Andy Thorn still believes... (1 Viewer)

AT has blamed the owners and some of the players.

How about also admitting failings tactically and motivationally, Andy? :thinking about:

He's got to get off to a good start in L1...the fans will NOT accept some of the naivety shown last year being repeated.

Mary_Mungo_Midge said:

Is not the bigger problem that he wasn't allowed to bring in sufficient players of the right quality to keep us up? We had two loan players for the critical stage in the season when our peers had either signed players on permanent deals, or drafted in 8 loanees like Bristol. Do you think we would have stood a chance if Thorn would have been allowed to also bring in more players of the ilk of Nimely and Norwood?

We were poor before Christmas - that's clear, and a function of Thorn's naivety and fledging tactical nous being bettered by more experienced peers, and with far, far too many youngsters who were clearly not ready. That's a given. But post-Christmas, when we'd 'wised-up', and were putting results together, the one thing that really, and critically cost us at the death was an over-stretched squad. If you really and genuinely want to look at what sent us down, it was the reluctance to invest in the playing squad for the run-in; and therefore - for me - SISU who are ultimately responsible for our fate. To attribute it to Thorn's signings not being 'good enough' is, I believe, short-sighted and over-simplistic in the extreme

Click to expand...

Also add to that a lack of strikers that can score goals. Goals get you points. We didn't get enough goals. We didn't get enough points.

Can someone remind me what happened to our striker that had got 3 times the amount of goals to our second highest scorer in Janruary? I suppose some think that was the idea of AT as well :facepalm:

Brighton Sky Blue said:

That's what makes getting relegated bitterly frustrating to accept in the end MMM; had any investment been made in the squad in addition to Nimely and Norwood-and by that I mean say 3 or 4 additions-I'm pretty sure we wouldn't have collapsed at the finish. .

Click to expand...

Agreed, perhaps...that's on the assumption that AT and Weasel would have got in the right players, employed the right tactics and motivated them.

I'm not sure they would have. The fact that we lost crucial make or break games partly proves this.

You use Nimely as an example...yes, AT brought him into score goals. How many did he score?

AT has some excuses to hide behind...I admit that....but some on here vehemently argue that having money is the be-all and end-all of defining managerial success...IT ISN'T!!!

if it was, we would just have Chief Executives buying players and then letting them get on with it...what about tactics/motivation/negating the opposition etc...???:thinking about:

Astute said:

Also add to that a lack of strikers that can score goals. Goals get you points. We didn't get enough goals. We didn't get enough points.

Can someone remind me what happened to our striker that had got 3 times the amount of goals to our second highest scorer in Janruary? I suppose some think that was the idea of AT as well :facepalm:

Click to expand...

He scored one league goal in the rest of the season, and we as a team scored more goals and earned more points per game than prior to that?

Astute said:

Also add to that a lack of strikers that can score goals. Goals get you points. We didn't get enough goals. We didn't get enough points.

Can someone remind me what happened to our striker that had got 3 times the amount of goals to our second highest scorer in Janruary? I suppose some think that was the idea of AT as well :facepalm:

Click to expand...

It was his idea to bring in a striker as a replacement who scored one goal in 17 appearances, though, wasn't it?

LeamingtonBootBoy said:

Agreed, perhaps...that's on the assumption that AT and Weasel would have got in the right players, employed the right tactics and motivated them.

I'm not sure they would have. The fact that we lost crucial make or break games partly proves this.

You use Nimely as an example...yes, AT brought him into score goals. How many did he score?

AT has some excuses to hide behind...I admit that....but some on here vehemently argue that having money is the be-all and end-all of defining managerial success...IT ISN'T!!!

if it was, we would just have Chief Executives buying players and then letting them get on with it...what about tactics/motivation/negating the opposition etc...???:thinking about:

Click to expand...

Nimely added depth and pace at a time when our only fit striker was Platt-and despite lack of goals gave us a threat up front. I think it's a fair assumption that the right additions would've been made had the resource been there. He remains culpable for the away losing run and terrible pre Christmas form, though.

LeamingtonBootBoy said:

It was his idea to bring in a striker as a replacement who scored one goal in 17 appearances, though, wasn't it?

Click to expand...

Yes, I remember that interview where he said he was looking for a striker who would score 1 in 17 well..


I also remember a lot of interviews (that actually happened) where he said he couldn't afford the players he wanted to bring in on loan, IE experienced players, and that there was no pint in bringing in players who weren't. But then we sold Lukas; I guess we could have gone with just Platt and Jeffers, seeing as Cody was injured at the time-but I think Alex added something that those two didn't have, for all his poor strike-rate, and was thus a justifiable signing: not good enough, but probably the best we could afford. I'd still take him back next season in a shot, and I'm sure most fans would agree with me! His best showings were early on: maybe if we'd had a bit more quality and depth we'd have been able to rest and rotate him after the kickings he'd taken, and he'd have been as fresh as he was against Midboro'?

wonder how AT feels at the moment

..... TF assured him that there would be a player budget (even heard him say on radio that he was trying to increase the player budget) - I am assuming a player budget refers to the pot we pay wages from not the cost of transfer fees....... AT says he isnt staying unless he has assurances that new players can come in, he must have had them judging by his recent comments........... next thing is CCFC have not paid the rent ........ wont pay rent until it comes down and cant set a budget because no agreement on the new rent....... in JS & TF's interviews both refer to the current situation being unviable financially unless they have the income streams from the stadium.......... that implies that as it stands they cant put figures together that show the business as a going concern because they dont have the income streams andin their own words it doesnt work and is not viable ...... result of which is accounts can not be filed because auditors wont sign off as a going concern and club under transfer embargo ........... AT cant sign players and his assurances received are worthless ....... couldnt blame him for walking away really

If he left the club we'd also lose our head scout-and could you see us replacing that post as well? Unlikely! Thorn covers 2 jobs at the moment, something some people forget.

Brighton Sky Blue said:

If he left the club we'd also lose our head scout-and could you see us replacing that post as well? Unlikely! Thorn covers 2 jobs at the moment, something some people forget.

Click to expand...

whats the point of a scout if we wont buy any players in the first place ?

Hadn't factored that in M and D.

Brighton Sky Blue said:

N. I think it's a fair assumption that the right additions would've been made had the resource been there. .

Click to expand...

Some fair points, BSB...but I can't quite agree with your assumption.

AT's choice of who to give extended contracts to, and overall signings/scouting recommendation, lead me to believe that it would only have been a possibility that the right additions would have been made.

Nonleagueherewecome said:

Yes, I remember that interview where he said he was looking for a striker who would score 1 in 17 well..


I also remember a lot of interviews (that actually happened) where he said he couldn't afford the players he wanted to bring in on loan, IE experienced players, and that there was no pint in bringing in players who weren't. But then we sold Lukas; I guess we could have gone with just Platt and Jeffers, seeing as Cody was injured at the time-but I think Alex added something that those two didn't have, for all his poor strike-rate, and was thus a justifiable signing: not good enough, but probably the best we could afford. I'd still take him back next season in a shot, and I'm sure most fans would agree with me! His best showings were early on: maybe if we'd had a bit more quality and depth we'd have been able to rest and rotate him after the kickings he'd taken, and he'd have been as fresh as he was against Midboro'?

Click to expand...

So if it wasn't AT's choice to bring in Nimely...whose was it????? :thinking about:

oldskyblue58 said:

....... couldnt blame him for walking away really

Click to expand...

I'll take that.

However, if he is to go, please go now...and let someone have the time to implement their strategy...money or not.

If AT stays that we'll have to give him 10/15 games and see where he is at that point...

LeamingtonBootBoy said:

Some fair points, BSB...but I can't quite agree with your assumption.

AT's choice of who to give extended contracts to, and overall signings/scouting recommendation, lead me to believe that it would only have been a possibility that the right additions would have been made.

Click to expand...

No manager has a perfect recruitment record LBB. In general I don't think AT recruited poorly this season-and even if he didn't bring in amazing loanees, they would have added depth at least.

never been a big fan of his LBB and i wouldnt overly worry about him leaving ...... however TF said he was the man for the job so i get behind him in the sense of dealing with what is ........ but it has taken what 2 weeks ? for his assurances to be put in doubt, you can not run a team or a business in that manner .... it simply is ridiculous

I've never know anyone move quite so dramatically from the "it's not really his fault, he hasn't got any players" camp to "it's all his fault, he's an idiot" camp. It's like a Communist joining The Republican Party!

Brighton Sky Blue said:

Thorn covers 2 jobs at the moment, something some people forget.

Click to expand...

And three chairs.

lordsummerisle said:

And three chairs.

Click to expand...

That's got to hurt!