Got to be Wilkins - and quick!

[Giraffe]

Wilkins was fired because those in a position to see how things were being handled day in and day out realised he was not the right man for the job. And now some people (who see maybe 2% of how he worked say he is the right man for the job and he should never have been fired? I'll say again, good grief.

Sorry Juan, but that is bollocks. Wilkins was fired because he didn't always do what Knight wanted. He wasn't a yes man. That is all, and I am fed up with this constant inference that there was some other reason for it.

 

[Russell Slade's hat]

Look what happened when we went back to Adams

 

[J2 DOG]

Wilkins lacked bollocks as a player and bollocks as a manager.He should never have been given the job.He was a top youth coach ,that was his level.Thanks to Mr Knight we lost a top youth coach. We should have got a good manager in after Mcghee instead of taking the happy shopper option.

 

[Binney on acid]

Mansfield fans rate Wilkins even more highly than we do.

 

[Barrel of Fun]

Surely Adams has proved that you should never go back. He was twice the manager Wilkins ever was first time round, and look what happened to him.

Twice? In a league lower? Shirley incomparable? Your dislike for Wilkins is verging on ridiculous.

 

[NMH]

Mansfield fans rate Wilkins even more highly than we do.

Nah, they are bigger fans of Lynch for that evening!

 

[British Bulldog]

Wilkins lacked bollocks as a player and bollocks as a manager.

But I thought one of the reasons he got the sack was for siding with Dean Hammond against Dick Knight during Hammond's contract negotiations? That does'nt sound like a manager lacking bollocks to me!

 

[stss30]

Never, NEVER go back.

You're right

 

[J2 DOG]

Any manager would have to try and keep there captain and there only decent midfielder who incidentally we still not have replaced!

 

[Giraffe]

But I thought one of the reasons he got the sack was for siding with Dean Hammond against Dick Knight during Hammond's contract negotiations? That does'nt sound like a manager lacking bollocks to me!

Excellent point. And frankly I would rather have a manager that stood up to Knight than one who just does everything he says. Wilkins was still learning but had a lot of potential. It always felt we were building something for the future with Wilkins, since he left we have just been looking back into the past.

 

[mcshane in the 79th]

The squad were shocked when he went, so who exactly are the insiders and 'experts' who "realised he was not the right man for the job"?

Experts, eh?

Weren't the squad disappointed that Adams left? Doesn't say too much does it.

 

[British Bulldog]

Any manager would have to try and keep there captain and there only decent midfielder who incidentally we still not have replaced!

A manager lacking bollocks would'nt side with a player against the chairman, I agree that Hammond has never been replaced but that has to go down as another black mark against the chairman. Wilkins was'nt allowed the money to keep his captain and build a team around him, Where as Adams was allowed endless funds for midfielders just to warm the bench and god knows how much it cost us to have Savage for a month?

 

[withdeanwombat]

I love these joke threads.

 

[NMH]

Weren't the squad disappointed that Adams left? Doesn't say too much does it.

Apparently so, but it's their profession too so they just accepted Adams and got on with shipping goals and losing loads of games - which says a whole lot more, doesn't it?