Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
justfoxes

Is Nigel Pearson safe in his role ? ESPN ARTICLE

Recommended Posts

Posted

I got as far as 'Farcical team selection' and closed the page. What a lemon. Kramaric was never going to start and Ulloa was ineffective when he came on.

Not much else to say on any other position as I'm sure anyone would've picked another side.

Posted

I got as far as 'Farcical team selection' and closed the page. What a lemon. Kramaric was never going to start and Ulloa was ineffective when he came on.

Not much else to say on any other position as I'm sure anyone would've picked another side.

 

Farcical is certainly taking it to far, but as I've said elsewhere he got it horribly wrong Saturday.

Posted

Right some nutter has a blog, writes two articles saying Pearson is running out of time in December and one in November (acknowledging that he just doesn't like him frankly), and we're giving him more credence than Ian Stringer, Dangerous Tiger, Seenitall etc. because?

Posted

Farcical is certainly taking it to far, but as I've said elsewhere he got it horribly wrong Saturday.

You think he got it wrong... we might have lost 3-0 with the players you and I wanted. We'll never know, people slated his selections at Liverpool and it was one of our best performances.

Posted

You think he got it wrong... we might have lost 3-0 with the players you and I wanted. We'll never know, people slated his selections at Liverpool and it was one of our best performances.

I think the forced decision to not play Konchesky would have had an effect, something he wouldn't have even considered had he not been suspended.

Posted

I think the forced decision to not play Konchesky would have had an effect, something he wouldn't have even considered had he not been suspended.

Liverpool barely went down that side during the game, it was all down the left so De Laet had a fairly quiet game I thought.

Posted

You think he got it wrong... we might have lost 3-0 with the players you and I wanted. We'll never know, people slated his selections at Liverpool and it was one of our best performances.

 

Well we lost 1-0 and put in one of our worst performances of the season so I'm quite confident my thoughts are correct.

 

People may have, I didn't, thought it was quite ballsy myself although I would of accepted a tighter line up. 

Posted

Well we lost 1-0 and put in one of our worst performances of the season so I'm quite confident my thoughts are correct.

First half at Stoke was as bad as the second half on Saturday and that was with Ulloa upfront and Mahrez playing. As I said before the game and after it the problem would be / was in the centre and we only combated that away from home when we went to three in the middle.

 

For me arguing about a winger and a striker is by the by because the biggest problem on the day was something else and led to everyone looking shit.

 

But like I said, none of us know what would have happened.

Posted

We set up not to lose on Saturday, that's the alarming point for me.

We were never going to score with those two up front, that's what wound me up.

A game where we are at home, should be looking to win, could get out the bottom 3 and we set up not to lose, I'm still fuming now.

What's more annoying is we set up not lose and we bloody lost, we didn't even succeed with the bleeding game plan.

Posted

We set up not to lose on Saturday, that's the alarming point for me.

We were never going to score with those two up front, that's what wound me up.

A game where we are at home, should be looking to win, could get out the bottom 3 and we set up not to lose, I'm still fuming now.

What's more annoying is we set up not lose and we bloody lost, we didn't even succeed with the bleeding game plan.

 

This is right on the money - bloody frustrating!

Posted

We set up not to lose on Saturday, that's the alarming point for me.

We were never going to score with those two up front, that's what wound me up.

A game where we are at home, should be looking to win, could get out the bottom 3 and we set up not to lose, I'm still fuming now.

What's more annoying is we set up not lose and we bloody lost, we didn't even succeed with the bleeding game plan.

I wouldn't say the set up not to lose at all. I don't see how Vardy in for Ulloa suddenly changes a team from an attacking one to a defensive one when he's up the other end of the pitch most of the time.

 

You could argue the team was more attacking than against Villa with King and DD in the middle over James and Hammond.

 

We had feck all in the middle strength wise and no option to change it. That's the short and long of it for me, any combination of players in other positions would have been pissing in the wind to my eyes.

Posted

You think he got it wrong... we might have lost 3-0 with the players you and I wanted. We'll never know, people slated his selections at Liverpool and it was one of our best performances.

 

Everybody 'gets it wrong' from time to time. You're allowed to do that. But if we can't say a manager has got it wrong when we drop our top scorer (by miles) and one of our most creative players from the week before - leaving around twenty million pounds worth of talent on the bench - and, subsequently, failing to look like we'll score in a million years against a side we beat earlier in the season, then when can we say it?

 

I understand the logic behind his decisions, and appreciate that we had injuries in one specific position where we're also quite weak (and have had for about a month - but we're 20 days into a transfer window, we can hardly say the manager is helpless), but managers always take ultimate responsibility for results. I'm out of the country and watched that game on a stream. The commentator remarked that Leicester weren't playing with the sort of fire in their belly you'd expect from a side in our position, and I have to agree. Ultimately Pearson made some big calls and, too often this season, those big calls have backfired.

 

That doesn't mean he's the wrong manager for us, it just means that if we want to stay up the attitude has to be 'where did I get it wrong today?' and not 'I got everything right, I don't understand why we weren't good enough'.

Posted

I've known Ben Jacobs for many, many years. Currently lives and works in Dubai. He's been consistently anti-Pearson so the article isn't a surprise. Hope that adds a bit on context.

 

Unless we start getting hammered every week, which doesn't look likely, then Pearson is probably safe in his job this season.

Posted

Everybody 'gets it wrong' from time to time. You're allowed to do that. But if we can't say a manager has got it wrong when we drop our top scorer (by miles) and one of our most creative players from the week before - leaving around twenty million pounds worth of talent on the bench - and, subsequently, failing to look like we'll score in a million years against a side we beat earlier in the season, then when can we say it?

Where did I say you can't have an opinion?

 

The point I'm making is that I find it annoying that people sit here and make out 100% their team selection would have been better, without any appreciation that it might not have been. I've already stated I'd have chosen different subs and starting players, but I fully appreciate it might not have made the blindest bit of difference.

 

As I pointed out in my post above the Stoke game away we were utter shit first half with Ulloa and Mahrez. A player everyone is saying Pearson got it wrong over and a winger everyone would have in the team over Albrighton every day of the week. We only turned it around second half going three in the middle

Posted

The very same Ben Jacobs who was fired from the BBC for putting out inappropriate content? I wouldn't trust a word of it. Also happens to be a City 'fan' and given the state of some fans on here it holds about as much credibility

Posted

You think he got it wrong... we might have lost 3-0 with the players you and I wanted. We'll never know, people slated his selections at Liverpool and it was one of our best performances.

I agree with that. I was quite happy with the team selection pre match on Sat. I wouldn't have played Ulloa as he was dreadful against Villa. I was quite surprised to see Vardy in, as he was equally terrible against the Villa albeit for a shorter time. But overall fairly happy .

Posted

I've known Ben Jacobs for many, many years. Currently lives and works in Dubai. He's been consistently anti-Pearson so the article isn't a surprise. Hope that adds a bit on context.

 

Unless we start getting hammered every week, which doesn't look likely, then Pearson is probably safe in his job this season.

 

Opened the link, saw the author and searched him on Twitter. Saw he lived in Dubai and closed the page. I'm not taking opinions from a journalist who lives 4500 miles away, hasn't seen us live and isn't even in the country to have any ITK opinion.

 

Your post about him completes my opinion on the article. Agenda-driven tut

Posted

Where did I say you can't have an opinion?

 

The point I'm making is that I find it annoying that people sit here and make out 100% their team selection would have been better, without any appreciation that it might not have been. I've already stated I'd have chosen different subs and starting players, but I fully appreciate it might not have made the blindest bit of difference.

 

As I pointed out in my post above the Stoke game away we were utter shit first half with Ulloa and Mahrez. A player everyone is saying Pearson got it wrong over and a winger everyone would have in the team over Albrighton every day of the week. We only turned it around second half going three in the middle

 

I think you've misread me, or I expressed myself badly, I was saying the manager is allowed to get things wrong, and using 'when can we say he's got it wrong if not today?' as if to say 'surely this is a prime example'. No, I'm not accusing you of being a Fascist!

 

This argument is going back to what a lot of us were saying before about the importance of finding our best side, settling it, and not tinkering with it unnecessarily. Ulloa has been rested a lot lately - can he not form part of a settled side any more? Because he has been by far our greatest goalscoring threat this season. Albrighton - are we saying that he can't adapt to different opposition? If he comes in next week and does a dreadful job, will it be because he isn't good enough, or because he hasn't had the chance to grow with the team on the back of an excellent performance against Villa?

 

I'm not a football manager. Before the Liverpool game I had the same raised eyebrows as everyone else and I was wrong. But more often than not, these brave decisions have backfired on Pearson this season. And, at times, they appear to have impacted on subsequent performances.

Posted

First half at Stoke was as bad as the second half on Saturday and that was with Ulloa upfront and Mahrez playing. As I said before the game and after it the problem would be / was in the centre and we only combated that away from home when we went to three in the middle.

 

For me arguing about a winger and a striker is by the by because the biggest problem on the day was something else and led to everyone looking shit.

 

But like I said, none of us know what would have happened.

 

 

For me all  three are problematic, the difference in the middle was his hands were somewhat tied due to lack of options.

 

Vardy should never start unless we need him to at the moment. Albrighton should not have been left out for the entire 90 and should have had much more involvement over the course of the season in general. 

Posted

Farcical is certainly taking it to far, but as I've said elsewhere he got it horribly wrong Saturday.

 

 

Well we lost 1-0 and put in one of our worst performances of the season so I'm quite confident my thoughts are correct.

 

People may have, I didn't, thought it was quite ballsy myself although I would of accepted a tighter line up. 

 

I'm going to refute your points (you're way too negative btw) on the above. 

Posted

I'm going to refute your points (you're way too negative btw) on the above. 

 

Pointing out my grammar mistakes got boring about a year before you joined the forum. 

 

I'm realistic not negative. We are bottom of the league after all I think it's fair to say things aren't going well.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...