Ruud van Nistelrooy - New Manager - Official

[teblin]

Cooper was Bobbins, RVN is Bobbins.

 

Coopers chaos and seeming lack of a plan maybe helped us get points as it made us not easy to know what e were going to do.

[Legend_in_blue]

Cooper had lost the players.  Despite the poor run of results with Coopers signings making us worse, has RVN lost the players?

[Winstonthedog]

22 hours ago, Mike the Metal Ed said:

Has any Premier League club ever had three permanent first team managers in a single season and not been a total shitshow that inevitably got relegated?

There's still time 😂 

[Sly]

31 minutes ago, Legend_in_blue said:

Cooper had lost the players.  Despite the poor run of results with Coopers signings making us worse, has RVN lost the players?

Did he ever have them? 

[OadbyBlue]

Crazy how Cooper comes out of this situation looking so good. The players have a lot to answer for, with all the leaks about how much they don’t rate Cooper’s tactics, miss Enzo etc, yet when a new man comes in, they do even worse.

[Dmitry]

On 12/03/2025 at 16:32, Mike the Metal Ed said:

Has any Premier League club ever had three permanent first team managers in a single season and not been a total shitshow that inevitably got relegated?

 

I don't know, but we at LCFC aim to please the fans. Maybe not our fans, but still..

[Dmitry]

24 minutes ago, OadbyBlue said:

Crazy how Cooper comes out of this situation looking so good. The players have a lot to answer for, with all the leaks about how much they don’t rate Cooper’s tactics, miss Enzo etc, yet when a new man comes in, they do even worse.

Players are shite. Who they rate matters little now. Many of them will end up playing in shit leagues, like Finland, Slovakia or Latvia (yes, I know , it's a low blow...).

[Gubbins]

13 hours ago, The Doctor said:

can pretty much guarantee it tbh, you're forgetting how bad the last month of him was. Getting completely outclassed by RvNs Man Utd twice, barely laying a glove on Walsall in the cup, getting outclassed by Ipswich until they had a clear penalty not given and a red card then given, absolutely dog shit performance v Forest as their fans sung his name. We were getting results our performances didn't deserve back in August/September and that luck had clearly run out. 

You absolutely can't guarantee it. Cooper was crap but he is still an actual football manager whilst rvn at this point is more akin to a disgraced PE teacher, statistically the 3rd worst manager in PL history. Now obviously you despise Cooper and have slagged him off all season but is it really beyond the realms of possibility that he would have by hook or by crook gained 4-6 points more than rvn has? Still pretty diabolical but seeing as wolves and Ipswich are so bad we would still be in with a shot of staying up. You can't say that now.

[The Doctor]

4 hours ago, Gubbins said:

You absolutely can't guarantee it. Cooper was crap but he is still an actual football manager whilst rvn at this point is more akin to a disgraced PE teacher, statistically the 3rd worst manager in PL history. Now obviously you despise Cooper and have slagged him off all season but is it really beyond the realms of possibility that he would have by hook or by crook gained 4-6 points more than rvn has? Still pretty diabolical but seeing as wolves and Ipswich are so bad we would still be in with a shot of staying up. You can't say that now.

honestly I'd be surprised if he'd even manage as many points as RvN has, and that's a really low bar to clear. Like in terms of the games against opposition they both faced (Spurs, Fulham, Villa, Palace, Everton, Arsenal, Chelsea)

 

Cooper: W0, D3, L4, G: 9, GA: 14

RvN: W1, D0, L5, G: 3, GA: 14

 

Points the same, defence the same, only difference is we're scoring less.

 

Then consider RvNs fixtures: Chelsea, West Ham x 2, Brentford, Arsenal, Everton, Spurs, Fulham, Palace, Villa, Man City, Liverpool, Wolves, Newcastle, Brighton.

 

Let's assume that Cooper manages his same points return in the return fixtures (despite us barely laying a glove on Everton when they were under Dyche with 12 senior players).

 

Does he manage 4 points from West Ham x 2, Brentford, Man City, Liverpool, Wolves, Newcastle and Brighton? I don't think so, man City, Liverpool and Newcastle are still comfortable losses, Brentford probably as well. so, 4 points from West Ham x 2, Wolves and Brighton? we lost v wolves because of Ward, and he was Cooper's second choice, so unless we're doing a butterfly effect, Cooper staying means Hermansen doesn't get injured, we have the same issue there. West Ham and Brighton in RvNs first week? the rot under Cooper was really bad at the end, I genuinely wouldn't see us getting anything from either of them...

[everton carr]

31 minutes ago, The Doctor said:

honestly I'd be surprised if he'd even manage as many points as RvN has, and that's a really low bar to clear. Like in terms of the games against opposition they both faced (Spurs, Fulham, Villa, Palace, Everton, Arsenal, Chelsea)

 

Cooper: W0, D3, L4, G: 9, GA: 14

RvN: W1, D0, L5, G: 3, GA: 14

 

Points the same, defence the same, only difference is we're scoring less.

 

Then consider RvNs fixtures: Chelsea, West Ham x 2, Brentford, Arsenal, Everton, Spurs, Fulham, Palace, Villa, Man City, Liverpool, Wolves, Newcastle, Brighton.

 

Let's assume that Cooper manages his same points return in the return fixtures (despite us barely laying a glove on Everton when they were under Dyche with 12 senior players).

 

Does he manage 4 points from West Ham x 2, Brentford, Man City, Liverpool, Wolves, Newcastle and Brighton? I don't think so, man City, Liverpool and Newcastle are still comfortable losses, Brentford probably as well. so, 4 points from West Ham x 2, Wolves and Brighton? we lost v wolves because of Ward, and he was Cooper's second choice, so unless we're doing a butterfly effect, Cooper staying means Hermansen doesn't get injured, we have the same issue there. West Ham and Brighton in RvNs first week? the rot under Cooper was really bad at the end, I genuinely wouldn't see us getting anything from either of them...

Love the way you mention Everton had only 12_senior players  not true btw I've looked but completely ignore the fact that we played a Spurs side missing 13  who had lost 5 in a row we also played a Villa side missing 6 

[Fox92]

2 hours ago, The Doctor said:

honestly I'd be surprised if he'd even manage as many points as RvN has, and that's a really low bar to clear. Like in terms of the games against opposition they both faced (Spurs, Fulham, Villa, Palace, Everton, Arsenal, Chelsea)

 

Cooper: W0, D3, L4, G: 9, GA: 14

RvN: W1, D0, L5, G: 3, GA: 14

 

Points the same, defence the same, only difference is we're scoring less.

 

Then consider RvNs fixtures: Chelsea, West Ham x 2, Brentford, Arsenal, Everton, Spurs, Fulham, Palace, Villa, Man City, Liverpool, Wolves, Newcastle, Brighton.

 

Let's assume that Cooper manages his same points return in the return fixtures (despite us barely laying a glove on Everton when they were under Dyche with 12 senior players).

 

Does he manage 4 points from West Ham x 2, Brentford, Man City, Liverpool, Wolves, Newcastle and Brighton? I don't think so, man City, Liverpool and Newcastle are still comfortable losses, Brentford probably as well. so, 4 points from West Ham x 2, Wolves and Brighton? we lost v wolves because of Ward, and he was Cooper's second choice, so unless we're doing a butterfly effect, Cooper staying means Hermansen doesn't get injured, we have the same issue there. West Ham and Brighton in RvNs first week? the rot under Cooper was really bad at the end, I genuinely wouldn't see us getting anything from either of them...

For balance then you also need to mention that Van Nistelrooy's victory against Spurs was basically against their B team. 

[Paninistickers]

2 hours ago, everton carr said:

Then consider RvNs fixtures: Chelsea, West Ham x 2, Brentford, Arsenal, Everton, Spurs, Fulham, Palace, Villa, Man City, Liverpool, Wolves, Newcastle, Brighton.

This is subjective, but I think we've often played teams 'at the right time' and still managed to lose..

 

As pointed out, spurs and villa were decimated of their first team. 

 

But,.as I said subjectively, Man City were at the bottom of their curve and frankly, there for the taking.. Arsenal were very low key and minus a striker. Fulham and Palace didn't need to move out of second gear. Chelsea were poor last week. 

 

There's no defending it. No matter how bad and clueless Cooper was, this guy is at best, just as bad. And in all probability,. significantly worse. 

[everton carr]

2 hours ago, The Doctor said:

honestly I'd be surprised if he'd even manage as many points as RvN has, and that's a really low bar to clear. Like in terms of the games against opposition they both faced (Spurs, Fulham, Villa, Palace, Everton, Arsenal, Chelsea)

 

Cooper: W0, D3, L4, G: 9, GA: 14

RvN: W1, D0, L5, G: 3, GA: 14

 

Points the same, defence the same, only difference is we're scoring less.

 

Then consider RvNs fixtures: Chelsea, West Ham x 2, Brentford, Arsenal, Everton, Spurs, Fulham, Palace, Villa, Man City, Liverpool, Wolves, Newcastle, Brighton.

 

Let's assume that Cooper manages his same points return in the return fixtures (despite us barely laying a glove on Everton when they were under Dyche with 12 senior players).

 

Does he manage 4 points from West Ham x 2, Brentford, Man City, Liverpool, Wolves, Newcastle and Brighton? I don't think so, man City, Liverpool and Newcastle are still comfortable losses, Brentford probably as well. so, 4 points from West Ham x 2, Wolves and Brighton? we lost v wolves because of Ward, and he was Cooper's second choice, so unless we're doing a butterfly effect, Cooper staying means Hermansen doesn't get injured, we have the same issue there. West Ham and Brighton in RvNs first week? the rot under Cooper was really bad at the end, I genuinely wouldn't see us getting anything from either of them

Also obvs but will still worth  pointing out that we may have only drew  with Palace and Everton but at least it meant we stayed in touching distance with  our direct  rivals since RVN we have given all are rivals  another 3 point lead.Even if we drew against Wolves the gap would be a manageable 3 points instead of 6

[Fox92]

32 minutes ago, Paninistickers said:

This is subjective, but I think we've often played teams 'at the right time' and still managed to lose..

 

As pointed out, spurs and villa were decimated of their first team. 

 

But,.as I said subjectively, Man City were at the bottom of their curve and frankly, there for the taking.. Arsenal were very low key and minus a striker. Fulham and Palace didn't need to move out of second gear. Chelsea were poor last week. 

 

There's no defending it. No matter how bad and clueless Cooper was, this guy is at best, just as bad. And in all probability,. significantly worse. 

The week before Man City beat us they were held to a 1-1 at home to Everton and earlier in the month were held to a draw at Palace. Also consider Newcastle hadn't won in 5 or 6 before they played us.

 

We definitely played teams at the right time. Unfortunately though they didn't need to get out of second gear to beat us. 

 

Also the OP said Everton were missing players when we played them under Cooper. They were also missing players, albeit not as many, when we played them under Van Nistelrooy. Beto played, and scored against us, despite only previously only scord 1 goal all season. 

[The Doctor]

4 hours ago, everton carr said:

Love the way you mention Everton had only 12_senior players  not true btw I've looked but completely ignore the fact that we played a Spurs side missing 13  who had lost 5 in a row we also played a Villa side missing 6 

Everton were in the midst of an injury crisis and were playing centre mids and Ashley Young at full back, and we managed one shot in that game. Frankly that game alone should have been a sacking offence

 

2 hours ago, Fox92 said:

For balance then you also need to mention that Van Nistelrooy's victory against Spurs was basically against their B team. 

ok, then he's still 2 points behind RvNs performance. They're both utterly shit. We'd have gone down with a similar whimper if we'd kept Cooper as we are now

 

2 hours ago, everton carr said:

Also obvs but will still worth  pointing out that we may have only drew  with Palace and Everton but at least it meant we stayed in touching distance with  our direct  rivals since RVN we have given all are rivals  another 3 point lead.Even if we drew against Wolves the gap would be a manageable 3 points instead of 6

right, and we'd have drawn v wolves with a proper keeper in goal. So, are we claiming that Cooper would have magically stopped Hermansen getting injured during a match?

[Gubbins]

5 hours ago, The Doctor said:

 

 

Does he manage 4 points from West Ham x 2, Brentford, Man City, Liverpool, Wolves, Newcastle and Brighton? I don't think so, man City, Liverpool and Newcastle are still comfortable losses, Brentford probably as well. so, 4 points from West Ham x 2, Wolves and Brighton? we lost v wolves because of Ward, and he was Cooper's second choice, so unless we're doing a butterfly effect, Cooper staying means Hermansen doesn't get injured, we have the same issue there. West Ham and Brighton in RvNs first week? the rot under Cooper was really bad at the end, I genuinely wouldn't see us getting anything from either of them...

Butterfly effect is exactly what we're doing. Cooper doesn't play the same tactics or pick the same players so things will be different. Maybe having seen wards uselessness against newcastle and with stolarcyzclk off the treatment table he risks throwing him in against wolves. Wel never know. Now no doubt we still lose the majority of games but I'm not having that we would be as record breakingly bad under cooper as we have been under Van Rooney. He had enough about him to not be statistically one of the worst 10 prem manager ever which is all it needed to be level with wolves.

[Paninistickers]

I think it'd be pretty reasonable to say Cooper wouldn't have blindly stuck with the same losing tactics and players, defeat after defeat after defeat 

 

Okoli would've had more minutes. Buonanotte would certainly have had more minutes..losing Fatawu it's possible Stephy would've had more minutes. Soumare and BdcR and Ayew would all have had less minutes. Those changes alone would've - at worst - garnered the same results 

 

 

[everton carr]

2 minutes ago, Paninistickers said:

I think it'd be pretty reasonable to say Cooper wouldn't have blindly stuck with the same losing tactics and players, defeat after defeat after defeat 

 

Okoli would've had more minutes. Buonanotte would certainly have had more minutes..losing Fatawu it's possible Stephy would've had more minutes. Soumare and BdcR and Ayew would all have had less minutes. Those changes alone would've - at worst - garnered the same results 

 

 

Good points and don't forget Cooper unlike RVN realized Vesty was crap

[The Doctor]

30 minutes ago, Gubbins said:

Butterfly effect is exactly what we're doing. Cooper doesn't play the same tactics or pick the same players so things will be different. Maybe having seen wards uselessness against newcastle and with stolarcyzclk off the treatment table he risks throwing him in against wolves. Wel never know. Now no doubt we still lose the majority of games but I'm not having that we would be as record breakingly bad under cooper as we have been under Van Rooney. He had enough about him to not be statistically one of the worst 10 prem manager ever which is all it needed to be level with wolves.

He really wouldn't, Stolarcyk was not fully fit and Ward was Cooper's second choice.

 

18 minutes ago, Paninistickers said:

I think it'd be pretty reasonable to say Cooper wouldn't have blindly stuck with the same losing tactics and players, defeat after defeat after defeat 

 

Okoli would've had more minutes. Buonanotte would certainly have had more minutes..losing Fatawu it's possible Stephy would've had more minutes. Soumare and BdcR and Ayew would all have had less minutes. Those changes alone would've - at worst - garnered the same results 

 

 

which is why he blindly stuck with JJ while Ricardo was fit and we were conceding multiple per game from the right back position...

[Stadt]

We could be prepping for next season with both a new manager and blooding young players. We’re doing neither.

 

RVN can’t coach an attack, it’s not just the players aren’t up to it - I’d expect a bottom half championship to offer more than we are. He’s also barely played Mavididi and Buonanotte, neither of whom are world beaters but they’re not worse than Ayew and Reid.

 

Persisting with players who are only getting worse is dumb, particularly when we actually have a promising crop coming through.

 

There is essentially zero point in Seagrave if we don’t appoint managers that will play youth teamers. If Yamal came through our system he’d get his first start in 18 months time not before being loaned to Stenhousemuir first.

 

Rudkin wields the power at the club and is also the academy director and never does anything to help academy prospects with that autonomy.

Edited 14 March by Stadt

[inckley fox]

17 hours ago, Legend_in_blue said:

Cooper had lost the players.  Despite the poor run of results with Coopers signings making us worse, has RVN lost the players?

It makes no difference whether a set of players like a manager or not if the results are awful. My take on it is - much as it was with Enzo - that these players generally prefer a type of manager which isn't going to bring them success (not at this club, at least) at a higher level. It's not to say that those managers wouldn't pull it off with a better set of players at their disposal, nor that the managers they disliked would fail with a more positive and adaptable squad at theirs.

 

Most players would love to be praised, to play 'expansive' football, and to be made to believe that they're good enough to do it, but those that make the grade at clubs like ours are often those who understand the need to compromise on some of their ideals. I mean, just for starters, Albrighton started out as a quick, tricky winger at Villa but then had a bunch of injuries and later a torrid few months under Pearson while he had to learn how to serve a different kind of purpose. He wasn't technically as gifted as several of our current players, he was just - after a few gripes along the way - ultimately more willing to adapt.

 

We currently have too many players who aren't willing to listen and adapt their game in accordance with the situation we're in. That's what made Cooper's position untenable, and it's why they're quite happy getting mauled now under a manager who is nice to them and happy to make concessions, where possible, for their personal, inviable preferences.

 

It's wonderful in the second tier when a manager encourages you to play as you'd like, and gives you the effusive praise that you deeply desire. Not so good when you need to scrap, work tirelessly, listen to advice or even take in a few serious rocketings, and get better.

 

Perhaps there are good sides out there that could accommodate some of the Wouts and Boubas and Vestys and Harry Winks of this world, but they can't possibly be at the heart of a side that needs to battle fiercely for survival.

[Lako42]

Wasting time. Should be getting a new manager in with an eye on the Championship next season. 

 

 

If this muppet is in charge next season it's an absolute joke 

[ClaphamFox]

14 minutes ago, Lako42 said:

Wasting time. Should be getting a new manager in with an eye on the Championship next season. 

 

 

If this muppet is in charge next season it's an absolute joke 

Extremely limited choice of decent candidates at the moment - nobody in a job is going to quit at this stage of the season. Much better to wait until the summer when we'll have far more to choose from.

Edited 14 March by ClaphamFox

[indierich06]

11 minutes ago, Lako42 said:

Wasting time. Should be getting a new manager in with an eye on the Championship next season. 

 

 

If this muppet is in charge next season it's an absolute joke 

Don't think it's the best idea for a new man to come in and probably oversee a bunch of defeats, fans will be calling for his head by the end of the season - absolutely no doubt.

[Chelmofox]

13 minutes ago, Lako42 said:

Wasting time. Should be getting a new manager in with an eye on the Championship next season. 

 

 

If this muppet is in charge next season it's an absolute joke 

Nah, unless there is someone out there they really think can keep us up, we should be preparing candidates who can get a good preseason in them. Bringing in someone who is going to lose every game is gonna lose the fans before the end of the season.

Edited 14 March by Chelmofox