Bedworth (H)

Scores, live updates, discussion etc. on Yeltz matches
Post Reply
Yeltz27
Yeltz Forum Member
Posts: 469
Joined: 22 Sep 2013, 11:22

Re: Bedworth (H)

Post by Yeltz27 » 09 Apr 2019, 17:02

KenR wrote:
09 Apr 2019, 16:30
Piearce9, The decision to allow Hill to continue was totally wrong. We had had 4 years of crap under him and the signs were that he was incapable of making it better. The decision to appoint Smith and Chambers was nt to my liking at the time, as they had a history of leaving clubs, (bit like Martin O'Neil), which I said at the time, even moreso when you also consider that they practically appointed themselves with I believe Hill's help. Also I am led to believe that "they were n't got rid of" but walked out on us due to their failings , a scenario that they have done at clubs in the past, more than once. I have sympathy with the owners as I feel with the timespan, they had little choice other than to appoint Hughes in temporary charge. I for one hope that a new appointment is made during the close season, but I fear otherwise may be the case.
You are totally right.

I see no reason why Lee Hughes would need be at the forum on Thursday unless he is going to be the manager. I fear an announcement on Thursday that that’s what is happening. I would say it’s a dead cert that he will be the manager.

Standing there on Saturday was the lowest point in all of my years of going to the Yeltz. These owners have allowed the Lee Hughes situation to transpire, and it takes an awful lot to regain trust after that

AwayDayYeltz
Yeltz Forum Member
Posts: 2694
Joined: 14 Jul 2017, 13:58
Contact:

Re: Bedworth (H)

Post by AwayDayYeltz » 09 Apr 2019, 17:44

piearce9 wrote:
09 Apr 2019, 13:14
Yeltz27 wrote:
09 Apr 2019, 12:14
And Piearce, the owners could have had a fresh start last summer but chose not to, so what makes you think this summer will be any different?
Part of me can't be bothered to debate, but then I'm a sucker and I can't really help myself...

- It was the right decision (at the time) to let John Hill continue as manager into this season.

- It was the right decision and the right time to relieve John Hill of his duties - which was well handled too.

- It FELT (at the time) like the right decision to appoint Rob & Larry.

- It was the right decision (at the time) to get rid of them and have one last throw of the dice with Hughes to try and save the season.

Now- what I know you'll say is "aha, these can't be good decisions, we're just about to be relegated". But that's because it's easy to reflect and analyse what went wrong after the event. But, in each of these scenarios, I think the owners have acted promptly and tried to drive some positive change. That could not have been said of the previous owner.
I believe that from Karen and Keith's perspective, you're bang on. I can not fault their intentions and reasons as to why they made those choices. It certainly shouldn't be a stick to beat them with.

In relation to Hill, I think we all know my opinions, and many others would have agreed with me, when I argued that he should have been relieved of his duties as soon as the takeover was completed. It was clear to all that a fresh start was needed for all parties. But I completely understand as to why Karen and Keith wanted to be loyal to Hill and see what he could do under their leadership, as opposed to Lynch's leadership. It's a decision I respected, understood but didn't agree with.

The timing of sacking, in terms of during the season was correct. It left enough time for us to appoint someone else and for them to turn it around. I was happy with the appointment at the time, and for a brief period, performances were improved. However the results didn't.

In hindsight, I believe Smith and Larry stayed too long. It was clear long before they left, it wasn't working. Now, I read it as Smith and Larry resigned? Is this not correct? If they were sacked, it was too late. There is a possible theme emerging here, in that relieving a failing management is taking too long.

It's a very difficult balance, and it's a decision I wouldn't like to make. On one hand I'm a massive believer that consistency and continuity breads success. So as a fan I want to see owners be patient with managers, and allow them time to get it right. On the other hand, if I see a manager constantly getting things wrong, and repeating the same mistakes, I then see that as a sign he will not get it right, and a sign that things will not improve, no matter how much time you allow the management. It's at that time, action should be taken. It must be near impossible to judge, for an owner, and as I say, a decision or position, I do not envy.

At the time key decisions were made, I've either been happy or understood them. Our owners shouldn't come under heavy criticism for me. They're new to ownership of a football club, and are making decisions with the clubs interests at heart. They may not get it right first time, and I can appreciate it's a learning curve.

With regards to Colin Brookes, I can understand where Yeltz 27 is coming from. I do not agree with him at all, but if you take time to message or talk to him, and he explains why he thinks what he thinks, his reasoning makes sense, and it's certainly not him moaning for the sake of moaning. You don't have to agree with him, but respect his opinion.

Colin has been here for many years, as we all know, and has overseen and / or worked with a number of owners, who have seen us through difficult times, that have almost left the town without a club.

I don't believe for one second there is any criticism due to Colin. Infact the only thing Colin is perhaps guilty of is being a true gentleman and giving various people, over the years, the benefit of the doubt, and even trusting them with a second chance, out of good nature, only for them to go back on that second chance, and mess him, the fans and club around. I would bet anything that anything Colin has said or done, in relation to this club, has been in genuine good faith and for the best interests of the club.
Last edited by AwayDayYeltz on 09 Apr 2019, 19:00, edited 1 time in total.
Josh - Keyboard warrior! #UpTheYeltz

User avatar
andy
Yeltz Forum Member
Posts: 6872
Joined: 29 Apr 2011, 18:43

Re: Bedworth (H)

Post by andy » 09 Apr 2019, 18:38

What a great post! I reckon you should apply for the job. I'll second it if you appoint me assistant, and we'll knock anyone out who dares to criticise us after 25 straight defeats. ;D
Proud owner of FOUR Georges O0 O0 O0 O0

Yeltz7
Yeltz Forum Member
Posts: 62
Joined: 30 Apr 2011, 17:44

Re: Bedworth (H)

Post by Yeltz7 » 10 Apr 2019, 17:13

piearce9 wrote:
09 Apr 2019, 13:14
PS- not sure where this "Colin is a secret M**s*n sympathiser" line has come from, but it seems like a cheap (and bizarre) shot to discredit him. Not on.
Well anybody who was there that night at the forum,which happened during the boycott of games will tell you,he took the mic when there was an angry atmosphere on the night,credit in a way it calmed it down a little but it was a backward step for the club in my eyes what he said,but we all have different views on our great club and to me its not been the same club since Harry Rudge passed away,but like everything in life things move on.

Noggin
Global Moderator
Posts: 954
Joined: 01 May 2011, 18:56

Re: Bedworth (H)

Post by Noggin » 10 Apr 2019, 18:29

I think that Yeltz7, you are confusing some of the various neerdowells that have plagued our club over the last 10 years. THe meeting that you are referring to look place at the time when M**s*n and Kelly Gentles had apparently scarpered and the Brothers Ingram had arrived with an offer to buy the club from the administrator. The Ingrams were claiming at the time to have nothing to do with MM (something that many were dubious of and they proved to be a deeper connection than originally thought).

THe gist of what Colin said was “you have won, they have left” (almost his exact words, referring to MM and Gentles). He then went on to say that the Ingrams had put up the cash and deserved to be given a chance. As it happens, I spoke on the other side of the motion almost immediately after Colin.

I disagreed with Colin then and have disagreed with him since. But I don’t doubt for a second his integrity and his willingness to put himself on the line for the football club. To say that he was sympathetic to known rogues is simply unfair. I mentioned earlier in this post the fact that we have had a plague of dubious characters assocociated with the club since 2007 and it just makes me realise how grateful we should be that we now have the club in honest hands.

Yes, the performance on the pitch has been dire this season and it may take a while to fix, but I would much rather have honest solutions that take a while than a quick fix followed by another crisis.

Yeltz7
Yeltz Forum Member
Posts: 62
Joined: 30 Apr 2011, 17:44

Re: Bedworth (H)

Post by Yeltz7 » 10 Apr 2019, 18:51

I don't think i said in my 2 previous posts he was sympathetic with MM or anybody,just saying what he said and the boycott ended which i strongly disagreed with.Like i said all history but another thing i feel unhappy about as well and i don't know the history why is all these events was taken away from the yeltz bar,that club was always Halesowen Town to me,the night paddy page(or was it harry rudge) was lifted shoulder height and took round the bar after the win at burnham (83) one of the greatest days in my life.

Post Reply