I know, I’m behind the loop in commenting on this story, but it’s been for a reason, as I’ve been thinking about why we’ve sacked him at this particular time.
And make no mistake, this wasn’t “mutual agreement”. He was sacked.
Or was he?
Almstadt going on holiday to Dubai didn’t surprise me in the slightest.
Indeed, if things were a bit quiet at work and I was feeling “flush” money-wise, I’d be looking to go there myself.
But what astounded me was the fact that apparently the club didn’t even know he was going and were supposedly “stunned”.
Shocked… And stunned… Very stunned (anyone else remember the Rutles?)
So the obvious answer to a major official who just waltzes off on holiday without a minute’s notice in our direst hour of need, is to sack him.
What a load of rubbish and I don’t believe that for one second.
My money says he knew what was coming, because he’d been told and just thought “sod it” and did one. Either that or he was told to go; deal done.
His going on holiday was just too convenient for my liking.
The concern here is, I’ll bet he gets paid off big time and I dread to think what he’ll have cost the club, given that it seems he did next to nothing, apart from making sure he filled his plates with food down at Bodymoor heath each day.
Anyway, the more important point is that Tom Fox recommended him.
And if you believe that Almstadt was so useless, surely he has to go too, for his atrocious judgement?
Well, yes and no for me, although I lean to the yes side of things.
While Fox on the face of it, seems to be a poor CEO who was appointed above his level, it does seem he’s good at bringing the money in.
So, yes, he needs to be sacked as CEO. But maybe we should retain him as the revenue producer?
But then it depends on where you think the revenue will end up, doesn’t it?
So that leaves us with Paddy Riley, who I suspect will carry the can for the summer recruitment.
I’d guess he’s already been given notice and will probably see out the season.
That’s maybe somewhat unfair, if he wasn’t the major player.
But I’m not bothered.
Stats never worked for me, so it has to be a case of good riddance to a rubbish idea.
Which takes me back to Fox, who was probably the instigator of the whole thing.
The point there being that it’s rarely those higher up who get the sack, which is why I think he’ll get to stay.
All that said, we don’t really care do we?
We’re going down and want the lot of them out.
Which leaves the much more interesting subject of protests.
With the “out the door on 74” protest having proven a joke (imo), there’s now a much better proposition of “banners out on 74”.
This is much more like sucking the right tit and will be way more noticeable, given that the Chelsea game will be shown live on BT.
My opinion says there is much to commend this type of protest, especially after the despicable way those who bought the banners out last week were treated by the Gestapo’s henchmen.
Even the staid (read boring) AVST basically came out and said there is nothing wrong with a banner saying “Lerner out”, as it does not contravene any of the rules.
So sneak them into the ground, however you can.
The stewards will have to kick out half the support if enough banners are displayed and the fans stand their ground.
Although, hands up, I won’t be there myself.
The way the club treats it’s fans, let alone the rubbish on the pitch is just another reason I don’t attend anymore, as I’ve previously attested (wow, was that really 2010 when I got thrown out for holding an unlit cigarette?).
Get those banners out in force, if you’re asking me, as it’s the best those who turn up can probably do without teaming up with the Newcastle fans at our penultimate game and invading the pitch in a joint protest at the owners and the state of the game.
Not that I’m suggesting that at all.
I couldn’t possibly suggest a first, in two Premier league clubs coming together in a pitch invasion could I?
It’d be seen as “incitement”.
And it’s all just my opinion, anyway.
