Valérien Ismaël: Blackburn Rovers Head Coach

[chaddyrovers]

14 minutes ago, onlyonejackwalker said:

I'm seriously thinking about not renewing. My mate and my son also. I enjoyed our organisation and fight under Eustace, but it was turgid stuff at times. Forget Duff and Tugay, it wasn't a patch on watching Scotty Sellars, Garner and Gayle.

Fair enough, I respect that and whatever decision you made. 

I was talking about our players and performances/results in the early PL days like Shearer, Sherwood, Mimms, Wilcox, Atkins Ripley. Those memories can't been taken away from me and I started following Rovers around the 1992 and it was cos of my dad influence being a Rovers supporter and going to games. In 1993/94 my dad took me to my first game and I was hooked from that minute to now. I still enjoyed going and I am proud Rovers supporters and still am to this day. 

Never had the pleasure of watching Simon Garner play sadly. Shearer is my Favourite ever Rovers player. 

Edited 8 hours ago by chaddyrovers

[lraC]

7 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

Fair enough, I respect that and whatever decision you made. 

I was talking about our players and performances/results in the early PL days like Shearer, Sherwood, Mimms, Wilcox, Atkins Ripley. Those memories can't been taken away from me and I started following Rovers around the 1992 and it was cos of my dad influence being a Rovers supporter and going to games. In 1993/94 my dad took me to my first game and I was hooked from that minute to now. I still enjoyed going and I am proud Rovers supporters and still am to this day. 

Never had the pleasure of watching Simon Garner play sadly. Shearer is my Favourite ever Rovers player. 

Your Dad will have watched Simon Garner play and will no doubt tell you, what a real hero he was at the time.

I named my son after him, and the special bit for me, is the fact that he was a working class lad on meagre wages at the time, but boy did he play his heart out.

He genuinely loved the club too and for me, is my favourite ever Rovers player and I can't imagine anyone in the modern day game, making me feel that way again. 

 

[roversfan99]

29 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

what is reasonably amount of backing? how many millions? 

Do you not think that Ismael has agreed before he appointed head coach role to play this style he and Gestede has said they want to play? 

I take you aren't renewing/buying ST next season, is this correct? 

Yes, he probably did agree to play this "style" before.

But again, it comes back to this point where you seem to think that any decision that is pre communicated and made must be logical and make sense.

We have a novice of a director of football overseeing and instructing a poor manager (whose success in the past came playing a totally different style) on what style to play. Im still none the wiser as to why that makes any sense.

It will be loans, frees and if we are lucky the avoidance of our remaining few decent players leaving and a couple of sub par randomers from abroad. 

[JHRover]

Even if Eustace's primary motivation in moving was money, which I don't believe but I suppose it could be true, I'd like to know why it is that a club that was in administration only a couple of years ago, a club that was in League One last season, a club owned by a local non-billionaire, a club we were warned we would 'end up' like if Venkys left, a club up to their necks in relegation trouble 'not knowing what league they are going to be in next season' could offer our manager more than we were paying him.

And even if they could, and our wage offering was being comfortably beaten by Derby's offer, why none of the owners, representatives, Waggott thought it was appropriate, or necessary, to immediately and urgently offer him an improved deal bettering that of Derby in an attempt to keep him here. 

Of course the short termism at this club comes back to bite it in the arse in spectacular fashion. I don't expect Eustace's demands were unreasonable - clarity on the future, new contracts for his key players, maybe an improved/extended deal for himself, a plan for the summer, some sort of backing. 

Presumably the regime thought themselves clever denying him this, and some satisfaction was felt as the money from Derby cleared into the accounts, but of course in saving themselves time, effort and money here the medium to long term is going to go tits up big time. 

So far, in the space of a couple of months, they've chucked away another play-off push, when even mediocre form since February would have kept us right in the mix, they've caused a rebellion in the fanbase and this has forced the curtain twitcher and other stooges out into the open, those interviews have confirmed the suspicion for everyone to see that these three are totally untrustworthy and out of their depth running this club, their latest lame duck manager is overseeing an epic collapse in performances and results which shows no sign of stopping, if it carries on like this then our Championship status will be in major jeopardy by September, ticket sales are going to collapse, and those players we do want to stick around in the summer and beyond I would expect are getting their agents to work on getting the hell out of here.

So hats off to them. For what required a few reasonable demands to be met for Eustace they've ushered in a catastrophe that is going to take some turning around. So unnecessary, it would have been so easy just to improve Eustace's deal and address his reasonable concerns. 

Now that chaos has been chosen by the regime they've got to live with the consequences - and it is going to cost them dearly both in terms of plummeting ticket sales and pressure on their positions. 

[Mattyblue]

A ‘new, improved deal ’ wasn’t an issue for the CEO himself…

Edited 7 hours ago by Mattyblue

[lraC]

6 minutes ago, Mattyblue said:

A ‘new, improved deal ’ wasn’t an issue for the CEO himself…

Exactly

[chaddyrovers]

10 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Yes, he probably did agree to play this "style" before.

So, what your point then? if Rovers under Gestede and the Rovers board wanted to play this style and have picked their head coach choice to be appointed

10 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

But again, it comes back to this point where you seem to think that any decision that is pre communicated and made must be logical and make sense.

Have I? no I have commented on what been said and what they said. 

I have previously said what formation and style I would play. 

10 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

We have a novice of a director of football overseeing and instructing a poor manager (whose success in the past came playing a totally different style) on what style to play. Im still none the wiser as to why that makes any sense.

Have I said it made sense here but I was commented a wider point within the football community that is how football work now. That was my point 

10 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

It will be loans, frees and if we are lucky the avoidance of our remaining few decent players leaving and a couple of sub par randomers from abroad. 

You said the same last summer and we spent from what Pasha said around 4.5m mark this season on transfers and increase the wage bill for the January signings. 

I expect something similar this summer, where I think we spend some money on player transfer fees(around 3-5 million), a couple of loans and couple of frees. 

[Blue blood]

32 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

 

You said the same last summer and we spent from what Pasha said around 4.5m mark this season on transfers and increase the wage bill for the January signings. 

See this is the issue of selectively of stats. Basically what is posted here is an admission of neglect and an utter downgrade on what we have. 

It's like me saying that people have a 95% of being safe with me not mugging them or I did 2 years without committing a crime (whilst in prison) - it's damning by what it doesn't say! Neither of the above are true they are illustrative only. 

So 4.5 on millions and increased wage budget. Let's say 3 on fees 1.5 in wages. Now given the last 2 years the wage budget has been cut by 20% that means this year alone the wage budget has decreased by about 5 mill. So what he's saying is we are paying 3 million plus less wages. Hardly a sign of generosity! 

These might not be the exact figures but the point still stands. 

Same with transfer fees. We've brought in what? 24 mill from Wharton and Sammi alone. So at best we've paid out 12.5% of fees. How generous! But then when. Raya money, Gally fee etc are taken into account that drops below 10%. Do you think that's acceptable levels of investment. It is what it is isn't an answer. 

 

32 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

I expect something similar this summer, where I think we spend some money on player transfer fees(around 3-5 million), a couple of loans and couple of frees. 

So either you are saying you expect us to invest about 10% of what we make in transfer fees on players - implausible as we don't have that much talent waiting to be sold- or you think somewhere from something they are going to give us an extra 3 million? There is zero evidence they will do this. 

[roversfan99]

1 hour ago, chaddyrovers said:

So, what your point then? if Rovers under Gestede and the Rovers board wanted to play this style and have picked their head coach choice to be appointed

Have I? no I have commented on what been said and what they said. 

I have previously said what formation and style I would play. 

Have I said it made sense here but I was commented a wider point within the football community that is how football work now. That was my point 

You said the same last summer and we spent from what Pasha said around 4.5m mark this season on transfers and increase the wage bill for the January signings. 

I expect something similar this summer, where I think we spend some money on player transfer fees(around 3-5 million), a couple of loans and couple of frees. 

Your point seems to be, thats whats happening. Do you think the head coach should have sole autocracy to decide on tactics or should the director stick his beak in and decide? 

I dont think it makes sense to have a (novice) director of football deciding which tactics to employ.

I dont think its in the best interests of the team to have demands set regarding minutes given to academy players.

I dont think it makes sense to employ a shit manager.

I dont think it makes sense to employ manager whose only successful spell in this country came playing tactics which are the opposite of what Gestede wants to play.

Little makes sense at this club. I dont know why you are believing anything that the snake that is Suhail says.

[SIMON GARNERS 194]

17 hours ago, miqaayil said:

maybe he'll achieve a club record of straight loss ...

 

definitely he won club record for straight winless for new manager 

 

maybe that's what he meant "LOOK AT MY RECORDS"

The ever growing list of shame under the Punatics :

• The worst ever start to a New Managers career in the waiting.

• Our worst Season Ticket sales in over 30+ years

• Club's worst ever home defeat v Fulham

• 6 straight defeats at home to Burnley,worst ever.

• Relegation to third tier

 

This list of shame will be added to.

Edited 5 hours ago by SIMON GARNERS 194

[RevidgeBlue]

2 hours ago, JHRover said:

Even if Eustace's primary motivation in moving was money, which I don't believe but I suppose it could be true, I'd like to know why it is that a club that was in administration only a couple of years ago, a club that was in League One last season, a club owned by a local non-billionaire, a club we were warned we would 'end up' like if Venkys left, a club up to their necks in relegation trouble 'not knowing what league they are going to be in next season' could offer our manager more than we were paying him.

And even if they could, and our wage offering was being comfortably beaten by Derby's offer, why none of the owners, representatives, Waggott thought it was appropriate, or necessary, to immediately and urgently offer him an improved deal bettering that of Derby in an attempt to keep him here. 

Of course the short termism at this club comes back to bite it in the arse in spectacular fashion. I don't expect Eustace's demands were unreasonable - clarity on the future, new contracts for his key players, maybe an improved/extended deal for himself, a plan for the summer, some sort of backing. 

Presumably the regime thought themselves clever denying him this, and some satisfaction was felt as the money from Derby cleared into the accounts, but of course in saving themselves time, effort and money here the medium to long term is going to go tits up big time. 

So far, in the space of a couple of months, they've chucked away another play-off push, when even mediocre form since February would have kept us right in the mix, they've caused a rebellion in the fanbase and this has forced the curtain twitcher and other stooges out into the open, those interviews have confirmed the suspicion for everyone to see that these three are totally untrustworthy and out of their depth running this club, their latest lame duck manager is overseeing an epic collapse in performances and results which shows no sign of stopping, if it carries on like this then our Championship status will be in major jeopardy by September, ticket sales are going to collapse, and those players we do want to stick around in the summer and beyond I would expect are getting their agents to work on getting the hell out of here.

So hats off to them. For what required a few reasonable demands to be met for Eustace they've ushered in a catastrophe that is going to take some turning around. So unnecessary, it would have been so easy just to improve Eustace's deal and address his reasonable concerns. 

Now that chaos has been chosen by the regime they've got to live with the consequences - and it is going to cost them dearly both in terms of plummeting ticket sales and pressure on their positions. 

Great post, you nailed it there with the catastrophic consequences of refusing to listen to Eustace's concerns.

Maybe if he had sidelined Lowe and didn't get on with Gestede as alleged by one of the so called insiders, those were key reasons for not wanting to extend his deal.

[sverrehh]

I struggle to believe any (reputable) manager at this level would respect Rudy Gestede. Gestede is far too inexperienced in his position at this level. This alone can't be healthy in any organisation.

Broughton atleast had more than 15 years as academy manager before coming to Rovers as sporting director.

[RevidgeBlue]

40 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

I dont think its in the best interests of the team to have demands set regarding minutes given to academy players.

I don't want this to be an over-riding objective that has to be implemented at the expense of the team no matter what, but I've seen little evidence that VI has any particular appetite to get these 2-3000 Academy minutes in so far.

[chaddyrovers]

12 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Your point seems to be, thats whats happening.

You seem to have such a problem with the head coach role and what it should be. You wanted them to be old school manager where he control everything football side of the club has done. 

 

12 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Do you think the head coach should have sole autocracy to decide on tactics or should the director stick his beak in and decide? 

well that depends whether the head coach has been employed to play that style of play the club want they to or whether he has autocracy to decide a style of play he wants to play

12 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

I dont think it makes sense to have a (novice) director of football deciding which tactics to employ.

I dont think its in the best interests of the team to have demands set regarding minutes given to academy players.

I dont think it makes sense to employ a shit manager.

I dont think it makes sense to employ manager whose only successful spell in this country came playing tactics which are the opposite of what Gestede wants to play.

Little makes sense at this club. I dont know why you are believing anything that the snake that is Suhail says.

Its the football club who has decide to play this way based on what the football board, management and sporting Director wants. They will employ a head coach who has experience in playing that way or bring through youth into the first team. What ever they want to do. 

 

[Mattyblue]

The ‘football board’, how are they working out?

[Mercer]

@chaddyrovers now reverted back to type and defending all things Rovers and indulging in absolute fantasy.  Either he's stopped smelling the coffee or Waggott's bunged him a free season ticket!?

I think Rovers are rotten to the core.

Imo, until our owners, Waggott, Pasha, Gestede, Ismael and Lowe etc are all gone we will remain a dysfunctional, ambitionless and unholy mess.

IMO, the purchase of season tickets will just elongate the misery and moribund state of our club.  Each to his own but a bit of short term pain (severance of emotional attachment) is surely better than another 15 years of nonsense.

[chaddyrovers]

20 minutes ago, Mattyblue said:

The ‘football board’, how are they working out?

I was talking about football in general not about Rovers management. You have asked me questions previously and I answered every one

[roversfan99]

I definitely have never said that the manager should be in control of everything.

I do however think it should be solely down to the manager/head coach to decide what bloody tactics he uses. Rather than some head in the skies suit wearer behind the scenes deciding what the "philosophy" is or the "right way of playing." Its all drivel. Its hardly an outdated, antiquated outlook to management.

Obviously, at our club this is particularly relevant as we are so terribly run. People in jobs they shouldnt be in, constantly changing staff, constant disagreements, constantly changing what "style" we should be playing in. And now we have a dreadful head coach to top it all off because we scared off the decent ones.

[Mattyblue]

23 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

I was talking about football in general not about Rovers management. You have asked me questions previously and I answered every one

So not well.

[miqaayil]

1 hour ago, SIMON GARNERS 194 said:

The ever growing list of shame under the Punatics :

• The worst ever start to a New Managers career in the waiting.

• Our worst Season Ticket sales in over 30+ years

• Club's worst ever home defeat v Fulham

• 6 straight defeats at home to Burnley,worst ever.

• Relegation to third tier

 

This list of shame will be added to.

can we march the 3 down the streets ... and glen ring the bell "SHAME , SHAME , SHAME" like game of thrones 

 

[TugaysMarlboro]

3 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

So, what your point then? if Rovers under Gestede and the Rovers board wanted to play this style and have picked their head coach choice to be appointed

Have I? no I have commented on what been said and what they said. 

I have previously said what formation and style I would play. 

Have I said it made sense here but I was commented a wider point within the football community that is how football work now. That was my point 

You said the same last summer and we spent from what Pasha said around 4.5m mark this season on transfers and increase the wage bill for the January signings. 

I expect something similar this summer, where I think we spend some money on player transfer fees(around 3-5 million), a couple of loans and couple of frees. 

Firstly, I don't think partly quoting a sentence from Pasha as the gospel truth is a wise thing when trying to backup your argument, especially when one of those signings came in at the end of January and the other seemingly can't dislodge Pears as number 1 (a position we both agree, should be number 1 priority in the summer).

 

Secondly, you have said we need 10 new players next season, i'll assume that does not include replacements of any other potential losses who we haven't had this season (such as if Markanday or Garrett leave on a perm or loan again). Do you think obtaining the number of players we need at the right level, can be obtained with the small amount of money you've mentioned?

[roverandout]

The chadometer has begun to swing the other way again 

[Tomphil2]

I don't believe for a nano second Derby were offering Eustace 10/12k a week more than he was on here, a month more maybe and that adds up well over a few years.

They already committed half a million in compensation for him although i wouldn't be surprised if there was a nice big bonus attached if he keeps them up.

If you were this set of fools here and he was being sounded out with an attractive offer but clearly open to staying you'd say ...look we can't renegotiate right now and we can't confirm what the summer budget will be but we'll meet you half way...

..X amount bonus for finishing in the play offs and XX amount if we go up through those.

Make the gamble of staying and turning down a Derby deal worthwhile even if it meant he was still uneasy about staying beyond that.

Do we think that was even considered ?  Or was the just out of the shadows man by then more excited about the prospect of a big compen payment and bringing in Rudy's cheaper pal who'll do as he is told ?

[sharpysharps86]

26 minutes ago, roverandout said:

The chadometer has begun to swing the other way again 

It'll swing back if Rovers lose tomorrow night and Ismael stands with his hands in his pockets, offering absolutely no encouragement to his players before heading down the tunnel at full time, ignorant to the fans.

 

 

Edited 3 hours ago by sharpysharps86

[MarkBRFC]

25 minutes ago, sharpysharps86 said:

It'll swing back if Rovers lose tomorrow night and Ismael stands with his hands in his pockets, offering absolutely no encouragement to his players before heading down the tunnel at full time, ignorant to the fans.

 

 

When*