Sormaz Interview

No mate. He has been shi.te so far and there's no evidence to suggest the summer window was down to him. When it transpires he's done a good job I'll back him and will say he's done a good job. Until then I'll continue to assume he's crap because nothing from him appears to have changed. Amazing that now the team are doing a bit better many people (not necessarily you) seem to think he's now a good guy and all the crap that went before is irrelevant.

 

So he gets all the blame when its crap and no recognition when its decent.

 

Not necessarily.

 

Good post but have to say I disagree on Kelly.

Firstly, it’s a long season and he will certainly get a run of games, depth in that position is key.

Secondly, we’ve been crying out for a player like him for ages. Someone who can carry the ball, at pace, through midfield.

We are light up front but we have 6 forwards. We can also switch to a system that has two forwards if injuries are bad…..lots of those would work. How we’re blessed in attack, is whilst we are missing a ‘unit’ all our forward are very mobile and allow for a number of fluid formations.

 

Totally agree. Spoke to Bolton about McAtee early on yet go for him last day. Says we need luck with injuries until January despite having months to not have that issue. He’s shown he’s inept at his job and time to move on.

 

I thought it was a good interview and he didn’t seem to dodge or fudge any of the questions.
What I did like about the interview in particular was he knows that generally the fans feel it’s been a better than expected transfer window but instead of trying to claim it was down to him he kept giving the praise to Conor.

 

Still useless

 

Well at least he came out and did the Radio Sheffield interview, that’s a start I suppose. Jury’s still out for me as we could have done with another forward. However as someone posted earlier we are very interchangeable up top end of pitch so maybe Phillips/Russell will cover if DKD/Didzy get injured and we manage while January. I just wonder where we would be without Conor being Didzy’s mate tbh because Sormaz definitely seems to struggle signing strikers.

 

I have no problem with that view.

My main point was there is a limited pot of money. We can't get every player we want. I personally think we needed another forward rather than another midfielder. But I can see why people like Kelly, he's a good player.

 

Would guess they signed him as expected to lose one or two of the midfield and so was getting in early.
If we’d not and two had left we’d be saying we were short in midfield too.

 

I think we would have sold Connell if Wycombe had met our valuation and then Kelly would have been his replacement. I still back him to usurp one of the midfield positions before the end of the season.

 

Ten years ago I'd have firmly agreed with you. Not so sure now. Back in the old days you had a manager and a chairman. In the case of someone like John Dennis he'd be at the club most days and would have been present to deal with other clubs and agents re contracts and signings either way, in and out. The sort of stuff a manager shouldn't have to deal with. Now we have largely absent owners who simply have to delegate this stuff. That however should be the extent of his involvement. We have had rumours of interfering with the playing style/system and picking players to sign both should be left entirely to the manager once one has been picked, probably based on his style and perceived competence. As to Mladen's competence and whether he stays in his lane? I think that's where the debate needs to be focused

 

Maybe had a few cheeky enquiries and conversations where fees were discussed? I’m not sure exactly how it works, but would imagine that a written offer isn’t always the first point of contact?

 

Fully agree with this, all of us thought DKD, Connell or Phillips were on their way but it didn't happen. Kelly was available and just what we needed if one of the above went. I'm in the Sormez out camp and although this window has surpassed previous windows I've got to ask did Sormez back the wishes of Collins and Clarke as he has with Conor. It's already obvious that Houriane is immensely popular with the fans and with the board, results and performances are getting us out of our seats so what better than wait a few games and when it's gone well do a " I'm right behind him" interview. I'll bet if we'd drawn 2 lost 5 ya wouldn't be listening to his views on radio Sheffield. I'll credit him with getting stuff through but it's obvious who's pushing the agenda.

 

I’m thinking that Kelly was signed in anticipation of one or more of the ‘crown jewels’ being sold and possibly wasn’t one that could wait I.e. someone else was in for him.

 

He said they spoke to Bolton early but the response from the guy he knows there was that they weren’t letting McAtee out until they had brought players in. As that only happened in the last day it was a late chance to get McAtee sorted.

 

It seems clear from what has been said that Conor is leading the recruitment direction and that is different to how others have worked.
Personally I think it’s a tad unfair to lay that at Sormaz door as it was the same before he was here and he would have been carrying out the direction/instructions of the board.
January was just dire and everyone involved needs to take responsibility for that but equally this one has been much better and all involved should take some credit.

 

Well yes and no.

Whilst that’s certainly true, the fact that we were after McAtee on deadline day would surely mean that there was money for both……which again turns the conversation to asking why if we had the money leave it so late, or identify him as our only target?

 

Not so sure there was money for Mcatee as we only wanted him on loan and they pulled the deal as we wouldn’t commit to buying (allegedly).

 

Yes - but if there was money for a McAtee loan then there was money to bring in another striker on loan