Football 18/19

[kaosmark2]

2 hours ago, pink_triangle said:

Well Hughes did a decent job at Stoke before getting sacked. The reality is at that level most managers will be sacked for being crap after a few years.

Bruce and Hughes both have good and crap. Ole has had one opportunity and only had crap. The reality is Hughes and Bruce are more tainted due to longevity. Note I wouldnt give any the job, but find it funny how people judge "qualified".

Hughes did a decent job at a fair few places, Wales, Blackburn, City, Stoke. It's only really QPR and Southampton he was really awful at.

I feel there's a current backlash against the merry-go-round managers, particularly the more defensive ones (which is a good thing). But just because Hughes is outdated doesn't mean he's always been atrocious.

[zahidf]

1 minute ago, kaosmark2 said:

Hughes did a decent job at a fair few places, Wales, Blackburn, City, Stoke. It's only really QPR and Southampton he was really awful at.

I feel there's a current backlash against the merry-go-round managers, particularly the more defensive ones (which is a good thing). But just because Hughes is outdated doesn't mean he's always been atrocious.

He got stoke relegated pretty much. I wouldn't say he did a good job there! 

He used to be decent, but to tout him for the Utd job on a permanent basis is clearly mental. Ole is only a 5 month appointment after all

[thetime]

5 minutes ago, zahidf said:

He got stoke relegated pretty much. I wouldn't say he did a good job there! 

 

How to re-write football history.

He gave Stoke 3 top 10 finishes on the bounce, he did a good job there and perhaps stopped a season to long. 

He left stoke in the January in 18th position, they finished 19th.

[thetime]

I’m pleased with Ole as interim, certainly better than Jose being there for the rest of the season.

pochettino in the summer. 

[The Nal]

Very interested to see how he gets on. The team sheet at the weekend will be interesting. 

[pink_triangle]

16 minutes ago, zahidf said:

He got stoke relegated pretty much. I wouldn't say he did a good job there! 

He used to be decent, but to tout him for the Utd job on a permanent basis is clearly mental. Ole is only a 5 month appointment after all

Does getting a team relegated mean the manager has done a poor job. I would maintain that if the likes of Howe and Dyche stay at the clubs they will eventually taken them down.  if your managing a bottom half premiership side you are likely to be relegated or sacked within a few years, Im not convinced all this is down to poor management.

I am not necessarily saying Hughes should be given the Man Utd job, but more disagreeing with the argument that Ole is qualified for it, but Hughes is not.  Based on achievements as a manager you could argue that both are, or both are not.

However managerial qualifications are not necessarily the only things that matter.  I guess Man Utd are also looking at the personality of the manager and are looking at someone the other end of the scale from his predecessor. Also when it comes to management a lot comes down to luck.  Ole wouldnt get the Man Utd job (or probably any other premiership job pre season) but the timing may mean he takes his opportunity and becomes a successful manager.

[TheGayTent]

Bournemouth and Eddie Howe are bankrolled by a dodgy Russian billionaire. Whilst one may admire Howe’s football philosophy and Bournemouth’s style of play, keeping Bournemouth in the premier league is hardly the great achievement many choose to believe. 

[thetime]

Well Dyche took Burnley down you could say, one could also say he’s doing a great job at Burnley. 

[jyoung]

I wonder what reception he will receive from the Cardiff fans at the weekend.

[thetime]

3 minutes ago, TheGayTent said:

Bournemouth and Eddie Howe are bankrolled by a dodgy Russian billionaire. Whilst one may admire Howe’s football philosophy and Bournemouth’s style of play, keeping Bournemouth in the premier league is hardly the great achievement many choose to believe. 

They haven’t spent much of those billion though, net spend is pretty low.

Edited December 19, 2018 by thetime

[TheGayTent]

14 minutes ago, thetime said:

They haven’t spent much of those billion though, net spend is pretty low.

Compared to Man City or Cardiff?

[zahidf]

35 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

Does getting a team relegated mean the manager has done a poor job. I would maintain that if the likes of Howe and Dyche stay at the clubs they will eventually taken them down.  if your managing a bottom half premiership side you are likely to be relegated or sacked within a few years, Im not convinced all this is down to poor management.

I am not necessarily saying Hughes should be given the Man Utd job, but more disagreeing with the argument that Ole is qualified for it, but Hughes is not.  Based on achievements as a manager you could argue that both are, or both are not.

However managerial qualifications are not necessarily the only things that matter.  I guess Man Utd are also looking at the personality of the manager and are looking at someone the other end of the scale from his predecessor. Also when it comes to management a lot comes down to luck.  Ole wouldnt get the Man Utd job (or probably any other premiership job pre season) but the timing may mean he takes his opportunity and becomes a successful manager.

Well, stoke were a mid table club. Burnley.... aren't normally. They went down after their first season but came back up. 

I'd argue stoke had more than enough money and good players to not go down. That they did was down in part to the manager.

I don't think Bournemouth will go down. Burnley may well do, but they've played terrible this year, ESP in defence, so that may be down to dyche.

[thetime]

16 minutes ago, TheGayTent said:

Compared to Man City or Cardiff?

Compared to the teams in the league, saying that less than 1m between Cardiff and Bournemouth.

Edited December 19, 2018 by thetime

[TheGayTent]

29 minutes ago, thetime said:

Compared to the teams in the league, saying that less than 1m between Cardiff and Bournemouth.

Over what time period? This season I assume? A period when Bournemouth’s starting position is very much higher than that of Cardiff’s. What’s it like compared over the last 5 seasons? 

I don’t know if their net spend on transfers is higher or lower than the league average but I’d imagine it’s somewhere around there - it’s certainly higher than the lowest three for example. 

What’s Bournemouth’s wage bill like compared to Cardiff’s? Or the league average? 

Howe is doing a tremendous job, I’m a big fan.

All I’m pointing out is that Bournemouth aren’t the ‘plucky little club’ they try to portray and many believe. 

Edited December 19, 2018 by TheGayTent
Typed Bournemouth instead of Cardiff

[kaosmark2]

Newcastle went down with Benitez. Does that mean Rafa is as bad a manager as Shearer? 

[TheGayTent]

7 minutes ago, kaosmark2 said:

Newcastle went down with Benitez. Does that mean Rafa is as bad a manager as Shearer? 

Rafa’s command of the English language is certainly a lot better

[kaosmark2]

1 hour ago, zahidf said:

Well, stoke were a mid table club. Burnley.... aren't normally. They went down after their first season but came back up. 

I'd argue stoke had more than enough money and good players to not go down. That they did was down in part to the manager.

I don't think Bournemouth will go down. Burnley may well do, but they've played terrible this year, ESP in defence, so that may be down to dyche.

What is normal? 15 years ago Stoke weren't in the prem. Pulis made them an obstinate and annoying team that stuck around, then in his first few years Hughes added flair to that. He stuck around too long for sure but he did a good job overall. 

[TheGayTent]

13 minutes ago, kaosmark2 said:

What is normal? 15 years ago Stoke weren't in the prem. Pulis made them an obstinate and annoying team that stuck around, then in his first few years Hughes added flair to that. He stuck around too long for sure but he did a good job overall. 

They sold Arnoutovic - not sure if that was Sparky’s fault or not

[jyoung]

Really disillusioned by Chelsea fans lately. Very aware that it is a minority  that engage in discrimination, be it racism, anti semitism or homophobia but everytime I've been on Twitter it's been the majority of fans acting as if it's a witch hunt against the club and as though they are the victims. The genuine mood among a lot of fans seems to be 'We're not all racist' or 'Every club has racists'. I've even seen people sending abusive messages towards Chelsea journos for reporting on it. Shocking... Can't get my head round how another human can't realise that standing up to this whole thing is a positive and if we do it together we're setting an example. Glad to see the club taking a strong stance on it and pleased that there's one or two brave enough to risk the wrath of a lot of uneducated idiots to stand up for what's right. Proper depressing though.

[TheGayTent]

 

[Hugh Jass]

1 hour ago, TheGayTent said:

They sold Arnoutovic - not sure if that was Sparky’s fault or not

Arnie wanted out by all accounts.

Mid-sized clubs always have a limited shelf life in the Premier League, they come up in a blaze of optimism and pluck, scrap and fight their to survival for a couple of seasons before replacing the players who got them up in search of "the next level". In time they stagnate and back down they go, sometimes it takes a season or two, sometimes it takes five, but sure enough fate comes for all of them. Just ask Stoke, West Brom, Swansea, Birmingham, Middlesbrough, Bolton, Blackburn, Ipswich, Norwich, Forest, Wolves (pre dodgy investment), Wigan, Reading, Hull, Derby and many more... It'll happen to Huddersfield, Burnley and Southampton too (they've been threatening it for a while) and eventually gravity will catch up with the likes of Brighton and Bournemouth.

Teams that size are only ever a few bad decisions (usually signings and/or appointments) from the drop.

[WS_Jack_III]

Has a manager ever been loaned out before?

[pink_triangle]

3 hours ago, zahidf said:

Well, stoke were a mid table club. Burnley.... aren't normally. They went down after their first season but came back up. 

I'd argue stoke had more than enough money and good players to not go down. That they did was down in part to the manager.

I don't think Bournemouth will go down. Burnley may well do, but they've played terrible this year, ESP in defence, so that may be down to dyche.

Again you have to look at things in context. Stoke were a mid table club looking to reduce expenditure. When that happens it is far from uncommon for that mid table team to become relegation candidates. Also when you look at the premiership you have 5 teams who have been there for donkey years (Man U, Arsenal, Liverpool, Spurs, Everton) , City who have been there for around 10 year,s and 14 teams who have been in the championship in the last 6/7 years. 

Teams tend to reach their sell by date as the likes of Swansea and WBA have found recently. I think to always put relegation down to poor management (admittedly manager easiest scapegoat) is over simplistic.  The difference between the average and poor premiership teams isnt that great and a small change can push you from one group to another. There are loads of factors other than management that can impact on things.  

[The Nal]

34 minutes ago, WS_Jack_III said:

Has a manager ever been loaned out before?

Not to my knowledge. Nor has a club announced an interim manager for 48 hours, then an interim manager until the end of the season and then a permanent manager, all in the same statement.

Happy enough with Ole. Should get the team trying at least and playing attacking football. 

This Pogba post thing seems to have blown up out of proportion. 

 

[Chaarlie]

Whoever United appointed, would it be realistic to expect them to finish anywhere other than 6th? So in a way did it matter at all who they hired for the rest of the season?