Westerby Posted 17 March 2015 Posted 17 March 2015 A sensible suggestion for a replacement - assuming that should become a requirement. He has often praised City on MOTD, He would inherit a team capable of doing well in that division. He has undoubted skills as a forward but limited management experience. His name - ALAN SHEARER. Unproven managers may be a risk, but I feel that would be a risk worth taking. I think STEVE CLARK got a raw deal at WBA and is currently doing a fair job with a moderate Reading team. He does have experience of assistance management at the very top domestic level. I'm sure very few fans would object to the return of MARTIN O'NEILL either. A high profile manager may be a good idea in principle but we have seen those fail - even if they could be enticed to come in the first place.
Gerard Posted 17 March 2015 Posted 17 March 2015 No it's pretty simple really upson Morgan Huth CB RDL right back schlupp was playing left back ( not midfield ) they was not in any midfielder role closest to it was wing backs , cambiasso James CM, vardy mahrez on the wings , kramaric ST that gives you a formation of 5221 , it's not a formation to win games it's a formation to park the bus there is no 343 in there because if there was albrighton would of started ahead of delaet , but if anyone seriously think there was not 5 at the back need to either go to games any games or atleast watch them I agree with you it was a 5-2-2-1 I was making the point that wing backs can be called either DF's or MF's and our inside left and right players can be called either MF's or FW's. To be fair to Pearson I was quite happy with the side he put out. I would have preferred a 4-4-1-1 but considering we were playing wing backs it had to be De Laet and Schlupp as I would have screamed if it was Simpson and Konchesky. I thought he would have played Krameric and Vardy up front with Mahrez just behind when I heard the team and not Mahrez and Krameric as inside forwards.
Gerard Posted 17 March 2015 Posted 17 March 2015 A sensible suggestion for a replacement - assuming that should become a requirement. He has often praised City on MOTD, He would inherit a team capable of doing well in that division. He has undoubted skills as a forward but limited management experience. His name - ALAN SHEARER. Unproven managers may be a risk, but I feel that would be a risk worth taking. I think STEVE CLARK got a raw deal at WBA and is currently doing a fair job with a moderate Reading team. He does have experience of assistance management at the very top domestic level. I'm sure very few fans would object to the return of MARTIN O'NEILL either. A high profile manager may be a good idea in principle but we have seen those fail - even if they could be enticed to come in the first place. Please God not Shearer, I'd rather stick with Pearson. My plan would be to get O'Neill in on a two month contract and look for a new manager in the summer. Ireland play Poland next weekend and that's it for them until the summer. O'Neill could easily do this job and it's win win for him. He wouldn't ruin his legacy if we got relegated and would be given near God like status if he kept us up. I believe it would put a huge shot of life into the club, players and fans to have the living legend back for one last time.
Silverdaz Posted 17 March 2015 Author Posted 17 March 2015 How about James Beattie done wonders at Accrington
Fox Ulike Posted 17 March 2015 Posted 17 March 2015 How about James Beattie done wonders at Accrington
UpTheLeagueFox Posted 17 March 2015 Posted 17 March 2015 perhaps he gives them hell in p rivate but he has to stick up for them pubically That would be a hair-raising thought...
Oxfordfox83 Posted 17 March 2015 Posted 17 March 2015 A sensible suggestion for a replacement - assuming that should become a requirement. He has often praised City on MOTD, He would inherit a team capable of doing well in that division. He has undoubted skills as a forward but limited management experience. His name - ALAN SHEARER. Unproven managers may be a risk, but I feel that would be a risk worth taking. I think STEVE CLARK got a raw deal at WBA and is currently doing a fair job with a moderate Reading team. He does have experience of assistance management at the very top domestic level. I'm sure very few fans would object to the return of MARTIN O'NEILL either. A high profile manager may be a good idea in principle but we have seen those fail - even if they could be enticed to come in the first place. Steve Clarke is a great shout. Shearer is a terrible shout, but if we can get Clarke then we should...
buzzy Posted 17 March 2015 Posted 17 March 2015 sadly the players have not been up to it but the buck stops with pearson who week in week out plays his favourite players. you lot know who i mean
Corky Posted 17 March 2015 Posted 17 March 2015 sadly the players have not been up to it but the buck stops with pearson who week in week out plays his favourite players. you lot know who i mean Yeah, he should drop Oakley and play Gradel.
Babylon Posted 17 March 2015 Posted 17 March 2015 sadly the players have not been up to it but the buck stops with pearson who week in week out plays his favourite players. you lot know who i mean So he plays his favourite player and not yours the bugger.
Guest MattP Posted 17 March 2015 Posted 17 March 2015 Part of being a footballer these days - they generally do get off scot free no matter how much their performance nosedives. The Manager always takes total responsibility - even when everyone should be.
RedSoxUK Posted 17 March 2015 Posted 17 March 2015 OP is right, in the same way blaming a GK for a mistake goes a lot further than a striker missing an open goal. All our flaws don't come down to Pearson being a bad manager or man manager, it's also partly down to our own players inability to perform and compete. You may say that's down to the manager for picking them, training them etc.. but the truth is that we're a newly promoted team, and like the others - we've stumbled, it almost always happens and that's not down to the manager but the gulf in quality and experience difference between 17 teams and 3 newly promoted Championship teams. We've signed Huth, Cambiasso and Kramaric, three players who could arguably be with a Top 10 Premier League team, It's not always down to who you sign, or how you play.. the right formula starts waaaay beyond that level, I think it starts the season and two before, building on success or you don't stay up. Southampton / Swansea are the perfect examples at a club structure sticking with players and building around them Swansea still had Monk & Britton who were there in League 2, Southampton had the foundations of last years squad when they were in League 1. Partly luck.. partly having very good quality players that can make the step up, ours just haven't and that shouldn't be a reflection of the manager not 'managing' them to step up, it doesn't happen. You can't get turn a Volvo in to a Jaguar in one summer, unless you already have the parts - or some bullshit. I'm not defending Pearson's mistakes because he has made plenty: not dropping Wes Morgan two months ago being at the top IMO, I'm just saying, from day one with this squad, I don't think any manager in the world could've prevented us from being near the drop zone this season, not Fergie / Mou. And the talk of managerial changes to teams like West Brom / Aston Villa - guess what, they're already well established Premier League teams with a better gulf in quality in their squads than us, if their players weren't performing for their previous managers than fine, but Sherwood's only awoken the sleeping beast Paul Lambert created, Villa shouldn't be anywhere near the drop based on their squad. You think Ramsey will save QPR?? We've only ever looked incredibly inferior on a few occasions this season The squad has to share the blame with the management and the owners.
Guest MarshallForEngland Posted 17 March 2015 Posted 17 March 2015 Curious to know whether or not most of the moaners' strong opinions on playing "5 at the back" come from playing frustrating scoreless draws on FIFA Seasons. You know it's not necessarily that negative in real life don't you? Done properly, 5-4-1 / 5-3-2 & similar variants can allow you to flood midfield and retain possession for long spells and allow you to attack with one shape and defend with another. If your wing-backs are willing and able to get up the pitch and you have creative & brave midfielders who know when to join the strikers, you can look something like 3-4-3 going forward. Potentially leaves you narrow and exposed at the back and vulnerable to the counter-attack, but on paper there's no reason why it shouldn't work and it almost has on several occasions. De Laet is arguably our club's fastest player and in previous seasons has shown a lot of willingness to go forward, and on his day Schlupp dances past players like a man possessed (usually before smashing a shot towards the corner flag admittedly). Mahrez is usually very creative and keen to get involved and I honestly don't think, other than against Hull, that we have looked like a negative side in recent weeks. How many of our recent results can you genuinely put down to formation alone? If everybody did what they are capable of against Hull, we could definitely have got a result. We have a lot of quick and creative players, but if they're playing conservatively/nervously/safely then it makes a potentially attacking and aggressive set-up look like a park-the-bus one.
Arriba Los Zorros Posted 17 March 2015 Posted 17 March 2015 Curious to know whether or not most of the moaners' strong opinions on playing "5 at the back" come from playing frustrating scoreless draws on FIFA Seasons. You know it's not necessarily that negative in real life don't you? Done properly, 5-4-1 / 5-3-2 & similar variants can allow you to flood midfield and retain possession for long spells and allow you to attack with one shape and defend with another. If your wing-backs are willing and able to get up the pitch and you have creative & brave midfielders who know when to join the strikers, you can look something like 3-4-3 going forward. Potentially leaves you narrow and exposed at the back and vulnerable to the counter-attack, but on paper there's no reason why it shouldn't work and it almost has on several occasions. De Laet is arguably our club's fastest player and in previous seasons has shown a lot of willingness to go forward, and on his day Schlupp dances past players like a man possessed (usually before smashing a shot towards the corner flag admittedly). Mahrez is usually very creative and keen to get involved and I honestly don't think, other than against Hull, that we have looked like a negative side in recent weeks. How many of our recent results can you genuinely put down to formation alone? If everybody did what they are capable of against Hull, we could definitely have got a result. We have a lot of quick and creative players, but if they're playing conservatively/nervously/safely then it makes a potentially attacking and aggressive set-up look like a park-the-bus one. Well said. The problem with it for me though is that it generates a lot of possession too far down the pitch and away from dangerous areas
sylofox Posted 17 March 2015 Posted 17 March 2015 What grinds my gears is the fact he comes out week after week defending them. They need a kick up the arse not praising, they don't deserve to be praised. The players must be hugely confused, we are bottom of the league and playing rubbish, losing every week and all Pearson says is I thought we played well blah blah, they must be scratching their heads whilst asking themselves "so what we are doing is good enough?". Crap football management. I never remember Sir Alex slagging his players off in public. But that don't mean he did not go in the dressing room and bollock the fvck out of them. That is what and why players respect Nige and Man U players respected AF. Would you like it if your boss slagged you off and bollocked you infront of all the other staff and public.
RedSoxUK Posted 17 March 2015 Posted 17 March 2015 I never remember Sir Alex slagging his players off in public. But that don't mean he did not go in the dressing room and bollock the fvck out of them. That is what and why players respect Nige and Man U players respected AF. Would you like it if your boss slagged you off and bollocked you infront of all the other staff and public. Very true. Restraining from picking out individual poor performances in interviews is a strong manager trait. You do the bashing behind closed doors. Harry Redknapp does it a lot.
StanSP Posted 17 March 2015 Posted 17 March 2015 Pearson's gotta be blamed, for sure. However, when the team does well, does Pearson get the praise? He certainly hasn't this season (we have a lot of post-match reactions along the lines of 'we played well, we were unlucky with the result'?
jamesmilner Posted 17 March 2015 Posted 17 March 2015 whats that got to do with them making mistakes on the pitch hes not responsible for them passing to the opposition he doesnt go out and say 'You know what Matt just pass it to the opposition' or 'You know what Ben kick the ball straight out into touch' what the hell are you on about ? are you stupid ? so he buys players that are quite obviously not good enough in talent to play in the premier league , they cant keep the ball/pass to their own players all the time because they haven't that ability to and you say its the players fault ? if I was employed by my mate to take up darts and i'm useless at it , cant get treble twenty for love or money, its not my mates fault ? i'm knocked out every tournament first round and its not his fault ? this thread and opinion just sums up the pearsonites , thick as **** !!
Matt Posted 17 March 2015 Posted 17 March 2015 The players a massively at fault, they havn't stepped up, but I simply put it down to them not having the quality, not being good enough, if any (Well most) of them ever grace the PL again it's a joke, they've had their chance and do not deserve another one. Now, where does Pearson get the blame? He did **** all to replace them and would much rather play certain players no matter how many mistake they make - hence the favourites and mates tag. In the summer, I thought these players would step up, be good enough, hold their own, I was wrong, Pearson obviously had that opinion as well so I cannot slag him off for that when I had the same view. Although a quarter of the season in (That's being generous) and it was quite clear these players we not cutting it so January comes, it's Pearson's chance to replace them....nope, he hardly did **** all as replacing players in key areas. For that he is accountable, it's his fault, he needs to go, I cannot forgive him for that. Add to that the tactics he's been playing in the last few weeks/months
nettle Posted 17 March 2015 Posted 17 March 2015 what the hell are you on about ? are you stupid ? so he buys players that are quite obviously not good enough in talent to play in the premier league , they cant keep the ball/pass to their own players all the time because they haven't that ability to and you say its the players fault ? if I was employed by my mate to take up darts and i'm useless at it , cant get treble twenty for love or money, its not my mates fault ? i'm knocked out every tournament first round and its not his fault ? this thread and opinion just sums up the pearsonites , thick as **** !! You've got it spot on there mate these Pearsonites really are thick as ****!
SpacedX Posted 17 March 2015 Posted 17 March 2015 So is he responsible for a keeper making a mistake, a defender losing his man, a midfielder misplacing a pass or an attacker missing a goal no hes not, even if we changed managers we would still have the same standard championship players but people are just blinked in there digust at the manangers performance this season. Say you did a bad day at work and made a mistake that cost the company a load of money is that your manangers responsibilty for you doing something wrong. when a keeper makes a blinding series of errors, when a defender consistently week in week out loses his man, when an attacker fails to find the target and hits a goal drought and yet they consistently remain in the starting XI in spite of obvious glaring shortcomings, then yes, you question the management. Further when selection, formation and tactics are so utterly atrocious that they inhibit the performance and potential of several key players - again the manager is liable. If the manager is as obnoxious and thick as shit pie, as appears to be the case, then I would further suggest that careers and club can be irreparably damaged. This man is toxic and he needs to be immediately removed before he further tarnishes our reputation.
sylofox Posted 17 March 2015 Posted 17 March 2015 Very true. Restraining from picking out individual poor performances in interviews is a strong manager trait. You do the bashing behind closed doors. Harry Redknapp does it a lot. He may have got a lot wrong this season but people dishing out the blame for him supporting the players. FFS why not blame him for breathing as well. Makes me wonder if people think about what they are saying.
Guest MarshallForEngland Posted 17 March 2015 Posted 17 March 2015 when a keeper makes a blinding series of errors, when a defender consistently week in week out loses his man, when an attacker fails to find the target and hits a goal drought and yet they consistently remain in the starting XI in spite of obvious glaring shortcomings, then yes, you question the management. Further when selection, formation and tactics are so utterly atrocious that they inhibit the performance and potential of several key players - again the manager is liable. If the manager is as obnoxious and thick as shit pie, as appears to be the case, then I would further suggest that careers and club can be irreparably damaged. This man is toxic and he needs to be immediately removed before he further tarnishes our reputation. What reputation?! I don't think he made a "blinding series of errors" either. Pretty harsh appraisal of an exceptionally good goalkeeper. His performance against Man City was top class. As I have said in other threads though, anything bad happens and people like you will find a way, some way, of causally linking it to Nigel Pearson.
cjslcfc Posted 17 March 2015 Posted 17 March 2015 The problem you have is, if the players aren't good enough then what can the manager do? There's a couple of options. First of all, he can rotate the team, use different options and try different ways of playing. Arguably, Pearson has done this but perhaps at the wrong times. Rarely have the players that have come in done significantly better than our first choice players. I think there was a Guardian article somewhere on FT showing Pearson had been one of the biggest tinkerers in the league. So he's tried different ways of playing with the players he's got and we still manage to lose (again, you could argue he's used the wrong systems at the wrong times). However, he's never really gone back to the King/Hammond, Nugent/Ulloa partnerships that actually served us well early in the season. Clearly then, he thinks that he is putting our best players out on the pitch. If they aren't cutting it, how are our reserve players supposed to step up? Some of them have, so one criticism could be that he hasn't tried to use these players. Perhaps we were still running on the fumes of promotion and rode our luck playing top teams yet to get into stride when these players played. Second of all, he can bring players in once he knows the current ones haven't stepped up. The thing for me is we don't know what goes on with budgets etc... so I find it hard to criticise him directly for transfer dealings. I am, however, hugely disappointed the clear issue at LB hasn't been resolved. I thought that would have been a priority. Added to this, buying a striker and then playing him up front on his own in a new country and league with very little other support is somewhat bemusing. For me, while a lot of the players aren't good enough, I don't think Pearson has helped. Wasted games at home to West Brom and Sunderland stick out in the mind (the diamond!). Do I think Pearson is getting the best out of this group of players? Absolutely not. Do I think their best would be good enough? Probably, however it's debatable and many have been shown up and crumbled under the pressure and quality of this league. The individual mistakes, misses etc... have all been astonishing and mean that the manager alone is not at fault. These are things players should easily avoid. It's a joint issue. Both are at fault. However, the manager sets up the team, motivates them etc... and too often this has seemed completely wrong. A bit more luck and better decisions and we might just be a lot closer to staying up. Over the course of the season though, there's a reason we are rock bottom. That's because the players and manager aren't yet good enough for this level. The manager always takes the hit for failings and it's got to the stage for me where I think a new man and direction might just wake the players up and get the best out of them.
DANGEROUS TIGER Posted 17 March 2015 Posted 17 March 2015 NP has made a lot of mistakes this season but it seems everyone is totally blaming him for this season whereas it seems no one is mentioning how poor our players have been this season, from our three keepers, defenders, midfielders and attackers everyone has played poorly and show they are championship players at best apart from maybe Huth as he is the only decent CB we have and he isnt ours Who was responsible for bringing them in, and getting them to play well. It's a geezer called PEAR SHAPED PEARSON!
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.