Sven

[man in the long Black Coat]

All Sven ever did at any club was buy loads of players and pay them loads of money. When it didn't work he would buy some more. It was like he was playing a real life football manager game.

[seenitall]

Argue for the sake of it you can do one mate your an idiot, one of the biggest ones on here in fact, of course our attendances would be capacity in the Premier League but that again is totally besides the point, we're in the Championship, your talking about finishing 1st or 2nd in the Championship, we are not the 1st or 2nd biggest club in this league no matter what ruler your using to measure club size, and we certainly don't have the best or 2nd best starting 11. 

 

Your second point is also, loopey, I am not surprised by that but then your forgetting most teams  don't even have a manager for more than 3 years whether they do well or not, if they don't they're sacked, if they do they get a better job and go elsewhere! 4 out of 12 is actually showing that despite nearly every club chopping and changing their manager every 5 minutes, the few that stick might actually get up, I'd like to see the percentage of teams going up who stick with a manager for longer than 3 years compared with the percentages of teams that don't, that'd be interesting stat to read, unlike yours as it's a bent statistic.

 

It is not, you regarding it as such does not make it so.

 

Good result for the boys today though don't your reckon, should at least put you back in your trolls cave until next Saturday!

Despite you resorting to insults whenever somebody doesn't agree with you, your pompous high regard of your own misguided opinion, your lack of ability to spot the difference between your and you're and your refusal to accept that Leicester City fans can come in forms other than sycophantic worshippers of a dullard who assume they are promoted after 4 games and revel in it as if it is some kind of achievement........I still think you have a role to play on the board.

Keep up the 'must be a non supporting troll idiot' line whenever a post catches you out. Just to clarify for me, as I'm clearly an idiot though, if eight out of twelve teams go up with a manager in their first year and three with a manager in their second, does that make the one in twelve that achieved it with a manager in year three and none in year four more or less likely that long term stability is the road to success?

Try to answer nicely, you little keyboard warrior you...........

[Oxshottfox]

Sadly I think in ten years time we will look back at Sven's time here and realise he did the most damage in the shortest period of time of any manager we have ever had. I'd have taken a teenager who showed a modicum of aptitude on football manager over him.

He was clueless. If you put him in a barrel and told him to piss in the corner he'd have been flumoxed.

Destroyed the club possibly

[Tielemans63]

your refusal to accept that Leicester City fans can come in forms other than sycophantic worshippers of a dullard.........

Bit hypercritical don't you think? You seem to think everyone who disagrees with you belongs in the category you've mentioned. Your posts suggest you regard anyone who thinks Pearson is doing a decent job as a 'sycophantic worshipper of a dullard'. If you bothered to read other people's posts carefully you'd realise that most posters offer a balanced view - something you rarely do.

Say what you like in return, I've popped you on my ignore list. No doubt it'll be something along the lines of "Pearson-lover", "Why am I the only one who wants the best for LCFC?", "Why are we happy with mediocrity?" blah blah boring.

[seenitall]

Bit hypercritical don't you think? You seem to think everyone who disagrees with you belongs in the category you've mentioned. Your posts suggest you regard anyone who thinks Pearson is doing a decent job as a 'sycophantic worshipper of a dullard'. If you bothered to read other people's posts carefully you'd realise that most posters offer a balanced view - something you rarely do.

Say what you like in return, I've popped you on my ignore list. No doubt it'll be something along the lines of "Pearson-lover", "Why am I the only one who wants the best for LCFC?", "Why are we happy with mediocrity?" blah blah boring.

What a strange thing to do - ignore the people you don't agree with.........I assume you meant hypocritical.....I certainly don't think that anyone who is able to debate the flaws and mistakes of the past four years is a sycophant, merely the sycophants who can see no wrong even when there is some wrong to see.

[DANGEROUS TIGER]

Sven dragged us up from the lower depths, when he arrived, to a position of safety. Something that many people conveniently forget to mention.

 

 

He brought in expensive players, yes, but he was never given the time to get them to gel, which was ludicrous.

 

Pearson on the other hand, has people saying "he needs time to get the team to gel" Very hypocritical of some people. You can't fairly have one rule for one manager, and another for a different one.

Mr. P has failed to get us promoted, and if he fails again then he will doubtless be shown the door.

[Col city fan]

Sven dragged us up from the lower depths, when he arrived, to a position of safety. Something that many people conveniently forget to mention.

He brought in expensive players, yes, but he was never given the time to get them to gel, which was ludicrous.

Pearson on the other hand, has people saying "he needs time to get the team to gel" Very hypocritical of some people. You can't fairly have one rule for one manager, and another for a different one.

Mr. P has failed to get us promoted, and if he fails again then he will doubtless be shown the door.

Pearson is doing this on the basis of building a team capable of developing. He's done this by shipping out big paid rubbish and recruiting less well paid, more hungry lads.

Sven (and the Board) did it according to a 'sweet-shop' mentality. Namely, pick some big-name players and pay them what they want. Don't try to build and develop, just throw them all in and frankly, hope it works.

That's the difference.

Given the money (and time actually) that Sven had at his disposal, he could have and should have got a team that was far superior to what it was. Really think about it..... Sven blew away a fantastic chance of getting the Club back into the big-time (that season, we spent our way through £15 million quid, £5 million more than West Ham!).

To create a team that was obviously so poor as it was nothing short of disgraceful. It amazes me, still, that anyone defends him.

Finally, improving upon what Sousa did? Well to be honest, I think most of us could have done that.

[DANGEROUS TIGER]

Pearson is doing this on the basis of building a team capable of developing. He's done this by shipping out big paid rubbish and recruiting less well paid, more hungry lads.

Sven (and the Board) did it according to a 'sweet-shop' mentality. Namely, pick some big-name players and pay them what they want. Don't try to build and develop, just throw them all in and frankly, hope it works.

That's the difference.

Given the money (and time actually) that Sven had at his disposal, he could have and should have got a team that was far superior to what it was. Really think about it..... Sven blew away a fantastic chance of getting the Club back into the big-time (that season, we spent our way through £15 million quid, £5 million more than West Ham!).

To create a team that was obviously so poor as it was nothing short of disgraceful. It amazes me, still, that anyone defends him.

Finally, improving upon what Sousa did? Well to be honest, I think most of us could have done that.

I just don't agree at all, but what is all he point of this anyway?, Sven has gone, you wont change your views, and I won't change mine.

[Captain...]

There are some seriously flawed arguments in this thread I don't really have time to disagree with all of them. I'm generally in agreement with Col on this, and in his short time here he basically built 2 teams, one of loan players, and one of expensive overpaid players, and dismantled a solid promotion challenging team and spent a fortune in the process. It was madness.

Something else that was quite clear to me at the time, and hasn't really been mentioned here is that he got sacked because the players had lost confidence in him. They didn't get what he was trying to do and looked clueless at times. Even when won that season we did it because the opposition were crap we didn't look great. I think it was Derby at home we won 4-0 but were awful apart from the first and last 10 minutes. The final straw was him asking the players to sit down and write down what they thought was going wrong and how they could improve things. Like I said madness.

[fleckneymike]

Pearson is doing this on the basis of building a team capable of developing. He's done this by shipping out big paid rubbish and recruiting less well paid, more hungry lads.

Sven (and the Board) did it according to a 'sweet-shop' mentality. Namely, pick some big-name players and pay them what they want. Don't try to build and develop, just throw them all in and frankly, hope it works.

That's the difference.

Given the money (and time actually) that Sven had at his disposal, he could have and should have got a team that was far superior to what it was. Really think about it..... Sven blew away a fantastic chance of getting the Club back into the big-time (that season, we spent our way through £15 million quid, £5 million more than West Ham!).

To create a team that was obviously so poor as it was nothing short of disgraceful. It amazes me, still, that anyone defends him.

Finally, improving upon what Sousa did? Well to be honest, I think most of us could have done that.

 

 

Is this still rumbling on? Both men were charged with getting us to the Premier League. One man was given substantial funds and failed, the other slightly less substantial funds as has failed.

 

Pearson isn't 'building' a team out of the kindness of his heart and as part of some altruistic mission for the fans and owners he's doing so because that is what he's been told to do.

[Zingari]

Is this still rumbling on? Both men were charged with getting us to the Premier League. One man was given substantial funds and failed, the other slightly less substantial funds as has failed.

 

Pearson isn't 'building' a team out of the kindness of his heart and as part of some altruistic mission for the fans and owners he's doing so because that is what he's been told to do.

I don't remember reading anyone saying otherwise , but if that's his remit he's doing a fookin good job .

[Mark_w]

Sven dragged us up from the lower depths, when he arrived, to a position of safety. Something that many people conveniently forget to mention.

 

 

He brought in expensive players, yes, but he was never given the time to get them to gel, which was ludicrous.

 

Pearson on the other hand, has people saying "he needs time to get the team to gel" Very hypocritical of some people. You can't fairly have one rule for one manager, and another for a different one.

Mr. P has failed to get us promoted, and if he fails again then he will doubtless be shown the door.

 

Strange, you always seem to conveniently forget that Pearson had to drag us up from the lowest point in our history (where I can assure you instant success was expected) and then managed to get us to 5th in the Championship while spending nothing like the money spent during Sven's time in charge.

 

It's also odd that you should mention managers needing time to allow players to gel as a defense of Sven, yet you were calling for Pearson's head months into his second spell at Leicester City when he'd had no time at all to get the players used to playing his style of football.

 

These people who use one rule for Pearson and another for Sven are funny aren't they? Surely they should know that it isn't fair?

 

[fleckneymike]

There are some seriously flawed arguments in this thread I don't really have time to disagree with all of them. I'm generally in agreement with Col on this, and in his short time here he basically built 2 teams, one of loan players, and one of expensive overpaid players, and dismantled a solid promotion challenging team and spent a fortune in the process. It was madness.

Something else that was quite clear to me at the time, and hasn't really been mentioned here is that he got sacked because the players had lost confidence in him. They didn't get what he was trying to do and looked clueless at times. Even when won that season we did it because the opposition were crap we didn't look great. I think it was Derby at home we won 4-0 but were awful apart from the first and last 10 minutes. The final straw was him asking the players to sit down and write down what they thought was going wrong and how they could improve things. Like I said madness.

 

He didn't dismantle that side, that side didn't really belong to us. Pearson left, Mandaric slashed the wage bill to make us appear more attractive and we were left the a shell of a squad. Waghorn had returned to Sunderland, Solano had left, Brown's contract expired, Vaughan returned to Everton, Kermorgant was ****ed off to France, Spearing returned to Liverpool and Alex Bruce returned to Ispwich.

 

Sven payed a transfer fee for Bamba, got Vassel and the unfairly maligned Ricardo on frees. He loaned in lots of players and shipped out just Hobbs and Fryatt from the promotion side.

[fleckneymike]

I don't remember reading anyone saying otherwise , but if that's his remit he's doing a fookin good job .

 

I think if you read Col's post there is a clear difference between Pearson 'doing this' and Sven and the board doing it differently.

[Strokes]

Is this still rumbling on? Both men were charged with getting us to the Premier League. One man was given substantial funds and failed, the other slightly less substantial funds as has failed.

Pearson isn't 'building' a team out of the kindness of his heart and as part of some altruistic mission for the fans and owners he's doing so because that is what he's been told to do.

Lord almighty, a person I can agree with.

Well done sir,

Sven and Pearson both have strengths and faults but ultimately it is the board who has issued the direction/policy. To berate or big up either based on it is naive beyond belief.

[Ashley]

Can people who are saying Sven gave out these ridiculous contracts stop? He didn't our executives did, Sven would of only gave them a list of players that he wanted. BIG DIFFEFENCE

[Manwell Pablo]

Despite you resorting to insults whenever somebody doesn't agree with you, your pompous high regard of your own misguided opinion, your lack of ability to spot the difference between your and you're and your refusal to accept that Leicester City fans can come in forms other than sycophantic worshippers of a dullard who assume they are promoted after 4 games and revel in it as if it is some kind of achievement........I still think you have a role to play on the board.

Keep up the 'must be a non supporting troll idiot' line whenever a post catches you out. Just to clarify for me, as I'm clearly an idiot though, if eight out of twelve teams go up with a manager in their first year and three with a manager in their second, does that make the one in twelve that achieved it with a manager in year three and none in year four more or less likely that long term stability is the road to success?

Try to answer nicely, you little keyboard warrior you...........

 

 

Hahaha the sheer amount of hypocrisy in that first sentence is amazing! 

 

I'll answer how I like, and yeah keyboard warrior I am, well done I  make no attempt remain anonymous on here and have had discussions with plenty of people off here in person of whom I both agree and disagree with so if you want to hop the Euro Star I'll call you an idiot to your face . Bring a nice Bordeaux with you.

 

If 21 clubs out of 24 have a manager in the first year or second year, more than likely, one of them will go up, it's basic statistics. So it shows nothing. I don't ever remember saying long term stability is a guarantee of success anyway you obviously have to have the right man for the job I just find it amazing you think someone could walk into Pearson's job have no money and finish 2nd with the team we've got for no other reason than "We're Leicester City, we should be in the Premeir League" . This is not to mention you don't even have a clue who you want, it's just anyone but Pearson . The Dullard has got us to the play offs twice in his only two full seasons here and got us out of League One in the other, and we've just made the best start to a Championship campaign since the early 90's and you wonder why people might be content with our managerial situation . Madness.

[Captain...]

He didn't dismantle that side, that side didn't really belong to us. Pearson left, Mandaric slashed the wage bill to make us appear more attractive and we were left the a shell of a squad. Waghorn had returned to Sunderland, Solano had left, Brown's contract expired, Vaughan returned to Everton, Kermorgant was ****ed off to France, Spearing returned to Liverpool and Alex Bruce returned to Ispwich.

Sven payed a transfer fee for Bamba, got Vassel and the unfairly maligned Ricardo on frees. He loaned in lots of players and shipped out just Hobbs and Fryatt from the promotion side.

He also sold Morrison, basically ended Berner's career he treated Waghorn and Weale like they were surplus to requirements and whilst he didn't sell them he wanted to make sure they knew they had no future here. Dyer was another one often sidelined for no reason.

Spearing, Vaughan, Bruce were not major contributors to our play-off side and neither really was Yann, the only key element to that side we lost was Brown and that was for understandable reasons.

Vitor was another inexplicably poorly treated by Sven. If you weren't of his boys you were treated like shit even when you played well, that was the most frustrating part. He brought in useless loans when we had more than capable sitting in the reserves doing nothing, players that had proven their quality at this level.

[fleckneymike]

He also sold Morrison, basically ended Berner's career he treated Waghorn and Weale like they were surplus to requirements and whilst he didn't sell them he wanted to make sure they knew they had no future here. Dyer was another one often sidelined for no reason.

Spearing, Vaughan, Bruce were not major contributors to our play-off side and neither really was Yann, the only key element to that side we lost was Brown and that was for understandable reasons.

Vitor was another inexplicably poorly treated by Sven. If you weren't of his boys you were treated like shit even when you played well, that was the most frustrating part. He brought in useless loans when we had more than capable sitting in the reserves doing nothing, players that had proven their quality at this level.

 

In that playoff side Morrison had been playing predominantly as a right back. Kyle Naughton was much better than him at RB. At CB he was (and still is) severely limited.

 

Berner wasn't played as much for the understandable reason that his legs had gone and couldn't be expected to bomb back and forth from LB HOWEVER he still managed 19 appearances which was the MOST of any LB.

 

In terms of appearances just take the time to look at the stats,

 

Based on players with the most starts.

No. Pos Nat Name MS Notes 1 GK   Chris Weale 30   16 RB   Kyle Naughton 38   25 CB   Jack Hobbs 27   34 CB   Sol Bamba 18   15 LB   Bruno Berner 19   10 CM   Andy King 48   22 DM   Yuki Abe 29 Matt Oakley had 23 starts 19 CM   Richie Wellens 48   37 RW   Darius Vassell 28   24 ST   Yakubu Aiyegbeni 19   7 LW   Paul Gallagher 38  

4–3–3 Formation

[TheUltimateWinner]

I miss the cheerleaders.

[Monsell1976]

How has this gone from Sven losing money, to a Sven v Pearson debate😃, it's all irrelevant Sven and Pearson are like chalk and cheese, and one has been sacked ( wether or not it was to early, or wasnt given a chance to succeed), the other one is still in post and struggling to get us promoted.

Both haven't got us where we and the owners want to be after large investment.

The fact is both Pearson and Sven are two totally different style of managers, and should be judged on there achievements over their careers not just at Leicester, as sometimes it just doesn't work out at a club for whatever reason.

[DANGEROUS TIGER]

Strange, you always seem to conveniently forget that Pearson had to drag us up from the lowest point in our history (where I can assure you instant success was expected) and then managed to get us to 5th in the Championship while spending nothing like the money spent during Sven's time in charge.

 

It's also odd that you should mention managers needing time to allow players to gel as a defense of Sven, yet you were calling for Pearson's head months into his second spell at Leicester City when he'd had no time at all to get the players used to playing his style of football.

 

These people who use one rule for Pearson and another for Sven are funny aren't they? Surely they should know that it isn't fair?

 

You're wasting your time.         By the way it's not "defense", it's defence. Your spelling is as good as your argument.   

[Mark_w]

You're wasting your time.         By the way it's not "defense", it's defence. Your spelling is as good as your argument.   

 

So you're admitting to trolling? (Didn't someone get banned for that a few weeks ago? )

 

If that's not the case then you've got no real comeback so you're going to pick out one misspelled word to avoid the argument.

 

If you're a troll I really don't know what satisfaction you can get from me biting, it's pretty obvious that I'm going to keep doing it and it's not like you're actually upsetting or particularly annoying anyone, you're just making yourself look like a prat. I'll never understand why people bother, you must have far too much time on your hands.

[The Horse's Mouth]

Dangerous Tiger is growing on me.

[Strokes]

Dangerous Tiger is growing on me.

You should visit a gp