kingfox Posted 12 May 2014 Posted 12 May 2014 Why? Clarke won 7 out of his last 34 games, not much better than the whole of this season for WBA. Did he. He should of been sacked then shouldn't he. Silly Kingfox
The Horse's Mouth Posted 12 May 2014 Posted 12 May 2014 Can a mod! please ban Leicesterpool! from using exclamation marks!? He even does it in his f**king signature
Super_horns Posted 12 May 2014 Posted 12 May 2014 It seems the communication was a problem and they didn't like the director of technical performance coming in to help Mel.. Quote from Gareth McAuley: "It was difficult for some players to take, being told by a computer analyst how to play football" There was some dispute over coaches too I remember which actually meant Mel was rejected at first.
Fez of Mahrez Posted 12 May 2014 Posted 12 May 2014 What has that got to do with anything , they have only been their for 4 seasons consequtivitively if it was a club the size of Newcastle, Everton for example then yes I would be concerned, but WBA are in the shitter now whereas we as a club are in much healthier position with regards to managerial stability and financially wise.
ousefox Posted 12 May 2014 Posted 12 May 2014 Stupid to get rid of Clarke in the first place, and then to go after a manager who was doing a worse job than Clarke in a different league seemed bizarre. Admittedly, Mel had done a fantastic job the year before but still a stupid appointment for a relegation battle and lucky they avoided it.
Kitchandro Posted 12 May 2014 Posted 12 May 2014 What has that got to do with anything , they have only been their for 4 seasons consequtivitively if it was a club the size of Newcastle, Everton for example then yes I would be concerned, but WBA are in the shitter now whereas we as a club are in much healthier position with regards to managerial stability and financially wise. I hate to say it but he's right, there's no way WBA are in a more healthy position than us. If Newcastle come calling I might be a bit more worried.
Strokes Posted 12 May 2014 Posted 12 May 2014 What has that got to do with anything , they have only been their for 4 seasons consequtivitively if it was a club the size of Newcastle, Everton for example then yes I would be concerned, but WBA are in the shitter now whereas we as a club are in much healthier position with regards to managerial stability and financially wise.Managerial stability, what does that have to do with it? If pearson was chosing to leave then he is the stabilty. West brom, are a similar sized club, they would be an attractive outfit for an up and coming manager. As far as i am aware he is still out of contract, which would make him an attractive target. Take the blue tinted specs off.
Kitchandro Posted 12 May 2014 Posted 12 May 2014 Managerial stability, what does that have to do with it? If pearson was chosing to leave then he is the stabilty. West brom, are a similar sized club, they would be an attractive outfit for an up and coming manager. As far as i am aware he is still out of contract, which would make him an attractive target. Take the blue tinted specs off. Why would you leave for a similar (marginally smaller) sized club? It's not as if they're rich, have a great squad or loads of potential is it? What would be the benefit of him leaving for them? We're on an upward curve and we have the team he built. He'll have money to spend and I'd fancy us to finish above West Brom next season. I think you need to take your blindfold off.
Strokes Posted 12 May 2014 Posted 12 May 2014 Why would you leave for a similar (marginally smaller) sized club? It's not as if they're rich, have a great squad or loads of potential is it? What would be the benefit of him leaving for them? We're on an upward curve and we have the team he built. He'll have money to spend and I'd fancy us to finish above West Brom next season. I think you need to take your blindfold off. West brom finished 8th, the season before last. Im saying its not beyond comprehension, that pearson, might just find them a viable option. His contract here is due for renewal. he would be foolish not to at least look at it, if they came knocking. Im not saying he would go, or should go, just that its not daft to think he might. West brom will most certainly be looking in his direction.
Kitchandro Posted 12 May 2014 Posted 12 May 2014 Why? Clarke won 7 out of his last 34 games, not much better than the whole of this season for WBA. Stats like that are often pretty misleading. That is over the course of 2 different seasons, I'm sure you could find runs like that for most bottom half teams. The important thing is there league position at the end of each season. He achieved a good one last year, and should have been shown a bit of faith during a rough patch.
Kitchandro Posted 12 May 2014 Posted 12 May 2014 West brom finished 8th, the season before last. Im saying its not beyond comprehension, that pearson, might just find them a viable option. His contract here is due for renewal. he would be foolish not to at least look at it, if they came knocking. Im not saying he would go, or should go, just that its not daft to think he might. West brom will most certainly be looking in his direction. Well that's great but their squad now isn't good enough to finish 8th. And if it was, so is ours. Other squads have improved, and they have been struggling against relegation all season. I disagree, I think it is daft. We are in a stronger position and have a team which he has been building. Why start again at a club with, at best, the same potential?
The Horse's Mouth Posted 12 May 2014 Posted 12 May 2014 it's more of a sideways step which is why Pearson wouldn't go.
MC Prussian Posted 12 May 2014 Posted 12 May 2014 I hate all this 'mutual consent' bollocks. Just say it like it is - he was sacked because he did a shit job. Well, blame the board for sacking Clarke in the first place, then replacing him with Mel. That managerial short-sightedness is baffling at times.
Frost Posted 12 May 2014 Posted 12 May 2014 I hate all this 'mutual consent' bollocks. Just say it like it is - he was sacked because he did a shit job. Not sure that was quite the case this time. Pretty certain both parties agreed a clause in Pepe's contract so they could part easily at the end of the season. Most likely it actually was a 'mutual agreement'. Wasn't there all that nonsense with Mel refusing to join WBA because he couldn't take his Spanish backroom staff?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.