FAO: iamITK - Can your contacts in the club tell you if TAR is injured?

[Notts78]

I think he signed before LW so unlike Langstaff where they showed LW, he had no input to his signing. I don't know if he'll be forced to play TAR or watch the investment sit on the bench or worse.

TAR and Langstaff signed before LW took over.

Not aimed at you Crazy, but who are Luke Williams cronies? It’s a bizarre comment given he has signed one or two players since he took over.

[iamITK]

IamITK - now is your chance to shine - can you have a word with your contacts to find out? - surely one of them would know something.

Why would you be asking me for info? Im always wrong, so how would I know?

To answer your question, not from my contacts but from fans HE spoke to receently, hes not injured, just not faniced by the manager at the moment.

[iamITK]

Good question. If he comes back to say TARs injured, we’ll know he’ll definitely play the 90 minutes on Saturday.

Yet here you are wanting to know!

[PedroTheFisherman66]

Yet here you are wanting to know!

if its of any consolation I love your tit bits !! you should reveal them more often !!!

[Woodypie]

Sold a pup. You'd think somebody would have looked at his stats!

[slack_pie]

Assuming TAR isn't fancied by LW, this sort of thing seems inevitable with the 'head coach' approach.

At the end of the day, LW picks the team. It's surely his right to pick players he rates - players he can trust to carry out his instructions and get results. But what if the owners get frustrated that a player they chose and invested in isn't being played? At that point, either the entire scouting approach is undermined or the head coach's ability to make autonomous decisions is. Not ideal either way.

[crazyfists]

TAR and Langstaff signed before LW took over.

Not aimed at you Crazy, but who are Luke Williams cronies? It’s a bizarre comment given he has signed one or two players since he took over.

Yeah it might have been Austin I'm thinking of instead. I'm not sure all these rumours are true, it's just abit worrying they're coming out after the third game, you would have thought these kind of things came out later on in the season. It just all feels abit unsettled at the moment.

[the_anticlough]

Assuming TAR isn't fancied by LW, this sort of thing seems inevitable with the 'head coach' approach.

At the end of the day, LW picks the team. It's surely his right to pick players he rates - players he can trust to carry out his instructions and get results. But what if the owners get frustrated that a player they chose and invested in isn't being played? At that point, either the entire scouting approach is undermined or the head coach's ability to make autonomous decisions is. Not ideal either way.

As long as everyone concentrates on the role they've agreed to take it should be fine.

How did Moniz's recruitment go? Sheridan's players? Nolan's? What impact did the recruitment under Ardley have? We all know the answer to that one.

To me, it would seem like bad faith verging on sabotage to agree to take a job within a club's defined structure and then not pick the players recruited by the club. You'd just be putting yourself on the fast-track for the exit door.

This is all a theoretical conversation though, there's no firm evidence that this problem exists.

[the_anticlough]

Didn't we get a load of nonsense when Ross and IB first arrived?
Teams with Griffiths, Knowles and Knight with Rodrigues and Sam nowhere near the team? In fact Knight got a long run of starts (for absolutely zero return) that was double to what Eli got in 2 full years.

Now, in their wisdom, LW and RH think you can have Francis, Palmer and O'Brien in a 3, with a back-5 behind them.
Seems like it's inevitable teething problems - new coaches come in and have to learn from scratch and trial and error amazingly.

[GranthamPie]

Oh dear… oh dear… dark clouds


Edit: I’d like to upload my dark clouds giff or photo but this sheite 1980s website doesn’t allow complicated stuff like that. Lol