marko Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Is Nigel really to blame for the sale of our skipper or must the blame be placed at the feet of our board. It's easy to shoot **** at our manager but surely if the board stumped up a little more money for him to play with all this wouldn't have happened. I'm all for watching the purse strings but wouldn't a comprimise between save and spend do a club good every now and again instead of a "save at all costs" attitude? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoggy Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Clough for me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StaffsRam Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 He's operating on a zero budget. He's also probably been told that there's no room in the wage budget even with a number of players going. Left with that, the only way to bring players in to shore up any gaps is to sell. Shackell was probably our more sellable asset. At least by selling now we have over a month to bring players in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jezza Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Ive been looking at every ones opinions about whos to blame for the sale of Shackle , For me Cloughs hands are tied and hes here to do a job on a shoe string , he has no control of the budget and has to be judged on what he does with the budget provided . just think were taking steps backwards and its all out of Nigels hands Board out lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marko Posted July 5, 2012 Author Share Posted July 5, 2012 Ive been looking at every ones opinions about whos to blame for the sale of Shackle , For me Cloughs hands are tied and hes here to do a job on a shoe string , he has no control of the budget and has to be judged on what he does with the budget provided . just think were taking steps backwards and its all out of Nigels hands Board out lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marko Posted July 5, 2012 Author Share Posted July 5, 2012 bang on jezza!! here! here! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davenportram Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 He's operating on a zero budget. He's also probably been told that there's no room in the wage budget even with a number of players going. Left with that, the only way to bring players in to shore up any gaps is to sell. Shackell was probably our more sellable asset. At least by selling now we have over a month to bring players in. There's been no mention of needing to reduce wage budgets so I think its a case of wages saved may be spent Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 This is pointless, the majority love clough and defend the man because his father was manager during the greatest period in our history. It doesn't matter what happens, clough shall have the majority of the fans backing through almost any circumstance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StaffsRam Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 There's been no mention of needing to reduce wage budgets so I think its a case of wages saved may be spent Hopefully, but with us making another loss last season let's hope they don't see another reduction on the wagebill (that's already happened) as a great way of reducing those losses this season. They haven't said that we need to reduce the wagebill but they might happily take it if it happened, which for the moment it has. Hopefully that's not the case though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DcFc Dyycheee Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 It's definitely Nigel Clough that's sold Shack, but if the Americans gave him money for a striker then we wouldn't have to sell him. Nigel or the board? Both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOB BIGGS Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 If it's a straight question of picking between the two, it's the board. I'm not blind to Clough's faults but I'm not blind to his strengths either. I'd take some convincing that he wanted to sell one of his better players. I doubt he had any choice though if he wanted to try to make progress. I'm getting used to it all now though. May as well prepare yourselves for the next one! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ladyram Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Oh lovely. Another hap hap happy thread. Don't know how I cope with all this joy.... 'http://www.dcfcfans.co.uk/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/rolleyes' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':rolleyes:' /> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenzzo Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 get rid of them both the board are crap and nigel hasent got the balls to stand up to them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gcdcfc28 Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Ive been looking at every ones opinions about whos to blame for the sale of Shackle , For me Cloughs hands are tied and hes here to do a job on a shoe string , he has no control of the budget and has to be judged on what he does with the budget provided . just think were taking steps backwards and its all out of Nigels hands Board out lol How is He operating on a zero budget? 800,000 on Bailey/Brayford 500,000 on Maguire 300,000 on Moxey 400,000 on Porter 400,000 on Fielding 300,000 on Robinson 350,000 on Davies 250,000 on Martin 900,000 on Barker 750,000 on Shackell He's had money in the pot and with the exceptions of Brayford, Robinson, Barker and Bryson He hasn't done a great deal with it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenzzo Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 WOULD LOVE TO SIT DOWN WITH THE BOARD AND GO THROUGH THE PROFIT AND LOSS WITH THEM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcnram Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 WOULD LOVE TO SIT DOWN WITH THE BOARD AND GO THROUGH THE PROFIT AND LOSS WITH THEM WOT?? ALL THAT SUMS AND STUFF?? WOULD YOU COPE? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Children behave try to not insult each other before the mods come calling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jezza Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 How is He operating on a zero budget? 800,000 on Bailey/Brayford 500,000 on Maguire 300,000 on Moxey 400,000 on Porter 400,000 on Fielding 300,000 on Robinson 350,000 on Davies 250,000 on Martin 900,000 on Barker 750,000 on Shackell He's had money in the pot and with the exceptions of Brayford, Robinson, Barker and Bryson He hasn't done a great deal with it... For one i didnt say a zero budget . I cant see how he would want to build by selling his player of the year who has only been here for one year, best player hes signed sold for a mere profit . but the question was whos to blame for the sale of Shackle and i feel its not his decision to sell , but as manager its his job to justify what the boards decide to do! The day he speaks his mind then he will be turned on ! IMO not trying to say all his signings are going to be a success ie due to his skills and stubborness! But dont believe he is allowed to build now due to funds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AucklandRam Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Id feel sorry for Clough because he is working within a very tight budget. But as the footballing man he must surely know that in this market Shackell is worth more than what we got for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenzzo Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 WOT?? ALL THAT SUMS AND STUFF?? WOULD YOU COPE? this is my job this is what i do everyday Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.