The trouble is that it would have to be more than one or two defeats to stimulate change

it'd have to be a string of s**t performances and results and even then there'd be no guarantee the board would a) act, b) hire a manager who'd be more successful.

It's quite clear to me that even if anyone doesn't want Adams (and let's face it, no one in their right mind would've said he was the best option at the time) the most logical thing to do is hope we keep winning because us contining to lose has many other ramifications that make the incoming manager's job even harder, such as losing players to other teams, loss of confidence etc etc

Posted By: Worzel Scrimmage, Jan 2, 19:22:43