Devil's Advocate Re Pearson

[Mack]

It seems to me a lot of people thought Pearson was something special when it came to managing our club, and granted he got us back up the first time of asking as we escaped lower league football hell and for that I thank him.

I wanted to run a few points past you for discussion.

1/ He proved more than once last season that tactically he was pretty much plan a and if they did'nt work there was no plan b. Because we were a fresh face on the scene last season it did'nt become too much of a factor, but this season many teams would have found out Pearson's system.

2/ The style of football we played under Pearson was not the best, and often left a flat atmosphere at the Walkers. Despite being relatively successful last season I would prefer someone in charge who plays a more attractive style of play.

3/ The whole 'Stringer debacle' gave the public a window into the World of Pearson. The bloke seemed to be allergic to criticism and I can imagine on the training ground there were situations that were less than healthy.

4/ Pearson hardly had a sparkling CV when Mandaric saw something in him but he has shown no loyalty to the club and has jumped ship to a club that are hardly an attractive proposition. He seems a man driven by his own agenda and we could do with someone with the club at heart.

5/ Pearson knew he overachieved last season and also knew the chances of him doing the same or better this season were small as the transfer kitty is small, he has upset some of the current squad and he has run out of tactical ideas. So a move on was best for both parties.

[harpendenfox]

It seems to me a lot of people thought Pearson was something special when it came to managing our club, and granted he got us back up the first time of asking as we escaped lower league football hell and for that I thank him.

I wanted to run a few points past you for discussion.

1/ He proved more than once last season that tactically he was pretty much plan a and if they did'nt work there was no plan b. Because we were a fresh face on the scene last season it did'nt become too much of a factor, but this season many teams would have found out Pearson's system.

2/ The style of football we played under Pearson was not the best, and often left a flat atmosphere at the Walkers. Despite being relatively successful last season I would prefer someone in charge who plays a more attractive style of play.

3/ The whole 'Stringer debacle' gave the public a window into the World of Pearson. The bloke seemed to be allergic to criticism and I can imagine on the training ground there were situations that were less than healthy.

4/ Pearson hardly had a sparkling CV when Mandaric saw something in him but he has shown no loyalty to the club and has jumped ship to a club that are hardly an attractive proposition. He seems a man driven by his own agenda and we could do with someone with the club at heart.

5/ Pearson knew he overachieved last season and also knew the chances of him doing the same or better this season were small as the transfer kitty is small, he has upset some of the current squad and he has run out of tactical ideas. So a move on was best for both parties.

Some reasonable points Mack, but in truth aren't we all driven by our own agenda (your point 4), if we're really honest?

[kitty_katt_83]

It seems to me a lot of people thought Pearson was something special when it came to managing our club, and granted he got us back up the first time of asking as we escaped lower league football hell and for that I thank him.

I wanted to run a few points past you for discussion.

1/ He proved more than once last season that tactically he was pretty much plan a and if they did'nt work there was no plan b. Because we were a fresh face on the scene last season it did'nt become too much of a factor, but this season many teams would have found out Pearson's system.

2/ The style of football we played under Pearson was not the best, and often left a flat atmosphere at the Walkers. Despite being relatively successful last season I would prefer someone in charge who plays a more attractive style of play.

3/ The whole 'Stringer debacle' gave the public a window into the World of Pearson. The bloke seemed to be allergic to criticism and I can imagine on the training ground there were situations that were less than healthy.

4/ Pearson hardly had a sparkling CV when Mandaric saw something in him but he has shown no loyalty to the club and has jumped ship to a club that are hardly an attractive proposition. He seems a man driven by his own agenda and we could do with someone with the club at heart.

5/ Pearson knew he overachieved last season and also knew the chances of him doing the same or better this season were small as the transfer kitty is small, he has upset some of the current squad and he has run out of tactical ideas. So a move on was best for both parties.

I think the wheels started coming off a while ago to be honest! Little things towards the end of the season made me think all wasnt well in the ranks.

The Oakley incident at D**by,the Brown incident at D**by,his fall out with Stringer,if you watched him after the home games he hardly showed the same appreciation to the fans like he used to.

Its the same in any situation you always look back and see things you didnt see at the time and for that maybe its a good thing he's trundled off to H**l.

One thing that used to annoy the hell out of me with Pearson was his late subs!! One thing i wont miss!!

[Corky]

It seems to me a lot of people thought Pearson was something special when it came to managing our club, and granted he got us back up the first time of asking as we escaped lower league football hell and for that I thank him.

I wanted to run a few points past you for discussion.

1/ He proved more than once last season that tactically he was pretty much plan a and if they did'nt work there was no plan b. Because we were a fresh face on the scene last season it did'nt become too much of a factor, but this season many teams would have found out Pearson's system.

2/ The style of football we played under Pearson was not the best, and often left a flat atmosphere at the Walkers. Despite being relatively successful last season I would prefer someone in charge who plays a more attractive style of play.

3/ The whole 'Stringer debacle' gave the public a window into the World of Pearson. The bloke seemed to be allergic to criticism and I can imagine on the training ground there were situations that were less than healthy.

4/ Pearson hardly had a sparkling CV when Mandaric saw something in him but he has shown no loyalty to the club and has jumped ship to a club that are hardly an attractive proposition. He seems a man driven by his own agenda and we could do with someone with the club at heart.

5/ Pearson knew he overachieved last season and also knew the chances of him doing the same or better this season were small as the transfer kitty is small, he has upset some of the current squad and he has run out of tactical ideas. So a move on was best for both parties.

Some good points there.

1/ I thoguht one of his strengths was his substitutions. Yes some were too late, but the opening day for example, struggling, 1-0 down, brings on pace which gets us two goals and wins the game.

2/ It wasn't that attractive on the whole, but there were some spells where we knocked it about nicely and played some very attractive football.

3/ He didn't seem a big fan of the media overall really.

4/ We don't know the real reasons as to why he left. Maybe if things had been different he might've stayed, he didn't look to me like a bloke who was totally unhappy at the club. But we'll probably never know why he's gone.

5/ Yes, he did overachieve, and it probably would've been harder to sustain that without decent investment. I suppose we'll see whether it was the best move around Christmas/ New Year.

[Ric Flair]

For a minute there I thought we'd been linked with Dick Advocaat.

[Lillehamring]

it's very easy to sound all sour grapesy in threads like this, but my biggest problem with NP was our complete inability to become effective in the final third, which was almost exclusively down to the fact that he never got the best out of a very reasonable collection of midfielders.

the way we played and with the forwards we had, it was apparent that we played best with out and out wingers, especially when dyer or n'guessan were correctly employed - and with the promising adams distant from the bench let alone the pitch and the promising gradel 'too good to be playing', we were too often left with gallagher and lyle oakley as our wingers.

the fact that gally was a premier league striker playing on the wing suggests that NP was as guilty of square-peg-syndrome as any other manager, kermo is another example of a player used particularly ineffectively.

given the midfielders we had, NP never really found his best combo (until maybe he dropped oakley for the run in), and never really had a settled team.

i'm on record supporting pearson from day 1, and i'm sad to see him go from the point of stability, but from a performance issue i think he can be adequately replaced, unlike perhaps steve walsh who, the more i think of it, was the real reason for our success. for the first time since o'neill we actually have players that can be considered heroes.

[Mack]

I totally agree in the final third we often looked bereft of ideas. The lack of width and use of central midfielders and strikers in wide areas while our genuine wide players sat on the bench was a real sense of frustration.

It would be lovely to see someone come in and employ those talented wide players we have to beat a full back and supply some quality into the box, and not see everything we do attack wise go down the middle in a predictable fashion.

[mitchofox]

I totally agree in the final third we often looked bereft of ideas. The lack of width and use of central midfielders and strikers in wide areas while our genuine wide players sat on the bench was a real sense of frustration.

It would be lovely to see someone come in and employ those talented wide players we have to beat a full back and supply some quality into the box, and not see everything we do attack wise go down the middle in a predictable fashion.

I thought we dropped alot of points last season with poor team performances. Bristol at home Derby at home Reading at home S****horpe away to name a few

[marbelladave]

Many of you who have read my posts will know that I was not Pearson's biggest fan, However he did completely re-organise and energise the playing side of the club and gave us two pretty successful seasons.

Thanks Nigel...

Our relative success last season will be difficult to duplicate without freshening up the squad and I think Pearson realised this. The lack of funds to perform this is probably at the core of Pearson's decision to leave.

Given that the squad will not change that much, maybe a change of manager is exactly what the team needs?

[shen]

Many of you who have read my posts will know that I was not Pearson's biggest fan, However he did completely re-organise and energise the playing side of the club and gave us two pretty successful seasons.

Thanks Nigel...

Our relative success last season will be difficult to duplicate without freshening up the squad and I think Pearson realised this. The lack of funds to perform this is probably at the core of Pearson's decision to leave.

Given that the squad will not change that much, maybe a change of manager is exactly what the team needs?

If Walsh is really the man behind many of our good signings these past years, then I believe he's the one we will miss the most. There's no denying Pearson got the best out of Fryatt though. However there have to be a few question marks over his handling of Gradel and DJ in particular. It would also be interesting to know how involved he was in the dressing room bust up before the Cardiff games.

[MPH]

I think if our transfer.budget was so small then that might of been a very frustrating thing for him- like peeing into the wind. He. Is ambitiois. Who isn't? I would be much more concerned if we had a manager who was happy with just surviving in this division. I think tapping into his ambition is what got us into the play offs.

[marbelladave]

If Walsh is really the man behind many of our good signings these past years, then I believe he's the one we will miss the most. There's no denying Pearson got the best out of Fryatt though. However there have to be a few question marks over his handling of Gradel and DJ in particular. It would also be interesting to know how involved he was in the dressing room bust up before the Cardiff games.

Recruitment was a strong point but a new manager will have new contacts... Clearly we need some new players and at minimum cost, very challenging for the new man.

Man management was generally considered a strong point, however stories are beginning to emerge that this may not have been the case. It seems that there are a number of disgruntled players who feel they were not given a chance, maybe a new manager will make a difference, we shall see.

I think if our transfer.budget was so small then that might of been a very frustrating thing for him- like peeing into the wind. He. Is ambitiois. Who isn't? I would be much more concerned if we had a manager who was happy with just surviving in this division. I think tapping into his ambition is what got us into the play offs.

Milan and the board can not allow themselves to be dictated to by the ambitions of the manager. The club is losing money, so careful money management is the order of the day.

Whilst I believe money issues are the core of the issue I think it is entirely possible that there was a fundamental disagreement as to just how successful Pearson actually was. Pearson will point at promotion and a playoff place, good results alright but the management (Hoos?) will counter with the fact that the Div 1 championship was delivered by what was still really a Championship level side, the fact that we got it wrong in the playoffs this season, the problems revolving around Campbell and no doubt other points we know nothing about.

[Guest Basildon Fox]

It seems to me that MM wanted him out and NP wanted out. The way this has been done probably suits both parties. This way we haven't needed to pay compo for sacking NP and he has been able to secure what he wanted,. assurances about backroom staff etc. Win Win situation........Or Lose lose, depends on what happens next with who we appoint and where the teams finish at the end of the season. Could well come back to haunt both parties.

[shen]

Recruitment was a strong point but a new manager will have new contacts... Clearly we need some new players and at minimum cost, very challenging for the new man.

Man management was generally considered a strong point, however stories are beginning to emerge that this may not have been the case. It seems that there are a number of disgruntled players who feel they were not given a chance, maybe a new manager will make a difference, we shall see.

Of course he will, but if those 'contacts' are as competent as those under Holloway and Allen then there's a reason to be worried! What I'm a bit mystified about is that NP + staff leave shortly after having brought in Tom Kennedy, which to me indicates that the Hull interest is very recent and hasn't been on the table for very long.

I can see the point about man management, but really his strength was squad management. He did fall out with players, but he had the ability to give the team some confidence and self-belief, which was very noticeable in the cases of Morrison, Hobbs and Fryatt at least.

In any case he did do SOMETHING right, otherwise we wouldn't have experienced the success we've had over the past two seasons.

[marbelladave]

Of course he will, but if those 'contacts' are as competent as those under Holloway and Allen then there's a reason to be worried! What I'm a bit mystified about is that NP + staff leave shortly after having brought in Tom Kennedy, which to me indicates that the Hull interest is very recent and hasn't been on the table for very long.

I can see the point about man management, but really his strength was squad management. He did fall out with players, but he had the ability to give the team some confidence and self-belief, which was very noticeable in the cases of Morrison, Hobbs and Fryatt at least.

In any case he did do SOMETHING right, otherwise we wouldn't have experienced the success we've had over the past two seasons.

On the other hand we might get a manager who gets in better players than Pearson / Walsh, pure speculation at this stage.

Kennedy may have been lined up months ago, so the timing is unclear.

I believe Morrison is somewhat unimpressed at getting so few games in central defense, with Brown seemingly preferred anyone would be. Gradel was never given a chance and both N'Guessan and Gallagher were clearly unhappy being given defensive roles when deployed wide.

On the other hand some of his work was first class, as I acknowledged in an earlier post.

[Lillehamring]

Of course he will, but if those 'contacts' are as competent as those under Holloway and Allen then there's a reason to be worried! What I'm a bit mystified about is that NP + staff leave shortly after having brought in Tom Kennedy, which to me indicates that the Hull interest is very recent and hasn't been on the table for very long.

I can see the point about man management, but really his strength was squad management. He did fall out with players, but he had the ability to give the team some confidence and self-belief, which was very noticeable in the cases of Morrison, Hobbs and Fryatt at least.

In any case he did do SOMETHING right, otherwise we wouldn't have experienced the success we've had over the past two seasons.

he man managed certain players very well, but he seemed to have a bit of tunnel vision, what i mean is that while he got some individual players playing well, as a team we rarely clicked.

i get the feeling that players like hobbs and king and fryatt are naturally gifted players who don't really need management, they seem to be great pro's who are well self-motivated. as far as man management, at the other end of the scale, he didn't really get the best out of wellens, at least not with any consistency, same with howard, who only really hit form at the end of the season

he pretty much scared off/abandoned DJ and gradel and we never saw the best of kermo and n'guessan and the less said about mcgivern and neilsen the better.

in general, it was a very rare thing for us to play 2 decent halves of footy in one game.

christ, the more i think about it, the more it seems like we had a half decent squad, playing in a mediocre league. the positive thing then, i guess, is that if we can find a manager who can sort out the failings of the current squad, then we know we have a pretty good, by championship standards, squad - assuming we don't sell em all.

[carterfox90]

as most of us saw last season at times the performances were very poor & remember many games the boos that came out & even thought myself how we were doing so well but at times we played some great stuff ie: 1st half against covscum was brilliant but the 2nd half was crap still feel thankful to pearson for 2 good seasons but fear we will miss walsh more than pearson

[flanimal]

I know it's probably been talked out but I believe Pearson is replaceable. The one thing that sticks out in my mind about the Pearson era was good scouting and good signings, which was probably not anything to do with him.

Pearson was quite tactically inferior. Very stubborn, playing systems that didn't seem to work. Constantly played players out of position. I think he was generally a good motivater, and a good man (deserting Leicester aside) but that is replaceable in the manager world. Overall, I think Pearson took us as far as he could, and would struggle in the Premier League playing the way he did, and resorting to long ball as he often did (I don't know if the long ball was down to him, but he didn't seem to stop people doing it).

I'm disappointed he's gone, as I thought he could have developed into a quality manager, but I'm not heartbroken. Doing well with Leicester aside, I hope Hull struggle the same way Wolves struggled Mark McGhee - forcing him into the manager oblivion!

[Daggers]

If Walsh is really the man behind many of our good signings these past years, then I believe he's the one we will miss the most. There's no denying Pearson got the best out of Fryatt though. However there have to be a few question marks over his handling of Gradel and DJ in particular. It would also be interesting to know how involved he was in the dressing room bust up before the Cardiff games.

One word: Neilsen

[marbelladave]

he man managed certain players very well, but he seemed to have a bit of tunnel vision, what i mean is that while he got some individual players playing well, as a team we rarely clicked.

i get the feeling that players like hobbs and king and fryatt are naturally gifted players who don't really need management, they seem to be great pro's who are well self-motivated. as far as man management, at the other end of the scale, he didn't really get the best out of wellens, at least not with any consistency, same with howard, who only really hit form at the end of the season

he pretty much scared off/abandoned DJ and gradel and we never saw the best of kermo and n'guessan and the less said about mcgivern and neilsen the better.

in general, it was a very rare thing for us to play 2 decent halves of footy in one game.

christ, the more i think about it, the more it seems like we had a half decent squad, playing in a mediocre league. the positive thing then, i guess, is that if we can find a manager who can sort out the failings of the current squad, then we know we have a pretty good, by championship standards, squad - assuming we don't sell em all.

Very nicely put.

We can move on from here and do it in a very positive manner.

All depend on who we get in as a manager...

This does not have to be a disaster, really...

[Koke]

I know it's probably been talked out but I believe Pearson is replaceable. The one thing that sticks out in my mind about the Pearson era was good scouting and good signings, which was probably not anything to do with him.

Pearson was quite tactically inferior. Very stubborn, playing systems that didn't seem to work. Constantly played players out of position. I think he was generally a good motivater, and a good man (deserting Leicester aside) but that is replaceable in the manager world. Overall, I think Pearson took us as far as he could, and would struggle in the Premier League playing the way he did, and resorting to long ball as he often did (I don't know if the long ball was down to him, but he didn't seem to stop people doing it).

I'm disappointed he's gone, as I thought he could have developed into a quality manager, but I'm not heartbroken. Doing well with Leicester aside, I hope Hull struggle the same way Wolves struggled Mark McGhee - forcing him into the manager oblivion!

I think tactically he's pretty sound and knows his stuff. His type of football is pretty grim most of the time though, but it is quite effective as it showed.

The only criticism I have of Pearson is his loyalty to certain players. it took up until March until he came to his senses and dropped Matt Oakley, who was virtually a passenger from November onwards. Richie Wellens also put in several below par displays over the course of the seasons, but Pearson stuck with him and we were practically grinding out results due to our midfield bar King being completely non-existent.

Overall, his postives far outweigh his negatives and I'm sad to see him go. But he is replaceable.

[Lillehamring]

Very nicely put.

We can move on from here and do it in a very positive manner.

All depend on who we get in as a manager...

This does not have to be a disaster, really...

thanks, i mean i'm basing it almost entirely on a mixture of what i caught on tv and what the (smart) people on here have said, plus radio leicester - so maybe i understand the situation with a simplicity that is lost when you get to witness all the nuances of a live match...

[breadandcheese]

The only criticism I have of Pearson is his loyalty to certain players. it took up until March until he came to his senses and dropped Matt Oakley, who was virtually a passenger from November onwards. Richie Wellens also put in several below par displays over the course of the seasons, but Pearson stuck with him and we were practically grinding out results due to our midfield bar King being completely non-existent.

That loyalty came back to roost with a herculean effort by Wellens in Cardiff for the 2nd leg. Despite being injured, with no more substitutions, he played on with 1 leg in the extra time.

[marbelladave]

thanks, i mean i'm basing it almost entirely on a mixture of what i caught on tv and what the (smart) people on here have said, plus radio leicester - so maybe i understand the situation with a simplicity that is lost when you get to witness all the nuances of a live match...

It is quite amazing that people can look at the same game and see completely different things, I suppose it depends on what you are looking to get out of the game. Some folks just want a few beers and a good sing, nothing wrong with that but getting heavily involved off the pitch sometimes makes it difficult to be totally aware what is happening on it. Some see the result as everything and do not give a shit about the quality of the performance, and there are others who have their own agendas, regarding particular players for example.

As you are aware, I give my views on the games that I see with just one thing in mind, I want to see my team play the best they can all the time. Of course I know there will be times when that does not happen but in general terms the better you play, the better your results will be. I often get given a hard time because I criticise a performance even though we might have got a result, but if you continue with sub-standard performances you will stop getting results.

Furthermore under Pearson we played (mostly) what is politely known as 'direct' football. Making this style work for you depends on a lot of things including luck. Sometimes when your luck is in, the second ball falls for you and you get a win, sometimes in similar circumstances, it does not and you don't, totally different results though the performance may be similarly mediocre in both games.

Personally I would like to see us play a more structured game with the ball played through midfield and into feet, this way if you are dominating a game you can expect to make chances and win games by playing better than the opposition, simple really. During the season past I saw some evidence that we can actually play in that manner but usually such play was cut short by instructions from the bench to get the ball forward more quickly. It was this that annoyed and frustrated me most often.

My hope is that a new manager will see the potential that remained unlocked under Pearson and find a way to unleash it.

As I said, simple really.

[Captain...]

Whilst I agree that Pearson is limited as a manager, compare him to every manager before him since MON, Micky Adams aside he was far more successful, with the results, the performances, the signings and most importantly the team spirit. He also brought pride and passion back to the club. So yes he is replaceable, and we could do better, but looking at past managers we can do a hell of a lot worse. I still think Pearson has shown a complete lack of class in the way he left us, but I am grateful for what he did here. Only time will tell if this becomes a blessing in disguise.