Coppell resigns as Bristol City manager

[Terminal Boardom]

GENERAL FOOTBALL

AND WHO CARES

Maybe just a bit of news about the most successful manager WE HAVE EVER HAD? HTH

[paultheroyal]

"I did enjoy working with him and we are still friends. We met last night, when he told me the news. He apologised for leaving me in this situation.

"We need to concentrate on getting players fit again, bringing in some new faces and prepare correctly for Saturday's match at Doncaster."

Interesting quote from Millen when reading between the lines....

"fit", "new faces", "prepare correctly".....

Fit - Maynard's injured.
New faces - Kitson was supposed to be coming in, they're also looking at a kid from Wycombe.
Prepare correctly - i.e. not take our eye off the next game and go about it the way Coppell would have.

All matters that Coppell would have been dealing with - the new man must make sure of continuity. No lines to read between here, move along, please.

Quote was players not a player, and there is fit and there is injured!!

Like i said, interesting quote.

[Mr Angry]

Clearly the passion which he had lost in his last 6 months with us hasn't returned and SSC, being the man he is, recognised this and rather than take money from Brizzel on false pretences, walked away.

[TBM]

I thought Bristol City were plagued with injuries a couple weeks back......hence the needing to get players fit again. They may not be injured any more but still unfit.

[Ferris]

GENERAL FOOTBALL

*salutes*

[PorkyRfc]

As my mate pointed out - the last thing he did in football management was to give us £500k for Cisse. Well done agent Coppell!!


He says he still wants " a role in football"..........maybe coming home and taking over as director of football from Hapless Hammond??!!

The same Hapless Hammond that appointed Coppell and did the business that saw us reach the top division after 135 years of failure? The same Hapless Hammond that ensures we don't do a Pompey?

Christ, some of our fans are an embarrassment!

You took the words right out of my mouse

You are clearly huge fans of Hammond then guys? Fair enough, you are entitled to you view, as I am to mine. However, I would point out that Hammond would have very limited say in financial matters as a director of football and has no qualifications in that matter whatsoever. Those decisions, which help run the club so brilliantly and keep us such a viable entity, would be made well above his head at board level.

Also, I think you will find that our most successful ever period on the pitch was down to the genius and accquistions of just one man and that is Steve Coppell as proved by the failure to return since.

I concur that Hammond has presided over a very successful period. He has probably been involved in some excellent negotiations too. I don't have a problem with him but it is undeniable that he has failed on occasion to seal transfer deals for the club (most notably Smith) and occasionally made concerning (but forgivable I accept) decisions about the likes of Simon Cox. Following your reasoning he would have been the 'man' who brought in Rodgers.

What I am saying is that there are many more important people than him in the cogs of RFC that have made us successful. I, personally, would rather see a more experienced, knowledgable and qualified man dealing with our transfers an contracts in a hugely respected Steve Coppell. But thanks for your insults all the same!

[Hoop Blah]

What I am saying is that there are many more important people than him in the cogs of RFC that have made us successful. I, personally, would rather see a more experienced, knowledgable and qualified man dealing with our transfers an contracts in a hugely respected Steve Coppell. But thanks for your insults all the same!

In what way is Coppell more qualified and experienced for the role than Hammond?

Remember this is the manager who prefered to distace himself from all the work of the DoF in order to concentrate on the football matters.

[Smoking Kills Dancing Doe]

Bottle job oxf*rd. No Hammond/Noades to hold his hand and make him look good in the transfer market.

Shafted Bristol City.

[Stranded]

You are clearly huge fans of Hammond then guys? Fair enough, you are entitled to you view, as I am to mine. However, I would point out that Hammond would have very limited say in financial matters as a director of football and has no qualifications in that matter whatsoever. Those decisions, which help run the club so brilliantly and keep us such a viable entity, would be made well above his head at board level.

Also, I think you will find that our most successful ever period on the pitch was down to the genius and accquistions of just one man and that is Steve Coppell as proved by the failure to return since.

I concur that Hammond has presided over a very successful period. He has probably been involved in some excellent negotiations too. I don't have a problem with him but it is undeniable that he has failed on occasion to seal transfer deals for the club (most notably Smith) and occasionally made concerning (but forgivable I accept) decisions about the likes of Simon Cox. Following your reasoning he would have been the 'man' who brought in Rodgers.

What I am saying is that there are many more important people than him in the cogs of RFC that have made us successful. I, personally, would rather see a more experienced, knowledgable and qualified man dealing with our transfers an contracts in a hugely respected Steve Coppell. But thanks for your insults all the same!

If the manager is to be praised for players coming to the club and doing well, why is the DoF to be blamed for those leaving or not arriving?

[Smoking Kills Dancing Doe]

The writing was on the wall when David James was brought in without SC's prior knowledge or agreement.

Bollox. He knew about, talked to him a number of times. If he didn't want James he should have told the chairman. Instead of telling him to go ahead with the deal and throwing his toys out when he got him.

[FiNeRaIn]

Stand up for steve coppel booming out of y25 when city visit later in the season.

[PorkyRfc]

What I am saying is that there are many more important people than him in the cogs of RFC that have made us successful. I, personally, would rather see a more experienced, knowledgable and qualified man dealing with our transfers an contracts in a hugely respected Steve Coppell. But thanks for your insults all the same!

In what way is Coppell more qualified and experienced for the role than Hammond?

Remember this is the manager who prefered to distace himself from all the work of the DoF in order to concentrate on the football matters.

Again, only in my personal view, but yes. Coppell is an incredibly articulate and intelligent with over 300 footballing appearances, tens of caps for England and around 25 years of football management and understanding of the game. He also has an endless number of contacts throughout the game. All of these abilities were shown at the highest levels of the game and most were successful demostrating his skills and ability in football. Hammond has played less than 100 games and never managed but clearly has done a good job at Reading. That is not to say Coppell could not still be incredibly useful to us now.....or in the future.

[Geekins]

Coppell obviously could find that love for a club like he did with us so every job he had he'd always be comparing it to us

Cant we get him in as director of football?

^^ This

[readingbedding]

Yokels.

[Smoking Kills Dancing Doe]

Yeah he'd be a great Director of Football.

[havoc]

You are clearly huge fans of Hammond then guys? Fair enough, you are entitled to you view, as I am to mine. However, I would point out that Hammond would have very limited say in financial matters as a director of football and has no qualifications in that matter whatsoever. Those decisions, which help run the club so brilliantly and keep us such a viable entity, would be made well above his head at board level.

Also, I think you will find that our most successful ever period on the pitch was down to the genius and accquistions of just one man and that is Steve Coppell as proved by the failure to return since.

I concur that Hammond has presided over a very successful period. He has probably been involved in some excellent negotiations too. I don't have a problem with him but it is undeniable that he has failed on occasion to seal transfer deals for the club (most notably Smith) and occasionally made concerning (but forgivable I accept) decisions about the likes of Simon Cox. Following your reasoning he would have been the 'man' who brought in Rodgers.

What I am saying is that there are many more important people than him in the cogs of RFC that have made us successful. I, personally, would rather see a more experienced, knowledgable and qualified man dealing with our transfers an contracts in a hugely respected Steve Coppell. But thanks for your insults all the same!

ooh, paragraphs

hang on while i put the kettle on and get comfy so I can read all this

[readingbedding]

Best manager ever at RFC.
Phucked Bristol City over.

Nice one Coppell!

[PorkyRfc]

Stranded - in my view, it is the club manager's role to find and suggest players and then to keep them happy and playing well once they arrive.

It would be the director of football's role to negotiate those deals (given his orders from above) and keep those players on reasonable contracts.

Would that be a reasonable assumption? In which case Coppell wanted certain players, who did well.....he should be praised. Hammond, on many occasions, did well to get those players. I do not, we should note, think Hammond did a bad job. I said he was "hapless" - slightly unlucky, dour, not always had the rub of the green. Now, it may be argued that Hammond has not always negotiated the deals we wanted (e.g. Smith) or kept all the players we needed (e.g. Cox).

Can I reiterate I was simply, idly suggesting Coppell may be of use to us. Cheekily suggesting maybe more so than Hammond. I think to therefore called me an embarressment may be a bit too far!

[Hoop Blah]

I think you mis-read my question, so I'll rephrase it for you.

I was asking in what way was a manager that hasn't really been involved in transfers, the background administration and boardroom level running of a football club for many years, if ever, more qualified than a man that's been doing just that for the best part of the last ten years or so?

Hammond's playing career wasn't the greatest, but he has apparently got good contacts in the game too, probably a lot more up to date than Coppells if you're saying that their playing careers define their contacts.

[Silver Fox]

I'm guesing you don't m8, to sum up in a frimmers style switcheroo he's gone very quickly from calling Hammond hapless to saying he's done a good job at reading, he'll be h8ing on Coppell soon at this rate