Wig_Wam_Bam Posted 5 November 2011 Posted 5 November 2011 Just heard that interview with Pearson from today, you can just tell if he gets the chance he would be straight back to us, if not he would have said so.
The Year Of The Fox Posted 5 November 2011 Posted 5 November 2011 Hull are the main game on FLS, wonder whether anything will be mentioned
Nick Posted 5 November 2011 Posted 5 November 2011 And you know why? Hull simply does not have the pedigree in the side to deliver anything more than playoffs. They played the Hammers today, had 49% of the possession & 14 shots on target. They didn't score. West Ham won 2-0 and guess how many shots they had on target.......... Two. Quality is quality.
Guest parky0607 Posted 5 November 2011 Posted 5 November 2011 It just said on FLS that hull have lost 1 in 10... And people are seriously turning their noses up at this?!?
Len Finsbury Posted 6 November 2011 Posted 6 November 2011 With all this NFP love, it sounds like some of you are trying to convince yourselves that this is the best we could have hoped for.
m00nie Posted 6 November 2011 Posted 6 November 2011 It just said on FLS that hull have lost 1 in 10... And people are seriously turning their noses up at this?!? its all good selecting stats to please,, how about they have lost the last 2.. or 2 on the trot.. in a week...
Wherethefoxhat? Posted 6 November 2011 Posted 6 November 2011 Stringer knows feck all!! .........and neither does anyone on here .......no matter how many times they post !!
tomtom Posted 6 November 2011 Posted 6 November 2011 I love plan B - but the writings on the wall if we appoint Pearson. No room in Pearson's world for Gradel like flair. Just solid, grim football. But hey, winning is winning right? NP likes players who consistently perform and Gradel was not one of those during his time here , he'd beat a man then deliver a Shit cross but always had potential and blossomed at Leeds To say he doesn't like flair at all is harsh though as he brought in Mark Davies who is one of the best midfielders to put on a city shirt in a while
Guest parky0607 Posted 6 November 2011 Posted 6 November 2011 its all good selecting stats to please,, how about they have lost the last 2.. or 2 on the trot.. in a week... but 2 is a rather minescule number... Whereas 1 in 10 is significant. Its not just about the stats though, youve got to look at hulls players compared to ours and seriously wonder how they are above us.
Guest seanfox778 Posted 6 November 2011 Posted 6 November 2011 He's coming. No question I think you're right, he answered that question so awkwardly
Wherethefoxhat? Posted 6 November 2011 Posted 6 November 2011 I think you're right, he answered that question so awkwardly He did everything BUT answer it !
The Year Of The Fox Posted 6 November 2011 Posted 6 November 2011 its all good selecting stats to please,, how about they have lost the last 2.. or 2 on the trot.. in a week... In the dame way before Birmingham away we were '7 games unbeaten' that was banded about a lot on here. We'd drew 4 (i think) of those 7
radical Posted 6 November 2011 Posted 6 November 2011 He's coming. No question Nailed on. thought he would of been more prepared for that question.
FallenAngel Posted 6 November 2011 Posted 6 November 2011 And you know why? Hull simply does not have the pedigree in the side to deliver anything more than playoffs. They played the Hammers today, had 49% of the possession & 14 shots on target. They didn't score. West Ham won 2-0 and guess how many shots they had on target.......... Two. Quality is quality. Do we really want NP to come back and make us play like that, too many fans complain about not enough goals being scored as it is!
m00nie Posted 6 November 2011 Posted 6 November 2011 In the dame way before Birmingham away we were '7 games unbeaten' that was banded about a lot on here. We'd drew 4 (i think) of those 7 clark 40 unbeaten yet people turning there noses up at him... and i bet if we looked half of them are the ones who want np..
lcfcliam Posted 6 November 2011 Posted 6 November 2011 How can anybody just assume he is coming back because he didn't really want to answer a question? Doesn't necessarily mean he is even considering us
radical Posted 6 November 2011 Posted 6 November 2011 It was'nt that he didnt want to answer, its the way he went about not wanting to answer..... if that makes any sence at all.
lcfcliam Posted 6 November 2011 Posted 6 November 2011 It was'nt that he didnt want to answer, its the way he went about not wanting to answer..... if that makes any sence at all. Yeah he did make it awkward for himself But could there be a reason eh?
FallenAngel Posted 6 November 2011 Posted 6 November 2011 It's prob his way of saying, **** off why would I consider going back there, without offending Lcfc fans, just a thought
smudger63 Posted 6 November 2011 Posted 6 November 2011 If Hull don`t give us permission to speak to Pearson, and why would they, i certainly don`t see him resigning. I wouldn`t be against him coming back personally, but it would feel a bit like we`ve just wasted the last 16 months, to go back to where we were before he left.
Guest parky0607 Posted 6 November 2011 Posted 6 November 2011 Im not assuming hes coming back at all, however we can take that hes definately not ruling himself out as he would have confirmed this like lee clark did
radical Posted 6 November 2011 Posted 6 November 2011 Yeah he did make it awkward for himself But could there be a reason eh? when i saw that interview, the first thing i thought was, he's comming back.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.