In January..........

[FatherKnowsBest]

Often the 'pro team' tell us we may well have gone to the wall without his backing. What,Like all the others? is my retort to that.

The argument was that his continued ownership of the club has held it back, whereas it is entirely possible that it is the opposite that is true. Its hard to blame the guy based on a hypothetical argument.

The 'pros' can't have it both ways. One minute he's totally in charge, 'major shareholder' etc, the next he was swayed by others.He's either in charge and responsible or he's not. I think we all know the truth behind that one- it's his club, he's the owner.

Leaders don't exist in a bubble as you well know. Everyone has advisors and influencers around them. In the end it is his decision, but that does not mean he hasn't been badly advised. Neither of these are mutually exclusive as you seem to be suggesting.

It was only yesterday TT that you were accusing me of arrogance about a light hearted comment about you 'banging-on' about King Kev, yet here you are claiming a full keep-net, (although I think you need a bit more than collecting posters who are simply pointing out the logical flaws and absurd positions of your arguments) Frankly, pot and grimy arrse spring to mind...

[U-F-O]

Very few of us would. If any on here.

Take the " running a football club isn't like running any other business". Of course it is. It's still all about the bottom line. Hit it, miss and pump money in to keep it going or go bust. It's still a multi million pound enterprise.

The business side of it is I agree. The football side, sorry different story. As we are testimony to, get the appointment of the manager wrong and it doesn't end well.

[Chips1889]

Nice to see a bit of discussion on BM.

Fpor a few years now, as you are all aware, I have joined in, sometimes instigated, criticim of McC.

Obviously most hold strng opinions on both sides of the argument, for ao against.

Often the 'pro team' tell us we may well have gone to the wall without his backing. What,Like all the others? is my retort to that.

When dealing with facts the undeniable one is that , due to the men he appointed, due to his decisions, SUFC spent the longest ever time in the club's history languishing in the 3rd division.

The 'pros' can't have it both ways. One minute he's totally in charge, 'major shareholder' etc, the next he was swayed by others.He's either in charge and responsible or he's not. I think we all know the truth behind that one- it's his club, he's the owner.

However, the point of this particular post is to tell you all how much I have enjoyed posting the last few years, living up to Rod and others' expectations, to criticie wherever and whenever possible.

I know so many expected it so I did it so as not to disappoint.

To be fair I do understand that he's suffered from bad luck ( haven't we all) and bad advice, that , unlike other businesses, the results are not certain regardless of the structures and strictures in place and that not all clubs can win all the time.

I also understand that the resources and backing available to SUFC are way better than those available to others and am baffled by the consistent failure to convert those assets into meaningful progress.

To sum up, I have played a part over the years and been amused, ennervated, dismayed, surprised,entertained, insulted and praised but mostly amused by the reactions to my posts about him.

I am sure you will all agree his period of tenure has been disappointing at best in football terms but, as a Blade, I've had some fun, some heartache and some little joy.

I'm not going to stop criticising when he deserves it but no longer will I jump in to play the McC hating villain at every cue much,latterly, of which was tongue in cheek.

Thanks for the responses but the keep net is now full to bursting.

I finally glad you accept my point of view is as valid as your point of view.

Thank you Mr McCabe

UTCB

[tomytony]

I finally glad you accept my point of view is as valid as your point of view.

Thank you Mr McCabe

UTCB

All points of view are valid Chips, it's just that some have more logic to them than others.

[tomytony]

The argument was that his continued ownership of the club has held it back, whereas it is entirely possible that it is the opposite that is true. Its hard to blame the guy based on a hypothetical argument.




Leaders don't exist in a bubble as you well know. Everyone has advisors and influencers around them. In the end it is his decision, but that does not mean he hasn't been badly advised. Neither of these are mutually exclusive as you seem to be suggesting.

It was only yesterday TT that you were accusing me of arrogance about a light hearted comment about you 'banging-on' about King Kev, yet here you are claiming a full keep-net, (although I think you need a bit more than collecting posters who are simply pointing out the logical flaws and absurd positions of your arguments) Frankly, pot and grimy arrse spring to mind...

I think the argument about his continued ownership has two sides and most seem to be on the side of his stewardship protecting the club from the rocky waters of oblivion.As I allude to, that has always been highly unlikely.

The alternative, that he has held SUFC back, would be a minority viewpoint, although I would give it some credence.

One man's 'light hearted' or, as the pigs that were on here said, 'banter' is another man's serious comment.see 'absurd' above

Nice to see you responding with your customary grace and style though- and if anything were to remain in my memory about you it would certainly be ' a grimy arrse'

[rodcurrie]

There's always room for a few more Rod.

You can't be a very good fisherman if it's took this long to fill the net mi owd,Perhaps tha needs a leader who can get what he wants like King Kev did when he appointed TUFTY,what a masterstroke that was.UTCB

[Ayamonteblade]

Regardless of everything McCabe has done, good or bad - if he goes we have to start again with somebody else, probably foreign, probably with a shed load of cash, but probably not with SUFC at the heart of his/her intentions.

So the goalposts shift again, as do the arguments, but my main worry is that TT will probably disappear into the sunset down the M2 in his campervan, never to be seen again.......Bladesmad would not be the same without him to argue with

[tomytony]

You can't be a very good fisherman if it's took this long to fill the net mi owd,Perhaps tha needs a leader who can get what he wants like King Kev did when he appointed TUFTY,what a masterstroke that was.UTCB

I know nowt about fishing Rod ( see what I did there) but I do know that the bait works.

Apparently the more times you cast your rod the more chances you have of catching something.

I'm told the odds are about 1 in 10 and you need to ensure you don't stir up the bottom or you end up with a load of dross on the hook, about 9 in 10 apparently.

[Holden_C]

The business side of it is I agree. The football side, sorry different story. As we are testimony to, get the appointment of the manager wrong and it doesn't end well.

It's inextricably interlinked. The appointment of a senior ember of staff to run a specific side of the set up - in this case the team - is still a business decision. A wrong appointment is a wrong appointment, whatever part of the organisation they're in charge of. I'm

[U-F-O]

It's inextricably interlinked. The appointment of a senior ember of staff to run a specific side of the set up - in this case the team - is still a business decision. A wrong appointment is a wrong appointment, whatever part of the organisation they're in charge of. I'm

A wrong appointment is a wrong appointment but will have varying degrees of impact on the club. Get the appointment of the tea lady wrong and its probably no biggie. On the other hand appoint a crap manager and well........I think it speaks for itself.