cap), so the tribunals these days are setting realistic figures for players. Everton will potentially have to shell out £1.5M to Leeds for Luke Garbutt, who had barely played for their reserves let alone their first team. And Leeds took £5M from Chelsea in an out of court settlement for those luminaries Tom Taiwo and Michael Woods. If we sold him in January it would have to be for much more than we'd get at tribunal in the summer. If he has another high scoring season I can see his tribunal figure being at least £5m in the summer, so we'd have to be looking at a transfer fee of £7m or £8m to make it worth our while.