Andy Thorn back....

[georgehudson]

i accept the fact that all people have a selective memory,
the crux surely must be whether a person is able to accept and muse over an alternate point of view,

recent historic;
Igwe's statement about being more communicative,
the enlistment of Clarke as PR guru,
Joy is now hands on,

previous regimes will have to accept their catastrophic decisions,
but the present incumbents should make an attempt to make a statement,
we, the fans, are left to debate between ourselves,

 

[Grendel]

Keogh, Mcpake, Gunnar, Juke, DMC (i assume loans are included), Norwood, Westwood.

Loans don't count as signings. Clubs circulate who us available for loans and decisions are made from there.

I know you are trying to re-write history but he wasn't manager when the other players were signed.

Before you blather on about being a scout the role is totally different. Also it means Dowie never signed Leon Best (well Ian's brother may have) and Micky Adams didn't sign Misfud - his scout did.

 

[dongonzalos]

Unfortunately G man, you can't re write history. If your market is the loan market and that's where you have to delve into the you have to talent spot from the loan market and you are judged by your selections.

Saying murphy is the only player of any worth that AT has ever signed is just plain silly, sorry.

At times you make some valid points but this is not one if those times.

 

[Sick Boy]

Why is it that we talk about the recent signings as Robins' signings, yet previous manager's signings were signed by Thorn even when he was not manager?

 

[DazzleTommyDazzle]

Why is it that we talk about the recent signings as Robins' signings, yet previous manager's signings were signed by Thorn even when he was not manager?

Just a guess - but perhaps people think he played a part in them because he was Chief Scout.

 

[Sick Boy]

Just a guess - but perhaps people think he played a part in them because he was Chief Scout.

Maybe they were spotted by scouts other from the Chief Scout?

It is bizarre that in the past all previous signings have been attributed to the managers and not the scouts. There must be a lot of scouts in the world who feel a great deal of anger when they see managers getting the praise for signings.

 

[Grendel]

Just a guess - but perhaps people think he played a part in them because he was Chief Scout.

Bit odd though. Until Thorn joined the club if you named any player signed and asked who signed him who would you have said - manager or Scout?

 

[Grendel]

Unfortunately G man, you can't re write history. If your market is the loan market and that's where you have to delve into the you have to talent spot from the loan market and you are judged by your selections.

Saying murphy is the only player of any worth that AT has ever signed is just plain silly, sorry.

At times you make some valid points but this is not one if those times.

You name a group of players signed before he became manager and claimed he signed them and I am just plain silly. OK. To be fair there is one interview when he did claim to have strongly pushed the then manager to make a signing of a player he had always admired - David Bell - or Belly as he called him in the interview.

 

[georgehudson]

the truth is out there,
for anyone who has our interests at heart,
listen back to the K & G interview, and then proffer questions from that,
whilst listening to skyblueinteractive, heard eakin give a quick dismissive comment in reply to a fan,
we all want to move on from the thorn era, but there are many 'johnny nash' moments,
PUSB

 

[georgehudson]

just a quick addendum to that, the interesting stuff starts from 16m, 18s,

 

[dongonzalos]

You name a group of players signed before he became manager and claimed he signed them and I am just plain silly. OK. To be fair there is one interview when he did claim to have strongly pushed the then manager to make a signing of a player he had always admired - David Bell - or Belly as he called him in the interview.

I don't know why I bother but I will.

As a scout he has told us in interviews who he identified to managers to sign.

You deny most of it and re-write history and deny it effectively suggesting he is a liar. Yet no other scout has come forward and disputed what AT has taken credit for so I would say you should accept it.

Then if you are been pedantic and saying you are only talking about people he actually signed......
His first season he signed 3 players, one you like. One is a back up goalie so I think it would be hard to judge him. The other was a striker that you openly admit a lot of people apart from you like.
Then he signs two loan players who do well. That was all he was allowed to do but you say loan players can't count......
Then this season he signs 9 players and states he did the deal for DMC.

He was slowed to spend a reported 100k on a player MR said in the CET is quality.

He has 3 matches with these players and a new manager takes over and you declare the players the worse signings in history.

I would say loan signings do count. If you are forced to make loan signings then you have select the right ones. We have had many average to say the least ones.

I would say
Murphy
Norwood
Nimely
DMC
Fleck
Barton
McDonald's

Are good signings

I would say

Edge.
Jennings

Are ok signings.

I would say Ball, Brown were poor signings.

Malaga I personally think would be in the ok camp if this language issue was not seen as a issue.

I think Kilbane and Elliot should be good signings and the players themselves are a serious let down.

I don't think you can ignore the players he identified as a scout

 

[dongonzalos]

the truth is out there,
for anyone who has our interests at heart,
listen back to the K & G interview, and then proffer questions from that,
whilst listening to skyblueinteractive, heard eakin give a quick dismissive comment in reply to a fan,
we all want to move on from the thorn era, but there are many 'johnny nash' moments,
PUSB

The interview stops as it gets interesting.

I hope the CET interview him.

 

[georgehudson]

think sisu will put a stop to any further actions

 

[Grendel]

I don't know why I bother but I will.

As a scout he has told us in interviews who he identified to managers to sign.

You deny most of it and re-write history and deny it effectively suggesting he is a liar. Yet no other scout has come forward and disputed what AT has taken credit for so I would say you should accept it.

Then if you are been pedantic and saying you are only talking about people he actually signed......
His first season he signed 3 players, one you like. One is a back up goalie so I think it would be hard to judge him. The other was a striker that you openly admit a lot of people apart from you like.
Then he signs two loan players who do well. That was all he was allowed to do but you say loan players can't count......
Then this season he signs 9 players and states he did the deal for DMC.

He was slowed to spend a reported 100k on a player MR said in the CET is quality.

He has 3 matches with these players and a new manager takes over and you declare the players the worse signings in history.

I would say loan signings do count. If you are forced to make loan signings then you have select the right ones. We have had many average to say the least ones.

I would say
Murphy
Norwood
Nimely
DMC
Fleck
Barton
McDonald's

Are good signings

I would say

Edge.
Jennings

Are ok signings.

I would say Ball, Brown were poor signings.

Malaga I personally think would be in the ok camp if this language issue was not seen as a issue.

I think Kilbane and Elliot should be good signings and the players themselves are a serious let down.

I don't think you can ignore the players he identified as a scout

McDonald was signed in August last season and failed badly. His lack of fitness at the start was not acceptable and he has continued to look overweight and poor quality. Most actually agree with this assesment.

However, the fact you claim Nimeley as a "good" signing shows your lack of knowledge. Read the reason Thorn signed him - to score goals.

He scored once in over 1,500 minutes of football.

 

[Grendel]

The interview stops as it gets interesting.

I hope the CET interview him.

SISU were the only people stupid and desparate enough to give him an opportunity in football management.

Instead of being grateful he squeals and never once shows any humility for the part he has played in our demise.

He is truly without dignity and shame.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Every club has chief scouts in place, but it is always the manager, especially at smaller clubs, who has the final say-and even then the board can block it. The one time the board gave Thorn free rein he totally blew it-yet he still has the audacity to whine about it.

 

[dongonzalos]

Every club has chief scouts in place, but it is always the manager, especially at smaller clubs, who has the final say-and even then the board can block it. The one time the board gave Thorn free rein he totally blew it-yet he still has the audacity to whine about it.

yep a win in the cup a draw away to Yeovil a draw with Sheff utd and one poor draw at home to Bury.

Don't think he couldnt have blown it any more.

I think at least ten games of him managering these players in the styles he intended for them. Playing the roles he envisaged them to play when he signed them.

If that went wrong then you could fairly say he completey blew it.

 

[dongonzalos]

He signed DMC. But didnt get to play him.

He would be playing but didn't get to play him.

My guess is if we had DMC we would have beat Yeovil and Bury.

I think he signed to players to suit his style. The likes of Barton would have been the focal point of our play

 

[DazzleTommyDazzle]

Maybe they were spotted by scouts other from the Chief Scout?

It is bizarre that in the past all previous signings have been attributed to the managers and not the scouts. There must be a lot of scouts in the world who feel a great deal of anger when they see managers getting the praise for signings.

Not sure how long you've been following City, but perhaps you might remember the credit that was frequently given to Ray Clark when he was our scout in Europe?

Or is that an awkward fact that doesn't fit the agenda?

 

[Grendel]

The likes of Barton would have been the focal point of our play

Thank God he isn't we'd be relegated without trace.

 

[oldskyblue58]

just my opinion but i dont believe AT's version of events from pre season to sacking any more than i believe TF's or "sisu's" (not sure we have ever heard the latter). The actual truth is somewhere in the middle of the mess they all created. None of them are very good at taking responsibility for their actions............. in fact i have yet to see responsibility taken by any of them for what went on.

None are transparent in the information they give out, all have their own agenda, all are inconsistent in what they say, all have a different version of the truth.

Would I have swapped AT for MR yes absolutely .......... and i would have done it any time since March 2011. In terms of manager alone we are better off now than we were with AT.

He is gone, has been paid out, has no real relevance to our future, has contributed to where we are and the problems we face, it isnt all his fault though others are involved and at least one far more responsible............................... move on from it

 

[Sick Boy]

Not sure how long you've been following City, but perhaps you might remember the credit that was frequently given to Ray Clark when he was our scout in Europe?

Or is that an awkward fact that doesn't fit the agenda?

It is funny that we wouldn't be having this conversation about any other 'manager', and have never done before and probably won't again.

Many have previously tried to rewrite history by claiming he signed players before he was even manager and that he even managed to bring players into the club when he wasn't even employed here.

They would probably even try to give him credit for the win today.

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

Every club has chief scouts in place, but it is always the manager, especially at smaller clubs, who has the final say-and even then the board can block it. The one time the board gave Thorn free rein he totally blew it-yet he still has the audacity to whine about it.

Free rein? He lost out on his mail target(s) as we were in embargo. What's so free about being able to sign nobody?

Farcical post

 

[The Reverend Skyblue]

Please and a bigger please, can we now stop posting about Thorn. Its OK now and then but this subject has been done to death ten times over.
For the sake of this forum, we have talked about Andy bloody Thorn enough, lets talk about something else and perhaps at the end os the season re-open a Thorn thread for nostalgic reasons, or for those who have really missed posting about him.

We are manged by Mark Robins Now

The Rev

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Free rein? He lost out on his mail target(s) as we were in embargo. What's so free about being able to sign nobody?

Farcical post

He missed out on what, 2 players? He was still allowed to sign nearly 10 for goodness' sake.

 

[Mary_Mungo_Midge]

He missed out on what, 2 players? He was still allowed to sign nearly 10 for goodness' sake.

His chosen strike force was Collins and McGoldrick. Neither were delivered.

I don't know what 'free rein' means on your planet; but its a different interpretation from that the rest of us saw. The silliest post since you asserted McGoldrick was a wasted loan. Well done

 

[SkyblueBazza]

Please and a bigger please, can we now stop posting about Thorn. Its OK now and then but this subject has been done to death ten times over.
For the sake of this forum, we have talked about Andy bloody Thorn enough, lets talk about something else and perhaps at the end os the season re-open a Thorn thread for nostalgic reasons, or for those who have really missed posting about him.

We are manged by Mark Robins Now

The Rev

WHAT? Thorn's gone?!!!

 

[fernandopartridge]

His chosen strike force was Collins and McGoldrick. Neither were delivered.

I don't know what 'free rein' means on your planet; but its a different interpretation from that the rest of us saw. The silliest post since you asserted McGoldrick was a wasted loan. Well done

Because he missed out on Mcgoldrick he signed assorted bilge instead?

 

[Sick Boy]

The only conclusion that can be drawn from all of this is that he has some relations posting on this forum.

All of the great managers enlist the help of a PR agency to help them find work and make claims in them that bend the truth and rewrite history.

 

[Sick Boy]

He missed out on what, 2 players? He was still allowed to sign nearly 10 for goodness' sake.

You still don't understand that the signings aren't as good as we all thought, so they have to have been signed by Waggot!!!! The only one who Thorn signed was DM!! (even though he signed several days after he had been sacked.)

 

[Nick]

I could set it on the forum so when somebody types Thorn it changes it to something else so people forget about him?

 

[Sick Boy]

I could set it on the forum so when somebody types Thorn it changes it to something else so people forget about him?

Just a picture of a chocolate teapot would do.

 

[Nick]

I could do that....

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

You still don't understand that the signings aren't as good as we all thought, so they have to have been signed by Waggot!!!! The only one who Thorn signed was DM!! (even though he signed several days after he had been sacked.)

MMM never gave me that pie you know. As big a disappointment as his beloved manfriend.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

His chosen strike force was Collins and McGoldrick. Neither were delivered.

I don't know what 'free rein' means on your planet; but its a different interpretation from that the rest of us saw. The silliest post since you asserted McGoldrick was a wasted loan. Well done

Every manager misses out on targets and must cope accordingly. My McGoldrick post was made before he signed and not as dismissive as you imply.