Parkes Sacked By Hughes !

[American]

After careful consideration of the question, I decided to vote for Undecided. Yes, it was his right to make the move, but if it was a good move or not won't be known for a few years.

For the pro-Parkes side, they are undefeated right now. For the anti-Parkes side, none of the (non-injury recovering) players, bar Jay, have even had a sniff at the first team squad, and by all accounts he was playing pretty uninspired under Parkes.

[SIMON GARNERS 194]

Fair comment Phil but NO one man is bigger than the club.....not even Jack Walker.No one can argue about Tony's good service to the club but also it's hard to argue against the fact that his involvement/influence at first team level was deminishing rapidly,infact it was vertually non-existent at the time of his departure.

The case for Tony staying was firmly based on sentimentality reasons in my honest opinion,everthing I've read and heard to date just confirms this.

Edited November 16, 2004 by SIMON GARNERS 194

[John]

On the decision itself its upto the manager who his backroom staff are. The board will always support the manager on issues like this.

Hughes feels Parkes qualities are working with players of first team calibre not developing a nucleus of young players from reserve team football to being able to handle first team action. Pity no role for Tony at academy level but I certainly under-estimated the mess the club was/is in. Fundamental changes were needed are they are happening.

[philipl]

From what I have seen, the only "hard headed" Parkes had to go comments are being posted on this message board. Everywhere else the comments are universally in condemnation of what happened.

[SIMON GARNERS 194]

Not too sure about that Phil,it think opinion is VERY firmly split 50-50.

Strangley, feelings of angst appear to be more hightened amongst the older supporter

Edited November 16, 2004 by SIMON GARNERS 194

[Paul Mellelieu]

If it was Hughes' judgement that Tony Parkes, in his role as Reserve team coach, was an obstacle to improving the club then I think he had every right to make the move he did. Of course no-one can defend how he's treated. A similar story is told by City fans about Colin Bell.

[Biddy]

I believe that Hughes has every right to chose his own back room staff I just wished that they had found a place Parkes.

I watched the season video over the weekend where Don Mackay got the sack and Parkes took over. He was interviewed and you could see how much he wanted the job at that point.

I think his commitment to the club should be commended and I hope his testimonial goes well.

[Alan75]

Whilst I can understand that Mark Hughes would want his own back room staff, I cannot comprehend or defend the actions of the club that has always had the reputation of being a friendly family orientated club.

When the news broke in the press that Parkes had been sacked, I was shocked, however I was more shocked to find out that the club had not informed Parkes, before the press broke the news.

If reports are true that the decision to release Parkes had occurred on Tuesday, why didn't the powers at Ewood, see fit not to inform their loyal servant that his services were no longer required, before the news broke in the press Friday morning, allowing him a dignified exit.

There is no such thing as a job for life and every one is expendable but the manner of Tony Parkes's dismissal has left a bitter taste in my mouth.

[Flopsy]

amen - how hard is it to come up with some ambassador role - same pay (or near same pay) and an undefined role - i know at least 2or 3 people in my company with that kind of role.

Im not going to be able to sing "Tony's got his suit on" anymore

[92er]

Alan-the club seem to be saying that Friday was the first day they could all meet up. I don't know if it's true.

Philipl-what I find interesting about the letters in the LET is that they are supportive and mainly written by local people.

[USABlue]

Sentimental or not SG194 , they are Rovers fans and they are entitled to withdraw their custom anytime they want . We aren't in the position of many clubs who can run roughshod over their fans in the knowledge that there are others who will replace them . That's why the decision to axe Parkes isn't just heartless , it's bloody stupid as well . Money isn't the issue ; it's the way a long standing employee has been treated by lesser men.

  For the first time ever I fully agree with a Guardian column . I'll be agreeing with Colin next......

Will it still be considered stupid if it has the results Hughes is hoping for, better links throughout the club. Success for BRFC, if it comes, both short and long term, should justify this move.

Can't really fairly judge it as stupid until we have seen the full impact.

Edited November 16, 2004 by USABlue

[Glenn]

amen - how hard is it to come up with some ambassador role - same pay (or near same pay) and an undefined role - i know at least 2or 3 people in my company with that kind of role.

Im not going to be able to sing "Tony's got his suit on" anymore

I think Tony's "I want to remain a coach" kind of rules an ambasadorial role out even if the club offered one.

[broadsword]

He was offered an ambassador's role.

Presumably he wasn't swayed by the "all you can eat Ferraro Rocher" inducement! (Geedit?!)

[mattyboy6000]

This was intended to be heavily laced with sarcasm and to point out how WELL our club is run. I get the feeling not everyone got my point.

a simple example of how sarcasm/ irony doesn't do well in the wash

it never ceases to amaze me how people ignore the mounting evidence of incompetence and then employ a "two wrongs make a right" argument by citing examples of failure elsewhere as testament.

in a general sense good managment does not merely keep a firm afloat but increases turnover, profitability and overall success. and yet for some reason, here, this ability to scrape by is lauded. buy you drinks at your regular meets do they? keep you sweet?

[Al]

Everyone has the right to withdraw their support and I would have done had I not already paid for my season ticket.

I therefore now am committed to a cooling off period after which I will have to make a decision between Rovers and Stanley.

My first reaction is to support Stanley until Hughes is replaced.

The sacking of Parkes is disgraceful and is apparently down to Hughes.

[Radagast]

Seriuosly, Al, that's pretty sad. Noone is bigger than the club, not Parkes and not Hughes either.

[FourLaneBlue]

Kevin Davies was. Literally. The fat bas....

Anyway Parkes has gone. Long after those responsible for his departure have also exited the gates of Ewood the club will remain. That's the one thing that is important. Bob Crompton outlasted Parkes by a long chalk and was at the club for half a century. Still died sometime though. Yet the club moved on. While I realise some people are upset I cannot understand not supporting the club. Dislike the manager or the fans or the board but just remember that it is Blackburn Rovers that is the most important. When Keith Berkinshaw was sacked by Spurs he mentioned to someone outside that "there used be a football club over here". Tony Parkes might have felt the same when he left. However...there still is a football club in Blackburn. No matter who stays or goes. All the best Tony but come on...we're still Rovers 'till we die right?

[Alan75]

In my opinion, it's not the sacking of TP, thats annoyed people, it's the manner in which it's been done.

Personally I have been disillusioned with the professional game for some time, inconsistent kick off times, saturated tv coverage, mercenary players, etc. the words sport and enjoyment have disappeared from the game.

This latest chapter of PR by the club, may be the straw that broke the back of many supporters, me included.

Football has become such a cut throat business, that the human factor has disapppeared.

[dave birch]

can't disagree with anything you've said there Alan75, but the point that others have made is that the Rovers will still be there in some form or other.

I must admit that I've felt the same way about "professional football" for quite some time. That's why I will always put "playing" before "supporting".

If it meant missing a playing game because the Rovers were playing, then the Rovers would miss out. Every game I play is a bonus to me.

Having said that, is this the "1960's gaffe" repeated?

[Glenn]

In my opinion, it's not the sacking of TP, thats annoyed people, it's the manner in which it's been done.

Amen to that. This is precisely why I started the poll (and left it so long after the event). I was trying to gauge if, had it been done properly, would people object quite so much.

This latest chapter of PR by the club, may be the straw that broke the back of many supporters, me included.

I'm glad I'm not the only one that thinks almost every problem at the club (off the pitch) can be traced back (in some way) to poor PR.

I'm going to choose my words carefully on this, I don't want to right royally offend Paul Agnew in the same way I did Gerald Jackson.

Football has become such a cut throat business, that the human factor has disapppeared.

Across the 92 clubs I'd agree, but I'd still argue that despite the poor PR, Rovers is still one of the most fan friendly and human clubs in the country.

[SIMON GARNERS 194]

Everyone has the right to withdraw their support and I would have done had I not already paid for my season ticket.

I therefore now am committed to a cooling off period after which I will have to make a decision between Rovers and Stanley.

My first reaction is to support Stanley until Hughes is replaced.

The sacking of Parkes is disgraceful and is apparently down to Hughes.

Will your 'cooling off peroid' do you,Parkes or the club any good...what is there to be gained from such an over-reaction Al?

Edited November 17, 2004 by SIMON GARNERS 194

[Hughesy]

Is all this moaning still going on? Rovers can do nothing if there is a mole who has leaked to the press.

It was unfortunate they way it came out, however i fully back Hughes' decision.

[jim mk2]

I must admit that I've felt the same way about "professional football" for quite some time. That's why I will always put "playing" before "supporting".

If it meant missing a playing game because the Rovers were playing, then the Rovers would miss out. Every game I play is a bonus to me.

Having said that, is this the "1960's gaffe" repeated?

Agree absolutely.

Playing sport is far more important (and enjoyable) than watching or supporting a team.

I played semi-pro football for nearly 20 years during which I saw only a handful of Rovers games each season.

Likewise I have never been to a Test match because I always played cricket in the summer.

Many people in Blackburn vowed never to go to Ewood Park again after the 1960 FA Cup Final tickets scandal and this Tony Parkes episode has the potential to cause the club the same sort of damage.

It's typical of Rovers to disaffect supporters when they need them most.

Another thought is that if Rovers were a plc the chief executive would have probably have lost his job over this. Poor PR or not, the buck stops at the top. Williams out.

[Tony Diamond Inc]

It's typical of Rovers to disaffect supporters when they need them most.

And for balance...

'Rovers to offer cheap tickets for the Birmingham game'

[Biddy]

And for balance...

'Rovers to offer cheap tickets for the Birmingham game'

Which has also pee'd off people who bought them at full price.

They can't win!