| Sir Les and Hoos 21:32 - Nov 29 with 13883 views | zicoshoops |
So….
We’re looking for a new Manager.
Do your homework, do your research.
I must admit I’m not really fussed.
You can appoint Kim Jong bastard Un, if he could do the job, but……..
Do not appoint another Chelsea supporting Manager like Agent Beale.
Once can be considered careless and a mistake…..
Twice?
Well, that would be unforgivable.
What’s going on?
We should be told
Sort it out |  | | |  |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 21:55 - Nov 29 with 6904 views | ted_hendrix |
Whom ever Is interviewed should firstly be wired up to a lie detector machine ( the sort of lie detection machine you'd see in an American black and white detective film from the Fifties).
Secondly He or She should be asked If they can spell integrity and overlapping fullback without looking at a dictionary.
Thirdly the applicant should be asked If they have any dietary requirements or food allergies.
Fourthly the applicant should be asked If he or She Is pregnant.
Fifthly and lastly the applicant should be asked If they have any holiday's booked. |  |
| My Father had a profound influence on me, he was a lunatic. |
| |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 22:15 - Nov 29 with 6769 views | digswellhoop |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 21:55 - Nov 29 by ted_hendrix |
Whom ever Is interviewed should firstly be wired up to a lie detector machine ( the sort of lie detection machine you'd see in an American black and white detective film from the Fifties).
Secondly He or She should be asked If they can spell integrity and overlapping fullback without looking at a dictionary.
Thirdly the applicant should be asked If they have any dietary requirements or food allergies.
Fourthly the applicant should be asked If he or She Is pregnant.
Fifthly and lastly the applicant should be asked If they have any holiday's booked. |
if female who seeing some are anti Chelsea | | | |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 22:19 - Nov 29 with 6742 views | DWQPR |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 21:55 - Nov 29 by ted_hendrix |
Whom ever Is interviewed should firstly be wired up to a lie detector machine ( the sort of lie detection machine you'd see in an American black and white detective film from the Fifties).
Secondly He or She should be asked If they can spell integrity and overlapping fullback without looking at a dictionary.
Thirdly the applicant should be asked If they have any dietary requirements or food allergies.
Fourthly the applicant should be asked If he or She Is pregnant.
Fifthly and lastly the applicant should be asked If they have any holiday's booked. |
You forgot to mention about checking for unsightly growths on the face. For me that’s the first thing to check for. | |
| |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 06:51 - Nov 30 with 6441 views | stainrods_elbow |
To remind us all, here are the self-congratulatory statements from Amit, Hoos and Les when they appointed Beale from the club website:
Amit:
“This has perhaps been the most comprehensive search that we’ve conducted during my time at the club. A lot of work went into the process — there were interviews with a number of impressive candidates. We wanted to give the process the consideration it deserves. That’s what we’ve done and we’re thrilled with the outcome in appointing Michael. He was the unanimous first choice of the board, taking into consideration a number of different metrics, and we’re thrilled to have landed our man. His pedigree is clear and all of the feedback we received on Michael was incredibly encouraging. We’re all really excited about the period ahead of us now.”
Lee Hoos:
“This was a meticulous process that has yielded a very positive outcome — we’re really excited to have Michael on board. A lot of credit must go to our recruitment department who did a fantastic job in amassing a lot of data so that we could identify candidates who could really take this club forward. There were a number of different considerations — how individuals work with younger age groups, how they set up and how they play — playing style was a big factor for us. The DNA of the club is now firmly in place, which we’re grateful to Mark Warburton for helping to establish. Now it’s about building on that and Michael fits in very well in that respect. There is a lot to look forward to.”
Les:
"We have spoken to a number of excellent candidates, but we had to whittle them down to one and believe that we have the best individual that we spoke to in Michael. Twenty-odd candidates is a high volume of people to speak to, but this was a process driven by what we were looking for. In years gone by, we may have been contacted about speaking to certain managers, and interviewed them as a result. However, now, we identify who we’re after and won’t speak to anyone who isn’t where we need to be as a result. Michael scored really highly in terms of all the data — then it was about myself, Lee [Hoos] and the owners speaking to the final six candidates, asking our own set of questions. You have to do your investigations and speak to people who have worked with Michael or seen Michael at work. The feedback was excellent, in terms of the type of coach he is and the way he goes about what he does — how much people have enjoyed working with him."
I won't bother putting up all their multiple statements about Warburton, McClaren, Holloway, JFH, Ramsey etc. etc., which have preceded a total of 10 - TEN - permanent and stand-in managerial appointments at the club since 2015.
The fact that Hoos even uses Beale's exit to try to leverage the club's own performance in this tawdry affair by saying 'it's ok, guys, we were already onto his replacement with a shortlist' is the kind of risible own goal that makes it clear the people in charge are not fit for purpose to represent us. But when, bizarrely, there is zero professional accountability, performance analysis and proper pushback, you can say what you like and cover your sorry arses as you go.
In sum, Beale is a sorry shit - obviously. But it's clear his recruitment was clearly deeply flawed, compromised and ultimately embarrassing, and it's endemic with this hierarchy. Why on earth should anyone trust them with the next one? [Post edited 30 Nov 2022 6:54]
|  |
| |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 10:06 - Nov 30 with 6176 views | francisbowles |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 06:51 - Nov 30 by stainrods_elbow |
To remind us all, here are the self-congratulatory statements from Amit, Hoos and Les when they appointed Beale from the club website:
Amit:
“This has perhaps been the most comprehensive search that we’ve conducted during my time at the club. A lot of work went into the process — there were interviews with a number of impressive candidates. We wanted to give the process the consideration it deserves. That’s what we’ve done and we’re thrilled with the outcome in appointing Michael. He was the unanimous first choice of the board, taking into consideration a number of different metrics, and we’re thrilled to have landed our man. His pedigree is clear and all of the feedback we received on Michael was incredibly encouraging. We’re all really excited about the period ahead of us now.”
Lee Hoos:
“This was a meticulous process that has yielded a very positive outcome — we’re really excited to have Michael on board. A lot of credit must go to our recruitment department who did a fantastic job in amassing a lot of data so that we could identify candidates who could really take this club forward. There were a number of different considerations — how individuals work with younger age groups, how they set up and how they play — playing style was a big factor for us. The DNA of the club is now firmly in place, which we’re grateful to Mark Warburton for helping to establish. Now it’s about building on that and Michael fits in very well in that respect. There is a lot to look forward to.”
Les:
"We have spoken to a number of excellent candidates, but we had to whittle them down to one and believe that we have the best individual that we spoke to in Michael. Twenty-odd candidates is a high volume of people to speak to, but this was a process driven by what we were looking for. In years gone by, we may have been contacted about speaking to certain managers, and interviewed them as a result. However, now, we identify who we’re after and won’t speak to anyone who isn’t where we need to be as a result. Michael scored really highly in terms of all the data — then it was about myself, Lee [Hoos] and the owners speaking to the final six candidates, asking our own set of questions. You have to do your investigations and speak to people who have worked with Michael or seen Michael at work. The feedback was excellent, in terms of the type of coach he is and the way he goes about what he does — how much people have enjoyed working with him."
I won't bother putting up all their multiple statements about Warburton, McClaren, Holloway, JFH, Ramsey etc. etc., which have preceded a total of 10 - TEN - permanent and stand-in managerial appointments at the club since 2015.
The fact that Hoos even uses Beale's exit to try to leverage the club's own performance in this tawdry affair by saying 'it's ok, guys, we were already onto his replacement with a shortlist' is the kind of risible own goal that makes it clear the people in charge are not fit for purpose to represent us. But when, bizarrely, there is zero professional accountability, performance analysis and proper pushback, you can say what you like and cover your sorry arses as you go.
In sum, Beale is a sorry shit - obviously. But it's clear his recruitment was clearly deeply flawed, compromised and ultimately embarrassing, and it's endemic with this hierarchy. Why on earth should anyone trust them with the next one? [Post edited 30 Nov 2022 6:54]
|
WTF is wrong with what they did and said in appointing Beale? | | | |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 10:50 - Nov 30 with 6068 views | stainrods_elbow |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 10:06 - Nov 30 by francisbowles |
WTF is wrong with what they did and said in appointing Beale? |
Try re-reading my post and maybe living dangerously and reading a bit between the lines while you're there - you might think some more interesting thoughts! Or do you seriously think Hoos' statement on Beale's departure that the shortlist for his successor was already underway isn't extremely and embarassingly telling of how QPR have beeen played by him in a way that makes Mark Hughes look meek. That own goal would have Freud reaching for superlatives.
Let me spell it out for you and anyone else as I see it. If there was a release clause in Beale's contract (and we don't know for sure, unless Clive or someone else can produce a copy of it), it was clearly (i) inadequate and (ii) should never have been incorporated into the first 12-18 months at a minimum. I appreciate hindsight is 20-20, but if Beale was uppity about this during the contractual negotiation, that should have been a big red flag to everyone involved - to the extent of not proceeding with employing him. On the other hand, if there was no escape clause, the club could and should have refused permission to Wolves, Rangers and everyone else and sat down with Beale and told him he was expected to honour his contract at least till the end of the season. It's called pride, professionalism and an employer exerting their legitimate power on behalf of us poor fans. If it was then realised that Beale's heart really wasn't in it come June, they could, I suppose, terminate with a 'mutual consent' spin and explain to the fans why. But that would mean proceeding professionally, sensibly and respectfully, and this is pro football with all its muck and machiantions.
Hoos' and Les's 'exit' statements have been lamentable - thanking him for his ludicrously short spell with us, in order, in my opinion, to deflect embarrassment from themselves- embarrassment even the ickily complacent Hoos alluded to with his reference to understanding our 'frustrations' . The rallying call to get behind the players is just a cynical bit of spin to try and keep us all onside - a bit like Tony B. Liar telling the UK that, you may not agree with the Iraq invasion, but please get behind our soldiers now. It's pathetic, really, but all of a piece for me.
If you think the recruitment of Beale, knowing what we now know, doesn't smell fishy from start to finish, good luck with your credulousness. Most of it is down to his corruption, but by no means all, and the club needs to look at itself in a mirror. To repeat, I don't trust any of them to proceed responsibly now, and if I were a professional manager, there's no way I'd be looking at QPR anyway with these muppets running the show. In short, it stinks! | |
| |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 11:06 - Nov 30 with 6024 views | timeforheroes |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 10:50 - Nov 30 by stainrods_elbow |
Try re-reading my post and maybe living dangerously and reading a bit between the lines while you're there - you might think some more interesting thoughts! Or do you seriously think Hoos' statement on Beale's departure that the shortlist for his successor was already underway isn't extremely and embarassingly telling of how QPR have beeen played by him in a way that makes Mark Hughes look meek. That own goal would have Freud reaching for superlatives.
Let me spell it out for you and anyone else as I see it. If there was a release clause in Beale's contract (and we don't know for sure, unless Clive or someone else can produce a copy of it), it was clearly (i) inadequate and (ii) should never have been incorporated into the first 12-18 months at a minimum. I appreciate hindsight is 20-20, but if Beale was uppity about this during the contractual negotiation, that should have been a big red flag to everyone involved - to the extent of not proceeding with employing him. On the other hand, if there was no escape clause, the club could and should have refused permission to Wolves, Rangers and everyone else and sat down with Beale and told him he was expected to honour his contract at least till the end of the season. It's called pride, professionalism and an employer exerting their legitimate power on behalf of us poor fans. If it was then realised that Beale's heart really wasn't in it come June, they could, I suppose, terminate with a 'mutual consent' spin and explain to the fans why. But that would mean proceeding professionally, sensibly and respectfully, and this is pro football with all its muck and machiantions.
Hoos' and Les's 'exit' statements have been lamentable - thanking him for his ludicrously short spell with us, in order, in my opinion, to deflect embarrassment from themselves- embarrassment even the ickily complacent Hoos alluded to with his reference to understanding our 'frustrations' . The rallying call to get behind the players is just a cynical bit of spin to try and keep us all onside - a bit like Tony B. Liar telling the UK that, you may not agree with the Iraq invasion, but please get behind our soldiers now. It's pathetic, really, but all of a piece for me.
If you think the recruitment of Beale, knowing what we now know, doesn't smell fishy from start to finish, good luck with your credulousness. Most of it is down to his corruption, but by no means all, and the club needs to look at itself in a mirror. To repeat, I don't trust any of them to proceed responsibly now, and if I were a professional manager, there's no way I'd be looking at QPR anyway with these muppets running the show. In short, it stinks! |
There was a good article about manager release clauses on the athletic last month. Well worth a read https://theathletic.com/3736230/2022/11/01/manager-player-value-compensation?sou but consider the following point before using that particular issue as a stick to beat Hoos and Les with:
Sasha Ryazantsev is Everton’s former chief finance and commercial officer. He was also on the board of directors at Goodison until 2021 and while he believes the manager is the most important person at a club, he feels there is a “fundamental difference” between their value and that of a player.
Initially, there is the issue of reciprocity. “Clubs would love to have a release clause for a manager,” he says, “But any manager, or his agent, worth their salt would demand a reciprocal amount to be payable to him, should he be let go.
“Because it is far more likely that the club would sack the manager than him going himself, clubs prefer to keep any release clause as low as possible. Sometimes, the fee can be clearly stipulated in the contract and sometimes it has to be negotiated. If the release clause is subject to negotiation, then a good starting point would be the manager’s termination clause.
“In cases when that is not clear, it could be the remaining value of the contract, which can be quite expensive if the manager has just signed a new one.” |  | | |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 11:08 - Nov 30 with 6011 views | francisbowles |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 10:50 - Nov 30 by stainrods_elbow |
Try re-reading my post and maybe living dangerously and reading a bit between the lines while you're there - you might think some more interesting thoughts! Or do you seriously think Hoos' statement on Beale's departure that the shortlist for his successor was already underway isn't extremely and embarassingly telling of how QPR have beeen played by him in a way that makes Mark Hughes look meek. That own goal would have Freud reaching for superlatives.
Let me spell it out for you and anyone else as I see it. If there was a release clause in Beale's contract (and we don't know for sure, unless Clive or someone else can produce a copy of it), it was clearly (i) inadequate and (ii) should never have been incorporated into the first 12-18 months at a minimum. I appreciate hindsight is 20-20, but if Beale was uppity about this during the contractual negotiation, that should have been a big red flag to everyone involved - to the extent of not proceeding with employing him. On the other hand, if there was no escape clause, the club could and should have refused permission to Wolves, Rangers and everyone else and sat down with Beale and told him he was expected to honour his contract at least till the end of the season. It's called pride, professionalism and an employer exerting their legitimate power on behalf of us poor fans. If it was then realised that Beale's heart really wasn't in it come June, they could, I suppose, terminate with a 'mutual consent' spin and explain to the fans why. But that would mean proceeding professionally, sensibly and respectfully, and this is pro football with all its muck and machiantions.
Hoos' and Les's 'exit' statements have been lamentable - thanking him for his ludicrously short spell with us, in order, in my opinion, to deflect embarrassment from themselves- embarrassment even the ickily complacent Hoos alluded to with his reference to understanding our 'frustrations' . The rallying call to get behind the players is just a cynical bit of spin to try and keep us all onside - a bit like Tony B. Liar telling the UK that, you may not agree with the Iraq invasion, but please get behind our soldiers now. It's pathetic, really, but all of a piece for me.
If you think the recruitment of Beale, knowing what we now know, doesn't smell fishy from start to finish, good luck with your credulousness. Most of it is down to his corruption, but by no means all, and the club needs to look at itself in a mirror. To repeat, I don't trust any of them to proceed responsibly now, and if I were a professional manager, there's no way I'd be looking at QPR anyway with these muppets running the show. In short, it stinks! |
To state the obvious it takes two to make a contract and agree any and all terms in it. The process is negotiated and without being present we don't know what couldn't be agreed and was therefore omitted. If either party hadn't been satisfied, he wouldn't have become our head coach.
At the time of his appointment, without the benefit of hindsight, are you saying that you wouldn't and they shouldn't have hired him? | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Sir Les and Hoos on 11:10 - Nov 30 with 5987 views | BazzaInTheLoft |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 10:50 - Nov 30 by stainrods_elbow |
Try re-reading my post and maybe living dangerously and reading a bit between the lines while you're there - you might think some more interesting thoughts! Or do you seriously think Hoos' statement on Beale's departure that the shortlist for his successor was already underway isn't extremely and embarassingly telling of how QPR have beeen played by him in a way that makes Mark Hughes look meek. That own goal would have Freud reaching for superlatives.
Let me spell it out for you and anyone else as I see it. If there was a release clause in Beale's contract (and we don't know for sure, unless Clive or someone else can produce a copy of it), it was clearly (i) inadequate and (ii) should never have been incorporated into the first 12-18 months at a minimum. I appreciate hindsight is 20-20, but if Beale was uppity about this during the contractual negotiation, that should have been a big red flag to everyone involved - to the extent of not proceeding with employing him. On the other hand, if there was no escape clause, the club could and should have refused permission to Wolves, Rangers and everyone else and sat down with Beale and told him he was expected to honour his contract at least till the end of the season. It's called pride, professionalism and an employer exerting their legitimate power on behalf of us poor fans. If it was then realised that Beale's heart really wasn't in it come June, they could, I suppose, terminate with a 'mutual consent' spin and explain to the fans why. But that would mean proceeding professionally, sensibly and respectfully, and this is pro football with all its muck and machiantions.
Hoos' and Les's 'exit' statements have been lamentable - thanking him for his ludicrously short spell with us, in order, in my opinion, to deflect embarrassment from themselves- embarrassment even the ickily complacent Hoos alluded to with his reference to understanding our 'frustrations' . The rallying call to get behind the players is just a cynical bit of spin to try and keep us all onside - a bit like Tony B. Liar telling the UK that, you may not agree with the Iraq invasion, but please get behind our soldiers now. It's pathetic, really, but all of a piece for me.
If you think the recruitment of Beale, knowing what we now know, doesn't smell fishy from start to finish, good luck with your credulousness. Most of it is down to his corruption, but by no means all, and the club needs to look at itself in a mirror. To repeat, I don't trust any of them to proceed responsibly now, and if I were a professional manager, there's no way I'd be looking at QPR anyway with these muppets running the show. In short, it stinks! |
I must be clear, I am 100% behind Les and Hoos and consider them not only the best antidote to the Hughes and Redknapp years, but also the key to our future infrastructure improvements and ethos on future proofing.
So I have to ask Wegerles Stairs / Stainrod:
When you’ve fcked off Hoos and Les then what? What’s your solution? Who comes in? |  | | |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 11:14 - Nov 30 with 5994 views | w7r |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 10:50 - Nov 30 by stainrods_elbow |
Try re-reading my post and maybe living dangerously and reading a bit between the lines while you're there - you might think some more interesting thoughts! Or do you seriously think Hoos' statement on Beale's departure that the shortlist for his successor was already underway isn't extremely and embarassingly telling of how QPR have beeen played by him in a way that makes Mark Hughes look meek. That own goal would have Freud reaching for superlatives.
Let me spell it out for you and anyone else as I see it. If there was a release clause in Beale's contract (and we don't know for sure, unless Clive or someone else can produce a copy of it), it was clearly (i) inadequate and (ii) should never have been incorporated into the first 12-18 months at a minimum. I appreciate hindsight is 20-20, but if Beale was uppity about this during the contractual negotiation, that should have been a big red flag to everyone involved - to the extent of not proceeding with employing him. On the other hand, if there was no escape clause, the club could and should have refused permission to Wolves, Rangers and everyone else and sat down with Beale and told him he was expected to honour his contract at least till the end of the season. It's called pride, professionalism and an employer exerting their legitimate power on behalf of us poor fans. If it was then realised that Beale's heart really wasn't in it come June, they could, I suppose, terminate with a 'mutual consent' spin and explain to the fans why. But that would mean proceeding professionally, sensibly and respectfully, and this is pro football with all its muck and machiantions.
Hoos' and Les's 'exit' statements have been lamentable - thanking him for his ludicrously short spell with us, in order, in my opinion, to deflect embarrassment from themselves- embarrassment even the ickily complacent Hoos alluded to with his reference to understanding our 'frustrations' . The rallying call to get behind the players is just a cynical bit of spin to try and keep us all onside - a bit like Tony B. Liar telling the UK that, you may not agree with the Iraq invasion, but please get behind our soldiers now. It's pathetic, really, but all of a piece for me.
If you think the recruitment of Beale, knowing what we now know, doesn't smell fishy from start to finish, good luck with your credulousness. Most of it is down to his corruption, but by no means all, and the club needs to look at itself in a mirror. To repeat, I don't trust any of them to proceed responsibly now, and if I were a professional manager, there's no way I'd be looking at QPR anyway with these muppets running the show. In short, it stinks! |
Question for you: How do you propose they mitigate against someone like Bealshitter who is, in hindsight a consummate liar? |  | | |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 11:39 - Nov 30 with 5956 views | PinnerPaul |
Bit of a nonsense pulling up the 'Welcome' quotes about ANY manager after they have left.
Has anyone ever said,
"Welcome to Joe Bloggs our new manager, not our first choice, but one of the cheaper options available & after a few turned us down. Don't expect him to last the 3 years we have given him, but everyone else gives out 3 year contracts so we had no choice. Even if we had a transfer budget I wouldn't trust him with it. Still fingers crossed and hope for the best eh?"  | | | |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 11:41 - Nov 30 with 5944 views | LongsufferingR |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 10:50 - Nov 30 by stainrods_elbow |
Try re-reading my post and maybe living dangerously and reading a bit between the lines while you're there - you might think some more interesting thoughts! Or do you seriously think Hoos' statement on Beale's departure that the shortlist for his successor was already underway isn't extremely and embarassingly telling of how QPR have beeen played by him in a way that makes Mark Hughes look meek. That own goal would have Freud reaching for superlatives.
Let me spell it out for you and anyone else as I see it. If there was a release clause in Beale's contract (and we don't know for sure, unless Clive or someone else can produce a copy of it), it was clearly (i) inadequate and (ii) should never have been incorporated into the first 12-18 months at a minimum. I appreciate hindsight is 20-20, but if Beale was uppity about this during the contractual negotiation, that should have been a big red flag to everyone involved - to the extent of not proceeding with employing him. On the other hand, if there was no escape clause, the club could and should have refused permission to Wolves, Rangers and everyone else and sat down with Beale and told him he was expected to honour his contract at least till the end of the season. It's called pride, professionalism and an employer exerting their legitimate power on behalf of us poor fans. If it was then realised that Beale's heart really wasn't in it come June, they could, I suppose, terminate with a 'mutual consent' spin and explain to the fans why. But that would mean proceeding professionally, sensibly and respectfully, and this is pro football with all its muck and machiantions.
Hoos' and Les's 'exit' statements have been lamentable - thanking him for his ludicrously short spell with us, in order, in my opinion, to deflect embarrassment from themselves- embarrassment even the ickily complacent Hoos alluded to with his reference to understanding our 'frustrations' . The rallying call to get behind the players is just a cynical bit of spin to try and keep us all onside - a bit like Tony B. Liar telling the UK that, you may not agree with the Iraq invasion, but please get behind our soldiers now. It's pathetic, really, but all of a piece for me.
If you think the recruitment of Beale, knowing what we now know, doesn't smell fishy from start to finish, good luck with your credulousness. Most of it is down to his corruption, but by no means all, and the club needs to look at itself in a mirror. To repeat, I don't trust any of them to proceed responsibly now, and if I were a professional manager, there's no way I'd be looking at QPR anyway with these muppets running the show. In short, it stinks! |
You've said on numerous tedious posts going on and on and on about the same things that you were done with football and QPR. We all hoped that meant you were done with LFW also. Well, we're all waiting.......
I can't think of a single poster on here other than you who sees fit to belittle others and show such a condescending attitude despite having very little of any interest to say beyond your personal vendetta against Lee Hoos. There are obviously no mirrors in your house. [Post edited 30 Nov 2022 11:47]
|  | | |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 11:48 - Nov 30 with 5892 views | Phildo |
I think it is time to give Jesus Christ a go at the helm. We will be able to adulate him, call him the messiah, eventually crucify him and then resurrect him. He also can fix the water pressure in the toilets. [Post edited 30 Nov 2022 11:49]
|  | | |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 12:02 - Nov 30 with 5789 views | Wilkinswatercarrier |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 06:51 - Nov 30 by stainrods_elbow |
To remind us all, here are the self-congratulatory statements from Amit, Hoos and Les when they appointed Beale from the club website:
Amit:
“This has perhaps been the most comprehensive search that we’ve conducted during my time at the club. A lot of work went into the process — there were interviews with a number of impressive candidates. We wanted to give the process the consideration it deserves. That’s what we’ve done and we’re thrilled with the outcome in appointing Michael. He was the unanimous first choice of the board, taking into consideration a number of different metrics, and we’re thrilled to have landed our man. His pedigree is clear and all of the feedback we received on Michael was incredibly encouraging. We’re all really excited about the period ahead of us now.”
Lee Hoos:
“This was a meticulous process that has yielded a very positive outcome — we’re really excited to have Michael on board. A lot of credit must go to our recruitment department who did a fantastic job in amassing a lot of data so that we could identify candidates who could really take this club forward. There were a number of different considerations — how individuals work with younger age groups, how they set up and how they play — playing style was a big factor for us. The DNA of the club is now firmly in place, which we’re grateful to Mark Warburton for helping to establish. Now it’s about building on that and Michael fits in very well in that respect. There is a lot to look forward to.”
Les:
"We have spoken to a number of excellent candidates, but we had to whittle them down to one and believe that we have the best individual that we spoke to in Michael. Twenty-odd candidates is a high volume of people to speak to, but this was a process driven by what we were looking for. In years gone by, we may have been contacted about speaking to certain managers, and interviewed them as a result. However, now, we identify who we’re after and won’t speak to anyone who isn’t where we need to be as a result. Michael scored really highly in terms of all the data — then it was about myself, Lee [Hoos] and the owners speaking to the final six candidates, asking our own set of questions. You have to do your investigations and speak to people who have worked with Michael or seen Michael at work. The feedback was excellent, in terms of the type of coach he is and the way he goes about what he does — how much people have enjoyed working with him."
I won't bother putting up all their multiple statements about Warburton, McClaren, Holloway, JFH, Ramsey etc. etc., which have preceded a total of 10 - TEN - permanent and stand-in managerial appointments at the club since 2015.
The fact that Hoos even uses Beale's exit to try to leverage the club's own performance in this tawdry affair by saying 'it's ok, guys, we were already onto his replacement with a shortlist' is the kind of risible own goal that makes it clear the people in charge are not fit for purpose to represent us. But when, bizarrely, there is zero professional accountability, performance analysis and proper pushback, you can say what you like and cover your sorry arses as you go.
In sum, Beale is a sorry shit - obviously. But it's clear his recruitment was clearly deeply flawed, compromised and ultimately embarrassing, and it's endemic with this hierarchy. Why on earth should anyone trust them with the next one? [Post edited 30 Nov 2022 6:54]
|
Having been a Procurement Manager I can see you are just letting off steam and ranting as you're not making a lot of sense.
I cant see what the club have done wrong in this case, they interviewed, he smashed it, they got external references and character references.
Contracts are negotiated and you have to accept you won't get everything you want, but you will hopefully both be happy. That's why you negotiate. You put whatever u want it a contract, but the other party has to sign it.
He's gone, we move on. | | | |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 12:19 - Nov 30 with 5675 views | kropotkin41 |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 11:48 - Nov 30 by Phildo |
I think it is time to give Jesus Christ a go at the helm. We will be able to adulate him, call him the messiah, eventually crucify him and then resurrect him. He also can fix the water pressure in the toilets. [Post edited 30 Nov 2022 11:49]
|
Some would say you've nailed it. Presumably with him as coach, we'd be pretty good at dealing with crosses. |  |
| ‘morbid curiosity about where this is all going’ |
| |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 12:24 - Nov 30 with 5656 views | dm97 |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 10:50 - Nov 30 by stainrods_elbow |
Try re-reading my post and maybe living dangerously and reading a bit between the lines while you're there - you might think some more interesting thoughts! Or do you seriously think Hoos' statement on Beale's departure that the shortlist for his successor was already underway isn't extremely and embarassingly telling of how QPR have beeen played by him in a way that makes Mark Hughes look meek. That own goal would have Freud reaching for superlatives.
Let me spell it out for you and anyone else as I see it. If there was a release clause in Beale's contract (and we don't know for sure, unless Clive or someone else can produce a copy of it), it was clearly (i) inadequate and (ii) should never have been incorporated into the first 12-18 months at a minimum. I appreciate hindsight is 20-20, but if Beale was uppity about this during the contractual negotiation, that should have been a big red flag to everyone involved - to the extent of not proceeding with employing him. On the other hand, if there was no escape clause, the club could and should have refused permission to Wolves, Rangers and everyone else and sat down with Beale and told him he was expected to honour his contract at least till the end of the season. It's called pride, professionalism and an employer exerting their legitimate power on behalf of us poor fans. If it was then realised that Beale's heart really wasn't in it come June, they could, I suppose, terminate with a 'mutual consent' spin and explain to the fans why. But that would mean proceeding professionally, sensibly and respectfully, and this is pro football with all its muck and machiantions.
Hoos' and Les's 'exit' statements have been lamentable - thanking him for his ludicrously short spell with us, in order, in my opinion, to deflect embarrassment from themselves- embarrassment even the ickily complacent Hoos alluded to with his reference to understanding our 'frustrations' . The rallying call to get behind the players is just a cynical bit of spin to try and keep us all onside - a bit like Tony B. Liar telling the UK that, you may not agree with the Iraq invasion, but please get behind our soldiers now. It's pathetic, really, but all of a piece for me.
If you think the recruitment of Beale, knowing what we now know, doesn't smell fishy from start to finish, good luck with your credulousness. Most of it is down to his corruption, but by no means all, and the club needs to look at itself in a mirror. To repeat, I don't trust any of them to proceed responsibly now, and if I were a professional manager, there's no way I'd be looking at QPR anyway with these muppets running the show. In short, it stinks! |
If someone has to read between the lines to understand a post that long, maybe their perceptiveness isn’t the issue… |  | | |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 14:27 - Nov 30 with 5416 views | stainrods_elbow |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 11:41 - Nov 30 by LongsufferingR |
You've said on numerous tedious posts going on and on and on about the same things that you were done with football and QPR. We all hoped that meant you were done with LFW also. Well, we're all waiting.......
I can't think of a single poster on here other than you who sees fit to belittle others and show such a condescending attitude despite having very little of any interest to say beyond your personal vendetta against Lee Hoos. There are obviously no mirrors in your house. [Post edited 30 Nov 2022 11:47]
|
Ah yes, another of the lovely people on LfW who speaks for 'all' rather than just for themselves, which is all anyone can do. Next!
As for being 'condescending', try actually engaging with my arguments, which have been very detailed on recent events, rather than your internal fantasy of who I am/you need me to be to purify your own self-image.
PS Actually, I've just put up an exceedingly large and pleasingly Gothic mirror in my new abode, but I can't seem to find a reflection! | |
| |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 14:34 - Nov 30 with 5395 views | PinnerPaul |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 14:27 - Nov 30 by stainrods_elbow |
Ah yes, another of the lovely people on LfW who speaks for 'all' rather than just for themselves, which is all anyone can do. Next!
As for being 'condescending', try actually engaging with my arguments, which have been very detailed on recent events, rather than your internal fantasy of who I am/you need me to be to purify your own self-image.
PS Actually, I've just put up an exceedingly large and pleasingly Gothic mirror in my new abode, but I can't seem to find a reflection! |
Well. I'll have a go.
Ignoring my sarcasm, but aren't all clubs effusive about who they appoint, would look pretty strange otherwise no?
And as for the number of mangers we have had in x years, hardly alone, or even the worse for that are we? | | | |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 14:39 - Nov 30 with 5358 views | stainrods_elbow |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 11:41 - Nov 30 by LongsufferingR |
You've said on numerous tedious posts going on and on and on about the same things that you were done with football and QPR. We all hoped that meant you were done with LFW also. Well, we're all waiting.......
I can't think of a single poster on here other than you who sees fit to belittle others and show such a condescending attitude despite having very little of any interest to say beyond your personal vendetta against Lee Hoos. There are obviously no mirrors in your house. [Post edited 30 Nov 2022 11:47]
|
Ah yes, another of the lovely people on LfW who speaks for 'all' rather than just for themselves, which is all anyone can do. Next!
As for being 'condescending', try actually engaging with my arguments, which have been very detailed on recent events, rather than your internal fantasy of who I am/you need me to be to purify your own self-image.
PS Actually, I've just put up an exceedingly large and pleasingly Gothic mirror in my new abode, but I can't seem to find a reflection! | |
| |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 16:33 - Nov 30 with 5152 views | derbyhoop |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 14:39 - Nov 30 by stainrods_elbow |
Ah yes, another of the lovely people on LfW who speaks for 'all' rather than just for themselves, which is all anyone can do. Next!
As for being 'condescending', try actually engaging with my arguments, which have been very detailed on recent events, rather than your internal fantasy of who I am/you need me to be to purify your own self-image.
PS Actually, I've just put up an exceedingly large and pleasingly Gothic mirror in my new abode, but I can't seem to find a reflection! |
If you can't find anything positive to say, why say anything at all.
Beale seemed a cracking appointment at the time, after a rigorous selection process. Not just to the board, but to many fans as well. I don't think many saw him jumping ship so soon.
A factor in the growing professionalism at QPR is that there is an element of long term planning. The sort that identifies Paal and Richards is similar for keeping tabs on players, coaches and managers.
It is similar to the WBA approach when Ashworth was involved. |  |
| Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the Earth all one’s lifetime. (Mark Twain)
Find me on twitter @derbyhoop |
| |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 16:58 - Nov 30 with 5068 views | francisbowles |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 14:39 - Nov 30 by stainrods_elbow |
Ah yes, another of the lovely people on LfW who speaks for 'all' rather than just for themselves, which is all anyone can do. Next!
As for being 'condescending', try actually engaging with my arguments, which have been very detailed on recent events, rather than your internal fantasy of who I am/you need me to be to purify your own self-image.
PS Actually, I've just put up an exceedingly large and pleasingly Gothic mirror in my new abode, but I can't seem to find a reflection! |
Funny that you only come back on the attack with some posts but don't answer questions that are put to you in others.
Try rereading some of the posts above that you seem to have ignored. | | | |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 17:05 - Nov 30 with 5026 views | danehoop |
Just looked at this thread when I wasn't logged on and remembered why I have the WUM Elbow on ignore. There is something seriously off with his particular hate for the current board and Hoos in particular. It's like an even less coherent Scott Jones (for those that remember that far back). |  |
| Never knowingly understood |
| |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 17:13 - Nov 30 with 4997 views | Wegerles_Stairs |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 11:10 - Nov 30 by BazzaInTheLoft |
I must be clear, I am 100% behind Les and Hoos and consider them not only the best antidote to the Hughes and Redknapp years, but also the key to our future infrastructure improvements and ethos on future proofing.
So I have to ask Wegerles Stairs / Stainrod:
When you’ve fcked off Hoos and Les then what? What’s your solution? Who comes in? |
I'll bite. My issue is less with Hoos, more with our DoF. My solution would be appointing someone suitably qualified who might manage to get us into at least the play-offs within eight years. Obviously that won't happen as he was appointed by Uncle Tony as a sop to the fans, which is a strategy that is clearly still working. [Post edited 30 Nov 2022 17:16]
| | | |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 17:20 - Nov 30 with 4946 views | stainrods_elbow |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 11:14 - Nov 30 by w7r |
Question for you: How do you propose they mitigate against someone like Bealshitter who is, in hindsight a consummate liar? |
I've said Beale queered everyone's pitch (no offence to the gay community), but also to claim the club's 'due diligence' was unimpeacahble is clearly silly. If Amit, Hoos, Les and the Board really feel there's no stock to take on their disastrous recruitment of Beale, they should stand aside. | |
| |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 17:24 - Nov 30 with 4936 views | stainrods_elbow |
| Sir Les and Hoos on 14:34 - Nov 30 by PinnerPaul |
Well. I'll have a go.
Ignoring my sarcasm, but aren't all clubs effusive about who they appoint, would look pretty strange otherwise no?
And as for the number of mangers we have had in x years, hardly alone, or even the worse for that are we? |
My point was not really about Beale's lovely (misguided) welcome, to addo to all othe others extended to Hair Island, JFH, Holloway etc. etc, but wouldn't it have been refreshing for the club to have put on an exit statment condemining MB's ethics (and thereby standing up for the club's)?
(I know - I'm living in a rose-tinted 70s football Avalon.) | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
