Who gets sacked First Roy or Carlo?
- Thread starter psd99
- Start date
Associate
- Joined
- 26 Mar 2009
- Posts
- 1,807
- Location
- State of Volatile Apathy
Posted this in the 'Woy is keeping The Anfield Ubermensch from attaining their Destiny as Galactic Champions' thread, but it seems more appropriate here:
[url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2011/jan/06/premier-league-managers-sackings]Paul Hayward[/url] said:
nah don't buy it. Scapegoat.
Like I said proof will be in the pudding with his replacement...
good post by Paul Hayward
really LOL'd @ "............Chelsea's commander sports a more fatalistic look. Life as an employee of Silvio Berlusconi in Milan is the ideal preparation for exposure to proprietorial whim. Equally Roman Abramovich's meddling is the perfect shield for Chelsea's players, who have escaped the scrutiny inflicted on their leader. Further north we could ask Fernando Torres about this too, assuming we could find him
really LOL'd @ "............Chelsea's commander sports a more fatalistic look. Life as an employee of Silvio Berlusconi in Milan is the ideal preparation for exposure to proprietorial whim. Equally Roman Abramovich's meddling is the perfect shield for Chelsea's players, who have escaped the scrutiny inflicted on their leader. Further north we could ask Fernando Torres about this too, assuming we could find him
Caporegime
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 75,897
- Location
- Wish i was in a Ramen Shop Counter
I dont think Carlo will worry about he future if he gets chopped. The man won a double his first year, won many league titles and the CL with Milan. If he gets sacked in his second season at Chelsea while laying in 5th in he league, his record/CV is still pretty impressive when you put it on paper.
Roy on the other hand has lost his big shot at ever managing another big club with this. Something isn't quite right, the results are bad and more importantly the performances have been terrible, both home and away.
Roy on the other hand has lost his big shot at ever managing another big club with this. Something isn't quite right, the results are bad and more importantly the performances have been terrible, both home and away.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 15 Aug 2010
- Posts
- 4
Roy cant manage a big team better at west ham
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
But regardless of if he's the best or the worst manager in the world, Torres missing a complete sitter, or Glen Johnson just being crap, or Soto being, from the highlights and other bits I caught, just not even a footballer, isn't the managers fault. If Mourinho was there and Torres was as much of a useless tart as he's been in the past year, or Gerrard, Caragher, Johnson etc, etc, they'd struggle aswell.
I don't think many managers will be doing much better, though after a decent transfer window that could change, for either Hodgson or a new manager. They desparately need competant defenders, wingers, another striker and thats a bare minimum, realistically I'd say a CB, a RB, left and right wingers and a second real striker.
Johnson/Soto were out of position, lazy or just plain awful for all 3 goals they conceded and many more they could have conceded, Soto shouldn't be in the top league in any country at all he's so bad, Johnson should be a winger and never ever played in defence ever, under any circumstances, even at a non league team.
Bit dissappointed really, wanted someone to be fired today
Grant really should be the least likely to get fired, he's got the worst situation with his squad in terms of injuries and form of players and before the season started West Ham would be aiming to stay up, nothing more or less, Villa being bottom 3 is infinately worse, as would be Liverpool in the bottom 8. Brum aswell are doing fairly badly after recent season expectations.
Houllier/Hodgson/Carlo have teams mostly performing miles below where people think they should be, West Ham are 2 wins from midtable, basically exactly where you expect.
^Bit strange he travelled to the Emirates last night then?
It's gotta be done because it is getting ridiculous, Sven flirted with Chelsea so the FA rushed out and made him unsackable in the short term (since they still had to pay for Wembley), then Capello also given a 2 year extension at £6m a year BEFORE the world cup, gg?
What beggars belief is that Pardew got a FIVE-AND-A-HALF-YEAR deal at Newcastle
eek:
In his entire managerial career, he has NEVER before managed even 4 years at the same club, let alone 5.5 years.
In fact, if you look at top flight managerial experience, he has only TWO seasons experience in the top division (one of which his club got relegated).
So a 5.5 year deal at a Prem club has been given to manager with 2 years Prem experience.
It's gotta be done because it is getting ridiculous, Sven flirted with Chelsea so the FA rushed out and made him unsackable in the short term (since they still had to pay for Wembley), then Capello also given a 2 year extension at £6m a year BEFORE the world cup, gg?
What beggars belief is that Pardew got a FIVE-AND-A-HALF-YEAR deal at Newcastle
eek:In his entire managerial career, he has NEVER before managed even 4 years at the same club, let alone 5.5 years.
In fact, if you look at top flight managerial experience, he has only TWO seasons experience in the top division (one of which his club got relegated).
So a 5.5 year deal at a Prem club has been given to manager with 2 years Prem experience.
DM's got mixed up with Benitez's contract. Benitez was actually entitled to £16m if he was simply sacked, no matter how long he had left on his deal. In the end he left by 'mutual consent' with a £6m payoff; in other words he was sacked however the club couldn't afford the £16m but they reached a compromise of £6m.
I believe Broughton confirmed that Hodgson however is only entitled to 1 years salary if our new owners sack him.
I believe Broughton confirmed that Hodgson however is only entitled to 1 years salary if our new owners sack him.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
I meant at Inter, afaik he was only entitled to a years worth of compensation from Inter if they fire him, despite being on a longer contract than that, though the delay over his firing after those comments he made were rumoured to be Inter higher ups and lawyers working out if they can fire him with no compensation I assume due to his ultimatum and unprofessional behaviour, and basically asking for them to fire him or give him a ridiculous amount of money.
With Liverpool a deal was struck, legally it seems he was entitled to his full contract if he was fired but, seemingly time limits meant Benitez was willing to take less cash. IE if they decided they couldn't afford to fire him, he's in a job he no longer likes and Inter would have a new manager, leaving when he did meant he could other jobs/Inter job before they get filled up in the summer so made sense to strike a comprimise.
I think a LOT of newer managers whose latest contracts have been done in the past couple of years are either getting short contracts, automatically renewing contracts or clauses so they aren't entitled to having their full contracts paid up if they get fired.
It had to happen, Sven's pay off's have been ridiculous, as have many others, the Capello one is ridiculous and I can't exactly remember why now
Was it right before the world cup Capello was, hmm, was he on a contract where he wasn't entitled to a big pay out if he was fired and the FA wanted to remove that clause, in their complete and utter incompetance. Renewing his contract right before the world cup was just stupid on every level, at no stage had England looked one iota better than in the previous decade, same old rubbish, same old wrong manager.
I would be surprised if the same isn't true of Pardew, he might have a long contract but he's probably only entitled to a year or so of wages if he gets fired. He's also not on that outrageous a wage either, isn't he on something like half a mil a year which even if he got fired tomorrow would be what, 2.75mil payout.
Thing is , the manager picks the players who are on the pitch, if players are having a nightmare then its up to the manager to see that and do something about it. For instance, if Johnson is crap, then give Kelly a run. Try Kelly at RB and push Johnson up the wing. If Torres is having a bad run, then give Pacheco a run out and so on. Such things might work, such things might not work, but at least give them a try. IMO both Kelly and particularly Pacheco are woefully underused. (same applies for Shelvey who I thought has looked exceptionally promising in the very few games he has had this year)
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
Kelly had one great game iirc, then people complained he wasn't used, he got another game and wasn't even close to as good the second time around.
THe problem is, Torres at his worst is better than the other strikers, and while its all good saying he could try other things, theres nothing to suggest Kelly and Pacheco aren't worse than the current players.
We don't know if Hodgson had control of any of the deals, what managers say isn't necessarily real, Pool fans tend to pick and choose, he had no part in Joe Cole deal when they though Joe Cole was the deal of the summer, but he was 100% behind Poulsen and Konchesky and depending on how good a week the portuguese guy had he either bought him or didn't. Fact is we don't really know, when benitez was there bad deals weren't his fault, they were forced on him.
Maybe he recommended Konchesky as he begged for a right back and they said no more than a few million, or maybe he had the option to buy a world class left back, and opted for Konchesky, NO ONE knows but Hodgson/previous owners really.
Also Konchesky was never ever close to as bad now as he was at any of his previous clubs, pressure, bad team, system not working, I don't know. THeres players I laugh at Fergie and Wenger for buying, Jeffers, Kleberson, and players that despite being either brilliant, or just decent joined and played FAR below their normal level and you can't really blame the managers for that. Sometimes players can't settle, can't adapt to a different culture and unhappy, don't play well and go on to better things elsewhere. Konchesky is one of the later, he's MUCH better than he's playing right now and after being solid in the same league for YEARS its not fair to say its Hodgsons fault, you can't predict a player will just not adapt and will suddenly play well below their capability. Veron was world class before, and after being at Utd, he flopped there and left, its bad luck not a poor buy.
Poulsen is the same he was a mainstay in the national team and since being at Pool people are saying he's a joke for the national side aswell, his level has clearly dipped well below normal. With both the question isn't were they world class players, but for a side with little to no cash could they be reliable and average, at their normal level the answer is yes, playing like retarded monkeys since they joined, no.
Thing is Liverpools players aren't producing, particularly away from home and that happened LONG before Hodgson went there, and yet under Benitez they did perform well then stopped performing as well at the beginning of last season and went to utter crap mid season.
Hodgson is done at Liverpool, his fault, the fans, the players, I don't know, fans will claim its his fault no matter if Liverpool improve or get worse after he leaves so its just a dead end.
A new manager and assuming the new owners invest and Liverpool should improve, even if they stick with Hodgson AND give him money and buy the right players, Liverpool might simply be done with Hodgson, the fans won't ever back him and improving away form without fans turning up and the ones that do chanting negatively for 90 minutes isn't going to help the team.
Liverpool need a new manager, and HEAVY investment in the team, not necessarily huge cash, but they need a LOT of player turnover, theres 4-5 that basically have to go, and they need 7-8 players minimum to replace and add to the squad.
THe problem is, Torres at his worst is better than the other strikers, and while its all good saying he could try other things, theres nothing to suggest Kelly and Pacheco aren't worse than the current players.
We don't know if Hodgson had control of any of the deals, what managers say isn't necessarily real, Pool fans tend to pick and choose, he had no part in Joe Cole deal when they though Joe Cole was the deal of the summer, but he was 100% behind Poulsen and Konchesky and depending on how good a week the portuguese guy had he either bought him or didn't. Fact is we don't really know, when benitez was there bad deals weren't his fault, they were forced on him.
Maybe he recommended Konchesky as he begged for a right back and they said no more than a few million, or maybe he had the option to buy a world class left back, and opted for Konchesky, NO ONE knows but Hodgson/previous owners really.
Also Konchesky was never ever close to as bad now as he was at any of his previous clubs, pressure, bad team, system not working, I don't know. THeres players I laugh at Fergie and Wenger for buying, Jeffers, Kleberson, and players that despite being either brilliant, or just decent joined and played FAR below their normal level and you can't really blame the managers for that. Sometimes players can't settle, can't adapt to a different culture and unhappy, don't play well and go on to better things elsewhere. Konchesky is one of the later, he's MUCH better than he's playing right now and after being solid in the same league for YEARS its not fair to say its Hodgsons fault, you can't predict a player will just not adapt and will suddenly play well below their capability. Veron was world class before, and after being at Utd, he flopped there and left, its bad luck not a poor buy.
Poulsen is the same he was a mainstay in the national team and since being at Pool people are saying he's a joke for the national side aswell, his level has clearly dipped well below normal. With both the question isn't were they world class players, but for a side with little to no cash could they be reliable and average, at their normal level the answer is yes, playing like retarded monkeys since they joined, no.
Thing is Liverpools players aren't producing, particularly away from home and that happened LONG before Hodgson went there, and yet under Benitez they did perform well then stopped performing as well at the beginning of last season and went to utter crap mid season.
Hodgson is done at Liverpool, his fault, the fans, the players, I don't know, fans will claim its his fault no matter if Liverpool improve or get worse after he leaves so its just a dead end.
A new manager and assuming the new owners invest and Liverpool should improve, even if they stick with Hodgson AND give him money and buy the right players, Liverpool might simply be done with Hodgson, the fans won't ever back him and improving away form without fans turning up and the ones that do chanting negatively for 90 minutes isn't going to help the team.
Liverpool need a new manager, and HEAVY investment in the team, not necessarily huge cash, but they need a LOT of player turnover, theres 4-5 that basically have to go, and they need 7-8 players minimum to replace and add to the squad.
Last edited:
I really like Ancelotti, don't know why just warmed to him.
He's jsut really not getting anything out of the players. Ray Wilkins leaving clearly shows who did most of the effort in the coaching.....
I think Abramovich is very close to pushing him out. Roy should get till the end of the season I think!
He's jsut really not getting anything out of the players. Ray Wilkins leaving clearly shows who did most of the effort in the coaching.....
I think Abramovich is very close to pushing him out. Roy should get till the end of the season I think!
Dm, he had no say in the Cole transfer as it was all but done before he got the job. Hodgson also gave an interview a few weeks back where he confirmed that Cole was signed by Purslow and that he shouldn't take responsibility for it, unlike the Poulsen, Meireles, Konchesky and Jones deals.
The squad is better than 12th, so manager has to take some responsibility. The squad is not good enough to win the Premiership, so we need investment and a clear out.
I would not mind seeing Kelly or Pacheco play if it meant we did not have to buy 2 journeyman 'internationals'. Thus saving transfer funds for the players we need. We have brought too many stop gap players over the years and it is costing us badly.
Roy was never the right man for the job. He was seen as steady and had done well on a restricted budget ( that statement I do not believe though), however it was plainly obvious he was a journeyman mediocre manager but a media darling.