Matt Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 Also perhaps i'm just a cynical fucker, or looking for something to moan, adding 2 + 2 and coming up with 5 but no press conference announcing Ranieri, how often do clubs announce a manager without a press conference? I can't think of it happening too often, I think it's quite unusual and extraordinary infact. Now I understand the owners flew him out to Austria to 'get to work straight away', meet the players, e.t.c, that is all right, all well and good, but at the same time (Considering NP is apparently looking into legal action) does anyone think that was simply convenient for the owners, a nice excuse to use? So that they didn't have to have a press conference, they didn't have to face the media and face awkward questions, digging for answers for the sacking of NP? (Because the questions would have been asked, regardless of whether it was to announce the man or not). Maybe i'm barking up the wrong tree but it stinks abit to me, do they have something to hide? I'm suspicious for one. Like I said above though for the majority the owners have come out looking the bad guys in this whole situation and it will be hanging over them, a big blot of their copybook (One of not many admittedly, but a big one) and conspiracy theories, stories and rumours will continue to keep coming out if we don't get answers - even more so if we don't get off to a good start.
Fox92 Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 Inckley, if I had an arsehole working for me I would look for any reason to sack them. Don't want to get sacked? Don't be an arsehole. Even if he gained you success? If you go with your logic I'm sure Mourinho would have been sacked as soon as he walked through the door...
smudger63 Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 No, but if we found out, we could probably one way or another move on, this will be hanging over the owners head for a long time I think because they look like the bad guys in this (In most people's opinion) and the fans want answers. If we have a bad start, god help them. They don`t look the bad guys from where i`m sitting, in fact it`s obvious that Pearson has brought this on himself! Do you really think that after sticking by him during the two worst runs in the clubs history, and with all the off the field stuff that went with him last season, that they would suddenly get rid of him for no reason! They would also have been fully aware that it wouldn`t be a popular decision, both with fans, and within the football media world, and that they would be slated, and yet, they still obviously felt that they couldn`t work with him anymore, and had to get rid. Nigel Pearson is no longer the manager of Leicester City, FFS get over it, and get behind the football club, rather than a man that was not bigger than Leicester City, but just an employee of the club. The football world moves on, our football club moves on, and no doubt Nigel Pearson will move on, all it needs now, is for some of our fans to get over it and move on!
Wymsey Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 You know this how exactly? http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/Nigel-Pearson-considering-taking-legal-action/story-26821997-detail/story.html
DEMANN Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 Even if he gained you success? If you go with your logic I'm sure Mourinho would have been sacked as soon as he walked through the door... Yes...If you could no longer maintain a working relationship with them...If Chelsea felt that way about Mourinho, then he'd be gone too, regardless of success...I like Pearson...but he's not indispensable, is he?...I hope not anyway.
Matt Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 They don`t look the bad guys from where i`m sitting, in fact it`s obvious that Pearson has brought this on himself! Do you really think that after sticking by him during the two worst runs in the clubs history, and with all the off the field stuff that went with him last season, that they would suddenly get rid of him for no reason! They would also have been fully aware that it wouldn`t be a popular decision, both with fans, and within the football media world, and that they would be slated, and yet, they still obviously felt that they couldn`t work with him anymore, and had to get rid. Nigel Pearson is no longer the manager of Leicester City, FFS get over it, and get behind the football club, rather than a man that was not bigger than Leicester City, but just an employee of the club. The football world moves on, our football club moves on, and no doubt Nigel Pearson will move on, all it needs now, is for some of our fans to get over it and move on! Like I said in most people's opinions. Obviously you're not one of the most, that's fine, you're welcome to your own opinions. Ok so they stuck by him during the two worst runs in the clubs history, and with all the off field stuff, I applaud them for that, but i'll raise you, They've got rid of him 3 times, got him back twice aswell, but I think it's quite clear they crave a big name to promote the club, on three occasion's they've done this now, twice they've failed (The 3rd time remains to be seen, hopefully this won't be failure though I have my suspicions) Sousa (Champions League winner), Sven and now Ranieri. I would get behind the decision if I felt it was the right decision, a good one, one for the club to move forward but i'm not too sure it is, it all remains to be seen and as always hope i'll be proved wrong and will be the first to admit it if I am to be proved wrong.
smudger63 Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 Also perhaps i'm just a cynical fucker, or looking for something to moan, adding 2 + 2 and coming up with 5 but no press conference announcing Ranieri, how often do clubs announce a manager without a press conference? I can't think of it happening too often, I think it's quite unusual and extraordinary infact. Now I understand the owners flew him out to Austria to 'get to work straight away', meet the players, e.t.c, that is all right, all well and good, but at the same time (Considering NP is apparently looking into legal action) does anyone think that was simply convenient for the owners, a nice excuse to use? So that they didn't have to have a press conference, they didn't have to face the media and face awkward questions, digging for answers for the sacking of NP? (Because the questions would have been asked, regardless of whether it was to announce the man or not). Maybe i'm barking up the wrong tree but it stinks abit to me, do they have something to hide? I'm suspicious for one. Like I said above though for the majority the owners have come out looking the bad guys in this whole situation and it will be hanging over them, a big blot of their copybook (One of not many admittedly, but a big one) and conspiracy theories, stories and rumours will continue to keep coming out if we don't get answers - even more so if we don't get off to a good start. You answered your own question. Of course they were going to fly him straight out to Austria to meet up with the players, i wouldn`t have expected anything else. I`m sure when they get back to this country you will have your press conference.
Matt Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 You answered your own question. Of course they were going to fly him straight out to Austria to meet up with the players, i wouldn`t have expected anything else. I`m sure when they get back to this country you will have your press conference. With the owners included and present or just Ranieri in a standard managers press conference? As for the other stuff you picked up on, The owners flew him out, could they have not announced him and done a press conference yesterday morning/mid-day then flew out? Or even flew out this morning? They've fucked about for so long finding a new manager i'm not sure how much 24 hours is gonna halt the situation in getting straight to work or meeting the players.
hackneyfox Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 Also perhaps i'm just a cynical fucker, or looking for something to moan, adding 2 + 2 and coming up with 5 but no press conference announcing Ranieri, how often do clubs announce a manager without a press conference? I can't think of it happening too often, I think it's quite unusual and extraordinary infact. Now I understand the owners flew him out to Austria to 'get to work straight away', meet the players, e.t.c, that is all right, all well and good, but at the same time (Considering NP is apparently looking into legal action) does anyone think that was simply convenient for the owners, a nice excuse to use? So that they didn't have to have a press conference, they didn't have to face the media and face awkward questions, digging for answers for the sacking of NP? (Because the questions would have been asked, regardless of whether it was to announce the man or not). Maybe i'm barking up the wrong tree but it stinks abit to me, do they have something to hide? I'm suspicious for one. Like I said above though for the majority the owners have come out looking the bad guys in this whole situation and it will be hanging over them, a big blot of their copybook (One of not many admittedly, but a big one) and conspiracy theories, stories and rumours will continue to keep coming out if we don't get answers - even more so if we don't get off to a good start. That's the 3rd time I've seen you mention Ranieri not being introduced at a press conference because the owners are running scared. I think we've got the point. Where does this info that NFP is considering legal action come from, I keep asking but I'm yet to receive an answer. It's a majority on here that think the owners are in the wrong, no Leicester fan that I know personally is blaming the owners, most think NFP probably brought it on himself, they base this on his general demeanour.
Webbo Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/Nigel-Pearson-considering-taking-legal-action/story-26821997-detail/story.html Leicester City are understood to have still to agree a settlement figure with sacked manager Nigel Pearson, with reports he is considering taking legal action over his dismissal. Pearson was sacked on Tuesday after the club said 'fundamental differences in perspective' exist between the two. The reason for the sacking is believed to be Pearson's defence of his son, James, following the scandal over the three development squad players who filmed themselves in an orgy with Thai girls while on a goodwill tour of the club's owners' homeland. In the leaked video, one of them appeared to use racist language and the controversy sparked outrage within the Thai media, who called for all three to be sacked immediately. Funny how many people are prepared to believe the first bit but not the second even though they come from the same source.
Webbo Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 Are you referring to me in particular, Webbo? Not particularly.
smudger63 Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 Like I said in most people's opinions. Obviously you're not one of the most, that's fine, you're welcome to your own opinions. Ok so they stuck by him during the two worst runs in the clubs history, and with all the off field stuff, I applaud them for that, but i'll raise you, They've got rid of him 3 times, got him back twice aswell, but I think it's quite clear they crave a big name to promote the club, on three occasion's they've done this now, twice they've failed (The 3rd time remains to be seen, hopefully this won't be failure though I have my suspicions) Sousa (Champions League winner), Sven and now Ranieri. I would get behind the decision if I felt it was the right decision, a good one, one for the club to move forward but i'm not too sure it is, it all remains to be seen and as always hope i'll be proved wrong and will be the first to admit it if I am to be proved wrong. Well you say in most peoples opinion, but you don`t know that it`s most people do you, maybe most of the people you know, just as most of the people i know thought that Pearson had obviously brought it on himself. First time Pearson went, he left us, supposedly (so only hearsay obviously)because he didn`t get on with the then chief exec Lee Hoos, and Mandaric was the owner, at that time, not the Thais. I know there is a suggestion that the Thais were pulling the strings, but knowing the kind of man Pearson is, do you really think he would have come back here to work for them, if he felt they were responsible for him moving on the first time, because i don`t. Also, the fact that we clearly never had another manager lined up when they sacked Pearson, suggests to me that either they are crap at running a buisness, which clearly they`re not, or that the decision to sack Pearson was made in the haste of something pushing them into finally pulling the trigger.
fox_favourite Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 I think this thread needs to be closed we could debate this until the cows come home. I was a massive fan of Nige and was devastated when he left. But we now have Ranieri and its time to move on. The truth will come out one day, but for now, use your energy to support the new manager and prepare for the new season. Its not gonna be dull!!
dylanlegend Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 Surely every manager that gets sacked takes 'legal action' to get their compo (just ask 'our Claudio'). Whatever the reason for sacking when a person is in a contract leads to 'legal action' and a nice bitta compo. I wouldn't read to much into that.
hackneyfox Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/Nigel-Pearson-considering-taking-legal-action/story-26821997-detail/story.html It just mentions reports. It also mentions that he was probably sacked for defending his son,. Strange how some believe one and not the other. Oops, Webbo beat me to it.
BoyJones Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 I think this thread needs to be closed we could debate this until the cows come home. I was a massive fan of Nige and was devastated when he left. But we now have Ranieri and its time to move on. The truth will come out one day, but for now, use your energy to support the new manager and prepare for the new season. Its not gonna be dull!! Most sensible post of the day!
inckley fox Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 If that was the case then he should have resigned, not kick up and force the owners to sack him. If he had I would have supported him. So let's get this straight. If he'd been forced to sign a player and resigned you'd have backed him, but if he said he thought it was a bad idea and got fired for speaking his mind, you wouldn't? I thought your whole argument was based on professional standards, and surely the professional thing to do is raise your concerns in the appropriate manner. Be they the firing of your son or the signing of a player. But you'd prefer a manager to resign at first warning and drag the club's dirty laundry through the media, and you consider that to be more professional. Or am I missing something? Honestly, your argument was one hell of a reach already, this just takes it to the next level for me. Unless, of course, that turn of phrase you use here - 'kick up and force the owners to sack him' - is critical. Because if it is then it proves you are still assuming precisely what you want to assume, with no evidence to back your opinions up, and that your argument is an entire waste of everyone's time because it's based purely on your imagination.
inckley fox Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 I think this thread needs to be closed we could debate this until the cows come home. I was a massive fan of Nige and was devastated when he left. But we now have Ranieri and its time to move on. The truth will come out one day, but for now, use your energy to support the new manager and prepare for the new season. Its not gonna be dull!! Surely the idea of a forum is to debate something until the cows come home! And it's an issue which is going to crop up again and again and again until it's established that either his sacking was unavoidable, that the owners forced the issue, or that it was in the best long-term interests of the club anyway. What's the point in opening up new threads about the same matter every week, until it's resolved a year or so down the line, when we've already got a perfectly good one here?
inckley fox Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 It just mentions reports. It also mentions that he was probably sacked for defending his son,. Strange how some believe one and not the other. Oops, Webbo beat me to it. If they sacked him purely because he defended his son then that would be a horrendous reflection on their professional practice. I'm perfectly happy to believe that, at some point, he said 'look, is there another way round this?' Or, maybe, 'look, you guys could and should have done more to avoid this yourselves'. I would be appalled if he were sacked for either of those stances. It would be illegal for a start. On the other hand maybe he kicked up one hell of a fuss, in which case he'd have been fired for gross misconduct. And he wasn't.
hackneyfox Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 Inckley, Can't see whether you answered my question yesterday. Were you calling for NFP to leave before the final few games of last season?
Webbo Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 So let's get this straight. If he'd been forced to sign a player and resigned you'd have backed him, but if he said he thought it was a bad idea and got fired for speaking his mind, you wouldn't? I thought your whole argument was based on professional standards, and surely the professional thing to do is raise your concerns in the appropriate manner. Be they the firing of your son or the signing of a player. But you'd prefer a manager to resign at first warning and drag the club's dirty laundry through the media, and you consider that to be more professional. Or am I missing something? Honestly, your argument was one hell of a reach already, this just takes it to the next level for me. Unless, of course, that turn of phrase you use here - 'kick up and force the owners to sack him' - is critical. Because if it is then it proves you are still assuming precisely what you want to assume, with no evidence to back your opinions up, and that your argument is an entire waste of everyone's time because it's based purely on your imagination. The transfer policy would have been agreed with the board sometime in May. It was obviously something Pearson could live with as we signed 3 players while he was still here. If he wasn't happy the onus was on him to resign and tell us why. If he was unhappy with the policy but decided to stay and be obstructive for spite then he was acting like an arsehole and wouldn't be deserving of respect.
hackneyfox Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 If they sacked him purely because he defended his son then that would be a horrendous reflection on their professional practice. I'm perfectly happy to believe that, at some point, he said 'look, is there another way round this?' Or, maybe, 'look, you guys could and should have done more to avoid this yourselves'. I would be appalled if he were sacked for either of those stances. It would be illegal for a start. On the other hand maybe he kicked up one hell of a fuss, in which case he'd have been fired for gross misconduct. And he wasn't. Perhaps they were appreciative of his getting us promoted and finally managing to keep us up so decided not to give the reason as 'gross misconduct'. We will or won't find out eventually, paragraph after paragraph of people's opinions (and that is all they are as nobody knows anything) is starting to get a tad boring. You don't have a clue as to whether or how he defended his son but are happy to assume the owners are wrong. You then give 2 spurious scenarios and state they are illegal. You don't have a clue, it really is time to take a deep breath and move on until we know more (which I doubt we ever will).
inckley fox Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 Even if he gained you success? If you go with your logic I'm sure Mourinho would have been sacked as soon as he walked through the door... Exactly what I thought. Assuming that they've accrued their wealth by fair and competitive means, you'd have thought they'd have learned the age-old lesson that somebody who makes you loads of money is more important than someone who behaves him or herself impeccably. It's surprising to see how many of these wonderful businessmen who turn up in football and seem to forget that. Perhaps a person's wealth isn't a reasonable reflection of their intelligence and worth to society after all.
hackneyfox Posted 14 July 2015 Posted 14 July 2015 You have a lot more patience than me Webbo, I doff my hat to you.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.