demportdave":lywqs4s5 said:"Evidence on the pitch" as you call it is the only thing that matters. The rest of your rant about Sheridan eating pies etc. is irrelevant nonsense bordering on the paranoid. There would little or no interest or criticism of anything regarding Sheridan if he had achieved what he had hoped to do, get us promoted.Forest of Dean Green":lywqs4s5 said:demportdave":lywqs4s5 said:What do you mean by evidence?Forest of Dean Green":lywqs4s5 said:Deacster":lywqs4s5 said:Interesting points especially regarding the manager but then again they are mates and Sheridan has signed him twice so no real surprise.
So he knows him and his qualities as a manager much better than you or i or any of the posters on here who pontificate on Sheridan's qualities without a shred of evidence. Maybe Branno has a point?
I hope it's not based on Sheridan's performance as a Manager in the 2 most important games for years affecting Argyle; that was pretty damning evidence of poor team selection, poor tactics and in particular, a shambolic defence conceding 5 goals in 2 games from set plays. Wycombe also scored against us from a corner earlier in the season.
Surely a good Manager would have sorted that out on the training ground.
But then again, what do we fans know. None of us would have thought to have started the second leg with the team that ended the first leg so well... Or perhaps maybe we would have.
Ultimately, the judgement of any Manager is based on what he achieves with the available resources.
The 'evidence' are the results and league position surely?
This forum has been a catalogue of speculation this year. Evidence on the pitch is one thing. But Sheridan's home arrangements, his travel to and from the North, and therefore his commitment to the team and players has been like a broken record. Yet we have Branno and McCormick saying he's a decent boss and there does not seem to be a bundle of dressing room discontent. So why would we not listen to Branston, or take his view seriously? Because it dies not fit into the cosy fan driven narrative that Sheridan is a waste of space, spends half his life up country eating pies, and and is a dour bloke who couldn't motivate the team. But no. Let's not listen to people who may actually know a fact or two.
But when you don't achieve your aims - and the aim of most Argyle fans - you will inevitably attract speculation as to why you have failed, that is the nature of football. And before you or anyone else jumps in, reaching the play-offs was not the end goal; that was Promotion and Sheridan himself has said as much.
Paranoid rant? Are you winding me up? I appear to be the only one here saying that perhaps, just perhaps, Branston is making a comment from the perspective of someone who has worked with Sheridan and might, although you would think it was barely convceivable, have a view on Sheridan that is better informed than fans who think that a) he's a mate/former player of Sheridan's and therefore we should ignore his view and b) he's just looking to cosy up to get a job at the club. I don't know what definition of paranoid you are working with, but if it now means 'give a guy who might know a bit more than you or I a fair shout' then guilty. But it appears we don't want to disrupt the received wisdom that has been created about Sheridan and his motivations on these boards.