Who does the transfers?

[Blackville]

Under Moniz we signed a lot of players that Moniz clearly wasn't interested in so it asks the question who signs the players is it the manager or is it someone else if so why don't we know. Or are some signed by the manager and some by someone else. Personally I think that we should know who signs the players so we know who to praise and who to blame.

 

 

[ivansneck]

Under Moniz it seemed to be both Branston and Moniz with totally separate agendas so we ended up with 2 Squads in effect. Shows how badly the club is being run.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Chris]

God knows, yet I hope JF handles all the transfer activity from who arrives to who leaves. We need to secure players loans if they won't play, get some form of contributions for their wages.

I felt we had built wisely at the start, in hindsight it just seems we signed backup for cover.

Sharpe is one of the weirdest signings, why haven't we seen him?

Should we ask Branston via Twitter???

[Northants Pie]

The problem for me with all of the modern approach to signings is that one simple question seems to be missed...

Can he actually play?

The statistical approach is OK as long as it is used as an add on to what you actually see with your own eyes.

A scouting report form for one the biggest clubs in Europe has 12 boxes all to be filled in with statistics like size, weight, which foot etc etc but no where does it say can he play?

Statistically Guy Branston would seem like a good prospect, realistically he was absolute horse dung.

It does seem to me that the two approaches have resulted in our split approach to players. Moniz went for what he could see with his own eyes, the transfer panel went with what looked good on paper.

Of the two, personally I think we have done better out of the Moniz style than the statistical approach

[Elite_pie]

59 minutes ago, Northants Pie said:

The problem for me with all of the modern approach to signings is that one simple question seems to be missed...

Can he actually play?

The statistical approach is OK as long as it is used as an add on to what you actually see with your own eyes.

A scouting report form for one the biggest clubs in Europe has 12 boxes all to be filled in with statistics like size, weight, which foot etc etc but no where does it say can he play?

Statistically Guy Branston would seem like a good prospect, realistically he was absolute horse dung.

It does seem to me that the two approaches have resulted in our split approach to players. Moniz went for what he could see with his own eyes, the transfer panel went with what looked good on paper.

Of the two, personally I think we have done better out of the Moniz style than the statistical approach

That's the big worry I have, that we are using some sort of trendy business style flowchart / spreadsheet approach to recruit our 'staff'.  In fact, it seems we even have a new name for those who do it - it's something like the 'player trading forum', so ridiculous that I can't even be bothered to research the actual name.  Our policy for signing players has been a disaster for a long time, I doubt there is any other club at our level who pay good money to so many players who make no contribution at all.  Ray seems to be trying to run the club like he runs his (successful) business.  That would explain the bizarre appointment of Fullarton - hugely impressive in the boardroom, but unfortunately we don't play in a boardroom, we play on a football pitch.  Even though it's very early days and therefore unfair to make judgements, I have zero confidence that Fullarton will be up to what's required on the football pitch.  These are worrying times indeed.

[AmericanPie]

I do not care who does or does not handle the transfer policy provided the manager confirms the final singing.

My take is here 

 

[Tarkers]

14 hours ago, Elite_pie said:

That's the big worry I have, that we are using some sort of trendy business style flowchart / spreadsheet approach to recruit our 'staff'.  In fact, it seems we even have a new name for those who do it - it's something like the 'player trading forum', so ridiculous that I can't even be bothered to research the actual name.  Our policy for signing players has been a disaster for a long time, I doubt there is any other club at our level who pay good money to so many players who make no contribution at all.  Ray seems to be trying to run the club like he runs his (successful) business.  That would explain the bizarre appointment of Fullarton - hugely impressive in the boardroom, but unfortunately we don't play in a boardroom, we play on a football pitch.  Even though it's very early days and therefore unfair to make judgements, I have zero confidence that Fullarton will be up to what's required on the football pitch.  These are worrying times indeed.

During the several years I have known you @Elite_pie I cannot ever remember you being so negative about any of our many new managers, after only a few games.

You, like me, were often accused of being a "nodding dog" by the more vocal forum members.

Jeez, Saturday must have been worse than I thought!!

[Elite_pie]

2 minutes ago, tarquinbeech said:

During the several years I have known you @Elite_pie I cannot ever remember you being so negative about any of our many new managers, after only a few games.

You, like me, were often accused of being a "nodding dog" by the more vocal forum members.

Jeez, Saturday must have been worse than I thought!!

You're quite right Tarquin, normally I would be accusing people of knee-jerk reactions after just two games, especially when we actually won one of them!  It is of course far to early to judge, but the game against Wimbledon was a real shock to the system.  It wasn't so much the bizarre team selection and the baffling 'who played where' bit, it was the complete lack of any sort of shape and pattern of play.  We were all over the place with huge gaps in the middle that made a fairly good Wimbledon team look like Barcelona.  Worryingly, Fullarton didn't appear to have the first idea how to address our problems, and didn't even seem to acknowledge we had them in his post-match interview.  It wasn't just that we were beaten, it was the way we were beaten, because if that level of performance is repeated even the teams at the bottom will find us easy to beat.  

 

I've just depressed myself even more after reading that back, let's hope it is a knee-jerk reaction and Fullarton proves us all wrong!

[Tarkers]

With games coming up against York, Hartlepool (twice) and Luton (roughly the same "level" as Notts).....we are going to find out pretty quickly whether JF is "learning his trade".

I love how Notts have adopted a policy of "on-the-job training".....it is almost like the current re-introduction of the National Apprenticeship Scheme?

[Piethagoram]

Agree with @Elite_pie take on things. I would like to stress that one would have thought by half time, he would have realised the shape / players were in a serious mess. It needed changing then, not to wait til 70 minutes. A double substitution at Half time was what was needed. The sheer lack of any creativity was there for all to see. The Wimbledon goal keeper could have sat in a deck chair in goal reading the newspaper, that is how bad it was. 

Ray may soon need to be back in his boardroom soon, doing his Alan Sugar impersonation. I would have normally gone to Luton for Saturday's match and it took the Wimbledon non performance, to say, why waste my money watching  that again. That's how bad it gets from a true supporter through thick and thin.

Klopp at Liverpool, has engaged with their supporters, to move as one. What we are seeing is a fractured support, wanting to give 100 per cent supporting the team but one without any confidence that he is engaged with our feelings. He could have taken the opportunity to have apologised after last Saturday's fiasco, but chose to ignore any shortcomings in the performance. How is the average supporter going to take that, in so much that to reassure us that he knows what he is doing. 

@tarquinbeech You are lucky that you were in no position to ever witness Saturday's debacle. Still awaiting opening offers for hacienda Tarqo Bell...

 

[Tarkers]

@Piethagoram not too sure about the Tarqo Bell idea......I've got about $1.2 million stuck in this place already and with the current state of the Mexican Peso, I'm unlikely to even get half that back....c'est la vie.........................you win some, you lose some.

I'm not really too bothered.....the location here is tremendous, central highway straight to Texas....but it would cost another $100,000 to sort out the restaurant, carpark, leaking roof etc and I don't really want to tie up the last of my cash.........I basically have enough cash to sit it out here for another few years, drink beer in the sun, maybe sell some of the land (I have about 8 acres of Commercial Land that is sitting idle)......and chat on this forum!!

[DangerousSausage]

I think our transfers are mainly from "above" - we signed Rob Burch when we were managerless and were apparently in for a player this time too. It's part of a general trend in football - as managers now usually have a shelf life of a year or less, boards are less willing to give them total control of transfer dealings. In a way this is understandable: if you're putting the money in you don't want to hand the entire budget to a new manager you hardly know, so you hire a director of football or a transfer committee. It can work if they know what they're doing, see Swansea who made excellent progress despite having virtually a new manager every year. But if you do it badly, you can end up like we have.

Of course, if you hire a manager with a proven track record but who still has the required fire in his belly, giving him more control wouldn't be quite such a risk. But with a novice it would be a major gamble. So you end up with an inexperienced manager who has to accept what he's given and a few months later you're on the merrygoround again.

Agree with @Piethagoram about JF's approach towards the fans. Instead of trying to unite or galvanise us, he needlessly provoked us and insulted our intelligence with that bizarre interview on Saturday.

[ivansneck]

I think the performance against AFCW looked so bad because we were comparing it to Moniz's team. If it had come half-way through CK's it would have just looked normal. This is not to condone it, but our opinions are always relative.

JF's remarks afterwards made it a lot worse.

[Super_Danny_Allsopp]

Probably Ray Trew and Aileen Trew. 

[liampie]

the t lady gave me a pg tip last saturday, supposedly there is a ghost director of football.

no seriously, what matters provided they do the job well?

[Super_Danny_Allsopp]

38 minutes ago, liampie said:

the t lady gave me a pg tip last saturday, supposedly there is a ghost director of football.

no seriously, what matters provided they do the job well?

They don't

[Modern Notts Fan 🔥]

for me branston is doing it all no moniz signings now in the squad Stanley snijders Jenner de silva amervor swerts etc etc.

But now look at the branston signings Hewitt Bennett Milsom stead Atkinson Campbell there all there I think branston has to much authority and power for my liking and he is running the team.

When moniz went he should of been sacked to because this bunch of crap is his fault as much as anyone sack him and to realese Jimmy Spencer is madness I hope the next home game fans let there anger shown as this club is been run into the conference.

and it's still possible to happen this season people may think am mad now but there is enough time for it get worse next Murray will be released don't be surprised 

[liampie]

20 hours ago, Super_Danny_Allsopp said:

They don't

tbf we have better players, so it sort of has worked but problem is we signed a lot and some have not worked out.