GroundsmansFork
Member
- Joined
- 7 Mar 2012
- Messages
- 100
- Player
- Backayogo
I too, would have thought Shaun Garnett would have been given the role as temporary Manager.
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.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.
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.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.
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.
I doubt if Russell will profit RLC. He is simply there pro tem.