That has to be it. Pearson needs to go.

[Mark_w]

So what? At least I try to give an argument. You're presence on the forum is pointless. You always say the same things, and never even try to discuss.

It is odd. It's like Nige is your dad.

 

Is your argument that Pearson's my Dad? Because that's very constructive, a much stronger argument than my point about all of the sides in the relegation battle getting battered at Old Trafford. You just say 'balance' and 'defensive midfielder' a lot and hope some shit will stick.

[Guest Col city fan]

Would you have had a go at Pearson for not starting Kramaric, our most expensive signing? I know there was uproar after Stoke for not starting him so don't get me wrong and I apologise if you weren't one of them.

The key failure today was not applying pressure on their defence/wing-backs and Daley Blind. We gave them too much respect and perhaps Pearson should take some blame for that for maybe not telling the players to get stuck in a bit more from the start. They had unbelievable amounts of time on the ball from the back to pick their desired pass. I agree starting Vardy on the wing was a non-entity from the beginning.

You play a FORMATION.

First and foremost.

If Kramaric wouldn't fit in today, if he wouldn't do the job, in that formation, that Ulloa did, you leave him out and play him next week, at home.

You don't simply play someone because of his name and because he's your record signing. Like you don't always play Vardy because he's quick.

This is Pearson's biggest failing IMO.

Start with how you want to play, then get players in to conform to that system. Pearson seems to do it the other way round. Or at least, this season.

[Guest Col city fan]

Is your argument that Pearson's my Dad? Because that's very constructive, a much stronger argument than my point about all of the sides in the relegation battle getting battered at Old Trafford. You just say 'balance' and 'defensive midfielder' a lot and hope some shit will stick.

No, I said your unwillingness to even discuss any shortfalls is odd. You know what I said, because it is.

[Sunbury Fox]

You never try to defend Pearson so I don't see how that's at all noteworthy.

If we're going to look at the situation objectively, here's how the managers of sides in the bottom six have got on at Old Trafford this season...

Manchester United 3-0 Hull

Manchester United 4-0 QPR

Manchester United 3-1 Leicester

Burnley, Villa, West Brom haven't played there yet. But clearly, setting up a relegation threatened side to get something at Old Trafford isn't as easy as perhaps some people are making it out to be. But whatever let's crucify him for making one change from the team that beat a strong Tottenham side at White Heart Lane. Obviously losing by two goals at Old Trafford and getting three points from the two games against Man United is atrocious for a side that cost a minute fraction of the price of Manchester United.

I think you're right we were never likely to get anything from that game, but I don't think it'd have been at all different if we put Albrighton on the right or didn't take Kramaric off, or if Nigel Pearson did anything different at all really. United are ****ing miles ahead of us, and at Old Trafford, for a side like ours, you're basically relying on them having an off day if you're going to look like getting anything. And after we beat them 5-3 last time out, let's face it, they weren't going to have an off day.

You say that making one change from the team who won against a "strong" Spurs team was legitimate. Spurs made 9 changes for that game and King and DD were totally dominated by their reserves. The reason we won last week was a superb piece of finishing from Ulloa and an awful mistake by their reserve keeper. Don't get me wrong, we created chances but the centre midfield was largely awful, as they were v Stoke. It was obvious that we won despite King and DD but he left them in today. And before you say, "You don't change a winning team", that's precisely what he did against Stoke when he dropped Albrighton. It's baffling - as someone else said, the only possible explanation is that he wrote off the game and wanted to rest some key players for the winnable game v Palace. Mick McCarthy did the same thing at Old Trafford a few years ago when he was Wolves manager.

[Fox Ulike]

I think our formation and personnel were definitely to set up to have a go!! Kramaric, Vardy, Schlupp, Ulloa? When Kramaric and Ulloa didn't start vs Stoke we all cried out for our most expensive purchases to start and today they did and still Nige can't win? 

 

I don't see how playing 4 attacking players like those can be seen as set up not to have a go. On the day Man Utd were better than us tactically and we were never in the game but I doubt Pearson planned for the players to put in a dire performance.

"Having a go" is what non league teams do when they go to Old Trafford in the Cup.

Pearson is a Premiership manager. He should be setting his team up for a tight, disciplined, defensive performance. Frustrate them, get their fans on their backs. Keep it tight first half. Break up the game. Hit them on the counter.

We had a go. Three strikers (one out of position)...and two attack-minded midfielders.

3-0 down at half time.

[StanSP]

You play a FORMATION.

First and foremost.

If Kramaric wouldn't fit in today, if he wouldn't do the job, in that formation, that Ulloa did, you leave him out and play him next week, at home.

You don't simply play someone because of his name and because he's your record signing. Like you don't always play Vardy because he's quick.

This is Pearson's biggest failing IMO.

Start with how you want to play, then get players in to conform to that system. Pearson seems to do it the other way round. Or at least, this season.

 

You play a FORMATION.

First and foremost.

If Kramaric wouldn't fit in today, if he wouldn't do the job, in that formation, that Ulloa did, you leave him out and play him next week, at home.

You don't simply play someone because of his name and because he's your record signing. Like you don't always play Vardy because he's quick.

This is Pearson's biggest failing IMO.

Start with how you want to play, then get players in to conform to that system. Pearson seems to do it the other way round. Or at least, this season.

 

That's my point though and I kind of agree with you anyway - Pearson is never gonna win. If he plays Kramaric he satisfies some fans because of the expense he was signed for and he needs to play to justify that expense. If he doesn't play, he'll no doubt get criticised for not playing our most expensive signing. 

 

I think he'll definitely play next week however in a similar attacking formation. 

[tickler28]

Do we have in our squad anyone who can play a decent through ball...someone who can supply service to the strikers....answers on a postcard please

[inckley fox]

You never try to defend Pearson so I don't see how that's at all noteworthy.

 

If we're going to look at the situation objectively, here's how the managers of sides in the bottom six have got on at Old Trafford this season...

 

Manchester United 3-0 Hull

Manchester United 4-0 QPR

Manchester United 3-1 Leicester

 

Burnley, Villa, West Brom haven't played there yet. But clearly, setting up a relegation threatened side to get something at Old Trafford isn't as easy as perhaps some people are making it out to be. But whatever let's crucify him for making one change from the team that beat a strong Tottenham side at White Heart Lane. Obviously losing by two goals at Old Trafford and getting three points from the two games against Man United is atrocious for a side that cost a minute fraction of the price of Manchester United.

 

I think you're right we were never likely to get anything from that game, but I don't think it'd have been at all different if we put Albrighton on the right or didn't take Kramaric off, or if Nigel Pearson anything different at all really. United are ****ing miles ahead of us, and at Old Trafford, for a side like ours, you're basically relying on them having an off day if you're going to look like getting anything. And after we beat them 5-3 last time out, let's face it, they weren't going to have an off day.

 

I think he's focusing on how spiritless and inept our own performance was, and how our manager's bizarre decisions didn't help that.

 

And these decisions were bizarre. Saying there was only one change doesn't tell the full story, because we had Konchesky, Hamer, Nugent and Knockaert playing in our previous league game, and we didn't win the Newcastle game until we introduced Albrighton. And, of course, the Newcastle game wasn't a league game, and they didn't play an entirely full strength side.

 

Of the aforementioned 'dropees', Hamer, Knockaert, Albrighton had done nothing obvious to be left out. On top of that we had King, Drinkwater and Vardy who were dreadful over both games and were still played today - pretty much everyone expressed surprise at this when the teams were read out. Only one out of the three was taken off. And today we had Cambiasso back who, if you place much value on those ratings we give players each game, is level with Mahrez and Hammond as our most highly rated midfielder this season. Oh, and there's another one - Hammond. He's actually been our highest-rated player, level with Hamer.

 

I mention this because we're focusing on fan reaction, and why fans might be surprised. Well, if three of the six players they've rated most highly this season are left out, while three of the worst are left in, then they're ever likely to be surprised. And, looking at the performance, I can't help but feel the Foxestalk average ratings generator might have done a much better job at our team selection than the manager.

[Corky]

Yes, unfortunately he's in Africa right now.

[Mark_w]

No, I said your unwillingness to even discuss any shortfalls is odd. You know what I said, because it is.

 

I do discuss his failing and supposed failings, quite often. I'd have thought you'd have noticed considering you're involved in most of those discussion, you're just saying I don't because I frequently don't take the same side as you because I think that many of those failings don't actually exist. I do think he has failings, everyone does, I just think that the majority put forward on here are completely unfounded. And I think that despite his failings, he's generally a very strong manager who is having and will have a positive impact on the football club I support, so of course I don't come on here and go 'this was shit, that was shit' constantly. I'm not going to because I think generally speaking we're better off with him, and sitting here and micro analyzing the timing of every substitution is just going to depress or bore me.

[inckley fox]

I think our formation and personnel were definitely to set up to have a go!! Kramaric, Vardy, Schlupp, Ulloa? When Kramaric and Ulloa didn't start vs Stoke we all cried out for our most expensive purchases to start and today they did and still Nige can't win? 

 

I don't see how playing 4 attacking players like those can be seen as set up not to have a go. On the day Man Utd were better than us tactically and we were never in the game but I doubt Pearson planned for the players to put in a dire performance. 

 

I don't see how you seriously expect any line-up to have a go with a two-man central midfield of King and Drinkwater. The only league game this season that we haven't lost with both of them in the starting line-up (and there's been 8 of them) was Everton, when Drinkwater went off in the first half. If our manager isn't aware of this, and doesn't think it's significant, then he shouldn't be a manager.

 

And how many of our 21 league goals have been scored when that pair have both been on the pitch? I make it 3, possibly 4. And bear in mind that these are the players who have had the 6th and 8th most game time of anybody in our squad this season.

[Monsell1976]

Do we have in our squad anyone who can play a decent through ball...someone who can supply service to the strikers....answers on a postcard please

Or any players that don't panic on the ball, or give it away to the opposition cheaply, or hoof it aimlessly forward, because the rest of the players cannot move into space to offer an option of a pass, or the fact the are not good enough to retain the ball as a team.

[ADK]

I didn't agree with the selections either but at the end of the day the pivotal moment that most affected the outcome was the linesmen's decision to allow an offside goal.

[StanSP]

I don't see how you seriously expect any line-up to have a go with a two-man central midfield of King and Drinkwater. The only league game this season that we haven't lost with both of them in the starting line-up (and there's been 8 of them) was Everton, when Drinkwater went off in the first half. If your manager isn't aware of this, and doesn't think it's significant, then he shouldn't be a manager.

 

Okay, perhaps the midfield of King and Drinkwater wasn't the correct decision, but a lot of people on here need to realise we clearly haven't 'set up to fail'. Even in the worst parts of supporting Leicester never have I seen a team 'set up to fail'.

[theessexfox]

I'm not defending his team selections today but if you seriously believe he 'set up to lose' today then you're a bit weird imo

Okay, perhaps the midfield of King and Drinkwater wasn't the correct decision, but a lot of people on here need to realise we clearly haven't 'set up to fail'. Even in the worst parts of supporting Leicester never have I seen a team 'set up to fail'.

Snap

[StanSP]

I'm not defending his team selections today but if you seriously believe he 'set up to lose' today then you're a bit weird imo

Snap

 

It actually and genuinely staggers me some fans think one of our most successful managers in recent history will pick a team that's set up to fail

[Monsell1976]

I didn't agree with the selections either but at the end of the day the pivotal moment that most affected the outcome was the linesmen's decision to allow an offside goal.

No excuses mate, we were shocking for 80 minutes of the game, even if he called it right, the result would have been as comfortable.

My biggest concern is, our players are in the top flight, where all players want to be, at one of the most famous grounds in the world, and they couldn't show any sort of performance, or try and put the effort in, barring 10 minutes when the game was already decided, worrying in my eyes.

[inckley fox]

I do discuss his failing and supposed failings, quite often. I'd have thought you'd have noticed considering you're involved in most of those discussion, you're just saying I don't because I frequently don't take the same side as you because I think that many of those failings don't actually exist. I do think he has failings, everyone does, I just think that the majority put forward on here are completely unfounded. And I think that despite his failings, he's generally a very strong manager who is having and will have a positive impact on the football club I support, so of course I don't come on here and go 'this was shit, that was shit' constantly. I'm not going to because I think generally speaking we're better off with him, and sitting here and micro analyzing the timing of every substitution is just going to depress or bore me.

 

Sometimes you have to admit you're wrong. I've always wanted Pearson here, I still do, but it seems very, very likely, to the point of being obvious, that - with the benefit of hindsight - we'd have been better off getting rid of him a long time ago if we'd seriously wished to stay up.

 

Now I can admit I was wrong...

[Corky]

I didn't agree with the selections either but at the end of the day the pivotal moment that most affected the outcome was the linesmen's decision to allow an offside goal.

 

It doesn't, these things happen. Quite a lot against us recently but I don't want us to turn into a bunch of paranoid, small time tossers who endlessly blame officials for our failings, like the Man United fans did back in September and the Chelsea fans currently are. 

 

We had a long time to sort it out and failed to do so.

[Mark_w]

Sometimes you have to admit you're wrong. I've always wanted Pearson here, I still do, but it seems very, very likely, to the point of being obvious, that - with the benefit of hindsight - we'd have been better off getting rid of him a long time ago if we'd seriously wished to stay up.

 

Now I can admit I was wrong...

 

Oh right well if you think I'm wrong then I must be. You've really won me round. God maybe I was wrong about him at the end of 2012/13 too. Thanks for putting me right, if you could just PM me all the answers from now on I'll never have to form my own opinion based on what I see with my own eyes again.

[Bettsj2]

Obviously he didnt set up to lose. He has said many times that he picks the side he thinks is most capable of winning the game.

That is the problem.

[MC Prussian]

No, our formation was suicidal.

There is setting up to 'have a go', then there's setting up to just fail.

We needed some sort of game plan. Personally, I'd have stuck an extra man in midfield, probably Cambiasso, then played with Schlupp out wide left and Albrighton out wide right. I'd have started with Ulloa, tried to get the ball out to the flanks for Schlupp and Albrighton to run at the full backs and get crosses in.

If the crosses were cleared, the extra body in midfield could have battled to win the second ball.

What was the game plan today?

Playing away at Man Utd, with a midfield two of King and Drinkwater is crazy stuff.

And indefensible I think.

Setting up to 'have a go' meant having a plan which would give us just a sniff of a chance at Old Trafford. As it was, it was over after forty minutes.

Suicidal to me means seeing no other exit and choosing an option that spells downfall from the start.

 

The formation wasn't suicidal. The gameplan worked. Until one particular moment which was out of our control.

The crucial element was a linesman who had forgotten his specs at home, allowing Manchester United to score the first in controversial fashion.

From then on, we simply gave in and let the heads hang. If at all, I find that attitude disheartening.

 

The team needed a good talking to at half-time in order to come up with damage control. And so they did.

[Monsell1976]

I'm not defending his team selections today but if you seriously believe he 'set up to lose' today then you're a bit weird imo

Snap

He didn't set up to lose, but they did nothing to prove they set up to win either, I think he set up not to lose, but we sat so deep, a team like utd would always tear us apart.

[inckley fox]

Okay, perhaps the midfield of King and Drinkwater wasn't the correct decision, but a lot of people on here need to realise we clearly haven't 'set up to fail'. Even in the worst parts of supporting Leicester never have I seen a team 'set up to fail'.

 

Of course nobody wants to lose a game, unless something seriously dodgy has gone on. But that pair have been among the top eight in terms of game time this season, and we've scored what - 3 / 4 goals with both of them starting? And lost all but one of those games, and that was a game when one of them went off injured!

 

If you really want to make sure you lose a game, it's a good way to start.

 

Like I said, a computer could pick a better side than Pearson at the moment. As much as I love him and believe he can improve, he has been comically bad as a PL manager. While a much better manager than McLintock, Hamiltom, McGhee, Taylor, Bassett and Adams, he's right up among them in terms of how downright silly most of his decision making at this level has been.

[MC Prussian]

Do we have in our squad anyone who can play a decent through ball...someone who can supply service to the strikers....answers on a postcard please

The transfer window closes in two days, so there's still time and hope we'll get a decent attacking midfielder in.