Scully Posted 1 hour ago Posted 1 hour ago I'm in favour of keeping him. The spying was a terrible idea and a badly executed one but the punishment has been disproportionate and the media have blown the whole thing up bigger than it needed to be. 3
Morse Posted 1 hour ago Posted 1 hour ago He's been successful (apart from the amateurish espionage) IF he still commandes the backing of the players I think he should stay. Sacking him would be shooting ourselves in the foot. Nobody beyond Saints fans will remember this spying in 6 months time. 3
Toussaint Posted 52 minutes ago Posted 52 minutes ago 3 hours ago, trousers said: Yeah, fair point... I guess 'coercion' is indeed a potential differential here... Damn...! If Salt was coerced and bullied to the extent he claims, it’s not beyond the realms of possibility that there may have been a potential “plea bargain” or “saving one’s own arse” that came into play here.
Wade Garrett Posted 47 minutes ago Posted 47 minutes ago 24 minutes ago, saint michael said: Hackney not play was an advantage but planning for him playing or not playing should have been standard stuff and available from previous games they played with and without. Didn’t need spying to confirm this Why the fuck did that prick send the lad up there then!
saint michael Posted 43 minutes ago Posted 43 minutes ago 5 minutes ago, Wade Garrett said: Why the fuck did that prick send the lad up there then! Exactly. I think it’s ridiculous too. Use data by all means but if he couldn’t work out what they would do with or without says more about him.
Saint Billy Posted 42 minutes ago Posted 42 minutes ago I voted for Tonda to be sacked but that is based on the whole thing starting and ending with Tonda. If it comes to light that it started above Tonda then that changes things.
beatlesaint Posted 31 minutes ago Posted 31 minutes ago 9 minutes ago, Saint Billy said: I voted for Tonda to be sacked but that is based on the whole thing starting and ending with Tonda. If it comes to light that it started above Tonda then that changes things. Well you can be sure it wasn’t Tonda who signed off his expenses claims……
LegalEagle Posted 31 minutes ago Posted 31 minutes ago If the FA ban him for say 6 months or more, or indeed any ban save for about 14 days, surely the club will not pack him off somewhere for a placement elsewhere until his ban is over? This all ends of course if the players want shot of him which begs the question that as he’s still here and I’m assuming the players’ opinions have been collected, there must be a decent rump of the squad who are standing by him. I know that THB posted that piccie yesterday of the bottle and his pint, and in itself that was quite simple stuff, you don’t do that if you do hate the club and its manager and you want out now.
Lord Duckhunter Posted 23 minutes ago Posted 23 minutes ago (edited) Because of his actions, a decent side will be broken up, we lost the chance of promotion & could face further charges & scrutiny. It’s unbelievable people think he should keep his job after that monumental mistake. Unlike Bielsa he didn’t take accountability for this from the off. It looks like he lied by pretending he thought it wasn’t illegal. Why did he think Salt objected to doing it against Ipswich, because he had a haircut that day he didn’t want to miss? Edited 22 minutes ago by Lord Duckhunter
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now