11 March 2018
Originally posted by Barry Sanchez
His inaction has cost us by not doing his job but in turn so has Kruegar not done his by making sure Reed does his, they're both yes men chancers, fucking useless.
To refer to Reed and Kruger as "yes men" begs an obvious question: who they saying 'yes' to? Your depiction suggests that there is some greater force in play, telling Reed and Kruger what to do, a force to which they both willingly acquiesce. So what exactly is this force, and what is it telling them?
Look at the positions of the two men. One is, to all intents and purposes, director of football (I can't remember what his actual job title is, but Les Reed is an executive director in charge of football matters). The other is the non-executive chairman - should I have put NON in caps there? So he isn't in charge of things on a day-to-day basis, as he has no executive role. It's not his job to manage Les Reed, or indeed anyone else. A key problem at present (and I can recall Phil saying much the same) is that the club hasn't had a CEO since Gareth Rodgers left. You need someone in that position; someone who you may not have heard of, and who you very rarely (if ever) hear from.
Back to Les Reed. Yes, he has to be accountable for our current predicament - that's all part of the territory. But to suggest that he's totally useless, always has been, etc. etc., is utter drivel. If he's to blame for where we are now then he can also be credited with what happened prior to that. You can't have it both ways.