Tisdale V Taylor

[richard_portland]

I can totally understand why he didn't. He will have wanted to win it and achieve promotion, and why not. Would look good on his cv just as much as it would have been good for us.

Maybe so, but the way he set us up and the initial substitutions at two down didn't make it look that way. It was classic Tisdale, and most could see it was very unlikely to succeed. We could have really gone at them if we had been braver.

 

[geoffwp]

Hindsight is always spot on for answers though isn't it. There were players who didn't turn up either, but hey water under the bridge. I'm still certain that he wanted it.

 

[hienzeECFC]

The question in the OP is pointless.

Tisdale has gone. Matt Taylor is the Gaffer now and we need to get behind him and the team.

Like we did with Tisdale?

Personally I think the fans who voted to serve notice on Tisdale's contract when results were poor made a decision as to what club they wanted this to be. By that rational, I would argue Taylor is 3 more games without a win before he gets the chop.

 

[Hants_red]

While we've been Trust owned, we've never sacked a manager. I've asked some Trustees, whether they think the Trust Board could have put forward to the Club Board that a manager should be sacked - I've no had a clear answer. Unless something disastrous happens, I don't think the TB would ever ask (instruct) the CB to get rid of a manager.

 

[IndoMike]

While we've been Trust owned, we've never sacked a manager. I've asked some Trustees, whether they think the Trust Board could have put forward to the Club Board that a manager should be sacked - I've no had a clear answer. Unless something disastrous happens, I don't think the TB would ever ask (instruct) the CB to get rid of a manager.

Quite right (except in very exceptional circumstances)

 

[hienzeECFC]

While we've been Trust owned, we've never sacked a manager. I've asked some Trustees, whether they think the Trust Board could have put forward to the Club Board that a manager should be sacked - I've no had a clear answer. Unless something disastrous happens, I don't think the TB would ever ask (instruct) the CB to get rid of a manager.

Serving notice on his deal was as good as a sacking. The trust didn't give him a new offer and most of the (more vocal) fans made little bones about the fact they wanted Tisdale (and perryman) to go.

The problem is that whatever we may think, 99.9% of supporters on the terrace know absolutely ****** all about football. Very few have sat in a professional dressing room. Although I am perfectly aware non-football people make footballing decisions at other (most) clubs, we have now created a situation for ourselves where we have neither football people, nor business people, making major decisions for the club. People may have dressed up Tisdale's notice as a business decision, and others as a football decision. Unfortunately a democratic majority of our trust members are experts in either.

The other thing that worries me is that people were so vocal about getting rid of the most successful manager in the club's history, that now there is a motivation to prove themselves right with with the man who was brought in to replace him.

How do the fans (who have demonstrated their power in making massive decisions) now demonstrate any form of objectivity when it comes to their new man? I'd be interested to know what level of success/or failure people would continue to support him with and for how long.

 

[Hants_red]

Tisdale was offered a new contract. He chose to walk away from City. This is FACT, a real fact.

 

[fred binneys head]

Not many “football people” or “business people” make a very good job at other clubs, maybe we’ve broken the mould by having people who genuinely love the club they’re working for and treat people the right way.

Tisdale was offered a new contract by the trust.

 

[tonykellowfan]

Tisdale was served notice when we were bottom of the league FFS.

People have short memories.

 

[hienzeECFC]

Tisdale was offered a new contract. He chose to walk away from City. This is FACT, a real fact.

It is a fact, however I cannot believe anyone here is naive enough to argue that he wasn't helped out of the door. The fans, and at least in theory, his paymasters, voted to serve notice on the most successful manager in the club's history.

Yes he was bottom of the league when the notice was given, however after two trips to the play-off final in two years, people still wanted him out and he knew it. Had there been chants of 'we want you to stay' at the end of the Lincoln game, maybe he would have re-considered signing.

The point is, to argue that by serving notice we (I use the word 'we' loosely') did not effectively call for the manager to be dismissed, is just mad.

Sacking or not, he was as much pushed as he did walk.