sylofox Posted 10 November 2014 Share Posted 10 November 2014 To think, a few short weeks ago there was some concern that Newcastle might sack Pardew and be interested in Nige. lets turn the tables on the geordie fvkers lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Royston. Posted 10 November 2014 Share Posted 10 November 2014 If you want Pearson to stay then fine but I challenge you to not make another post this season bemoaning píss poor performances and shít results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain... Posted 10 November 2014 Share Posted 10 November 2014 If you want Pearson to stay then fine but I challenge you to not make another post this season bemoaning píss poor performances and shít results. A poor performance is a poor performance regardless of how you feel about the manager. So that is a stupid thing to say. Actually I think that is the dumbest thing posted this week, which is really quite an achievement. Well done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john ridley Posted 10 November 2014 Share Posted 10 November 2014 Never mind the manager. The players are just not turning up for the games. Where are they...where is Nuge, Drinky, Kasper, De Laet, Kingy. To many player in poor form and need to think if the premiership is for them. Shape up or ship out. Never mind the manager. The players are just not turning up for the games. Where are they...where is Nuge, Drinky, Kasper, De Laet, Kingy. To many player in poor form and need to think if the premiership is for them. Shape up or ship out.trouble is most on 4 year deals Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Doctor Posted 10 November 2014 Share Posted 10 November 2014 trouble is most on 4 year deals 5 weeks ago everyone was loving that, that we "had them tied down for the best years of their life", that if other clubs come in for them "we've got a good bargaining position". Why has it suddenly become a problem? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Royston. Posted 10 November 2014 Share Posted 10 November 2014 So sacking the manager will magically remove the risk of us losing to QPR & Villa? No but it might cause a positive reaction. We all know how frustrating it is when a team in bad form sacks their manager just before we play them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inckley fox Posted 10 November 2014 Share Posted 10 November 2014 But you are looking at 30 clubs, when only 15 can be relegated, only half of those can be relegated, so for it to be statistically significant you need to take a lot more than 3 when you would expect 5 of them to be relegated. You also need to clarify the starting position, a team 6th from bottom changing their manager in November and finish 17th doesn't prove your point. Changing managers cannot be measured accurately as it all depends on how you are changing for who, changing a muppet like Holloway for an experienced manager like Pulis is always going to have a positive effect, replacing a long standing manager like McKay for a premier league novice like Solksjear less so, changing an experienced manager like Hughes for an experienced manager like Redknapp doesn't mean anything when you have a poisonous dressing room and a squad of overpaid mercenaries. I guess I agree with your point, but I don't like the way you have tried to explain it. I disagree. We are in the bottom six and we want to know, based on past evidence, will a side in approximately our position be more or less likely to go down if we change our manager at some point between now and the end of January. So, naturally, a sample of the 30 sides who have been in the bottom 6 on 9 November, for the past five years, and looking at whether or not they changed managers between now and January, is going to tell us something. No, it doesn't differentiate between sides in the bottom three and sides in the bottom six, it doesn't take into account when the manager is changed, it doesn't take into account who the manager is, it doesn't tell us anything about the five sides who WEREN'T in the bottom 6 and still went down, doesn't tell us what happened purely to the teams in 18th place, or to the bottom three, or what had happened under those same managers in previous seasons... it is, in that respect, a bog standard statistic (much like the old 'sides who are bottom at Xmas... stat). If you look at some of these outcomes then you will find that the evidence is similarly inconclusive. And here lies the point that you and, say, Babylon or Mark_w have missed: The point is that there these statistics are NOT significant. They don't conclude that we are better off keeping the same manager - as Babylon has suggested himself in the past, without any serious consideration of what has actually happened in the majority of cases when clubs in roughly our position have done this. Now they don't conclude that we are better off getting rid either, of course they don't (if they did, I'd probably be arguing that we should change manager, instead of suggesting that we don't), but if we go round saying that 'more often than not a change in manager goes wrong' then it's worth looking at evidence which suggests that this is not the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inckley fox Posted 10 November 2014 Share Posted 10 November 2014 The biggest irritation, for me, is the lack of balance. There is a pro-Pearson camp which is about as effective as the pro-Ed camp in the Labour Party right now, or the Spanish government's response to Catalan independence, and it works along similar lines: to come out with lines like 'he's proved in the past that he's the right man' / 'he needs a full season no matter what' / 'if you don't support him you're disloyal' / 'look at all the rubbish managers we had before him'. All of this fails to address what's actually best for us in the PL, and a lot of it is simply a bid to stifle conversation about whether or not he can take us forward. And it seems the loyal thing, for me, to want your club to move forward. Equally, the anti-Pearson camp has a habit of being irrational. A few bad results and he's got to go, a few abrasive interviews and he's got to go. We knew this was going to be tough. Is it not possible to accept that (a) things have gone a little worse than we'd hoped, we're on a hefty slump and need to get better very quickly, (b) that if we don't, changing manager will be a valid - though by no means necessarily the right option and © that we can afford to give our manager a little longer - because he's still learning this level - but equally allow time for a new man to turn things around if we choose to go down that route. The response is an over-emotive one on both sides. Either people feeling personally offended by the manager, or inability to make sensible judgements which may benefit the club based on some sense of loyalty to him or even a straight-up reluctance to permit change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socks Posted 10 November 2014 Share Posted 10 November 2014 Personally the owners will give him Sunderland and QPR if no results (especially against QPR) he will go Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain... Posted 10 November 2014 Share Posted 10 November 2014 I disagree. We are in the bottom six and we want to know, based on past evidence, will a side in approximately our position be more or less likely to go down if we change our manager at some point between now and the end of January. So, naturally, a sample of the 30 sides who have been in the bottom 6 on 9 November, for the past five years, and looking at whether or not they changed managers between now and January, is going to tell us something. No, it doesn't differentiate between sides in the bottom three and sides in the bottom six, it doesn't take into account when the manager is changed, it doesn't take into account who the manager is, it doesn't tell us anything about the five sides who WEREN'T in the bottom 6 and still went down, doesn't tell us what happened purely to the teams in 18th place, or to the bottom three, or what had happened under those same managers in previous seasons... it is, in that respect, a bog standard statistic (much like the old 'sides who are bottom at Xmas... stat). If you look at some of these outcomes then you will find that the evidence is similarly inconclusive. And here lies the point that you and, say, Babylon or Mark_w have missed: The point is that there these statistics are NOT significant. They don't conclude that we are better off keeping the same manager - as Babylon has suggested himself in the past, without any serious consideration of what has actually happened in the majority of cases when clubs in roughly our position have done this. Now they don't conclude that we are better off getting rid either, of course they don't (if they did, I'd probably be arguing that we should change manager, instead of suggesting that we don't), but if we go round saying that 'more often than not a change in manager goes wrong' then it's worth looking at evidence which suggests that this is not the case. As I said I agree with your point, just that those statistics don't really prove or disprove anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain... Posted 10 November 2014 Share Posted 10 November 2014 Personally the owners will give him Sunderland and QPR if no results (especially against QPR) he will go I wouldn't be so sure. We all thought that he was gone during our run of poor results in 2013, but the owners stuck with him, and we are were all thankful they did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 10 November 2014 Share Posted 10 November 2014 People underestimate just how patient our owners are, look at how they backed him at the end of 2013. We certainly shouldn't be thinking about this yet, he deserves at least half the season. We've had a real tough start and have lots of games coming up against lower sides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nod.E Posted 10 November 2014 Share Posted 10 November 2014 Said it before and I'll say it again: Our fans are among the most fickle going. There shouldn't even be a thread for this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inckley fox Posted 10 November 2014 Share Posted 10 November 2014 As I said I agree with your point, just that those statistics don't really prove or disprove anything. I think they go a long way to disproving that there is conclusive evidence that sides who make a managerial change before the end of January generally suffer as a consequence. Seven out of the ten who have been in the bottom 6 now and have made a change don't go down. But it's a stat and it's got holes in it, I understand that. But I'm simply demonstrating how the matter isn't clear-cut. I still feel the best possible answer to our problems will come from Pearson, and a change in his approach. There's nothing wrong with switching to a 4-1-2-1-2 if it suits you approach during a specific game (e.g. United), but it can't be a formation that you try to impose over successive games on an unsettled line-up who have repeatedly switched formations. Especially if, as was the case at the end of the West Brom game, you play two target men with no wingers! So he needs to give us the best possible chance of winning games, and can't impede that with bizarre team selections / formations / substitutions. His comments are also bizarre. Shakespeare said they'd been focusing on attacking set plays and crossing more than at any time in the past, then today Pearson says there's been no increased focus on attacking play in training. Pearson says we will naturally get less chances at this level and need to seize on them, but we're having less than half of the chances of the sides - home, away and in many cases in a similar position to us - who are playing against us and beating us - and THEN he says that the problem is actually that we're not making enough chances. I hope this is a case of a manager saying one thing, but perhaps doing another. One thing's for sure, though, he needs to learn and learn fast or the board will be looking at past evidence like that which I presented and may decide that - while a change is far from a guarantee of success or failure - it represents a better chance of survival than a manager who, for instance, practises crossing all week and then doesn't play a winger! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maybes Posted 10 November 2014 Share Posted 10 November 2014 The only thing that needs to go is the fvcking diamond formation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitchandro Posted 10 November 2014 Share Posted 10 November 2014 Away from home, yes, tremendous support. In fact I'd argue that the fans cheered us on to our equalizer at your place. At home it's a bit hit and miss. You were shit at our place mate. In fact you've been shit season after season at our place. You're deluded. Said it before and I'll say it again: Our fans are among the most fickle going. There shouldn't even be a thread for this. More fickle than Newcastle and West Ham? Somehow I don't think so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chug Laguna Posted 10 November 2014 Share Posted 10 November 2014 Dear God don't let anything happen to Pearson ever. Sure he's kinda daft when it comes to tactics and football and that kind of stuff, but his post match interviews, where he talks like a magician being forced to interact with a slow child... its absolutely brilliant and worth the eventual relegation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inckley fox Posted 10 November 2014 Share Posted 10 November 2014 Of course there should be a thread on this. We're in the bottom three and we are the out-of-form side in the bottom three. When clubs have successfully changed managers during a PL season it has been at roughly this time of year. And our manager is a good second and third tier promotion challenger, but is untested as a PL survival specialist. And the best PL survival specialist in the game is currently available. There are good arguments that Pearson should stay, at least for now. I think those arguments win over. But to simply negate the argument all together because it's fickle or disloyal or whatever is insanity. When there's a question mark over an issue the aim must be to have the debate and win it, not to hope that the debate will just go away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inckley fox Posted 10 November 2014 Share Posted 10 November 2014 Dear God don't let anything happen to Pearson ever. Sure he's kinda daft when it comes to tactics and football and that kind of stuff, but his post match interviews, where he talks like a magician being forced to interact with a slow child... its absolutely brilliant and worth the eventual relegation. I'm annoyed with myself for never noticing this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackburnClaret Posted 10 November 2014 Share Posted 10 November 2014 You were shit at our place mate. In fact you've been shit season after season at our place. You're deluded. More fickle than Newcastle and West Ham? Somehow I don't think so. http://www.foxestalk.co.uk/forums/topic/97480-atmosphere/ Deluded, along with many of your own fans, apparantly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitchandro Posted 10 November 2014 Share Posted 10 November 2014 http://www.foxestalk.co.uk/forums/topic/97480-atmosphere/ Deluded, along with many of your own fans, apparantly. Yep, a lot of our fans are idiots, unfortunately. Don't worry I tell them so regularly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lambert09 Posted 10 November 2014 Share Posted 10 November 2014 He got us here, he knows this team, he will get it right! He always does. After what this man has done for the club over the years he has a free pass from me this season, if we go down so be it, he's the man whos got us here. Id be completely ashamed if we turned our back on him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Babylon Posted 10 November 2014 Share Posted 10 November 2014 They don't conclude that we are better off keeping the same manager - as Babylon has suggested himself in the past, without any serious consideration of what has actually happened in the majority of cases when clubs in roughly our position have done this. I'm sorry, I've said what now? Could you let me know when I said that we are definitely better off keeping the same manager? As far as I know, the closest I have come to saying anything of the sort was in a post about the views of the owners and it was more of a warning that changing managers isn't the guarantee of a change in fortunes that some people think it is. http://www.foxestalk.co.uk/forums/topic/97692-pearson-out/page-12#entry3187083 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Royston. Posted 10 November 2014 Share Posted 10 November 2014 He got us here, he knows this team, he will get it right! He always does. After what this man has done for the club over the years he has a free pass from me this season, if we go down so be it, he's the man whos got us here. Id be completely ashamed if we turned our back on him I like this attitude so long as you dont contradict yourself by slágging the team/manager off in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Col city fan Posted 10 November 2014 Share Posted 10 November 2014 I think many are blaming the diamond (or whatever it is) too much. As restrictive though it clearly is, I think Pearson may well have not signed well in the summer. Our formation certainly doesn't help, but I suggest Pearson knows we could struggle playing any particular formation at present. I think the opposition has been underestimated and we are looking a weakish squad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.