Bob Booker...

[Uncle Buck]

If it is true, I do not think it is a bad move, it could have been worse, Cork or Heath.

Under Adams, Taylor and Coppell, Booker was the buffer between the players and the manager. It was only with McGhee that he got to close to the manager and I suspect an element of communication with the players was lost.

Under Adams he certainly seemed to be a calming influence. Whilst it was Adams and Cork we had public slating of players (Cameron), fighting with players (Cork and Kuipers) and an abysmal disciplinary record.

Once Cork went and Booker came in all of these things seemed to stopped.

 

[Gritt23]

I agree with that UB. It all seemed to work quite well with Booker as the assistant.

I'd certainly welcome him back.

 

[Lady Whistledown]

I know what you're saying, but I'm starting to get a little nervous about all the personnel we have brought back or are supposedly bringing back.

I thought we wanted to look forward to Falmer, not back.

Tonight, I'm gonna party like it's 1999....because that's what it's starting to feel like.

 

[Gritt23]

I know what you're saying, but I'm starting to get a little nervous about all the personnel we have brought back or are supposedly bringing back.

I thought we wanted to look forward to Falmer, not back.

Tonight, I'm gonna party like it's 1999....because that's what it's starting to feel like.

Surely this was ALWAYS going to be how it would pan out, once we'd re-appointed MA.

Not only were we going back to a previous manager, but one who has a track record of taking players and staff that he's worked with before.

 

[Lady Whistledown]

I know, it is a little predictable, but I was under the impression Adams had already said he wouldn't be bringing back any of his old mates?

Or was that before Chapman & Wendy resigned?

Bob Booker is the Junior Lewis of the management world, except possibly with better Freddie Mercury impressions.

 

[Mendoza]

I know what you're saying, but I'm starting to get a little nervous about all the personnel we have brought back or are supposedly bringing back.

I thought we wanted to look forward to Falmer, not back.

Tonight, I'm gonna party like it's 1999....because that's what it's starting to feel like.

Ive been saying it for a while, although its good seeing people from the past, we sacked Wilkins to look forward going into Falmer

We have signed the manager from 7 years ago, and his assistant, signed Virgo who left 2 years ago, transfer targets seem to be Currie, Mayo, Hart, Richards, all who have done well ad played their part, but ultimatley not got us promoted.

im not unhappy with what weve done, but it doesnt always strike me as looking forward

 

[Mr Banana]

Ive been saying it for a while, although its good seeing people from the past, we sacked Wilkins to look forward going into Falmer

We have signed the manager from 7 years ago, and his assistant, signed Virgo who left 2 years ago, transfer targets seem to be Currie, Mayo, Hart, Richards, all who have done well ad played their part, but ultimatley not got us promoted.

im not unhappy with what weve done, but it doesnt always strike me as looking forward

They all left us to go to higher divisions when we wanted to keep them. Mayo and Hart are hardly transfer targets - they'll probably get short-term contracts if we need them as cover. It's hardly like we're bringing McGhee back as manager with Culverhouse as coach, Butters at centre-back and McPhee upfront.

Engage brain before you post?

 

[Lady Whistledown]

They all left us to go to higher divisions when we wanted to keep them. Mayo and Hart are hardly transfer targets - they'll probably get short-term contracts if we need them as cover. It's hardly like we're bringing McGhee back as manager with Culverhouse as coach, Butters at centre-back and McPhee upfront.

Engage brain before you post?

Hardly fair. I agree with him.

There were perfectly good reasons for releasing Hart & Mayo, both have served the club well over the years, but have had their best days and aren't going to improve in future, therefore as far as I'm concerned (that's football) it's thanks very much and goodbye. Why keep them on? They were kept on last season without making any impact, therefore if you just want squad players you might as well get someone in who's younger and maybe cheaper, and who might possibly surprise you.

Currie was a decent player but I can't help wondering if it's a couple of years too late for him.

Virgo- again I loved him originally, but I think his success was a product of our particular circumstances at the time and I'm not sure if he can replicate that under a new manager and in different times. We shall see.

Bob Booker did not leave for better times. He was fired.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think any of the signings are bad, per se, but I do believe in looking forward, and I don't think you can automatically recreate past successes simply by bringing in the same people all over again.

I'm saying exactly what Mendoza is- let's wait & see.

 

[Uncle Buck]

Engage brain before you post?

That is a tad uncalled for.

 

[Mendoza]

Well said. This football club needs to start looking forwards rather than back.

Engage brain before you post?

 

[Mr Banana]

How can you say Hart and Mayo were "kept on without making any impact" last season? Alright Mayo is shit anyway, but they never got a chance. I don't see how you can question bringing back Adams and Virgo just because they used to be here before. If it turns out to be a "backward" move I'll give you a score, until then I think I'll keep the faith until Jeff Wood gets a coaching role and Junior McDougald gets Murray's squad number.

 

[portslade seagull]

Mayo's best days are long gone..still think Hart can do it thou