Adam Owen set to become Rovers new head of technical.

[jim mk2]

Blackburn Rovers . ….  the multi headed monster. Where is the modern day Busby who just told his teams to go out and play because he had faith in them as good players?

Football clubs used to have a manager, a trainer and a secretary with a few helpers, and they worked. I’ve no faith that this latest set up of under worked, over-titled no marks will be any more successful than the last

[wilsdenrover]

3 minutes ago, jim mk2 said:

Blackburn Rovers . ….  the multi headed monster. Where is the modern day Busby who just told his teams to go out and play because he had faith in them as good players?

Football clubs used to have a manager, a trainer and a secretary with a few helpers, and they worked. I’ve no faith that this latest set up of under worked, over-titled no marks will be any more successful than the last

Cerberus on steroids 

[roversfan99]

This thread sums up the risks of adding people in technical roles at a dysfunctional club.

It adds unnecessary confusion and conflict if it is at a club that cant operate efficiently.

[roversfan99]

3 hours ago, London blue said:

Incredibly difficult to be excited by any hire who will work directly under Waggot. Either they'll tow the line and compound our problems or strive to improve the club and be forced out. 

*under Venkys. Waggott is just a useless puppet.

[RoversClitheroe]

5 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

why would anyone get exciting over a technical director type appointment anyway? 

Bro you created this thread 😂😂😂😂

[nbdrovers]

blimey, is john park coming back???

 

edit: and veno too?? what year is this??

Edited June 2 by nbdrovers

[Ghost7]

It's called the 5 year plan, in reverse.

Which ultimately results in a new 10 year plan.

[Ghost7]

The Brentford model vs the Blackburn model, oh and everyone gets to keep their job during those 10 years (unless they decide they don't want it anymore), it's completely up to the employee. 🤡

 

[arbitro]

I was told that Broughton was released as a cost cutting measure, effectively made redundant. As such Rovers couldn't replace him with someone and give them the same job description - employment law forbids this. My guess is that the job title and description have changed to get around this. It goes back to the power struggle that Tomasson and Broughton had with Waggott and Suhail when there was only going to be one winner, the pair with a hotline to Pune. 

[davulsukur]

14 hours ago, Hasta said:

We are his 8th club in 11 years.

So in reality, what's the point in hiring him?

He's unlikely to be here beyond the end of the season.

Also, and it might be different in football, but i find people who change jobs almost annually are generally bullshitters, who jump before they are found out.

[Wheelton Blue]

57 minutes ago, arbitro said:

I was told that Broughton was released as a cost cutting measure, effectively made redundant. As such Rovers couldn't replace him with someone and give them the same job description - employment law forbids this. My guess is that the job title and description have changed to get around this. It goes back to the power struggle that Tomasson and Broughton had with Waggott and Suhail when there was only going to be one winner, the pair with a hotline to Pune. 

I'm not sure how replacing one salary/role with two could be seen as 'cost cutting'.

In normal cost cutting/downsizing exercises, the opposite is true.

[MarkBRFC]

4 minutes ago, Wheelton Blue said:

I'm not sure how replacing one salary/role with two could be seen as 'cost cutting'.

In normal cost cutting/downsizing exercises, the opposite is true.

Maybe these pair together cost less than Gregg?

I'd bet good money on Eustace being on less than JDT so it's money saved all round and another feather in Steve's cap.

[tomphil]

How long will this one last until hes either a sacrificial lamb for balls ups or cost cutted or just gets fed up himself ?

A year, 2 at most ?

[Wheelton Blue]

4 minutes ago, MarkBRFC said:

Maybe these pair together cost less than Gregg?

I'd bet good money on Eustace being on less than JDT so it's money saved all round and another feather in Steve's cap.

Yeah, that's the only financial scenario, but not the only scenario, that I can think of.

[ABBEY]

Another venkyscum rat

[arbitro]

46 minutes ago, Wheelton Blue said:

I'm not sure how replacing one salary/role with two could be seen as 'cost cutting'.

In normal cost cutting/downsizing exercises, the opposite is true.

My take is they needed a reason to get rid of Broughton who was an ally of Tomasson. His job is effectively defunct. The cost cutting story isn't official - I was told about it and joined the dots. In truth does it really surprise you though that through poor, ineffective management a silly decision ends up costing more money? Since December I believe there has been a civil war akin to the days of Singh, Agnew and Shaw. 

[Wheelton Blue]

Just now, arbitro said:

My take is they needed a reason to get rid of Broughton who was an ally of Tomasson. His job is effectively defunct. The cost cutting story isn't official - I was told about it and joined the dots. In truth does it really surprise you though that through poor, ineffective management a silly decision ends up costing more money? Since December I believe there has been a civil war akin to the days of Singh, Agnew and Shaw. 

I'm not surprised at all! There's always an ulterior motive with this lot, and in this case I don't think it's purely financial.

When we have the people running the shop as we do, whatever structure, appoinments etc. that are put in place, will inevitably be half-arsed in both planning and execution, and not done for the right reasons.

[chaddyrovers]

8 hours ago, nbdrovers said:

blimey, is john park coming back???

 

edit: and veno too?? what year is this??

Yes

Rovers statement said by mutant agreement when GB left. 

Also we have split the GB roles into with one bit of focusing on transfers, recruitment and contracts of the first team then technical director/advisor for the rest of GB role. Basing this on Nixon articles recently

Surely you could get rid of GB based on his record on transfers in last season would be good enough reason? 

How can you have a power struggle when GB reported to the board of directors which Waggott and Pasha sit on as GB said in his last interview. 

I personally think and with @Paul Mani around Mid January time that Waggott, Pasha and Owners lost faith in JDT and Waggott was task with lining up John Eustace to replace JDT, brought in McFadzean and Fleck. Our last game under JDT against QPR which we should have got hammered by more if Sinclair Armstrong could finish and his rant post match meant it was the end for JDT here. 

 

Edited June 2 by chaddyrovers

[arbitro]

38 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

Yes

Rovers statement said by mutant agreement when GB left. 

Also we have split the GB roles into with one bit of focusing on transfers, recruitment and contracts of the first team then technical director/advisor for the rest of GB role. Basing this on Nixon articles recently

Surely you could get rid of GB based on his record on transfers in last season would be good enough reason? 

How can you have a power struggle when GB reported to the board of directors which Waggott and Pasha sit on as GB said in his last interview. 

I personally think and with @Paul Mani around Mid January time that Waggott, Pasha and Owners lost faith in JDT and Waggott was task with lining up John Eustace to replace JDT, brought in McFadzean and Fleck. Our last game under JDT against QPR which we should have got hammered by more if Sinclair Armstrong could finish and his rant post match meant it was the end for JDT here. 

 

How appropriate for some of the people in power at Rovers. 😂😂

[tomphil]

It's strange how the main mutant has gone from seemingly having zero power to having all the power.

[roversfan99]

2 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

Yes

Rovers statement said by mutant agreement when GB left. 

Also we have split the GB roles into with one bit of focusing on transfers, recruitment and contracts of the first team then technical director/advisor for the rest of GB role. Basing this on Nixon articles recently

Surely you could get rid of GB based on his record on transfers in last season would be good enough reason? 

How can you have a power struggle when GB reported to the board of directors which Waggott and Pasha sit on as GB said in his last interview. 

I personally think and with @Paul Mani around Mid January time that Waggott, Pasha and Owners lost faith in JDT and Waggott was task with lining up John Eustace to replace JDT, brought in McFadzean and Fleck. Our last game under JDT against QPR which we should have got hammered by more if Sinclair Armstrong could finish and his rant post match meant it was the end for JDT here. 

 

You are still assuming that we are a normally run club and shifting the blame for the dysfunction onto the 2 that have now left. Tomasson went because he clearly wanted to go and had become publically unhappy with the shit show, it wasnt a choice based on performance. And Broughton never got this level of criticism regarding his transfers (his record was always not the greatest albeit the main issue was he was forced to scrape the barrel because of the owners) from you when he was here. Both exits were ones greeted with frustration and annoyance from you.

[London blue]

Rovers' statement could have said GB left to find intelligent life in the solar system, doesn't mean a thing.

As has been posited earlier in the thread, I believe he was made redundant to cut costs and either the new roles pay less (the incoming welshman seems to have been out of work for a year) or internal fuck ups mean that they end up spending more.

I don't believe a word of any official press release. 

[bluebruce]

2 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

Yes

Rovers statement said by mutant agreement when GB left. 

Also we have split the GB roles into with one bit of focusing on transfers, recruitment and contracts of the first team then technical director/advisor for the rest of GB role. Basing this on Nixon articles recently

Surely you could get rid of GB based on his record on transfers in last season would be good enough reason? 

How can you have a power struggle when GB reported to the board of directors which Waggott and Pasha sit on as GB said in his last interview. 

I personally think and with @Paul Mani around Mid January time that Waggott, Pasha and Owners lost faith in JDT and Waggott was task with lining up John Eustace to replace JDT, brought in McFadzean and Fleck. Our last game under JDT against QPR which we should have got hammered by more if Sinclair Armstrong could finish and his rant post match meant it was the end for JDT here. 

 

Sorry Chaddy, but your views here would hold a lot more weight if you had been critical of JDT and GB at the time. But when you only criticise them after they leave, it upholds the view that you defend nearly everything the club does. Maybe consider this next time personnel at the club are being criticised. If you're willing to accept criticisms of club staff, even if you're also defending correct decisions (that's the balance I try to strike, honest criticism, honest defence), you won't be mocked for it on here when you do a 180.

Btw I think you've been making quite good posts in this thread for the most part. I'm not having a go, but you undermine your own future arguments by staunchly defending the club's staff even when they're indefensible.

[chaddyrovers]

19 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

You are still assuming that we are a normally run club and shifting the blame for the dysfunction onto the 2 that have now left. Tomasson went because he clearly wanted to go and had become publically unhappy with the shit show, it wasnt a choice based on performance. And Broughton never got this level of criticism regarding his transfers (his record was always not the greatest albeit the main issue was he was forced to scrape the barrel because of the owners) from you when he was here. Both exits were ones greeted with frustration and annoyance from you.

No way has said we are normally run club have I or others. But with your attitude might has shut the thread and this forum. 

GB could have get different targets I am sure but we will never know who will could have gone. 

I like JDT and the way he wanted to achieve promotion and move forward but last summer if I knew he offered his resignation cos of the project he came here for had change, Then I would have accept it. 

The budget is the budget, you can still find good players as Luton shown when they got potential 

10 minutes ago, bluebruce said:

Sorry Chaddy, but your views here would hold a lot more weight if you had been critical of JDT and GB at the time. But when you only criticise them after they leave, it upholds the view that you defend nearly everything the club does. Maybe consider this next time personnel at the club are being criticised. If you're willing to accept criticisms of club staff, even if you're also defending correct decisions (that's the balance I try to strike, honest criticism, honest defence), you won't be mocked for it on here when you do a 180.

Btw I think you've been making quite good posts in this thread for the most part. I'm not having a go, but you undermine your own future arguments by staunchly defending the club's staff even when they're indefensible.

You can only judge at this time looking back at their performances and using what happening has happen not knee-jerked reacting like others have after one performance 

[roversfan99]

It wouldnt be a knee jerk reaction after one performance, no one has suggested that anything should be decided on one shoddy performance against QPR.

Our budget last season wasnt comparable to Luton when they got promoted as they bought Morris, Doughty and Woodrow as well as loaning Nakamba, Horvarth and Drameh who arent young untested kids. Hardly being unable to even bring in Batth and having to shop in the German 4th division.

Any credibility in opinions is lost when up until and including a manager/DOF's departure, anyone refuses to accept criticism yet now they are gone, blame is constantly put onto them as if their departure was simply down to the club wanting better.

Tomasson went because he was being very public with his justifiable criticisms regarding the way the club is run and owned, nothing to do with losing faith. Had be not kicked up a stink and accepted the mess around him, he would have continued in his job. Broughton might have been a bit more down to a power struggle but I am not having that his exit was simply because his transfer business was deemed to be unsatisfactory. Perhaps more likely a mixture of a power struggle, cost cutting and again unhappiness on his part as to what has happened above his head compounded by Tomasson going.