chili_con_carne Posted 2 April 2013 Posted 2 April 2013 The owners clearly know nothing about football. So wonder who's decision it will actually be to sack Pearson. Susan Whelan? But then wouldn't it show weakness if it's the same people that recommended to appoint Pearson, then recommend to sack Pearson. It's just admitting that you failed. Lets face it. Pearson is here until the end of the season. If we don't get promoted he's gone. Now lets just get behind him.
smelly-pooface1 Posted 2 April 2013 Posted 2 April 2013 you muppet, hes lost the dressing room. we need someone who can come in a lift the lads for the final push, much like billy has done at forest
cc_star Posted 2 April 2013 Posted 2 April 2013 The owners clearly know nothing about football. So wonder who's decision it will actually be to sack Pearson. Susan Whelan? But then wouldn't it show weakness if it's the same people that recommended to appoint Pearson, then recommend to sack Pearson. It's just admitting that you failed. Lets face it. Pearson is here until the end of the season. If we don't get promoted he's gone. Now lets just get behind him. With the 6 pointers coming up, there is no time like now to pull in the same direction. Just wish NP was making that easier. Still, whoever said it was going to be easy. ... But they know a lot about business Our finances indicate they know even less about business than they do about football
Lcfcman2010 Posted 2 April 2013 Posted 2 April 2013 With the 6 pointers coming up, there is no time like now to pull in the same direction. Just wish NP was making that easier. Still, whoever said it was going to be easy. The joys of being a LCFC fan! Be nice to go on a unbeaten run again..........
Libertine Dream Posted 2 April 2013 Posted 2 April 2013 They clearly do know something about football
chili_con_carne Posted 2 April 2013 Author Posted 2 April 2013 In my opinion it was there decision to appoint sven. Pearson was recommended to them.
coley1884 Posted 2 April 2013 Posted 2 April 2013 In my opinion it was there decision to appoint sven. Pearson was recommended to them. But looking at their respective track records, how could appointing Pearson be a better decision than appointing Sven, which I think is your inference, Chili? What has Pearson really achieved as a manager in truth? Promotion with us from the third and avoiding relegation with Southampton and Carlisle? And one appearance in the play offs. I know Sven polarises opinion, but he was the first [and I think still the only] manager to win the double in three different countries so he has a far stronger track record at club level than most. He is also the most consistent England manager without doubt. Ironically he touch over a bunch of players who looked down and out [following defeat to Germany and Keegan's resignation] and turn them around quickly to great success - very much the sort of record we may be looking for ourselves later today. And like most at the very top, he managed a wide range of characters to great effect. I appreciate it didn't work out for Sven at City for whatever reason, but appointing him made far more sense to me than bringing Pearson back after he walked away from us.
volpeazzurro Posted 2 April 2013 Posted 2 April 2013 ... But they know a lot about business Yes, great businessmen, we're only £85m in debt. I reckon I could have got us in the same position for £84m.
Bettsj2 Posted 2 April 2013 Posted 2 April 2013 Yes, great businessmen, we're only £85m in debt. I reckon I could have got us in the same position for £84m. Build a business empire worth as much as theirs, buy the club, run up the debt and then come back and talk some shit. Until then, dont give up your day job. Or work harder at it. Whatever, just stop talkig shit.
dayday Posted 2 April 2013 Posted 2 April 2013 Was it not Andrew Neville behind Pearsons appointment?
BNET Posted 2 April 2013 Posted 2 April 2013 lf you look properly at Pearsons record at Carlisle and Southampton its not good at all. lt was a terrible move appointing Pearson.
volpeazzurro Posted 2 April 2013 Posted 2 April 2013 Build a business empire worth as much as theirs, buy the club, run up the debt and then come back and talk some shit. Until then, dont give up your day job. Or work harder at it. Whatever, just stop talkig shit. They're probably absolutely brilliant at their own business, no doubt about it, but do you really think they're running city well? With the odd exception, that I can't think of at the moment, have the clubs that have gone up in recent seasons managed to get themselves into so much debt in so short a time? Even if they have, I can't see it as being a healthy state of affairs. Now if it was their own money they had been 'gambling' with then no problem, no harm done, but it's not is it. Anyway, why the insults, are you incapable of discussion or just one of those brave nerdy keyboard warriors who feel they look big to everyone by slagging people off. We all have a right to an opinion even if we disagree with each other.
i luv u foxes Posted 2 April 2013 Posted 2 April 2013 I still think we would of been promoted under sven last season im sure his record at beginning of last season was better than pearsons when he took over
LCFC_FAN_1995 Posted 2 April 2013 Posted 2 April 2013 Top knows football, spoke to him in Austria when Sven was in charge and he's a big fan of football, used to play it
Greatness_Since_1884 Posted 2 April 2013 Posted 2 April 2013 But looking at their respective track records, how could appointing Pearson be a better decision than appointing Sven, which I think is your inference, Chili? What has Pearson really achieved as a manager in truth? Promotion with us from the third and avoiding relegation with Southampton and Carlisle? And one appearance in the play offs. I know Sven polarises opinion, but he was the first [and I think still the only] manager to win the double in three different countries so he has a far stronger track record at club level than most. He is also the most consistent England manager without doubt. Ironically he touch over a bunch of players who looked down and out [following defeat to Germany and Keegan's resignation] and turn them around quickly to great success - very much the sort of record we may be looking for ourselves later today. And like most at the very top, he managed a wide range of characters to great effect. I appreciate it didn't work out for Sven at City for whatever reason, but appointing him made far more sense to me than bringing Pearson back after he walked away from us. I remember Top giving an interview after Sven went saying Championship experience was paramount so that was one box ticked. But to be fair I agree with another post that it was most likely Andrew Neville (who was around in his first spell) that pushed him to Top. If that was the case, would the owners a) Then be relying on Neville to give feedback on whether to sack him or not given they haven't been in the country for the majority of the season (with evidence suggesting he's fairly pro-Pearson given his re-appointment) and b) Will they trust Neville again to make the next appointment or will they look to do it themselves this time? That could be pure speculation but for me it seems more likely than Top turning to the fellow board members and saying "I've always rated that Nigel Pearson". Either way, if he does leave, whether we make the play-offs or not I still think we should always be thankful for the way he's cleaned up the mess left by Sven and we're certainly in a better position and on the road to recovery from that 2011 summer thanks to NP.
Bettsj2 Posted 2 April 2013 Posted 2 April 2013 They're probably absolutely brilliant at their own business, no doubt about it, but do you really think they're running city well? With the odd exception, that I can't think of at the moment, have the clubs that have gone up in recent seasons managed to get themselves into so much debt in so short a time? Even if they have, I can't see it as being a healthy state of affairs. Now if it was their own money they had been 'gambling' with then no problem, no harm done, but it's not is it. Anyway, why the insults, are you incapable of discussion or just one of those brave nerdy keyboard warriors who feel they look big to everyone by slagging people off. We all have a right to an opinion even if we disagree with each other. My opinion is you were talking shit. I've no idea about any other promoted clubs financial situation just as I have no idea why they've structured ours as they have which in turn is why I dont comment on it. I work with various businesses every day of the week, some fund through cash and some through debt. I have no fvcking idea why or whats better but why I do know is, the people doing it have a better idea than me which is why when people like you say, 'I could do that', I throw an insult because to be frank, I find that sort of shit offensive.
MooseBreath Posted 2 April 2013 Posted 2 April 2013 My opinion is you were talking shit. I've no idea about any other promoted clubs financial situation just as I have no idea why they've structured ours as they have which in turn is why I dont comment on it. I work with various businesses every day of the week, some fund through cash and some through debt. I have no fvcking idea why or whats better but why I do know is, the people doing it have a better idea than me which is why when people like you say, 'I could do that', I throw an insult because to be frank, I find that sort of shit offensive. But but but, but but, but dey forren m8. Dey don't no noffink about noffink cos dey all forren innit.
Fox92 Posted 2 April 2013 Posted 2 April 2013 Yes, great businessmen, we're only £85m in debt. I reckon I could have got us in the same position for £84m. I was joking (hence the ) but they do have a massive International business, more than what we've got sat on an internet forum.
MC Prussian Posted 2 April 2013 Posted 2 April 2013 These guys now all about decisions: Plus, they're originally from Ashby-de-la-Zouch.
The Doctor Posted 2 April 2013 Posted 2 April 2013 lf you look properly at Pearsons record at Carlisle and Southampton its not good at all. lt was a terrible move appointing Pearson. Bouncing straight back out of league one and then reaching the play-offs seems to disagree with you. Amazingly, I couldn't give two tosses about his record at Carlisle, I'm more bothered how he did here. The answer? Pretty ****ing well.
volpeazzurro Posted 2 April 2013 Posted 2 April 2013 My opinion is you were talking shit. I've no idea about any other promoted clubs financial situation just as I have no idea why they've structured ours as they have which in turn is why I dont comment on it. I work with various businesses every day of the week, some fund through cash and some through debt. I have no fvcking idea why or whats better but why I do know is, the people doing it have a better idea than me which is why when people like you say, 'I could do that', I throw an insult because to be frank, I find that sort of shit offensive. My initial quote was part ironic and part sarcasm, possibly too subtle for you sorry. That having been said, whatever the business model being used, the club and not the individuals are still a huge amount in debt, which, whilst not proclaiming to be an expert,l as an outsider makes me nervous and probably a few others I would suspect. No offence meant.
5waller5 Posted 2 April 2013 Posted 2 April 2013 Bouncing straight back out of league one and then reaching the play-offs seems to disagree with you. Amazingly, I couldn't give two tosses about his record at Carlisle, I'm more bothered how he did here. The answer? Pretty ****ing well average Corrected.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.