Jimmy Posted 28 March 2012 Posted 28 March 2012 the Thais nor anyone else SACKED Pearson here, he left
MrSpaM Posted 28 March 2012 Posted 28 March 2012 You mean Yuki Abe who did little under anyone and wanted to go home? You mean Fernandes who stated the moment Sven went he wanted to go and had no intention of staying here? You mean "fat" Johnson who barely even played under Sven has hasn't done anything since about 3 years ago? Mills who has lived up to the billing the Reading fans gave him of not being very good and having an attitude problem? Beckford seems to be playing better than he was under the previous manager, so I'm not sure what evidence there is to show he's not playing for Pearson. And i'm not even sure where the Kasper stuff comes from. As for Gradel, he was a kid we were near the top of the championship and he went on loan to get some games. He went to a team a league below us and even they didn't start him that often in his first season there, mostly appearing from the bench for the main part. You don't need names to get promoted, you need a team. Just like Norwich and Swansea. I'm so glad you wrote all that so I didnt have to
Steam Posted 28 March 2012 Posted 28 March 2012 Going by the form table, we have a good chance of getting one of those playoff positions. So I don't think he has failed. We are 3rd in the form table at the moment; Cardiff - 21st Hull - 18th Blackpool - 17th Middlesborough - 15th Birmingham - 14th All this despite the fact we aren't playing consistantly well, it almost seems ours to lose at the moment with everyone dropping points.
Corky Posted 28 March 2012 Posted 28 March 2012 We really discussing whether a manager has failed or not after 23/24 league games in charge? Paulo may disagree
Tielemans63 Posted 28 March 2012 Posted 28 March 2012 Glad to see that the vast majority of fans are sensible and realistic folk.
Babylon Posted 28 March 2012 Posted 28 March 2012 Paulo may disagree Very true, but that was a fairly exceptional case that looked a diaster from the first interview on radio Leicester when nobody had a clue what he was talking about. Christ even me as someone who tries not to be overly critical too soon lost the plot with him after about 6 games.
Jace Posted 28 March 2012 Posted 28 March 2012 We are improving, thats all that matters doesn't matter how slow the progression if we are going in the right direction that is all that matters. As soon as we start declining down the league then Pearson will have failed but to be honest I can't see that happening
Les-TA-Jon Posted 28 March 2012 Posted 28 March 2012 The way I see it - Main differences from Sven to Pearson: Under Sven: - When we lost we lost badly with a whimper - We had no width or cutting edge that would slice through teams, and little pace - Little fight or steel, lack of a plan B and no ability to grind out results - When we won it seemed to be a lottery and Sven seemed to have no real idea as to why we had won - Transfers : High profile and costly, little chance of profit for the future, or long term vision (Johnson, Mills, Fernandes) Under Pearson: - When we lose we go down fighting - We have great width and pace (see Dyer, Marshall, Beckford, Nugent) - We have a plan B - Howard, 4-3-3, 4-4-2, 5-3-2, 4-5-1 with Marshall in the hole - We can grind out results (see Hull 2-1) - When we win we outplay our opponents - Transfers: Cheap hungry professional youngsters with great ability and potential, a longer term vision and will make a profit in the future. I think a lot has changed for the better and given time, a pre season and more signings in the summer I we'll be there or thereabouts next year. Has Pearson failed? No - he's just got started!!!
chris_lcfc_85 Posted 28 March 2012 Posted 28 March 2012 The way I see it - Main differences from Sven to Pearson: Under Sven: - When we lost we lost badly with a whimper - We had no width or cutting edge that would slice through teams, and little pace - Little fight or steel, lack of a plan B and no ability to grind out results - When we won it seemed to be a lottery and Sven seemed to have no real idea as to why we had won - Transfers : High profile and costly, little chance of profit for the future, or long term vision (Johnson, Mills, Fernandes) Under Pearson: - When we lose we go down fighting - We have great width and pace (see Dyer, Marshall, Beckford, Nugent) - We have a plan B - Howard, 4-3-3, 4-4-2, 5-3-2, 4-5-1 with Marshall in the hole - We can grind out results (see Hull 2-1) - When we win we outplay our opponents - Transfers: Cheap hungry professional youngsters with great ability and potential, a longer term vision and will make a profit in the future. I think a lot has changed for the better and given time, a pre season and more signings in the summer I we'll be there or thereabouts next year. Has Pearson failed? No - he's just got started!!! Lovely post! Agreed!
AyewJoking Posted 28 March 2012 Posted 28 March 2012 Lovely post! Agreed! The way I see it - Main differences from Sven to Pearson: Under Sven: - When we lost we lost badly with a whimper - We had no width or cutting edge that would slice through teams, and little pace - Little fight or steel, lack of a plan B and no ability to grind out results - When we won it seemed to be a lottery and Sven seemed to have no real idea as to why we had won - Transfers : High profile and costly, little chance of profit for the future, or long term vision (Johnson, Mills, Fernandes) Under Pearson: - When we lose we go down fighting - We have great width and pace (see Dyer, Marshall, Beckford, Nugent) - We have a plan B - Howard, 4-3-3, 4-4-2, 5-3-2, 4-5-1 with Marshall in the hole - We can grind out results (see Hull 2-1) - When we win we outplay our opponents - Transfers: Cheap hungry professional youngsters with great ability and potential, a longer term vision and will make a profit in the future. I think a lot has changed for the better and given time, a pre season and more signings in the summer I we'll be there or thereabouts next year. Has Pearson failed? No - he's just got started!!! Its ok to lose to teams lower in the table as long as we go down fighting
Les-TA-Jon Posted 28 March 2012 Posted 28 March 2012 Its ok to lose to teams lower in the table as long as we go down fighting We lost against lower teams under Sven too - except we were really bad - see Bristol, Millwall at home Under Pearson when we've lost against the lower teams we've at least had drive to get back into the game - see Barnsley at home
UpTheLeagueFox Posted 28 March 2012 Posted 28 March 2012 Nobody wants to see us lose - especially to lower teams - but this is a work-in-progress. Some fans want success immediately and aren't prepared for us to build over time. Whether Pearson is the right man or not to deliver is open to debate but I think we should stick with him. I prefer to see young, hungry players like Drinkwater and Marshall rather than the likes of Abe, Fernandes, Johnson, Pantsil, Ball etc. Pearson is trying to weed out those who won't take us forward and it takes time. I suspect the likes of Howard will be moved on in the summer. Whether the owners give him time is another matter of course.
foxaholic Posted 28 March 2012 Posted 28 March 2012 How about comparing him with Micky Adams in administration lost I believe only 4 games all season won promotion average gate about 30000.
inckley fox Posted 28 March 2012 Posted 28 March 2012 How about comparing him with Micky Adams in administration lost I believe only 4 games all season won promotion average gate about 30000. Well, it's completely irrelevant and pointless, but how about comparing him with Micky Adams at Coventry or Sheffield United?In fact, while I'm at it, how about comparing him with Micky Adams at Leicester? He got us relegated from the Premier League twice (once as assistant, once as manager) and won us one promotion with leftovers from the club's finest ever generation of players - Izzet, Elliot, Taggart - at his disposal. It was a fine achievement, but the strength of the squad he inherited was one of the main reasons for the league rules re:administration changing.To compare that squad with the one which Sven left languishing in 13th after eight years out of the top flight is absurd.
inckley fox Posted 28 March 2012 Posted 28 March 2012 How about comparing him with Micky Adams in administration lost I believe only 4 games all season won promotion average gate about 30000. Well, it's completely irrelevant and pointless, but how about comparing him with Micky Adams at Coventry or Sheffield United?In fact, while I'm at it, how about comparing him with Micky Adams at Leicester? He got us relegated from the Premier League twice (once as assistant, once as manager) and won us one promotion with leftovers from the club's finest ever generation of players - Izzet, Elliot, Taggart - at his disposal. It was a fine achievement, but the strength of the squad he inherited was one of the main reasons for the league rules re:administration changing.To compare that squad with the one which Sven left languishing in 13th after eight years out of the top flight is absurd.
ivarti Posted 28 March 2012 Posted 28 March 2012 NP has done well so far, and hopefully City will manage to finish in the top half of the table. The team is still inconsistant and cannot win games against the teams lower in the table. That was a problem under Sven as well and most of the players are stil at the club and a few changes must be made. Morgan, Drinkwater and Marshall all looks ok, but City needs more changes to be a top team next season, since players like Howard, Wellens can't be going on forever.
Bryn Posted 28 March 2012 Posted 28 March 2012 He hasn't even had an objective to fail in my eyes, you sack a manager halfway through the season and it's done, for me, it's no way to operate. I think a manager needs at the absolute minimum, 18 months, particularly when an element of rebuilding is required, unless the club looks like getting relegated. Ideally, at least two full seasons, but that just seems to be too much to ask in this day and age.
Happy Fox Posted 28 March 2012 Posted 28 March 2012 I would give him till December, if we aint in the top 4 then get rid.
Corky Posted 28 March 2012 Posted 28 March 2012 How about comparing him with Micky Adams in administration lost I believe only 4 games all season won promotion average gate about 30000. He did a great job but I fail to see how that is relevant to Pearson now.
Corky Posted 28 March 2012 Posted 28 March 2012 Very true, but that was a fairly exceptional case that looked a diaster from the first interview on radio Leicester when nobody had a clue what he was talking about. Christ even me as someone who tries not to be overly critical too soon lost the plot with him after about 6 games. Yeah, there were no signs of any sort of stability or progress under Sousa, whereas we've had encouraging moments under Pearson.
Ely fox Posted 28 March 2012 Posted 28 March 2012 No as Pearson has not had enough time yet. I am a little concerned that he struggles to get the players up for a game though, ie last night ... we were really flat throughout and nearly lost the game ... the header on the bar. We didnt look like we were gonna score all night apart from marshall's great effort and save by camp david. Enjoyed watching Marshall ... i think he is gonna be a real threat in games in the future. Like the chant for him too. Good atmosphere tonight ... not sure about the scarf waving though ... but irritating to be honest. You have gotta love our fans!! Looking forward to posh away now ... 2 local derbys in 4 days ... will be another good atmosphere ... a very tough place to go and win ... i think it will be 2-2 with a niugent and a marshall goal.
Jace Posted 28 March 2012 Posted 28 March 2012 How about comparing him with Micky Adams in administration lost I believe only 4 games all season won promotion average gate about 30000. According to the Football League we lost 6 games our average attendance was 29230 but it is normal to see an increase for a first season in a new stadium because everybody wants to checkout the new facilities
Heskey2011 Posted 28 March 2012 Posted 28 March 2012 I could see after 30mins it was going to be 0-0, nigel just didn't do enough to change it. its a weakness, but sacking a manager yet again takes us nowhere.As he would say, he has a lot of work to do. very true, how bringing schlup and howard on was supposed to get us a goal i do not know, neither have a real proven goal scoring ability, and neither are match fit imo. We have to develop a better plan b than throwong long balls up to stevie and hopeing the strikers read where his flicks are going.
Babylon Posted 28 March 2012 Posted 28 March 2012 According to the Football League we lost 6 games our average attendance was 29230 but it is normal to see an increase for a first season in a new stadium because everybody wants to checkout the new facilities And we'd only just been relegated and had players like Izzet still on the books.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.