Keep Holloway

[Trumpet]

Is this a joke??

I have supported Holloway til the end this season, but as soon as he took us down he has to go! I'm sorry but he's got the tactical awareness of a goat! Whilst you see other managers who are technical who analyse games properly, I have saw none of that from Holloway, the bloke simply isn't good enough! I would keep him on as coach though as he is obviously very motivational, but quite simply he is not good enough to be at Leicester City football club, and quite frankley neither are lots of the players!

Hahahaha. Motivational? Where did you get that from?!

[Thracian]

I'm findng it hard to see a reason for sacking Holloway. He's put his heart and soul into this club, and things didn't quite work out on the pitch to not much fault of his own. Every single player over the age of 22 should be sacked (Including Hume)

This squad of players have failed everyone. I don't care whether you have a pet favourite cretin, but every single one of those players should go. That's what's needed.

Holloway couldn't have come in at a worse time. The players here have let everyone down, including Holloway.

I'd be quite sad if Milan got rid of him now. I don't think sacking Holloway is the answer at all.

You can't blame Holloway for what happened, if you do, you're an idiot.

It seems funny to be labelled an idiot when it comes to football. Mechanics yes, computer technology certainly, any number of other subjects...

But football? Having predicted forcefully that scoring would be our problem as early as pre-season, having pleaded with our club to retain Gradel when Newton was signed and Sheehan at Christmas, having said we needed to play Beswick wide to get more goals from free-kicks etc from the left and so many other things I find any defence of Holloway pathetic and being called an idiot hard to stomach.

As I recall Holloway chose to shunt Sheehan off therefore costing his vital goals/assists.

Holloway was in charge when we started running time down against Charlton when leading 1-0.

Holloway preferred to play people out of position rather than Beswick on the left.

Holloway preferred to play sterile midfielders instead of potential goalscorer King.

Holloway moved top scorer Hume from a central striking role.

Holloway's cautious approach meant us hardly competing with any intent and for any length of time at places like Southampton, Coventry, Hull, Watford and Blackpool to name just some.

All those things and we got relegated by one point after failing to seriously try to score against Stoke.

Holloway was categorically to blame and anyone who considers otherwise should have a serious look at his logic.

Any idiot should have been able to keep that squad of players in the Championship - no problem.

If he'd made the right decisions.

And there is no reason to suggest he'll take a different approach in future.

Not that it would matter to me if he did.

With his ability to pick a poor team when a good one's on offer, he could still fail.

[Trumpet]

You have to remember the utter shite of a team he had to take over with. The players he bought we're good on paper but flopped the moment they arrived. I just don't think the manager can be held responsible for the way the players conducted themselves in the games in which he was in charge. They were so awful, terrible infact. There was only so much he could do.

The players in my eyes let this club down. Sheffield Wednesday a perfect example.

Spot on. I'm on the fence for this argument, but put yourself in Holloway's shoes. 10 games left, the players aren't producing anything on the pitch. What would any of you seriously do? I don't think he could do much tbf. You can rant and rave all you want but when the players go on the pitch, they've got to do the business.

[davieG]

Spot on. I'm on the fence for this argument, but put yourself in Holloway's shoes. 10 games left, the players aren't producing anything on the pitch. What would any of you seriously do? I don't think he could do much tbf. You can rant and rave all you want but when the players go on the pitch, they've got to do the business.

Surely a half decent manager should be able to get players 'up' for a game especially one including many with experience of winning this league and avoiding relegation from it. It's no excuse for a manger to say I couldn't get the players interested.

[Thracian]

Spot on. I'm on the fence for this argument, but put yourself in Holloway's shoes. 10 games left, the players aren't producing anything on the pitch. What would any of you seriously do? I don't think he could do much tbf. You can rant and rave all you want but when the players go on the pitch, they've got to do the business.

You sound as if you've never been a manager. Good manager's can change most anything on the field and, apart from the fact we should never have been so deep in the mire with 10 games left anyway, Holloway would have had no problem at all changing his approach if he'd so chosen.

He didn't because he hadn't got the bottle. He opted for caution courtesy of his experienced Chosen Men, his big wage earners, no matter where he had to play them so they'd all get in. It didn't work and was never likely to work.

[Thracian]

but sometimes you have to step away from a situation, take a good long look and then make desicions. summer allows that but it can't always be done when you're in a massive relegation dog fight at a relatively new club

How well you've captured the essence of Holloway. If a manager can't be rational making decisions in the heat of battle then he's no damned use to us.

And fool can manage during the summer.

[Trumpet]

You sound as if you've never been a manager. Good manager's can change most anything on the field and, apart from the fact we should never have been so deep in the mire with 10 games left anyway, Holloway would have had no problem at all changing his approach if he'd so chosen.

He didn't because he hadn't got the bottle. He opted for caution courtesy of his experienced Chosen Men, his big wage earners, no matter where he had to play them so they'd all get in. It didn't work and was never likely to work.

That definately goes back to Milan aswell though.

Your right, I haven't been a manager, only 17 you see

[renards]

I'm findng it hard to see a reason for sacking Holloway. He's put his heart and soul into this club, and things didn't quite work out on the pitch to not much fault of his own. Every single player over the age of 22 should be sacked (Including Hume)

This squad of players have failed everyone. I don't care whether you have a pet favourite cretin, but every single one of those players should go. That's what's needed.

Holloway couldn't have come in at a worse time. The players here have let everyone down, including Holloway.

I'd be quite sad if Milan got rid of him now. I don't think sacking Holloway is the answer at all.

You can't blame Holloway for what happened, if you do, you're an idiot.

Your either 5 years old, Bernie, Mrs H or drunk?

[Benji]

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, especially when things that fail are opposite to what you say

[Bellend Sebastian]

Would people feel quite so strongly if we hadn't been relegated? After all, to be relegated from the second tier with 52 points is more than a little unfortunate - it's only 1 point less than last season, and I'm sure it's close to if not the highest points tally secured by a relegated side in the second tier. It certainly would have seen us safe in all of the last few years.

Holloway's failure has been his inability to lift the club out of mediocrity, and given the fact that it's been a mess for a few years now, turning it round in 6 months to my mind was always going to be a tall order.

I'm not a massive fan of Holloway myself, but keeping him on I would have thought would provide at least as good a chance of progress than bringing in another manager of the questionable quality of some of the candidates being bandied around, who for the most part seem no better or worse than what we've got. I actually think Holloway has got a bit of an advantage over other potential managers in that none will be better motivated than him - he'll feel responsible for the mess we're in and getting us out of it will go some way towards restoring his professional pride, which no matter what anyone says, will have taken a battering

[davieG]

Would people feel quite so strongly if we hadn't been relegated? After all, to be relegated from the second tier with 52 points is more than a little unfortunate - it's only 1 point less than last season, and I'm sure it's close to if not the highest points tally secured by a relegated side in the second tier. It certainly would have seen us safe in all of the last few years.

Holloway's failure has been his inability to lift the club out of mediocrity, and given the fact that it's been a mess for a few years now, turning it round in 6 months to my mind was always going to be a tall order.

I'm not a massive fan of Holloway myself, but keeping him on I would have thought would provide at least as good a chance of progress than bringing in another manager of the questionable quality of some of the candidates being bandied around, who for the most part seem no better or worse than what we've got. I actually think Holloway has got a bit of an advantage over other potential managers in that none will be better motivated than him - he'll feel responsible for the mess we're in and getting us out of it will go some way towards restoring his professional pride, which no matter what anyone says, will have taken a battering

His failure was to take us down below mediocrity. He said finishing 17th (mediocre) was easy but didn't manage it!

[Corky]

His failure was to take us down below mediocrity. He said finishing 17th (mediocre) was easy but didn't manage it!

Quite right. I've got nothing against Holloway the person, but as a manager, I'm not convinced that he will lead us to promotion next season.

[Bellend Sebastian]

His failure was to take us down below mediocrity. He said finishing 17th (mediocre) was easy but didn't manage it!

That's my point though - he hasn't taken us below mediocrity, it's just that this year the way the table has panned out, mediocrity hasn't been enough to keep us up. Obviously we should be aiming higher than the mediocrity of 52 points, but I get the impression that Holloway will go down in history because of a supposed level of unprecedented incompetence, and I think that would be a bit unfair. He's not really any better or worse than his recent predecessors

[Corky]

That's my point though - he hasn't taken us below mediocrity, it's just that this year the way the table has panned out, mediocrity hasn't been enough to keep us up. Obviously we should be aiming higher than the mediocrity of 52 points, but I get the impression that Holloway will go down in history because of a level of unprecedented incompetence, and I think that would be a bit unfair. He's not really any better or worse than his recent predecessors

Though statistically and historically he will be considered the worst, I don't think he is. Taylor is for me, because Holloway had a bunch of players that were not helped by Allen and Megson. Taylor ripped up one of our best team's ever, and then proceeded to ruin the club.

We had plenty of chances to secure safety or pull away from the relegation zone, but everytime we had that chance, we threw it away. That is Holloway's, and the player's, fault. He wasn't helped out by Megson or Allen, Megson more so, but he didn't do himself any favours, like sticking our best attacking threat on the right wing, and playing players out of position.

[Thracian]

That's my point though - he hasn't taken us below mediocrity, it's just that this year the way the table has panned out, mediocrity hasn't been enough to keep us up. Obviously we should be aiming higher than the mediocrity of 52 points, but I get the impression that Holloway will go down in history because of a supposed level of unprecedented incompetence, and I think that would be a bit unfair. He's not really any better or worse than his recent predecessors

]

The standard is set in the present not the past and we fell below it. That's mediocrity in capital letters.

God knows how many weeks ago I said we'd need 53 points to survive.

Holloway didn't get them and I'm not in any way convinced he did all he could in the attempt.

Quite the contrary.

[stevec]

I'm findng it hard to see a reason for sacking Holloway. He's put his heart and soul into this club, and things didn't quite work out on the pitch to not much fault of his own. Every single player over the age of 22 should be sacked (Including Hume)

This squad of players have failed everyone. I don't care whether you have a pet favourite cretin, but every single one of those players should go. That's what's needed.

Holloway couldn't have come in at a worse time. The players here have let everyone down, including Holloway.

I'd be quite sad if Milan got rid of him now. I don't think sacking Holloway is the answer at all.

You can't blame Holloway for what happened, if you do, you're an idiot.

Makes me a very big idiot then - wouldn't be the first time.

[Father Ted]

It seems funny to be labelled an idiot when it comes to football. Mechanics yes, computer technology certainly, any number of other subjects...

But football? Having predicted forcefully that scoring would be our problem as early as pre-season, having pleaded with our club to retain Gradel when Newton was signed and Sheehan at Christmas, having said we needed to play Beswick wide to get more goals from free-kicks etc from the left and so many other things I find any defence of Holloway pathetic and being called an idiot hard to stomach.

As I recall Holloway chose to shunt Sheehan off therefore costing his vital goals/assists.

Holloway was in charge when we stated running time down against Charlton when leading 1-0.

Holloway preferred to play people out of position than Beswick on the left.

Holloway preferred to play sterile midfielders instead of potential goalscorer King.

Holloway moved top scorer Hume from a central striking role.

Holloway's cautious approach meant us hardly competing with any intent and for any length of time at places like Southampton, Coventry, Hull, Watford and Blackpool to name just some.

All those things and we got relegated by one point after failing to seriously try to score against Stoke.

Holloway was categorically to blame and anyone who considers otherwise should have a serious look at his logic.

Any idiot should have been able to keep that squad of players in the Championship - no problem.

If he'd made the right decisions.

And there is no reason to suggest he'll take a different approach in future.

Not that it would matter to me if he did.

With his ability to pick a poor team when a good one's on offer, he could still fail.

I am not going to write on the topic of Holloway anymore, because everything that Thracian says is what I would say. You can't have a manager in charge of a team if they are tactically inept! Even megson would have kept us up on draws!

[Sparky]

It seems funny to be labelled an idiot when it comes to football. Mechanics yes, computer technology certainly, any number of other subjects...

But football? Having predicted forcefully that scoring would be our problem as early as pre-season, having pleaded with our club to retain Gradel when Newton was signed and Sheehan at Christmas, having said we needed to play Beswick wide to get more goals from free-kicks etc from the left and so many other things I find any defence of Holloway pathetic and being called an idiot hard to stomach.

As I recall Holloway chose to shunt Sheehan off therefore costing his vital goals/assists.

Holloway was in charge when we stated running time down against Charlton when leading 1-0.

Holloway preferred to play people out of position than Beswick on the left.

Holloway preferred to play sterile midfielders instead of potential goalscorer King.

Holloway moved top scorer Hume from a central striking role.

Holloway's cautious approach meant us hardly competing with any intent and for any length of time at places like Southampton, Coventry, Hull, Watford and Blackpool to name just some.

All those things and we got relegated by one point after failing to seriously try to score against Stoke.

Holloway was categorically to blame and anyone who considers otherwise should have a serious look at his logic.

Any idiot should have been able to keep that squad of players in the Championship - no problem.

If he'd made the right decisions.

And there is no reason to suggest he'll take a different approach in future.

Not that it would matter to me if he did.

With his ability to pick a poor team when a good one's on offer, he could still fail.

]

The standard is set in the present not the past and we fell below it. That's mediocrity in capital letters.

God knows how many weeks ago I said we'd need 53 points to survive.

Holloway didn't get them and I'm not in any way convinced he did all he could in the attempt.

Quite the contrary.

Id lend you my trumpet but you seem to being doing a good job of blowing your own

[Thracian]

Id lend you my trumpet but you seem to being doing a good job of blowing your own

I tell it as it is. If you want me to be sincerely modest about 1000 subjects I know sod all about that's no problem. But it's a fine line between false modesty and personal confidence/belief and I've never lacked the latter where sport is concerned.

At least if I have a view I stand by it and defend it.

As for the 53 points I would rather not have needed to mention them. I'd rather we'd just gone all out to get them.

[Super Arj]

ive said this before

keep holloway unless we can get Zidane to manage us

[Sparky]

I tell it as it is. If you want me to be sincerely modest about 1000 subjects I know sod all about that's no problem. But it's a fine line between false modesty and personal confidence/belief and I've never lacked the latter where sport is concerned.

At least if I have a view I stand by it and defend it.

Yeah but its every bleeding post fella , im confident in my ablitys to do this that and the other in life and in football but if people dont agree with me ill let it go as it is their opinion and everybody is entitled to it . In fairness i used to actually look forward to reading your points on selection / tactics / mentallity but its just same old same old every post

You talk about lets go out and score then score again mentality which sounds fantastic but how many Managers in the MODERN game manage to go with that approach ? Wenger perhaps , Mowbray at west brom this season ? Even Fergie knows when its time to slow a game down

edit , this is not a pro Holloway post , i think he has to be replaced . Newell for me

[Thracian]

Yeah but its every bleeding post fella , im confident in my ablitys to do this that and the other in life and in football but if people dont agree with me ill let it go as it is their opinion and everybody is entitled to it . In fairness i used to actually look forward to reading your points on selection / tactics / mentallity but its just same old same old every post

You talk about lets go out and score then score again mentality which sounds fantastic but how many Managers in the MODERN game manage to go with that approach ? Wenger perhaps , Mowbray at west brom this season ? Even Fergie knows when its time to slow a game down

Fergie can be forgiven most things with his record and for his massive and wonderful contribution to preserving the spirit of attacking football. But his putting the brakes on has cost him dearly at times.

Wenger too has helped shdow the joy that can be football and with the sort of success I would have thought might have encouraged others.

But it matters not. A good manager sets his own standards. What the hell does it matter what others do?

[The People's Hero]

Thracian, it's a lovely summers day.

Get the fu ck over yourself and enjoy your life.

[davieG]

Thracian, it's a lovely summers day.

Get the fu ck over yourself and enjoy your life.

Yes do what I've just done - paint the kitchen ceiling

[Sparky]

Fergie can be forgiven most things with his record and for his massive and wonderful contribution to preserving the spirit of attacking football. But his putting the brakes on has cost him dearly at times.

But isolated incidents , Your a big fan of Keegan but when England played Portugal (euro 2000) we led 2-0 and it was blindinly obvious that a Possesion game was required with patience when building attacks but he continued his "gung ho" approach and it cost us dear .

Attacking football is superb on the eye , i love it . But football has changed , in the 60s and 70s wingers were almost part of the forward line , nowadays they are expected to work like horses getting back to support full backs much to the detriment of the game . Today football is purely about results