If you could go back in time and choose again...

[Skillz]

Peter Robinson groomed Parry for a number of years if I remember correctly. It should have been obvious he wasn't good enough. I don't have the level of insight into the club to criticize Parry and lay the blame on him (or part of), but it's been a fact that we've been totally outplayed off the pitch by Man Utd and Arsenal. With our potential, that's totally outrageous.

I might be wrong here but is it possible he was hamstrung by Moores? Moores comes across as a total fan and the fabric of the club was very important to him. Therefore did he struggle to embrace the commercial aspect in preference to maintaining standards he felt represented the fans wishes.

I am in Australia and therefore a long way away so I could be very wrong, but if I am right I will never criticise anyone for feeling that way regardless of whether it was the right decision at the time.

[Guest]

I might be wrong here but is it possible he was hamstrung by Moores? Moores comes across as a total fan and the fabric of the club was very important to him. Therefore did he struggle to embrace the commercial aspect in preference to maintaining standards he felt represented the fans wishes.

I am in Australia and therefore a long way away so I could be very wrong, but if I am right I will never criticise anyone for feeling that way regardless of whether it was the right decision at the time.

Moores loved the club but didn't have the nous to run it, possibly. He did fairly well though and he always wanted the best for this club.

[Skillz]

Moores loved the club but didn't have the nous to run it, possibly. He did fairly well though and he always wanted the best for this club.

That's what I think but did he hold Parry back? I am referring to the marketing and selling of the club here. I don't expect you to know the answer but I do think it is possible.

I also find it hard to believe he didn't pass on transfer information. I would be more likely to believe Parry allowed that to be released to take the heat off Rafa and G&T.

Maybe I am just stupid and Parry is stupider

[Guest]

That's what I think but did he hold Parry back? I am referring to the marketing and selling of the club here. I don't expect you to know the answer but I do think it is possible.

I also find it hard to believe he didn't pass on transfer information. I would be more likely to believe Parry allowed that to be released to take the heat off Rafa and G&T.

Maybe I am just stupid and Parry is stupider

Parry as Chief Exec should have had the foresight to implement changes for us to challenge. I think he's been in this club since 1996 or something like that, but the gap off and on the field has widened.

We had the money to build a successful team, remember us breaking the transfer record for Stan Collymore and paying over the odds for Phil Babb.

Not blaming Parry, but I think that it's a number of things, add to that Parry's lack of foresight which lead us to sulk like that.

Investment was a last resort to try to compete and to erase the deficiencies of those still there.

[Lecter]

Investment was a last resort to try to compete and to erase the deficiencies of those still there.

Might have been far less painful just sacking Parry

[Guest]

Might have been far less painful just sacking Parry

Could he sack himself though ?

It seems he had as much power.

[Lecter]

Could he sack himself though ?

Hed probably forget to do it

[DaveC]

zzzzzzzzzzzzz.

[DaveC]

Parry as Chief Exec should have had the foresight to implement changes for us to challenge. I think he's been in this club since 1996 or something like that, but the gap off and on the field has widened.

We had the money to build a successful team, remember us breaking the transfer record for Stan Collymore and paying over the odds for Phil Babb.

Not blaming Parry, but I think that it's a number of things, add to that Parry's lack of foresight which lead us to sulk like that.

Investment was a last resort to try to compete and to erase the deficiencies of those still there.

Why bother?

You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

Stick to the football.

[Guest]

Why bother?

You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

Stick to the football.

So, care to enlighten me, oh lord.

Did I portray myself as having ideas on the matter ? It's a discussion of sorts.

[Guest]

Are you Rick Parry ?

[sonsofthedesert]

Saying this wasnt a Glazer style takeover that there would be no debt on the club etc.. which appears to have changed somewhat with their new financial package

I have asked the following questiona few times but no one answers so here goes again. The possible new £500m debt is used to prove the ground will cost £500m to use RS4 even says in his stadium thread that it will cost that, Hicks has said it will cost that and the papers also say it. Then we have people like yourself using it a proof that the money they used to buy the club is included in it. It can not be both, if there is a £500m loan then the ground is all of the cost or it costs around £300m and the other £200m approx. is consolidated debt, which is it?

[Dan]

Why bother?

You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

Stick to the football.

Welcome to est. Rick

[Dhav]

zzzzzzzzzzzzz.

Why bother?

You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

Stick to the football.

Welcome to Est and all that but can I just say that I don't understand posts like these. If people want to partake in an intelligent debate about Parry , investment, DIC etc why not let them to it? If it's not a topic you're interested then can I suggest you don't open the thread? No one knows the ins and outs of the club, and as such we all speculate about things but if anything this adds to the debate - it doesn't mean we don't know anything or have no idea what we're talking about.

[DaveC]

Intelligent debate, my arse.

You're no better than tabloid hacks.