This messageboard is for Adults 18 years and over.
If you are under this age please leave the board.

Luton Outlaws accepts no responsibility for the content of this messageboard nor any other content posted on it.

Luton Outlaws disclaims all liability for such content to the fullest extent permitted by law.

What you read on here is 100% conjecture, fiction, lies, bullshit and complete bollocks. If you want to be taken seriously, you are in the wrong place.

Any potentially libellous comments that might jeopardise the future of this messageboard will therefore be deleted, and the person posting them will receive a ban.Enjoy.

    Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy

    Posted by Madpig on 11/11/2022, 12:58:21

    All over now
    https://www.lutontoday.co.uk/sport/football/luton-town/luton-ceo-confirms-hatters-are-prepared-to-take-a-manager-from-another-club-to-replace-jones-3914986

      Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy

      Posted by bbb on 11/11/2022, 13:59:31, in reply to "Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy"

      Good.

      Fukk everyone else.

      We're luton town, we'll do what we want.

        Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy

        Posted by WSV on 11/11/2022, 13:20:44, in reply to "Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy"

        Show me where that was a "policy".
        Rather than 'preferred not to' or 'only at the right time'?

        One thing that pees me off in life is people being misquoted and that being used in a context that's the complete opposite of what was meant. It's a Sun journalist trait.

        Mick Harford says, "The players are really pleased Nathan has gone on to the Premier League"
        Journo reports his quote, "The players are really pleased Nathan has gone..."

          Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy

          Posted by Madpig on 11/11/2022, 15:35:56, in reply to "Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy"

          Picky...dear God picky. OK , preference, no poaching preference . Is that ok for you? Not pissed off any more. Sorry if I spoiled your day 😑

            Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy

            Posted by Garstang Hatter on 11/11/2022, 14:01:16, in reply to "Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy"

            I'll hold my hands up, I did say the other day that I thought GS had said something along these lines when NJ left first time around, although I couldn't remember exactly what he said. I did then remember that Sir John Still joined us from Dagenham though, which kind of blew that out of the water! So as you suggest, what he said must have been a bit more nuanced than that.

              Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy

              Posted by Mahatma Gander on 11/11/2022, 15:04:14, in reply to "Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy"

              I think Sweet's biggest beef when Jones left for Stoke was that it was during the transfer window. He described that as being a little "unethical" and suggested a rule should be made against it.

                Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy

                Posted by Maah001 on 11/11/2022, 14:21:33, in reply to "Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy"

                Probably more along the lines that we wouldn't be underhand about it in the way Stoke were, but would do it properly like Southampton did. (and only when we're approaching a long international break due to a winter world cup)

                  Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy

                  Posted by Garstang Hatter on 11/11/2022, 14:27:42, in reply to "Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy"

                  Although there is no break for Leagues One & Two, so that doesn't apply to some of the names being suggested. But as you say, the overall idea must have been to do with the manner of it rather than just the timing - although I wish I could remember the actual quote! Not that it matters, it just bugs me that I can't remember, that's all.

                    Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy

                    Posted by bbb on 11/11/2022, 14:25:40, in reply to "Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy"

                    Like Southampton did? You're deluded if you think Jones wasn't tapped up before they sacked their manager.

                      Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy

                      Posted by crumpsall on 11/11/2022, 14:30:33, in reply to "Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy"

                      A quick Google reveals that they'd openly said (in February) that they had identified their chosen successor for and with Ralph Wotsit for when he retired in a couple of years time. His departure came a lot earlier of course but I'd guess they meant NJ. Whether he was 'tapped up' a while ago we'll not know, but news gets round doesn't it...

                        Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy

                        Posted by ITK on 11/11/2022, 16:25:45, in reply to "Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy"

                        It was post playoff/training camp period and the cause of our new seasons initial disruption.

                          Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy

                          Posted by bbb on 11/11/2022, 14:44:43, in reply to "Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy"

                          I imagine it was done as professionally as it gets in football. I'm not having that Jones' first personal contact with them wasn't until the Wednesday though!

                          Anyway, it's done, I for one am glad the Nathan Jones show is over. He did a great job but we move on

                            Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy

                            Posted by Teacher on 11/11/2022, 20:25:02, in reply to "Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy"

                            You won't care, but I agree.

                              Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy

                              Posted by crumpsall on 11/11/2022, 14:53:20, in reply to "Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy"

                              Agreed and amen to that.

                              Have you clocked the changes to bus services from MK?

                                Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy

                                Posted by bbb on 11/11/2022, 14:54:57, in reply to "Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy"

                                No mate.

                                I best take a look eh?!

                                  Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy

                                  Posted by crumpsall on 11/11/2022, 15:17:03, in reply to "Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy"

                                  Yep! There's no 99 any more. It's now route MK1 and goes to the airport first. Different times too. But it's okayish overall.

                                  Bloody public transport, what a pain!

                                    Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy

                                    Posted by Malc on 11/11/2022, 15:30:23, in reply to "Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy"

                                    Itís Bedford to MK via the airport so has the potential to be late! It does have a 5 min wait at the airport presumably to compensate for delays. We shall see!

                                      Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy

                                      Posted by crumpsall on 11/11/2022, 15:39:39, in reply to "Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy"

                                      If it's anything like the trains have been it'll be chaotic! Travel has been an (expensive) pain in the arse of late.

                                      The shuttle bus from The Glebe to the ground on Tuesday was good though!

                                      Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy

                                      Posted by Nearly a Genius on 11/11/2022, 15:27:40, in reply to "Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy"

                                      Some of the F70s go to Luton from MK via Leighton Buzzard (stopping at the station there) but a) I'm not sure of the times, and b) they take forever.

                                        Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy

                                        Posted by crumpsall on 11/11/2022, 15:29:38, in reply to "Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy"

                                        Ta - they do, but as you say take a lot longer!

                        Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy

                        Posted by Osmosis on 11/11/2022, 14:00:52, in reply to "Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy"

                        You are too defensive Vinny and come across like you are spoiling for a fight a lot of the time when itís clear the tone people have posted. So much genuine discussion gets closed down by people like you on here.

                          Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy

                          Posted by Herve Baquet on 11/11/2022, 14:15:17, in reply to "Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy"

                          Bollocks.

                          People's "genuine discussion" is usually saying something completely over the top and without any factual basis, and then getting sensitive when people call them out on it.

                          If you're going to write bullshit on the internet, don't get upset when someone calls you an idiot.

                            Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy

                            Posted by Like this? on 11/11/2022, 14:32:11, in reply to "Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy"

                            Posted by Osmosis on 26/9/2022, 12:16:54, in reply to "Shorting the pound"
                            Who does the chancellor have a close relationship with, who bets against the pound? (Odbey) he should be hung as a traitor to the British people.

                            Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy

                            Posted by crumpsall on 11/11/2022, 14:07:44, in reply to "Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy"

                            Calling out inaccuracies is not 'closing down genuine discussion' though is it Osmosis? If we're going to discuss stuff it's essential to get the facts right (or we'll end up like the kids playground that is parliament at Question Time!)

                            WSV obviously has a connection with the club and to my knowledge has never posted anything inaccurate about their actions or policies, whereas some posters (not that one) seem to go out of their way to misrepresent and claim opinion as fact. They do much more damage to discussion I'd say.

                            Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy

                            Posted by WHOSHer on 11/11/2022, 13:53:33, in reply to "Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy"

                            Or maybe something *like* "poaching managers currently employed by another club is not our way of doing things" ?? From memory, but I may be wrong.

                            He certainly seems to be watering down certain things that the club once seemed to take a moral stance on - accepting money for promoting gambling being the other one.

                              Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy

                              Posted by crumpsall on 11/11/2022, 13:57:46, in reply to "Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy"

                              You are wrong. And making a perfectly legal approach with decent timing is not 'poaching' is it?

                              As for: accepting money for promoting gambling being the other one. - care to expand?

                              If you're referring the EFL sponsors no club has any choice

                              Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy

                              Posted by Godders on 11/11/2022, 13:30:23, in reply to "Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy"

                              Bang on!

                                Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy

                                Posted by crumpsall on 11/11/2022, 13:50:10, in reply to "Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy"

                                +1

                                If there's room for misinterpretation or misrepresentation people will find it. Not necessarily meant in this case, but it often is. Look at all the 'no information about Power Court' and 'not being honest about when they knew' guff.

                                It has ever been the way.

                              Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy

                              Posted by Madpig on 11/11/2022, 13:01:37, in reply to "Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy"

                              One category we're probably not looking at is those managers who've got a lot of experience, have a certain way of doing things and have maybe been around the block a little bit. That's not our profile," said Sweet.

                              Narrowing it down now

                                Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy

                                Posted by Andy Cappucino on 11/11/2022, 13:13:16, in reply to "Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy"

                                So we are going for someone with no experience and who doesn't have their own way of doing things?

                                  Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy

                                  Posted by hatters on 11/11/2022, 13:15:03, in reply to "Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy"

                                  Basically, yes, I guess the thinking is that it would be easier to incorporate them into how we do things.

                                    Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy

                                    Posted by Godders on 11/11/2022, 13:33:13, in reply to "Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy"

                                    Quite simply that rules out journeymen managers who have limited success pretty much everywhere but remain on the merry-go-round and cost a fortune.

                                    It rules out the likes of Steve Bruce, Sean Dyche, Neil Warnock, etc.

                                      Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy

                                      Posted by WH on 11/11/2022, 13:44:13, in reply to "Re: Sweet's ' no poaching ' ipolicy"

                                      How is Sean Dyche a journeyman manager with limited success?

                            [ Luton Outlaws - The Avenue of Evil ]

                            DISCLAIMER

                            The posts made on this board are the opinions of the people posting them and do not always reflect the opinion of the board administration.

                            Luton Outlaws is a totally independent forum, paid for and run by supporters of Luton Town and is not associated with Luton Town Football Club, lutontown.co.uk, lutonfc.com, Loyal Luton Supporters Club, Trust in Luton, Luton Town Supporters Club or anyone else for that matter and is declared a 100% Tombola Free Zone.

                              Luton Outlaws accepts no responsibility for the content of this messageboard nor any other content posted on it. Luton Outlaws disclaims all liability for such content to the fullest extent permitted by law.

                              What you read on here is 100% conjecture, fiction, lies, bullshit and complete bollocks. If you want to be taken seriously, you are in the wrong place. Enjoy. Admin contact - dilligaf.outlaws@gmail.com.

                            eXTReMe Tracker