It's official

[filbertway]

That's as close to my point of view on the matter as I can find. I'm not 'happy' to see how he fares, but we're past the point where Pulis was our man, so we may as well give a previously successful manager a chance for now. But I would be very careful with our spending, and make sure we have one eye on building for a medium to long-term future.

 

If we go down it's not unthinkable that decent bids could come in for Schmeichel, Mahrez and Ulloa, and we have eight players out of contract in the summer, so we should really keep trying to make longer term investments, rather than quick fixes.

 

After seeing Hamer, I'm happy for Schmeichal to go to be honest. Mahrez and Ulloa would justify decent price tags I think, but I'd rather we hold onto them. Especially Riyad. 

 

Can see us dipping into the loan market for a few players to be honest as some players may see our position and think it's a risk to join us, or would at least want a relegation release clause stuck in their contract. It almost seems unfair to only judge Pearson on this window as he's going to be working with one hand tied behind his back. The problem is though, it's self inflicted so I can see the reasons people have for losing their patience with him.

 

I'm already looking to 2015/2016 to be honest, if we stay up that's great, but if we don't then I'd hope Pearson can get us up again. At the start of 2016/2017 then it'd be up to Nigel to convince the owners that he won't repeat this years summer fiasco. It's a lot of ifs and buts. Basically though I'd give Pearson till 1st Decemer 2016 to have us at least 17th in the Premier League.

 

If he achieves that then I would be happy

[filbertway]

After seeing Hamer, I'm happy for Schmeichal to go. Mahrez and Ulloa would justify decent price tags I think, but I'd rather we hold onto them. Especially Riyad. 

 

Can see us dipping into the loan market for a few players to be honest as some players may see our position and think it's a risk to join us, or would at least want a relegation release clause stuck in their contract. It almost seems unfair to only judge Pearson on this window as he's going to be working with one hand tied behind his back. The problem is though, it's self inflicted so I can see the reasons people have for losing their patience with him.

 

I'm already looking to 2015/2016 , if we stay up that's great, but if we don't then I'd hope Pearson can get us up again. At the start of 2016/2017 then it'd be up to Nigel to convince the owners that he won't repeat this years summer fiasco. It's a lot of ifs and buts. Basically though I'd give Pearson till 1st Decemer 2016 to have us at least 17th in the Premier League.

 

If he achieves that then I would be happy

[MC Prussian]

Are you able to ever wake up and smell the coffee. I to am grateful for what Pearson has done but he isn't good enough and the results and table prove that. He even said himself that he felt his players were good enough so on that basis he is to blame not them.

How is the manager to blame for individual errors during a game - coming even from the most respected (captain Morgan) or most experienced players (Konchesky)?

Explain me that.

[MC Prussian]

Explain Burnley then? How are they doing so much better than us. Here's a thought - Cleverer and more tactically aware manager.

How is five points "so much better than us"? It feels as if you think they're gracing the top of the table.

 

How about accepting the theory that they've been luckier with their recent results? Not so long ago, we were a world apart in the table (or so it felt at times).

[Kitchandro]

How is the manager to blame for individual errors during a game - coming even from the most respected (captain Morgan) or most experienced players (Konchesky)?

Explain me that.

 

Because he's the manager, he had faith in the players, and because they are all short on confidence due to his failures to prepare them well enough to get results.

 

One individual error is just something that happens now and again, when it's happening multiple times in every game it's clear that the management is just not getting the most out of these players.

[filbertway]

How is the manager to blame for individual errors during a game - coming even from the most respected (captain Morgan) or most experienced players (Konchesky)?

Explain me that.

 

Hopefully by signing replacements that aren't error prone. If you persist with panicky/limited defenders it's not unreasonable to expect errors to be made. It's clear he made an error sticking with the defence that got us promoted (Simpson aside). Hopefully he goes some way to rectifying this is Jan.

[Kitchandro]

How is five points "so much better than us"? It feels as if you think they're gracing the top of the table.

 

How about accepting the theory that they've been luckier with their recent results? Not so long ago, we were a world apart in the table (or so it felt at times).

 

It's luck that we haven't won in 12 games whilst they've made up about 10 points on us in that time?

 

Stop being silly, they're playing better than us and are 5 points ahead for a reason. It's not cos they're good, in fact it highlights just how bad we are at the moment.

[MC Prussian]

Because he's the manager, he had faith in the players, and because they are all short on confidence due to his failures to prepare them well enough to get results.

 

One individual error is just something that happens now and again, when it's happening multiple times in every game it's clear that the management is just not getting the most out of these players.

So, a manager is responsible for individual errors "because he's the manager"? What kind of a reason is that? You might as well exchange it for statements such as "because the sky is blue" or "because one swallow doesn't make a summer".

In the end, it's all shallow rhetoric.

 

Whenever I see the players perform on the pitch, they don't strike me as a squad short of confidence. But it only lasts so long: We were our own worst enemy once more following one individual mistake (by Konchesky this time). Up to that point, we held up our own pretty well.

What I do acknowledge is that at the moment, we're in dire need for some creativity, skill and experience coming from midfield and attack, something to gel it all together. The amount of narrow defeats to me means we're not that far off getting points on the board once more.

[BigMicky]

So, a manager is responsible for individual errors "because he's the manager"? What kind of a reason is that? You might as well exchange it for statements such as "because the sky is blue" or "because one swallow doesn't make a summer".

In the end, it's all shallow rhetoric.

Whenever I see the players perform on the pitch, they don't strike me as a squad short of confidence. But it only lasts so long: We were our own worst enemy once more following one individual mistake (by Konchesky this time). Up to that point, we held up our own pretty well.

What I do acknowledge is that at the moment, we're in dire need for some creativity, skill and experience coming from midfield and attack, something to gel it all together. The amount of narrow defeats to me means we're not that far off getting points on the board once more.

Perfectly summised and well thought out post

[Harry - LCFC]

It's incredible how many guarantees there are on both sides of the argument. You yourself said 'if Pearson stays he'll turn it around'. But yes, I've heard that he's guaranteed to take us down, that ANY new manager is guaranteed to take us down, that he's guaranteed to bring us back up and that we're guaranteed to spend ten years in the dark again if he goes. You end up with a headache trying to process all of that.

 

No I didn't. I said history suggests he will.

[inckley fox]

No I didn't. I said history suggests he will.

 

It doesn't. He turns things around in close seasons, not during seasons. He didn't turn around our poor form in 2011 mid-season, and didn't turn it around sufficiently to win promotion (our aim) in 2013. He has, literally, never turned around a period of sustained poor form to go on to achieve his season's goals.

[inckley fox]

So, a manager is responsible for individual errors "because he's the manager"? What kind of a reason is that? You might as well exchange it for statements such as "because the sky is blue" or "because one swallow doesn't make a summer".

In the end, it's all shallow rhetoric.

 

Whenever I see the players perform on the pitch, they don't strike me as a squad short of confidence. But it only lasts so long: We were our own worst enemy once more following one individual mistake (by Konchesky this time). Up to that point, we held up our own pretty well.

What I do acknowledge is that at the moment, we're in dire need for some creativity, skill and experience coming from midfield and attack, something to gel it all together. The amount of narrow defeats to me means we're not that far off getting points on the board once more.

 

Unfortunately all managers are judged on the mistakes / moments of brilliance of their players. Does O'Neill not get credit for promotion in 1996 because it was a spectacular fluke which won it for us? And do we excuse Peter Taylor because a player got needlessly sent off in his final game as manager, and it cost us the match?

 

I'm afraid managers are judged on every aspect of a performance, including spectacular goals and awful individual errors. A substandard player is more likely to commit errors as frequently as Konchesky does. The fact that we have come into the season with a substandard player in that role is down to the manager, especially when there are valid alternatives. The fact that we've gone on playing him as his tally of awful individual errors mounts up is also down to the manager.

 

As for our performances, I'm afraid we've deserved nothing from the vast bulk of games in our losing run. We've created less chances, conceded far more, made more individual errors and actually been out-worked by most of the sides we've played against. There have been some shocking errors made by the management which a great many fans would have comfortably avoided. 

 

And it's not a few games we're talking about. It's a twelve game run, one of the worst in our history and by anyone at this level, and we're five points adrift of sides we were better than last year. If the individual errors - and let's face it, all errors which lead to goals are individual at some level - don't reflect badly on the manager, then nothing ever will. We could have anyone in charge and he'd never be to blame.

 

The argument that 'you can't judge a manager on the mistakes of his players' has been blown out of the water a million times in the past. All decent managers accept that they take responsibility for results. Mistakes are an aspect of player performance, managers buy, coach and pick those players week in week out and invariably take responsibility for the outcome of those performances. That's the nature of the game, and always will be.

[tickler28]

Anyone else feel like this argument goes round in circles and for everyones point someone has an answer. It gets so tiring and I for one am done with it.

Que Sera Sera whatever will be will be...the futures not ours to see.

Merry Xmas to everyone who follows the mighty blue of Leicester (even MC Prussian). United we stand DIVIDED we fall.

All I want for Xmas is something to celebrate as far as LCFC are concerned.

[MC Prussian]

Unfortunately all managers are judged on the mistakes / moments of brilliance of their players. Does O'Neill not get credit for promotion in 1996 because it was a spectacular fluke which won it for us? And do we excuse Peter Taylor because a player got needlessly sent off in his final game as manager, and it cost us the match?

 

I'm afraid managers are judged on every aspect of a performance, including spectacular goals and awful individual errors. A substandard player is more likely to commit errors as frequently as Konchesky does. The fact that we have come into the season with a substandard player in that role is down to the manager, especially when there are valid alternatives. The fact that we've gone on playing him as his tally of awful individual errors mounts up is also down to the manager.

 

As for our performances, I'm afraid we've deserved nothing from the vast bulk of games in our losing run. We've created less chances, conceded far more, made more individual errors and actually been out-worked by most of the sides we've played against. There have been some shocking errors made by the management which a great many fans would have comfortably avoided. 

 

And it's not a few games we're talking about. It's a twelve game run, one of the worst in our history and by anyone at this level, and we're five points adrift of sides we were better than last year. If the individual errors - and let's face it, all errors which lead to goals are individual at some level - don't reflect badly on the manager, then nothing ever will. We could have anyone in charge and he'd never be to blame.

 

The argument that 'you can't judge a manager on the mistakes of his players' has been blown out of the water a million times in the past. All decent managers accept that they take responsibility for results. Mistakes are an aspect of player performance, managers buy, coach and pick those players week in week out and invariably take responsibility for the outcome of those performances. That's the nature of the game, and always will be.

Managers are held responsible for almost all aspects by some fans, not all of them. Same goes for criticism issued by the media or pundits - at least the ones that are able to differentiate.

 

Glimpses/moments of genius or the awkward moments are usually connected to the player who committed them/came up with them, not the manager. The latter are usually in the spotlight for bad runs, winning streaks or winning trophies, the overall performance, so to speak.

 

I can but assume Pearson thinks highly or thought highly of Konchesky prior to the start of the season because he's one of the most experienced players in the team and should know the Premier League and its workings a bit better than any other player within this squad (bar Upson).

The fact that experienced players like Konchesky are committing such mistakes isn't the manager's wrongdoing - he has little to no influence on how a player performs once the whistle goes. Or else he'd be psychic. Individual errors are the player's fault, no one else's.

 

Yes, we are five points worse off than Burnley or seven games worse off than QPR. Doesn't change the fact that we'll ultimately be judged by the end of the season. People like you are using this bad spell as a argument against the manager, even though you could've seen it coming when you consider the lack of top-flight experience we've got within our ranks, be it players or the manager.

 

You say it yourself - managers take the blame for results, but not for individual errors.

[inckley fox]

Managers are held responsible for almost all aspects by some fans, not all of them. Same goes for criticism issued by the media or pundits - at least the ones that are able to differentiate.

 

Glimpses/moments of genius or the awkward moments are usually connected to the player who committed them/came up with them, not the manager. The latter are usually in the spotlight for bad runs, winning streaks or winning trophies, the overall performance, so to speak.

 

I can but assume Pearson thinks highly or thought highly of Konchesky prior to the start of the season because he's one of the most experienced players in the team and should know the Premier League and its workings a bit better than any other player within this squad (bar Upson).

The fact that experienced players like Konchesky are committing such mistakes isn't the manager's wrongdoing - he has little to no influence on how a player performs once the whistle goes. Or else he'd be psychic. Individual errors are the player's fault, no one else's.

 

Yes, we are five points worse off than Burnley or seven games worse off than QPR. Doesn't change the fact that we'll ultimately be judged by the end of the season. People like you are using this bad spell as a argument against the manager, even though you could've seen it coming when you consider the lack of top-flight experience we've got within our ranks, be it players or the manager.

 

You say it yourself - managers take the blame for results, but not for individual errors.

 

People like myself? I've argued consistently that we should keep Pearson and still think we should, but I've got it within me to say that - with hindsight - there was a period about a month ago when he probably should have gone.

 

And yes, I do say it myself, managers take the responsibility for results. And the results are appalling and have been for a long time. That's Pearson's responsibility - whether the results be down to individual players who most of us thought weren't good enough at the start of the season, and we have alternatives for which he's only just starting to explore - or because of us not playing very well in general.

 

We're suffering from both problems right now. The commentators you're talking about have, even in games where we've come out with some credit like QPR, Burnley, West Brom, Liverpool and Man City, come to the conclusion that we've deserved to lose. There are no fine margins, over the course of this run there have been almost twice as many shots against us as we've had in our favour.

 

We are less organised (see set pieces), have a less settled system and line-up, and are frequently out-worked by our opposition. These are managerial and coaching issues. There is no point whatsoever, regardless of how convinced you are that Pearson is the best way forward (and I think he is), in arguing that Pearson isn't to blame because the errors have been 'individual errors'. All errors involve an individual failing to do his job properly, and the side which commits most errors tends to get the worse results which, as you concede, is the manager's responsibility.

 

Even if we were deserving a great deal more from games (and we're not, to be frank), it would not matter whether our errors were failing to track a man (of which Konchesky, Morgan, Schlupp, James, Mahrez, De Laet have all been guilty), failing to clear a ball effectively (Morgan), own goals (Morgan again), goalkeeping error (Schmeichel), failing to convert good chances (Vardy, Cambiasso) or ridiculous back passes (Konchesky, more than once), these sorts of errors are how all games are decided. And it's not just one type of error, or one player committing them.

 

If you have the season dvd, take a look at how our last successful PL manager responded to individual errors in defeats to Liverpool and Leeds. "They were shocking. You cannot make mistakes like that at this level, if you do you'll be relegated". There were no excuses, no claims that we deserved more, no talk of fine margins, no denial of his own personal responsibility (after Leeds he went up to the away fans and spent a few minutes talking with them, and apologised more than once for the standard of display). We did not have exceptional quality in that side, or make exceptional summer purchases, but we worked hard as a team and committed few errors individually. O'Neill took credit for both, and deservedly. 

 

I put it to you before. Did O'Neill not win us promotion in 96? Or was it all down to Claridge's individual brilliance? What about Kaamark - did he win us the League Cup with his heroic defensive display? Was it all Elliott's individual brilliance in 2000? O'Neill took plenty of credit for these successes, which all hinged on individual brilliance. Similarly, the individual errors of Junior Lewis, Lee Marshall and Ade Akinbiyi were a huge part of what made Taylor arguably our worst ever manager.

 

So what wins and loses games? A team effort? Because our performances have not been as good as our oppositions'. Or individual errors and individual brilliance? Again, all of our players are making errors and there's precious little brilliance out there.

 

But let's get one thing straight, if we win our next three games - be it because of our team playing better, or because of individual moments of heroism from a defender, a keeper or a goalscorer, then Pearson will rightly get the credit. You can't have it one way and not the other - and don't be surprised if people remind you of this if things go our way in the future.

[MC Prussian]

People like myself? I've argued consistently that we should keep Pearson and still think we should, but I've got it within me to say that - with hindsight - there was a period about a month ago when he probably should have gone.

 

And yes, I do say it myself, managers take the responsibility for results. And the results are appalling and have been for a long time. That's Pearson's responsibility - whether the results be down to individual players who most of us thought weren't good enough at the start of the season, and we have alternatives for which he's only just starting to explore - or because of us not playing very well in general.

 

We're suffering from both problems right now. The commentators you're talking about have, even in games where we've come out with some credit like QPR, Burnley, West Brom, Liverpool and Man City, come to the conclusion that we've deserved to lose. There are no fine margins, over the course of this run there have been almost twice as many shots against us as we've had in our favour.

 

We are less organised (see set pieces), have a less settled system and line-up, and are frequently out-worked by our opposition. These are managerial and coaching issues. There is no point whatsoever, regardless of how convinced you are that Pearson is the best way forward (and I think he is), in arguing that Pearson isn't to blame because the errors have been 'individual errors'. All errors involve an individual failing to do his job properly, and the side which commits most errors tends to get the worse results which, as you concede, is the manager's responsibility.

 

Even if we were deserving a great deal more from games (and we're not, to be frank), it would not matter whether our errors were failing to track a man (of which Konchesky, Morgan, Schlupp, James, Mahrez, De Laet have all been guilty), failing to clear a ball effectively (Morgan), own goals (Morgan again), goalkeeping error (Schmeichel), failing to convert good chances (Vardy, Cambiasso) or ridiculous back passes (Konchesky, more than once), these sorts of errors are how all games are decided. And it's not just one type of error, or one player committing them.

 

If you have the season dvd, take a look at how our last successful PL manager responded to individual errors in defeats to Liverpool and Leeds. "They were shocking. You cannot make mistakes like that at this level, if you do you'll be relegated". There were no excuses, no claims that we deserved more, no talk of fine margins, no denial of his own personal responsibility (after Leeds he went up to the away fans and spent a few minutes talking with them, and apologised more than once for the standard of display). We did not have exceptional quality in that side, or make exceptional summer purchases, but we worked hard as a team and committed few errors individually. O'Neill took credit for both, and deservedly. 

 

I put it to you before. Did O'Neill not win us promotion in 96? Or was it all down to Claridge's individual brilliance? What about Kaamark - did he win us the League Cup with his heroic defensive display? Was it all Elliott's individual brilliance in 2000? O'Neill took plenty of credit for these successes, which all hinged on individual brilliance. Similarly, the individual errors of Junior Lewis, Lee Marshall and Ade Akinbiyi were a huge part of what made Taylor arguably our worst ever manager.

 

So what wins and loses games? A team effort? Because our performances have not been as good as our oppositions'. Or individual errors and individual brilliance? Again, all of our players are making errors and there's precious little brilliance out there.

 

But let's get one thing straight, if we win our next three games - be it because of our team playing better, or because of individual moments of heroism from a defender, a keeper or a goalscorer, then Pearson will rightly get the credit. You can't have it one way and not the other - and don't be surprised if people remind you of this if things go our way in the future.

Results are in most cases attributed to the manager (especially by the media and the fans), but in reality, the whole (management) team is to blame/praise for it alongside with the squad.

The manager is simply the standout person to oftentimes receive all the credit, applause or all the battering. Whether you think that's fair or not, is subjective.

 

Pearson isn't without his flaws - he isn't perfect. You strike me as someone who dwells in the club's recent successes under MON and hold every manager who follows up to the same standard. I mean, it's good for you that you were able to witness the surge up the table and a European campaign, no matter how short-lived it was. Please acknowledge that O'Neill wasn't without his own negative attributes, as well (for example, he could've stayed longer instead of opting for Celtic, then Villa).

 

O'Neill didn't just receive all the applause or earn all the credit for the wins himself, he oftentimes pointed to the collective display just as much as he handed out individual praise, as well. He knew just as much as you do that he wouldn't have earned all the success without a team, a group of players ready to give it all.

 

Leicester City have hardly ever been blessed with real talent, you may argue Lineker was the last really skilled youth product - ever since then, we've convinced fans, pundits and the opposition much more by being a team that is tough to break down.

 

In the end, I do believe we do posses that same attitude under Pearson, we have a similar core to build upon. I sense fighting spirit and camaraderie among the players, the team doesn't strike me as one ready to give up yet and call it a day in the Premier League. We've been unlucky at times, hardly ever really really poor (Swansea away aside). There are fine margins, indeed. The type of results (defeats) again suggests to me we only lack so little to compete for survival.

 

Managers are to blame for results, players for their individual mistakes. I think that's fair. Now all we need is both parts to pull in the same direction and work on the execution.

It's not like every player is making the same mistakes each game. Strangely enough, in my eyes, every single player in the starting eleven needed one particularly bad game to smell the coffee. My hope is that once they've all been exposed for their individual shortcomings, they've learnt from those mistakes. Because we all know how unforgiving the Premier League is. In particular towards teams with little to no PL experience.

[tickler28]

Its still official...even more so now