SpartakAnj Posted 6 November 2011 Posted 6 November 2011 But how do we know we HAVE approached Hull? Could it be someone in their boardroom is trying to fend off any interest? And are "Sky sources" any more reliable than BBC, Mirror or Mail ones? True. Until either club confirm the approach than it remains speculation. Personally I would be very surprised if Pearson wanted to come back. He was treated pretty poorly by the club. If Hull have rejected an approach then Pearson will have to do the running and I don't really see why he would want to bother considering the circumstances that originally lead to him leaving the club.
ray49 Posted 6 November 2011 Posted 6 November 2011 Perhaps we could give Hull Waggy on a free transfer as compensation for letting us have Pearson back?
Thracian Posted 6 November 2011 Posted 6 November 2011 I keep seeing things saying Pearson was too defensive, . Because that's what his results demonstrate. http://www.hullcityafc.net/page/Fixtures I'll make it easier. Goals for Hull this season, match by match... 0,0,1,1,0,1,1,1,1,1,2,0,3,1,1,0. That's 14 goals in 16 games. What is it that fails to convince you? Division One has sod all to do with it. Anything less that promotion and the goals you mentioned would have beenn abject failure.
Guest Posted 6 November 2011 Posted 6 November 2011 Because that's what his results demonstrate. http://www.hullcityafc.net/page/Fixtures I'll make it easier. Goals for Hull this season, match by math... 0,0,1,1,0,1,1,1,1,1,2,0,3,1,1,0. That's 14 goals in 16 games. What is it that fails to convince you? Division One has sod all to do with it. Anything less that promotion and the goals you mentioned would have beenn abject failure. So you want Kevin Keegan then?
Mooseboy Posted 6 November 2011 Posted 6 November 2011 Because that's what his results demonstrate. http://www.hullcityafc.net/page/Fixtures I'll make it easier. Goals for Hull this season, match by math... 0,0,1,1,0,1,1,1,1,1,2,0,3,1,1,0. That's 14 goals in 16 games. What is it that fails to convince you? Division One has sod all to do with it. Anything less that promotion and the goals you mentioned would have beenn abject failure. They have Fryatt.. nuff said...
reynard Posted 6 November 2011 Posted 6 November 2011 If we have made an official approach and we don't actually know this then I think it shows a couple of things. Mainly that we've either failed to convince our preferred choices or that we've spoken to some candidates readily available and not been impressed. Anyone else hear the interview on Radio5 this am on how Man utd got Ferguson? I'm not comparing them to us only the method and thought process they used. This does smack a bit of blimey we've run out of options we'd better try for him. He did a good job for us but if they really wanted him then they should have made an official approach earlier.
iancognito Posted 6 November 2011 Posted 6 November 2011 Because that's what his results demonstrate. http://www.hullcityafc.net/page/Fixtures I'll make it easier. Goals for Hull this season, match by match... 0,0,1,1,0,1,1,1,1,1,2,0,3,1,1,0. That's 14 goals in 16 games. What is it that fails to convince you? Division One has sod all to do with it. Anything less that promotion and the goals you mentioned would have beenn abject failure. If he was that bad, there wouldn't have been so much shock when he left the first time and if Hull's form was that bad why would they be trying to keep him by refusing permission. I enjoyed the time that Pearson was here and the 18 months since have been bloody frustrating with one inconsistent performance after another.
Jace Posted 6 November 2011 Posted 6 November 2011 Because that's what his results demonstrate. http://www.hullcityafc.net/page/Fixtures I'll make it easier. Goals for Hull this season, match by match... 0,0,1,1,0,1,1,1,1,1,2,0,3,1,1,0. That's 14 goals in 16 games. What is it that fails to convince you? Division One has sod all to do with it. Anything less that promotion and the goals you mentioned would have beenn abject failure. You are bang on this is not a Leicester side that should be playing defensive football our squad is better than that right now
Mooseboy Posted 6 November 2011 Posted 6 November 2011 If he turns around and say's he wants to stay - this could be really embarrassing for us. Let's hope that some 'unofficial' whispers have been relayed both ways....
Thracian Posted 6 November 2011 Posted 6 November 2011 So there we go. Now we know. The ball is in Pearson's court now. Thankyou Hull. It is heartening to see a club defending the position of its esteeemed manager and I hope that Pearson shows the good grace to appreciate that fact and to see his contract through properly! If that means our "Academy" managers seeing us through to the end of the season so be it. I've every confidence in them. In fact for all the comings and going Rudkin and Beaglehole are among the few people to have overseen any significant success here in years.
Mooseboy Posted 6 November 2011 Posted 6 November 2011 Thankyou Hull. It is heartening to see a club defending the position of its esteeemed manager and I hope that Pearson shows the good grace to appreciate that fact and to see his contract through properly! If that means our "Academy" managers seeing us through to the end of the season so be it. I've every confidence in them. In fact for all the comings and going Rudkin and Beaglehole are among the few people to have overseen any significant success here in years.
MGLCFC Posted 6 November 2011 Posted 6 November 2011 Comment from earlier - Pearson thought Fryatt and Hobbs were good - so did a large number of Leicester fans and to be honest they aren't that bad. Pearson had to work with these players and could only bring in loan players with real quality (Cleverley, Davies, Spearing). I have no doubt with his chief scout, Steve Walsh, we could expect some quality signings who can actually perform in this league. Plus Tunchev would come back into the reckoning.
Leicester Lass Posted 6 November 2011 Posted 6 November 2011 Thankyou Hull. It is heartening to see a club defending the position of its esteeemed manager and I hope that Pearson shows the good grace to appreciate that fact and to see his contract through properly! If that means our "Academy" managers seeing us through to the end of the season so be it. I've every confidence in them. In fact for all the comings and going Rudkin and Beaglehole are among the few people to have overseen any significant success here in years. And Pearson didn't oversee any significant success here in recent years?!
Filberts Treat Posted 6 November 2011 Posted 6 November 2011 Agree, this is turning into a farce... Why is it?
teblin Posted 6 November 2011 Posted 6 November 2011 And Pearson didn't oversee any significant success here in recent years?! Well said!
Filberts Treat Posted 6 November 2011 Posted 6 November 2011 This sadly just confirms our owners haven't got a clue Errr... No it doesn't
m00nie Posted 6 November 2011 Posted 6 November 2011 Comment from earlier - Pearson thought Fryatt and Hobbs were good - so did a large number of Leicester fans and to be honest they aren't that bad. Pearson had to work with these players and could only bring in loan players with real quality (Cleverley, Davies, Spearing). I have no doubt with his chief scout, Steve Walsh, we could expect some quality signings who can actually perform in this league. Plus Tunchev would come back into the reckoning. i love how ppeople select the postitive things ONLY to try and make it sound better.. how about Robbie nielson for example ??? and we dont really need to be buying many players. 1 or 2 at most.. we need a manager who can work WITH the players we have... motivate and organise them.. the squad is already there..
Mack Posted 6 November 2011 Author Posted 6 November 2011 Comment from earlier - Pearson thought Fryatt and Hobbs were good - so did a large number of Leicester fans and to be honest they aren't that bad. Pearson had to work with these players and could only bring in loan players with real quality (Cleverley, Davies, Spearing). I have no doubt with his chief scout, Steve Walsh, we could expect some quality signings who can actually perform in this league. Plus Tunchev would come back into the reckoning. I think certain players fit certain Managers. Fryatt and Hobbs did not fit in with Sven and his systems and ideas, whereas under Pearson they both look like quality players.
Guest DavidJCW Posted 6 November 2011 Posted 6 November 2011 Martin O'Neill deal dead in the water then? Genuine question... with no answers anywhere, it's so frustrating trawling through the hearsay on here.
MGLCFC Posted 6 November 2011 Posted 6 November 2011 Pearson will be the next Pulis!!!!!! Not at all charasmatic, but will guide us to the promised land and keep us there - I can dream.
munf1987 Posted 6 November 2011 Posted 6 November 2011 i love how ppeople select the postitive things ONLY to try and make it sound better.. how about Robbie nielson for example ??? and we dont really need to be buying many players. 1 or 2 at most.. we need a manager who can work WITH the players we have... motivate and organise them.. the squad is already there.. To be fair to Pearson, why would anyone spend any money on a Robbie Nielson. He was brought in on a free transfer and i'm guessing on a small wage with leadership skills as competition for a place in the starting 11. like it has been said before the club is in a different place right now where he'll have money to spend which means he can attract better players to the club. Some of the players Pearson brought into the club on loan were class and its his eye for these players, which i think will make him successful at the club (thinking of cleverly and mark davies). I know we wouldnt be able to prise the youth players away from the top clubs but if another player like mark davies was found at a level like he was at wolves. Then he could have been a LCFC player rather than just a loan and stopping others getting a sniff in. I'm still undecided on what manager will be best for us but you cant compare how Pearson has done to what he could do if he came back with money to spend.
Suffolk_fox Posted 6 November 2011 Posted 6 November 2011 I think certain players fit certain Managers. Fryatt and Hobbs did not fit in with Sven and his systems and ideas, whereas under Pearson they both look like quality players. Sorry, I disagree. Whereas Hobbs was good, I do remember being so frustrated at Fryatt's performance in the Championship. The glaring misses, the dry patches and scoring 1 goal every 3 games. OK, but certainly not quality.
iBleedLeicesterColours Posted 6 November 2011 Posted 6 November 2011 Not read the thread .. Is it likely he will return ?
Mack Posted 6 November 2011 Author Posted 6 November 2011 Sorry, I disagree. Whereas Hobbs was good, I do remember being so frustrated at Fryatt's performance in the Championship. The glaring misses, the dry patches and scoring 1 goal every 3 games. OK, but certainly not quality. Pearson's last season the play off season he was very very good until he got injured. And go and check his record at Hull, it's also very good. Anyway, he's a Hull player, I was just making the point that some players do better under different managers. Let's hope this is also true of Beckford!
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.