[Archived] Steve Kean Thread (Poll reset after Stoke game)

[greco]

Topman beat ya to it with the sarcasm quite some time ago. Do try and be original lad or is that too difficult?

ahh now isee why you admire braddock, its not because he speaks up, its because he can troll with a bit of humor, whereas your humor reaches its pinnacle, at naming yourself after a cartoon character.

[Amo]

...a man who can't seem to raise his eyes above tit level

Only when talking to the likes of you & braddock.

BOOYA!

[otto man]

Only when talking to the likes of you & braddock.

BOOYA!

Touche!

[Andy]

I think braddock's comported himself with great dignity over the last few days. He's had to endure a massive amount of pressure from fellow supporters when he's only trying to go about business like the next man. I think it's downright disgraceful that our own supporters can't back him for the good of the club and help us move onwards and upwards. It wouldn't at all surprise me if the poor chap had to rent a bodyguard, thus is the state of affairs. Rovers fans should be ashamed of themselves.

[otto man]

ahh now isee why you admire braddock, its not because he speaks up, its because he can troll with a bit of humor, whereas your humor reaches its pinnacle, at naming yourself after a cartoon character.

Hey have you got something against Otto? After all the Simpsons are the pinnacle of humour, aren't they?

[Amo]

Look, I have nothing against a difference of opinion. I've butted heads with a many a folk on here over the years, and although I didn't necessarily agree with them, I respected most of their views and could see where they were coming from.

That's not really the case with braddock, is it? Should we respect a controversial opinion for the sake of it? Should I respect that he thinks the fans are morons? That he defends our charlatan of a manager? That he glorifies the owners that have taken this club aprt? And the fact he gets off from all this? Where's the sense in that? Please tell me, o enlightened few.

To be honest, I think the majority rooting for braddock are those who were butthurt in the past and have formed some kind of siege mentality.

[otto man]

Look, I have nothing against a difference of opinion. I've butted heads with a many a folk on here over the years, and although I didn't necessarily agree with them, I respected most of their views and could see where they were coming from.

That's not really the case with braddock, is it? Should we respect a controversial opinion for the sake of it? Should I respect that he thinks the fans are morons? That he defends our charlatan of a manager? That he glorifies the owners that have taken this club aprt? And the fact he gets off from all this? Where's the sense in that? Please tell me, o enlightened few.

To be honest, I think the majority rooting for braddock are those who were butthurt in the past and have formed some kind of siege mentality.

Now I was gonna treat your response with respect until I read that last line and you wonder why he winds you up!

[greco]

Look, I have nothing against a difference of opinion. I've butted heads with a many a folk on here over the years, and although I didn't necessarily agree with them, I respected most of their views and could see where they were coming from.

That's not really the case with braddock, is it? Should we respect a controversial opinion for the sake of it? Should I respect that he thinks the fans are morons? That he defends our charlatan of a manager? That he glorifies the owners that have taken this club aprt? And the fact he gets off from all this? Where's the sense in that? Please tell me, o enlightened few.

To be honest, I think the majority rooting for braddock are those who were butthurt in the past and have formed some kind of siege mentality.

good post.

its rather funny. They scream from rooftops, that they want and need a place, where peoples opinions can be shared and debated, but when the general opinion differs from theirs and they get a lot of responses, its all of a sudden not sharing your views anymore, its now labelled as bullying. Thats not asking for a level playing field, thats asking for speciel priveleges, just like the leftwing idiots, who daily claim they cant stand violence, but when they have a cause, they feel is "worthy" and morally better, violence is just fine.

[deryck guyler's spoon]

good post.

its rather funny. They scream from rooftops, that they want and need a place, where peoples opinions can be shared and debated, but when the general opinion differs from theirs and they get a lot of responses, its all of a sudden not sharing your views anymore, its now labelled as bullying. Thats not asking for a level playing field, thats asking for speciel priveleges, just like the leftwing idiots, who daily claim they cant stand violence, but when they have a cause, they feel is "worthy" and morally better, violence is just fine.

You're quite the angry ant aren't you?

[braddock]

good post.

its rather funny. They scream from rooftops, that they want and need a place, where peoples opinions can be shared and debated, but when the general opinion differs from theirs and they get a lot of responses, its all of a sudden not sharing your views anymore, its now labelled as bullying. Thats not asking for a level playing field, thats asking for speciel priveleges, just like the leftwing idiots, who daily claim they cant stand violence, but when they have a cause, they feel is "worthy" and morally better, violence is just fine.

Exchange the word bullying for trolling and you have my thoughts.

You're quite the angry ant aren't you?

It's the card carrying commies on the left, I tells ya!

[greco]

Exchange the word bullying for trolling and you have my thoughts.

It's the card carrying commies on the left, I tells ya!

youre definetly a confused troll

[otto man]

good post.

its rather funny. They scream from rooftops, that they want and need a place, where peoples opinions can be shared and debated, but when the general opinion differs from theirs and they get a lot of responses, its all of a sudden not sharing your views anymore, its now labelled as bullying. Thats not asking for a level playing field, thats asking for speciel priveleges, just like the leftwing idiots, who daily claim they cant stand violence, but when they have a cause, they feel is "worthy" and morally better, violence is just fine.

[/quot

No it's rather funny that you immediately insult any one with an opposing view(left wing idiot my arse!) You are so blinkered by your own views you just can't see anyone else's. And as for your little "analogy" at the end I won't even dignify it!

[greco]

left wing otto has entered the building i see

you want special privileges, you dont want a level playing field, as you wouldnt be able to cope with it. Thats been proven numerous times, when you´ve been schooled by the alzheimers club

[eire3382]

Personally I think those who say we play exactly the same under Kean as we did Sam do Sam a disservice. His approach is very specific and takes months to drill into the players to get them doing it as he intends. It's all about them knowing exactly what to do in a wide range of specific situations; there's no way all the newer players to the team will just pick it up in 5 mins.

Thats a very good point under sam we were so organised and had a defence you could depend upon.

Now our defensive record is a joke.

Sam had a plan and stuck to it because most of the time it worked (there were one or two times when it was a disaster mind).

He worked wonders with the players we had and set the team up to the players strengths.

So much has changed and it drives me mad to still hear people down playing what sam did for this club.

I also don't understand the arguement that he wouldn't have given teh younger players a chance.

As memory serves he brought in Jones, Hanley and junior and was introducing them slowly.

The only reason jones got a long run was due to injuries initially.

[deryck guyler's spoon]

left wing otto has entered the building i see

you want special privileges, you dont want a level playing field, as you wouldnt be able to cope with it. Thats been proven numerous times, when you´ve been schooled by the alzheimers club

...........................anyroad, this Steve Kean bloke..

[otto man]

left wing otto has entered the building i see

you want special privileges, you dont want a level playing field, as you wouldnt be able to cope with it. Thats been proven numerous times, when you´ve been schooled by the alzheimers club

[/quote

Ah if only that was worth a response!

[otto man]

...........................anyroad, this Steve Kean bloke..

Yup, got me too DGS.

[eire3382]

This whole situation is absolutely stupid.

We are all here to debate and discuss issues and give our opinions.

There is a a mob mentality going around at the minute.

I may agree with most here but if we don't allow everyone to discuss all view points then the forum may as well be closed down.

I don't agree with Braddock (and others by the way) and have responded to him but he is allowed to have an opinion. And I have no right to expect him to change his opinion just because I told him to.

The board has never ever been so bad.

I hate the notion that "if you don't agree with me you are my enemy" bulls*^%.

There are serious issues at the club right, now we can all agree to that, regardless of what you think those issues are.

[braddock]

Thats a very good point under sam we were so organised and had a defence you could depend upon.

Now our defensive record is a joke.

Sam had a plan and stuck to it because most of the time it worked (there were one or two times when it was a disaster mind).

He worked wonders with the players we had and set the team up to the players strengths.

So much has changed and it drives me mad to still hear people down playing what sam did for this club.

I also don't understand the arguement that he wouldn't have given teh younger players a chance.

As memory serves he brought in Jones, Hanley and junior and was introducing them slowly.

The only reason jones got a long run was due to injuries initially.

Our defensive record is bad indeed.

Sam did not play to the players strength as such, he played to his own strength and moulded the players in to this style and bought players who fit into it. It was effective, no denying. There is a distinction between playing to the players strengths and this though. Only a small point but needs to be made in terms of commenting on what actually happened. As I said however, it was effective.

Jones and Hanley were brought through and this was very good. They suited his system very well (not an attack on anybody, just an observation). I'm skeptical that Hoilett would ever have succeeded in an Allardyce side to the extent he has succeeded under Kean.

None of the above post is slagging of the previous management so I'd advise people to be sure to read before jumping down my throat.

There are serious issues at the club right, now we can all agree to that, regardless of what you think those issues are.

Indeed.

[eire3382]

Our defensive record is bad indeed.

Sam did not play to the players strength as such, he played to his own strength and moulded the players in to this style and bought players who fit into it. It was effective, no denying. There is a distinction between playing to the players strengths and this though. Only a small point but needs to be made in terms of commenting on what actually happened. As I said however, it was effective.

Jones and Hanley were brought through and this was very good. They suited his system very well (not an attack on anybody, just an observation). I'm skeptical that Hoilett would ever have succeeded in an Allardyce side to the extent he has succeeded under Kean.

None of the above post is slagging of the previous management so I'd advise people to be sure to read before jumping down my throat.

Indeed.

Its funny but I think he would have suited sams play.

Sam loves 451 and in that system your wide players can be given licence.

Personally I think junior has a huge ego and needed to be brought into the team slowly.

He will probably end up like bentley now.

As for how sam set his team up. When he came in we were in free fall and much like hughes before him he spent the first season and a half organising the team. I believe given longer things would have improved. Remember he really was never given much money and so couldn't bring in the players he wanted. But like you say sam was effective and considering everything I think he would be handy right now.

[Steve Moss]

Trust me we try and keep a balance throughout, if you see anything you think is out of order please report it as it's a massive help to us.

As a general rule, I distrust people who say "trust me".

And to keep the conversation on point, Kean is a poor manager and a worse person, in my opinion. Exhibit A- his league record. Exhibit B- his long record of interviews.

I approve of Venkys' cost cutting, but disapprove of Venkys' poor ownership philosophy and incredibly poor stewardship of the club. Any group of owners who think professional athletes (celebrities in today's crazed world) and top drawer managers and executives (normally hyper-successful, competitive human beings) will "toe the line" are deluded. The successful ones are akin to medieval warlords. The only line that will be toed is the one they draw in the sand.

[braddock]

As a general rule, I distrust people who say "trust me".

I approve of Venkys' cost cutting, but disapprove of Venkys' poor ownership philosophy and incredibly poor stewardship of the club. Any group of owners who think professional athletes (celebrities in today's crazed world) and top drawer managers and executives (normally hyper-successful, competitive human beings) will "toe the line" are deluded. The successful ones are akin to medieval warlords. The only line that will be toed is the one they draw in the sand.

All of that seems fine. I never listen to Rovers managers anyway since it all became propaganda and saving ones own face from the times of Ince, so I've taken the Kean paragraph out.

[david_daft]

So,are we going to reset the poll?

I want kean out but would be interested to see the result of a new poll.

[braddock]

I'd suggest we start it now if we hadn't just won a game as it then seems a bit unfair to start the poll after a clean sheet and a win, as they are rare things to come by, but if people want to reset it after the Sunderland game you have to be ready for votes immediately affected by one result. Could be wise to do it midweek between a game (now or next week) when the dust is settled and people are less reactionary.

Either way, I fully expect a trouncing in the opinion polls for Kean, just interested in how much by.

[eire3382]

I'd suggest we start it now if we hadn't just won a game as it then seems a bit unfair to start the poll after a clean sheet and a win, as they are rare things to come by, but if people want to reset it after the Sunderland game you have to be ready for votes immediately affected by one result. Could be wise to do it midweek between a game (now or next week) when the dust is settled and people are less reactionary.

Either way, I fully expect a trouncing in the opinion polls for Kean, just interested in how much by.

I don't think any result will effect peoples views too much really. Most have an opinion on last season and this.

Also it should not be left to run for more than a week.

Just get a reading for one week and repeat in a couple of months if you want to.