NWBluesFan
Vital Squad Member
I think it's really interesting to see Kevin Maher being the 2/1 present favourite with Gillingham, as of today.
Why? Because in focussing on who comes next, we can - whether we like it or not - step out our ecosystem and see what other fans, organisations etc think of us. Sometimes, a little outside observation is the best dose of reality anyone can get because there's no (or less!) subjectivity to spoil the evaluation.
Perception, they say, is reality. I hate that phrase as it gets bandied about as a lazy excuse - but I accept it is somewhat true in the fast paced world we now live in.
So what did I see?
"Yet again"
"Only appointed"
That's quite telling from whomever penned that and, let's be honest, it doesn't take a lyricist to interpret its meaning either.
The consequent a quick glance at a very interesting thread on the Shrimpers board also has some similar sentiments that I think are also worth noting. These were a clip of a few of them. Spot a theme?
I have been challenged a lot on here the past few days by people who seem to trend in the "something had to be done!" camp. I get the frustration - I'm a fan of this football club for 35 years and will support us no matter what or who is in charge. I will freely admit, I felt Harris was terminated too soon and his relative success now at Millwall, two leagues higher, somewhat backs that point. I mentioned as such at the time, but I accepted it was Brad's call and backed him. For me, what needed to be done was getting the right kind of players into support the coaching staff's approach. As of the weekend, that looked on the cards. SC wanted it. Fans wanted it. I was excited that most of us were on the same page.
For full disclosure at this point, I not only suggested Stephen Clemence in a post a few days before his appointment, I was delighted when it came about. So emotion ran high for me on Tuesday - it was the first time in a while I've felt genuine anger towards our football club.
When I've tried to politely (and somewhat facetiously at times - I apologise, that was bad) articulate that I felt Stephen Clemence's departure wasn't just too soon - it was actually detrimentally so - I've been met with a perhaps predictable barrage from some incumbents of "WeLl tHaTs FoOtBaLl!, MaTe!" (Ok, for fulll disclosure, I do enjoy it a little bit because it's not close to the experience I've found having worked within professional football setting for a number of years, but on a serious level, it is frustrating that it's so quickly dismissed by those who disagree.)
I think the above, though - if we're being level headed - the outsiders perspective - is the issue that while we may WANT to disregard it, has the potential to come home to roost now.
Often, perception is reality and I happen to agree with the majority of those comments from the Shrimpers fans. No, I don't think it would be a dealbreaker for a guy like Kevin Maher if he was offered the job but they are absolutely spot on when they say it will play into his decision making.
We'd be naive to suggest otherwise.
Which brings me to how we may have come to be perceived (whether it is fair or not). It's still a lingering love for many to appear ruthless. Steve Evans often gets praised for his effectiveness but very few seems to cross examine the trail behind him. I've gone on record before of having been told by one ex-professional who played for Evans of an almost universal dislike for his methods which were portrayed as dehumanising. But still, some fans love it. I'm not quite sure why because fundamentally it goes against almost every aspect of known evidence around human development, decision-making, psychological safety etc - the sympathetic nervous system biologically wires us to sense and respond to perceived threat. It's not a choice, it's an instinct!
So be honest with yourself for a second in a moment of introspection. If you had the threat of sacking hovering over you all the time - would it not factor into your psyche? At the very least would it alter your behaviour towards short term survival at the expense of long term improvement? There's evidence to suggest it does. At the risk of going all (N/G!) on you all for a second, it's why I feel our electoral system is flawed, but heck that's another thread around short termism.
There's risk in everything, and don't get me wrong, an element of golden carrot theory can be very effective motivation for everyone but "yet again" and "only appointed" is the sort of charged language which implies we're now being seen as something a bit more than engaged in house cleaning. I can't honestly say I think it's unfair. These are the costs that, while we rejoice in seemingly looking ruthless, that will take their toll. Someone's ability to handle high stakes pressure is not the only consideration of a good manager but at the very least, does it need to so potentially prohibitive? This is the realm of Freud, not football.
Outside of professional sport, my other labour of love has always been learning and psychology. I count myself very privileged to work with professional athletes but as I've said on here before, the vast majority who talk with me are built no different from you and I when it comes to mental make up, aside of their drive and competitive talent. Most do NOT thrive under the level of scrutiny they face in minutiae - or at least admit that - and I cannot tell you enough how many do hear, in my experience, the ruthless comments about them. If you don't believe me, go look up how many calls have been made to the PFA helplines in the past 2 years. It'll stagger you.
My long and rambling point here is that ultimately we ALL want a football team that is successful.
From fans, to players to the board of directors. And while it's tempting to bang the drums of 'do it now' to the rhythm of 'really, THAT's FOOTBALL MATE', we should be able to recognise that expectation is just one element of a successful sporting organisation. Should it be the biggest priority?
If we get known for being "ruthless", it will come at a potential cost and ironically the casualties of that strategy may well be hidden from view, but they will be there. It may also, very humbly, attract the wrong kind of character into our football club in their approach with our players. At the very minimum, some balance ought surely to be needed for everyone's sake.
Perception is, after all, reality. Get this one wrong, and it might just be justified too.
I'll finish by saying, if you read all this, bravo. My ramblings were cathartic by intent. And for the record, no matter who comes in, I'll wear my shirt with pride, go to as many away games as I can justify to my wife and family, and clap the boys off every time, win draw or Barrow.
Come on you Gills. Have a good one!
TL:DR ? "It's potentially more than just football, mate!
Why? Because in focussing on who comes next, we can - whether we like it or not - step out our ecosystem and see what other fans, organisations etc think of us. Sometimes, a little outside observation is the best dose of reality anyone can get because there's no (or less!) subjectivity to spoil the evaluation.
Perception, they say, is reality. I hate that phrase as it gets bandied about as a lazy excuse - but I accept it is somewhat true in the fast paced world we now live in.
So what did I see?
"Yet again"
"Only appointed"
That's quite telling from whomever penned that and, let's be honest, it doesn't take a lyricist to interpret its meaning either.
The consequent a quick glance at a very interesting thread on the Shrimpers board also has some similar sentiments that I think are also worth noting. These were a clip of a few of them. Spot a theme?
I have been challenged a lot on here the past few days by people who seem to trend in the "something had to be done!" camp. I get the frustration - I'm a fan of this football club for 35 years and will support us no matter what or who is in charge. I will freely admit, I felt Harris was terminated too soon and his relative success now at Millwall, two leagues higher, somewhat backs that point. I mentioned as such at the time, but I accepted it was Brad's call and backed him. For me, what needed to be done was getting the right kind of players into support the coaching staff's approach. As of the weekend, that looked on the cards. SC wanted it. Fans wanted it. I was excited that most of us were on the same page.
For full disclosure at this point, I not only suggested Stephen Clemence in a post a few days before his appointment, I was delighted when it came about. So emotion ran high for me on Tuesday - it was the first time in a while I've felt genuine anger towards our football club.
When I've tried to politely (and somewhat facetiously at times - I apologise, that was bad) articulate that I felt Stephen Clemence's departure wasn't just too soon - it was actually detrimentally so - I've been met with a perhaps predictable barrage from some incumbents of "WeLl tHaTs FoOtBaLl!, MaTe!" (Ok, for fulll disclosure, I do enjoy it a little bit because it's not close to the experience I've found having worked within professional football setting for a number of years, but on a serious level, it is frustrating that it's so quickly dismissed by those who disagree.)
I think the above, though - if we're being level headed - the outsiders perspective - is the issue that while we may WANT to disregard it, has the potential to come home to roost now.
Often, perception is reality and I happen to agree with the majority of those comments from the Shrimpers fans. No, I don't think it would be a dealbreaker for a guy like Kevin Maher if he was offered the job but they are absolutely spot on when they say it will play into his decision making.
We'd be naive to suggest otherwise.
Which brings me to how we may have come to be perceived (whether it is fair or not). It's still a lingering love for many to appear ruthless. Steve Evans often gets praised for his effectiveness but very few seems to cross examine the trail behind him. I've gone on record before of having been told by one ex-professional who played for Evans of an almost universal dislike for his methods which were portrayed as dehumanising. But still, some fans love it. I'm not quite sure why because fundamentally it goes against almost every aspect of known evidence around human development, decision-making, psychological safety etc - the sympathetic nervous system biologically wires us to sense and respond to perceived threat. It's not a choice, it's an instinct!
So be honest with yourself for a second in a moment of introspection. If you had the threat of sacking hovering over you all the time - would it not factor into your psyche? At the very least would it alter your behaviour towards short term survival at the expense of long term improvement? There's evidence to suggest it does. At the risk of going all (N/G!) on you all for a second, it's why I feel our electoral system is flawed, but heck that's another thread around short termism.
There's risk in everything, and don't get me wrong, an element of golden carrot theory can be very effective motivation for everyone but "yet again" and "only appointed" is the sort of charged language which implies we're now being seen as something a bit more than engaged in house cleaning. I can't honestly say I think it's unfair. These are the costs that, while we rejoice in seemingly looking ruthless, that will take their toll. Someone's ability to handle high stakes pressure is not the only consideration of a good manager but at the very least, does it need to so potentially prohibitive? This is the realm of Freud, not football.
Outside of professional sport, my other labour of love has always been learning and psychology. I count myself very privileged to work with professional athletes but as I've said on here before, the vast majority who talk with me are built no different from you and I when it comes to mental make up, aside of their drive and competitive talent. Most do NOT thrive under the level of scrutiny they face in minutiae - or at least admit that - and I cannot tell you enough how many do hear, in my experience, the ruthless comments about them. If you don't believe me, go look up how many calls have been made to the PFA helplines in the past 2 years. It'll stagger you.
My long and rambling point here is that ultimately we ALL want a football team that is successful.
From fans, to players to the board of directors. And while it's tempting to bang the drums of 'do it now' to the rhythm of 'really, THAT's FOOTBALL MATE', we should be able to recognise that expectation is just one element of a successful sporting organisation. Should it be the biggest priority?
If we get known for being "ruthless", it will come at a potential cost and ironically the casualties of that strategy may well be hidden from view, but they will be there. It may also, very humbly, attract the wrong kind of character into our football club in their approach with our players. At the very minimum, some balance ought surely to be needed for everyone's sake.
Perception is, after all, reality. Get this one wrong, and it might just be justified too.
I'll finish by saying, if you read all this, bravo. My ramblings were cathartic by intent. And for the record, no matter who comes in, I'll wear my shirt with pride, go to as many away games as I can justify to my wife and family, and clap the boys off every time, win draw or Barrow.
Come on you Gills. Have a good one!
TL:DR ? "It's potentially more than just football, mate!
Last edited:
