Mrs Barista wrote:Thought you said enough was enough for you and seven others and you weren't paying any more?
That was and still is correct................
We will not be buying passes for the 2016 season, two of the seven are stopping going completely the remainder will be going on a game by game basis.
Last Saturday three of us went, three where working and could not attend, nice of you take the interest and you can add to the "been count"
Take kindly the counsel of the years, gracefully surrendering the things of youth. Nurture strength of spirit to shield you in sudden misfortune. But do not distress yourself with imaginings. Many fears are born of fatigue and loneliness. Beyond a wholesome discipline, be gentle with yourself.;
Can't we all draw a line under this now and agree to evaluate Radford's performance at the end of the season?
The league table after the top/middle 8 games will show without question whether he's been good enough.
It's not enough to merely make the 8. If we aren't in the running to make the final 4 with two games to go I'd say we haven't achieved our goal for the season.
Before anyone jumps on me, I'm not a Radford hater, neither will I be calling for his head if this objective hasn't been achieved.
The buck stops with AP, Radford is his appointment and in 2011 he said that he will not accept a top eight finish as a barometer of supposed success at any point in the future whilst he is the owner of this club.
I think that 4 years is long enough for him to have made substantial progress towards this goal, so I don't think I'm being unreasonable.
If you aren't fired with enthusiasm, you will be fired with enthusiasm. Vince Lombardi
Doom&Gloom Merchant wrote:You should probably make yourself clearer then Bumpy. Big rolling eyes icons for gods sake, you're an adult, articulate, don't use little emoticons that people could misinterpret.
Actually, maybe that's what the petition was missing?
It was perfectly clear to all and sundry except yourself,(ok, you and 1865) given the fairly obviousness of what had/has been said (or indeed NOT been said) for you to misunderstand is your failing. My rolling eyes icon was a representation of exactly that when you say something particularly ironic...how you could not understand that given everything that had being said is beyond me. The petition was clear and accurate in what it said, if you couldn't understand it that again is a failing on your part, you didn't have to read it, no-one is forcing you.
Joined: Jan 23 2006 Posts: 15980 Location: Boulevard with my balls of steel!
carl_spackler wrote:Then I think you should reread the quote in full:
Specifically attributing the change to a team meeting.
Note eventually. There's been criticism and calls for his head for a fair while, I'm not sure how saying the coach eventually changed his philosophy is suggesting it's a direct reaction to fan unrest. If it was fan-inspired it would have been before now, IMO. The point is clearly how strange it is to suggest that fans were wrong to not be happy on the evidence that they have been given what they want for a couple of games and as a result have (in the main) stopped complaining.
Claiming to be right about something is not the same as trying to claim the credit for fixing it.
Absolutely spot on sir. I was in no way claiming fan pressure had any sort of influence on the apparent change. In fact as you point out I highlighted the team meeting as the main reason. FWIW I think what has possibly happened is that Radford in conjunction with the players has decided that being so good defensively actually gives us more licence to take a few risks and do something with the ball as if/when it doesn't come off our defence can make up for it.
It's not just a case of Sneyd and Pryce suddenly hitting some form either, the entire team we're playing with more freedom. At one point we had Paea and Watts doing a run around and the number of offloads suddenly went up. The ball from Paea to Watts (slightly forward fwiw) that led to the 3rd try I think it was hasn't even looked like a possibility previously this season. The philosophy has definitely changed and I couldn't care less what the reason behind it is but long may it continue.
knockersbumpMKII wrote:It was perfectly clear to all and sundry except yourself,(ok, you and 1865) given the fairly obviousness of what had/has been said (or indeed NOT been said) for you to misunderstand is your failing. My rolling eyes icon was a representation of exactly that when you say something particularly ironic...how you could not understand that given everything that had being said is beyond me. The petition was clear and accurate in what it said, if you couldn't understand it that again is a failing on your part, you didn't have to read it, no-one is forcing you.
You could send a glass eye to sleep pal.
Cup Winners: 1914, 1982, 2005, 2016, 2017. Cup Runners-Up: 1908, 1909, 1910, 1922, 1923, 1959, 1960, 1980, 1983, 1985, 2008, 2013. League Champions: 1920, 1921, 1936, 1956, 1958, 1983. League Runners-Up: 1957, 1982, 1984, 2006.
Joined: Aug 30 2005 Posts: 3231 Location: in a cave
Lang Park wrote:Can't we all draw a line under this now and agree to evaluate Radford's performance at the end of the season?
The league table after the top/middle 8 games will show without question whether he's been good enough.
It's not enough to merely make the 8. If we aren't in the running to make the final 4 with two games to go I'd say we haven't achieved our goal for the season.
Before anyone jumps on me, I'm not a Radford hater, neither will I be calling for his head if this objective hasn't been achieved.
The buck stops with AP, Radford is his appointment and in 2011 he said that he will not accept a top eight finish as a barometer of supposed success at any point in the future whilst he is the owner of this club.
I think that 4 years is long enough for him to have made substantial progress towards this goal, so I don't think I'm being unreasonable.
Very sensible post. Radford is coach till the end of the season and if we make the 8 I think he will keep his job because its a considerable improvement on last season. If we don't make the 8 I think he should go but I will back him until then.
Despite what Pearson said I think financial constraints may have caused him to moderate his ambitions.
First there was wisdom Then there was knowledge Now there is only information
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 219 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
