Managerial Changes In League One | Page 4 | Vital Football

Managerial Changes In League One

Yes - and which team did Scarborough replace in the Football League cherryexile ?

I know, but I thought I would ignore that since our fall was hardly their fault, they just benefitted from it.

In any case, their demise was more significant - relegated after 10 years before going bust in 2007. The phoenix club now compete in the Northern Premier and play at the wonderfully local 'Flamingo Land Stadium'.
 
Last edited:
Sexism, Racism and anything to with rights or all this stuff will only be gone when it isn't even mentioned anymore.

Does it matter if somebody is black, white, male, female, transgender, bisexual, homosexual, martian or some other celestial being. Does it matter who the first black manager was the first woman manager? No it doesn't! The media continue to add fuel to the debate and polarise the morons on both sides by making it an issue all the time.

Judge someone by the person they are and the ability they have to do the job not who they sleep with or the colour of their skin or the gender they are. Only when it stops getting mentioned in reports will we know that the problems have been put largely to bed.

Personally I take people as I find them.
Well said.

We're all people.

A great person is a great person.

And a pillock is a pillock.

And we're all Imps.
 
There's one thing standing up for the ladies game and another for being very disrespectful to Wimbledon. They 'couldn't afford her' amongst other things.

An alternative pov is that had she taken a role at a professional men's club she could be striking new ground and pioneering a cause for women in football. After that she's made it harder for those calling for women to be given managerial posts in the men's game at a good level.

I'm sorry but as valid and entertaining as ladies football is, for her to try and suggest the Wimbledon job is beneath her (watch the interview) displays a poor attitude in my opinion.

There are ways of distancing yourself from a job and perhaps she needs to go on a media course. I get that she's a little miffed at reporters pushing the story and probably irked at the patronising of the women's game by some of them but that's not Wimbledon's fault. A very classless lady on this occasion I'm afraid.
‘Couldn’t afford her’ is quoted here as being a quip, so I wouldn’t be getting outraged by that.)))
https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...upgrade-on-chelsea-women-afc-wimbledon-insult

what is interesting to me is the comparisons being made, chelsea women could not beat Wimbledon men etc. But that is not her job. Her job is to coach Chelsea ladies to beat the opposition. If she became Wimbledon boss, her job would be to have success against other league one men’s teams. If she is a good coach, why couldn’t she do this? i can’t see any reason why coaching men’s football should only be done by men. Interested to hear them.
it is a bit like the attitude to cowley in the early days with us, when the focus was on him being a teacher, when he already had the experience of successfully coaching and managing 100s of lower league games. then we have frank lampard - accepted at Chelsea after 1 failed playoff season at Derby.

on the male/female coach flip side, I am interested to see how the new coach does with England women, replacing the distinctly average Phil Neville.

There is also this, to show the Europeans are ahead of us as usual.
https://www.olympicchannel.com/en/s...ate-blindheim-female-football-coach-men-team/
 
Andrew Watson (Scottish international from 1880's)
John Walker (1st to play in England and Scotland inc. Lincoln 1900)
Walter Tull (pre-WWI player)
Arthur Wharton (pre-WWI player)
Jack Leslie (1st black player called up by England 1925)
Tony Collins (started playing in 1947)
Steve Stacey (Bristol & Wrexham 60's - 74)
Ade Coker (played for Lincoln 1974/5)

Don't forget Eddie Dilsworth who played a few games for Lincoln under Ron Gray in 1967.
 

Thanks for that tinnionsrightfoot. It took a bit of bluster out of my sails as I genuinely thought it was Big Keith. But the point still stands.

Where I really take umbrage, and what are internet forums for if not taking umbrage, is the raw hypocrisy in her comments. She claims to want to break glass ceilings and I'm totally on board with that, but then ridicules and diminishes the one team in the conversation, AFC Wimbledon, that are apparently seriously considering doing just that.

Emma Hayes might want to ask why, when Chelsea was considering an appointment of a new manager, they did not seek the services of someone already in their organization, who had managed at the top of the game, with elite world class players, and who had won everything there was to win, but instead gave the job to an ex-pro and fan favorite with virtually bugger all management experience.

Her ire should be directed perhaps at those closer to home and a certain Russian billionaire. But instead she comments that Wimbledon couldn't afford her while decrying the lack of opportunities for BAME managers and women. Can't criticize he who signs the paycheck regardless of principles. Total hypocrisy.

When the glass ceiling is broken, and it will be broken, it won't happen in the Premiership.
 
‘Couldn’t afford her’ is quoted here as being a quip, so I wouldn’t be getting outraged by that.)))
https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...upgrade-on-chelsea-women-afc-wimbledon-insult

what is interesting to me is the comparisons being made, chelsea women could not beat Wimbledon men etc. But that is not her job. Her job is to coach Chelsea ladies to beat the opposition. If she became Wimbledon boss, her job would be to have success against other league one men’s teams. If she is a good coach, why couldn’t she do this? i can’t see any reason why coaching men’s football should only be done by men. Interested to hear them.
it is a bit like the attitude to cowley in the early days with us, when the focus was on him being a teacher, when he already had the experience of successfully coaching and managing 100s of lower league games. then we have frank lampard - accepted at Chelsea after 1 failed playoff season at Derby.

on the male/female coach flip side, I am interested to see how the new coach does with England women, replacing the distinctly average Phil Neville.

There is also this, to show the Europeans are ahead of us as usual.
https://www.olympicchannel.com/en/s...ate-blindheim-female-football-coach-men-team/
Having watched the interview I would suggest that although set up to say they 'couldn't afford her', the tone of her voice was very much not a quip and the suggestion it was is pure damage limitation.

No one is suggesting she shouldn't be the coach of Wimbledon or be a success at it. It was her contemptuous tone at the suggestion she wouldn't dream of coaching them and it would be a major step down that was the issue. Some may feel it was a kick in the teeth for those championing equality and would like to see a woman managing in the men's professional game.

The issue from the interview wasn't her credentials it was her lousy attitude. Basically she came across as a surly female version of Cooper and deserves to be called out for that, not her coaching abilities.
 
Following on, she was suggesting that managing Wimbledon players was a big step down in quality to managing Chelsea ladies.

We'll never know but having watched televised live games of both sides I respectfully suggest that Chelsea ladies defence would not have a great day versus Ollie Palmer for one. Nor do I think they would give our Imps side a game which Wimbledon did.

Had the situation been reversed and the 'current' male Wimbledon manager been linked with the Chelsea Ladies job and scoffed at the idea, he would quite rightly have been crucified for an appalling attitude and views.
 
Emma Hayes saga cont'd.
I don't think any one was seriously saying they're no good because they couldn't beat a rubbish mens' team. Of course they wouldn't be playing them. The point was they are different products, not equal by any measure, so for her to claim women's football is not a step down from men's is in my view incorrect.
So she's had 9 years experience coaching a team with one of the biggest budgets in a fledgling competition. Does that equip her to manage a club in a relegation fight with no budget like a Wimbledon or a Grimsby?

OK tonight we've got Boreham Wood in the cup. There's this big bloke called Matt Rhead up front. I've not faced anything like this before, oh shit, where's me coaching manual?

Hand on heart who can honestly say they would be happy with her as boss when Mapp goes.?
Still, so long as she could shout 'when it's a battle, you fu**ing battle!'
 
Last edited:
I'm not really a fan of the line that a woman's team couldn't beat a men's team so therefore the quality is better, because the physical attributes will be a factor every time and her point about tactics and management skills being the same are true.

But where I do take exception is on the technical side of the game. There should be no reason that women cannot be as technically proficient as male players, but from what I have seen of women's football the standard is simply not there yet. Will they be one day, I think so. So in that respect, working with the technical abilities of male players to implement her tactics, strategy, and vision will be a step up and in many respects a new challenge.

None of which means she should take the Wimbledon job, that's obviously up to her. But her attitude displayed in the interview revealed significant problems with football in England, regardless of whether we are talking about the male or female game.
 
So she's had 9 years experience coaching a team with one of the biggest budgets in a fledgling competition. Does that equip her to manage a club in a relegation fight with no budget like a Wimbledon or a Grimsby?

Mark Sampson was the England Women's team manager, so technically a more important job than manager of Chelsea. He's currently Assistant Manager of Stevenage.

So that should enable us to gauge the relative standard, as it's not tainted by any issues regarding sexism.

And of course, there's Phil Neville............
 
Youre so right Hully! You’re just not allowed to say anything these days, on multiple social
media platforms, without some lentil-eating vegan transvestite trying to impose their trendy world view on you. It’s like living in Nazi Germany - or Merkel Germany more like it (that one goes down well with the Daily Express readers).

Rule Britannia!
Are you seriously equating someone getting mad at your disrespectful online views to being in Nazi Germany....?
 
Sexism, Racism and anything to with rights or all this stuff will only be gone when it isn't even mentioned anymore.

Does it matter if somebody is black, white, male, female, transgender, bisexual, homosexual, martian or some other celestial being. Does it matter who the first black manager was the first woman manager? No it doesn't! The media continue to add fuel to the debate and polarise the morons on both sides by making it an issue all the time.

Judge someone by the person they are and the ability they have to do the job not who they sleep with or the colour of their skin or the gender they are. Only when it stops getting mentioned in reports will we know that the problems have been put largely to bed.

Personally I take people as I find them.
I like the sentiment of this Casperimp but I don't believe it is totally correct. Ignoring who people are isn't going to fix the systemic racism in our culture. Just because you don't "see color" doesn't mean someone isn't Black or Latino or whatever. Ignoring someone's race will erase their culture, this is something minorities do not want.

You have to be able to see the color of a person and respect them as a human being. Whilst treating them with respect.

Have you ever talked to a person of color about this viewpoint?
 
[
Are you seriously equating someone getting mad at your disrespectful online views to being in Nazi Germany....?
Don't worry Michigan he's really not. He's having a bit of banter with me. We often come at things from a different point of view so he's just exaggerating those differences.
 
I'm not really a fan of the line that a woman's team couldn't beat a men's team so therefore the quality is better, because the physical attributes will be a factor every time and her point about tactics and management skills being the same are true.

But where I do take exception is on the technical side of the game. There should be no reason that women cannot be as technically proficient as male players, but from what I have seen of women's football the standard is simply not there yet. Will they be one day, I think so. So in that respect, working with the technical abilities of male players to implement her tactics, strategy, and vision will be a step up and in many respects a new challenge.

None of which means she should take the Wimbledon job, that's obviously up to her. But her attitude displayed in the interview revealed significant problems with football in England, regardless of whether we are talking about the male or female game.
Re: bold. doesn’t that apply to any coach that is ‘promoted’. Cowley for instance, experienced coach, but had to keep stepping up... from national league south players (less technical ability) to championship players (more technical ability).

I like the quote in the article about the Norwegian team ‘Sotra, who recruited their new coach on the basis of coaching credentials, not gender, and reaped the reward’.
 
Mark Sampson was the England Women's team manager, so technically a more important job than manager of Chelsea. He's currently Assistant Manager of Stevenage.

So that should enable us to gauge the relative standard, as it's not tainted by any issues regarding sexism.

And of course, there's Phil Neville............
Personally don’t buy that as an argument. I think Mark Sampson was definitely tainted, and by the same token where does that rank whatever Steve McLaren is doing now for example.
 
Re: bold. doesn’t that apply to any coach that is ‘promoted’. Cowley for instance, experienced coach, but had to keep stepping up... from national league south players (less technical ability) to championship players (more technical ability).

I like the quote in the article about the Norwegian team ‘Sotra, who recruited their new coach on the basis of coaching credentials, not gender, and reaped the reward’.

Exactly, which is why there is an argument to make that Wimbledon might be a form of "promotion" for Hayes. Whether she wants to take that is up to her. But I take exception to her point that it is insulting to compare Wimbledon to the players she works with now, because I think there are technical differences. Sadly, the conversation often gets lost as people compare the relatively irrelevant physical differences between men and women.

But if she thinks her resume is going to open doors for her in the mens Premiership, and not League 1 and 2 first well good luck to her I guess. I think she will be waiting a long time though.

I guess I don't get her premise that she thinks inclusivity in the football workplace should occur, while simultaneously disparaging the team that is taking those strides.