That has to be it. Pearson needs to go.

[Max Power]

If what Lineker said about Pearson's 'sacking' is true, why wouldn't we as fans want to hear about it? It's shambolic behaviour from the board. I don't want that kind of shit under wraps.

 

Only problem is it proabably strengthened Pearson's position as they felt embarrassed by the whole situation and don't want to sack him now even though he's doing a terrible job and we're going down.

[MC Prussian]

If you look at the tweet again. He is responding to the fountain of knowledge jibe by releasing the information. Hardly confidential information. Pearson is acting like a willy puller whose losing the plot. He deserves to be sacked.

Hold it there, dear jit - calling the manager names is uncalled for.

 

Allegedly releasing information about talks behind the scenes between the board and the manager is in fact confidential.

Regardless of whether you like Pearson or not and are somehow aggravated by the McArthur "incident" or the "row" with a "fan", Lineker could've just kept his mouth shut there, as well.

[indierich06]

If what Lineker said about Pearson's 'sacking' is true, why wouldn't we as fans want to hear about it? It's shambolic behaviour from the board. I don't want that kind of shit under wraps.

 

Only problem is it proabably strengthened Pearson's position as they felt embarrassed by the whole situation and don't want to sack him now even though he's doing a terrible job and we're going down.

 

What exactly have we gained by this information going public? Apart from our owners, manager and Gary Lineker looking like a bunch of twats?

[nettle]

If what Lineker said about Pearson's 'sacking' is true, why wouldn't we as fans want to hear about it? It's shambolic behaviour from the board. I don't want that kind of shit under wraps.

 

Only problem is it proabably strengthened Pearson's position as they felt embarrassed by the whole situation and don't want to sack him now even though he's doing a terrible job and we're going down.

I think you've hit the nail on the head there.

[Alf Bentley]

If what Lineker said about Pearson's 'sacking' is true, why wouldn't we as fans want to hear about it? It's shambolic behaviour from the board. I don't want that kind of shit under wraps.

 

 

As a fan, I'd have been interested to hear about it - but I wouldn't want the whole world to hear about it, potentially creating uncertainty at the club and among the players, and potentially undermining NP's authority with the players (whether NP should have been sacked is a separate issue - I disagree with you and think he should stay - but, in any case, that was a decision for the board; Lineker released potentially damaging information when NP was Leicester City manager, whatever you or I might think of him.

 

I agree that it was shambolic behaviour from the board. I don't want that kind of shit going on at "my" club, but if it happens, I want it kept under wraps, dealt with internally and procedures put in place to ensure that it doesn't happen again.

[Alf Bentley]

I think you've hit the nail on the head there.

 

I think he's hit himself square on the thumb myself....as Pearson, Lineker and the board all did at the time (and I'd argue that the board was guilty of the greatest incompetence and Lineker of the most irresponsible malice).

[nettle]

I'd hazard a guess you would for them all bar Nugent.

Certainly more than we've paid out in wages in a season for them anyway.

Does anyone seriously believe Kasper, RDL, James, Drinkwater or Vardys value has decreased since they joined us?

You forgot to mention Nugent, Morgan they won't be worth anything now and the others obviously can't cut it at the top level so who would want them. They are only worth what people are willing to pay.

[Guest MattP]

You forgot to mention Nugent

If you aren't even bothering to read my replies I don't see why I should even make the effort.

Have a look at the post you even quoted.

[nettle]

If you aren't even bothering to read my replies I don't see why I should even make the effort.

Have a look at the post you even quoted.

Sorry my mate don't cry I missed the first bit.

[Guest MattP]

Sorry my mate don't cry I missed the first bit.

No problem sweetie.

As for the 'who would want them' comment - I'd say every team in the Championship would. What's PL football worth? 150 million?

That makes two high class Championship players who know how to be top players in a side that can go up be worth quite a bit I'd say.

[cc_star]

I like how when Fulham buy McCormack for 11 million it's 'good business if he gets them up' but tried and tested top class Championship players like Vardy and Drinkwater who will get you up we apparently would barely get a penny for if we tried to sell...

Thats the blind hatred for anything Pearson has touched taken to its conclusion

[nettle]

Everyone seems so bitter on here! I think people need to get out more.

[st albans fox]

This thread has descended into a state of 'garbage' from pretty well all directions. Given that the manager clearly isn't going anywhere soon, perhaps it could be finished with.

I'm not a fan of the manager but I don't see the point in slagging him off when the team need all the support they can muster.

[inckley fox]

Pearson's "fountain of knowledge" comment was unwise and unnecessary (if understandable), but that doesn't justify Lineker releasing sensitive and potentially damaging information - which wasn't in the public domain until he released it.

 

If my boss said something rude to me, would that justify me in avenging myself by releasing potentially damaging information about our employer to the press?

 

He's a Life President. It's like saying that Steve Coogan is employed by the University of Manchester because he has an honorary degree. And let's not change history to suit those who support Pearson and, in doing so, wish to lash out at anyone and everyone else. The real damaging information that weekend came from the club deciding, and then not deciding, to sack to manager. A banal tweet from Lineker, in response to provocation from Pearson, about how that happened was at no point the main story.

 

I think he's hit himself square on the thumb myself....as Pearson, Lineker and the board all did at the time (and I'd argue that the board was guilty of the greatest incompetence and Lineker of the most irresponsible malice).

 

So what was Pearson guilty of? Because there's no specific mention of the arms round the throat of a player, or the 'I can look after myself' machismo nonsense, or the comments specifically aimed at provoking Lineker. To accuse Lineker of 'the most irresponsible malice' makes him sound like he was one of the main reasons for what happened, which is incredibly wrong and misguiding and, in fact, represents a complete rewriting of the events that happened. We made ourselves a laughing stock through our manager behaving like a child (again), our board sacking and then un-sacking him... a media pundit's response to further childish behaviour from that manager, even if it added to the humiliation we'd already heaped on ourselves, doesn't come close to being the reason for that.

 

As a fan, I'd have been interested to hear about it - but I wouldn't want the whole world to hear about it, potentially creating uncertainty at the club and among the players, and potentially undermining NP's authority with the players (whether NP should have been sacked is a separate issue - I disagree with you and think he should stay - but, in any case, that was a decision for the board; Lineker released potentially damaging information when NP was Leicester City manager, whatever you or I might think of him.

 

I agree that it was shambolic behaviour from the board. I don't want that kind of shit going on at "my" club, but if it happens, I want it kept under wraps, dealt with internally and procedures put in place to ensure that it doesn't happen again.

 

There has been no suggestion that the initial 'leak' came from Lineker. And it's interesting that you overlook the 'damaging' comments which Pearson levelled at Lineker immediately before his comments.

 

Lineker did not create the media storm, that was already there before he said a word. Our manager's actions on the Saturday had already created one set of headlines, the board created another the next day when they tried to respond to them, and to the fact that Pearson wasn't actually doing a great job as manager at the time. Lineker's role in all of this is to respond to one the many silly things that Pearson said over those few days (i.e. the comments about 'paying his taxes'). You are giving him a major role in something which wasn't at all of his making.

 

It's like looking back on a massive pub brawl and overlooking the guy who started throwing the punches, and focusing almost entirely on somebody who - in the early hours of the morning, as the police dragged everyone away - turned up and planted a limp-wristed slap on the face of one of the main troublemakers.

[Head Honcho]

Showed a bit of mettle on Sunday but really think we need to be a bit more adventurous from the off.

 

Nothing to lose now.

[inckley fox]

This thread has descended into a state of 'garbage' from pretty well all directions. Given that the manager clearly isn't going anywhere soon, perhaps it could be finished with.

I'm not a fan of the manager but I don't see the point in slagging him off when the team need all the support they can muster.

 

I agree with you entirely. I find a lot of the defences of him strange in the extreme, but he's done a decent job for us over a longer period of time and there's no reason why we shouldn't get behind him. And it would be a shame if we decided, at the end of February, to fire a manager on the back of - say - a loss to the Champions. We made our choice in November and December, at this point we should stick with it until the end of the season. At that point, relegated or not, there may be a sensible argument to change managers, and another sensible argument to keep him. And when we make that decision, our fans will have to learn to live with it until November and December.

 

There's nothing wrong with debating who should be in charge. But it's vital that we get behind whoever that is.

[inckley fox]

Our league position isn't down to Pearson only, although the people who've never warmed up to him will never cease to use it as a case in point against him.

 

Secondly, the headlines about Pearson tell you more about the media than Pearson himself. If you call this "wrong", then I wonder what you consider fraud, deceit, libel and greed to be in comparison to one "fvck off and die" and a harmless, albeit odd mingle with an opposing player.

 

How was the "near-sacking" wrong? I mean, seriously? Can't you grab a more ridiculous straw to cling onto? How is this even as an argument in your favour? If at all, it's just another case of a heinous frenzy, fueled by egocentric media representatives.

 

I find it really baffling that you aim all your criticism at one person in particular, deliberately overlooking that he's only a part in a puzzle.

 

Lastly, his decisions consistently don't work? I take it you didn't see one sub score a goal on Sunday and another one providing two assists?

 

I don't know where to begin with this. Anybody, at any club who questions the role of their manager is aware that more than one person is responsible for their league position. But ultimately the manager is the one who takes responsibility for results - and that's the same at every club in the world. Just like we give Pearson the credit he deserves for promotions in 2009 and 2014, rather than pointing towards the respective boards, or sets of players. It's the nature of the game, otherwise we'd never have 'great managers' and it wouldn't really matter who your manager was; who you appointed, who you sacked.

 

Believe me, I'm someone who warmed a great deal to Pearson, but I see no reason to lose a sense of balance. We're a side with ambitions of establishing ourselves in the top flight, if not this time then next time. His performance at this level has to make it very questionable that Pearson is the guy who can do this. Now, if he goes on and keeps us up, then that's obviously the perfect outcome. But if he doesn't, and especially if we don't see significant improvement over these final 12 games, then he will look very much like a manager who is unlikely to deliver success at the highest level. I don't see how anyone could possibly disagree with this, because it's the most obvious statement of all time. We wouldn't especially want Phil Brown, Billy Davies, Aidy Boothroyd or Ian Holloway at our club either, and one of the main reasons must be the aforementioned.

 

And 'his decisions consistently don't work' - no, they don't. We're bottom with one point in the past five or six games. It's interesting that you give him credit for one substitution on Saturday, ignore the line-up that preceded it, and the other substitution which followed it (just before their equaliser). The ultimate judgement of how much the manager gets right is the league table, not an isolated moment in a match which we were losing after one of his decisions, then winning after another, then drew after another.

 

As for the 'near sacking', of course it reflects badly on Pearson. His poor performance as manager, both in terms of results and professional conduct, led to it. People seem happy to focus attention on Lineker whose role was a footnote to a catalogue of calamity, but they choose to overlook Pearson's own role. To describe what happened as a 'media frenzy' to which Pearson, or even the board, were unwitting passengers is obviously inaccurate.

[Danno]

I'd hazard a guess you would for them all bar Nugent.

Certainly more than we've paid out in wages in a season for them anyway.

Does anyone seriously believe Kasper, RDL, James, Drinkwater or Vardys value has decreased since they joined us?

Yeah what a terrible decision by Pearson, giving our best players from last season contracts to keep them at the club. It's not like those players got us 102 points or anything.

[MC Prussian]

I don't know where to begin with this. Anybody, at any club who questions the role of their manager is aware that more than one person is responsible for their league position. But ultimately the manager is the one who takes responsibility for results - and that's the same at every club in the world. Just like we give Pearson the credit he deserves for promotions in 2009 and 2014, rather than pointing towards the respective boards, or sets of players. It's the nature of the game, otherwise we'd never have 'great managers' and it wouldn't really matter who your manager was; who you appointed, who you sacked.

 

Believe me, I'm someone who warmed a great deal to Pearson, but I see no reason to lose a sense of balance. We're a side with ambitions of establishing ourselves in the top flight, if not this time then next time. His performance at this level has to make it very questionable that Pearson is the guy who can do this. Now, if he goes on and keeps us up, then that's obviously the perfect outcome. But if he doesn't, and especially if we don't see significant improvement over these final 12 games, then he will look very much like a manager who is unlikely to deliver success at the highest level. I don't see how anyone could possibly disagree with this, because it's the most obvious statement of all time. We wouldn't especially want Phil Brown, Billy Davies, Aidy Boothroyd or Ian Holloway at our club either, and one of the main reasons must be the aforementioned.

 

And 'his decisions consistently don't work' - no, they don't. We're bottom with one point in the past five or six games. It's interesting that you give him credit for one substitution on Saturday, ignore the line-up that preceded it, and the other substitution which followed it (just before their equaliser). The ultimate judgement of how much the manager gets right is the league table, not an isolated moment in a match which we were losing after one of his decisions, then winning after another, then drew after another.

 

As for the 'near sacking', of course it reflects badly on Pearson. His poor performance as manager, both in terms of results and professional conduct, led to it. People seem happy to focus attention on Lineker whose role was a footnote to a catalogue of calamity, but they choose to overlook Pearson's own role. To describe what happened as a 'media frenzy' to which Pearson, or even the board, were unwitting passengers is obviously inaccurate.

Questionable in relation to what? Pearson has no other Premier League season to fall back onto for a fair comparison. Yes, we're all grateful for his work with us and for us in the Championship years (and that League One title, mind), but why use not even a full PL season to slate his capabilities?

I remember similar words being uttered by his critics when he was first appointed - lack of knowledge of the league(s) we were in he had, but in the end and after a few years, he prevailed.

 

The manager isn't a perfect human being and he does have his flaws. However, looking at the sportive side of things, I wonder what some fans were expecting from him. Miracles? Can you tell me which other manager with a similar track record like Pearson managed to keep his club in the Premier League on the first time of asking, straight after getting promoted from the Championship?

 

Credit where credit is due - Pearson is adapting to the new surroundings. Just not fast enough for some.

 

In the end, you consider him being "poor" when I say he's being lambasted and overly criticized for not matching some fans' expectations. As for his "poor professional conduct", I still believe the incidents were massively blown out of proportion and I don't see why a manager is treated with different standards to other human beings (e.g. fans). There's always this onus on the manager to wash himself clean somehow or prove himself, whilst people like you (willfuly) ignore the other side of the argument and fail to criticize other parties involved, as well. I find that very one-sided, despite your claims having warmed up to the manager (which still bears the question how indifferent you are towards him at this point or to what degree you dislike him).

[Swiss_tony]

Questionable in relation to what? Pearson has no other Premier League season to fall back onto for a fair comparison. Yes, we're all grateful for his work with us and for us in the Championship years (and that League One title, mind), but why use not even a full PL season to slate his capabilities?

I remember similar words being uttered by his critics when he was first appointed - lack of knowledge of the league(s) we were in he had, but in the end and after a few years, he prevailed.

 

The manager isn't a perfect human being and he does have his flaws. However, looking at the sportive side of things, I wonder what some fans were expecting from him. Miracles? Can you tell me which other manager with a similar track record like Pearson managed to keep his club in the Premier League on the first time of asking, straight after getting promoted from the Championship?

 

Credit where credit is due - Pearson is adapting to the new surroundings. Just not fast enough for some.

 

In the end, you consider him being "poor" when I say he's being lambasted and overly criticized for not matching some fans' expectations. As for his "poor professional conduct", I still believe the incidents were massively blown out of proportion and I don't see why a manager is treated with different standards to other human beings (e.g. fans). There's always this onus on the manager to wash himself clean somehow or prove himself, whilst people like you (willfuly) ignore the other side of the argument and fail to criticize other parties involved, as well. I find that very one-sided, despite your claims having warmed up to the manager (which still bears the question how indifferent you are towards him at this point or to what degree you dislike him).

the bizarre cult of pearson worshippers.

We're bottom of the league. by 'some' do you mean fans who would like to  stay in the premier league.

i don't think there is any point to getting rid of him now, november would've been  the time.

but these odd statements just make me wonder about some fans mental  processes.

at times it seems you like the manager more than the club.

[Fox Ulike]

Questionable in relation to what? Pearson has no other Premier League season to fall back onto for a fair comparison. Yes, we're all grateful for his work with us and for us in the Championship years (and that League One title, mind), but why use not even a full PL season to slate his capabilities?

I remember similar words being uttered by his critics when he was first appointed - lack of knowledge of the league(s) we were in he had, but in the end and after a few years, he prevailed.

 

The manager isn't a perfect human being and he does have his flaws. However, looking at the sportive side of things, I wonder what some fans were expecting from him. Miracles? Can you tell me which other manager with a similar track record like Pearson managed to keep his club in the Premier League on the first time of asking, straight after getting promoted from the Championship?

 

Credit where credit is due - Pearson is adapting to the new surroundings. Just not fast enough for some.

 

In the end, you consider him being "poor" when I say he's being lambasted and overly criticized for not matching some fans' expectations. As for his "poor professional conduct", I still believe the incidents were massively blown out of proportion and I don't see why a manager is treated with different standards to other human beings (e.g. fans). There's always this onus on the manager to wash himself clean somehow or prove himself, whilst people like you (willfuly) ignore the other side of the argument and fail to criticize other parties involved, as well. I find that very one-sided, despite your claims having warmed up to the manager (which still bears the question how indifferent you are towards him at this point or to what degree you dislike him).

 

The Premier League isn’t an internship in which you learn as you go along. You’ve got to hit the ground running. Pearson hasn’t done this. And what's worse is that he isn't adapting. He's making the same mistakes now as he was making four months ago.

 

I do think you make a good point about fans’ expectations, but Pearson hasn’t even met people’s lower expectations. The only people who can be happy with him are those whose expectation was that we'd be stranded at the bottom of the league!

 

At the start of the season, I thought we’d finish lower-mid-table, but I was prepared to accept a relegation fight.

 

I wasn’t expecting us to be stranded at the bottom and needing a ‘once-per-decade’ miracle to stay up though. With the excellent squad Pearson himself assembled, he should have done better.

 

For me, he gets a ‘D minus’ for this season so far.  Disappointing.

[MC Prussian]

the bizarre cult of pearson worshippers.

We're bottom of the league. by 'some' do you mean fans who would like to  stay in the premier league.

i don't think there is any point to getting rid of him now, november would've been  the time.

but these odd statements just make me wonder about some fans mental  processes.

at times it seems you like the manager more than the club.

I can't think of people on here "worshipping" the manager.

It's more a reaction to what his defendants consider to be either ludicrous or superficial attacks on his personality or capabilities.

And they've had their fair share of critique thrown at Pearson.

 

No fan wants to see us bottom of the league at this point - but it is a scenario that should've and could've reckoned with.

The way I see it, a portion of the fanbase definitely expected too much from this season and have given up already (when there's still plenty of points to play for). And the few who never warmed up to Pearson now dwell in the misery.

 

The manager may be made responsible for the current downfall (or not, depending on what the owners think) - I just find it somewhat baffling that we're having this rather one-sided discussion on here without any of his fiercest opponents coming out of the woodwork and acknowledging that the position we find ourselves in right now is a cumulation of many factors coming together - little to no slating of the players, the media, the board, the staff or even the slightest hint of self-criticism as far as being a supporter is concerned.

[DANGEROUS TIGER]

Questionable in relation to what? Pearson has no other Premier League season to fall back onto for a fair comparison. Yes, we're all grateful for his work with us and for us in the Championship years (and that League One title, mind), but why use not even a full PL season to slate his capabilities?

I remember similar words being uttered by his critics when he was first appointed - lack of knowledge of the league(s) we were in he had, but in the end and after a few years, he prevailed.

 

The manager isn't a perfect human being and he does have his flaws. However, looking at the sportive side of things, I wonder what some fans were expecting from him. Miracles? Can you tell me which other manager with a similar track record like Pearson managed to keep his club in the Premier League on the first time of asking, straight after getting promoted from the Championship?

 

Credit where credit is due - Pearson is adapting to the new surroundings. Just not fast enough for some.

 

In the end, you consider him being "poor" when I say he's being lambasted and overly criticized for not matching some fans' expectations. As for his "poor professional conduct", I still believe the incidents were massively blown out of proportion and I don't see why a manager is treated with different standards to other human beings (e.g. fans). There's always this onus on the manager to wash himself clean somehow or prove himself, whilst people like you (willfuly) ignore the other side of the argument and fail to criticize other parties involved, as well. I find that very one-sided, despite your claims having warmed up to the manager (which still bears the question how indifferent you are towards him at this point or to what degree you dislike him).

If you really mean what you say in that last paragraph, it would seem logical to presume, that your own standards are not set very high.

[SecretPro]

Somebody close this thread.

 

Owners clearly not got the balls to get rid of Pearson, especially after the debacle a few  weeks ago. This is a pointless discussion now.

 

He's here to stay, the players we have now are the players we have to see the season out with, so not really a lot else to say.

 

What will be will be, unfortunately.

[Matt]

Somebody close this thread.

 

Owners clearly not got the balls to get rid of Pearson, especially after the debacle a few  weeks ago. This is a pointless discussion now.

 

He's here to stay, the players we have now are the players we have to see the season out with, so not really a lot else to say.

 

What will be will be, unfortunately.

 

Unfortunately, which is where my problem with Pearson starts, but as you say nothing we can do about it although that doesn't excuse Pearson and he could do something other than playing his favourites.