I've also heard from a good source it is our CEO.
(I justcan't get over he is the CEO !)

Gaskells problem isn't Rush, Brown, Simmons, Potter or the boogeyman. Gaskells problem is himself.

heard some interesting stories to back that from a former ceo

Wish some one would spill the beans , I'm one nosy bugger at the min ,

Cool, PM me with them. I love a good gossip.

That's the party line anyway.

I'd want Gaskell back, but I don't think he will return. Howarth's done an alright job for us, but I wouldn't want him to stay any longer than the end of the season.

I never want to see the gazelle Gaskell in a Saints shirt again why! Because he thinks he is a world beater in the Garry Schofield mould who is not in the team for defence. When have you ever heard players break ranks about their own. Senior players have questioned his preparation. The Coaching staff don't want him. In the normal world of work this means you move on. I stood in the rain at Odsal and looked at him and Foster and just wished they were not in a Saints starting 13 ever again. Yes we can go on about Perry and Lance but they are just passing through. These other lads are what you build a team around. Percival I can see it happening Lomax like Roby it is in place, Walmsley it will be in place. Gaskell and Foster lets be proud we brought them through and remember Rush didn't throw them out as youngsters it was they that did not kick on. Rush is a senior manager at the club that is an organisational decision which I respect and wish him well.

Christ what are you Rush's Love Child!!!

If the problem was Rush then Gaskells problems would not be continuing into this season. Rush is not in charge of first team affairs, that's Brown. If Gaskell was playing well then he'd be in, personal problems with Rush or not.

I'm sure I have seen reports recently referring Rush in conncetion with player recruitment. Both Brown and Rush were mentioned in relation to Walmsley, for example.

Also, do you remember when our previous CEO left? Saints put out a press release containing a statement from McManus who reorganised his senior management team following the CEO's departure stating that he would have a more 'hands on' approach from then on. Included in that statement was the point that the coach would now be directly accountable to him, McManus. The implication was that the coach was previously accountable to the CEO. I think it would be safe to surmise that now we have a new CEO, the coach will be accountable to him rather than to McManus.

I would expect signings to be made by consensus, that is not uncommon. Whilst the coach may be accountable to the CEO, I would be surprised if the CEO is involved in the day to day running of the team.

Clubs are large organisations and there will always be some people who don't get on, it would be more surprising if everyone got on. If Gaskell had been performing to a decent standard, he would still be here, players who perform are always given leeway for other issues. Brown picked him at the start of the season, but he didn't take his chance on the pitch. Given the state of the squad, there must be far more than just a dislike of Gaskell by Rush for him to be binned off like he has been.