iamarover Posted June 2, 2008 Posted June 2, 2008 If Hughes takes this job then he deserves our complete disapproval next time he brings a team to Ewood Park. Take the Chelsea job and we would have applauded him, he's done a good job here and we couldn't argue with him joining them. But take the City job - with them finishing lower in the league and a maniac of a chairman just smacks of a lack of loyalty and a contempt for our club. ... or smacks of indifference towards blood money gained from the systematic abuse of human rights and looting of a country's treasury for his own personal gain. Appalling. He should turn this down. He wont though. It's about the money.
This thread is brought to you by theterracestore.com Enter code `BRFCS` at checkout for an exclusive discount!
nicko Posted June 2, 2008 Posted June 2, 2008 And Nicko what i said earlier about the Chris Ronnie with City links and being offered with a job there, possible takeoever ruse in order to speak to sparky is a load of rubbish? Chris Ronnie and his chums want to buy your club, but it is a painfully slow process. I don't think a new owner - unless he was a billionaire - would be able to keep Hughes at this stage. His idea to make him a director was because he was concerned that he could be a target and may leave. The fact that Man City can tempt Sparky tells you there HAS to be new money sooner rather than later.
T4E Posted June 2, 2008 Posted June 2, 2008 You cannot have a manager tell players to abide by their contracts and then go off flirting with other clubs. I doubt any of the players have taken anything like that seriously from Hughes since his complete refusal to rule himself out of the Newcastle job. Since that point his position has been in doubt - if he goes to speak to City it becomes untenable. Whatever happens, Hughes is gone and we have to find a new manager. There's plenty decent ones around.
tony gale's mic Posted June 2, 2008 Posted June 2, 2008 To be fair Harry spoke to Newcastle, turned it down and is sitting happily at Portsmouth. However, the speed at which this has all happened seems to suggest Hughes really does want out.
novella Posted June 2, 2008 Posted June 2, 2008 any chance we could get lippi or deschamps? wishful thinking i think....
Eddie Posted June 2, 2008 Posted June 2, 2008 Grow up Eddie Grow up? I believe the club needs investment. I'm also not overly concerned by the prospect of Hughes leaving. But.. Several on here (yourself include) insist that the club should really remain as it is, but if Hughes goes to City it will stand as strong proof that we are losing our manager (whom many consider to be the second coming) due to a lack of funds (at least that will have been a major reason in his deciding to leave).
RibbleValleyRover Posted June 2, 2008 Posted June 2, 2008 To be fair Harry spoke to Newcastle, turned it down and is sitting happily at Portsmouth. However, the speed at which this has all happened seems to suggest Hughes really does want out. I can't see Williams keeping Hughes on if Chelsea don't make an offer and he turns down City. This move by Hughes has made his position at Rovers untenable.
Mozzer Posted June 2, 2008 Posted June 2, 2008 any manager with any ambition -why would you work under that loony bin thaskin? hes sacked sven despite getting in europe albeit fair play, and hes got them finishing in their best position for years-but is their chairman happy-no.. yeh sven has been given money to spend-but with the shambles he took over from man city had a pretty decent season.. mark hughes would be mad to take over at man city..
BlueWhiteDynamite Posted June 2, 2008 Posted June 2, 2008 I can't see Williams keeping Hughes on if Chelsea don't make an offer and he turns down City. This move by Hughes has made his position at Rovers untenable. but why would you sack of someone and their staff which could be worth millions, i cant remember how much we got from newcastle but was it not like 2m for souness and an additional 3m for the backroom staff, and rovers wanted to get rid so i would think as a club blackburn would be looking for upwards of 8m for the staff.
RibbleValleyRover Posted June 2, 2008 Posted June 2, 2008 I can't see Hughes lasting more than a season a City as crazy Sinatra probably wants City to win the league next season. Utter madness.
Big Archie Posted June 2, 2008 Posted June 2, 2008 My only problem with him is that we will play the most boring football imaginable and not get flair players like Bentley, Rocky, MGP, etc. We've all seen notlob and Newcastle under him, it's just long ball and my season ticket wouldn't have been renewed under his charge. Quoted for truth. Newcastle were playing worse football under Allardyce than they were under Souness. Whilst many still argue that Newcastle were rash in getting rid of him if they hadn't they would may well have been relegated. The man is clueless and hides behind stats from a computer even when the most obvious things on the park to everyone are telling you different. Stay well clear...
vintageadidas Posted June 2, 2008 Posted June 2, 2008 I yeh i forget they were in Europe. Hughes is gonner. I think another factor is that he does not have to uproot his family.
RibbleValleyRover Posted June 2, 2008 Posted June 2, 2008 I hope we can put something in place that can stop Hughes raiding our club if he goes to City. Santa Cruz in particular is someone i see as being vital to the future of our club.
TugaysMarlboro Posted June 2, 2008 Posted June 2, 2008 Mark Hughes isn't the man I thought he was. Simple as that for me.
Oklahoma Posted June 2, 2008 Posted June 2, 2008 Terribly disapointed if HUghes signs for Man city. And, if he wants to take players from Rovers, make them pay an extra £5 million.
Big Archie Posted June 2, 2008 Posted June 2, 2008 Nicko do you think we should start laying against Hughes for Chelsea now?
The Prof. Posted June 2, 2008 Posted June 2, 2008 Brad anyone? Mmmm.... Might be a good one year stop gap for City but his age is against him and Hughes will go for a £10-15m goalkeeper I suspect. I wonder about Brad for Manager sometime in the future - he's a consumate professional!
den Posted June 2, 2008 Posted June 2, 2008 Those terms and conditions:- could they include that 1] he doesn't come back for any of our players 2] he doesn't take his coaching staff with him. ?
nicko Posted June 2, 2008 Posted June 2, 2008 Nicko do you think we should start laying against Hughes for Chelsea now? I would leave that for now. The next few hours should be very intriguing. Chelsea may yet react to this, it's a bold hand being played by Sparky here - if you look at it from a neutral's viewpoint.
Hasta Posted June 2, 2008 Posted June 2, 2008 I'd love to go back and find all those people who said Hughes would not be interested in City, Tottenham etc.... Players and managers don't love the club like we do. They also can't achieve what they want to achieve at Ewood in certain cases. If it happens lets move on.
Eddie Posted June 2, 2008 Posted June 2, 2008 Those terms and conditions:- could they include that 1] he doesn't come back for any of our players 2) He takes Mokoena and Roberts for a combined 15 million.
RibbleValleyRover Posted June 2, 2008 Posted June 2, 2008 I would leave that for now. The next few hours should be very intriguing. Chelsea may yet react to this, it's a bold hand being played by Sparky here - if you look at it from a neutral's viewpoint. I hope Chelsea make the move for him and i think Hughes hopes so to, thats why he has done this move in my opinion.
Iceman Posted June 2, 2008 Posted June 2, 2008 what will be interesting,is when Hughes doesnt get the job at City what his relationship will be like,with JW,the fans,and the players.The board has backed him(okay not financially)but have been a good provider,and gave him a stable platform to work with.The players and fans have taken to the guy,and like somebody mentioned,if he went to Chelsea,we would wish him well..However,the fact that he wants to speak to City,smacks of something else,that has money written all over it,whether personally,or money wanted to sepnd big on players. i get the feeling if City chooses somebody else,and chelsea doesnt take hughes,then there will be huge unrest within the club.JW did mention the board "reluctantly" agreed to allow him to have talks.I just get the feeling that if Hughes is at the club at the start of the season,we going to have a really uneasy time of things,untill it all settles down... For this reason,i hope things getted sorted out as soon as possible,either he goes and we replace quickly,or he makes up his mind and stays,and gets on with his job
b12_simon Posted June 2, 2008 Posted June 2, 2008 I would leave that for now. The next few hours should be very intriguing. Chelsea may yet react to this, it's a bold hand being played by Sparky here - if you look at it from a neutral's viewpoint. I agree he's trying to force Chelsea's hand but City is not necessarily a complete bluff. OK we finished above City in the League but unlike us they are in the UEFA Cup next season.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.