lrm14

I don’t think arguing against possession-based football is as valid as some people think.
 
We should have been promoted under Lampard, and would have been if he hadn’t had his head turned by Chelsea. That was bad enough, but even worse Lampard’s drawn out leaving party such that Cocu didn’t get to meet his new players until they were part way through their pre-season tour of America, by which time the transfer window was as good as over, with no-one signed and virtually no-one available. We then had Rooney’s arrival which have us all a boost until it was clear to everyone but him and Cocu that Rooney’s legs were gone. How many points that set us back isn't clear, but then Rooney started to undermine Cocu, again at a points cost. We then had the EFL came riding into town, so post-Lampard all our managers have faced impossible difficulties. I know that Rooney would gave got us to 17th place if it wasn’t dir the points deduction, which isn’t a promotion result, but he was still suffering the fall-out of a massively weakened squad courtesy of our Frank, followed by being hamstrung by Rick Parry and his henchmen.
Do ate we demanding Rosenior-ball instead of what is being dished up at the moment? I am not so sure. Maybe even the results aren’t so much the issue. What we want to see is the team competing with our opponents instead of being outplayed fir most of every match, ie a clear plan, playing to our strengths (which we do actually have) and some tactical nous.

What utter nonsense. Everyone at the club has talked of winning promotion this season as the aim. Warne has even targeted top 3. Our budget at the very least is top 6, and a chance of it actually being the highest wage bill in the league this season. We are 8 games in, sit 9th in the table thanks to an over reliance on set pieces and Waggy magic, whilst performing more like a bottom half side not far off the relegation spots.
Anything less than promotion this season is a failure.

It's strange people can't see this. 
The 'Warne out' people think that getting rid of Warne will lead to more success for the club in the medium to long term than the alternative.
The 'Warne in' people think that sticking with Warne will lead to more success for the club in the medium to long term than the alternative. 
I imagine if both sets of people were suddenly granted the ability to see into the future - could see where we would be under Warne in another year or two, say - then they'd probably agree about the right course of action now.
We disagree over Warne because we disagree over whether he will be good or bad for the club going forward. We don't disagree on what we want: success, a thriving club, a return to better times. 
We all support the club, we all want the club to win. 

I'm not arguing that he wasn't appointed interim manager. 🤣
I'm saying that strictly following the dictionary definition of the word interim to come to the conclusion that he was never under consideration to be taken on permanently is pedantic in the extreme, and is a notion which has been proven to be incorrect by virtue of statements made by the chairman of the club.
I've also said that I find a certain attitude on display (which you've disputed, but immediately displayed!), to be unnecessary. Nothing stronger than that.
I'd also suggest that the word interim has been used because the chairman's background in business has been entirely in the corporate world where interim would be in more common usage than caretaker, but that's mere supposition.

I mean Clowes himself said it was a tough decision to not give Liam the permanent role and he had interviewed for it so he was clearly a serious candidate. I don’t see why him being interim manager means he wasn’t a serious candidate for the job. 
 
The fella who’s been my interim boss at work is very very likely to be made my permanent boss. Not a dead man walking. Just taken the reigns until they knew for certain what was happening RE structuring…

I didn't say anyone had said those words, just displayed that sort of attitude.
It's an attitude which is very much very much prevalent in your posts on the subject, especially, for example when you revert to quoting strict dictionary definitions to make your point and to suggest that someone is 'slow' or 'naive if they thought that they had a chance of getting the job when their title is interim manager.
It seems to escape your grasp that we're talking about real people, not automatons.
The chairman himself has said that there was a good chance that said person could have got the job, which flies in the face of your pedantry over the word interim. 
The funny thing is I was kind of backing you up - I don't believe there's been any wrongdoing by any party and that everyone was pretty much clued in on the reality of the situation.

Folk will be slower to criticise Clowes for the simple and obvious reason that he saved our club. If there are issues on the field, Warne will cop the lion's share and perhaps rightly so. Being a grounded sort of fellow, I doubt DC is panicking just yet.

Because the rest of his game is lacking imo. 

It's bloody funny that people are sitting there saying that we just need to be patient with Warne, to ignore the style of football for now (or just stick with it anyway if it gets results), anyone complaining about the quality of football on show is impatient and entitled, wants us to lose so the manager gets the chop, not happy with 3 points, toxic in their negativity, dragging the board down (amongst all the other insults and ridicule hurled their way).
Yet when they start talking about Rosenior they pull out all the usual overstated b******* that everything we did was boring, pointless, possession for possession's sake crap which never got us outside of our own half, this tactic or that tactic was stupid and easy to counter, that he didn't understand what was needed for League One and all that crap
...thus displaying  absolutely zero patience, not allowing the possibility for Rosenior to learn and for the style to develop and basically displaying the very traits they accuse the "anti-Warne Brigade" of having.

No.
I just think that the level of derision aimed at those who do is getting a bit out of control. It feels like every point we gain is automatically and immediately used as something to attack other posters. It increasingly looks like there's only one accepted response to a victory and if someone goes against the grain then they're for it.
We saw plenty of this last season when we went on a good run, with threads created to call out other fans for earlier expressing doubts, and it feels like history repeating but with added hostility. We haven't even needed a good run for it to start this season! You'd think there may have been some lessons learned from the experience, but I'm not seeing much evidence of it.
It gets a bit tiring reading how it's people being negative that's making the forum hard to read when it gets just as bad (if not worse, because of the ganging up) from the other side of the argument.
I have reservations about his long-term suitability, but picking up results and keeping us 'there or thereabouts'  in the short term buys him more time to alleviate the concerns - he'll only do that if he shows signs of learning, and I don't just mean temporarily reacting to circumstances which almost force him into changing his ways before reverting to them the first chance he gets, but proper growth as a manager.
I don't have much faith in this happening, and I don't want us to be lumbered with some of the glaring faults within his philosophy which (if they remain) will likely see us as cannon fodder when we do go up, but that doesn't mean I want him sacked before he's had full opportunity to prove me wrong.

My opinion of Rosenior at the time was that it was a mistake to get rid of him. I wanted him to be given until Christmas to turn around the away form, and if he hadn't, then look at bringing in someone more experienced. Looking back and thinking about it, I'm pretty sure Rosenior would have steered us into the playoffs in the end. He built that squad to build his brand of football and we would have had more in the tank energy-wise than under Warne. Unlike Warne, Rosenior's recruitment here and at Hull has been exemplary, so I'm sure we'd have gotten in reinforcements in January as well. In the playoffs, who knows what would have happened, but it would have been very sweet to see us get promoted under him. 
I felt at the time bringing in Warne was an error and remains so. Not because he won't get us out of the division (i think he will next season) but because i have absolutely no faith in him doing anything except relegate us in the championship. I wanted us to invest in a coach who could be part of a longer-term project to guide us not just out of this league but the next one as well. I hope I turn out to be wrong as I was ultimately with Rooney who I spent months lambasting before he became our talisman. 

Clowes did exactly that a year ago. Instead of giving Rosenior time with the squad he had assembled since the middle of July, he brought in the footballing equivalent of a neanderthal.

Do you not recall as clearly those who wanted him to stay? You were busy telling them they were wrong as I recall, me being one of them.
And let's not pretend that good will for Liam is a new thing, borne out of dissatisfaction with Warne, as that's absolute nonsense. I thought we made a mistake at the time and while I'm not one of those screeching for Warne's removal, I still think it was a mistake now.

That's my take - all he really cared about was immediate (or near immediate) promotion, then worry about the long term once we were in the championship. (Maybe at that point selling the club to a richer, more ambitious owner.) Not necessarily the route I'd have preferred, but fine as far as it goes.
It does all depend on us actually getting promotion, though 

I guess Clowes didn't want a project? Water under the bridge an all, but I still don't get how there seems to have been no consideration to the type of football we'd see under Warne.

How he brought nearly an entirely new squad in and had them playing his style by the start of the season was very impressive. Yes, we sometimes over passed but I’m sure with time he would have sorted that out.
For all he did during administration and helping us get back on our feet I wish we’d have given him the season.

It wasn’t the most entertaining of games, we seemed to struggle after we went a goal up and if they had a bit more quality they very well could have made it more of a contest. Over the 90 they were the better side but a win is a win.

We managed an away win whilst not playing great which I suppose is a skill in itself. I don’t think it’s the players that are making us look bad right now, more the instructions they’re being given, which isn’t getting the best out of them. This squad is capable of more and that’s what I’m finding frustrating.

I thought it was only supposed to be after a defeat that this place turned toxic?

I’m not going to stop supporting my team because of the manager. No matter what I think of the football, I’ll be there to cheer them on. 
I come on here to say what I thought about the performance. That’s the point of a forum. I’m not trying to achieve anything, just positing my opinion. If you don’t like it, put me on ignore and create an echo chamber.

I go to pretty much all weekend games. Living in London midweek games are rarely feasible so I watch on RamsTV. 
My support of a manager is dependent on results / style of play - my support of Derby County is not. I will be there whatever, just as I was during administration. That is, unfortunately, the price of loving a football club.

Looks like another painful day for Hull fans with a painful away win at Stoke likely to take them to a painful fourth.
 

Yes but is Rosenior funnier than Warne? 
 
I suggest you rethink your priorities. 

I suspect clowes knows such wilful blindness isn't how good businessmen operate, even if you don't. 

Mate, don’t engage. You’ll be just wasting your time, you’ll have more luck teaching trigonometry to a dachshund then getting Turden to see any other point of view then the one that aligns with his own cemented beliefs without receiving a twisted response that doesn’t truly address the point you made.

Very sad.