Wilder willing to return?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?


dc_blade said:
No, it doesn’t answer my question. Did he try to quit after the Palace game in January and did results have anything to do with his resignation?
Click to expand...

It does, but I'll humour you. United began to talk about the strategy going into next season some weeks before that game. The plan had radically changed and the board wanted to radically change job description and next season's strategy. CW expressed dissatisfaction but negotiations were ongoing even in the final days. If a resignation was rendered the club would've just accepted it and CW would've left with nowt.

Your second question is one for PA really. Not from CW's side. This was always expected and an agreed plan was already in place. He communicated this publicly in his interviews. If the plan was adhered to CW would still be SUFC manager. In the end they were mutually incompatible and a parting of the waves was the desirable outcome for all parties imo.
 
P
nopigfansintown said:
It does, but I'll humour you. United began to talk about the strategy going into next season some weeks before that game. The plan had radically changed and the board wanted to radically change job description and next season's strategy. CW expressed dissatisfaction but negotiations were ongoing even in the final days. If a resignation was rendered the club would've just accepted it and CW would've left with nowt.
Your second question is one for PA really. Not from CW's side. This was always expected and an agreed plan was already in place. He communicated this publicly in his interviews. If the plan was adhered to CW would still be SUFC manager. In the end they were mutually incompatible and a parting of the waves was the desirable outcome for all parties imo.
Click to expand...
So when Wilder mouthed words to the effect that he "can't do this shit anymore" in the immediate aftermath of the Palace game, he wasn't thinking about the latest capitulation on the pitch, or the fact we had gone 17 games without winning, he was referring to potential changes in transfer strategy. And PA was lying when he said that Wilder failed to mention anything besides on-pitch failures when he offered his resignation. That's an interesting theory.

I'll be honest, I don't believe your version of events captures the truth of what happened. I think most of this is post hoc justification for failures on the pitch. Which is frustrating, because we started to turn it around after the Palace game and in my opinion would've finished the season more strongly if Wilder had stayed in charge.
 
dc_blade said:
P

So when Wilder mouthed words to the effect that he "can't do this shit anymore" in the immediate aftermath of the Palace game, he wasn't thinking about the latest capitulation on the pitch, or the fact we had gone 17 games without winning, he was referring to potential changes in transfer strategy. And PA was lying when he said that Wilder failed to mention anything besides on-pitch failures when he offered his resignation. That's an interesting theory.

I'll be honest, I don't believe your version of events captures the truth of what happened. I think most of this is post hoc justification for failures on the pitch. Which is frustrating, because we started to turn it around after the Palace game and in my opinion would've finished the season more strongly if Wilder had stayed in charge.
Click to expand...

Well it's not just me you're disbelieving (although that might be convenient), it's CW's interview in which he stated to a question about whether he wanted to stay next season: "If the plan remains the same".CW also went on the record about the failure to implement agreed infrastructure projects multiple times. Said promises have been in club literature almost all season, and featured heavily in the pre season fans forum.

You've cited the Prince's interview in which he claimed CW resigned twice. It is on the record that CW resigned post Bristol in our first Champ season - so that was hardly accurate from any viewpoint. The comments from PA re transfer policy were a myriad of contradictions too exhaustive to mention here.

I don't deal in theories or justifications thanks 😉My view is that it was a mutually benefical separation as it had NO future from both parties outlook. From CW point of view he probably should have moved on at least a season earlier. I would have walked post Bristol.
 
nopigfansintown said:
Well it's not just me you're disbelieving (although that might be convenient), it's CW's interview in which he stated to a question about whether he wanted to stay next season: "If the plan remains the same".CW also went on the record about the failure to implement agreed infrastructure projects multiple times. Said promises have been in club literature almost all season, and featured heavily in the pre season fans forum.

You've cited the Prince's interview in which he claimed CW resigned twice. It is on the record that CW resigned post Bristol in our first Champ season - so that was hardly accurate from any viewpoint. The comments from PA re transfer policy were a myriad of contradictions too exhaustive to mention here. I don't deal in theories or justifications thanks 😉.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I don't think you're making it up out of whole cloth, I think you've bought into a version of events concocted by Wilder's camp to explain why we had such a poor season and why he quit. I'm also perfectly happy to believe that there were delays in infrastructure projects and changes in the transfer strategy. I just think they've been twisted into justifications for what happened this season and for painting PA as the villain in some sort of childish "Wilder good, Prince bad" narrative.

The second paragraph is just silly pedantry and adds nothing to the discussion.
 
dc_blade said:
Yeah, I don't think you're making it up out of whole cloth, I think you've bought into a version of events concocted by Wilder's camp to explain why we had such a poor season and why he quit. I'm also perfectly happy to believe that there were delays in infrastructure projects and changes in the transfer strategy. I just think they've been twisted into justifications for what happened this season and for painting PA as the villain in some sort of childish "Wilder good, Prince bad" narrative.

The second paragraph is just silly pedantry and adds nothing to the discussion.
Click to expand...

I think you're the inversion of the same, only you have no facts to go on and have ignored those even in the public domain except, bizarrely, a few words mouthed after a game. If you see me as painting "Wilder good, Prince bad" you've completely missaprehended everything I've stated I'm afraid.

The last paragraph is just childish so I'll leave it there rather than responding in kind. I gave you the benefit of the doubt with your "evading" nonsense.
 
Would Wilder really want to come back and potentially damage his reputation? Highly unlikely
Would PA offer him a job after what’s already been said? Extremely improbable
Will Wilder manage us again? Who can say but don’t see it happening in 21-22 season
Conclusion? Nothing to see here.
 
nopigfansintown said:
I think you're the inversion of the same, only you have no facts to go on and have ignored those even in the public domain except, bizarrely, a few words mouthed after a game. If you see me as painting "Wilder good, Prince bad" you've completely missaprehended everything I've stated I'm afraid.

The last paragraph is just childish so I'll leave it there rather than responding in kind. I gave you the benefit of the doubt with your "evading" nonsense.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry but "failure to implement infrastructure projects" is a giant cop out. Wilder failed last season and wanted no part of the responsibility for it (it wasn't all his). That's completely his prerogative but to claim you had no control over events ("can't compete") when the whole club is shaped in your image is too much.

His main responsibility was the performance of the first team. His, and the teams performance was woeful for a long time. Everything else is window dressing.
 
I hope to god we never get another blade as a manager! I enjoyed the time and was great knowing he was a blade but some fans took to him a bit too much and it seems we had a ' wilder FC is god ' supporters group going on.

Had enough with the meltdown from wilder leaving to not want another episode further down the line when the inevitable happens and the wilder FC supporters go all funny again.


Like a relationship, we move on and he does.

Blades > wilder
 
nopigfansintown said:
Well it's not just me you're disbelieving (although that might be convenient), it's CW's interview in which he stated to a question about whether he wanted to stay next season: "If the plan remains the same".CW also went on the record about the failure to implement agreed infrastructure projects multiple times. Said promises have been in club literature almost all season, and featured heavily in the pre season fans forum.

You've cited the Prince's interview in which he claimed CW resigned twice. It is on the record that CW resigned post Bristol in our first Champ season - so that was hardly accurate from any viewpoint. The comments from PA re transfer policy were a myriad of contradictions too exhaustive to mention here.

I don't deal in theories or justifications thanks 😉My view is that it was a mutually benefical separation as it had NO future from both parties outlook. From CW point of view he probably should have moved on at least a season earlier. I would have walked post Bristol.
Click to expand...
I am a big fan of wilder and wish he was still manager but one major thing that I think is telling about the PA interview. He stated that CW offered to walk and wanted £4m in the process, if this wasn’t true surely CW or his representatives would have challenged this as it’s a public attack on his character.

PA is clearly a businessman who would know what legal trouble he could cause by going on live TV and telling lies about a former employee.
 
ScoobBlade said:
I am a big fan of wilder and wish he was still manager but one major thing that I think is telling about the PA interview. He stated that CW offered to walk and wanted £4m in the process, if this wasn’t true surely CW or his representatives would have challenged this as it’s a public attack on his character.

PA is clearly a businessman who would know what legal trouble he could cause by going on live TV and telling lies about a former employee.
Click to expand...

It was intended as such, no doubt, but it was, and remains just a natural part of the negotiation in a mutual parting of the waves. When a manager's position becomes untenable - for whatever reason. I'm sure that you noticed that he never stated that CW had received a 4m pay off? Which begs further questions: why not be equally candid about the pay off, and why you gave it a manager that had resigned twice? Why give any pay off when you have declared that the manager has resigned twice, and in so doing waived any pay off? Was the FC confident in their legal position re Wilder? Where is Alan Knill's pay off btw, or is the FC on firmer legal ground here 😉?
 
Sean Thornton said:
Just read it. Doesn’t really say much IMO. He closed off his other account because he couldn’t handle people suggesting he knew very little and just posted his opinions. There’s nothing on there that hasnt been discussed on here. Some of them were pretty ridiculous iirc. Looks like the same modus operandi, “look at me”.
Click to expand...

Sean, he is not a "look at me" type of person, I have had numerous debates and chats with him on Twitter and i think he does have "some" connection with the club - he left twitter for the reasons you quoted, he said he just didn't need the hassle from internet trolls - and who can blame him!! - he only came back on Twitter (reluctantly) because some of his followers (including me) asked him to comment. (he is an accountant so if i am correct in my assumption that you are also an accountant then you have a kindred spirit with him) 😁
 
ScoobBlade said:
I am a big fan of wilder and wish he was still manager but one major thing that I think is telling about the PA interview. He stated that CW offered to walk and wanted £4m in the process, if this wasn’t true surely CW or his representatives would have challenged this as it’s a public attack on his character.

PA is clearly a businessman who would know what legal trouble he could cause by going on live TV and telling lies about a former employee.
Click to expand...
The prince was well aware of the backlash he'd had for letting Wilder go/moving him out so to speak.
That interview was designed to tarnish Wilders rep, suggest he wasn't committed to the club and paint the Prince as an owner who tried everything and was surprised that Wilder still couldn't stay.
I'm sure the Prince is correct in that he tried to resign twice. What's also telling is that he stayed twice too, perhaps showing as much as he couldn't see a way forward that he didn't want to leave. This fallout/lack of way forward between the two has been grumbling on for a while, even last season and the season before whilst we were doing well. The Prince wants to run the club in a certain way, but whilst Wilder was doing well he couldnt' upset the applecart.

It was a PR interview, in fact it was quite politician esque. Seems to have worked, and many are now just straight up angry at Wilder.
But do you believe everything what politicians say, or take them at face value? I certainly don't buy that he had no clue whatsoever that Wilder was worried/unhappy about the relationship they had.
This time last year we had Michael Gove trying to convince everyone it's a good idea to drive short distances to test your eyesight.
 
nopigfansintown said:
It was intended as such, no doubt, but it was, and remains just a natural part of the negotiation in a mutual parting of the waves. When a manager's position becomes untenable - for whatever reason. I'm sure that you noticed that he never stated that CW had received a 4m pay off? Which begs further questions: why not be equally candid about the pay off, and why you gave it a manager that had resigned twice? Why give any pay off when you have declared that the manager has resigned twice, and in so doing waived any pay off? Was the FC confident in their legal position re Wilder? Where is Alan Knill's pay off btw, or is the FC on firmer legal ground here 😉?
Click to expand...
The details of a deal that was actually agreed re. The pay off when he actually left, are likely protected by a legal contract.

Also if CW did offer to go but with that pay off, you’d be insane to agree. Anyone would say “if you want to go, go mate but you ain’t getting paid”. If following PA refusing to pay him off CW then decided to stay then the contract is still in place therefore PA would have to pay CW off if he wanted to out him.

Irrelevant what PA wanted to do, if the contract is still there it needs to be adhered to.

There’s blame on both sides of this but in the end it appears that the prince was between a rock and a hard place if wanted to go but didn’t want to go empty handed.
 

CPB said:
The prince was well aware of the backlash he'd had for letting Wilder go/moving him out so to speak.
That interview was designed to tarnish Wilders rep, suggest he wasn't committed to the club and paint the Prince as an owner who tried everything and was surprised that Wilder still couldn't stay.
I'm sure the Prince is correct in that he tried to resign twice. What's also telling is that he stayed twice too, perhaps showing as much as he couldn't see a way forward that he didn't want to leave. This fallout/lack of way forward between the two has been grumbling on for a while, even last season and the season before whilst we were doing well. The Prince wants to run the club in a certain way, but whilst Wilder was doing well he couldnt' upset the applecart.

It was a PR interview, in fact it was quite politician esque. Seems to have worked, and many are now just straight up angry at Wilder.
But do you believe everything what politicians say, or take them at face value? I certainly don't buy that he had no clue whatsoever that Wilder was worried/unhappy about the relationship they had.
This time last year we had Michael Gove trying to convince everyone it's a good idea to drive short distances to test your eyesight.
Click to expand...
I’m in no way angry at CW and would love him back tomorrow but at the time PA was getting some serious grief for “Sacking” wilder. The fact that many of PA’s claims have been uncontested says a lot for me.

Like most things the truth most likely lies somewhere in the middle, issues on both sides and ultimately the relationship broke down
 
nopigfansintown said:
It was intended as such, no doubt, but it was, and remains just a natural part of the negotiation in a mutual parting of the waves. When a manager's position becomes untenable - for whatever reason. I'm sure that you noticed that he never stated that CW had received a 4m pay off? Which begs further questions: why not be equally candid about the pay off, and why you gave it a manager that had resigned twice? Why give any pay off when you have declared that the manager has resigned twice, and in so doing waived any pay off? Was the FC confident in their legal position re Wilder? Where is Alan Knill's pay off btw, or is the FC on firmer legal ground here 😉?
Click to expand...


His resignations hadn't been accepted by the club so that was that, can't carry them forward to a future event finance wise. Iirc PA said CW, or his advisors on his behalf, had asked for £4m. The detail of any pay off would likely be covered by the NDA talked about. So it doesn't actually beg any further questions and is just attempting to knock PA further.
 
CPB said:
The prince was well aware of the backlash he'd had for letting Wilder go/moving him out so to speak.
That interview was designed to tarnish Wilders rep, suggest he wasn't committed to the club and paint the Prince as an owner who tried everything and was surprised that Wilder still couldn't stay.
I'm sure the Prince is correct in that he tried to resign twice. What's also telling is that he stayed twice too, perhaps showing as much as he couldn't see a way forward that he didn't want to leave. This fallout/lack of way forward between the two has been grumbling on for a while, even last season and the season before whilst we were doing well. The Prince wants to run the club in a certain way, but whilst Wilder was doing well he couldnt' upset the applecart.

It was a PR interview, in fact it was quite politician esque. Seems to have worked, and many are now just straight up angry at Wilder.
But do you believe everything what politicians say, or take them at face value? I certainly don't buy that he had no clue whatsoever that Wilder was worried/unhappy about the relationship they had.
This time last year we had Michael Gove trying to convince everyone it's a good idea to drive short distances to test your eyesight.
Click to expand...


His resignations show he was no longer committed to the club, for whatever reasons. I've read on here that began in our first season in the Championship, over what l'm not sure.

There have been PR exercises from both sides. From PA himself and from those close to CW. I'd suggest if we actually knew the truth and were able to take an unbiased view - unlikely - we'd see plenty of red herrings from both sides.
 
Sean Thornton said:
His resignations hadn't been accepted by the club so that was that, can't carry them forward to a future event finance wise. Iirc PA said CW, or his advisors on his behalf, had asked for £4m. The detail of any pay off would likely be covered by the NDA talked about. So it doesn't actually beg any further questions and is just attempting to knock PA further.
Click to expand...

The obvious conclusion regardless of what is in the public domain - or known or unknown - is that Chris wanted out and PA wanted him out. That tends to cost football clubs a lot of money. The rest is PR.
If not Chris has no termination money or he's still in situ.
 
CPB said:
The prince was well aware of the backlash he'd had for letting Wilder go/moving him out so to speak.
That interview was designed to tarnish Wilders rep, suggest he wasn't committed to the club and paint the Prince as an owner who tried everything and was surprised that Wilder still couldn't stay.
I'm sure the Prince is correct in that he tried to resign twice. What's also telling is that he stayed twice too, perhaps showing as much as he couldn't see a way forward that he didn't want to leave. This fallout/lack of way forward between the two has been grumbling on for a while, even last season and the season before whilst we were doing well. The Prince wants to run the club in a certain way, but whilst Wilder was doing well he couldnt' upset the applecart.

It was a PR interview, in fact it was quite politician esque. Seems to have worked, and many are now just straight up angry at Wilder.
But do you believe everything what politicians say, or take them at face value? I certainly don't buy that he had no clue whatsoever that Wilder was worried/unhappy about the relationship they had.
This time last year we had Michael Gove trying to convince everyone it's a good idea to drive short distances to test your eyesight.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. It was always destined for divorce, although you could say that for any manager/owner relationship. This was a dysfunctional relationship from the start of the sole ownership. I imagine this will become more clear with the future direction of the club, starting with the remit of the new head coach (or de facto head coach). It's not a matter of right or wrong (some members seem determined to turn it into this) but of different ways of doing things.
 
nopigfansintown said:
The obvious conclusion regardless of what is in the public domain - or known or unknown - is that Chris wanted out and PA wanted him out. That tends to cost football clubs a lot of money. The rest is PR.
If not Chris has no termination money or he's still in situ.
Click to expand...


You appear to be the only one outside the club who knows every single thing. From both sides.

You have scouted around my point that pay off wise, previous offers to resign are irrelevant when it comes to settlement. A laughing smiley doesn't cover that.

Were there any requests for a settlement figure the previous times Wilder decided he couldn't continue? Or was he walking away with nothing?
 
Sean Thornton said:
You appear to be the only one outside the club who knows every single thing. From both sides.

You have scouted around my point that pay off wise, previous offers to resign are irrelevant when it comes to settlement. A laughing smiley doesn't cover that.

Were there any requests for a settlement figure the previous times Wilder decided he couldn't continue? Or was he walking away with nothing?
Click to expand...


I have never claimed that. Please quote me or apologise...

How so?

No.Yes.Yes.
 
nopigfansintown said:
The obvious conclusion regardless of what is in the public domain - or known or unknown - is that Chris wanted out and PA wanted him out. That tends to cost football clubs a lot of money. The rest is PR.
If not Chris has no termination money or he's still in situ.
Click to expand...
So when the owner said he didn't want him to leave and that he had talked him out of resigning multiple times he was lying?
 
nopigfansintown said:
I have never claimed that. Please quote me Or apologise...

How so?

No.
Click to expand...


You've mentioned "first hand" you post as if you know the inside story on every issue in the CW/PA fall out, and have no problem in putting down other people's opinions whilst yours appear to be based on inside info. It's not hard to infer you believe you know it all. Apologise? Get over yourself.

Previous threats to resign wouldn't affect any further discussions as to settlement. How could they? "I want x million to go" "Well you've threatened to leave twice so l'm only offering y million". Please.

Very generous of him. X 2. What did he pocket then?
 
Sean Thornton said:
You've mentioned "first hand" you post as if you know the inside story on every issue in the CW/PA fall out, and have no problem in putting down other people's opinions which appear to be based on inside info. It's not hard to infer you believe you know it all. Apologise? Get over yourself.

Previous threats to resign wouldn't affect any further discussions as to settlement. How could they? "I want x million to go" "Well you've threatened to leave twice so l'm only offering y million". Please.

Very generous of him. X 2. What did he pocket then?
Click to expand...

You need to read my post back. I've never stated or inferred that I know the story first hand from all sides. Massive lack of class for you not to apologise frankly. I've had the lowdown from one side that I trust implicitly from the last five years. If I did have doubts they've been evidenced enough to satisfy them.Unless you have everything first hand nobody is ever liable to know everything; that is a given

A figure significantly lower than the much vaunted 4 million in the Interview. An opening gambit does not a negotiation make. Again Chris leaving was a mutually beneficial conclusion that suited both parties. The word "resign" is a bit loaded in this context. It is more a case of we can't work together anymore so what's the best way forward. I think they found it.

Don't understand your third paragraph.
 
Kozzy_is_my_Dad said:
The kiss and make up rumours are gathering some pace and potentially a bit of substance. Fingers crossed!

As for those with short memories, he'd be perfect for the championship, I can think of noone better.

And those saying don't have him anywhere near recruitment? I get that, to a degree - but that was Wilder trying to learn how to adapt to PL life and how to spend at PL level. We were all learning together, regardless of the sums spent. We didn't get it right, but neither did West Brom, Fulham (again!), Norwich before them, Huddersfield before them...etc, etc. Even Villa, for all their millions and the 'gone to Villa' threads came within one goal of cocking it up entirely, the season before. PL recruitment isn't easy to adapt to. No matter who you are.

But that's irrelevant now anyway, what we're looking at is Championship recruitment and spending what we have wisely. Many have selective memories, I can think of noone better than the man who brought us O'Connell, Egan, Norwood, Baldock, Fleck, Duffy, Henderson, and revitalised Basham, Coutts and Freeman. I think he's more than proven his credentials...
Click to expand...
I love you.
 

nopigfansintown said:
You need to read my post back. I've never stated or inferred that I know the story first hand from all sides. Massive lack of class for you not to apologise frankly. I've had the lowdown from one side that I trust implicitly from the last five years. If I did have doubts they've been evidenced enough to satisfy them.Unless you have everything first hand nobody is ever liable to know everything; that is a given

A figure significantly lower than the much vaunted 4 million in the Interview. An opening gambit does not a negotiation make. Again Chris leaving was a mutually beneficial conclusion that suited both parties. The word "resign" is a bit loaded in this context. It is more a case of we can't work together anymore so what's the best way forward. I think they found it.

Don't understand your third paragraph.
Click to expand...


So you only have one side of the story. No bias there then. I took it that your ongoing posts on this matter were "gospel" or at least unchallengeable in the form they took.

"An opening gambit does not a negotiation make" Which is exactly why his first two offers to resign wouldn't affect the final one.

Sorry? You answered it in the first sentence of your second paragraph. Well, almost.

As an aside, and l genuinely can't recall, was the Bristol game resignation in the media?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom