Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire

[Rmpr 8,977]

I found the article a joke. I'm mixed between anger and pity for the writer. Using words like "Devil" to describe Roman was just unnecessary and then some of the suggestions were even stranger.

First of all, replacing Rafa with Hiddink won't happen. Why? Well is the author forgetting Mr Hiddink's currently coaching Anzhi right now? I don't think he's leaving the Russians for us again. It was different last time where he actually had time to coach us. Then calling for Roman's head. Well Roman's made some pretty foul mistakes during his tenure. Mourinho. But he has always tried to do it for the greater good of the club and when he's f'cked up, he's often tried to correct things.

"sell to the right people" - who exactly is that? Americans who will take out huge loans against the name of the club? Rich Arabs who are going to build an unsustainable project on-top the one we already have? No. Roman is the "right people" thanks.

So now the man who built up his own wealth doesn't have a "Strategy"? Okay. Oh and how nice to point out Arsenal.. They're REAL inspiration aren't they?

This was particularly amusing because it demonstrates to me another fan who's picked a random name out from club hierarchy and pointed the finger at. I'd love to hear his reasoning for this. What did Emenaldo do wrong? Why can Hiddink do better exactly?

I'd love to have heard this person's reaction when he heard we signed Hazard, Oscar, Mata, Azpilicueta etc.

[Peace. 4,352]

@The only place to be (and @LDN Blue).

Ima try and explain you what Emenalo did wrong, into my eyes.

--------------

First off all, for what thing(s) can we give him credit ?

Well, I don't follow at all our loaned players, so I cannot say whether they have been success or failure. I trust you on here, hence I'll give you that : Emenalo has done a good job.


I also give you that our transfert philosphy has changed. I do not know whether it's thank to him, but since he is the director of sportif, the credit goes to him.



And finally, I'll also give you that he wasn't helped by the short-term mentality that his predecessors had.



So all in all, we have improved under him : we seem to care a lot more about our youths, we seem to no longer target 30 years-old finished products, and instead, to target young players with potential (and who cost less). As he is credited for the bad things, we also gotta give credits for the good things. Credit where it's due.

--------------

Now, what did he get wrong, to my mind ? The fault I umpute to him are :

• A failure in our Mercato (in regard of the short-term) for which our current problems are partly due.
• To not have strengthened the striking force. Or rather, to not have purchased a striking force, since we didn't have any strikers. Indeed, at the start of the season, we had two strikers. The first one has been dog shit ever since he joined the club (so for the 18 months before the summer — even 24 months because he was also shit at Loserpool) — even though, the board (thus Emenalo) decieded to give him the key of our attack. The second one was not a lonely striker (so no suited to our formation) and it seems that he was out of favors anyway. Major error.
• To not have brought in players actually suited to play into the midfield-two. It's arguably the more important area of the formation, at least into my eyes. Even though, we started the season neither with players suited to play there, nor good enough to play there — or both. Throughout the season we could have notice that the double-pivot had let us down. Major error.
• To not have brought in enough players to improve our squad depth. At the start of the season, we had 21 players and we were engaged in 7 competitions. Obviously, we were aiming to try and win each of them. Although, not the squad depth nor its quality were good enough to achieve that. We didn't have the tool to fulfill our aims, but we have overlook that fact and tried to win everywhere. We tried to bit more than we could chew. The board didn't give us the weapons to accomplish what they were asking us to. Another error.
• To have let Essien and Meireles leave without buying any replacement for them — remember the concerns over the squad depth.

You might tell me that the problem of the squad depth, is rooting deeper than this summer. Of course, it's started long before this summer. But with the decisions he took this summer (or which he didn't take), he did nothing to improve that ! We can even say that, in some ways, he has ultimately weakened the squad.




There's another thing that I'd like to point out. You are telling that Emenalo is to be given credit for our successful loans. I cannot deny that. Although, as I've aforementioned, we have a big problem as for the quantity of players : our squad has not enough depth. And now I read somewhere that we have 23 players who are loaned out. Yes, you read it right, 23 players. Do I have to remind you that we have 21 players in our squad ? We have more players out on loan than players in the squad. And funnily enough our struggles are in part due to our lack of depth. Isn't there something wrong ?



I am not suggesting that they would have made us a lot better as a team ; most of them were/are not good enough. And I am not into a position to work out whether those loaned players could have made us better or not, had they stayed here.



I just think that it's a good question to ask ourselves. Is it normal to have more players out on loan than players in the squad while we are lacking depth ? Food for thoughts.



Just a quick reminder of what he also did last season. We were desperatly crying for a central midfielder. All summer long we were chasing Modric. Even it was more likely that Levy wouldn't sell than would sell, we put all our eggs in that basket. And we eventually ended up with Meireles as a "panick buy".

-------------------

So yeah, he has done good things. But he has also done a lot of bad things. Basically, he has made good thing for the long-term ; but has made bad things for the short term. And unfortunatly, without the short-term there's no long-term. It seems that the board has realized that their short-term thinking doesn't work and thus has decided to shift to a long-term thinking. But it seems they are always in the extremes : it's either 100% short-term, or 100% long-term. And, in this transition from short-term thinking to long-term thinking, they did forget to take a middle step, they did want to go too much quickly. We're lost in translation lol. Although I do not think Emenalo is the only one culprit for this.

I am not saying that he should be fired or not because of that. I am just trying to expose what are his faults into my mind — since you were wondering what people were reproaching him.

I hope my sayings have been relevant

[Rmpr 8,977]

@Peace., out of likes!

Excellent, excellent post. I will give it a like once I have it...

[Peace. 4,352]

@Peace., out of likes!

Excellent, excellent post. I will give it a like once I have it...

Tssss, everybody should keep in stock some "likes" for me. That behaviour is intolerable !

Joking, thanks

[Peace. 4,352]

Peace, although I like most of what he says, has given a one-sided view of Gourlay's job. I try and look at things a little more balanced.

Yes, I know that I am giving a one-sided view of Ron Gourlay's job. Why ? Because to me, he could save puppies from the fire each and every day, that does not compensate the bad things he did for us.

I'll past and copy what I reproached him a few pages back :

He made us believe that we didn't need to buy anyone in the 2011 summer because we had Kakuta, McEachran, Bruma and Van Aaholt.

He got Ray Wilkins sacked during a Chelsea youth game.

He got Ancelotti sacked in a corridor about a few minutes after the end of our last game.

He was one of the man who — at 4 in the morning — told Roberto that he was sacked.

He has told the fans that the club needed a change of direction and that Skinny Boy was the right man.

The way he treats people is intolerable. Sacking a club legend during the half-time of one of our youth games that he was attending to, seriously ? Couldn't have he chosen a better time to do so ? Or even better, couldn't have he man-up and tell him in front of him, face to face, that he was dismissed, instead of giving him a call in this context ? Wilkins wasn't even told why he was sacked. That lacks class.

Wilkins wasn't even sacked because he was not good enough in his job ! Carlo Ancelotti didn't have a saying in this decision. Wilkins was sacked because he allegedly had a bust-up with Gourlay (which seems to have followed an argument between Roman and Ray in the summer). While I am agree that if there were tensions between Wilkins and the hierarchy, parting their paths might have been a sensible decision — but, Wilkins' contract was ending in a few months (before the end of the season)... Would it not have been also a sensible decision to wait until the end of his contract ? I know that hindsight is a bitch, but especially when you know that after his dismissal we entered the "Bad Moment" (© Ancelotti). I don't think that our Bad Moment © has been caused by Wilkins departure, but in my opinion it has taken a part in it.

The same goes for the way he sacked Ancelotti. Unbelievable. Back then, Carlo has offered us the best season (trophy-wise) we ever had. Ron the dinosaur could have show more class and respect. I know that everybody saw it coming — and to be honest, I wanted us to axe Carlo Ancelotti. But seriously, couldn't have he at least wait to arrive in London to tell Carlo that he was sacked ?

For me, the way he treated Roberto di Matteo was the straw which broke the camel's back. Seriously, 4 in the morning ? Even if Roberto sacking was in the air, wait another moment for Jésus sake.

And after that, he had the cheek to come out and say that the skinny one is the right man — the man hated by the majority of us, the man we didn't want — for that change of direction.

I am agree to say that he is good with the business side. But he should have stuck to that side and not get his nose in the football matters. Especially when he disrupts these football matters because of personal affairs.

From Chelsea official web-site :

The day-to-day running of Chelsea is undertaken by the football club's Executive Board headed by chief executive Ron Gourlay:

That's the third time in a row that our season falls into shambles. The three times, he has been the CEO. And, this year is the cherry upon the cake. We have turned into a laughting stock, into a big circus. Someone has to pay for that. Indeed, once, okay that can happen. Twice, well... It starts to be a lot. But three times, that is not acceptable, especially when the third time is that bad.

And I'd like to point out another thing. You are saying that what is happening today is not entirely Gourlay's fault because the problems have started before he was appointed CEO. Here's what can be also be found on Chelsea web-site :

Previously chief operating officer, he had been with Chelsea for five years in a variety of director-level roles before becoming chief executive in November 2009.

He is at the club since 2004. He is there for nine years. That's not really as if he was a newbie, isn't it ? He has been COO during five years before becoming CEO. I don't really know what's a COO, but there's one thing that I am sure about : he wasn't the gardener, nor he was parking the players' cars. To my understanding, COO is one of the highest job within the board. So yes, he is also partly at fault for the problems which have started before he has been hired as CEO, since he was a member of the board !!

That's why I want him to be sacked. Yes, he isn't the only one at fault. But life's unfair ! A high job means big responsibilities. The CEO is for the administration what the coach is for the players (in some ways). So, as managers get sacked because their players don't perform, CEO should get sacked if their subordinates don't work well.

And I'll end my comment by stating this fact. Ever since he was appointed as our CEO, each passing season we have become poorer and poorer :

• 2009-10 : 1st in the Premier League and we won the FA Cup.
• 2010-11 : 2nd in the Premier League and we ended trophy-less.
• 2011-12 : 6th in the Premier League, and we won the CL and FA Cup, but it was a special context.
• 2012-13 : As of today, we have been engaged into 8 competitions ; we can win only two of them right now. And we don't know if you'll even make it into the top four.

Whatever the whys and hows, that's a fact. Each passing season is less good than the previous one. In that respect, we are entitled to challenge our board's capacity.

The bottom line :

"However, the owner and the Board felt that a change was necessary to keep the club moving in the right direction ahead of a vitally important part of the season" Gourlay.

"However, Me, Myself and I feel that a change is necessary to keep the club moving in the right direction ahead of a vitally important part of the club transition". Me.

P.S. Sorry for the long post.

[The only place to be 11,313]

Yes, I know that I am giving a one-sided view of Ron Gourlay's job. Why ? Because to me, he could save puppies from the fire each and every day, that does not compensate the bad things he did for us.

I'll past and copy what I reproached him a few pages back :

He made us believe that we didn't need to buy anyone in the 2011 summer because we had Kakuta, McEachran, Bruma and Van Aaholt.

He got Ray Wilkins sacked during a Chelsea youth game.

He got Ancelotti sacked in a corridor about a few minutes after the end of our last game.

He was one of the man who — at 4 in the morning — told Roberto that he was sacked.

He has told the fans that the club needed a change of direction and that Skinny Boy was the right man.

Do you blame the mailman when you get bad news in the post?

How much of that is him and how much is Roman?

Your main problem seems to be with him doing things too soon. We're a multi-million pound operation and you need to act quickly once the decision has been made. When should we have sacked Robbie? When the players started arriving for training? When the rest of the staff were around? Then people like you would have bemoaned him doing it in front of other people and embarrassing him.

The fact that you can admit

I am agree to say that he is good with the business side.

suggests he's doing a good job and unless you can actually name someone better qualified to do this job then the endless bellyaching really is pointless.

[Manuf 1,448]

Roman is acting like a fucking Nero and should clear his eyes.

[robdog 2,084]

facts

The bottom line :

"However, the owner and the Board felt that a change was necessary to keep the club moving in the right direction ahead of a vitally important part of the season" Gourlay.

"However, Me, Myself and I feel that a change is necessary to keep the club moving in the right direction ahead of a vitally important part of the club transition". Me.

P.S. Sorry for the long post.

Don't apologize for educating the ignorant. Like Run DMC once rapped, "Knowledge is the Key to end all of your woes...Your ups & downs...your highs & lows"

[zolayes 14,489]

Gourlay is not a C EO he is a shirt salesmen recruited by Kenyon to head commercial sales, David Dein and Gill are examples of top class C E Os

they are capable of handling business with football interests taking priority .

face up to it Gourlay and Buck do what they are told to do ....PUPPETS on a string

[The only place to be 11,313]

Gourlay is not a C EO he is a shirt salesmen recruited by Kenyon to head commercial sales, David Dein and Gill are examples of top class C E Os

they are capable of handling business with football interests taking priority .

face up to it Gourlay and Buck do what they are told to do ....PUPPETS on a string

So the state Arsenal are in right now is nothing to do with Dein?

As for Gill, it just shows how fans' perceptions of these type of men change so quickly. A couple of years go he was the guy who sold Ronaldo to Real Madrid and welcomed the Glazers with open arms. Now he's a 'top class CEO'.

But you're right that Gourlay and Buck do have to be somewhat subservient to Roman - so we should definitely fire them and replace them. Who will replace them by the way?

Oh right....

[zolayes 14,489]

So the state Arsenal are in right now is nothing to do with Dein?

As for Gill, it just shows how fans' perceptions of these type of men change so quickly. A couple of years go he was the guy who sold Ronaldo to Real Madrid and welcomed the Glazers with open arms. Now he's a 'top class CEO'.

But you're right that Gourlay and Buck do have to be somewhat subservient to Roman - so we should definitely fire them and replace them. Who will replace them by the way?

Oh right....

arsenal went downhill when Dein left

[The only place to be 11,313]

arsenal went downhill when Dein left

They were already in decline when he left. The legacy of a person's actions don't end the moment they leave a position like that. It befuddles my noggin why Peter Kenyon doesn't get more stick on here when the problems we have right now are about a decade in the making.