Tony Mowbray

[47er]

14 minutes ago, Wheelton Blue said:

For all we know - and I suspect this will possibly be the case - the club have said to Mowbray 'now is not the time, let's talk once the season ends'.

 

That's not normal behaviour though is it? Surely every club should have a manager arranged so that one takes over as the other departs. Just as the potential targets for transfers in and out should have been sorted before season end.

A new manager needs to hit the ground running with his team 1st day back.

None of that happens at Ewood anymore. And I don't think your scenario will eventuate, his contract will run down and he'll be off that day. Its a graceless way to treat him. He has after all been here nearly 6 years. I want him out but some manners wouldn't hurt.

I don't think that's a good look from the club's point of view and it doesn't encourage anyone who might be interested in coming to Ewood.

 

 

[K-Hod]

14 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Why? They'd get called up hill and down dale if they'd announced his departure at the end of the season and he then got us promoted in the meantime.

Because there’s this thing called courtesy. You might have heard of it?

If any of us had been somewhere five years and our contracts were up and we were in the dark about what was happening when they ended in about a month’s time, we wouldn’t be happy….

[roverandout]

1 hour ago, DavidMailsTightPerm said:

I would argue he hasn't been a bad manager. He has got some things right, some wrong - though I feel we have blown a huge opportunity this season, I think most would have take a chance of top 6 with two games to go at the start of the season.

Agree with some of that. Some of his signings have been ok but when it comes to the actual matchday he's useless 

[riverholmes]

34 minutes ago, Wheelton Blue said:

We've only heard one side of this story.

For all we know - and I suspect this will possibly be the case - the club have said to Mowbray 'now is not the time, let's talk once the season ends'.

Mowbray is simply trying to engineer an opportunity for himself.

Overall, I think Mowbray is being selfish by bringing this up now. He's been asked about it by journalists but he should prioritise the team over his personal frustrations. He may well have a legitimate grievance but he's hardly a young reserve player with an injury record who's set to be released by Rovers. He has been well-paid and will get a new job somewhere as a manager/consultant or, perhaps, pundit, if he wants it. Albeit, he might not get as cushy a role as he has at Rovers where he can spend possibly £1 million+ on transfer fees for Amari'Bell, Harry Chapman and Jacob Davenport and shrug it off, whilst not progressing greatly in the league for years. He's made good signings but not produced a good consistent team and had a fair amount of money to waste.

Edit: I have some sympathy for his frustrations and a lot of condemnation for the owners but Mowbray should be acting as a role model for his players. No doubt plenty of Rovers players are miffed by their contract situations - especially, youth players who don't know where there next job will be.

Moreover, Mowbray has given the ownership cover for a long time, to keep his job. He is implicated with the Venky's.

Edited April 29, 2022 by riverholmes

[JHRover]

A few issues I have with the theory that Mowbray was to be replaced last summer and that this plan is going to be carried out now:

Why go to the trouble of speaking to and identifying options last year, knowing there's a strong chance Mowbray would at least get wind of this on the grapevine, but then stop short of sacking Mowbray, then allow him a whole extra year on top of that?

To save money on compensation, reallly? They've just allowed him to pay money for Hedges who was coming for nothing in the summer, they've allowed Lenihan, Rothwell and Nyambe to leave for nothing and rejected cash for Rothwell. So if money was the motive behind their decisions I find it odd that they would persist with a manager for a whole extra year effectively accepting our lot and putting their grand plan on ice for that time just to avoid paying off his final year.

I'd like nothing more than to see a well thought out plan come to fruition but don't expect so.

I think Venkys are so warped in their ways that they probably don't even know about Mowbrays contract situation and probably don't think it is important anyway. They are likely so arrogant that they expect him to come crawling for a new deal at his inconvenience at a time that suits them. Maybe Mowbray has had enough of waiting now and is going to stick two fingers up at them for messing him around, so they might be surprised to find that for only the 2nd time in 12 years they have a manager who makes his own decision to walk away rather than gratefully accept whatever nonsense they have in mind.

 

[USABlue]

13 hours ago, Miker said:

I think everyone has been in agreement after the latest death spiral that we don’t want Mowbray to continue as manager and need someone better in.

I’m wondering though what people think about the idea of Mowbray staying but in some sort of Director of Football role instead?

I know people have questioned some of his signings in the past, but I think he’s actually been really successful in both the loan market and transfer market and has brought through a number of academy players into the first team as well.

TM as DoF may just work, IF under a competent Chairman, with good staff.

As far as Venkies new manager choice, I am already terrified.  Seeing BB now coaching outfield players on the touchline while Mowbary basically takes a nap has me wondering they wouldn't would they?

[RevidgeBlue]

3 minutes ago, 47er said:

That's not normal behaviour though is it? Surely every club should have a manager arranged so that one takes over as the other departs. Just as the potential targets for transfers in and out should have been sorted before season end.

A new manager needs to hit the ground running with his team 1st day back.

That's the worry - not whether Tony has had his feelings hurt.

He's been telling us every month that he's not bothered about his contractual situation so why is it suddenly different now when we should actually be concentrating on winning the final two games?

[Gav]

3 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Give over Gav, it's one thing coming on here to wind people up, it's another to repeatedly accuse me of  something I never said in the first place.

I said Mowbray,  as manager, was complicit in the scheme, it doesn't go ahead if he doesn't agree to it. 

You were dead against the proposed sale of the training ground anyway so you're being a complete hypocrite on that particular point.

If you think wanting people to be treated with dignity and respect is winding people up then I’m guilty. 

You’re damn right I was dead against selling off fixed assets, you seem happy to support your mates in Pune whilst they trample all over Jacks legacy, I’m not.

[USABlue]

12 hours ago, AllRoverAsia said:

What's he really up to?

A holy quest for the mystical life balance or a new 5 year contract and design override on his statue?

He's up to a Baldrick, imho

He can quote his mate Klopp as inspiration for signing a new contract.

Whut's a Baldrick?

[Sparks Rover]

Just now, USABlue said:

Whut's a Baldrick?

A cunning plan?  I agree....he's said it, he's leaving....why hasn't the social media people said it on twitter etc.?...Manager has said he is leaving.....🤷‍♂️ something is going on and my money is on him getting a new deal.

 

[Miller11]

Despite the huge reservations I have over who they will replace him with, I’ll be glad to see the back of Mowbray. That doesn’t mean that the owners shouldn’t treat him with a little bit of respect and common courtesy.

I’m more concerned though about the complete disconnect between the owners and the people they employ, and that’s completely on Venky’s. There is no way this uncertainty hasn’t had an impact on results either. Their arrogance knows no bounds, they will never learn, and ultimately they don’t give a toss.

[davulsukur]

Sharpe tweeted that Lamberts departure was announced on 28th April but Coyle wasn't appointed until 2nd June. 

So, expect this one to drag.

[StubbsUK]

I know the prevailing view of BRFCS.com members towards Tony & his tenure at Ewood is negative and with his contract expiring this summer it does feel like the right time to go for reasons that have been done to death in previous posts, but I think a lot of what he's done for the club while he's been here is largely behind the scenes and not instantly visible or front of people's minds.

So, here's a list of things that I think are better than when he arrived.

1) League position. The trend between 2017 and today has been upwards, only 1 season did we finish lower than the season before. Well, technically 2 because 2nd in League 1 is lower than the Championship.

2) Squad value/saleability. There's no denying Blackburn are both reliant now on the owners benevolence, and player sales to stay afloat and under Tony we've now had sales of raya, Armstrong and probably Brereton (arguably Dack would also have gone for a tidy profit if he hadn't been sidelined) to help keep us going. We've also had a nice steady stream of players graduate from the academy and should be saleable assets in the future. The down side to this is debt is still growing but with factors like having a season with no fans it's hard to pin that on Tony ... look elsewhere in the club.

3) Our recruitment network is back up and running after being in tatters.

4) We are a trusted club with top class clubs like Liverpool and Manchester City willing to lend us their upcoming talent like Elliot, Adarabioyo and Van Heck because they know the players will be developed on and off the pitch, not just used as bench warmers. Like it or not these kind of players are a big source of talent for teams like us.

5) Stability. He halted the crazy shit-show that was the Blackburn Rovers Managerial Merry Go Round of Ineptitude (Coming soon to an Easter Fayre near you).

So there's my 5 reasons, I actually have a few more but I think that'll do.

Despite everything that's happened since Christmas this has been one of my favourite seasons watching the team and it will stay with me for a long time.

[RevidgeBlue]

10 minutes ago, K-Hod said:

Because there’s this thing called courtesy. You might have heard of it?

If any of us had been somewhere five years and our contracts were up and we were in the dark about what was happening when they ended in about a month’s time, we wouldn’t be happy….

But would you not agree there's a huge difference in the landscape between him miraculously scraping into the play offs at the last minute and taking us up via that route as opposed to us missing out on the play offs altogether?

Personally I wouldn't want him in charge even if he took us up as I think we could do far better in that event. However I'd imagine that in the unlikely view of that happening my view would be a minority one and most people would be clamouring for him to get a new deal of some description even if it was only a 12 month rolling contract.

Once his contract expires there would hypothetically be nothing whatsoever stopping both parties sitting down and discussing a new deal if they thought it was a good idea. I pray to God that doesn't happen myself but I really don't see the issue. He's bloody lucky he's been allowed the dignity of seeing his contract out.

[RevidgeBlue]

18 minutes ago, Gav said:

If you think wanting people to be treated with dignity and respect is winding people up then I’m guilty. 

You’re damn right I was dead against selling off fixed assets, you seem happy to support your mates in Pune whilst they trample all over Jacks legacy, I’m not.

The fatal deficiency in your argument there is that Mowbray, Waggott and Venus tried (and likewise failed) to do the same thing at Coventry and Waggott freely admitted he was the driving force behind the replicated scheme here.

I know you know that really as you're an intelligent chap.

[Admiral Nelsen]

Just now, Miller11 said:

Despite the huge reservations I have over who they will replace him with, I’ll be glad to see the back of Mowbray. That doesn’t mean that the owners shouldn’t treat him with a little bit of respect and common courtesy.

I’m more concerned though about the complete disconnect between the owners and the people they employ, and that’s completely on Venky’s. There is no way this uncertainty hasn’t had an impact on results either. Their arrogance knows no bounds, they will never learn, and ultimately they don’t give a toss.

 

I'm concerned about how employees are treated by the club, even if it's an employee who ultimately should be replaced.

The lack of professionalism is more concerning though. Fans of championship clubs often looked at the Brentford model in terms of how to have sustainable success at this level. Usually this is more about player trading and spotting value in transfers, but more fundamentally it's about looking at all aspects of how the football club is run and looking for where you can make improvements, large or small. That sort of care of detail and making sure the club is operating at its' maximum is completely at odds with how Rovers are run, outside of possibly the Academy, and the way that Mowbray's future has been handled appears to be the latest example of that. 

 

For those who don't follow Rugby League, Wigan have just sacked a player for repeatedly failing to meet their professional standards, and they're taking a hit on losing a quality player in order to preserve the culture of success that they're trying to build, shared by players, staff and directors. Wouldn't it be nice to think a similar level of thought has gone into the setup at Rovers. 

[Gav]

2 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

The fatal deficiency in your argument there is that Mowbray, Waggott and Venus tried (and likewise failed) to do the same thing at Coventry and Waggott freely admitted he was the driving force behind the replicated scheme here.

I know you know that really as you're an intelligent chap.

Nobody does anything at this club without the owners signing off, like sacking managers, selling players or selling training grounds.

No matter how hard you try to deflect, posters see right through you. 

[AllRoverAsia]

26 minutes ago, USABlue said:

Whut's a Baldrick?

A character in Blackadder, always says he has a 'cunning plan' ... lots on YouTube, hilarious.

I think TM is fishing for a contract offer by saying he's going.

[Mattyblue]

Amazing that for Rev, even selling off the fixed, core assets of the business has either nothing to do with the owners, or they were totally unaware of the plans, as two bit operators like Steve Waggott and Mark bloody Venus make merry with nefarious schemes.

Either way, after 12 years of owning a football club, it doesn’t put them in a great light, does it?

Edited April 29, 2022 by Mattyblue

[RevidgeBlue]

Just now, Gav said:

Nobody does anything at this club without the owners signing off, like sacking managers, selling players or selling training grounds.

No matter how hard you try to deflect, posters see right through you. 

So using your reasoning as outlined in para 1 above then:

- as the proposed scheme did not eventually go through it must have been the owners who put a stop to it, and they who substituted the accounting exercise instead to prevent the necessity of the sale of a fixed asset to which you were so opposed.

"Nobody does anything at the Club without the owners signing off"

Right?

[AllRoverAsia]

25 minutes ago, Miller11 said:

Despite the huge reservations I have over who they will replace him with, I’ll be glad to see the back of Mowbray. That doesn’t mean that the owners shouldn’t treat him with a little bit of respect and common courtesy.

I’m more concerned though about the complete disconnect between the owners and the people they employ, and that’s completely on Venky’s. There is no way this uncertainty hasn’t had an impact on results either. Their arrogance knows no bounds, they will never learn, and ultimately they don’t give a toss.

And yet how many times has Mowbray said the owners are always available and contactable, always watch games etc ... plus Shadowman must be lurking somewhere.

It's a TM 'poor poor me' routine ahead of a big Ewood gate and feck how it impacts the team.

[RevidgeBlue]

Just now, Mattyblue said:

Amazing that for Rev, even selling off the fixed assets of the business has either nothing to do with the owners, or they were totally unaware of the plans, as two bit operators like Steve Waggott and Mark bloody Venus make merry with nefarious schemes.

Either way, after 12 years of owning a football club, it doesn’t put them in a great light, does it?

Bloody hell Matty you're better than that. You never heard of them trying to do the same at Coventry? If you can prove any connection between Venky's and Coventry at that point in time I'll concede!

[Gav]

1 minute ago, RevidgeBlue said:

So using your reasoning as outlined in para 1 above then:

- as the proposed scheme did not eventually go through it must have been the owners who put a stop to it, and they who substituted the accounting exercise instead to prevent the necessity of the sale of a fixed asset to which you were so opposed.

"Nobody does anything at the Club without the owners signing off"

Right?

Jesus wept…..

Yes you got me, superb owners, we’re lucky to have them.

[Mattyblue]

5 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Bloody hell Matty you're better than that. You never heard of them trying to do the same at Coventry? If you can prove any connection between Venky's and Coventry at that point in time I'll concede!

Considering it was me that first brought all this to this forum’s attention and repeatedly flagged the Coventry situation, I’m not naive to the possible intentions of certain people  

So surely any responsible owner should’ve been well aware and nipped it in the bud at birth, not let it get all the way to planning permission being requested with RVC, architect plans published, promotional videos with the Chief Exec about it on the club website, interviews with the LT etc etc.

So what kind of owner is that much out of their loop of their own business that it could’ve got that far? Because, they were either in on it, or they are that far out of touch from their own football club that the training ground can be flattened for housing without their knowledge, so I repeat…

‘Either way, after 12 years of owning a football club, it doesn’t put them in a great light, does it?’

 

[booth]

53 minutes ago, K-Hod said:

Because there’s this thing called courtesy. You might have heard of it?

If any of us had been somewhere five years and our contracts were up and we were in the dark about what was happening when they ended in about a month’s time, we wouldn’t be happy….

If I'd made £5m from it I wouldn't care.