Stay Positive Posted 25 October 2011 Posted 25 October 2011 Obviously I'm not asking you to pick one over the other as that'd be too one sided, but let's get some perspective here. When O'Neill took over at Leicester, he won just TWO of his first thirteen matches, drew SEVEN and lost FOUR. Sven's record betters that. And for those of you who are going to say "You can only judge in his first full season", well, O'Neill's first full season, in his first 13 games, he won FIVE matches, drew TWO and lost SIX. THIS is why patience pays dividends. You naysayers can harp on all you want about the Millwall game being abysmal, but I can name you at least half a dozen dreadful games in the first year of O'Neill's reign, not least the Sheffield United home debacle. Perhaps we should have sacked HIM, eh? What a useless manager he turned out to be...
Cubbyben Posted 25 October 2011 Posted 25 October 2011 His first 'Full' season was in the Premier League having spent peanuts compared to everyone else. Which kind of makes that argument null and void. He brought European football here and a team that we may never see the like again in terms of spirit, desire & a will to win.
Stay Positive Posted 25 October 2011 Author Posted 25 October 2011 His first 'Full' season was in the Premier League having spent peanuts compared to everyone else. Which kind of makes that argument null and void. He brought European football here and a team that we may never see the like again in terms of spirit, desire & a will to win. Then I only have O'Neill's first 13 games to compare it to, don't I? Obviously I'm fully aware that O'Neill is the greatest manager in our history, but I'm just making the point that he was given time before he achieved all the great things he did.
Daggers Posted 25 October 2011 Posted 25 October 2011 Cue: 217th FT discussion about MON, despite him not being named manager, with nothing new being said.
Stay Positive Posted 25 October 2011 Author Posted 25 October 2011 Cue: 217th FT discussion about MON, despite him not being named manager, with nothing new being said. Well I'm very sorry I never read the other 217 discussions before I posted mine. Maybe I have a life.
flowwolf Posted 25 October 2011 Posted 25 October 2011 Sorry not even close to any sort of analogy. :dunno: :dunno: :dunno:
Stay Positive Posted 25 October 2011 Author Posted 25 October 2011 Sorry not even close to any sort of analogy. :dunno: :dunno: :dunno: How isn't it?
Fox92 Posted 25 October 2011 Posted 25 October 2011 I don't know if it just me or what, but people keep comparing Sven to other managers and I don't fully understand why. Without going into it all fully (again), Sven has spent millions on putting a team together, yet we still didn't look as solid and as other teams we played this season; Millwall for example. Other managers in the division, and other previous Leicester City managers (especially Martin considering this thread is about him) did not have the money that Sven has had to build a team. Martin O'Neill took Leicester City to the top half of the Premier League constantly, with littlle/no money at all. All I am trying to say is, I don't think you can really compare when Sven has had millions to spend. Sven never got Leicester City into the top 6 in a year - doesn't that say something?
Stay Positive Posted 25 October 2011 Author Posted 25 October 2011 I don't know if it just me or what, but people keep comparing Sven to other managers and I don't fully understand why. Without going into it all fully (again), Sven has spent millions on putting a team together, yet we still didn't look as solid and as other teams we played this season; Millwall for example. Other managers in the division, and other previous Leicester City managers (especially Martin considering this thread is about him) did not have the money that Sven has had to build a team. Martin O'Neill took Leicester City to the top half of the Premier League constantly, with littlle/no money at all. All I am trying to say is, I don't think you can really compare when Sven has had millions to spend. Sven never got Leicester City into the top 6 in a year - doesn't that say something? but Sven has only had 13 games with the majority of those players! People don't seem to get that. And we won 5 of them and only lost a few.
Happy Fox Posted 25 October 2011 Posted 25 October 2011 but Sven has only had 13 games with the majority of those players! People don't seem to get that. And we won 5 of them and only lost a few. And he had a whole preseason to get right formation etc, he didn't deliver
Stay Positive Posted 25 October 2011 Author Posted 25 October 2011 And he had a whole preseason to get right formation etc, he didn't deliver but he bloody well would have, if he'd been given time. No contest Sven every time As I said, it's not a vote. Obviously.
Happy Fox Posted 25 October 2011 Posted 25 October 2011 but he bloody well would have, if he'd been given time. Look mate I am not trying to have a argument with you, but the expectation is that the owners want us to win the championship and at the very least secure an automatic spot so by that reckoning being 8 points and a +13 goal difference to make up as this stage of the season is not good enough for them. As I said, it's not a vote. Obviously.
flowwolf Posted 25 October 2011 Posted 25 October 2011 Ok when O'Neil arrive we had a potential relegation on our hands .He bought wisely with the likes of Lennon Izzet ect got us into the playoffs won it and the rest is history . Contrast that with Erickson who arrived with 3/4 of the season still left and still balls up by tinkering with the goalkeeping situation that lead us to not even get us into the playoffs. O'Neil first full season in charge and he not only gets us a final10th position but took us to wembley and a replay and winning the League cup. Where as Erickson in his first full season pays out a fortune for mediocre players St Ledger to mention just one and his team play so piss poor at home he resorts to asking them to write down on a it of paper what they are doing wrong . Are you still seriously trying to compare the two ?
Stay Positive Posted 25 October 2011 Author Posted 25 October 2011 No problems. I'm not trying to have an argument either. Apologies if I came across that way.
Criggers Posted 25 October 2011 Posted 25 October 2011 There does seem to be a lot of people who were saying Sven had "lost the plot". His tactics have been rather questionable you cannt doubt that. I know we've only lost a few but apart from Derby there hasnt really been anything to get excited about. The Beighton game wasn't great and although I wasnt there we were lucky to beat Southampton from what I was told. We haven't played (apart from Derby which was as much to do with them being poor on the day) consistently well for more than 45 mins all season. I hate to say it but most people who are sad to see Sven go are probably feeling that way because of liking Sven rather than looking at the bigger picture. Myself included. I know yesterday I was slating Svens tactics yet was gutted to see him go in the evening. Makes no sense!
Stay Positive Posted 25 October 2011 Author Posted 25 October 2011 Ok when O'Neil arrive we had a potential relegation on our hands .He bought wisely with the likes of Lennon Izzet ect got us into the playoffs won it and the rest is history . Contrast that with Erickson who arrived with 3/4 of the season still left and still balls up by tinkering with the goalkeeping situation that lead us to not even get us into the playoffs. O'Neil first full season in charge and he not only gets us a final10th position but took us to wembley and a replay and winning the League cup. Where as Erickson in his first full season pays out a fortune for mediocre players St Ledger to mention just one and his team play so piss poor at home he resorts to asking them to write down on a it of paper what they are doing wrong . Are you still seriously trying to compare the two ? Ok maybe my heading of the thread was a mistake. I'm absolutely NOT trying to compare the two. The one and only point I am trying to make is that O'Neill was given time and Sven wasn't. A year is not a long time.
Fox92 Posted 25 October 2011 Posted 25 October 2011 but Sven has only had 13 games with the majority of those players! People don't seem to get that. And we won 5 of them and only lost a few. He also had the whole of pre-season to get his tactics and selection right. But when we got into the start of the season, he didn't know what formation was his best, and which players to pick. How many games did you think we were actually fantastic this season? I can only recall the Derby match. It is near enough impossible to compare Sven and Martin because both situations are so different.
Topman Posted 25 October 2011 Posted 25 October 2011 Then I only have O'Neill's first 13 games to compare it to, don't I? Obviously I'm fully aware that O'Neill is the greatest manager in our history, but I'm just making the point that he was given time before he achieved all the great things he did. To be fair, Sven had 49 games to put things right and £12 million plus the loan fees he paid last season, o'neil probably didn't haven't spent that much in 4 Years,
teblin Posted 25 October 2011 Posted 25 October 2011 Ok when O'Neil arrive we had a potential relegation on our hands .He bought wisely with the likes of Lennon Izzet ect got us into the playoffs won it and the rest is history . Contrast that with Erickson who arrived with 3/4 of the season still left and still balls up by tinkering with the goalkeeping situation that lead us to not even get us into the playoffs. O'Neil first full season in charge and he not only gets us a final10th position but took us to wembley and a replay and winning the League cup. Where as Erickson in his first full season pays out a fortune for mediocre players St Ledger to mention just one and his team play so piss poor at home he resorts to asking them to write down on a it of paper what they are doing wrong . Are you still seriously trying to compare the two ? O'Neill was a great manager for us and one of the best we have ever had but don't just make things up. We were in the top 6 when MON took over not a potential relegation. Then he failed to win any of his first 13 games and took is sown to midtable then had a great run to get us into the playoffs.
wellyfox Posted 25 October 2011 Posted 25 October 2011 Neither of em 1 left years ago and the other has just been sacked :whistle:
Bangkok Mick Posted 25 October 2011 Posted 25 October 2011 Are you sitting comfortably? .................Good, then i will tell you a tale called Sloppy Seconds Starring: Martin O`Neil (Boyfriend) & LCFC (Girlfriend) Boyfriend meets girlfriend. At fist he`s flattered cos she`s the most attractive g`friend he`s had. For a while (13games) she`s not that keen on him. But overtime he wins her round so much so she becomes totally in love with him. best boyfriend ever. But then boyfriend starts getting attention from other girls and eventually leaves for a so called more attractive girlfriend saying relationship has run its` course. Girlfriend then goes from different boy to different boy but nobody can compare to that man. She reminises and would love him back. Then both become single at the same time. Girlfriend would have him back like a shot but why would boyfriend go back? To rekindle a previous love? To find out what they had was good but ran its` course? Or to get back together, girlfirend falls in love all over again only for boyfriend eventually to run true to form and f**k off for a so called more attractive bird!!! Ain`t relationships difficult!!
The Doctor Posted 25 October 2011 Posted 25 October 2011 To be fair, Sven had 49 games to put things right and £12 million plus the loan fees he paid last season, o'neil probably didn't haven't spent that much in 4 Years, One thing I will pick up on there is the idea of spending £12m: Eriksson had told i that the Raksriaksorns, owners of the King Power duty-free company in Thailand who invested close to £10m on players and a substantial amount on infrastructure in the close season, "want to be in the Premier league next season". Out of my morning paper, straight from the horse's mouth. As for O'Neill not spending that much in 4 years - rubbish, there were good free dealings but there were also big (for the time) fees being spend - £2m on Arnar Gunnlaugsson wasn't it?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.