F.A.O The 'Bellamy, Bellamy, Bellamy' Crowd

[blueinsa]

Tolm, given your opinion that a number have downed tools, what's going to give here, again in your opinion?

Will the players win or will Bobby win the day?

 

[Soulboy]

Tolm, you are wrong about Reid and Ellis.

The fans didn't like Ellis as he was perceived to be a long ball merchant. Reid was popular. We were a few games into the season and Swales appointed John Maddock as "general manager". He promply sacked Reid.

The fans were not happy and that's when The Swales Out campaign escalated to the point where Lee arrived.

No mate, you are at mistaken.

Reid was told he could keep his job, if he got rid of Ellis.

He wouldn't and resigned as a matter of principle. The accusations from the terraces were that Reid allowed Ellis too much imput into the team.

John Maddock is an axe man wherever he has been, but he was only brought in after Reid made his stand.

It was also him who sourced Brian 'Who' Horton.

Reid never resigned, he was sacked. After 3 games of the new season!

Madness. Even then.

 

[tolmie's hairdoo]

The years seem to have clouded your memories?

Francis Lee announced his intentions to the Daily Mirror.

The fans started the Forward with Franny campaign.

You might not recall City fans visiting Swales at hospital.

We were played. Promised a brighter future, when it got worse than ever.

Swales did not sell because he got the right deal, he went because he had no other options.

He hung out and settled for a pittance.

John Dunklerley and Colin Barlow, took the financial piss.

As for Reid, again you are incorrect. The league position was not the issue, it was the style of football (sound familiar?)

Peter Reid was accused of listening too much to Sam Elliis. Swales attempted to get Reid to sack him, he refused, and walked.

How many people would have kept with Reid if they knew what the next 15 years would bring?

The debate has been sidetracked. I will say it again, the fans who sang for Bellamy were out of order.

Far from my memory being clouded I remember those days very clearly.

I was closely involved in the Franny In campaign, and it was after that that I realised fans were just treated as mugs by the owners, whoever they were.

But the fans pressure did NOT move Swales. He could have sat it out, like he had done for the previous 5 years.

I'm not sure where your... "they visited Swales at the hospital story" comes from... but I remember the press making up a story about City fans visiting his mother. No one visited Swales mother at the hospital. It was a story put about by the press at the time. There was never any evidence of it.

And how did the fans sack Reid? They quite simply didn't. The chairman did. It was HIS choice. Not mine, not any City fan that I know of.

I fail to see what Reid's style of play has to do with your argument... not a single fan had any input into his dismissal. The Chairman (and John Maddocks) made that decision.

Maybe it's your memory that is clouded as after the sacking of Reid, the campaign to remove the Chairman went into full swing. Did you not remember that? Because why would the fans "sack" Reid... and then start up a campaign to remove the Chairman who did it!

I thkink you are confusing "pressure and influence" from the fans... and the "power" that a Chairman has. The two are different things. We never had the power to remove managers and you do the fans a disservice by suggesting we are to blame for the inadequacies of our owners over the years.

You are splitting hairs when citing 'pressure and influence' as opposed to chairmen, anywhere, actually pulling the trigger.

It is exactly that pressure and influence which invariably brings it to bear.

I will say again, players and fans get managers the sack.

In terms of the Frannmy campaign, you have a romanticised version of events.

I have you at a disadvantage, I perhaps believe, in terms of knowing some of the principle characters involved at this time.

Franny played us all. The fans were mobilised by an open letter from Franny in the Daily Mirror.

I remember standing outside with thousdands of others as he rolled up that day.

He needed the fans, he knew that better than anybody. Swales would have stayed for another decade, otherwise.

-- Mon Nov 15, 2010 12:43 pm --

No mate, you are at mistaken.

Reid was told he could keep his job, if he got rid of Ellis.

He wouldn't and resigned as a matter of principle. The accusations from the terraces were that Reid allowed Ellis too much imput into the team.

John Maddock is an axe man wherever he has been, but he was only brought in after Reid made his stand.

It was also him who sourced Brian 'Who' Horton.

Reid never resigned, he was sacked. After 3 games of the new season!

Madness. Even then.

You missed my other post, mate.

Reid said he would rather resign if he was forced to sack Ellis.

Hence Maddock was brought in to get rid of both, and personally appoint Brian Horton.<br /><br />-- Mon Nov 15, 2010 12:46 pm --<br /><br />

Tolm, given your opinion that a number have downed tools, what's going to give here, again in your opinion?

Will the players win or will Bobby win the day?

Results will dictate, ultimately. If he gets them, in spite of below-par showings from whoever, he will cling on.

The whole dilemma is a lack of suitable availble candidates in world football.

A suspect a significant cross section of opinion would not know whether to 'stick or twist'.

It's a sticking plaster over an open wound. As Dave will tell you, Tevez has a lot of say and has had major issues since last season.

Mancini will be the loser. Whether City will be, remains to be seen.

 

[Soulboy]

Far from my memory being clouded I remember those days very clearly.

I was closely involved in the Franny In campaign, and it was after that that I realised fans were just treated as mugs by the owners, whoever they were.

But the fans pressure did NOT move Swales. He could have sat it out, like he had done for the previous 5 years.

I'm not sure where your... "they visited Swales at the hospital story" comes from... but I remember the press making up a story about City fans visiting his mother. No one visited Swales mother at the hospital. It was a story put about by the press at the time. There was never any evidence of it.

And how did the fans sack Reid? They quite simply didn't. The chairman did. It was HIS choice. Not mine, not any City fan that I know of.

I fail to see what Reid's style of play has to do with your argument... not a single fan had any input into his dismissal. The Chairman (and John Maddocks) made that decision.

Maybe it's your memory that is clouded as after the sacking of Reid, the campaign to remove the Chairman went into full swing. Did you not remember that? Because why would the fans "sack" Reid... and then start up a campaign to remove the Chairman who did it!

I thkink you are confusing "pressure and influence" from the fans... and the "power" that a Chairman has. The two are different things. We never had the power to remove managers and you do the fans a disservice by suggesting we are to blame for the inadequacies of our owners over the years.

You are splitting hairs when citing 'pressure and influence' as opposed to chairmen, anywhere, actually pulling the trigger.

It is exactly that pressure and influence which invariably brings it to bear.

I will say again, players and fans get managers the sack.

In terms of the Frannmy campaign, you have a romanticised version of events.

I have you at a disadvantage, I perhaps believe, in terms of knowing some of the principle characters involved at this time.

Franny played us all. The fans were mobilised by an open letter from Franny in the Daily Mirror.

I remember standing outside with thousdands of others as he rolled up that day.

He needed the fans, he knew that better than anybody. Swales would have stayed for another decade, otherwise.

-- Mon Nov 15, 2010 12:43 pm --

Reid never resigned, he was sacked. After 3 games of the new season!

Madness. Even then.

You missed my other post, mate.

Reid said he would rather resign if he was forced to sack Ellis.

Hence Maddock was brought in to get rid of both, and personally appoint Brian Horton.

And I may have you at a disadvantage as I was on the committee supporting the Forward with Franny campaign at the time.

But we're just going round in circles with this one now.

Only Chairmen sack managers, but they respond to pressure from fans and players... agreed?

 

[Didsbury Dave]

I'm not going to get into who said what, Tolm, becuase I like you and respect your opinion.We're all bickering over minor issues here and now we're getting to the rub.

I think the lack of candidates will mean Mancini can hang on for the rest of the season, regardless of what happens.

And if it means dodging another short-term appointment , I'm happy with that. Surely he can scrape 4th.

 

[tolmie's hairdoo]

You are splitting hairs when citing 'pressure and influence' as opposed to chairmen, anywhere, actually pulling the trigger.

It is exactly that pressure and influence which invariably brings it to bear.

I will say again, players and fans get managers the sack.

In terms of the Frannmy campaign, you have a romanticised version of events.

I have you at a disadvantage, I perhaps believe, in terms of knowing some of the principle characters involved at this time.

Franny played us all. The fans were mobilised by an open letter from Franny in the Daily Mirror.

I remember standing outside with thousdands of others as he rolled up that day.

He needed the fans, he knew that better than anybody. Swales would have stayed for another decade, otherwise.

-- Mon Nov 15, 2010 12:43 pm --




You missed my other post, mate.

Reid said he would rather resign if he was forced to sack Ellis.

Hence Maddock was brought in to get rid of both, and personally appoint Brian Horton.

And I may have you at a disadvantage as I was on the committee supporting the Forward with Franny campaign at the time.

But we're just going round in circles with this one now.

Only Chairmen sack managers, but they respond to pressure from fans and players... agreed?

Only This!

 

[blueinsa]

Far from my memory being clouded I remember those days very clearly.

I was closely involved in the Franny In campaign, and it was after that that I realised fans were just treated as mugs by the owners, whoever they were.

But the fans pressure did NOT move Swales. He could have sat it out, like he had done for the previous 5 years.

I'm not sure where your... "they visited Swales at the hospital story" comes from... but I remember the press making up a story about City fans visiting his mother. No one visited Swales mother at the hospital. It was a story put about by the press at the time. There was never any evidence of it.

And how did the fans sack Reid? They quite simply didn't. The chairman did. It was HIS choice. Not mine, not any City fan that I know of.

I fail to see what Reid's style of play has to do with your argument... not a single fan had any input into his dismissal. The Chairman (and John Maddocks) made that decision.

Maybe it's your memory that is clouded as after the sacking of Reid, the campaign to remove the Chairman went into full swing. Did you not remember that? Because why would the fans "sack" Reid... and then start up a campaign to remove the Chairman who did it!

I thkink you are confusing "pressure and influence" from the fans... and the "power" that a Chairman has. The two are different things. We never had the power to remove managers and you do the fans a disservice by suggesting we are to blame for the inadequacies of our owners over the years.

You are splitting hairs when citing 'pressure and influence' as opposed to chairmen, anywhere, actually pulling the trigger.

It is exactly that pressure and influence which invariably brings it to bear.

I will say again, players and fans get managers the sack.

In terms of the Frannmy campaign, you have a romanticised version of events.

I have you at a disadvantage, I perhaps believe, in terms of knowing some of the principle characters involved at this time.

Franny played us all. The fans were mobilised by an open letter from Franny in the Daily Mirror.

I remember standing outside with thousdands of others as he rolled up that day.

He needed the fans, he knew that better than anybody. Swales would have stayed for another decade, otherwise.

-- Mon Nov 15, 2010 12:43 pm --

Reid never resigned, he was sacked. After 3 games of the new season!

Madness. Even then.

You missed my other post, mate.

Reid said he would rather resign if he was forced to sack Ellis.

Hence Maddock was brought in to get rid of both, and personally appoint Brian Horton.

-- Mon Nov 15, 2010 12:46 pm --

Tolm, given your opinion that a number have downed tools, what's going to give here, again in your opinion?

Will the players win or will Bobby win the day?

Results will dictate, ultimately. If he gets them, in spite of below-par showings from whoever, he will cling on.

The whole dilemma is a lack of suitable availble candidates in world football.

A suspect a significant cross section of opinion would not know whether to 'stick or twist'.

It's a sticking plaster over an open wound. As Dave will tell you, Tevez has a lot of say and has had major issues since last season.

Mancini will be the loser. Whether City will be, remains to be seen.

Thanks for your reply.

Given your reply though, is it not feasible that we as fans are witnessing below par performances directly as a result of an ongoing war behind the scenes and as such, is it not fair to be blaming fans for getting worried? Bellamy chants aside mate, i am alarmed at our lack of attacking football but your confirmation of what many have heard about issues behind the scenes is clearly showing out on the pitch.

The owners have a duty to put it to bed asap.

 

[tonea2003]

And I may have you at a disadvantage as I was on the committee supporting the Forward with Franny campaign at the time.

But we're just going round in circles with this one now.

Only Chairmen sack managers, but they respond to pressure from fans and players... agreed?

Only This!

now you have agreed on the history
who do you think/know has downed tools?
and silly question, is mancini aware or not? if so why are they still playing.
and as mentioned before, it may have been you,
if a player can't leave his shit for 90 min he has no place in our club.

 

[tolmie's hairdoo]

I'm not going to get into who said what, Tolm, becuase I like you and respect your opinion.We're all bickering over minor issues here and now we're getting to the rub.

I think the lack of candidates will mean Mancini can hang on for the rest of the season, regardless of what happens.

And if it means dodging another short-term appointment , I'm happy with that. Surely he can scrape 4th.

This is the crux of the real debate for me.

The fact fans are are such poles, provides my stance Mancini stands no chance of getting it right.

He was a divisive appointment (the greatest irony being when I posted Hughes was sacked and the new man woulf divide opinion)

This was as a result of no viable alternative. We are at the same cross roads.

If we are deadly serious, we say to Jose, there's £20m a season for the next five years.

Otherwise, someone else is going to get lucky and get a punt on the richest ticket in town.

Problem is, we are sick of being a suck-it-and-see option.

 

[Soulboy]

Tolmie... has something happened in the last couple of days for you to be on such a downer?

I read you a few days ago waxing lyrically about Mancini and how we needed to stick by him, and that the board were all for backing him come what may.

Yet today it's as if someone has suggested they are getting set to pull the plug.

Dish the dirt mate... what's happened!