Bristol City on Fire

[toshes mate]

I've said all season that SteffJo was the engine we needed in midfield and also the player to get at the opposition. We've missed the type of player he is and damn CR for letting him go on loan

Shouldn't Jokavoic have started StefJo first game of the season if he was so good in PL?

Jokanovic had no say in the matter, Chief Exec and DOF insisted that Seri started.

Maybe it is true, but is there any evidence whatsoever to support this? Wouldn't take Jokanovic as someone that would ever let TK decide who to pick in his eleven.

You may be missing the point of what is in a player's contract either in writing or a verbal assurance given at the time of contractual agreement.  During Jokanovic's era there were quite a few on here who said he was being 'stubborn' the inference being he was trying 'to make or prove a point'.  We cannot be sure of what directions he was under only of his frustrations about recruitment which actually probably got worse after Rigg departed.

There's a difference between telling a player that he is brought in to be first choice without having the statement supported by the manager on one hand, and instructing the manager that he has to start that player on the other. In the first case it is of course stupid since it risks creating a problem by the manager then not meeting the expectations of the player in question. In the second it completely undermines (or tries to undermine) the authority of the manager when it comes to team selection.

Jokanovic could of course have been frustrated about recruitment without there being such instructions. The frustration could come from the fact that he wasn't included in the recruitment process and subsequently ended up with players that he didn't want. He could have tried to prove a point on occasion by not playing the newly recruited players. In such a case it would have been unprofessional from his side, since his job was surely first and foremost to produce results.

Has there been substantiated suggestions even that upper management actively tried to influence team selection? I am asking since it was inferred that he couldn't play Johansen because he had to play new recruits. In my opinion it is perfectly possible for him to be unhappy with recruitment but also at the same time deem Johansen not good enough for a staring spot. 

Is there any substantiated evidence that upper management did not actively try to influence team selection?  Why on earth were relationships between recruitment and coaching so tetchy?  Why were Rigg and CK dismissed?  How did Jokanovic survive so long when his first half seasons were always pretty unimpressive?   

[Sting of the North]

I've said all season that SteffJo was the engine we needed in midfield and also the player to get at the opposition. We've missed the type of player he is and damn CR for letting him go on loan

Shouldn't Jokavoic have started StefJo first game of the season if he was so good in PL?

Jokanovic had no say in the matter, Chief Exec and DOF insisted that Seri started.

Maybe it is true, but is there any evidence whatsoever to support this? Wouldn't take Jokanovic as someone that would ever let TK decide who to pick in his eleven.

You may be missing the point of what is in a player's contract either in writing or a verbal assurance given at the time of contractual agreement.  During Jokanovic's era there were quite a few on here who said he was being 'stubborn' the inference being he was trying 'to make or prove a point'.  We cannot be sure of what directions he was under only of his frustrations about recruitment which actually probably got worse after Rigg departed.

There's a difference between telling a player that he is brought in to be first choice without having the statement supported by the manager on one hand, and instructing the manager that he has to start that player on the other. In the first case it is of course stupid since it risks creating a problem by the manager then not meeting the expectations of the player in question. In the second it completely undermines (or tries to undermine) the authority of the manager when it comes to team selection.

Jokanovic could of course have been frustrated about recruitment without there being such instructions. The frustration could come from the fact that he wasn't included in the recruitment process and subsequently ended up with players that he didn't want. He could have tried to prove a point on occasion by not playing the newly recruited players. In such a case it would have been unprofessional from his side, since his job was surely first and foremost to produce results.

Has there been substantiated suggestions even that upper management actively tried to influence team selection? I am asking since it was inferred that he couldn't play Johansen because he had to play new recruits. In my opinion it is perfectly possible for him to be unhappy with recruitment but also at the same time deem Johansen not good enough for a staring spot. 

Is there any substantiated evidence that upper management did not actively try to influence team selection?  Why on earth were relationships between recruitment and coaching so tetchy?  Why were Rigg and CK dismissed?  How did Jokanovic survive so long when his first half seasons were always pretty unimpressive?

The normal expectation would be that a manager picks the team, wouldn't it? I have also never seen Jokanovic or anyone else actually suggest that he didn't pick the team.

If the normal case is that the manager picks the team, then the exception would surely be if upper management actively influences team selection. Thus, the former should normally not need to be proven, whereas the latter would. I understand that it would be even better if evidence was produced even in the former case, but surely it is first and foremost the one claiming something being out of the ordinary that has the burden of proof? So far it just looks like speculation mostly based on a dislike for upper management rather than anything else. Which is fine. The original claim in this thread was however worded like it is some known truth that Jokanovic had to play Seri, although there seem to be nothing really to support this.

But for the sake of argument, to try to adress your specific questions with my own fairly unsubstantiated guess work:

Why on earth were relationships between recruitment and coaching so tetchy? Maybe as I already stated, the fact that recruitment was done with little regard to the wishes of the head coach, and said head coach publicly criticized this on several occasions,  was enough for the relationship to be tetchy?

Why were Rigg and CK dismissed? I assume there could be a number of reasons, but I don't believe it necessarily had much to do with the team selection and upper managements alleged influence on the same. The Khans were probably either unhappy with the results produced, or with them not agreeing with the desired process, or they were just general asshats? Or a combination of those and/or multiple other factors.

How did Jokanovic survive so long when his first half seasons were always pretty unimpressive? One answer could be that they believe that Jokanovic would eventually be able to produce the results needed. Another could be that he turned things around just before they pulled the trigger. Yet another could be that they acknowledged at those times that it can take a while to get a team settled.

Frankly, it may very well be the case that TK put pressure on Jokanovic to play certain players, but so far I haven't even seen a rumor supporting that theory. Therefore, I prefer to assume that Jokanovic picked the team as that was his role. I rather then blame TK for the things that we know that he has done, since that should be sufficient to be less than happy with his role so far (to put it mildly).   

[toshes mate]

Frankly, it may very well be the case that TK put pressure on Jokanovic to play certain players, but so far I haven't even seen a rumor supporting that theory. Therefore, I prefer to assume that Jokanovic picked the team as that was his role. I rather then blame TK for the things that we know that he has done, since that should be sufficient to be less than happy with his role so far (to put it mildly).   

In other words neither view can be substantiated, nor can any favour be made to one position over the other as TK's regime has been openly acknowledged as being unique i.e the nepotism involved and his further conflict-of-interest stats system.  Theories tend to be unsupported by evidence since when they are supported by evidence they tend to become knowledge supported by replication.

[Sting of the North]

Frankly, it may very well be the case that TK put pressure on Jokanovic to play certain players, but so far I haven't even seen a rumor supporting that theory. Therefore, I prefer to assume that Jokanovic picked the team as that was his role. I rather then blame TK for the things that we know that he has done, since that should be sufficient to be less than happy with his role so far (to put it mildly).   

In other words neither view can be substantiated, nor can any favour be made to one position over the other as TK's regime has been openly acknowledged as being unique i.e the nepotism involved and his further conflict-of-interest stats system.  Theories tend to be unsupported by evidence since when they are supported by evidence they tend to become knowledge supported by replication.

In other words no, that is not what I meant by what you quoted. The quoted part was just an admittance that we cannot ever know for sure unless we were there and hence I cannot prove or know that it didn't happen.

What I meant overall however was that I do believe that the view that Jokanovic picked the team is very much substantiated by him being manager (based then on my further understanding, correctly or not, that the manager normally picks the team). That is the basis of my belief that if you oppose that view, it would be prudent to present some sort of supporting arguments or evidence or similar. It should normally be easier to prove that something happened (upper management was actively involved in picking the team) than to prove that something in fact did not happen (upper management was not involved in picking the team). Therefore, as it stands, I believe that one position very much holds favor over the other.

That is however based on my interpretation of the circumstances such as I have understood them, and everyone is of course very welcome to come to another conclusion.

[toshes mate]

@SOTN
And to think I only trimmed to save space..... !!!!!!!!

because all I said is you are taking the normal expectation (without nepotism and conflict of interests because we can assume contractual obligations would apply at any club) over an unusual and abnormal situation, the inference of which is not the subject of replication within English football (or can you prove otherwise?). Throw in the ramifications of the presence of TK and CK and their brainchild and you probably have a very, very unique situation the likes of which the vast majority of clubs will never experience and certainly will not be replicated anytime soon.  Therefore you have apples on the one hand and a pear on the other, and saying the pear is an apple may suit your purpose but simply can never be true.  The only known replication (proving a theory) for the duration was player recruitment which was largely last moment (especially for key signings and positions) and close to deadline throughout Jokanovic's time.  The big difference this season was window deadline and season's start were hours apart.  As long as Jokanovic was appearing to do the business (as required by whatever measures there were) then he was safe even if he did break step.   

[Sting of the North]

@SOTN
And to think I only trimmed to save space..... !!!!!!!!

because all I said is you are taking the normal expectation (without nepotism and conflict of interests because we can assume contractual obligations would apply at any club) over an unusual and abnormal situation, the inference of which is not the subject of replication within English football (or can you prove otherwise?). Throw in the ramifications of the presence of TK and CK and their brainchild and you probably have a very, very unique situation the likes of which the vast majority of clubs will never experience and certainly will not be replicated anytime soon.  Therefore you have apples on the one hand and a pear on the other, and saying the pear is an apple may suit your purpose but simply can never be true.  The only known replication (proving a theory) for the duration was player recruitment which was largely last moment (especially for key signings and positions) and close to deadline throughout Jokanovic's time.  The big difference this season was window deadline and season's start were hours apart.  As long as Jokanovic was appearing to do the business (as required by whatever measures there were) then he was safe even if he did break step.

What do you think my purpose is, since you refer to it? I hav no stake in this, and I was a big fan of Jokanovic, and I am certainly no big fan of our current upper management. I just appreciate substance to accusations.

Also, the above has very little do to with why you would think that upper management directly tried to influence team selection, which is an isolated fixture and the subject of the discussion. The apple is that a manager picks the team for the saturday. Nothing of the above suggests that this is not applicable to jokanovic at Fulham. Just because the situation at large at this club can be described as unusual and even unrivaled, doesn't mean that automatically every aspect has to be out of the ordinary. As I said before, nowhere have I seen anyone even hinting that Jokanovic was not free to pick the eleven he preferred (out of the players available). Again, maybe there was, but the only indications so far comes from a few posters on here. That doesn't mean that it didn't happen of course.

[Matt10]

Sounds like Moneyball , the Fulham FC version, is kicking on. Who's writing the script?

If TK was following that as a guide, then he'd have forced a transfer for the likes of Johansen, McDonald, Betts, Christie and Ream at all costs - just so Seri, Anguissa, Fabri, TFM and Chambers could see the pitch asap.

Something tells me that it's simply a manager wanting to play to the depth of our team, and the DOF abiding with too much aggression towards unproven targets.

We'll all have opinions, but what will remain consistent - no matter what - is that the power of suggestion will be more dominant than actual proof or context.

[toshes mate]

@SOTN
And to think I only trimmed to save space..... !!!!!!!!

because all I said is you are taking the normal expectation (without nepotism and conflict of interests because we can assume contractual obligations would apply at any club) over an unusual and abnormal situation, the inference of which is not the subject of replication within English football (or can you prove otherwise?). Throw in the ramifications of the presence of TK and CK and their brainchild and you probably have a very, very unique situation the likes of which the vast majority of clubs will never experience and certainly will not be replicated anytime soon.  Therefore you have apples on the one hand and a pear on the other, and saying the pear is an apple may suit your purpose but simply can never be true.  The only known replication (proving a theory) for the duration was player recruitment which was largely last moment (especially for key signings and positions) and close to deadline throughout Jokanovic's time.  The big difference this season was window deadline and season's start were hours apart.  As long as Jokanovic was appearing to do the business (as required by whatever measures there were) then he was safe even if he did break step.

What do you think my purpose is, since you refer to it? I hav no stake in this, and I was a big fan of Jokanovic, and I am certainly no big fan of our current upper management. I just appreciate substance to accusations.

Also, the above has very little do to with why you would think that upper management directly tried to influence team selection, which is an isolated fixture and the subject of the discussion. The apple is that a manager picks the team for the saturday. Nothing of the above suggests that this is not applicable to jokanovic at Fulham. Just because the situation at large at this club can be described as unusual and even unrivaled, doesn't mean that automatically every aspect has to be out of the ordinary. As I said before, nowhere have I seen anyone even hinting that Jokanovic was not free to pick the eleven he preferred (out of the players available). Again, maybe there was, but the only indications so far comes from a few posters on here. That doesn't mean that it didn't happen of course.

I have no interest in your purpose other than if you are eating a pear while claiming it to be an apple, and then I may, because I do not want you to buy the wrong thing next time, advise you of its correct title.  There have been plenty of discussions around why Jokanovic may have picked certain players or made certain substitutions and not followed the logic of others and certainly none of them proved anything beyond the context of their appearance on a thread.  We simply cannot know just how far either SJ or anyone else at FFC would go or went to protect their own interests.  What we do know is that Jokanovic would find a team that worked together and got results and he kept that side together as long as he could.  But, underlining SJ's situation, especially when he was not as successful as required was that short term memory idea that he would never be quite good enough for FFC.  I have written it as I see it, and nothing you have written has given me cause to question what I believe really went on.  And if you seriously believe that unusual situations do not lead to events and repercussions directly related to that unusual then I think you are being very naive. 

[Sting of the North]

@SOTN
And to think I only trimmed to save space..... !!!!!!!!

because all I said is you are taking the normal expectation (without nepotism and conflict of interests because we can assume contractual obligations would apply at any club) over an unusual and abnormal situation, the inference of which is not the subject of replication within English football (or can you prove otherwise?). Throw in the ramifications of the presence of TK and CK and their brainchild and you probably have a very, very unique situation the likes of which the vast majority of clubs will never experience and certainly will not be replicated anytime soon.  Therefore you have apples on the one hand and a pear on the other, and saying the pear is an apple may suit your purpose but simply can never be true.  The only known replication (proving a theory) for the duration was player recruitment which was largely last moment (especially for key signings and positions) and close to deadline throughout Jokanovic's time.  The big difference this season was window deadline and season's start were hours apart.  As long as Jokanovic was appearing to do the business (as required by whatever measures there were) then he was safe even if he did break step.

What do you think my purpose is, since you refer to it? I hav no stake in this, and I was a big fan of Jokanovic, and I am certainly no big fan of our current upper management. I just appreciate substance to accusations.

Also, the above has very little do to with why you would think that upper management directly tried to influence team selection, which is an isolated fixture and the subject of the discussion. The apple is that a manager picks the team for the saturday. Nothing of the above suggests that this is not applicable to jokanovic at Fulham. Just because the situation at large at this club can be described as unusual and even unrivaled, doesn't mean that automatically every aspect has to be out of the ordinary. As I said before, nowhere have I seen anyone even hinting that Jokanovic was not free to pick the eleven he preferred (out of the players available). Again, maybe there was, but the only indications so far comes from a few posters on here. That doesn't mean that it didn't happen of course.

I have no interest in your purpose other than if you are eating a pear while claiming it to be an apple, and then I may, because I do not want you to buy the wrong thing next time, advise you of its correct title.  There have been plenty of discussions around why Jokanovic may have picked certain players or made certain substitutions and not followed the logic of others and certainly none of them proved anything beyond the context of their appearance on a thread.  We simply cannot know just how far either SJ or anyone else at FFC would go or went to protect their own interests.  What we do know is that Jokanovic would find a team that worked together and got results and he kept that side together as long as he could.  But, underlining SJ's situation, especially when he was not as successful as required was that short term memory idea that he would never be quite good enough for FFC.  I have written it as I see it, and nothing you have written has given me cause to question what I believe really went on.  And if you seriously believe that unusual situations do not lead to events and repercussions directly related to that unusual then I think you are being very naive.

I don't think you are wrong in your overall assessment, just that you are arguing against something else than the particular topic that I debated, hence your eagerness to see many different fruits in the conversation.

This debate however began with someone stating that SJ was not allowed to pick StefJo because upper management made him pick Seri. I just asked if there was any substance to that particular accusation against upper management. I didn't qeustion anyone's right to hold that belief.

If anything, your explanation above suggests that SJ should have stayed with StefJo to start the season because that was when he still may have had the upper hand on TK given the end of last season. I don't doubt for a second that TK wanted SJ to play the star players acquired by TK. I also believe that TK was happy to see the back of SJ, partially because of this. As such, of course there was an indirect pressure on SJ as regarding what players he used, since using "his own" players without corresponding results would always lead to his dismissal. Then again, the only thing keeping him here was likely the results because of the aforementioned differences. Therefore I don't see why SJ would have gone with a team less likely to succeed. Especially if that also meant having to sacrifice his favoured players. I believe the simple reality in the case at hand was that he suspected that StefJo was not really up to good PL standards. Not everything is a conspiracy.

I am however more than happy to leave this debate, since I don't believe we will agree on the above regardless, and I am happy to admit that I may be wrong. I am however also just telling it how I see it, and sometimes when it looks like an apple it is in fact an apple. But then again, maybe not, and I welcome continued efforts to educate me in that regard.

[ScalleysDad]

Good debate you two and I would settle for the draw now.
For my part I think JOka had more say in team affairs than we thought, Grays dismissal for example, but I'll await Kmac's next revelation before putting any money down.

[deadcowboys]

This post has been up for 3 days, why has nobody called the Fire Brigade?   :022:

[Twig]

Next season is not going to be a walk in the park Villa, Derby, Middlesboro and West Brom could all be there looking for promotion.

Seen a fair amount of all these teams this season & don't see anything to worry about?  More concerned by Cardiff if they drop.

Say that again when we are in the bottom third of the division next season.

[Woolly Mammoth]

This post has been up for 3 days, why has nobody called the Fire Brigade?   :022:

Because it's just a smoke screen.

[SP]

Next season is not going to be a walk in the park Villa, Derby, Middlesboro and West Brom could all be there looking for promotion.

Seen a fair amount of all these teams this season & don't see anything to worry about?  More concerned by Cardiff if they drop.

Say that again when we are in the bottom third of the division next season.

Will do.