carl_spackler wrote:Firstly; sycophantic, propaganda, and culpable.
Secondly, people outside of the club have no idea for certain whether Rule is how you described or simply wasn't listened to. I think there are many who unfairly hold an association with the people he happened to be employed by against him. The fact is, he came to the club as a marketing man, and on that side we're one of if not the best in the league, as shown by our income.
I just hope that if Rule does stay in his position fans finally start to consider that he might be good at his job and an asset to the club, instead of just wanting rid because he's a reminder of Kath Hetherington.
Think he meant "sycophant".
I wonder how much better James Rule can be with the backing of AP.
There's a lot of emphasis in AP's piece on investment in youth development. We've long wondered why more young players weren't coming through the system and this seems to have lacked a lot more focus than our Grade A license would have lulled us into believing. The finger of blame has pointed at Andy Last for not developing them and Agar for not blooding them but perhaps they were just not up to it through lack of application of the sports science knowledge out there, lack of focus on player performance management and poor training facilities at a key point in their development as young, growing people. I find AP's determination to sort this area out as one of the most inspiring aspects of the piece.
It feels a bit too good to be true all of this after the last 20 or so years.