Independent Leyton Orient Forum

North Stand Dave wrote: ↑Wed Nov 20, 2019 5:51 pm Totally agree Huxley & as for you tuffers DO ONE.

Who are you , King of the F*ckin Gerbils ?

gshaw wrote: ↑Thu Nov 21, 2019 8:05 pm

Disoriented wrote: ↑Thu Nov 21, 2019 8:02 pm

gshaw wrote: ↑Thu Nov 21, 2019 7:58 pm

So what's the excuse for them being equally lazy and unfit under Embleton? Too pally with the players to give them the kick up the behind required?



Ermmm apart from Boco, Mooney, Caprice, Elokobi you mean. In the past JE dropped the deadwood who didn't perform, however that seems to be unfashionable now.

It’s as if incompetence is encouraged.

I think what we've got now is plenty of good cops but no bad cop to keep people in line and performing to the required levels. That's the side effect of the keeping it in-house model. In fact seems to be heading down the opposite route to Travis' "challenge culture"

It is why companies, at least in my line of work, actively discourage any relationship between staff. They also do not allow two people from the same family to be employed. Human nature to be protectionist anyway. It just gets worse when you have family involved. Don’t get me wrong, I thought fletcher came across as a complete plonker but Leyton Orient interviewed him and didn’t think so. It wasn’t results because 4-5 games is ridiculous to judge and results was barely mentioned when he was fired anyway. So what was it. All roads lead to certain people up to and including Ling feeling threatened by the way he was acting in those few weeks. They already have all those stipulations on existing staff must stay etc and perhaps Fletcher did the nodding dog in the interview and once hired immediately said he wanted different people. He also wanted to bin some senior players pissing them off. Asking for money may have rubbed Travis and Teague up the wrong way as well. Seems like he walked in there and within a few weeks had nothing but enemies. Thing is, any other manager worth his salt will have exactly the same problems and it’s more likely than not Justin was a one off, on and off the pitch. Did Ling, Embleton, Webb get us out of the national league or was it Justin, Bonne and Koroma. It was the later (admittedly Ling hired some of those, as well as a large number of duds). Fletcher played in the premier league and was employed by Howe. Our current staff played lower league football or for the dog and duck. We are close to the bottom of the lowest division. I think they need to show some humility. It is a disaster in any line of work if the people who are involved in a poorly performing business are related or very close because the fear for any human being is that it is not another that is the problem but them. If there is one other and lots of them they can always blame the other. Things get bad very quickly.

Red_Army wrote: ↑Thu Nov 21, 2019 4:34 pm

DuvB wrote: ↑Thu Nov 21, 2019 4:09 pm I have no sympathy for Fletcher. He patently was a loner and did not have the interpersonal skills to takeover or make and develop a team. If he had those skills, he wouldnt have fallen out with his staff and the squad. Did you notice that Ross was not wearing his Justin baseball cap v. Maldon but it was back v. Scunthorpe - rumour is he was told not to wear it by Fletcher - I can quite believe this given what we now know about him.

That is pure speculation that you have no basis for.

Is it not possible that he was made to seem like a loner because the existing staff closed ranks?

He was described as insular at the Q&A so no, is not pure speculation by me

DuvB wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 9:32 am

Red_Army wrote: ↑Thu Nov 21, 2019 4:34 pm

DuvB wrote: ↑Thu Nov 21, 2019 4:09 pm I have no sympathy for Fletcher. He patently was a loner and did not have the interpersonal skills to takeover or make and develop a team. If he had those skills, he wouldnt have fallen out with his staff and the squad. Did you notice that Ross was not wearing his Justin baseball cap v. Maldon but it was back v. Scunthorpe - rumour is he was told not to wear it by Fletcher - I can quite believe this given what we now know about him.

That is pure speculation that you have no basis for.

Is it not possible that he was made to seem like a loner because the existing staff closed ranks?

He was described as insular at the Q&A so no, is not pure speculation by me

By people who it would be in their interests to describe him as this way. It works both ways. If he was a different style of person, the staff and players need to adapt to that too.

UpminsterO wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 7:06 am Look I don't know how good he may of been but as others have said he was referred to as the outstanding candidate

That is what has made the club - Ling and Porter particularly look rather stupid in the past week or two. They went to such lengths to say what a great pick they'd made so to slate him as they then did in the Q&A shows a real failure in judgement.

Seems we won't be looking for a manager and going back to the old days of keeping the appointment cheap and in-house. Embleton does have that feeling of Brush Mk2 about him but after the shambles recently can't imagine many managers wanting to apply with the restrictions they'd have to work under.

DuvB wrote: ↑Thu Nov 21, 2019 4:09 pm Did you notice that Ross was not wearing his Justin baseball cap v. Maldon but it was back v. Scunthorpe - rumour is he was told not to wear it by Fletcher - I can quite believe this given what we now know about him.

Some really good point UO. I am concerned about RE and his relationship to ML and the words that ML is currently using, its worrying to me. The board really needs to evaluate ML’s contribution right now, his handling of the CF saga, his public offering at the Q&A and more importantly his decision making ability.

Lots of questions and answers required which the fans need to know before judgement can be made. Too many rumours flying around that need to be answered.
1) Did CF bring Teddy Sheringham in to help out in training.If so he was on a hiding to nothing with the board.
2) Did he alienate himself from the players and staff. He did not appear to have the character to win over the players
3) Berore you implicate your tactics he should have got to know the players and their capabilities. He had a winning team when he took over. Did he single out players and tell them what he thought of them. Too early to do that
4) Did he give ML a list of players he wanted to get rid of. If he did then this was too early in his appointment to do so
5) Was he the cheapest option in the list of interviews.
Clearly this whole issue has given the club a negative view if we go for another manager.It gives the club the view of being very cliche .By giving RE the job he clearly said he does not want is the only alternative left to allow the dust to settle. We all hope this goes well . Results are crucial over the next few weeks if we are going to come out of this with any creditability

gshaw wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 12:40 pm

UpminsterO wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 7:06 am Look I don't know how good he may of been but as others have said he was referred to as the outstanding candidate

Seems we won't be looking for a manager and going back to the old days of keeping the appointment cheap and in-house. Embleton does have that feeling of Brush Mk2 about him but after the shambles recently can't imagine many managers wanting to apply with the restrictions they'd have to work under.

Or indeed face up to “ the strong culture” amongst the existing staff and players?

Some excellent points above, UpminsterO, and when the whole sage is broken down onto a business level it's quite concerning.

No doubt Travis and Teague aren't complacent, as this little venture is no doubt costing them a fortune.

However Ling appeared flippant at the Q&A, and at times it appeared the whole thing was a laughing matter. I'm sure it isn't, and wasn't, a laughing matter for Fletcher, who now finds himself out of work, but Ling seems happy to have a good giggle at his expense.
Hardly befitting behaviour of a 'Director'.
Ditto the swearing. If you can't face an audience for a few minutes without resorting to profanities, you're not really of the calibre for the position.
Don't get me wrong, I like Ling, and he's done a good job since 2017, but this whole affair goes down as a black mark against him imho.

UpminsterO wrote: ↑Sat Nov 23, 2019 10:08 am It would be fantastic if the club put on record the precise make up of their requirements to defined "culture" attributes so we as fans can appreciate their business vision that uses this generic word so extensively

Tbh UO I get the impression that the definition of “ culture” as used by the club over the last 10 days is a bit of a moveable feast and is being used to cover a multitude of issues.

redintheface wrote: ↑Sat Nov 23, 2019 10:04 am

gshaw wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 12:40 pm

UpminsterO wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 7:06 am Look I don't know how good he may of been but as others have said he was referred to as the outstanding candidate

Seems we won't be looking for a manager and going back to the old days of keeping the appointment cheap and in-house. Embleton does have that feeling of Brush Mk2 about him but after the shambles recently can't imagine many managers wanting to apply with the restrictions they'd have to work under.

Or indeed face up to “ the strong culture” amongst the existing staff and players?

Indeed, as a manager coming in you know in advance certain players see themselves as untouchable and it appears have the DoF's backing. Basically it's a closed shop.

The other real reason behind it (imo) is purely down to money. Even before the CF appointment all doesn't seem well on the budget front. The solution Ling & co want comes out very cheap...

- Embleton "interim" manager... free
- minimal signings in January as said interim manager is too closely in with those who need dropping (Clay, Alabi etc.)
- won't complain if we sell any assets to cover whatever the Fletcher saga has cost us

Basically all it comes down to now is finishing 23rd rather than 24th. Welcome back to little Leyton Orient, that's the "culture" now in a nutshell sadly.

gshaw wrote: ↑Sat Nov 23, 2019 10:50 am

redintheface wrote: ↑Sat Nov 23, 2019 10:04 am

gshaw wrote: ↑Fri Nov 22, 2019 12:40 pm

Seems we won't be looking for a manager and going back to the old days of keeping the appointment cheap and in-house. Embleton does have that feeling of Brush Mk2 about him but after the shambles recently can't imagine many managers wanting to apply with the restrictions they'd have to work under.

Or indeed face up to “ the strong culture” amongst the existing staff and players?

Indeed, as a manager coming in you know in advance certain players see themselves as untouchable and it appears have the DoF's backing. Basically it's a closed shop.

The other real reason behind it (imo) is purely down to money. Even before the CF appointment all doesn't seem well on the budget front. The solution Ling & co want comes out very cheap...

- Embleton "interim" manager... free
- minimal signings in January as said interim manager is too closely in with those who need dropping (Clay, Alabi etc.)
- won't complain if we sell any assets to cover whatever the Fletcher saga has cost us

Basically all it comes down to now is finishing 23rd rather than 24th. Welcome back to little Leyton Orient, that's the "culture" now in a nutshell sadly.

Budgetary issues I can understand and appreciate. The owners can only allot a certain amount of money to keep things going and that’s always been the way at the O’s and lower league clubs in general. It’s the other stuff that’s apparently in the background that I find disconcerting.

redintheface wrote: ↑Sat Nov 23, 2019 10:55 am

gshaw wrote: ↑Sat Nov 23, 2019 10:50 am

redintheface wrote: ↑Sat Nov 23, 2019 10:04 am

Or indeed face up to “ the strong culture” amongst the existing staff and players?

Indeed, as a manager coming in you know in advance certain players see themselves as untouchable and it appears have the DoF's backing. Basically it's a closed shop.

The other real reason behind it (imo) is purely down to money. Even before the CF appointment all doesn't seem well on the budget front. The solution Ling & co want comes out very cheap...

- Embleton "interim" manager... free
- minimal signings in January as said interim manager is too closely in with those who need dropping (Clay, Alabi etc.)
- won't complain if we sell any assets to cover whatever the Fletcher saga has cost us

Basically all it comes down to now is finishing 23rd rather than 24th. Welcome back to little Leyton Orient, that's the "culture" now in a nutshell sadly.

Budgetary issues I can understand and appreciate. The owners can only allot a certain amount of money to keep things going and that’s always been the way at the O’s and lower league clubs in general. It’s the other stuff that’s apparently in the background that I find disconcerting.

Given the amount of income this year particularly I think we should be watching the finances more closely than some are.

Is spending all the Koroma money on a bloated academy staff wise when we sell our prospects off cheap without even touching first team now? (Koroma and Happe have been the exceptions rather than the rule). Can we ever compete when all the money Macklin brings in commercially goes straight back out to Hearn via increased rent costs etc.

The player / coach power and way it intertwines with the the DoF is concerning. As I posted elsewhere it's an echo chamber of the same people saying the same ideas and that isn't healthy moving forward.