SiY posted:
Yes we might have had good signings like Renouf, Dallas, Smith and Lam. But can you say that Mo was responsible for those.
Of course you can! After all he was supposed to be a dictator wasn't he? It was supposed to be Mo that did
all the signings and its only now that Millward has taken over.
If his total control of the club was a fact, then it you have to give him credit for the good sigings he made because only he can have signed them.
Just like we can't blame him for all bad signings. BUT he has had a dealing in all of those. 7 coaches might have had a dealing in good players and so Mo might have too. But Mo has been there for every single bad player while those 7 coaches have been changing.
So what you are saying is all the bad signings are Mo's fault but all the good ones prior to Millward were down to the various coaches?
You can't have it both ways. If you want to slag Mo off for bad signings pre-Millward you have to give him the credit for the good ones.
It is pretty obvoious reading comments like yours that some people have an almost pathalogical hatred of Mo and will try and blame him for everything bad at the club and credit everything good to someone else.
At the end of the day he is in charge at the top and if you think things like the recent improvements in marketing, the youth set up, the appointment of Milward and a new back room fitness staff have nothing to do with him just who is pulling the strings? DW is busy at Latics and not interested so we are led to believe.
Just look at the signings before IM.
Fletcher and Logan. 31 and 29. Not anything to rave about.
I seem to recall the signing of Fletcher being greeted as one that would bring much needed experience to the club.
As to Logan, he was signed on 9th July 2005. Millward joined the club on 23rd May 2005 so had almost two months in charge BEFORE Logan signed. Plenty of time to put a stop too it if Mo signed him and Millward didn't want the player. Conversley maybe it is Millward who signed him given how long he had been in charge.
Either way Millward either agreed with the siging or actually signed him so you can blame him for signing a 29 year old.
But what about Pat Richards. He was signed 13 days after Millward was appointed and it was annouced by Mo on his return from Australia so clearly it was Mo who signed him. How old is he?
Since IM came we got ourselves Richards, Calderwood, Paleasina, Higham all 25 and below. Fletch and Logan with those other 3 are good signings as they are place fillers till others grow in experience. But alone its not good.
You have your fact wrong on who signed who so I am afraid the above does not stand up.
As to place fillers while others grow isn't that exactly what we need? A couple of experienced players like Fletcher for two years while the younger players gain more experience?
While it might be nice to appoint a 28 year old Aussie international for hs experience there is a salary cap and such players just won't come these days.
Dave
