Edwards gone

[GroundsmansFork]

I too, would have thought Shaun Garnett would have been given the role as temporary Manager.

 

[bring back the cowshed!]

Shaun wasn't interested in standing in when John Barnes went, which is why we ended up with Les Parry. I doubt he'll have changed his mind. I'm not convinced Alex Russell and Matt Gill won't do better than Rob Edwards in the short term.

 

[Boz]

Shaun wasn't interested in standing in when John Barnes went, which is why we ended up with Les Parry. I doubt he'll have changed his mind. I'm not convinced Alex Russell and Matt Gill won't do better than Rob Edwards in the short term.

I remember something about Shaun not wanting to be assistant manager, because of lack of job security, but wasn't aware of that. It may be that if asked to step in for a short time, he'd accept; the Les Parry situation was more open-ended.

I'm unclear due to the double negative as to whether you think Russell-Gill will improve things? My view is that we played better without a coach and with McMahon as a/m, so would be very doubtful if they could change things. A reason for giving Garnett, who wasn't involved with the first team, a chance.

 

[bring back the cowshed!]

I'm unclear due to the double negative as to whether you think Russell-Gill will improve things? My view is that we played better without a coach and with McMahon as a/m, so would be very doubtful if they could change things. A reason for giving Garnett, who wasn't involved with the first team, a chance.

McMahon left after we'd played just one match under Rob, but I admit the more coaches/assistants Rob brought in, the worse things got. My argument was that as I don't think Shaun has any management ambitions, we might as well leave it to Russell/Gill. They won't get the job, but we might be surprised in the short term.

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

I'm unclear due to the double negative as to whether you think Russell-Gill will improve things? My view is that we played better without a coach and with McMahon as a/m, so would be very doubtful if they could change things.

A good point that, which I don't think many people have picked up on. McMahon, for all his faults, was the only individual with any experience in the coaching set up.

I generally take the view that when a manager goes his henchmen should go with him, on principle. There is no evidence from performances in the last six games that Russell was having any positive impact, and he has to accept a fair share of the responsibility for our failings. There is no reason why he should profit from Edwards' misfortune.

 

[drwhoman]

I doubt if Russell will profit RLC. He is simply there pro tem. He will have more experience of the squad than SG who probably prefers to stay out of it. More chance of keeping his job with youth when the new guy comes in. We should also reflect on the fact that almost all our losses have been by one goal. If Lowe had still been around RE might have had more time to build up his tactical nouse which was found wanting when we threw away games. By the end confidence was shot with Stockton injured and no one else up front capable of scoring a goal. Hence the frustration and resort to hoof ball. Let us hope for a decent appointment. Adams does not inspire me or Ronnie but perhaps beggars cannot be choosers in the current situation.

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

I doubt if Russell will profit RLC. He is simply there pro tem.

By profiting I simply mean remaining in a job for a couple of weeks when, in my view, he should no longer have one. I also think it is bad for morale if he hangs around, and we would stand a better chance of getting a result on Saturday - which we desperately need - with Garnett in charge.

I would be pleased if Mickey Adams got the job.

 

[drwhoman]

Thanks RLC. You are a lot closer to these things than me. I think they may get a result on Saturday. Nothing to do with Garnett or Russell but more a sense of guilt within the squad. They seemed to be a general liking for RE - perhaps that was his problem - he was too nice. Time will tell as always. Also, Oxford are pretty much in the proverbial as well!

 

[Ian]

I'd like to think they could get a result but I think it will be normal service on Sat. Trouble scoring goals and a real lack of belief. I'm sure I read that Palios wanted a new manager in by Sat, but that might just be wishful thinking on my part.

 

[lonerover]

Sky News saying Adams expected to be appointed in the next 24 hours.

 

[GroundsmansFork]

Well it is Micky Adams. Lets hope he can do well for us, he has the track record.

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

Personally, I am delighted by this appointment. He has a track record of both keeping teams in League Two and winning promotion from our division. I don't think we could have done much better given the circumstances.

 

[Ian]

That's excellent news. Now lets kick on!

 

[drwhoman]

He has a decent record. Fingers crossed! I doubt if we can have done better in the circumstances. Well done Mark and Nicola!

 

[lonerover]

Great appointment in my opinion. Agree that for a club bottom of the football league to attract a manager with his pedigree is a real coup. Shows two things in my eyes;

1. Mark Palios has some draw in the world of football and is respected throughout.
2. People think we are in a false position based on our record over the last 25 years.

Have total faith in both Mark and Nicola taking us in the right direction and this is a big step in that plan. Hope he sticks around for a few years.

 

[Boz]

Firstly, it's good that we've made an appointment relatively quickly and it's one of the more decent of those named as in contention. I have to admit that my knowledge of Micky is fairly limited, as although he's got a fairly extensive management history, aside from Port Vale last season, I'm struggling to recall other games between Rovers and a Micky side, so not entirely sure what to expect in how he'll deploy and develop the side.

However, how long is he going to be with us for? Not stated on the official site, Micky talks about "weeks and months" (not years) and it's been suggested elsewhere this is just until the end of the season. Also, has the aim of developing younger players gone out of the window and what exactly is Mark's vision for the club? It would be good to get more indication from the owners about this, as while the short-term prospects have become a lot rosier and MA has a history of building a decent foundation at previous clubs, the longer term remains unclear.

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

My guess would be that the longer term goals have not changed, ie. we want to develop young players and play enterprising football, as this is what Palios implied in his comments this week. However, the urgency of the current situation has necessitated a more pragmatic approach in the short term, and I think there is little doubt that we will play a more direct game under Adams than we did with Edwards.

Unless we stay in the Football League the niceties of our youth policy will be academic really.

 

[bring back the cowshed!]

I am delighted with Micky Adams' appointment, but what the OS does NOT say could be significant. No length of contract specified probably means either a rolling one-year, as with Rob, or something like a short-term arrangement. My guess is that Micky would either have gone for a two/three-year deal for his security, or an interim role until the end of the season with a bonus for keeping us up. This would give him a chance to assess the potential before fully committing himself. I heard that he resigned from his last job once it became too stressful. What will be interesting is who he brings in to help. If he is allowed to bring in his own team right away, he'll have signed a long contract. If he's only an interim, that would not make sense, so Gill and Russell are likely to stay for a while longer. Interesting times.

 

[bigmart]

rumoured to be contract till end of season, good move lets hope he can get us back on track and then stays a few seasons and builds the club back up

 

[frenchrover]

Great news and a very astute move by the Palios'. As BBTC says above, the roles of Gill and Russell after Saturday will very much indicate the length if Mickey's contract. Whatever it's length, I'm sure he will bring much needed stability to the club in the short term and hopefully that will ensure a longer period in which to move the club forward.