The Future of Ollie

[DanTheFoxBhoy]

He is everything we need at the moment - enthusiastic, positive, tactically aware (despite what some people say about him on here), knows what his job is and is prepared to get out there and do it.

If we can manage a respectable run of upcoming results and manage a decent finish, I can see him staying on for next season.

[Plymouth Pete]

Think you may have got the wrong bloke, Paul Sturrock had most of his "star" players sold, rebuilt the side and we have now won four on the spin and are back in a play off position, all in the same time as Ollie has had.

[LeeCovFox]

Think you may have got the wrong bloke, Paul Sturrock had most of his "star" players sold, rebuilt the side and we have now won four on the spin and are back in a play off position, all in the same time as Ollie has had.

All with the infrastructure set up by Holloway. Ollie has a more difficult job. Leicester City, in reality, have not had an infrastructure geared for success since Pete Taylor vandalised the good work done by Brian Little, Mark McGhee to an extent, and Martin O'Neill. And seriously, good luck to Plymouth. I like you as a club, and they are just the kind of club who would freshen up the Premier League, in the same way that Barnsley did in the late 90's. Its always good to see a club achieve through good management rather than a wealthy benefactor. I rate Paul Sturrock as well, always have done, since his St. Johnstone days. He was given a raw deal at Southampton, winning only one game less than he lost, in only 13 games.

[Babylon]

Think you may have got the wrong bloke, Paul Sturrock had most of his "star" players sold, rebuilt the side and we have now won four on the spin and are back in a play off position, all in the same time as Ollie has had.

Yes you can really compare the two situations can't you. Have you had 6 managers in the last year, 21 players come in since the summer and did sturrock take over a rotten team?

You are now back to where you were when Holloway left.

[Thracian]

Sorry but I just don't get this "chosen men" stuff you keep spouting off.

Who are they?

Mccauley, kisbnorbo, Clemence or perhaps Oakley (who you thought was a decent signing) or perhaps Howard who has at least scored 3 goals or perhaps Dj who you want to play but in all honesty looks disinterested most of the time and was well overpriced at 500k let alone what we paid for him or maybe Hume. This is the spine of our team.

They have played the most games of late (except DJ) so they must be the chosen men but who would you play instead. I challenge you to puit out a team from players currently available (ie not injured or on loan)without any of those players in it that would be any better than the one with them.

Chosen Men = McAuley, Kisnorbo, Clapham, Clemence, Oakley, Hume, Howard, Hayles, Laczko (for whatever reason).

Sidelined/exiled: Wesolowski, King, Beswick, Gradel (Ollie chose to continue loaning him out), Shush!.

At the very least the sidelined players should be on the bench providing genuine competition for the Chosen Men but they're not.

You might see the Chosen Men as the spine of our team - as I'm sure Holloway does - but who among them have ever deserved a nailed-on place?

I'd never choose to play two such poor passers at centre-back together. Despite their undoubted "stopper" qualities we need people who can launch attacks at the back.

Clapham's a safe and competent rather than a "happening" player. We no longer have Shush!, even as an option, and it's no coincidence that the three or four chances he created every game have disappeared.

Clemence did well against Norwich at home but otherwise when else has he roused the troops as a skipper and played like a hero? But his logical challengers, Weso and King no longer even feature, conveniently.

Oakley seems okay. He'd stay "Chosen" for me though he'd sure know he had some competition.

Hume was another to do well against Norwich but overall is no right winger and not a patch on the exiled Gradel who Holloway chose to keep out of the way. even Bori doesn't seem to figure any more as a potential replacement for the "Chosen" Hume.

Howard's the only person we've got for his role, there's no competition and Hayles gets squeezed in at every opportunity though neither are what I'd call especially exciting and as for Laczko getting in ahead of Beswick I can scarcely believe it.

I saw the two play in the same reserves match and Beswick as a left-back was a far more effective winger than Laczko.

So, given the choice, I'd replace or have replacements ready for all but three your chosen spine.

My team would have speed, passing ability, firepower and enthusiasm and from the players available to Holloway from January it would probably read:

Alnwick,

Lee Cox, Stearman, Kisnorbo, Clapham/Mattock;

Gradel, Wesolwoski, Oakley, Beswick;

Howard, Campbell.

Bench:

Chambers/N'Gotty, Shush!, King/Kishishev/Clemence, Hume, Fryatt.

The above side would be much closer to the pass-and-move team I'd see as capable of moving us forward.

[Jimmy]

Chosen Men = McAuley, Kisnorbo, Clapham, Clemence, Oakley, Hume, Howard, Hayles, Laczko (for whatever reason).

Sidelined/exiled: Wesolowski, King, Beswick, Gradel (Ollie chose to continue loaning him out), Shush!.

At the very least the sidelined players should be on the bench providing genuine competition for the Chosen Men but they're not.

You might see the Chosen Men as the spine of our team - as I'm sure Holloway does - but who among them have ever deserved a nailed-on place?

I'd never choose to play two such poor passers at centre-back together. Despite their undoubted "stopper" qualities we need people who can launch attacks at the back.

Clapham's a safe and competent rather than a "happening" player. We no longer have Shush!, even as an option, and it's no coincidence that the three or four chances he created every game have disappeared.

Clemence did well against Norwich at home but otherwise when else has he roused the troops as a skipper and played like a hero? But his logical challengers, Weso and King no longer even feature, conveniently.

Oakley seems okay. He'd stay "Chosen" for me though he'd sure know he had some competition.

Hume was another to do well against Norwich but overall is no right winger and not a patch on the exiled Gradel who Holloway chose to keep out of the way. even Bori doesn't seem to figure any more as a potential replacement for the "Chosen" Hume.

Howard's the only person we've got for his role, there's no competition and Hayles gets squeezed in at every opportunity though neither are what I'd call especially exciting and as for Laczko getting in ahead of Beswick I can scarcely believe it.

I saw the two play in the same reserves match and Beswick as a left-back was a far more effective winger than Laczko.

So, given the choice, I'd replace or have replacements ready for all but three your chosen spine.

My team would have speed, passing ability, firepower and enthusiasm and from the players available to Holloway from January it would probably read:

Alnwick,

Lee Cox, Stearman, Kisnorbo, Clapham/Mattock;

Gradel, Wesolwoski, Oakley, Beswick;

Howard, Campbell.

Bench:

Chambers/N'Gotty, Shush!, King/Kishishev/Clemence, Hume, Fryatt.

The above side would be much closer to the pass-and-move team I'd see as capable of moving us forward.

I almost hate to say this but I'd quite like to see that team

[Trav Le Bleu]

We have to look at the whole of Ollies tenure now, not just kneejerk reactions after this defeat.

The fact is he has had 20 games in charge, your telling me 20 games isn't long enough to get things right and get some consistency?

You mean like MON did?

Chosen Men = McAuley, Kisnorbo, Clapham, Clemence, Oakley, Hume, Howard, Hayles, Laczko (for whatever reason).

Sidelined/exiled: Wesolowski, King, Beswick, Gradel (Ollie chose to continue loaning him out), Shush!.

No, not exiled... young players with little experience who should not be expected to play regularly!

They will come good eventually, but now is not the time to rely on teenagers!

"You'll never win anything with kids" - Alan Hansen. I reckon he knows a thing or two about football.

[Father Ted]

Any suggestions?

I'll probably hang onto him, to see why he does in the Summer transfer window. Who knows? He could gte another Ebanks-Blake or another Hamolsi...

Well TBH the only plus point of his reign so far are the signings of Howard and Oakley - and there down to Gary Penrice so he hasn't really done anything.

[Father Ted]

I almost hate to say this but I'd quite like to see that team

and me! The prospect of Gradel, no Clemence but Wesolowski and the risk of Lee Cox makes me think thats good.

[Thracian]

All with the infrastructure set up by Holloway. Ollie has a more difficult job. Leicester City, in reality, have not had an infrastructure geared for success since Pete Taylor vandalised the good work done by Brian Little, Mark McGhee to an extent, and Martin O'Neill. And seriously, good luck to Plymouth. I like you as a club, and they are just the kind of club who would freshen up the Premier League, in the same way that Barnsley did in the late 90's. Its always good to see a club achieve through good management rather than a wealthy benefactor. I rate Paul Sturrock as well, always have done, since his St. Johnstone days. He was given a raw deal at Southampton, winning only one game less than he lost, in only 13 games.

I always read your comments with interest because you seem to know the game and always reflect a belief in positive football.

But I'm not sure we're lacking infrastructure.

I've rarely been more encouraged by the development areas of the club - UNTIL we reach first team level where the emphasis seems to change.

Throughout the club we pass, move and get our team to go forward and back together. That applies from outset through to and including the reserves, win or lose.

But once we get to the first team the team no longer operates as a single unit, though we were close against Norwich.

We have a defence, a midfield and an attack.

Without wishing to complicate that comment with explanations, this is what needs to change. The first team needs to have all its players capable of operating together as a single unit both at home and away.

But I'm not sure Holloway has the will to make what would be uncomfortable, perhaps even unsettling decisions.

And our reliance on "experience" now seems so close to Kelly's policy that I cannot help but wonder if its what Mandaric wants.

Unless there are yet more dramatic developments I cannot see the policy changing. Trouble is, if it works and we claw our way to safety, the narrow-minded policy will be vindicated like last season, just.

But it will never take us forward.

We need an exciting team, a team that asks questions of everyone and sets its own standards.

Not a team whose collective effect is one of plodding predictability.

[davieG]

You mean like MON did?

No, not exiled... young players with little experience who should not be expected to play regularly!

They will come good eventually, but now is not the time to rely on teenagers!

"You'll never win anything with kids" - Alan Hansen. I reckon he knows a thing or two about football.

Trouble is he was proved spectacularly wrong with that statement at that time.

[Jimmy]

"You'll never win anything with kids" - Alan Hansen. I reckon he knows a thing or two about football.

which he said about Manchester Uniteds dominant team of the 90's ...

yeah he was totally right

[Thracian]

You mean like MON did?

No, not exiled... young players with little experience who should not be expected to play regularly!

They will come good eventually, but now is not the time to rely on teenagers!

"You'll never win anything with kids" - Alan Hansen. I reckon he knows a thing or two about football.

I rest my case.

[Sniffer-Clarke]

But what IF sacking or keeping him is the difference between League 1 and staying in this division next season?

That is exactly my point mate, if we get relegated [ god help us ] they will be coming on the forum saying YEAH WE SHOULD HAVE SACKED HOLLOWAY IN FEB .

[volpeazzurro]

rediscover the fun of playing? fook that, we're in a relegation battle, pull your finger out and look like you give a damn! (the players, not leecovfox)

It won't be long now at this rate until we get into the Kelly/Worthington situation like last year possibly. Whilst Ollie did inherit problems, he's also been allowed to bring some of his own players in. He talks a good game and is very media friendly and easy to like BUT, is he a good manager? If you look at somebody like Warnock (love him or hate him) he also inherited a club in dire straights but after just a couple of matches took them on a 15 game or so unbeaten run. Also, many of the clubs above us have had nothing in the way of the financial support that Ollie has had since he got here. At this moment in time, my only reason for not getting rid of Ollie at this point would be that there's no-one better available! As for Ince, why would he want to come to this debacle when he's with a club who look well capable of promotion thereby adding to his already growing impressive CV.

Cheers.

[Lovingit]

SACK THE **** NOW I HAVE NEVER COME ACROSS SUCH A SELF ABSORBED TOSSER WHO THINK HE'S BETTER THAN EVERYONE. HIS MANAGERIAL SKILLS ARE THE EQUIVALENT OF A POLE DANCERS SKILLS WITHOUT A POLE, SHIT! HE IS SO INEPT IT'S UNREAL. WE ARE JUST SHIT. HIS NEW PLAYERS ARE SHIT. HE IS SHIT. SACK SHIT NOW.

[ssisodia]

Tight call. We have 12 games left this season.

If we slip into the relegation zone with say 6 games left we should get rid.

If we manage to hover around this position and manage to stay up this season, review the position in the summer. Let him sort out the mess we have, and I mean a complete clear out. Give him enough rope, then come end Sept and no improvement, then we should get shot.

On a side note, my biggest issue is there is not a leader on the pitch at the moment. Walshie (who does the commentary on the Beeb with that knob Barber) is crying out for a leader to put the fear of god into these players. Clemence does not do that for me, the back 4 are too quiet.