Wes Tender

This was the first line of my post after the match. What surprises me is that these are well paid professionals and that several were captains in their former teams and should have leadership qualities. I trust that when the new guy is appointed, he will be somebody who commands respect because of what he has himself achieved and that he will tell them in their first meeting with him, that he will not tolerate a lack of commitment or a negative losing mentality. He will also say that regardless of past glories, no player is too big that he cannot be replaced if he doesn't give 100% every match. I suspect that as often happens when a new manager comes in, players lift their games to impress him. Because of the lacklustre perfomance last night, it is plain to Cortese that the new appointment needs to be put in place as soon as possible, although it is important to get the right man rather than to pick in haste.

Me too, S_S. I was in my usual seat in the Northam. If ever there was a chant of complete and utter futility, that was it. Pardew's gone, for whatever reason and no matter how loudly the Northam chant, he isn't coming back. The Northam was packed with spotty juveniles last night, the sort who aren't bright enough to think for themselves and feel the need to belong by following like sheep.

There have been some tits suddenly appearing on the forum in the past couple of days, but you really do take the prize as the biggest. On the basis of one result since Pardew's departure against a team that beat us twice last year under him, you throw your toys out of the pram. How old are you? Are you looking forward to the new term? There were two teams who scored three goals against us (excluding Premiership Skates (4)) The mighty Bristol Rovers beat us 3-2 and Brighton managed to beat us 1-3 at St. Mary's. We also suffered 2-1 defeats by Colchester, Tranmere and Gillingham. I don't recall you feeling the urgent need to come on here then and call for NC's head then. It has obviously totally escaped your attention that the team that played last night was the pick of Pardew's team and you will apparently have us believe that they can only function if Pardew is on the touchline shouting orders. It doesn't occur to you at all that perhaps Lallana's absence, or Lambert not being fully fit are factors that might have changed the outcome, preferring instead to blame the chief executive. I expect that when things improve and we are climbing to the top of the division, you will quietly disappear as suddenly as you came. One lives in hope.

Did Pardew tell you that? So it doesn't make sense then to give a defender a rest after Saturday and play another well qualified defender instead? And presumably Seabourne who Pardew brought in is out of favour. Whatever happened to him?

We didn't look as if we were up for it and perhaps the players were a bit bewildered by the recent loss of Pardew. Certainly the crowd were very subdued apart from the idiotic chanting of Pardew's name whenever Swindon scored. That will have helped the players, wouldnt it? But let's be a bit more objective about things for a change instead of slashing our wrists just yet and face a few truths, unpalateable as they might be. For all the chants for Pardew, people seem to have very selective short memories and have somehow overlooked the fact that Swindon beat us twice last season under him. I would suggest that the first defeat by them was with a performance just as lacklustre as this one if I recall. This was also Pardew's team. Who is to say with any real conviction that had Pardew still been in charge, we would not have lost under him? I would also suggest that the team selected was as strong as it could have been. On balance in the game, we often had periods when we had more of the play and penetrated their defence more often than they threatened ours. Of the two keepers, theirs was the busier. But as often before under Pardew, a team had three chances and took them, while we had several more and failed to score. A couple of other things are worthy of mention and again would not have changed had Pardew still been here. Lallana's absence if a big miss for us and Lambert somehow seems out of sorts. On the plus side (there is one), the defeat makes Cortese's decision over the new manager more urgent than before the match. Although it would have been nice to have won the JPT back to back, we no longer have it as a distraction. The team played with more width than usual under Pardew and I for one hated the way that he restricted our play that way. I hope that we play with more width under the new manager. Whoever comes in has a quality squad available to him and just needs to restore confidence and belief. If we get a top name in, that is the sort of manager who can transform a team within a short time. Just as an aside, the referee and linesmen were diabolical, but that is often something one notices when things don't go well and we look for somebody to blame. But when their striker went to shoot at goal and sliced the ball out wide, the moronic officials awarding a corner really plumbed the depths of incompetance.

Precisely. So nobody can make a judgement as to whether the sacking was right or wrong, rendering the poll flawed. The correct answer to the poll as it stands unless anybody is privy to inside information is "Don't know". Presumably nearly a half of us know the ins and outs of it and perhaps they should share this information with us all.

So there's now a poll on the subject which will not change anything as it's a fait accomplis. Perhaps there ought to be another poll when the new manager is appointed so that people can say whether they prefer the new man, whoever it is. But as nobody yet knows why Pardew was sacked, the whole poll is flawed as nobody can make the judgement as to whether the sacking was right or wrong. Now, if the poll had asked whether they were happy about it or not, then that would have been an entirely different matter.

Who's putting those rumours about? Paul Hart?

In my opinion, anybody who makes accusations about a situation without knowing the facts, is an idiot. What would you call them? Astute? Perspicacious? Intelligent? And where did I jump to any conclusions? I could hardly have been more cautious in qualifying my statement. Naturally people will make comparisons between Pardew's performance and that of his successor, but then again, who's to say that Pardew would have got us promoted? Or that if there were deteriorating relationships between AP and the players, or that AP and Cortese did not see eye to eye on the plan, that it wasn't best to part ways anyway. But I will not formulate an opinion based on speculation and hearsay as some have done. And we will just have to differ on our opinion as to whether our season has been derailed or not. Personally I think that "derailed" is a bit shrill after 3 games and without knowing who will come in to take over as manager. Last season was derailed by our points deduction and yet we very nearly made it to the play-offs, so it is much to early yet for the wrist-slashing.

Not me, Whitey.

*yawn* Soggy in ego boosting thread when he could just as easily add his opinions to one of the other myriad threads. The thought crossed my mind that it was somehow slightly ironic SOG asking about what had happened to stability. What does this stability relate to?

And still we have the idiots piling in without any concrete knowledge of the circumstances. With luck, once the dust had settled and depending on who is brought in, people will begin to realise that they have been far too fraught and look at the broader picture to regain some perspective

The club is not in chaos. The club is still in the ownership of the Liebherr family and Cortese is still the chief executive. We are in a transitional period, that is all. Any judgement on the state of the club can only be made when we know who the new manager is to be.

OK you said the following:- As we failed to gain promotion last season, it would indeed be judged as failure if we were to fail to go up this season, with no points deduction and taking into account the improvements in the team. And Pardew did not have just three games on the clock. He had the entire full last season too, plus cup matches. I don't agree that it is madness, nor that the situation is chaotic, nor that any chance of promotion is put in real jeopardy. I regard those remarks as being hysterical and somebody who has followed football for as many years as you have ought to be able to recollect enough examples of similar situations which have produced positive results to make you a bit more ambivalent about it all. Neither are we at square one again. Square one was when NC and ML took over the club. We have made considerable progress since then and the squad is significantly improved. It isn't the players who have gone, it is the manager. It might come to pass that we appoint a better one, so how are we back at square one? I did name candidates who I would be happy with. I said Curbishley, but if it came to pass, O'Neill would be fantastic, but possibly beyond us. I pointed out that if we did get O'Neill, nearly everybody would then say what a good move it was, sacking Pardew. But you along with others have condemned Cortese for sacking Pardew without any knowledge as to what the reason was, so naturally if you make known your guesses as to the reasons, that is pure conjecture and speculation. I reiterate, it might come to pass that either there are good reasons for his actions, or that we will appoint a replacement who will have have the fans drooling instead of dribbling. I am happy to wait and see what transpires before making a knee-jerk reaction as to whether it is a good or a bad move. At this precise moment in time, nobody is able to make that judgment unless they know the background to it all. My suspicion is that there are very few people who know these things and that hardly any, or none of them have posted on this thread.

It all depends on how how you define well, doesn't it? You might think that he did well, but you do not run the club, so your definition is somewhat irellevant. For the first time the club is owned by people who have the money to spend on making us a success. For the first time we can buy players that other clubs in the same division cannot afford. For the first time we can keep players here rather than having to sell them if we don't want to, because we don't need the cash. For the first time we can decide to forego a shirt sponsor because wedon't need the cash. In short, for the first time in its 125 year history, the club is run by wealthy people with ambition for success instead of acceptance of mediocrity and success being defined as survival for another year. You are obviously so conditioned by past failures, that you cannot accept any other position as being a viable alternative. And what is this stunt you're babbling on about? The dismissal of a manager is a stunt in your mind is it? Right. So why don't you wait and see who is appointed in AP's place before making judgements which might prove to be stupid by ensuing events.

Starting from the end of your post first:- Lowe's record on managers was that because we were a pauper club, he did not allow managers the funds to buy the players who might have made a difference, or we needed to sell the players who would have made a difference. You see, the problem is that whereas you are correct that you can't excuse a bad decision based on who made it, it is pure conjecture as to whether this is a bad decision. The timing might have been forced on Cortese because of the death of ML, or something might have happened within the squad within the past day or so, or somebody Cortese wanted might just have become available - we don't know, so useless speculating until something concrete becomes known. But to state that the timing is a disaster that will ruin the season is totally over the top. It has already been pointed out that Norwich sacked their manager at a similar stage of the season and went up as champions. There have been too many instances of managers taking over teams during the season and a transformation in their fortunes ensuing. So, the transfer window is due to close. So what? We are still able to take on loans and most had agreed that bar a little fine-tuning, the squad was pretty well complete. Talk about the season being thrown into disarray and chaos and having to start again is frankly hysterical. Let's see who we appoint. Personally I'd consider Curbishley a good appointment, but according to most on here, O'Neill would be a fantastic coup, but improbable. So what if we did get O'Neill? Would he be incapable of sorting out this chaos that has been left by Pardew's departure and inspiring the squad? I don't think he would find it much of a problem.

Yes, why not? Nobody knows who is lined up to take Pardew's place. NC has done nothing so far to for me not to trust him. Managers come and go and if somebody comes in who is considered to be a better manager than AP, then a lot of people on here who are wetting themselves over his dismissal are the ones who are going to have egg all over their faces. The more sensible posters are those who consider the possibility that by the end of the season we might quite conceivably be congratulating NC for having the guts to take ruthless decisions against the knee-jerk reactions of the fanbase in pursuit of the club's success and return to the promised land. We'll have to wait and see, but those who make up their minds at this stage, based on nothing in particular are obviously idiots.

The voice of common sense.

The typical knee-jerk reaction from somebody whose opinion I normally value, but I excuse it on the grounds that people are in shock by the announcement and have not had time to form a more circumspect opinion. For example, to claim that sacking him after just three games is going to jeopardise the season is way over the top. So to summarise on what is factual and what is not, all of the information posted on the OS is factual; the manager and the management team have been sacked. So that is the sum total of anything that is known for a fact. Everything else posted on this thread speculating about the reasons for AP's dismissal, whether ML would have allowed it, who we have lined up in AP's place, etc, is all pie in the sky and should be treated as such. I'm going to wait and see who we appoint in his place. It could be that we are able to attract a manager who will have people changing their minds very shortly. In Cortese I still trust.

Well, they couldn't keep it up all season, otherwise they would look even more ridiculous over their childish and churlish little campaign. Besides, some advertising guru has probably told them that their campaign has made them look silly, whilst simulataneously giving us great free publicity, so they have terminated the campaign to spite us. Either that, or the Sun journos got bored with it all, as we have.

This was NOT their second team. It was a mix of first team and players on the fringe of the first team. A little analysis would show you that. Of the players from Bolton who played us, several featured in their previous two Premiership matches against Fulham and West Ham, either in the starting line-up or as substitutes. Those players who also played against us were Knight, Holden, Taylor, Kevin Davies, Klasnic and Elmander.Others who played and who were on Bolton's bench as subs for their first two matches were Bogden, Mark Davies, Andy O'Brien and Ricketts. On the bench and could have come on as subs were other first team players like Petrov, Jaskelainen (G/K) Cahill, Robinson and Muamba. So the only two who played and had not featured before in Bolton's teams were Martin Alonso (a youngster bought from Real Madrid) and Ricardo Gardner, who has been a first team regular for Bolton for yonks. Even having introduced two players to the match as subs from the first team, we still dominated and had we equalised, Coyle would only have had one further substitution available which might not have been enough. And when wrongly saying that Bolton played their second team, it also has to be said that neither did we field the strongest team available to us. Considering the two division gap between us, no impartial observer would have rated them the higher division team.

Well, I congratulate STOat for bothering to take the time to report this over officious plod to the club and the response from Cortese is welcomed. Although I accept that you telling him to get a life is an idiom, if one wishes to have any quality of life, occasionally a stand needs to be made against the increasing abuse of their powers by the police and others in positions of authority. The best situation is that they earn the respect of the public who then feel more inclined to assist them in their duty. What is not helpful is for them to be deliberately antagonistic and confrontational, which will make the public despise and resent them. Thanks for highlighting too the best way to curb these excesses, by writing to the local press or the television programmes like Watchdog. I would hazard a guess that you might also be a smoker. Now, if you couldn't care a toss about matters like these, then that's up to you. But please also allow others to feel differently about it as is their right. Judging by the number of comments on this thread, many felt as I did, that the actions of this rozzer in filming the crowd and the way that he went about it, was inflamatory.

I still harbour grave doubts over whether Mandaric will be able to sell to a Thai consortium and whether they will be able to pass the fit and proper persons test.

So the main man behind the takeover of Leicester is a young guy whose family own the King Power duty-free shops in Thailand. Anybody who flies into Bangkok will know that they are the major players in that area. Anybody who knows Thailand will also know that large contracts like that awarded to King Power at the time of the building of the new airport, will almost certainly have been granted because they were friends or allies of Thaksin Shinawatra. I would hazard a guess that because Thaksin is not able to have ownership of a club, deemed not to be a fit and proper owner, that he has a puppet to do it for him.

Your opinion, but not based entirely on facts IMO. Bolton did not play their second string. It was a mix of players who featured in their first team, together with some who were second choice. Look at their teams that have played so far this season and most of those that played last night have played in the Premiership matches or been on the bench. And it wasn't a case of matching them. I'm certain that the stats for possession, corners, shots on goal, etc, would show that we dominated the game, but lacked the finishing to score, or that their keeper made some very good saves. And the counter argument is that we also played some second string players like Martin and Mills and a kid of school age. Coyne's post match comments as shown above, were honest enough to admit that our players had given his team a really good testing. An equaliser for us and he would have had a nasty fright, as he had used up all of his substitutes, but although those subs had been made presumably mostly to attempt to shore up the team where we were exploiting weaknesses, we still continued to have the majority of the play and to create chances for ourselves. So quite how you can say that they strolled it and we couldn't match it is beyond me. Perhaps we weren't watching the same match, or it looked different from where you were sat. And even then, their goal should have been disallowed looking at the video of it, whereas most reckon that Lallana should have had a clear cut penalty. The referee was very poor and things could have been a bit different.