Football 17/18

[pink_triangle]

30 minutes ago, Hugh Jass said:

Has there been, or will there ever be, a worse appointment in PL history than Alan Pardew?

I would rank Steve Wigley and Tony Adams worse. At least with Pardew there was some evidence (Pardew bounce) to suggest it may work. Those 2 were useless and there was no evidence to suggest any different.

[Gucci Piggy]

Huddersfield look in trouble now. That draw at City could be huge. One more point now against Chelsea/Arsenal guarantees them safety. Otherwise they need Stoke to get a result at Swansea.

[CRW5252]

44 minutes ago, Hugh Jass said:

Has there been, or will there ever be, a worse appointment in PL history than Alan Pardew?

Steve Kean.

[mjsell]

51 minutes ago, Hugh Jass said:

Has there been, or will there ever be, a worse appointment in PL history than Alan Pardew?

Not even the worst for this season? De Boer has to be up there

[mjsell]

18 minutes ago, Gucci Piggy said:

Huddersfield look in trouble now. That draw at City could be huge. One more point now against Chelsea/Arsenal guarantees them safety. Otherwise they need Stoke to get a result at Swansea.

Swansea are way more likely of picking up a win than either either Huddersfield or Southampton (who have City last game of the season) - If Huddersfield get a point then Southampton are back in trouble.

 Edit: ah, Ive just seen Goal difference. Ignore me

Edited May 8, 2018 by mjsell

[zahidf]

10 minutes ago, mjsell said:

Swansea are way more likely of picking up a win than either either Huddersfield or Southampton (who have City last game of the season) - If Huddersfield get a point then Southampton are back in trouble.

 Edit: ah, Ive just seen Goal difference. Ignore me

 

[Gucci Piggy]

Aye they'd need a 10 goal swing to go down.

City 6-0 Soton and Swansea 4-0 Stoke probably your best bet of that happening (with Hudders also picking up a point against Chelsea or Arsenal).

[Hugh Jass]

8 hours ago, mjsell said:

Not even the worst for this season? De Boer has to be up there

Pardew was worse.

Palace recovered from De Boer, we were 16th when he took over and are now in the Championship.

[Hugh Jass]

8 hours ago, pink_triangle said:

I would rank Steve Wigley and Tony Adams worse. At least with Pardew there was some evidence (Pardew bounce) to suggest it may work. Those 2 were useless and there was no evidence to suggest any different.

There was no bounce with Pardew, just a splat.

The likes of Wigley and Adams were novices who were never cut out for the jobs, their poor performances can be excused. De Boer will be remembered as a failed experiment that was corrected before any real damage was done.

Pardew was supposed to be the steady hand who would use his experience to guide us clear.  He took us from 16th to ten points adrift at the bottom in just 18 matches, precided over the Barcelona fiasco and created an atmosphere so toxic the players simply downed tools (they’re not immune from this either, but that’s another story). That a guy who has never managed a team before has managed more points in 5 matches than he did in 18 says it all.

Pardew wasn’t a novice nor was he a foreign manager adapting to English football, there’s no mitigation for him whatsoever. That’s why he’s the worse.

[zahidf]

 

[mjsell]

1 hour ago, Hugh Jass said:

Pardew was worse.

Palace recovered from De Boer, we were 16th when he took over and are now in the Championship.

Palace recovered from De Boer because they have some decent players and should never have been anywhere near the position they were in - which has got to be put on De Boer. They also got rid of him early enough to recover. 

Roy has done a good job, but nothing spectacular. However, I never feared for Palace at all - which shows De Boer was a special case of terrible to get that team in the situation they were. His record must be the worst of all time. 0 wins, 0 goals...

[Hugh Jass]

2 minutes ago, mjsell said:

Palace recovered from De Boer because they have some decent players and should never have been anywhere near the position they were in - which has got to be put on De Boer. They also got rid of him early enough to recover. 

Roy has done a good job, but nothing spectacular. However, I never feared for Palace at all - which shows De Boer was a special case of terrible to get that team in the situation they were. His record must be the worst of all time. 0 wins, 0 goals...

As I said earlier De Boer was very much a failed experiment, if I recall correctly he was brought in to play an exciting style of football but the Place board didn't actually back him with the players he wanted to deliver it. He tried to enforce a style on a squad unsuited to it....

...But at least he had a plan and was trying something, Pardew was just shit.

[thetime]

4 minutes ago, Hugh Jass said:

As I said earlier De Boer was very much a failed experiment, if I recall correctly he was brought in to play an exciting style of football but the Place board didn't actually back him with the players he wanted to deliver it. He tried to enforce a style on a squad unsuited to it....

...But at least he had a plan and was trying something, Pardew was just shit.

Perhaps the players should take most of the responsibility, especially since they have turned there form on its head since he got sacked.

 

[Hugh Jass]

4 minutes ago, thetime said:

Perhaps the players should take most of the responsibility, especially since they have turned there form on its head since he got sacked.

 

Oh without doubt, I've asked several times recently where this newfound commitment was ten matches ago when it might actually have mattered. Under Pardew the players behaved like schoolchildren when a supply teacher came in, they shoulder a lot of the blame.

[pink_triangle]

1 hour ago, Hugh Jass said:

There was no bounce with Pardew, just a splat.

The likes of Wigley and Adams were novices who were never cut out for the jobs,

Thats not true, both had managed in the lower leagues and achieved very little. All 3 flopped but as an appointment the Pardew one made the most sense.

[TheGayTent]

10 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

Thats not true, both had managed in the lower leagues and achieved very little. All 3 flopped but as an appointment the Pardew one made the most sense.

Half a season at wycombe (when they got relegated) hardly makes Adams experienced. 

Wigley had never managed in the football league. 

I think the description of novice, adequately described both of them at the time they got their respective manager jobs in the top flight 

[Hugh Jass]

11 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

Thats not true, both had managed in the lower leagues and achieved very little. All 3 flopped but as an appointment the Pardew one made the most sense.

I think what is more frustrating is that most teams changed managers and saw at least some improvement - Everton, West Ham, Southampton, even Carvahal saw an improvement initially with Swansea. We traded Pulis (who deserved to go) for Pardew and managed to get worse.

It's remarkable to think that despite being utterly abject for 90% of the season we could end up finishing only 3-4 points away from safety. Imagine what would have happened had we employed a competent manager.

[pink_triangle]

2 minutes ago, TheGayTent said:

Half a season at wycombe (when they got relegated) hardly makes Adams experienced. 

Wigley had never managed in the football league. 

I think the description of novice, adequately described both of them at the time they got their respective manager jobs in the top flight 

Adams I think was a full year spread over  2 seasons as opposed to  half a season, during that time there was nothing that suggested he was good at football management. Similar Wigley as a manger did nothing that stood out. At least has had some success spread over his years in management.

I accept it is at a different level, but i certainly wouldnt ignore it.

[pink_triangle]

7 minutes ago, Hugh Jass said:

I think what is more frustrating is that most teams changed managers and saw at least some improvement - Everton, West Ham, Southampton, even Carvahal saw an improvement initially with Swansea. We traded Pulis (who deserved to go) for Pardew and managed to get worse.

It's remarkable to think that despite being utterly abject for 90% of the season we could end up finishing only 3-4 points away from safety. Imagine what would have happened had we employed a competent manager.

I think whats  most frustrating is there at least 4 or 5 squads worse than WBA. When I look at that Swansea side yesterday Im not convinced many of their players would make your first 11.

[TheGayTent]

15 minutes ago, Hugh Jass said:

I think what is more frustrating is that most teams changed managers and saw at least some improvement - Everton, West Ham, Southampton, even Carvahal saw an improvement initially with Swansea. We traded Pulis (who deserved to go) for Pardew and managed to get worse.

We didn’t improve under Moyes. He benefitted solely from everyone else being shit and finally catching up with the number of home games after our run of aways at the start of the season. 

Edited May 9, 2018 by TheGayTent

[eFestivals]

40 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

Thats not true, both had managed in the lower leagues and achieved very little.

true. Wigley managed Aldershot, in Isthmian League first division which they should have walked as a former Div 4 team in lowly league.

The season after he left they were promoted as champions.

[jyoung]

Also, saw people posting their World Cup squads. I'd go for this...

GKs - Pickford, Butland, Hart

DFs - Walker, Trippier, Maguire, Stones, Cahill, Bertrand, Young, Alexander Arnold

MFs - Dier, Wilshere, Alli, RLC, Henderson, Livermore, Lingard, Sterling,

STs - Kane, Rashford, Vardy, Welbeck

[TheGayTent]

There must be a keeper in league 2 that’s better than Hart?

[TheGayTent]

Also surprised so many are leaving Delph out of their squads 

[jyoung]

I'd pick Hart for the squad not based on form or with the idea that he'll play but simply because he has the experience. He'll be useful around the camp.