He doesn't (hopefully). I'm afraid I don't buy the "Gunny is a City legend" stuff. He was

part of a very good City side, but not the best part. Then he was part of a very poor City side, got relegated, and was part of a team that got worse and worse. That wasn't his fault, but he wasn't the greatest keeper City's had - that was Keelan.

He's had horrible family problems, for sure, which he's dealt with with great courage and dignity. That makes him a great person and family man, but not a City legend. He's spent years on the periphery of the Club, not contributing massively, just helping out where required. NONE OF THAT MAKES HIM FIT FOR MANAGING OUR CLUB. Only a Board that's either too lazy, too weak or too naive to try to understand what is actually required to manage the entire footballing side of a Football Club would have appointed him.

And you can't say "it's not his fault". He wanted the job, he pitched for it a number of times, and he wants to keep it now. I may be cycnical, but why wouldn't he? There's no penalty for failure, other than a huge pay-off and a short spell of vitriol from the fans. It's a way better deal than he'd get elsewhere. It's not ALL his fault, for sure, but he's part of the problem.

Posted By: Higher Wrather, May 4, 11:21:46