HonradaRaposa Posted 22 October 2010 Posted 22 October 2010 When do you think the Thai's will boot them both out the door? I think before December.
MrSpaM Posted 22 October 2010 Posted 22 October 2010 Theirs good reason people want Lee Hoos out, because of all the Pearson malarky, which was obviously down to him. After watching all the reports and that i actually feel a bit sorry for Mandy, he obviously wanted to keep Pearson, and he very much ended up looking like the bad guy until Pearson spoke out about it all. Hoos out definatly Don't really mind Milan hanging about for a while though
davieG Posted 22 October 2010 Posted 22 October 2010 Theirs good reason people want Lee Hoos out, because of all the Pearson malarky, which was obviously down to him. After watching all the reports and that i actually feel a bit sorry for Mandy, he obviously wanted to keep Pearson, and he very much ended up looking like the bad guy until Pearson spoke out about it all. Hoos out definatly Don't really mind Milan hanging about for a while though I don't really get this Hoos is to blame for Pearson leaving. Mandaric employs Hoos and he's not averse to getting rid of someone so if he really wanted Pearson to stay he would could have done, Hoos out / Pearson stays. Seems more likely he got Hoos to be the 'bad guy'. Just to add I'm not sticking up for Hoos as I don't like/trust him anymore than I do Mandaric but basically Mandaric was the boss not Hoos.
Al-aLondon-Foxile Posted 22 October 2010 Posted 22 October 2010 My information ia that MM will be gone by early January. I've said on here already that the deal is done. Watch this space.
Houdini Logic Posted 22 October 2010 Posted 22 October 2010 Mandaric wanted to sell. Found some investors. Investors wanted global name. Manaric lined up global name. Pearson went. Split the blame 50/50 between Mandaric and the Thais. Luckily it seems like it has worked out OK, though will never forget that Mandaric and the Thais were happy to get rid of a winning/productive manager to meet their own self interests and not that of the club
hackneyfox Posted 22 October 2010 Posted 22 October 2010 I'd heard that the Thais were advised to get rid of the poison at the club. That is Mandaric and Hoos. Sooner the better
HonradaRaposa Posted 22 October 2010 Author Posted 22 October 2010 Mandaric wanted to sell. Found some investors. Investors wanted global name. Manaric lined up global name. Pearson went. Split the blame 50/50 between Mandaric and the Thais. Luckily it seems like it has worked out OK, though will never forget that Mandaric and the Thais were happy to get rid of a winning/productive manager to meet their own self interests and not that of the club Not sure balme needs to be attached to either Mandaric or the Thai's, it was business. Perhaps the Thai's could see a bigger picture than any of us have given them credit for, I mean given what has gone on this season we are 1 point behind Hull.
Houdini Logic Posted 22 October 2010 Posted 22 October 2010 Not sure balme needs to be attached to either Mandaric or the Thai's, it was business. Perhaps the Thai's could see a bigger picture than any of us have given them credit for, I mean given what has gone on this season we are 1 point behind Hull. The bigger picture they could see was international recognition and merch sales. If it wasn't why would you get rid of a manager who had every chance of promotion with the correct investment?
HonradaRaposa Posted 22 October 2010 Author Posted 22 October 2010 The bigger picture they could see was international recognition and merch sales. If it wasn't why would you get rid of a manager who had every chance of promotion with the correct investment? Take your LCFC emotion out of it for a second and look at what you've just typed. It makes perfect sense to have got someone like Sousa (who may not mean much to us, but across the water and in to the big wide world he does) then Eriksson in. Increased revenue streams from a marketable name/face plus promotion. If you were going to buy a club in Asia you'd want to appoint a Ferguson or O'Neill so you could get some coverage back in your homeland. Also Pearson is having that second season (in Championship terms) slump, Hull are pretty poor this season.
Houdini Logic Posted 22 October 2010 Posted 22 October 2010 Take your LCFC emotion out of it for a second and look at what you've just typed. It makes perfect sense to have got someone like Sousa (who may not mean much to us, but across the water and in to the big wide world he does) then Eriksson in. Increased revenue streams from a marketable name/face plus promotion. If you were going to buy a club in Asia you'd want to appoint a Ferguson or O'Neill so you could get some coverage back in your homeland. Also Pearson is having that second season (in Championship terms) slump, Hull are pretty poor this season. You say Sousa then Eriksson like it was a given! Bottom line - they turfed out a manager that was doing great things for this club and put in an unproven manager who ultimately failed. If it was stricly about the club and the fans then they would have kept Pearson and gave him the financial backing, but it was more important to them to have an international brand. Luckily we have been able to recruit Sven who will no doubt be able to turn things around from their first mistake, but saying they don't hold some blame is not correct in my book. If you don't hold any blame against Mandaric and the Thais then fair enough - we'll have to disagree
Wymsey Posted 22 October 2010 Posted 22 October 2010 Mandaric recently said he is staying and not returning to Portsmouth.
HonradaRaposa Posted 22 October 2010 Author Posted 22 October 2010 You say Sousa then Eriksson like it was a given! Bottom line - they turfed out a manager that was doing great things for this club and put in an unproven manager who ultimately failed. If it was stricly about the club and the fans then they would have kept Pearson and gave him the financial backing, but it was more important to them to have an international brand. Luckily we have been able to recruit Sven who will no doubt be able to turn things around from their first mistake, but saying they don't hold some blame is not correct in my book. If you don't hold any blame against Mandaric and the Thais then fair enough - we'll have to disagree Building an brand internationally is the only way you can make money and keep a football club sustainable these days. That is why Chelsea have been chasing the dream hoping to be considered alongside Madrid, Barca and Man United. Pearson would never fit that bill and his stock, given Hull's lowly league position, is slowly dwindling as we discuss this. The end of the season will be time for recriminations, but I do not think that either Mandaric (who I dislike immensely) or Top and his dad did anything wrong in getting this deal done.
Roy Cropper Posted 22 October 2010 Posted 22 October 2010 Mandaric recently said he is staying and not returning to Portsmouth. Since when should we believe anything that Mandaric says?
Nick Posted 22 October 2010 Posted 22 October 2010 I thought Manadaric has a large share in the consortium, no? I read during the initial transfer of ownership that he still had a share though not a controlling one. They may not wish to buy him out yet if this is the case.
unreachable Posted 22 October 2010 Posted 22 October 2010 I thought Manadaric has a large share in the consortium, no? I read during the initial transfer of ownership that he still had a share though not a controlling one. They may not wish to buy him out yet if this is the case. I recall him calling himself "a stakeholder" which I took to mean that he was a creditor for the loans made to the club.
Houdini Logic Posted 22 October 2010 Posted 22 October 2010 1/1/11. Is that 'Milan's a Cock' in binary?
Matt Posted 22 October 2010 Posted 22 October 2010 Is that 'Milan's a Cock' in binary? It can be whatever you want it to be.
Nick Posted 22 October 2010 Posted 22 October 2010 I recall him calling himself "a stakeholder" which I took to mean that he was a creditor for the loans made to the club. That would make more sense, cheers.
okie fox Posted 22 October 2010 Posted 22 October 2010 Mandaric recently said he is staying and not returning to Portsmouth. That's because Portsmouth are likely to be liquidated. Google Portsmouth liquidated
Wymsey Posted 22 October 2010 Posted 22 October 2010 That's because Portsmouth are likely to be liquidated. Google Portsmouth liquidated Oh yeah forgot about that.............................
nickelbyfox Posted 22 October 2010 Posted 22 October 2010 If they do indeed get liquidated, will the league remove all their results/points? Could remove a loss for us
Wymsey Posted 22 October 2010 Posted 22 October 2010 If they do indeed get liquidated, will the league remove all their results/points? Could remove a loss for us would that mean only two teams get relegated then perhaps if they did fold?
MrSpaM Posted 22 October 2010 Posted 22 October 2010 would that mean only two teams get relegated then perhaps if they did fold? Interesting this one, got no idea what'd happen, i'm guessing it would mean only two teams get relegated Sad day for football if it happens though
MPH Posted 22 October 2010 Posted 22 October 2010 so, back on topic..... i'd give it a week before MM declares himself as their messiah....
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.