Naughty Nigel calling a reporter a pr*ck

[shailen]

I still cannot see how telling someone who is clearly trolling to feck off, has any link what so ever to him not doing his job properly. Infact I can't see anything to suggest that Nige isn't doing his job properly. He got us promoted for the first time in ten years smashing club records in the process, he has kept us FFP compliant alongside the promotion. He has given us a great youth set up, brilliant sports science facilities and developed a young hungry side.

This season we have struggled to step up admittedly, but many teams have come up and gone straight back down to come back stronger, aka west brom. I am not expecting too little, I'm being realistic. We have never been outclassed, not once this season, and been really unfortunate in many games. More to the point we are not down yet. People are radiculously negative and over hyping every little detail. It isn't helping the players at all.

Anyway I am wasting my breath. Plus typing on an Ipad is giving me RSI. You will im sure be happy to know that the Club still have great confidence in nige and the team, and Nige himself isn't going to be sent to the White coats anytime soon. You will also be glad to know that Nige is trying his best to keep the players out of the limelight, and the mood in the camp is still positive.

Shame it's not positive in the stands.

 

I've been saying this for a while. Fans are fickle. When results do not go in our favour, we played the wrong tactics or it's the wrong team selection... etc. The only clear trend for me, is the fact that we have missed so many clear cut chances. Had we had more composure we would have got more points and thus may be out of the relegation zone. We have played okay this season for the most part, but it's our inability to convert coupled with a little bit of bad luck. 

 

I don't understand how much people can expect from a manager. Sure he gets the blame for the results, but if we are playing well, competing almost every game what can Pearson do. Most of the people here call for a change in formation because we lost, rather than the fact that we were unlucky and the way we set up has nothing to do with it.

 

We have been the unluckiest team ever in the PL for me. It's not just me saying it, pundits are also of the same opinion. That doesn't mean anything for the situation we are in, but I think it helps make a case for why Pearson's tactics have been okay

 

Finally I'm hearing that Pulis/Sherwood/Pardew would have kept us up. Why? If you're judging by their track records then surely youd go back to Pearson track record with us which has been excellent till now. The argument about not being able to manage in this league for me is also rubbish. Pardew for example saw Charlton relegated. A good manager is one who has proven themselves over a longer period of time. Every manager has bad seasons and I believe in the longer term he will come good.

[inckley fox]

I still cannot see how telling someone who is clearly trolling to feck off, has any link what so ever to him not doing his job properly. Infact I can't see anything to suggest that Nige isn't doing his job properly. He got us promoted for the first time in ten years smashing club records in the process, he has kept us FFP compliant alongside the promotion. He has given us a great youth set up, brilliant sports science facilities and developed a young hungry side.

This season we have struggled to step up admittedly, but many teams have come up and gone straight back down to come back stronger, aka west brom. I am not expecting too little, I'm being realistic. We have never been outclassed, not once this season, and been really unfortunate in many games. More to the point we are not down yet. People are radiculously negative and over hyping every little detail. It isn't helping the players at all.

Anyway I am wasting my breath. Plus typing on an Ipad is giving me RSI. You will im sure be happy to know that the Club still have great confidence in nige and the team, and Nige himself isn't going to be sent to the White coats anytime soon. You will also be glad to know that Nige is trying his best to keep the players out of the limelight, and the mood in the camp is still positive.

Shame it's not positive in the stands.

 

It's incredible that so few words can get so much wrong.

 

The reporter might have pushed Pearson a little, but there was nothing exceptional in that, nothing which managers at this level aren't exposed to week-in week-out. The response was exceptional, which is why it's made so many headlines. Again. If Pearson's response seems like perfectly bog standard stuff to you, and the headlines and these threads are a load of nonsense, as were the various other incidents this season, then I'm glad you've managed to convince yourself of that.

 

What next?

 

You see 'no reason to suggest that Nige isn't doing his job properly'. Not looked at the league table lately? Any time in the past three or so months would suffice.

 

'He has kept us FFP compliant' - not the Trestellar deal then? A 12m increase in income kept us compliant, not any expert wheeler-dealing on the manager's part. Staff costs increased. And according to the league our case is still being examined.

 

'Great youth set up' / 'young hungry side'. Which academy graduates are these then? James Pearson? They've hardly impacted on our side this year, or last year. Schlupp and King came to the club in the Levein era, and Moore in the Kelly era, I believe. Our recent line-ups have been among the oldest we've fielded in over a decade, with an average age of between 29 and 30 in many games. We had four under-25 year olds in the line-up yesterday, and a fifth came on later, in comparison to four over-30 year olds and one over-40 year old in the same line-up. A couple of other guys in their mid-30s who've featured in most games this season didn't play yesterday. This isn't a young side, and in spite of what you say about them being 'hungry' and 'positive', this certainly doesn't look to be the case.

 

'We haven't been outclassed this season, not once' - that's impressively wrong. Even if we overlook the fact that we're bottom, adrift, have won four times all season and lost 17 of our 28 games, there were plenty of occasions when we were comfortably second best. Palace, Newcastle, Swansea, Southampton, West Ham, Manchester United and Manchester City away, off the top of my head. West Brom and Palace at home. No, we weren't hammered, but it's a bit like losing 8-0 and then saying 'but they were all good goals'.

 

It may well be that the board still have full confidence in Pearson, as you say, though I can think of other recent events which seem to contradict that. I don't think I'm being 'ridiculously negative' in pointing out that he's not doing a particularly good job this year, nor am I personally damaging the confidence of our players by daring to point out that they're not doing especially well right now.

 

It's interesting to see that you consider yourself a 'realist' when you say that 'many clubs' go down and come back stronger.You give the example of West Brom. Then there's Newcastle and West Ham (best not mention QPR). But look at the other clubs who got relegated in that same time frame - how did it serve Cardiff, Wolves, Blackburn, Birmingham, Bolton, Fulham, Wigan, Reading and Blackpool? My favourite part of your post is that, at the same time as being a 'realist' when it comes to expecting us to be relegated, you're 'positive' when it comes to Pearson, or the chances of bouncing straight back (don't worry that it took him 3-4 attempts last time) and it turns out that we're the ones who are ruining the party.

 

Has the defence of Pearson really come down to this sort of flat-out denial of the glaringly obvious?

[Foxhateram]

It's incredible that so few words can get so much wrong.

The reporter might have pushed Pearson a little, but there was nothing exceptional in that, nothing which managers at this level aren't exposed to week-in week-out. The response was exceptional, which is why it's made so many headlines. Again. If Pearson's response seems like perfectly bog standard stuff to you, and the headlines and these threads are a load of nonsense, as were the various other incidents this season, then I'm glad you've managed to convince yourself of that.

What next?

You see 'no reason to suggest that Nige isn't doing his job properly'. Not looked at the league table lately? Any time in the past three or so months would suffice.

'He has kept us FFP compliant' - not the Trestellar deal then? A 12m increase in income kept us compliant, not any expert wheeler-dealing on the manager's part. Staff costs increased. And according to the league our case is still being examined.

'Great youth set up' / 'young hungry side'. Which academy graduates are these then? James Pearson? They've hardly impacted on our side this year, or last year. Schlupp and King came to the club in the Levein era, and Moore in the Kelly era, I believe. Our recent line-ups have been among the oldest we've fielded in over a decade, with an average age of between 29 and 30 in many games. We had four under-25 year olds in the line-up yesterday, and a fifth came on later, in comparison to four over-30 year olds and one over-40 year old in the same line-up. A couple of other guys in their mid-30s who've featured in most games this season didn't play yesterday. This isn't a young side, and in spite of what you say about them being 'hungry' and 'positive', this certainly doesn't look to be the case.

'We haven't been outclassed this season, not once' - that's impressively wrong. Even if we overlook the fact that we're bottom, adrift, have won four times all season and lost 17 of our 28 games, there were plenty of occasions when we were comfortably second best. Palace, Newcastle, Swansea, Southampton, West Ham, Manchester United and Manchester City away, off the top of my head. West Brom and Palace at home. No, we weren't hammered, but it's a bit like losing 8-0 and then saying 'but they were all good goals'.

It may well be that the board still have full confidence in Pearson, as you say, though I can think of other recent events which seem to contradict that. I don't think I'm being 'ridiculously negative' in pointing out that he's not doing a particularly good job this year, nor am I personally damaging the confidence of our players by daring to point out that they're not doing especially well right now.

It's interesting to see that you consider yourself a 'realist' when you say that 'many clubs' go down and come back stronger.You give the example of West Brom. Then there's Newcastle and West Ham (best not mention QPR). But look at the other clubs who got relegated in that same time frame - how did it serve Cardiff, Wolves, Blackburn, Birmingham, Bolton, Fulham, Wigan, Reading and Blackpool? My favourite part of your post is that, at the same time as being a 'realist' when it comes to expecting us to be relegated, you're 'positive' when it comes to Pearson, or the chances of bouncing straight back (don't worry that it took him 3-4 attempts last time) and it turns out that we're the ones who are ruining the party.

Has the defence of Pearson really come down to this sort of flat-out denial of the glaringly obvious?

Firstly, please don't call my opinions 'wrong', debate my points fair enough, but to call my resourced opinions which I have backed up with evidence throughout wrong, is just rude.

Your post stinks of a person with a flat out refusal to see any positives in the season and therfore there is absolutely no point in me arguing back but I'm going to anyway. You seem to have an answer for everything while completely ignoring the fact that the only thing putting us in the situation we're in, is truly a lack of quality finishing in front of goal. There isn't one game where we haven't created enough chances to have at least earnt a point, I won't have anyone say otherwise. That is not, I repeat not Pearsons fault. Stop looking to blame individuals, our season has been poor due to many reasons, all of which add up to a team effort. As a team we just haven't been good enough.

As for its Pearson's fault for not buying anyone, you can only buy what's available, has any of the clubs near the bottom brought players that have genuinly made a difference to their side? Or even any clubs in the premier league for that matter?

Im sorry but comfortably second best means you have been thrashed 3-4 nil, like Burnley have had this season. Not losing 2-1 and at worst by two goals all season, and don't give me the bigger sides turned off clap trap. I stand by my point, we haven't been outclassed and have been very unlucky in many games to have not got the points we needed.

Has this forum of pearson nay Sayers really come down to the ignorance of missing the glaringly obvious point that football is a collective game. Why has one person got to be to blame. I would understand if pearson had put out a stupid formation and we had been thrashed, then it's his fault. That hasn't happened though, at all. We have been in games right to the final whistle all season and with more composure in front of goal it could all be very different. Especially yesterday.

On to your point of dismissing a youth set up that is competing well in the premier league of youth teams, the youth setup that has made it to the semi finals of the u21's cup. Try again. As for players coming through, Pearson might not have called them up originally but King, Moore and Schlupp have all played a part this season, admittedly the former two in less games than one might have hoped. We have thrown experience into the defence admittedly but we still have young hungry players in James, Mahrez, Krammy, Schlupp, Vardy ( I know he's not young, but he still has plenty of years of quality to come) de Leat, Knockeart and Ulloa aren't old either. Drinky, Moore, King and Lawrence will all have a part to play in the future also. Potential of panyhiouto (sp?) and hopper stepping up if we're playing our trade a lower level in the next few seasons. We certainly won't need an overhaul, like some are quoting.

Part of the reason we could afford to attract and get a company to write off debts, was because Pearson got us to the premier league on a small budget by the way. So you can forget that argument as well.

[gurru991]

People here keep saying that "he says it like its". He rally doesn't !! He says it like a pussy, under his breath !!! You wanna call someone a p***k, then strap on a set and say it to their face.     Classless Display !!!!

[inckley fox]

Firstly, please don't call my opinions 'wrong', debate my points fair enough, but to call my resourced opinions which I have backed up with evidence throughout wrong, is just rude.

Your post stinks of a person with a flat out refusal to see any positives in the season and therfore there is absolutely no point in me arguing back but I'm going to anyway. You seem to have an answer for everything while completely ignoring the fact that the only thing putting us in the situation we're in, is truly a lack of quality finishing in front of goal. There isn't one game where we haven't created enough chances to have at least earnt a point, I won't have anyone say otherwise. That is not, I repeat not Pearsons fault. Stop looking to blame individuals, our season has been poor due to many reasons, all of which add up to a team effort. As a team we just haven't been good enough.

As for its Pearson's fault for not buying anyone, you can only buy what's available, has any of the clubs near the bottom brought players that have genuinly made a difference to their side? Or even any clubs in the premier league for that matter?

Im sorry but comfortably second best means you have been thrashed 3-4 nil, like Burnley have had this season. Not losing 2-1 and at worst by two goals all season, and don't give me the bigger sides turned off clap trap. I stand by my point, we haven't been outclassed and have been very unlucky in many games to have not got the points we needed.

Has this forum of pearson nay Sayers really come down to the ignorance of missing the glaringly obvious point that football is a collective game. Why has one person got to be to blame. I would understand if pearson had put out a stupid formation and we had been thrashed, then it's his fault. That hasn't happened though, at all. We have been in games right to the final whistle all season and with more composure in front of goal it could all be very different. Especially yesterday.

On to your point of dismissing a youth set up that is competing well in the premier league of youth teams, the youth setup that has made it to the semi finals of the u21's cup. Try again. As for players coming through, Pearson might not have called them up originally but King, Moore and Schlupp have all played a part this season, admittedly the former two in less games than one might have hoped. We have thrown experience into the defence admittedly but we still have young hungry players in James, Mahrez, Krammy, Schlupp, Vardy ( I know he's not young, but he still has plenty of years of quality to come) de Leat, Knockeart and Ulloa aren't old either. Drinky, Moore, King and Lawrence will all have a part to play in the future also. Potential of panyhiouto (sp?) and hopper stepping up if we're playing our trade a lower level in the next few seasons. We certainly won't need an overhaul, like some are quoting.

Part of the reason we could afford to attract and get a company to write off debts, was because Pearson got us to the premier league on a small budget by the way. So you can forget that argument as well.

 

So to summarise your argument over the two posts:

 

1. Lots of sides go down and come back stronger. 

 

Three. As opposed to three times more teams, over the same time frame, that didn't.

 

2. Our side is young. King, Moore, Schlupp, Vardy, Ulloa, Kramaric, James, Mahrez, Drinkwater, Knockaert, De Laet and Lawrence are proof of this.

 

I'll ignore our first team line-up's average of between 29 / 30 over recent weeks, then. But King is 27 this year, Vardy is 28, Ulloa is 29 soon, De Laet is 26, Knockaert is out of contract in the summer, Drinkwater is 25. The average age of your examples of our fine young players, many of which aren't in the team, some of which aren't on the bench and one of which is nearly at the end of his contract, is 24.5. Hardly babies. And to suggest that Panayiotou, aged 20 and with a single appearance as a pro to his name, or Hopper could prove to be our saviours is really quite hopeful.

 

3. We are where we are purely because of our failure to take chances and Pearson can't be blamed for that.

 

Okay, so it ignores that we also have the 4th worst defensive record in the division, and the 5th lowest number of shots in the division (hard to convert chances when you hardly get any), yes of course a failure to score chances will tend to define whether or not you're successful. But Pearson spent our entire promotion budget on centre forwards, didn't he? So he sort of has to take a responsibility when they don't turn out to be any good at what centre forwards are meant to be good at. But last year we did take our chances, spectacularly well, and on that occasion Pearson was worthy of the credit for it, apparently.

 

4. There were no players available for Pearson to buy.

 

Of course there weren't. How unlucky he was to have got promoted during the great Footballer Famine of 2014. There are always players available, and plenty of clubs made perfectly good signings of players who we could have competed for while we were busy saving our cash for Ulloa, Kramaric and Lawrence. You say that 'no Premier League sides' at all made signings 'that have made a difference to their side' this year. That's quite a call. Even if we ignore Sanchez, Fabregas, Costa etc. there's still many, many players who have come in and done well. Obviously there's less among the bottom three because, well, they're the bottom three.

 

5. We haven't been outclassed all season, by anyone.

 

I notice you changed this to 'we haven't been comfortably second best' in your second post, because first time round you were just straightforwardly wrong, as 17 defeats, only 4 wins, and nine clear occasions when we were second best both in terms of performance and result, bear witness. I mean, we are bottom and on course for one of the lowest ever points totals in this league, unless that's just me being negative too. But you say we haven't been 'comfortably' outclassed because we only narrowly lost by one or two goals, and you blame our failure to convert chances for that, but you also fail to mention the oppositions' failures to convert their chances.

 

If we are a better side because of the chances we miss, then they must also be better if they miss their chances, right? And it just happens that we have had the 3rd most shots against us of any side in the PL this season, and of those shots, the sides playing against us have the 15th worst conversion rate in the division (the worst being against Chelsea, I believe). Put short, we may have failed to take our (not especially plentiful) chances, but sides against us have been even worse at taking their vastly greater number of chances.

 

6. Pearson kept us FFP compliant.

 

Even though we're still under investigation and staff costs went up. He gets the credit for the Trestellar deal, though. Does he get the blame for us needing it, because of not winning promotion in 2012 or 13?

 

7. The board have full confidence in Pearson.

 

That whole sacking him and then changing their minds thing was obviously people 'over hyping' and being 'ridiculously negative' as well, then.

 

In short, you will give Pearson credit for absolutely anything from third party media sponsorship, to assembling a young side which is actually pretty old. But he's responsible for absolutely nothing which ever goes wrong. Not results, that's down to the strikers he signed (because, of course, there was nobody else available) being rubbish. Although he does get credit for other strikers having been good enough last season. He's not to blame for public spats which get him bans and warnings and worldwide headlines, that's just people being horrible to him. Not performances, because literally all of our performances have been good enough. And we shouldn't worry, we should be 'realistic / positive' because 1 in 4 sides comes back stronger.

 

So yeah, I'd say you were 'wrong'. There are arguments for keeping Pearson, some of them are good ones. Just not these.

[ozleicester]

The biggest issue for me, is that the way a team plays is a reflection of their manager.

 

Pearson has demonstrated that he cannot cope with the pressure of the premier league, and his team have done the same thing. We are left with a manager that is far better than he has displayed this year who is crumbling under the weight of expectation and is resorting to  panicked comments and actions.

 

Now have a look at the way our team is playing....

 

They are better than they are displaying, they are panicked and unable to confidently assert themselves, so resort to childish outbursts and behaviours.

 

I was supportive of keeping Pearson for the Championship, but i fear the team and he are not psychologically equipped to work together next season?

[maxwelld_]

The guy has lost it simple. Time for a change and I would do it now and give someone else a chance for a few games . Can't do any worst than Pearson at the moment

[Burmesefox]

In isolation his aggression is forgivable but ( not in order) FOAD, followed by the strangling (that was not just a joke but well done mcArthur for diffusing it) followed by radio leicester blackout, followed by awkward interviews, followed by the very classless my 'arse and ****ing ****' lead me to believe this man has an ego too big for his ability. Alienating players, wrong team formations, refusal to play potentially one of our best players, negativity, and a very poor points tally. It's just time to go Nigel; you are lacking the ability at this level and you have cracked under the pressure. Thanks for the memories you need to move on for your own good as well as that of the club.

[Foxhateram]

So to summarise your argument over the two posts:

 

1. Lots of sides go down and come back stronger. 

 

Three. As opposed to three times more teams, over the same time frame, that didn't.

 

2. Our side is young. King, Moore, Schlupp, Vardy, Ulloa, Kramaric, James, Mahrez, Drinkwater, Knockaert, De Laet and Lawrence are proof of this.

 

I'll ignore our first team line-up's average of between 29 / 30 over recent weeks, then. But King is 27 this year, Vardy is 28, Ulloa is 29 soon, De Laet is 26, Knockaert is out of contract in the summer, Drinkwater is 25. The average age of your examples of our fine young players, many of which aren't in the team, some of which aren't on the bench and one of which is nearly at the end of his contract, is 24.5. Hardly babies. And to suggest that Panayiotou, aged 20 and with a single appearance as a pro to his name, or Hopper could prove to be our saviours is really quite hopeful.

 

3. We are where we are purely because of our failure to take chances and Pearson can't be blamed for that.

 

Okay, so it ignores that we also have the 4th worst defensive record in the division, and the 5th lowest number of shots in the division (hard to convert chances when you hardly get any), yes of course a failure to score chances will tend to define whether or not you're successful. But Pearson spent our entire promotion budget on centre forwards, didn't he? So he sort of has to take a responsibility when they don't turn out to be any good at what centre forwards are meant to be good at. But last year we did take our chances, spectacularly well, and on that occasion Pearson was worthy of the credit for it, apparently.

 

4. There were no players available for Pearson to buy.

 

Of course there weren't. How unlucky he was to have got promoted during the great Footballer Famine of 2014. There are always players available, and plenty of clubs made perfectly good signings of players who we could have competed for while we were busy saving our cash for Ulloa, Kramaric and Lawrence. You say that 'no Premier League sides' at all made signings 'that have made a difference to their side' this year. That's quite a call. Even if we ignore Sanchez, Fabregas, Costa etc. there's still many, many players who have come in and done well. Obviously there's less among the bottom three because, well, they're the bottom three.

 

5. We haven't been outclassed all season, by anyone.

 

I notice you changed this to 'we haven't been comfortably second best' in your second post, because first time round you were just straightforwardly wrong, as 17 defeats, only 4 wins, and nine clear occasions when we were second best both in terms of performance and result, bear witness. I mean, we are bottom and on course for one of the lowest ever points totals in this league, unless that's just me being negative too. But you say we haven't been 'comfortably' outclassed because we only narrowly lost by one or two goals, and you blame our failure to convert chances for that, but you also fail to mention the oppositions' failures to convert their chances.

 

If we are a better side because of the chances we miss, then they must also be better if they miss their chances, right? And it just happens that we have had the 3rd most shots against us of any side in the PL this season, and of those shots, the sides playing against us have the 15th worst conversion rate in the division (the worst being against Chelsea, I believe). Put short, we may have failed to take our (not especially plentiful) chances, but sides against us have been even worse at taking their vastly greater number of chances.

 

6. Pearson kept us FFP compliant.

 

Even though we're still under investigation and staff costs went up. He gets the credit for the Trestellar deal, though. Does he get the blame for us needing it, because of not winning promotion in 2012 or 13?

 

7. The board have full confidence in Pearson.

 

That whole sacking him and then changing their minds thing was obviously people 'over hyping' and being 'ridiculously negative' as well, then.

 

In short, you will give Pearson credit for absolutely anything from third party media sponsorship, to assembling a young side which is actually pretty old. But he's responsible for absolutely nothing which ever goes wrong. Not results, that's down to the strikers he signed (because, of course, there was nobody else available) being rubbish. Although he does get credit for other strikers having been good enough last season. He's not to blame for public spats which get him bans and warnings and worldwide headlines, that's just people being horrible to him. Not performances, because literally all of our performances have been good enough. And we shouldn't worry, we should be 'realistic / positive' because 1 in 4 sides comes back stronger.

 

So yeah, I'd say you were 'wrong'. There are arguments for keeping Pearson, some of them are good ones. Just not these.

You changed the wording for a start, not me. I stand by my comment, we haven't been outclassed.

4 th worst defence? That means we have conceded less then 3 other teams, who im guessing are also in the relegation scrap, could prove vital still that.

5th worst shots? Is that shots on target? Not that it matters, 5th worst means better than where we are.

Ha so preventing and blocking shots on target isn't a positive now? I will add that to the drivvle bank. It's a negative that we make teams have a lower conversion rate? Really?

Ulloa and Krammy are both decent, krammy is struggling to adapt to the league but looks class and Ulloa conversion rate has been good. So forget that argument.

Give me examples of players teams have brought this season, that have made a genuine difference to the side... Exactly.

As for other things you have outlined, I have already explained/evidenced/argued the case. And I flip your final comment, you are happy to point out the teams 'frailties' and/or the media clap trap, blaming Pearson, but refuse to give him credit for the positives, stating they are someone's elses doing. Que Sara. Oh and some the facts you have quoted disprove your points, just saying.

[Guest Col city fan]

Why are people suggesting what Pearson said is 'offensive'. It might have been to the journo (if he heard it) but not to me.

I'm not offended by it at all..I'm simply surprised. It's not protocol. It's not professional. AGAIN..you can see Pearson becoming increasingly more angry towards the end.

He might have been angry...but you contain that anger, get on with it and play the game.

Who else is he gonna fall out with this season? Stringer, Journos, Gary Lineker, the fans (in increasing numbers).

It's not offensive, to me...it simply shows a man under immense pressure, with anger issues, who has basically lost it.

That's the worrying thing and the thing that those posters who are banging on about 'offensiveness' are completely missing.

[Strokes]

Personally I'm not in the slightest bit offended by one man calling another man a '****'. I'm not too keen on the fact that I'm back in the school in Spain next week and the kids and staff have a habit of taunting me about what a nutcase our manager is, or that this is the only thing they seem to know about our club. But no, I'm happy to live with that, even if the results are harder to put up with sometimes.

What's more worrying is what it tells us about how well he can cope with the pressures of managing at this level. He's often acknowledged the importance of a manager keeping a calm head, but these incidents - and we're talking plural, of course - don't suggest that he can do that. Coupled with our awful results, which wasn't a problem for most of the other managers mentioned in this thread, it doesn't seem to create the impression of a man who is fit to manage at this level.

From what I can see, this is what people are worried about, rather than being personally shattered by the public use of a naughty word. Now if Pearson had the track record of Ferguson, Wenger et. al then an outburst or two would just be a case of a good manager looking a bit daft. But he doesn't.

I saw in the papers today that some young actor had been found pissing in the street, drunk. Does that make him an alcoholic knocking on death's door? No, probably not. But if you saw Gazza doing the same thing you'd worry for him, wouldn't you? The same logic applies to Pearson's behaviour yesterday. Much of what he's done this season, from his public spats to his key decisions to the results they've earned him, have suggested that he can't cope. While his words yesterday are no reason, in isolation, to kick up a fuss, it's still perfectly understandable that some may draw a connection between those words and the aforementioned failure to cope.

Quite honestly, its a reasonable post and a valid opinion. I don't feel the same. Although I do agree he has let the pressure get to him. I think, and probably hope, a season or two back in the champ and out of the limelight, will do him the world of good. You cant deny what he has done for the club and I'm not talking just about first team successes, he has transformed the infrastructure and we aren't far away from reaping the benefits of that. My hope is that he is here to reap it too.

[Bob Weasel Fox]

Why are people suggesting what Pearson said is 'offensive'. It might have been to the journo (if he heard it) but not to me.

I'm not offended by it at all..I'm simply surprised. It's not protocol. It's not professional. AGAIN..you can see Pearson becoming increasingly more angry towards the end.

He might have been angry...but you contain that anger, get on with it and play the game.

Who else is he gonna fall out with this season? Stringer, Journos, Gary Lineker, the fans (in increasing numbers).

It's not offensive, to me...it simply shows a man under immense pressure, with anger issues, who has basically lost it.

That's the worrying thing and the thing that those posters who are banging on about 'offensiveness' are completely missing.

Good post again Col

[Bettsj2]

You changed the wording for a start, not me. I stand by my comment, we haven't been outclassed.

4 th worst defence? That means we have conceded less then 3 other teams, who im guessing are also in the relegation scrap, could prove vital still that.

5th worst shots? Is that shots on target? Not that it matters, 5th worst means better than where we are.

Ha so preventing and blocking shots on target isn't a positive now? I will add that to the drivvle bank. It's a negative that we make teams have a lower conversion rate? Really?

Ulloa and Krammy are both decent, krammy is struggling to adapt to the league but looks class and Ulloa conversion rate has been good. So forget that argument.

Give me examples of players teams have brought this season, that have made a genuine difference to the side... Exactly.

As for other things you have outlined, I have already explained/evidenced/argued the case. And I flip your final comment, you are happy to point out the teams 'frailties' and/or the media clap trap, blaming Pearson, but refuse to give him credit for the positives, stating they are someone's elses doing. Que Sara. Oh and some the facts you have quoted disprove your points, just saying.

A few weeks ago people were saying that the 'Pearson Out' arguments were flimsy, without substance and fickle.

Your last few posts illustrate perfectly how this has turned on its head.

There is seeking the positives and then there is absolute bullshit. You are drowning in bullshit and unfortunately, you and those like you (blind loyalty) are a poison that just isnt worth arguing with.

You're too far gone.

[st albans fox]

Its good to debate but some of the stuff being wheeled out (on both sides I might add) is bordering on bizarre.

The antis are cleanly with the upper hand given our position but come on, let's recognise that black is black and white is white and not claim that grey is either.

[nixdas]

Leicester City manager Nigel Pearson gets agitated at a reporter during the post match press conference following his side's 0-0 draw at home to Hull.

Pearson dismisses a question from a reporter on Steve Bruce's allegations that Leicester players behaved to try and get Alex Bruce sent off.

The Foxes' boss then gets exasperated about a question on whether their season is "waxing or waning" before appearing to swear under his breath at the reporter.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/31900608

 

I know there is a split on whether Nigel Pearson should stay or not. I guess we can't do anything about it now, we have him until the end of the season and we should back him until then. This guy is really feeling the pressure! Got to admit though, he comes behind Mourinho and Van Gaal when it comes to off the pitch entertainment value!

[David Hankey]

"Waxing or waning", Pearson's time at the Club is definitely waning after the starting line-up for what he said was "a must win game". Very disappointing.

 

As it really come to this where the highlights of the day was Huddlestone's sending off and going to the pub for an after match pint?

[Guest MattP]

This place is so ridiculous at times. People who have used the most vilest language about Pearson are now offended by the word pr ick. People who condemned Stringer for asking awkward questions are now defending a journalist for doing the same.

Calling for Pearsons head for the disaster of a season we've had is completely understandable and undeniably correct but making a big deal about fvck all, which this is, is petty, spiteful and pathetic.

Spot on.

Just watched the interview and what a mountain out of a molehill. Waning or Waxing would test the patience of most people.

[HankMarvin]

Spot on.

Just watched the interview and what a mountain out of a molehill. Waning or Waxing would test the patience of most people.

Are you Nigel Pearson in disguise, your post seems to offer nothing apart from constant brown nosing of anything pro Pearson

[Guest MattP]

Are you Nigel Pearson in disguise, your post seems to offer nothing apart from constant brown nosing of anything pro Pearson

No I'm not Nigel Pearson.

[5waller5]

People here keep saying that "he says it like its". He rally doesn't !! He says it like a pussy, under his breath !!! You wanna call someone a p***k, then strap on a set and say it to their face.     Classless Display !!!!

 

So to summarise your argument over the two posts:

 

1. Lots of sides go down and come back stronger. 

 

Three. As opposed to three times more teams, over the same time frame, that didn't.

 

2. Our side is young. King, Moore, Schlupp, Vardy, Ulloa, Kramaric, James, Mahrez, Drinkwater, Knockaert, De Laet and Lawrence are proof of this.

 

I'll ignore our first team line-up's average of between 29 / 30 over recent weeks, then. But King is 27 this year, Vardy is 28, Ulloa is 29 soon, De Laet is 26, Knockaert is out of contract in the summer, Drinkwater is 25. The average age of your examples of our fine young players, many of which aren't in the team, some of which aren't on the bench and one of which is nearly at the end of his contract, is 24.5. Hardly babies. And to suggest that Panayiotou, aged 20 and with a single appearance as a pro to his name, or Hopper could prove to be our saviours is really quite hopeful.

 

3. We are where we are purely because of our failure to take chances and Pearson can't be blamed for that.

 

Okay, so it ignores that we also have the 4th worst defensive record in the division, and the 5th lowest number of shots in the division (hard to convert chances when you hardly get any), yes of course a failure to score chances will tend to define whether or not you're successful. But Pearson spent our entire promotion budget on centre forwards, didn't he? So he sort of has to take a responsibility when they don't turn out to be any good at what centre forwards are meant to be good at. But last year we did take our chances, spectacularly well, and on that occasion Pearson was worthy of the credit for it, apparently.

 

4. There were no players available for Pearson to buy.

 

Of course there weren't. How unlucky he was to have got promoted during the great Footballer Famine of 2014. There are always players available, and plenty of clubs made perfectly good signings of players who we could have competed for while we were busy saving our cash for Ulloa, Kramaric and Lawrence. You say that 'no Premier League sides' at all made signings 'that have made a difference to their side' this year. That's quite a call. Even if we ignore Sanchez, Fabregas, Costa etc. there's still many, many players who have come in and done well. Obviously there's less among the bottom three because, well, they're the bottom three.

 

5. We haven't been outclassed all season, by anyone.

 

I notice you changed this to 'we haven't been comfortably second best' in your second post, because first time round you were just straightforwardly wrong, as 17 defeats, only 4 wins, and nine clear occasions when we were second best both in terms of performance and result, bear witness. I mean, we are bottom and on course for one of the lowest ever points totals in this league, unless that's just me being negative too. But you say we haven't been 'comfortably' outclassed because we only narrowly lost by one or two goals, and you blame our failure to convert chances for that, but you also fail to mention the oppositions' failures to convert their chances.

 

If we are a better side because of the chances we miss, then they must also be better if they miss their chances, right? And it just happens that we have had the 3rd most shots against us of any side in the PL this season, and of those shots, the sides playing against us have the 15th worst conversion rate in the division (the worst being against Chelsea, I believe). Put short, we may have failed to take our (not especially plentiful) chances, but sides against us have been even worse at taking their vastly greater number of chances.

 

6. Pearson kept us FFP compliant.

 

Even though we're still under investigation and staff costs went up. He gets the credit for the Trestellar deal, though. Does he get the blame for us needing it, because of not winning promotion in 2012 or 13?

 

7. The board have full confidence in Pearson.

 

That whole sacking him and then changing their minds thing was obviously people 'over hyping' and being 'ridiculously negative' as well, then.

 

In short, you will give Pearson credit for absolutely anything from third party media sponsorship, to assembling a young side which is actually pretty old. But he's responsible for absolutely nothing which ever goes wrong. Not results, that's down to the strikers he signed (because, of course, there was nobody else available) being rubbish. Although he does get credit for other strikers having been good enough last season. He's not to blame for public spats which get him bans and warnings and worldwide headlines, that's just people being horrible to him. Not performances, because literally all of our performances have been good enough. And we shouldn't worry, we should be 'realistic / positive' because 1 in 4 sides comes back stronger.

 

So yeah, I'd say you were 'wrong'. There are arguments for keeping Pearson, some of them are good ones. Just not these.

 

 

Top post!!!!!

[Buzzell]

[inckley fox]

You changed the wording for a start, not me. I stand by my comment, we haven't been outclassed.

4 th worst defence? That means we have conceded less then 3 other teams, who im guessing are also in the relegation scrap, could prove vital still that.

5th worst shots? Is that shots on target? Not that it matters, 5th worst means better than where we are.

Ha so preventing and blocking shots on target isn't a positive now? I will add that to the drivvle bank. It's a negative that we make teams have a lower conversion rate? Really?

Ulloa and Krammy are both decent, krammy is struggling to adapt to the league but looks class and Ulloa conversion rate has been good. So forget that argument.

Give me examples of players teams have brought this season, that have made a genuine difference to the side... Exactly.

As for other things you have outlined, I have already explained/evidenced/argued the case. And I flip your final comment, you are happy to point out the teams 'frailties' and/or the media clap trap, blaming Pearson, but refuse to give him credit for the positives, stating they are someone's elses doing. Que Sara. Oh and some the facts you have quoted disprove your points, just saying.

 

I can honestly say, I've had a fair few debates on this forum - most of them early on in defence of Pearson - but I've never come up against such a misguided and intransigent argument as this one. You are simply incapable of seeing any complexities in an argument, but equally incapable of seeing anything totally straightforward which reflects badly on Pearson.

 

I'll rephrase it. We are bottom and seven points adrift, almost certainly on course to be statistically one of the worst PL sides in history, and in our history. You said there was one reason and one reason alone for this - that our strikers don't take their chances - and that we have not been outclassed once, in any game.

 

So it works on the assumption that our strikers are exceptionally poor at taking their chances and that, because of this, we're much better than we seem.

 

I've pointed out that we actually get far fewer chances than all but a select few sides, and that sides playing against us have been far poorer at taking their chances than we have been. The five teams that PL sides have been worst at taking their chances against include Chelsea, Stoke and Palace, as well as us, not necessarily the sides immediately above us as you assume.

 

The sides who play against us, put simply, are worse at taking their chances against us than we are against them.

 

And there are lots and lots of examples of good signings in the PL this year. For you to argue that nobody has improved their side at all, during the whole season, top or bottom, is pure insanity. Do you know the names of any PL players? Have you paid any attention to what's happened at all in this league? Here's a suggestion, look at the player stats for the PL and look at how many of those players have been signed since last May. I'll guarantee, in fact I know full well, that there's quite a few. But I'm not going to list them for you, you can do that yourself.

 

I love the fact, especially, that us blocking and saving shots is a positive for us in your book, but opposition sides blocking or saving shots doesn't make them any better than us. Or that the strikers Pearson spent his entire budget on not being good enough (either to convert chances or, alternatively, to make the first team) is in no way a reflection on the manager.

 

It's lovely that you manage to see positives, but the ones you've listed are simply wrong. Our 'young' side is our oldest in years. The nine youngsters you listed have an average age of almost 25 between them, and one of the younger ones is soon out of contract. Harry Panayiotou is unlikely to be our saviour next year. We haven't been worse at converting our chances than the sides we've played against, and we have been second best on more than one occasion this season.

 

If you want me to find you a valid argument for keeping Pearson, then I will do, but your post has been so magnificently full of inaccuracies and wild, hopeful deductions that it contains nothing, absolutely nothing, in his defence. A convincing argument requires at least one foot, or a toe maybe, rooted in reality. The facts need to be correct or justifiable. Yours weren't and aren't.

[Guest Col city fan]

I can honestly say, I've had a fair few debates on this forum - most of them early on in defence of Pearson - but I've never come up against such a misguided and intransigent argument as this one. You are simply incapable of seeing any complexities in an argument, but equally incapable of seeing anything totally straightforward which reflects badly on Pearson.

I'll rephrase it. We are bottom and seven points adrift, almost certainly on course to be statistically one of the worst PL sides in history, and in our history. You said there was one reason and one reason alone for this - that our strikers don't take their chances - and that we have not been outclassed once, in any game.

So it works on the assumption that our strikers are exceptionally poor at taking their chances and that, because of this, we're much better than we seem.

I've pointed out that we actually get far fewer chances than all but a select few sides, and that sides playing against us have been far poorer at taking their chances than we have been. The five teams that PL sides have been worst at taking their chances against include Chelsea, Stoke and Palace, as well as us, not necessarily the sides immediately above us as you assume.

The sides who play against us, put simply, are worst at taking their chances against us than we are against them.

And there are lots and lots of examples of good signings in the PL this year. For you to argue that nobody has improved their side at all, during the whole season, top or bottom, is pure insanity. Do you know the names of any PL players? Have you paid any attention to what's happened at all in this league? Here's a suggestion, look at the player stats for the PL and look at how many of those players have been signed since last May. I'll guarantee, in fact I know full well, that there's quite a few. But I'm not going to list them for you, you can do that yourself.

I love the fact, especially, that us blocking and saving shots is a positive for us in your book, but opposition sides blocking or saving shots doesn't make them any better than us. Or that the strikers Pearson spent his entire budget on not being good enough (either to convert chances or, alternatively, to make the first team) is in no way a reflection on the manager.

It's lovely that you manage to see positives, but the ones you've listed are simply wrong. Our 'young' side is our oldest in years. The nine youngsters you listed have an average age of almost 25 between them, and one of the younger ones is soon out of contract. Harry Panayiotou is unlikely to be our saviour next year. We haven't been worse at converting our chances than the sides we've played against, and we have been second best on more than one occasion this season.

If you want me to find you a valid argument for keeping Pearson, then I will do, but your post has been so magnificently full of inaccuracies and wild, hopeful deductions that it contains nothing, absolutely nothing, in his defence. A convincing argument requires at least one foot, or a toe maybe, rooted in reality. The facts need to be correct or justifiable. Yours weren't and aren't.

Absolutely spot on....

[Donut]

Firstly, please don't call my opinions 'wrong', debate my points fair enough, but to call my resourced opinions which I have backed up with evidence throughout wrong, is just rude.

Your post stinks of a person with a flat out refusal to see any positives in the season and therfore there is absolutely no point in me arguing back but I'm going to anyway. You seem to have an answer for everything while completely ignoring the fact that the only thing putting us in the situation we're in, is truly a lack of quality finishing in front of goal. There isn't one game where we haven't created enough chances to have at least earnt a point, I won't have anyone say otherwise. That is not, I repeat not Pearsons fault. Stop looking to blame individuals, our season has been poor due to many reasons, all of which add up to a team effort. As a team we just haven't been good enough.

As for its Pearson's fault for not buying anyone, you can only buy what's available, has any of the clubs near the bottom brought players that have genuinly made a difference to their side? Or even any clubs in the premier league for that matter?

Im sorry but comfortably second best means you have been thrashed 3-4 nil, like Burnley have had this season. Not losing 2-1 and at worst by two goals all season, and don't give me the bigger sides turned off clap trap. I stand by my point, we haven't been outclassed and have been very unlucky in many games to have not got the points we needed.

Has this forum of pearson nay Sayers really come down to the ignorance of missing the glaringly obvious point that football is a collective game. Why has one person got to be to blame. I would understand if pearson had put out a stupid formation and we had been thrashed, then it's his fault. That hasn't happened though, at all. We have been in games right to the final whistle all season and with more composure in front of goal it could all be very different. Especially yesterday.

On to your point of dismissing a youth set up that is competing well in the premier league of youth teams, the youth setup that has made it to the semi finals of the u21's cup. Try again. As for players coming through, Pearson might not have called them up originally but King, Moore and Schlupp have all played a part this season, admittedly the former two in less games than one might have hoped. We have thrown experience into the defence admittedly but we still have young hungry players in James, Mahrez, Krammy, Schlupp, Vardy ( I know he's not young, but he still has plenty of years of quality to come) de Leat, Knockeart and Ulloa aren't old either. Drinky, Moore, King and Lawrence will all have a part to play in the future also. Potential of panyhiouto (sp?) and hopper stepping up if we're playing our trade a lower level in the next few seasons. We certainly won't need an overhaul, like some are quoting.

Part of the reason we could afford to attract and get a company to write off debts, was because Pearson got us to the premier league on a small budget by the way. So you can forget that argument as well.

 

This is sensationally ignorant of whats actually happened this season.

[Fox92]

The reporter is on the phone in now. He's spot on to be fair. Saying these things happen, usually with the microphone off.