Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
Bazly

Nigel Pearson working for KP again

Recommended Posts

33 minutes ago, brucey said:

Jonathan Northcroft (one of the most ITK LCFC journos) reported the day after Ranieri was sacked, that the dressing room wanted Pearson back, or Shakespeare as their second choice if that was not possible.

 

Just send em to OHL if they miss him so much

 

Edit: Wouldn't be at all surprised to see one or two of his boys actually playing for OHL one day in the next year or so if Nige is still there. Would not shock me at all if someone like Matty James or Ben Hamer was there next season in fact. 

Edited by 4everfox
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, lifted*fox said:

 

I do my best not to initiate any conversation with you because, lol, you're impossible - BUT that sentence right there is exactly why Pearson did so well in the job. 

 

He kept people in line, communicated properly and everyone understood their job and why they were included / not included on the team sheet. 

 

Does it seem weird to you that the players were actively asking for Pearson to come back? If he did, they wouldn't be ruling anything - it'd be back to Pearson running the show.

 

Maybe, just maybe they miss the discipline and structure that he put in place.

Nail on head for me.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, brucey said:

Jonathan Northcroft (one of the most ITK LCFC journos) reported the day after Ranieri was sacked, that the dressing room wanted Pearson back, or Shakespeare as their second choice if that was not possible.

 

Must be nice to work at a place where you can pretty much choose who you want as manager.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pearson deserves great credit for what he did for our club, promotions and the great escape (ie getting us out of the shit that he got us in) and he is responsible for an excellent team spirit and work on some of the signings that became the football miracle.

 

But lets be about right , it was Ranieri that delivered the title

 

Anyway Pearson can't come back until he can control what comes out of his mouth and his unpredictable behaviour - so not soon

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, funkyrobot said:

Average Manager? For us? He’s up there as one of the BEST LCFC managers of modern times. He did a brilliant job with us. He played an instrumental role in building a team that eventually won the league and I guess for Pearson haters like you it’s best to ignore this fantastic period in our recent history. 

lol Believe what you will.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, DANGEROUS TIGER said:

lol Believe what you will.

Yeh. Belief backed up by actual achievements (winning league 1, winning the championship, staying in the premiership in the first season back) as well as an outstanding overall win ratio figure. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, DANGEROUS TIGER said:

lol Believe what you will.

 

A serious question - what do you think of the period where we sailed up from League One and into the PL in a short space of time, all under his guidance?

 

You've always posted with a pretty harsh anti-Pearson agenda - what exactly has made you that way? What are the crucial moments during his tenure, despite all of the success he bought to us, that have shaped your image of him in this way?

 

What exactly did he do that ****ed you off so badly?

 

Your opinion is in the minority and 819 rep points for nearly 10,000 posts tells it's own story but surely when you're swimming up stream all of the time on this particular matter you must wonder why.  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, DANGEROUS TIGER said:

lol Believe what you will.

Thankfully, him being a huge success as our manager is something that exists as an objective fact and is not dependent on your belief. If you don't like him as a person for whatever reason, fine, but denying his achievements as our manager is irrational and defies all logic

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, lifted*fox said:

 

A serious question - what do you think of the period where we sailed up from League One and into the PL in a short space of time, all under his guidance?

 

You've always posted with a pretty harsh anti-Pearson agenda - what exactly has made you that way? What are the crucial moments during his tenure, despite all of the success he bought to us, that have shaped your image of him in this way?

 

What exactly did he do that ****ed you off so badly?

 

Your opinion is in the minority and 819 rep points for nearly 10,000 posts tells it's own story but surely when you're swimming up stream all of the time on this particular matter you must wonder why.  

 

 

DT doesn’t like Nigel Pearson as he is a “loud mouth slob” who had the audacity to react to someone shouting obscenities at him. 

 

I’d love to see how DT would have reacted if someone was shouting abuse at his precious Cilla Black. 

  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Love him to bits but he’s not the same bloke he was (there’s a sad reason for that).  He was ideal for us. We do need a bloke with similar qualities as a builder and ability as a man motivator. Personally think Fulham’s manager fits that - he’s had to deal with an utter arsehole in between him and board level too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Donut said:

Does Pearson have a role in our downward trajectory now?

 

Genuine question, not banter or trying to annoy people.

 

It's a good question. I suppose if we credit him for the potential of his signings and their potential as a unit, then we also have to point out that over time - and without the guidance of that specific management team - some of those characters had the potential to lose focus.

 

In fact, many of the players who've been involved in our post-2016 slumps were also involved in the early 2013 downturn (Vardy, Morgan, James, King, Drinkwater etc.) and even more were involved in the 2014-15 mid-season collapse. So they have it within them to suffer prolonged periods of horrendous form.

 

Alternatively, you could argue that this applies to any set of players anywhere and that poor signings made things worse along the way. And obviously how a side does in the aftermath of a manager's departure, when most of the set-up is still in place, is always going to tell you more about how well systems were established by that manager, than the same club 18 months, 2 years, 3 years later.

 

I remember one football magazine, years ago, looked at managers' records and in doing so it presented a graph which included (distinguished by colour) the two seasons before their arrival and the two which followed it, to show both what they were inheriting and what they left behind. If such a thing were replicated for Pearson it would show him to be something quite exceptional in the modern game; his impact on the club would be greater by this measure than almost anyone else's in the game. But then again, the same table might also make Micky Adams look like a disaster, and Sven a bit of a hero.

 

So we should take these arguments about legacy with a pinch of salt. In Pearson's case (as with O'Neill's, to a far lesser extent) the main argument in favour of them having left the club in a tremendously health state, is how well we did immediately after their exit with the players they left behind, and how things fell away as time went by.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, coolhandfox said:

No, time to move on, need a strong manager like him, but with a better tactical brain. 

I'm never sure what people mean by a good tactical brain. Surely it just means playing the right system to get a result, by which measure Pearson did fine. My appreciation of the complexities of tactics isn't strong enough to judge a manager's merits in this area, and when pundits try to point out a stroke of tactical brilliance it often doesn't seem to be anything exceptional. It's easier for fans to judge things on outcomes than it is on the high-level stuff, which plenty of ex-players and a good few managers don't seem to be too clear on either.

 

He certainly wasn't one-dimensional. He had a very different style of play in his first stint to his second on account of the better resources available to him. He switched systems quite frequently, sometimes to great effect (e.g. the 3-5-2 in 2015). I wonder whether people see him as a quite brutish, old-school Englishman and therefore not the sort of bespectacled foreign scholar who we tend to see as a tactician.

 

I know Mahrez praised the tactical improvement after Ranieri replaced Pearson, but plenty of others have questioned how good an organiser or match-prep manager Claudio was. Equally, we've seen plenty of managers who were supposed to be very tactically astute, but who aren't very good at winning matches. Pleat, Taylor, Levein, Sousa, Eriksson and Puel were all supposed tacticians. O'Neill, Adams and Pearson weren't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...