Pearson Sacked

[Frank to be]

Yes, a reasonable person sits back, gathers as much information as possible and sees that we've just sacked our most successful manager in 10, 15 years with no expanded, precise explanation given. That after helping the club maintain its position within the Premier League in its first season upon promotion and after immediately re-instating him earlier this year when he had already been shown the door.

A sacking that raises more questions than it answers.

There's en eerie silence surrounding the club ever since; a decision that isn't popular with a large part of the fanbase.

A scenario that screams for concerns.

The sacking clearly isn't justified in footballing terms, nobody is saying that it was, but all that does is point towards an event occurring that earned Pearson instant dismissal.

Everyone is silent, throughout the club, not even a whisper of discontent. Obviously non-disclosure agreements are in place, but if people within the club were as outrages by this as some fans seem to be, we'd know about it by now. That nobody has resigned or spoken out through a source, or that the LMA isn't involved strongly suggests that everyone who knows what happened knows that it was unavoidable.

[The Doctor]

I don't know if you're deliberately refusing to understand the concept of an unavoidable sacking? If he has done something worthy of instant dismissal, as seems to be the case, then it's worthy of instant dismissal.

No, I'm not a King Power employee, nor am I an NPFC fan, I'm a Leicester City fan.

 

Why does it seem to be the case? You're just speculating that to defend what is increasingly looking like an utterly stupid decision.

 

No-one here is an NPFC fan you utter gimp, we're all Leicester fans, and can see that the best thing for the club is progression, which is what Pearson brought. We've moved ourselves backwards with this sacking, that the board refuse to give any details makes it look indefensible to be quite honest. I supported pearson because I support leicester, and I didn't want him sacked for the same ****ing reason.

[BigMicky]

Why does it seem to be the case? You're just speculating that to defend what is increasingly looking like an utterly stupid decision.

No-one here is an NPFC fan you utter gimp, we're all Leicester fans, and can see that the best thing for the club is progression, which is what Pearson brought. We've moved ourselves backwards with this sacking, that the board refuse to give any details makes it look indefensible to be quite honest. I supported pearson because I support leicester, and I didn't want him sacked for the same ****ing reason.

Sorry, I've missed this, what was Pearson sacked for??

[Frank to be]

You're making just as bigger assumptions. The fact that Pearson is considering legal action would suggest that he didn't do anything 'sackable.' If that were the case the legal teams would have advised his client not to comment in the media, which is why we have heard nothing.

I don't believe the story about him taking legal action. That doesn't make sense either. His pay off will have been far more generous than anything he could have got through compensation.

[Frank to be]

Why does it seem to be the case? You're just speculating that to defend what is increasingly looking like an utterly stupid decision.

No-one here is an NPFC fan you utter gimp, we're all Leicester fans, and can see that the best thing for the club is progression, which is what Pearson brought. We've moved ourselves backwards with this sacking, that the board refuse to give any details makes it look indefensible to be quite honest. I supported pearson because I support leicester, and I didn't want him sacked for the same ****ing reason.

You understand how non-disclosure agreements work, don't you? It means the board can't give any more details about what happened. These are usually put in place to protect reputations, in this case it could well be Pearson's reputation that is being protected.

Again, you bring footballing reasons into it when it's clear they don't belong. Pearson hasn't been sacked for footballing reasons so they are irrelevant.

[Babylon]

I don't believe the story about him taking legal action. That doesn't make sense either. His pay off will have been far more generous than anything he could have got through compensation.

If he's done something so bad that it warrants instant dismissal (as you would suggest), they wouldn't need to be paying him off. Certainly not the full amount anyway, so he certainly might need to take legal action if he believes the dismissal wasn't warranted.

[Frank to be]

If he's done something so bad that it warrants instant dismissal (as you would suggest), they wouldn't need to be paying him off. Certainly not the full amount anyway, so he certainly might need to take legal action if he believes the dismissal wasn't warranted.

Yeah but they would have no doubt reached an agreement on his severance package. Can't see the owners wanting the publicity of a court case even if they would likely win. Better for them to pay Pearson off and be done with it.

[Mark_w]

Yeah but they would have no doubt reached an agreement on his severance package. Can't see the owners wanting the publicity of a court case even if they would likely win. Better for them to pay Pearson off and be done with it.

 

If Pearson has done something worthy of the sack, surely the publicity of a court case would stop everyone thinking they're incompetent morons?

[Babylon]

Yeah but they would have no doubt reached an agreement on his severance package. Can't see the owners wanting the publicity of a court case even if they would likely win. Better for them to pay Pearson off and be done with it.

These things can drag on for months without being public, plenty of managers have had to sit on "gardening leave" whilst going through compensation battles. One side claiming gross misconduct, the other denying it. Until it actually goes to court (could take ages) there is nothing that will be disclosed, so you have brinkmanship between the two sides.

[MC Prussian]

Could Pearson actually be legally re-instated as manager? As absurd as it may sound, but technically, that's possible, right?

[Sly]

Am I the only surprised that the LMA haven't released a statement on the Pearson departure?

Also, does anyone have access to the PFA jobsite? Is the First Team Coach / Manager job advertised?

[Frank to be]

If Pearson has done something worthy of the sack, surely the publicity of a court case would stop everyone thinking they're incompetent morons?

Court cases drag everyone through the mud regardless of who wins. If the board and Pearson could reach an agreement then they would, and with money barely an object they surely would have.

[The Doctor]

Sorry, I've missed this, what was Pearson sacked for??

 

No-one has a clue, the only thing said by the club that the working relationship was no longer viable.

 

You understand how non-disclosure agreements work, don't you? It means the board can't give any more details about what happened. These are usually put in place to protect reputations, in this case it could well be Pearson's reputation that is being protected.

Again, you bring footballing reasons into it when it's clear they don't belong. Pearson hasn't been sacked for footballing reasons so they are irrelevant.

 

Is it though? Where have they said it was for non-footballing reasons? All they've said is a difference of perspective, working relationship no longer viable. That could easily be for footballing reasons (difference of opinion in transfer policy for instance). 

[Frank to be]

No-one has a clue, the only thing said by the club that the working relationship was no longer viable.

Is it though? Where have they said it was for non-footballing reasons? All they've said is a difference of perspective, working relationship no longer viable. That could easily be for footballing reasons (difference of opinion in transfer policy for instance).

I think it's very unlikely. If it was for footballing reasons they would have had a replacement lined up, it's becoming clear they they haven't.

Also I'd expect more leakage from within the club expressing disappointment with the decision if that was the case. We haven't heard a whisper of discontent.

The non-disclosure agreement that it looks like everyone is under also suggests something more than just a change of direction, goings on are usually kept secret for a reason.

If the owners wanted a change of footballing direction I think they would have said so. They wouldn't really have anything to lose because they will have known full well their statement was ambiguous and they would face a lot of criticism anyway, which they have.

Everything points to it being non footballing reasons.

[Fox Ulike]

I don't know if you're deliberately refusing to understand the concept of an unavoidable sacking? If he has done something worthy of instant dismissal, as seems to be the case, then it's worthy of instant dismissal.

No, I'm not a King Power employee, nor am I an NPFC fan, I'm a Leicester City fan.

 

 

What do you mean by "as seems to be the case"? If you know something that we don't, then spill.

 

Your argument is circular. It states that Pearson has been sacked for an offence that warrants dismissal. Therefore, his sacking was justified.

 

The first reason I think you’re from King Power is that your whole perspective is from their side. (The other reason is that it’s NFFC, not NPFC. Now why would you get that wrong??)

 

If you were an LCFC fan you’d be truly pissed off about Pearson’s dismissal, not defending those who sacked him. There’s no real mystery here. Pearson  has been sacked for refusing to get ‘on message’ and publically support the sacking of his son.

 

In football terms this refusal is meaningless. Pearson is the football manager. He’s not in charge of PR, he’s not there to support the corporate hierarchy and mouth support for the decisions of the CEO, as other Senior Executives would be.

 

Pearson doesn’t agree with the sacking and he’s told you (ie Top J) and your Dad what he thinks of it. You have done what you would have done to a ‘suit n tie’ Senior Exec, and told him that he has to get behind the corporate message or get a new job.

 

Now, I don’t agree with Pearson cos I think his son’s sacking was totally justified. But what is distasteful is that Pearson has been sacked for not toeing the corporate line. Why should he have to agree? What happened to letting a man have his own opinions rather than vapidly repeating what he's been told from those upstairs? Why can’t the Thais just let him get on with the job? The answer, because it’s King Power making the decisions according to a corporate Code of Practice which they have applied to his behaviour, not a football code.

 

And we, (ie proper LCFC fans) could not give a flying fvck about the Corporate side of King Power. We want a successful footy team, we don’t care about any temporary tarnishing of the KP brand.  Pearson is a football man, not a KP exec, and he should be treated accordingly.

 

The real shock though is that I now feel that King Power’s and the fans interests are once again aligned. We both need Pearson back. The fans need him, because we want a successful football team, and KP need him, because the current uncertainty and lack of suitable alternatives places the King Power brand at risk of being associated with failure next season.  KP could become a laughing stock by association with our self-inflicted implosion.

 

None of us want that. So, if you can, tell Top that we ALL need him back.

[Frank to be]

None of your assumptions make any sense for reasons I've already explained.

NPFC. Nigel Pearson Football Club.

[hackneyfox]

'If you were an LCFC fan you’d be truly pissed off about Pearson’s dismissal, not defending those who sacked him. There’s no real mystery here. Pearson has been sacked for refusing to get ‘on message’ and publically support the sacking of his son.'

A few assumptions there. Plenty of Leicester fans are shocked that he's gone but aren't necessarily pissed off. Get the right manager and I'll be a happy Leicester fan.

[Finn Claw II]

NP was more than just a coach, he was the public face of LCFC. It is important that his moral compass and that of the club is broadly aligned. His son might be the straw but it isn't why he was sacked.

It could be as simple as it being harder and harder to agree on decisions and the board getting tired of it. It might be something disrespectful. He might have done nothing. We don't know and we won't know for a long while whether the board's decision was correct.

Personally it looks like a terrible footballing decision as I think NP was improving as a manager.

[The Doctor]

I think it's very unlikely. If it was for footballing reasons they would have had a replacement lined up, it's becoming clear they they haven't.

Also I'd expect more leakage from within the club expressing disappointment with the decision if that was the case. We haven't heard a whisper of discontent.

The non-disclosure agreement that it looks like everyone is under also suggests something more than just a change of direction, goings on are usually kept secret for a reason.

If the owners wanted a change of footballing direction I think they would have said so. They wouldn't really have anything to lose because they will have known full well their statement was ambiguous and they would face a lot of criticism anyway, which they have.

Everything points to it being non footballing reasons.

 

Precisely, you think - you know as little as we do as to the reasons about it; and not necessarily, it being for football reasons doesn't preclude a wait. Sven was sacked for footballing reasons, still took 3 weeks to replace him.

 

Unless of course the club has been placed on lockdown with regards to social media...

 

Any evidence of an NDA or is this more idle speculation?

 

No, it doesn't point to it being non-footballing reasons, you're just reading it that was because it suits you better. It doesn't point either way.

 

 

 

None of your assumptions make any sense for reasons I've already explained.

NPFC. Nigel Pearson Football Club.

Yours make no more sense than his; and you could seriously do with growing up - I may not agree with Fox Ulike on much, but that post is relatively solid - the on field performance is always more important than our reputation in the media and with opposing fans. Millwall always used to sing "No-one likes us, we don't care"; a perfectly fine attitude to have - being everyones second team doesn't win trophies, winning matches wins trophies: from a footballing perspective (which should be the perspective we take given we're a football club), this sacking makes not one jot of sense. 

 

And, I'll say again; this NPFC thing is absolutely shit-for-brains retarded. The people who are opposed to this decision are not fanatical supporters of Pearson who cared more about him than the club; they supported Pearson because he was the one competent manager we've had since the turn of the bloody millennium. Pull your head out of your arse, while it may be tempting to see if you can survive by breathing your own farts as preparation for when this all goes belly-up, you're being wilfully moronic to ignore the points people are making and going "hurr durr nigel pearson fc" makes you look like the sort of pathetic kid who grew up on a lead paint based diet.

[Julian Joachim Jr Shabadoo]

That's the second time today I've clicked +1 and a post has gone from 0 to 2, both times it's been Mark. Great minds and that

[Fox Ulike]

None of your assumptions make any sense for reasons I've already explained.

NPFC. Nigel Pearson Football Club.

 

Jeez I have seriously over-rated you!!

 

What you have "already explained" is that "If he has done something worthy of instant dismissal... then it's worthy of instant dismissal."  Deep.

 

Can't believe I thought you worked for KP. If you do it's cleaning the ashtrays

 

'If you were an LCFC fan you’d be truly pissed off about Pearson’s dismissal, not defending those who sacked him. There’s no real mystery here. Pearson has been sacked for refusing to get ‘on message’ and publically support the sacking of his son.'

A few assumptions there. Plenty of Leicester fans are shocked that he's gone but aren't necessarily pissed off. Get the right manager and I'll be a happy Leicester fan.

 

Yeah I'm really just saying that I object to King Power corporate making key football decisions just to better promote the KP brand. Doesn't matter that it's Pearson. Imagine them deciding to sack your favourite player because he thought that Adam Smith was harshly treated. Same thing. 

[Frank to be]

Precisely, you think - you know as little as we do as to the reasons about it; and not necessarily, it being for football reasons doesn't preclude a wait. Sven was sacked for footballing reasons, still took 3 weeks to replace him.

Unless of course the club has been placed on lockdown with regards to social media...

Any evidence of an NDA or is this more idle speculation?

No, it doesn't point to it being non-footballing reasons, you're just reading it that was because it suits you better. It doesn't point either way.

Yours make no more sense than his; and you could seriously do with growing up - I may not agree with Fox Ulike on much, but that post is relatively solid - the on field performance is always more important than our reputation in the media and with opposing fans. Millwall always used to sing "No-one likes us, we don't care"; a perfectly fine attitude to have - being everyones second team doesn't win trophies, winning matches wins trophies: from a footballing perspective (which should be the perspective we take given we're a football club), this sacking makes not one jot of sense.

And, I'll say again; this NPFC thing is absolutely shit-for-brains retarded. The people who are opposed to this decision are not fanatical supporters of Pearson who cared more about him than the club; they supported Pearson because he was the one competent manager we've had since the turn of the bloody millennium. Pull your head out of your arse, while it may be tempting to see if you can survive by breathing your own farts as preparation for when this all goes belly-up, you're being wilfully moronic to ignore the points people are making and going "hurr durr nigel pearson fc" makes you look like the sort of pathetic kid who grew up on a lead paint based diet.

You talk about me needing to grow up and then insult me and talk about me breathing my own farts. Yeah ok kiddo.

I understand how and why others may interpret the situation differently. I've fully acknowledged my interpretation is exactly that, an interpretation. Yet you lot seem perfectly happy lambasting the owners based on mere speculation. Seems like you're the one who needs to grow up here friend.

[The Doctor]

You talk about me needing to grow up and then insult me and talk about me breathing my own farts. Yeah ok kiddo.

 

I insult people who deserve to be insulted. Anyone who talks about "it's LCFC not NPFC" or anything similar is well deserving of the scorn and derision in that post.

[Tielemans63]

Pretty sure Frank To Be is the new identity of Seenitall who rarely posts now after getting just about every prediction he ever made hopelessly wrong and generally making a bit of a tit of himself with his rantings about Pearson- think I'd do the same in the circumstances.

[Frank to be]

I insult people who deserve to be insulted. Anyone who talks about "it's LCFC not NPFC" or anything similar is well deserving of the scorn and derision in that post.

You're entitled to your view. I think NPFC is a neat way of grouping together those who have contrived to assume the absolute worst of the current Leicester City owners and the absolute best of former manager Nigel Pearson from every angle even when heavily contradictory and however unlikely. You can disagree and call me names if you want. Show us all how mature you are, go on.