mcnally

mcnally

closerthanyouthink
closerthanyouthink

March 8th, 2011, 10:22 pm #1


mcnallys league record with the linnets

played 24
won 6
drew 3
lost 15

signed 21 players since he started

worse record than wilkes

remember
wilkes budget was £550 per week

increased to £850 for mcnally

can it get any worse?
Quote
Share

Probable board member
Probable board member

March 9th, 2011, 6:54 am #2

how much does mcnally get paid?
Quote
Share

ste b
ste b

March 9th, 2011, 5:20 pm #3

mcnallys league record with the linnets

played 24
won 6
drew 3
lost 15

signed 21 players since he started

worse record than wilkes

remember
wilkes budget was £550 per week

increased to £850 for mcnally

can it get any worse?
oh yes it can.it can get a lot lot lot worse
Quote
Share

davis
davis

March 9th, 2011, 7:25 pm #4

mcnallys league record with the linnets

played 24
won 6
drew 3
lost 15

signed 21 players since he started

worse record than wilkes

remember
wilkes budget was £550 per week

increased to £850 for mcnally

can it get any worse?
course it can get worse, does the board stick or twist when the season ends, personally i think they will twist after the wilkes fiasco,maybe the next manager has already been to watch games,why not,it happened with wilkes fact,as for the budget it only coveres some of the players expenses,if he stays more players will come in,if he goes likewise,no guarantee the next man will have the formula, and town with nothing to loose if they get promoted,giving it a go,will add a lot more pressure on corn to keep the fans happy.
Quote
Share

Probable board member
Probable board member

March 9th, 2011, 7:31 pm #5

mcnallys league record with the linnets

played 24
won 6
drew 3
lost 15

signed 21 players since he started

worse record than wilkes

remember
wilkes budget was £550 per week

increased to £850 for mcnally

can it get any worse?
Given that McNally was told that if he applied he would get the job, them he wont be sacked.
He was offered the job before the application process even opened.
Good managers applied the the job, even including an experienced Argentinian manager. All dismissed as the job was already offered.
McNally got the job purely based on the fact he played for Runcorn FC.
Quote
Share

davis
davis

March 9th, 2011, 7:48 pm #6

was he also told he wouldnt ever be sacked ? i dont think so,
Quote
Share

Barry C
Barry C

March 10th, 2011, 9:41 am #7

mcnallys league record with the linnets

played 24
won 6
drew 3
lost 15

signed 21 players since he started

worse record than wilkes

remember
wilkes budget was £550 per week

increased to £850 for mcnally

can it get any worse?
Name me a football club where 21 strangers have come together and success has been guaranteed or immediate. Dalglish has tranformed Liverpool but critically with pretty much the same players. It's unrealistic, particularly at this level, as there are no contracts and transfers window restrictions. That the change hasn't occured has been proved true as Linnets faithful have suffered 61 league goals flying into their net before the Daffs are out. Linnets players are probably as good as any in the league. Linnets TEAM are not. In the same vein that it was grossly unfair (and amatuerish) to sack Wilkes when and how they did, the board would be equally silly to dismiss McNally now.

Maybe, just maybe, Wilkes would have been a success if all the clubs efforts were focussed on the playing side instead of moving ground? He should have been given a season at MLS having put up with the hassle and restricted playing budget to get them their.

It's a view! Discuss

Quote
Share

david dutton
david dutton

March 10th, 2011, 1:28 pm #8

i totally agree with your comments, if the allegations in a previous post re the appointment of mr mcnally are true.....then that is poor work by the board, and indeed underhand.(Allegedly)

i agree it might be the wrong time at this present moment to sack mr mcnally.....however a thorough analysis needs to take place in the close season. just what level of attendances could be attracted to the MLS, with a decent linnets team chasing honours and playing attractive football.

has the trust run idea, run its course? is it time to attract local business leaders to invest and take the club forward to the next level. there does seem to be an apathy for people to stand for the trust board. runcorn linnets needs to be a business first and foremost, to generate the revenue to invest in the ground and the playing staff. maybe it's time to think the unthinkable, think outside the box.

the club has moved to runcorn yes, but have they moved forward on the playing side from season 1, i would say NO, is the trust board capable of taking the club forward on the playing front? that is a question for its current ownership to decide (The Trust Members)
Quote
Share

Daz Law
Daz Law

March 10th, 2011, 2:20 pm #9

I dont wanna have a dig at some the board members as i feel some doing good job but i feel we need younger blood involved of running the club and people with proper football brains and not liek some still live in the dark ages .

If this club is to move on , then some of the board members need to step down .
Quote
Share

Probable board member
Probable board member

March 10th, 2011, 3:00 pm #10

Its a double edged sword.
Your not going to get them to step down, as they have to many self interests to be gained from being on the board, which they put over and above the development of the football club. The self interests of a majority of individuals has held the clubs progression back and has knocked many supporters off the attendance figures each week.

As a result of the people currently holding board positions and the previous corruption and bullying at elections that got swept under the carpet, nobody is willing to step forward. Take the last election process, not enough names came forward to make a challenge. Once Darren Law had stepped out of the running, it was a free reign. People such as Phil Wainwright can sit on a board unelected from day one, with no challenge. He supposedly represents a supporters club, yet how you can have a seperate supporters club within a fan run club is another issue.

What should happen, is that board members can only hold a position for a period of 2 years. Once that period has ended, they should be not allowed to run for election within a 10 year period following their tenure.

It would be interesting to know the actual number of trust members that remain and how many actually voted at the last AGM.

Given the club is supposedly fans run, very few decisions are ever passed by the fans or trust members.
Compare that to several other fan run clubs where nearly every decision is put to the vote.
Quote
Share


Confirmation of reply: