The buck stops with the manager eh? What a silly, idiotic narrow minded point of view, based on complete irrationality on your dislike of the manager.
Silly, idiotic and dislike of the manager; eh?
Well, first off - I don't dislike the manager... far from it in fact - something that is borne out in my posts, should you ever take time to read them, you twit. Unlike your good self; I have always stood firm in my support of Brendan. I have never called for his head; never called him names and very rarely criticised him you silly, f**king, idiot.
Now, having established that you aren't the sharpest tool in the box, do yourself a favour: read my post, in context, again. Better still get someone to read it to you.
* 7KK7 made a valid point - it contradicts your point of view, something which obviously makes you feel uncomfortable and defensive - after all you didn't start this thread for discussion; you just wanted people to agree with you. Yes, it is very "narrow-minded", of you, but that doesn't make his point any less valid.
* I acknowledged 7KK7's valid point and asked the question - "Where does the buck stop; top or bottom?"
* Obviously, if like 7KK7 and me, you believe the buck stops at the "top" [Brendan, in this instance]; then Achterberg, can't be suspect number 1.
* However, if like others, you believe the buck stops at the "bottom" [Mignolet, in this instance]; then Achterberg, can't be suspect number 1.
So what we are left with are people like your good self who want and need the buck to stop, somewhere in the middle, with Achterberg.
Now: if that's how you read it - then fair enough. You have an opinion; just like 7KK7 and just like me, you believe it is valid.
I'm sure you are secure enough in your belief that your opinion is right... to the point that a couple of questions, or opposing points of view, aren't going to be enough to make you look daft; right? So...
I was merely opening the discussion up - and pointing out that - "If, indeed, Achterberg is the problem (and I'm not saying he's not btw), then there's really only one man [Brendan] who can remove the problem, I suppose."
Is there any part of that assertion which isn't accurate? I mean; I might be missing something [I often do] but if "Suspect No1" John Achterberg is to get the chop - who is the man to give him the chop; his manager maybe? Yes? No? Are you, genuinely, suggesting that someone else should undermine Brendan's authority, step in and sack Achterberg instead?
Well then, might as well bring in Dalglish, Hodgson and Benitez into this argument as Achterberg was at the club during their tenure. Since 'the buck stops with the manager' then they are all equally to blame
Well the truth is - I haven't "blamed" anyone fella but the fact remains that; if
Achterberg was thought to be a problem, under any of those managers, the way you say he is now then...
... it's my view that the manager [any manager] should have sacked him, if
they were unhappy with his performance. It's really that simple... the name of the manager makes no difference - it's weird that you think it should.