Did Ranieri and Walsh have a disagreement over tansfer policy?

[DANGEROUS TIGER]

On 14/08/2016 at 01:05, UPinCarolina said:

I've posited this before - and I don't think it's wrong to believe that there might have been something behind the scenes. It's conjecture but it's not unreasonable conjecture. 

This + 1

[inckley fox]

15 hours ago, lgfualol said:

Isn't it quite clear why he was sacked though? He didn't get on with the owners anymore and we had that disastrous Thailand trip. 

I'm not sure this is the place for this, but neither do I think you can say that the reasons for his sacking were clear, nor that 'not getting along' with an employee is, on its own, justification for firing someone who has done a good job. The suggestion was that he got on well with our owners until the Thailand trip, even after the McArthur incident. And, seeing as we have no idea what discussions went on after that, I don't think we have clarity.

 

People were divided between those who (a) supposed that he'd thrown his toys out of the pram after Thailand, or had in some way been personally implicated and (b) those who believed the press reports that Pearson was shocked by his sacking, that it was the board who didn't want him any more because they unfairly saw him as a 'liability'.

 

I don't think either group had access to enough of the facts to say, without a great deal of filling-in gaps, that his sacking made sense to them. Was he drunk at the hotel that night? Did he implicitly encourage that type of behaviour? Had he been obstinate and unreasonable in his response to Thailand? Had he been a dead man walking since the pitch-side throttling? Who had done the firing and the un-firing back in February/March? Did Walsh and Shakespeare stay on because they thought Pearson had been in the wrong?

 

In the end, it hardly mattered because a new manager came in and we won the league. But there was never clarity.

[Gerard]

15 hours ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

You won't find a club in the country where a scout and a manager don't have disagreements. It's the nature of the relationship between the two. Like most workplaces, people will disagree but it doesn't affect the daily workings of the business. 

Exactly and it's perfectly healthy to have differing opinions.

 

Neither Walsh nor Ranieri should be 100% happy with all our incomings and outgoings but if one of them felt passionately about a player you'd like to think the other would relent.

[The Railway Man]

On 8/14/2016 at 09:26, LCFC FOX said:

Kante, Fuchs, Gray, Amartey and Musa were walshs recommendations.

 

Benny, Inler, Mendy, Hernandez and Zieler all ranieri's doing.

 

Ranieris management, tactical skills and Walshs transfer policy was bound to succeed. for me losing Walsh was very bad. Would people of been more confident if we had Gueye, Bolasi, Keane and Brady in our team right now?

I won't lie I'm hugely concerned we have lost something special in SW and looking at the list of signings it's hard not to think he is the man responsbile for msot of the good ones.

 

Anyway, it will all become clear over the course of the season just how much influence Walsh and Pearson still had last year.

[inckley fox]

21 minutes ago, The Railway Man said:

I won't lie I'm hugely concerned we have lost something special in SW and looking at the list of signings it's hard not to think he is the man responsbile for msot of the good ones.

 

Anyway, it will all become clear over the course of the season just how much influence Walsh and Pearson still had last year.

 

Of course he had a huge impact. We almost certainly couldn't have won the league without Ranieri, and equally we'd never have got there without Pearson.

 

I'm concerned too by our summer's work, because we've lost an incredibly important player and may well have neglected to buy a like-for-like replacement. If you look at the past 15 years or so of Leicester managers who have been fired, a few have pointed towards this as a key reason. Taylor said he should have properly replaced Heskey and Lennon, Levein said the same about Connolly. Adams might have had the same regrets about Izzet, Kelly about Gudjonsson.

 

So there have been some own goals - including the pre-season programme, which closely resembled those 'high on travelling, low on training and game-time' programmes which were so derided by Ferguson and Mourinho. You don't need to learn things the hard way when others have already learnt it for you.

 

That said, I suspect Ranieri desperately wants to fill the gap left by Kante, and I'm sure we have a list of names provided by a very competent scouting network. But making the wrong signing because there's pressure to make a signing is where we've tended to go wrong, even during the Walsh era (Kramaric being the obvious example).

 

Match fitness can still be restored, new players will improve too (how long did it take Drinkwater, Albrighton, Vardy and Simpson to get up to pace?), the key is to balance being proactive with not panicking.

[Babylon]

4 hours ago, The Railway Man said:

Anyway, it will all become clear over the course of the season just how much influence Walsh and Pearson still had last year.

Why do you keep acting like there are no other factors that can change the course of a season or results? The mentality of the players after they all achieved the biggest thing they ever will, is alone something that can totally change a season. It's going to take some time for fans and players to let last season go.

[Deucalion]

38 minutes ago, Babylon said:

 It's going to take some time for fans and players to let last season go.

And this will be a problem on the pitch and in the stands.

 

Instead of considering ourselves defending champions, it would be more effective to see ourselves as a team which was fairly easily beaten in the first game by the pre-season relegation certainties.

 

Hard work and mental strength needed.

 

(There is still no reason not to consider the bigger picture of the last couple of seasons.  But...it needs to stay on internet forums and not spill over onto the terraces)

[CosbehFox]

2 hours ago, Gerard said:

Exactly and it's perfectly healthy to have differing opinions.

 

Neither Walsh nor Ranieri should be 100% happy with all our incomings and outgoings but if one of them felt passionately about a player you'd like to think the other would relent.

Similarly the collecting of players against either Ranieri or Walsh is rubbish. If Ranieri recommends someone, the analysts will have looked at the player and Walsh sent a scout. Similarly Ranieri will have needed convincing of players suggested. 

 

The reason our scouting system has worked pretty well is that decisions are made collectively. Clubs where players are sign over the managers head normally go wrong - see Liverpool and Rodgers

[Guest]

Why wasn't Zlatan on Walsh's list? I bet he was and at the top and CR stopped him from hiring him so he said I'm going to take this much better job closer to home in Everton.

[NotTheMarketLeader]

On 14 August 2016 at 14:21, Webbo said:

We lost games under Pearson as well and in case you've forgotten we won the league last season.

 

What people need to remember is this time last year teams saw us as a chance to gain points and attacked us, this year teams are wary of us and are setting up differently. The system and personnel may need to evolve this season but to claim Ranieri isn't as good as Pearson, as some seem to be doing, is absolutely staggering.

Agreed. 

 

Weve be lost one league game - that's four in just over a season, we have become Champions, we are in Champions League Man, and the Pearsonites are all over various threads with this utter bullshit. 

 

By their logic if Pearson effectively won the league for us last season by his previous deeds the year before, does that mean Pearson will be to blame if we get relegated this season? 

 

[fuchsntf]

32 minutes ago, NotTheMarketLeader said:

Agreed. 

 

Weve be lost one league game - that's four in just over a season, we have become Champions, we are in Champions League Man, and the Pearsonites are all over various threads with this utter bullshit. 

 

By their logic if Pearson effectively won the league for us last season by his previous deeds the year before, does that mean Pearson will be to blame if we get relegated this season? 

Confusing post..I am probably classed has a Pearsonite, but no matter what he did for the club, and set up v a goodcsolid

base of players, it was Ranieri who took the title.. 

Comparing is pathetic, one way or tother...   

Gutter one up manship, discussuions, weird, weird...maybe even weird...

Shame the fans social media get in the way to try and destroy Other peoples memories.

J u st proves men c are more bitchy than women, and only can share compliments, through

gritted teeth.

[Deucalion]

Everyone should be a Ranieridori (a what?) because he is currently the manager.

 

However, Pearson was hugely influential at this club and Ranieri was wise and humble enough to see the strength of some of the previous setup.  He kept Walsh and Shakespeare and most of the sports science stuff too.

 

Pearson was hot on sports science, and Walsh was hot on scouting based on statistics.

 

As Ranieri is of an older generation than either of the former, is it a massive stretch of the imagination to assume he is unlikely to be very well versed in sports science and statistical evaluation of players?

 

Some evidence of this being the case is how unfit and ill-prepared we were against Hull.  It was reminiscent of both the Blackpool game under Allen and the start of the season under Sousa.  Both of these managers threw away the norm in pre-season and left us ill-prepared.  Does sports science still have the same weight in our coaching as previously?

 

I sincerely hope Saturday's game was a one-off, but...

 

the difference from the workrate and spirit of last season was stark.

 

Fingers crossed nothing is too fundamentally wrong.

[sphericalfox]

23 minutes ago, Deucalion said:

Everyone should be a Ranieridori (a what?) because he is currently the manager.

 

However, Pearson was hugely influential at this club and Ranieri was wise and humble enough to see the strength of some of the previous setup.  He kept Walsh and Shakespeare and most of the sports science stuff too.

 

Pearson was hot on sports science, and Walsh was hot on scouting based on statistics.

 

As Ranieri is of an older generation than either of the former, is it a massive stretch of the imagination to assume he is unlikely to be very well versed in sports science and statistical evaluation of players?

 

Some evidence of this being the case is how unfit and ill-prepared we were against Hull.  It was reminiscent of both the Blackpool game under Allen and the start of the season under Sousa.  Both of these managers threw away the norm in pre-season and left us ill-prepared.  Does sports science still have the same weight in our coaching as previously?

 

I sincerely hope Saturday's game was a one-off, but...

 

the difference from the workrate and spirit of last season was stark.

 

Fingers crossed nothing is too fundamentally wrong.

Nothing to do with the world travel and pointless friendlies. Why don't you compare the pre-season to the last and see if they stack-up to why we're not hitting the ground running (quite literally). You are drawing conclusions based on what evidence? Do you think they've cut back or removed the sports science team because Walsh is gone? Ridiculous.

[The_77]

1 hour ago, Deucalion said:

Everyone should be a Ranieridori (a what?) because he is currently the manager.

 

However, Pearson was hugely influential at this club and Ranieri was wise and humble enough to see the strength of some of the previous setup.  He kept Walsh and Shakespeare and most of the sports science stuff too.

 

Pearson was hot on sports science, and Walsh was hot on scouting based on statistics.

 

As Ranieri is of an older generation than either of the former, is it a massive stretch of the imagination to assume he is unlikely to be very well versed in sports science and statistical evaluation of players?

 

Some evidence of this being the case is how unfit and ill-prepared we were against Hull.  It was reminiscent of both the Blackpool game under Allen and the start of the season under Sousa.  Both of these managers threw away the norm in pre-season and left us ill-prepared.  Does sports science still have the same weight in our coaching as previously?

 

I sincerely hope Saturday's game was a one-off, but...

 

the difference from the workrate and spirit of last season was stark.

 

Fingers crossed nothing is too fundamentally wrong.

We lost to Hull yesterday, great-- the sun even shines on a dog's ass.

Yesterday's game is an incredibly small sample size and only the first league match after an extremely abnormal pre-season for Leicester City Football Club's standards.

Step away from the ledge, everyone (and don't push Ranieri over it, either).

[Tuna]

Can't be arsed to read the other 3 pages but i'm sure before he cried and ran away ramadaone alluded to something along these lines.

 

Someone asked whether they'd disagreed on Mendy/gueye and he replied it' wouldn't have been the first time'.

[Webbo]

2 minutes ago, Tuna said:

Can't be arsed to read the other 3 pages but i'm sure before he cried and ran away ramadaone alluded to something along these lines.

 

Someone asked whether they'd disagreed on Mendy/gueye and he replied it' wouldn't have been the first time'.

If they did disagree it doesn't mean they fell out over it.

[Deucalion]

46 minutes ago, sphericalfox said:

Nothing to do with the world travel and pointless friendlies. Why don't you compare the pre-season to the last and see if they stack-up to why we're not hitting the ground running (quite literally). You are drawing conclusions based on what evidence? Do you think they've cut back or removed the sports science team because Walsh is gone? Ridiculous.

 

My evidence is a poor first game, a pretty disjointed pre-season, the fact that personnel have left, and the fact that Ranieri is not Nigel Pearson, therefore he is likely to want to do things differently.  If we compare the Hull game with games in previous seasons, then the most obvious comparisons are seasons which started with a 1-0 home defeat to Blackpool, or the poor start we had under Sousa, both occasions were partly caused by changes in training regimes in pre-season, and both went on to last more than one game.

 

It is not a huge leap to say that the further away from Pearson we get, the more the club will be shaped in Ranieri's image, and the more we can accurately judge the impact of Ranieri.  Although, winning the Premier League is a pretty good start.

 

It is entirely possible that Ranieri will not emphasize sports science and statistical analysis to the same extent that Pearson and Walsh did, as these things were particular hobby horses of each.  Ranieri is also older and likely to be influenced by different things.

 

What I really want you to answer though, is which of my conclusions is 'ridiculous' ?

 

First of all, I don't come to any conclusions, what I actually do is suggest reasons why things might not have been too impressive on Saturday.

 

Secondly, I sincerely hope I am wrong,  I hope it was a genuine one-off and we are back to our old selves against Arsenal.

 

And last of all, the point behind everything I have said is simply, Cloudio Ranieri is different to Nigel Pearson.  

 

What is their to argue about?

 

 

 

 

[UPinCarolina]

10 minutes ago, Tuna said:

Can't be arsed to read the other 3 pages but i'm sure before he cried and ran away ramadaone alluded to something along these lines.

 

Someone asked whether they'd disagreed on Mendy/gueye and he replied it' wouldn't have been the first time'.

I remember the post in question, and that's an accurate account. 

[sphericalfox]

11 minutes ago, Deucalion said:

 

My evidence is a poor first game, a pretty disjointed pre-season, the fact that personnel have left, and the fact that Ranieri is not Nigel Pearson, therefore he is likely to want to do things differently.  If we compare the Hull game with games in previous seasons, then the most obvious comparisons are seasons which started with a 1-0 home defeat to Blackpool, or the poor start we had under Sousa, both occasions were partly caused by changes in training regimes in pre-season, and both went on to last more than one game.

 

It is not a huge leap to say that the further away from Pearson we get, the more the club will be shaped in Ranieri's image, and the more we can accurately judge the impact of Ranieri.  Although, winning the Premier League is a pretty good start.

 

It is entirely possible that Ranieri will not emphasize sports science and statistical analysis to the same extent that Pearson and Walsh did, as these things were particular hobby horses of each.  Ranieri is also older and likely to be influenced by different things.

 

What I really want you to answer though, is which of my conclusions is 'ridiculous' ?

 

First of all, I don't come to any conclusions, what I actually do is suggest reasons why things might not have been too impressive on Saturday.

 

Secondly, I sincerely hope I am wrong,  I hope it was a genuine one-off and we are back to our old selves against Arsenal.

 

And last of all, the point behind everything I have said is simply, Cloudio Ranieri is different to Nigel Pearson.  

 

What is their to argue about?

 

 

 

 

 

Do you think that Ranieri is doing something drastically different to what Walsh (Ghost Pearson)? I would have thought the training camp was planned well in advance. Sure you could argue that they might have scrapped it all, just worked on their smiles in the sunshine, but here is the list of friendlies that executed last year. Not only did we have a smaller squad, but if you look at who played, you can see the amount of solid minutes on the pitch they got, all with the comfort of utilising our top grade sports science facilities. Instead this year we went Thailand, had a few weeks off, then jetted here and there abroad, away from those magic making machines and freezers, and helped broaden our money making potential instead, as this in the long term probably is financially the course that the board felt was in the best interests of the club, as there's not many opportunities like that, that as a business you turn down. Here's the list of fixtures, do the miles and be mindful of the fatigue that follows.

 

I am curious at what point Ranieri departed the Walshy way, and has ruined the team, and has failed to replicate what was achieved during preseason last with a larger team? Did they throw away all the personal fitness plans from last year or perhaps and more likely, did the squad not have the time, recovery, and minutes on the pitch to do the same again?

 

You are using one game as evidence that Ranieri has thrown the baby out with the dishwater?

[Realist Guy In The Room]

Its a wonder Ranieri has ever managed to do anything at any other team anywhere in the world without Walsh by his side.

 

Christ does it really take so little to overlook so much?  Have people been lying in wait for a bad defeat to start banging on about past management and their ways?

[NotTheMarketLeader]

2 hours ago, fuchsntf said:

Confusing post..I am probably classed has a Pearsonite, but no matter what he did for the club, and set up v a goodcsolid

base of players, it was Ranieri who took the title.. 

Comparing is pathetic, one way or tother...   

Gutter one up manship, discussuions, weird, weird...maybe even weird...

Shame the fans social media get in the way to try and destroy Other peoples memories.

J u st proves men c are more bitchy than women, and only can share compliments, through

gritted teeth.

I have no idea what you are talking about with these riddles you write.

 

The point I am making is that we have people coming on this forum after a loss (only our 4th league loss in over a year) we are Champions after a great season giving who give no credit to Claudio, laying all the plaudits at Pearsons door. 

 

That annoys me.

 

That's my point.

 

if I may say so,I think you would be better served getting to your point in your posts rather than simply reeling off platitudes, and patronising others as you have done above.

 

[MC Prussian]

6 hours ago, The Railway Man said:

I won't lie I'm hugely concerned we have lost something special in SW and looking at the list of signings it's hard not to think he is the man responsbile for msot of the good ones.

 

Anyway, it will all become clear over the course of the season just how much influence Walsh and Pearson still had last year.

It's easy to say that now with hindsight involved.

 

Fact is: Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. You won't find many clubs where all players (and new signings) click from the off or forever. They all go through rough patches, and for what it's worth, last season should be remembered as a fantastic occurrence that unlikely will ever return again (sooner than later).

 

I can see people being somewhat worried, but pre-season results have never been a good indicator of how a season pans out in the end and we out of all team should know what it means having to start from scratch again: We had three players in the starting line-up on Tuesday that weren't there last season (Musa, Gray, Hernandez) and of course, it takes time to accustom them all.

Now is the time to look forward to a new season where we basically start with fighting relegation once more. I find that a healthier approach than existing in dreamland and panicking. Champions League or Europa League football should be seen as the icing on the cake, and nothing god-given.

 

Patience is a virtue.

[Deucalion]

29 minutes ago, sphericalfox said:

 

Do you think that Ranieri is doing something drastically different to what Walsh (Ghost Pearson)? I would have thought the training camp was planned well in advance. Sure you could argue that they might have scrapped it all, just worked on their smiles in the sunshine, but here is the list of friendlies that executed last year. Not only did we have a smaller squad, but if you look at who played, you can see the amount of solid minutes on the pitch they got, all with the comfort of utilising our top grade sports science facilities. Instead this year we went Thailand, had a few weeks off, then jetted here and there abroad, away from those magic making machines and freezers, and helped broaden our money making potential instead, as this in the long term probably is financially the course that the board felt was in the best interests of the club, as there's not many opportunities like that, that as a business you turn down. Here's the list of fixtures, do the miles and be mindful of the fatigue that follows.

 

I am curious at what point Ranieri departed the Walshy way, and has ruined the team, and has failed to replicate what was achieved during preseason last with a larger team? Did they throw away all the personal fitness plans from last year or perhaps and more likely, did the squad not have the time, recovery, and minutes on the pitch to do the same again?

 

You are using one game as evidence that Ranieri has thrown the baby out with the dishwater?

 

Well I think I have made some valid points.  If you disagree then that's up to you, but I'm not going to argue all night about it.

 

Peace !!

 

 

 

[Manc Fox]

Thought we looked OK on Saturday to be fair, a bit lacklustre but ok. Hull took their chances & we missed ours. This forum will go into meltdown if we lose vs the arse!! 

But this Pearson/Walsh/Ranieri love/hate thing is embarrassing. Just hope the bad seeds of negativity don't start leaking into the KP & we start hearing booing like the arse do!! Let's sing the boys on for the 90mins & show that our fans are different. Christ, we've been telling them we are all last season, just hope we prove it at the weekend. 

 

[Sooper Steve's shin]

Here's something to ponder:

https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2016/aug/14/idrissa-gueye-everton-debut

 

Mendy had better be good or this will look like a massive mistake. Surely no coincidence that he signs for Walsh's new team (along with Bolasie) - must have been on our radar. But then, who's to say that SW didn't put Claudio off the scent by downplaying this guy? I'm sure he didn't just get a phone call from Koeman one day and pack up and leave. There would have been contact - this is what garden leave is for...