Pearson on 5live now

[Corky]

See that the scum have gone and done an article with the headline "Ranieri was lucky to inherit my team - Pearson".

 

And yet people question his attitude towards the media

 

Absolutely on cue. Sort of bollocks that could be brought up in a press conference. Same as earlier in the season when Pearson said similarly about what a good job Ranieri was doing and the headline suggested he took all the credit for it.

 

Thankfully, Football365 pull this type of shit apart every day.

[inckley fox]

What a ridiculous post.

 

Why are you trying to justify your ridiculous hatred of Pearson... You'll not find many, if not any, PL club that would want any manager with just one year experience in the Premier League.

 

I'm not so sure. If you look at managers appointed this season, it's true that they have either 1+ years of PL experience (Allardyce, Ranieri, McClaren), or multiple years of experience in overseas leagues (Bilic, Flores, Hiddink), but if you look at last season the picture is less clear:

 

Of ten managerial changes last season, six had experience in England. One of them had never managed in the top flight (Irvine), one had only ever experienced failure at the highest level (Warnock), one had only 16/17 months of experience (Pochettino), another had only six months in a job (Sherwood).

 

Of the other four, two had had experience in top flights overseas (Koeman, Advocaat), and two had no managerial experience whatsoever (Carver, Ramsey).

 

Which leaves only two of the ten managerial changes last season (Pardew, Pulis) with two or more years of relative success in the English top flight.

 

I'd say Pearson has a fair old chance, especially in the second half of the season, which is when most of those changes took place. I suppose it depends how many struggling clubs are thinking 'I wish we had someone who was a survival specialist, capable of building a team like Leicester's, and capable of getting us promoted were it not to work out'. If they've got any sense...

[UpTheLeagueFox]

Part of the job is dealing with the media, Pearson never respected them...

 

He actually does have respect for the media. But he doesn't have much time for people who relentlessly ask shite questions.

 

I spoke to a Leicester player a few weeks ago and he laughed when I mentioned his 'media persona'. He said, and I'm paraphrasing, the lads loved him because he protected us, he was very different with us from what the press saw and that he played as big a part as any in staying up.

 

When I said that some LCFC fans "hated" him he actually couldn't believe it.

[Frank to be]

You're labelled 'anti-Pearson' because you never mention him without either directly or indirectly criticising him.

You say he's 'up there with Brian Little' and immediately after you say he got us up and 'kept us there'. Little didn't. Pearson did it twice. I think you might have needed a paragraph break between the two points.

You also talk about 'serious limitations'. Thank god he didn't show too many of them while he was with us, taking us up 31 league placings in five-and-a-half years, over two separate spells. 19 of which was without King Power's money. He had the tactical ability required to win a higher percentage of games than any other manager of ours in the second and third tier, and more than most in the first. But clearly there was some abstract problem in the midst of it all which, while it didn't actually affect our progress or our results, made him tactically inept in your eyes.

As for 'he won't take a job unless he can take his old staff with him' - neither he nor they have said this, just like nobody in the summer clarified why Pearson was fired (only you and a handful of enlightened others seemed to know why that was). Few sacked managers return instantly to the game, many have a year out. It's worth adding that, while you seem keen to credit them with much of his success in your third paragraph, he actually appointed these staff members. Just like he signed nearly all of the players on which our current success is based. I assume you also credit Walsh and Shakespeare with most of Ranieri's success, too.

When you talk about the 'gaping chasm' between his ability and Ranieri's, you're comparing over half a decade's worth of sustained progress beginning at a low level with six months of success starting at a higher level. Could Pearson have matched what Ranieri did? I don't know. The run that continued under Ranieri began under Pearson and with mostly the same players, players he signed, so maybe. Could Ranieri have matched what Pearson did? Equally, we don't know.

I'm delighted with Ranieri, but the comparison which you're so desperate to make between Pearson and him can't be looked at simply in terms of 'who got the team higher up the league table?' Was Bassett the great Wimbledon manager, or Gould? Was Hodge the great Leicester manager, or Orr? It goes without saying that all of them played their own, very different roles.

Why it is that you're so keen to belittle Pearson's achievement in the light of Ranieri's (which, of course, owes a great deal to Pearson's achievement) is still beyond me. My guess is that you once, in a frenzy of wishing to support the club in whatever decision they happened to make, came up with a whole load of half-assed reasons for their decision and have devoted much of your life since then to reinforcing your stance.

And those supporting the change in manager really shouldn't come across as partisan, divisive and downright incorrect as you consistently manage to. As it stands, results alone justify the change in manager. Hopefully that won't change. But none of it should undermine Pearson's role in our past, nor his part in our current success (e.g. assembling the squad, taking them up two leagues, keeping them up, beginning the run of great form, appointing those coaches whom you credit with much of our success).

For my part, I want to see Leicester doing well. Right now I love Ranieri for doing that, and Pearson for the part he played in it. Shouldn't we leave it at that?

I criticise him for some things and praise him for others. Isn't that what a proper assessment is made of? Discussion of both the positives and the negatives?

It seems like you've completely ignored what positives I did state, like him being one of our best ever managers, and focused purely on the negatives.

Not only that but you're putting words into my mouth. I didn't talk about a gaping chasm in overall ability, I talked about a gaping chasm in tactical ability. Nobody who has watched us regularly last season and this would deny the huge improvement we've made in our tactical game.

There's still question marks over Ranieri. He has a history of flying starts followed by disappointing declines. He hasn't had a proper chance to prove himself in the transfer market yet and I'm not especially confident he'll be as good as the Walsh/Pearson team was in that respect (though Pearson did also sign a few duds).

You see this is how I make my assessments, looking at both positives and negatives. You and a few others flat out refuse to acknowledge any of Pearson's faults and in doing so make yourself look frankly a bit weird. I suppose it's a credit to the cult of Pearson that he can inspire such blind loyalty, and in that case I'm sorry for your loss, but I'm not so devoted to the man that I'll convince myself to believe he was faultless.

[Kinowe Soorie]

This could be epic!! Gonna get me some popcorn

[dylanlegend]

I suspect he's had quite a few concrete offers (Reading / Fulham etc) the worrying thing is it seems the stumbling block is matching the contracts of our backroom staff.

The good thing about big Nige is he knows who to surround himself with, that's the sign of a good manager. He knows Walsh can find the gems, Shaky can influence the players / tactics and sports science affects the injuries / stamina of the players . It'd be interesting to see how he gets on if Walshy and Shaky don't join him.

[Dan]

NP is very naive in his dealings with the press ..... show some class like CR does, do you ever see him being mis-quoted or for a journo to be a bit naughty quoting him in the wrong context??? Fall out with people every week and it's no surprise that they relish the opportunity for a bit of devilment.

 

There is an element of truth in this, I won't pretend that it's not entirely on him, although it just amazes me how many people in this country take words of renowned shit-stirrers as gospel. It actually baffles me when I read people seeing people taking what they say as if it's a fact. It really does expose the lazy thinkers who don't deserve a platform to voice their inane drivel.

 

Ranieri was ripped to shreds when he got the Leicester job. They're out for everyone. That's what they're about. The sooner people turn on them, the better, but they won't because they can't see through it.

 

But its largely of his own doing Dan unfortunately, we cant put it any other way.

 

He handled the media poorly, and he gave them the ammunition to misquote him and twist things he says.

 

Its just sadly a fact.

 

They'll twist anyone's words. He could've definitely done better, I'm not doubting that, but again I don't think he's the main one at fault here. He actually praised Ranieri and gets made out to be taking the credit. I'm not having that as his fault. They're scum.

[Dan]

I'm not so sure. If you look at managers appointed this season, it's true that they have either 1+ years of PL experience (Allardyce, Ranieri, McClaren), or multiple years of experience in overseas leagues (Bilic, Flores, Hiddink), but if you look at last season the picture is less clear:

 

Of ten managerial changes last season, six had experience in England. One of them had never managed in the top flight (Irvine), one had only ever experienced failure at the highest level (Warnock), one had only 16/17 months of experience (Pochettino), another had only six months in a job (Sherwood).

 

Of the other four, two had had experience in top flights overseas (Koeman, Advocaat), and two had no managerial experience whatsoever (Carver, Ramsey).

 

Which leaves only two of the ten managerial changes last season (Pardew, Pulis) with two or more years of relative success in the English top flight.

 

I'd say Pearson has a fair old chance, especially in the second half of the season, which is when most of those changes took place. I suppose it depends how many struggling clubs are thinking 'I wish we had someone who was a survival specialist, capable of building a team like Leicester's, and capable of getting us promoted were it not to work out'. If they've got any sense...

 

I'd definitely have him over McClaren. I can't see the hype around that bloke one bit.

[Guest Col city fan]

I'm still surprised Pearson isn't in another job.

It has always made me wonder whether last season's off-field nonsense has put some chairman off him?

As a football manager, I'd snap him up. Villa should have got him over Remi, relegation bound, Garde.

But he's a bit of a PR disaster and as I tried to explain last season, these days that matters..rightly or wrongly.

[inckley fox]

I criticise him for some things and praise him for others. Isn't that what a proper assessment is made of? Discussion of both the positives and the negatives?

It seems like you've completely ignored what positives I did state, like him being one of our best ever managers, and focused purely on the negatives.

Not only that but you're putting words into my mouth. I didn't talk about a gaping chasm in overall ability, I talked about a gaping chasm in tactical ability. Nobody who has watched us regularly last season and this would deny the huge improvement we've made in our tactical game.

There's still question marks over Ranieri. He has a history of flying starts followed by disappointing declines. He hasn't had a proper chance to prove himself in the transfer market yet and I'm not especially confident he'll be as good as the Walsh/Pearson team was in that respect (though Pearson did also sign a few duds).

You see this is how I make my assessments, looking at both positives and negatives. You and a few others flat out refuse to acknowledge any of Pearson's faults and in doing so make yourself look frankly a bit weird. I suppose it's a credit to the cult of Pearson that he can inspire such blind loyalty, and in that case I'm sorry for your loss, but I'm not so devoted to the man that I'll convince myself to believe he was faultless.

 

I'm perfectly happy to discuss his weaknesses though I'm no more qualified to pick fault with him than he would be to pick fault with my job.

 

As you know full well, I was far from convinced that he should stay in his job beyond February. As it turns out I was wrong, but I think I've shown myself perfectly willing to acknowledge what I, rather inexpertly, consider to be his weaknesses.

 

Before going further, neither you nor I are tactically astute enough to fully discern the difference between Ranieri's tactical prowess and that of Pearson, apart from noting that Ranieri is probably better because he's won more games at the highest level, which is the ultimate test of whether someone's tactics are top class or not.

 

Neither would I go on too much about his dealings with the press. If they were designed to relieve pressure on the side when it looked for all the world like we were going down, then they worked. If they had no impact, then I can't say I care too much about the hurt feelings of Ian Stringer or anyone else. If anyone says that he turned us into a laughing stock then, put simply, they're not worth listening to.

 

But yes, there were weaknesses. Hindsight helps us here. Nicky Adams and Chris Weale weren't as good as we thought they might be, Neilson was rubbish, so was Futacs, Whitbread didn't work out, Upson was a waste of time, Kramaric was probably a waste of money. You'll struggle to find a manager with a better success ratio with transfers, but all of the above, and more besides, are valid criticisms of his policy nonetheless.

 

And he did stick with certain individuals for a long, long time after it became clear that their time had passed - we can only guess how it was that Konchesky lasted so long in the line-up, or why he wouldn't drop Keane in February 2013. On the other hand he appeared to unsettle the side a lot last season, constantly switching formations and picking unusual line-ups as he grasped for the right formula.

 

Worse still, it's hard to argue for the professionalism of anyone who turns and tells a section of the support to 'f*** off and die', and there's no doubt that his siege mentality tended to exclude the support - which led to incidents like Konchesky slagging off the fans, Gallagher, Marshall and Drinkwater all doing likewise.

 

On top of that he was the division's top-spending boss between his return in 2011 and the January of 2013, but still failed to achieve promotion on cue in his first two attempts. It might have been asking a lot of him, I know, and he did get there in the end of course, but he was a tad lucky to enjoy that third bite of the cherry.

 

So obviously there were failings and weaknesses. I'm as aware of them as you are. Equally, I'm hazily aware of O'Neill's weaknesses and failings in what was, much like Pearson's time in charge, an exceptional era in the club's history. But the difference is that when I mention O'Neill - or Pearson - it's usually in the context of him being an immensely positive influence on the club. Any criticism is a footnote. By way of contrast, in your posts we have a raft of gripes about Pearson's ineptitude, wild speculation about why he probably deservedly got fired, constant celebration of how much better off we are being shot of him and then, very occasionally, thrown in somewhere at the end of it all, a quick mention of the fact that - oh yeah - he was actually one of our best ever managers.

 

You can call my stance 'blind loyalty' or Pearson 'cult' nonsense if you wish. You can kid yourself that you tend to speak of Pearson respectfully, and with a proportionate level of criticism for someone who was so successful.

 

Perhaps (and I know you like to do this sort of thing with other posters, so it's only fair that you apply the same scrutiny to yourself) you'd like to look at my past posts and see all the lovely things I've written about the team and Ranieri, with rarely a whisper of Pearson. Alternatively, you could glance back at your own posts and see how many of them mention Pearson in the positive light you might expect of a Leicester fan talking about one of the club's best ever managers. You might startle yourself.

[Bluearmyfox28]

Be interesting to see when Nige does get a new job what backroom team he will take with him!

Just hope he doesn't come for Shakey or Walsh that could have a massive effect on us.

[inckley fox]

I'm still surprised Pearson isn't in another job.

It has always made me wonder whether last season's off-field nonsense has put some chairman off him?

As a football manager, I'd snap him up. Villa should have got him over Remi, relegation bound, Garde.

But he's a bit of a PR disaster and as I tried to explain last season, these days that matters..rightly or wrongly.

 

There's always the possibility that a chairman is out there who saw the headlines in the Spanish press which referred to him as 'the Premier League strangler' and thought, 'that's a way to get our name in the papers!' Perhaps not.

 

It may have been a factor in some chairmen looking elsewhere. I doubt sponsors were at the point of pulling out over the 'ostrich' comment, or that fans were switching their TVs off in disgust at the sight of the beastly man on the touchline. That said, I'm sure a few stunningly well-off football club owners who've never been told what to do in their lives took one look at him and said to themselves 'he's the last sort of headache I need'. Who knows. 

[EnglishOxide]

Inckley fox, nailing it yet again.

Saving me the hassle *claps*

[Guy]

A very good championship level manager..

We've pretty much got everything to thank him for this season in truth from his exploits with us last season, even though it will always be viewed as an unfinished managerial learning curve at the top level for Pearson but hopefully it will stand him in good stead for his next challenge. Yes, Ranieri did know a good thing when he saw it and hasn't tinkered too much with how things finished last season - plus he's signed well with the help of Steve Walsh I would say, while his more enhanced international reputation (in comparison to Pearson) probably swayed the likes of Inler and Kante over here. It's all good though and the best of luck to one of our finest ever managers in his next job.

[EnglishOxide]

I think it's important people don't underestimate Pearson's 'stay in the game' approach.

It's what helped foster the team spirit we see today IMO. It's easy to say we should go all out every week but Blackpool did that a few years ago and ended up getting hammered a few times.

If you keep a game close and don't regularly get beat by 2 or 3 goals the players start subconsciously believing they are good enough for this level.

When was the last time we got battered? Arsenal 5-2 (largely due to naive defending, but we still could have scored more). Before then? I can seriously only remember 4-1 to Brighton when we were hungover. Even when we were soundly beaten 2-0 to Swansea and Southampton last season, and 3-1 to Chelsea and Man U we were 'still in the game'.

Contrast that to Palace last night. Battered 3-0. Outclassed from start to finish. Arsenal the other day? Lost 4-0 to Saints. Liverpool 6-0 vs Saints. Arsenal 3-0 vs Man U.

That's what sets our team apart IMO. It's the result of 2 or 3 years of work ethic, success, manager stability, sound tactics and lack of player turnover.

Being 'in the game' may not be fine for van Gaal and Man Utd who are chasing trophies. But it is absolutely fine for a team like us whose first target is avoiding the drop.

[Leicester_Numan]

Because of his press conferences? A Premier League side has appointed a manager five years ago who previously gave a fascist salute on the pitch, Championship sides seemingly couldn't wait to sign Marlon King not that long ago, Alan Pardew is getting jobs fine, Jose Mourinho isn't exactly going to struggle either. Think it's fair to say that sides who want him are likely struggling to finance taking staff away from us, rather than any moral outrage at his past behavior. He's a very good manager, get over being wrong.

Wasn't it Fulham who wanted Pearson but couldn't afford his backroom staff?

[Grewks]

This is a man who signed the core of our current side, with the only exception being kasper, who spoke as highly of pearson as anyone has ever spoken of another person. The man who was responsible for amazing summer signings of kante and fuchs. The man who signed a player for £400,000, who has the ability to go on and have a playing career at a higher level than any player in our history.

 

He isn't just a 'good championship' manager, he has had one season in the top flight, seeing off premier league and european cup winner Steve Bruce and the then Harry 'should be next england manager' Redknapp.

 

Since Pearson arrived at this club, the club has transitioned from a club in league 1 signing ageing mercenaries, to a club challenging the best clubs in the country attempting to signing 17 and 19 year old wonderkids.

 

 

 

 

 

The only negativity i have regarding pearson is that he isn't leading us today. I only have to sit in the KP on a saturday afternoon to remind myself that this is the team that Pearson built, and the club that he re-invigorated.

[Monsell1976]

This is a man who signed the core of our current side, with the only exception being kasper, who spoke as highly of pearson as anyone has ever spoken of another person. The man who was responsible for amazing summer signings of kante and fuchs. The man who signed a player for £400,000, who has the ability to go on and have a playing career at a higher level than any player in our history.

He isn't just a 'good championship' manager, he has had one season in the top flight, seeing off premier league and european cup winner Steve Bruce and the then Harry 'should be next england manager' Redknapp.

Since Pearson arrived at this club, the club has transitioned from a club in league 1 signing ageing mercenaries, to a club challenging the best clubs in the country attempting to signing 17 and 19 year old wonderkids.

The only negativity i have regarding pearson is that he isn't leading us today. I only have to sit in the KP on a saturday afternoon to remind myself that this is the team that Pearson built, and the club that he re-invigorated.

People claim that Steve Walsh is amazing at finding these little gems as players, yet Pearson gets the praise for assembling the side.

Yes Pearson took the gamble as the manager, but he was just a part of a team that assembled the squad.

I think Shakespeare and Walsh have been a very important part of our rise, and are still continuing to do a good job for the club.

[Grewks]

People claim that Steve Walsh is amazing at finding these little gems as players, yet Pearson gets the praise for assembling the side.

Yes Pearson took the gamble as the manager, but he was just a part of a team that assembled the squad.

I think Shakespeare and Walsh have been a very important part of our rise, and are still continuing to do a good job for the club.

 

 

Pearson signed both shakespeare and walsh.

 

 

So he did assemble the side.

[Monsell1976]

Pearson signed both shakespeare and walsh.

So he did assemble the side.

Ok, I really am not going to get involved in this, Pearson is history, Walsh and Shakespeare are still here, I will make my own conclusions of who is my valuable to the club.

[MONreborn]

This is a man who signed the core of our current side, with the only exception being kasper, who spoke as highly of pearson as anyone has ever spoken of another person. The man who was responsible for amazing summer signings of kante and fuchs. The man who signed a player for £400,000, who has the ability to go on and have a playing career at a higher level than any player in our history.

He isn't just a 'good championship' manager, he has had one season in the top flight, seeing off premier league and european cup winner Steve Bruce and the then Harry 'should be next england manager' Redknapp.

Since Pearson arrived at this club, the club has transitioned from a club in league 1 signing ageing mercenaries, to a club challenging the best clubs in the country attempting to signing 17 and 19 year old wonderkids.

The only negativity i have regarding pearson is that he isn't leading us today. I only have to sit in the KP on a saturday afternoon to remind myself that this is the team that Pearson built, and the club that he re-invigorated.

Could not agree more - a true leicester city legend. Would welcome him back in the future with open arms

[MooseBreath]

I think it's important people don't underestimate Pearson's 'stay in the game' approach.

It's what helped foster the team spirit we see today IMO. It's easy to say we should go all out every week but Blackpool did that a few years ago and ended up getting hammered a few times.

If you keep a game close and don't regularly get beat by 2 or 3 goals the players start subconsciously believing they are good enough for this level.

When was the last time we got battered? Arsenal 5-2 (largely due to naive defending, but we still could have scored more). Before then? I can seriously only remember 4-1 to Brighton when we were hungover. Even when we were soundly beaten 2-0 to Swansea and Southampton last season, and 3-1 to Chelsea and Man U we were 'still in the game'.

Contrast that to Palace last night. Battered 3-0. Outclassed from start to finish. Arsenal the other day? Lost 4-0 to Saints. Liverpool 6-0 vs Saints. Arsenal 3-0 vs Man U.

That's what sets our team apart IMO. It's the result of 2 or 3 years of work ethic, success, manager stability, sound tactics and lack of player turnover.

Being 'in the game' may not be fine for van Gaal and Man Utd who are chasing trophies. But it is absolutely fine for a team like us whose first target is avoiding the drop.

Think I'd take the odd hammering if we're generally winning a lot over regularly losing narrowly tbh. Losing narrowly almost every week for about six months last season was no fun at all.

[Harry - LCFC]

But its largely of his own doing Dan unfortunately, we cant put it any other way.

 

He handled the media poorly, and he gave them the ammunition to misquote him and twist things he says.

 

Its just sadly a fact.

 

So it's the media's fault then.

 

You can't just sit their and admit it was the media who made him look bad and then decide to blame the person who wasn't responsible because you don't like him.

[MooseBreath]

Not sure about this "Ranieri hasn't changed much" thing. By this time last year we'd used about 40 different formations. Ranieri has used 2. Even if we compare with Pearson's eventual last chance saloon formation of 532 (or whatever variant you want to call it), Ranieri has still made numerous changes.

1) the formation itself

2) playing Danny Simpson

3) fuchsy baby

4) consistently selecting Albrighton

5) Drinkwater/Kante consistent midfield partnership

6) total dropping of Kramaric

7) consistently selecting Mahrez

These are tangible changes he has made and then you have others like transforming Morgan into a proper beat of a centre back, Vardy into the league's top scorer, sorting out the defence etc etc

It's a bit disrespectful to Ranieri to say he hasn't had to do anything because to get us where we are he surely has. Luckily I don't think we need to worry about Claudio throwing a pissy fit in the media about it though.

[inckley fox]

Not sure about this "Ranieri hasn't changed much" thing. By this time last year we'd used about 40 different formations. Ranieri has used 2. Even if we compare with Pearson's eventual last chance saloon formation of 532 (or whatever variant you want to call it), Ranieri has still made numerous changes.

1) the formation itself

2) playing Danny Simpson

3) fuchsy baby

4) consistently selecting Albrighton

5) Drinkwater/Kante consistent midfield partnership

6) total dropping of Kramaric

7) consistently selecting Mahrez

These are tangible changes he has made and then you have others like transforming Morgan into a proper beat of a centre back, Vardy into the league's top scorer, sorting out the defence etc etc

It's a bit disrespectful to Ranieri to say he hasn't had to do anything because to get us where we are he surely has. Luckily I don't think we need to worry about Claudio throwing a pissy fit in the media about it though.

 

I'm really not arguing with you here, because when people look back on the progress of teams over the years they tend to focus on the team-building more than anything else. They talk more about the 'architects' of success as much as, sometimes rather than, those that necessarily deliver it. Ranieri deserves huge credit for his role, and especially his willingness not to play his own men - Benalouane, Inler, Dyer - ahead of his predecessor's. And, of course, for all of those other tweaks he's successfully made, some of which you list.

 

But in your seven point list of changes made by Ranieri you've got (1) a formation which was, until very late in his reign, Pearson's favoured formation (2) Ranieri playing someone Pearson signed (3) A Pearson signing (4) Consistently playing a Pearson signing who was in Pearson's team at the end of last season (5) A partnership of a Pearson signing with a player targeted by Pearson and the scouting network he appointed (6) The dropping of a player who Pearson had already dropped and (7) The consistent selection of a player who Pearson signed, and was already consistently selected by Pearson.

 

The other two changes you made also concerned the improvement of two Pearson signings. One of which was his captain and already performing well by the end of last season, the other of which made the England team on the strength of his displays under Pearson.

 

So I agree that Ranieri has had an immense effect, but when if we look at your list of 'tangible impacts made by Ranieri', there's a distinctly-Pearson influence on them. That's inevitable, obviously, but it does demonstrate how big a role his work continues to have in our success.