Unlike Zola, Strachan has waived his right to compensation, accepting that he would be out of order to pocket a wad after doing a bad job. And this is all the more commendable because Gibson is a patient chairman who would probably have given the Scot as much time as he wanted - within reason. He stood by Robson and Southgate after all!
What a contrast with Zola, who was willing to drag the club down with him rather than do the honourable thing, and walk away from a job that he was clearly incapable of doing. And Zola, of course, like Turds before him, wanted his blood money.
You may remember that Strachan was a front runner for the West Ham job some years back. I can't remember who pipped him to it. Roeder? Or Pardew? Pards I think. I'm glad we didn't appoint him because I don't rate the guy as a manager but as a man, he deserves respect. Unlike our last two money grabbing managers.
give it a rest will you. first slagging off big mal earlier this week and now harping on about zola again. can't you stop being a prat for one day?
ReplyDeleteCan't you master capital letters yet?
ReplyDeleteActually, the contrast is with the chairmen. I'd sue gold and sullivan for all theyre worth if they sacked me. gibson I wouldnt. there is the difference.
ReplyDeleteWhy 1813? Gold and Sullivan have got a good record with managers. There is not a chairman in the premiership that wouldn't have given Zola the push.I accept Zola was a man who had been the best as a player, but he could just not realise that he was a failing as a manager.
ReplyDelete