Mutual consent

[BeatleBlade]

I went to Ched's appeal last month. I suspect I'm more ITK than the vast majority on this board in relation to this topic, and I know pretty much fuck all.

Yeah, as I said, it's not that much ITK but there ya go.

 

[Jon Bon]

You don't have to divulge your info, but does anyone genuinely know who he is?

It's got to be the janitor. It's always the fucking janitor - apart from the odd time when it was the owner of a fairground sitting on top of a secret gold mine.

I'm going with janitor.

 

[Highbury_Blade]

Yeah, as I said, it's not that much ITK but there ya go.

After hearing the new evidence live in court, my uneducated guess is that he's got a reasonable chance of the original verdict ruled unsafe.

 

[BeatleBlade]

After hearing the new evidence live in court, my uneducated guess is that he's got a reasonable chance of the original verdict ruled unsafe.

What does that mean exactly? Sorry, don't know much about all that.

 

[Highbury_Blade]

What does that mean exactly? Sorry, don't know much about all that.

It means that IMO the new evidence presented might have swung the original verdict in Ched's favour, so the appeal court may rule the original verdict unsafe.

I am not a lawyer though so take the above with a pinch of salt.

 

[Finn Keane o' Balmaqueen]

Hold on a minute..

Sunny's on Line One.

Can y'all hang fire on starting threads, adding to speculation, trying to work out who he is...
His sock drawer is depleted.
Anyone got any apple pies?

Chafed.

 

[PokerBlade]

If OP is being intentionally vague to hide his identity then he's doing it wrong.

If only one person is leaving by mutual consent (likely, if true) only the same number of people would know about it, and thus nothing is hidden. It would probably even be the case that fewer people would know the reason behind the departure than those who simply know a departure will occur.

So basically, OP is only hiding info from us. Which is annoying and defeats the point of posting this at all.

 

[Barney]

If OP is being intentionally vague to hide his identity then he's doing it wrong.

If only one person is leaving by mutual consent (likely, if true) only the same number of people would know about it, and thus nothing is hidden. It would probably even be the case that fewer people would know the reason behind the departure than those who simply know a departure will occur.

So basically, OP is only hiding info from us. Which is annoying and defeats the point of posting this at all.

I must have read that about five times and I still don't understand it.

 

[Champagneblade]

Maybe this decision was taken in June?

Adkins "aim is automatic promotion"
Board "ok but if we miss the playoffs we'll need the option for you to leave by 'mutual consent'.
Adkins "I can respect that. I'm confident in my own abilities. Where do I sign?"

Maybe it's just leaking out now. If we win the next 6 though...maybe it becomes null and void.

 

[Sirius]

If true,and Sunji seems to be spot on in previous posts...Chris Wilder would be a decent choice for me..seems to have done a cracking job at Northampton.

Allowing Adkins to leave would be akin to a Blade leaving at half time. Just for its novelty value, why not stick with our manager for a change. IMO Adkn is the best hope of us getting promotion next year season

 

[Higgo's Belly]

Great news if true. Adkins has been backed by the board by being allowed to sign six expensive loan/permenant signings, but has still somehow managed to turn Utd from a play off team to a mid table team. No manager who has failed to this extent deserves to keep his job. Does anybody really believe that Wilder, Cotterill, Powell, Appleton or just about anybody else could do a worst job and I'm certain most would do a great deal better. He is not daft, he must have known when he took the job that failure to reach at least the play offs would surely result in him being sacked. We cant afford to risk Adkins signing more players like Woolford, Sammon or Hammond. Clough should never have been sacked, but Adkins, thats a totally different matter.

 

[sitwell]

If it hadn't been for the victory against Mighty Walsall ,remind me why Adkins has turned this corner. We are fucking awful ,no foundations laid ,shocking signings ,terrible tactics ,laughable substitutions ,half time team talks from motivational hell ,but Nigel knows what hes doing because he got a couple of promotions years ago. He was also a physio years ago why shouldnt he be our physio ?
He has taken a bunch of players who made the play off last year added to them at great expense and made them worse ,and the main reason we should keep him is because of the past few managers we have sacked. The guy is an absolute disaster for Sheffield United and we cant get rid quick enough for me. I am not a trigger happy sacker either ,the only sacking I have wanted was Weir ,6 weeks before we did it.

 

[PokerBlade]

I must have read that about five times and I still don't understand it.

The flippant reply is just too easy, so I'll try again at an explanation:

Let's say that ten people know that Adkins is leaving by mutual consent.

One of them posts here that "A person is leaving by mutual consent". The list of possible leakers remains at ten.

Let's say he'd posted "Adkins is leaving by mutual consent". How could you eliminate any of the ten ITKers from that extra information?

Conversely:

Let's say ten people know Adkins is leaving. But only 9 of them know the extra information - that it's by mutual consent and not quitting or being sacked. Now the list of possible leakers is reduced by the OP, and that's the opposite of the intent of his vague info.

The final possibility:

X people know that someone at the club is leaving by mutual consent, but not who's leaving. But not only does that seem a really weird scenario, it also makes the OP kind of pointless.

Conclusion:

OP might as well tell us who he's talking about. Learn to hide your tracks better in future.

 

[Sirius]

Allowing Adkins to leave would be akin to a Blade leaving at half time. Just for its novelty value, why not stick with our manager for a change. IMO Adkn is the best hope of us getting promotion next Season.

 

[Champagneblade]

The argument here must be that he knows the players and therefore knows what is needed by now.

Issue I have is that if he still wants Hammond, he's clearly not as clued up as we'd like to think.

Hammond's bookings and times substituted are huge red flags for me.

If Adkins wants to play fast attacking football and his first building block is a slow player in the middle of the park who can't last 90 minutes, then this double confirms he's not our guy.

Any mention of Hammond as a future target and alarm bells would ring.

 

[PokerBlade]

The argument here must be that he knows the players and therefore knows what is needed by now.

Issue I have is that if he still wants Hammond, he's clearly not as clued up as we'd like to think.

Hammond's bookings and times substituted are huge red flags for me.

If Adkins wants to play fast attacking football and his first building block is a slow player in the middle of the park who can't last 90 minutes, then this double confirms he's not our guy.

Any mention of Hammond as a future target and alarm bells would ring.

It's very important that we go into the closed season in a mess so that when we don't have a decent side on the opening day we can have an excuse for not getting much done in the Summer and reassure everyone that this will definitely be the January where we strengthen for once. And then in January nobody will come.

I'm not sure why it's important for us to do it this way but I trust the board and I'm sure the persistence in the plan will pay off eventually.

 

[Rodders]

The flippant reply is just too easy, so I'll try again at an explanation:

Let's say that ten people know that Adkins is leaving by mutual consent.

One of them posts here that "A person is leaving by mutual consent". The list of possible leakers remains at ten.

Let's say he'd posted "Adkins is leaving by mutual consent". How could you eliminate any of the ten ITKers from that extra information?

Conversely:

Let's say ten people know Adkins is leaving. But only 9 of them know the extra information - that it's by mutual consent and not quitting or being sacked. Now the list of possible leakers is reduced by the OP, and that's the opposite of the intent of his vague info.

The final possibility:

X people know that someone at the club is leaving by mutual consent, but not who's leaving. But not only does that seem a really weird scenario, it also makes the OP kind of pointless.

Conclusion:

OP might as well tell us who he's talking about. Learn to hide your tracks better in future.

Wtf are you on about?

 

[Pierre's PC]

Haven't seen this level of shitstorming since Kim Kardashions arse "broke the interwebz"

 

[Blade58]

So, is it looking more and more like Adkins was given the bad news last week and it wasn't the common flu he caught, but actually Beattie flu?

Have we heard anything from Mr Adkins this week?

 

[chesblade]

That mike Stephenson that post's on Twitter also posted o VIP blades that he has heard same from 3 reliable sources. Think there is too much talk about this for it not to be true. Thinking back to McCabe interview when asked if Adkins would be here next season it took him a while to answer yes but still didn't sound convincing

 

[bladesmanluke]

Anyone rejoicing can look forward to another season of lazy cunts like Paul Coutts pulling on the shirt and the blades finishing 10th again

 

[PokerBlade]

Wtf are you on about?

That ITKers being pointlessly vague is a huge irritation. There's no good reason for OP not to say who he's talking about.

 

[Champagneblade]

What's vague mate?

If we don't make the play offs he's out.

 

[Ecco1889]

Why do "In the knowers" speak in bastard riddles!??

So they can squirm out of the shite when their prediction goes tits-up

 

[PeteBlade]

I thought that you were more mature than that. But then, you have your duties to attend to.

Always reassuring that you are on duty though

Sorry to disappoint, squire.

 

[GRUMPY BLADE]

http://www.sufc.co.uk/news/article/sheffield-united-martyn-green-david-green-2839510.aspx

David Greens red and white army

 

[Treeton Blade]

So, is it looking more and more like Adkins was given the bad news last week and it wasn't the common flu he caught, but actually Beattie flu?

Have we heard anything from Mr Adkins this week?

Heard hes got sunstoke after playing golf

 

[PeteBlade]

Maybe the 'dry January' now makes more sense if this speculation is true, perfect sense in fact.

None of us 'armchair' keyboard warriors know what the spirit is like in the dressing room. Not the players who are leaving but the ones who will still be with us next season. If they do not respect and respond to Adkins then he has to go. Performances suggest not many of the players are with him.

The other big issue is Hammond and that might be insurmountable if Adkins is insisting the club honours a personal promise he has made to the lad. These things happen. Last October time when Adkins was wooing Hammond our manager was fireproof but so much has happened since.

Unfortunately that's a lot of guesswork.
It would make no sense to hire a manager in June and fail to back him in the January window (unless you were cost cutting).

The players who some say loved Clough still played absolute shite for him more often than not.

And I'm not sure how they'd know anyway.

And the Hammond 'issue' is only a major issue to the fans. Talk of personal promises are not based on any kind of fact.

The bottom line is, we looked like we've sacked yet another one. After one season. Where he's had someone else's players.

We're a joke.

 

[GRUMPY BLADE]

If it hadn't been for the victory against Mighty Walsall ,remind me why Adkins has turned this corner. We are fucking awful ,no foundations laid ,shocking signings ,terrible tactics ,laughable substitutions ,half time team talks from motivational hell ,but Nigel knows what hes doing because he got a couple of promotions years ago. He was also a physio years ago why shouldnt he be our physio ?
He has taken a bunch of players who made the play off last year added to them at great expense and made them worse ,and the main reason we should keep him is because of the past few managers we have sacked. The guy is an absolute disaster for Sheffield United and we cant get rid quick enough for me. I am not a trigger happy sacker either ,the only sacking I have wanted was Weir ,6 weeks before we did it.

All true Sitters but Big Kev picks the next one.

 

[Woodwardfan]

January was an indication that Adkins should have just told the club to piss off.

Lo

Unfortunately that's a lot of guesswork.
It would make no sense to hire a manager in June and fail to back him in the January window (unless you were cost cutting).

The players who some say loved Clough still played absolute shite for him more often than not.

And I'm not sure how they'd know anyway.

And the Hammond 'issue' is only a major issue to the fans. Talk of personal promises are not based on any kind of fact.

The bottom line is, we looked like we've sacked yet another one. After one season. Where he's had someone else's players.

We're a joke.

Pete, I respect your opinions expressed in your post, but they are opinions not facts. Of course what I post is opinion and often guesswork. I'm not Sunjihi, nor do I work in the Ticket Office. Do I need to qualify everything I say with ' these are opinions and guesswork'? Maybe I should make it easier and state when my posts are facts instead, less typing!!