redandwhite1874 wrote:I don't believe saying positions are contradictory is abuse; not by any stretch of the imagination. Patronising is an entirely subjective assessment - its an opinion. Like the assessment of abuse I don't accept the assessment of patronising; buts its always tempting to attach negative abels to views that don't match yours.
Accies4ever you specifically asked me if I had inside info to share it. I never made any hint that I did and I would say you were suggesting that i did.
Your 'mind reading' comment I guess (?) is made at my interpretation of your 'cashing in' term which I took to be a negative take on things. The paragraph before this comment was about the club putting cash before the team. You said proof of this was 'cashing in' on Tony and then you don't accept my view that you were being critical of the club.
I have never questioned anyone's support of the club; but I do question if someone can support Canning having already decided the appointment was a mistake, starting to discuss the conditions under which he will be sacked and starting to discuss how the club might bottle that decision. Support for me is not just the absence of calling for someone to be sacked now.
Support for me is giving them the space and time to see through hard times; that support might end up being misplaced I grant you. But what is the alternative? Cold hearted/headed assessment of results and performance- well that is absolutely fine as well but not if it is dressed up as support.
What did you mean by cashing in? Should the club have knocked back Norwich in your opinion?
I asked
if you had inside information. Your answer is No. Question answered.
No suggestion made, is was purely a question.
The point I was making is that without said knowledge, you are speculating, same as the rest of us.
Cashing in. Already answered it. Read what I've said.
Should the club have knocked back Norwich in your opinion?
It was a opinion for the club, certainly. If you read what I've said already, none of us truly know what happened, it might not have been an option, if say Tony has a buy out clause. If he had a buy out clause Alex would certainly have known about it.
Mind reading thing was your assumption that just because I dare question a board's decision that I was against the club's ethos.
You seem to miss the basic point that you can actually be supportive of something, but be critical of individual points also. That's why I said everything's black or white with you. Life's dynamic. Example is my son's training in a boys football club. I'm 100% supportive of him, but I can also be critical of him, if he's not doing something right, and try to guide him how to make things better. It's how people improve.
By the way, that's standard managerial techniques.
Also I never once called for Canning to be sacked now. I don't think he is the correct appointment, but I still support him as present Accies manager. I want him to turn things round and improve performances/results. What I have posed is a benchmark where achievement is required.
I'm supportive of the team and the club primarily, individuals secondary.
It's the same idea as "no one bigger than the club"
Cold hearted/headed assessment of results and performance. I've already answered your question of what criterion I would apply a while ago, so why are you bringing this up again. Anyway, at some point results and performance have to come into play unless you're suggesting once a manager is in place, he can never get the sack. Why use the term cold hearted/headed, as if it's just a matter of crunching numbers. Again you miss the point, which you continually do.
Support in terms of a football board, manager or player does not mean blind allegiance to them. Don't understand why you don't get that.
Would you say that Rangers fans who are protesting against the board are not being supportive of the club. Far from it, they love their club so much that they can't stand what's happening to it, and fear for its existence.
It's an extreme example, granted, but I'm trying show you, you can be critical and support the overall club at the same time.
You said before everyone has a breaking point. Hypothetically if the team continue to perform badly and lose, into next season, there will be a point where even you would call for change. Does that mean you're then not being supportive.
If you say there wouldn't be a point, then you don't have the club's best interest at heart.
You say above that you wouldn't ever question a person's support, then at the end of that same paragraph imply I'm actually guising my opinions up as support (ie not being supportive). Contradiction!
I trust I have answered your questions and stop asking me the same question time and time again.
Seeing that you like asking me questions, in what set of circumstances would
you call for a managerial or board change at Accies?