um pahars

Stick to Tim then if he gives you more fun. Mwah :smt008.

Came through Wolves Youth Set Up (although I don't think he made a first team appearance), so can't really include him (PS plus as you've just said, he isn't playing anymore). We haven't been that good on keepers, although it's not really a position a player can grow into as you're straight in at the deep end, so imagine that's why we probably just bought them all in. The ones I can think of Granger, Poke etc only ever stepped in as an emergency on the odd occasion.

Have to say McDonald gets my vote as well, but would also accept that it is hard to judge him playing in that league.

Tim really will be upset, I just hope he doesn't see this thread (quick, Mods delete it) LOL.

I don't doubt that for one minute. But the point at hand was not the behaviour of Crouch, Chorley, Lawrie et al, instead we were discussing as to whether Lowe had managed the PR well since his return and one point against this was his performance at the AGM. We were discussing whether Lowe's performance at the AGM was a PR success or a PR failure, and my conjecture was that it was very much a failure. Now if others want to debate their bahaviour etc., then that's fine by me, and my opinion is that it was also found wanting, but let's not get distracted from this thread which was about Lowe's mistakes.

You're right. We signed him at 18 and he had already played 5 times for Torquay, so probably not fair to include him.

If you're back to stalking me, then me old mucker Tim will be upset. He much prefers you as his pet (I've got Frank you see). I think you can only do ten smilies (and i'll let Tim give you those) LOL.

Which brings us right back to the beginning of the argument (which has been somewhat lost by all the diversions), that one example of where Lowe has handled the PR poorly since his return, I think Jonah is the only poster who would argue that Lowe's performance at the AGM was anything other than poor PR.

I imagine that Burley's record was better than D&G's, but Pearson came in after both of them (and Burley towards the end appeared to had lost it big time) and he had to pick up the pieces. In fact by confirming D&G's record was worse, then it actually makes the halting of the slide by Pearson all the more impressive. Not world beating standard, but certainly a good job addressing a very worrying slide. He did what he had to do. His job was judged at the end of the season and he had us 20th, a position he inherited, but a position that he inherited after we had slid down the table. Wotte on the other hand has a different job (and a different context). He has to arrest the decline and then lead us up the table. The worry for me is not only is that a abig ask, but he was also a part of the problem that got us there in the first place.

Behave yourself you fool. You're the one on this thread accusing me of some "subtle" PR attack against Lowe, which is patently not the case, so please forgive me if I give you a broadside for being a ****** and accusing me of something that had never crossed my mind. I know what I posted, I know why I popsted it and in this instance your attempt at second guessing is wide of the mark and paranoid.

I'm not sure how you get that he was Englands Best Young Manager out of those stats. Maybe better than what went before or after him, but it is one large jump to go from stabilising a falling team and getting 1.23 ppg to calling him England's Best Young Manager. Methinks you're somewhat overegging his record there;) It looks brighter when you throw in his record at Leicester, but it would still be one hell of a leap.

you need to look at the reply in it's context nickh and not just throw in random comments IMHO. It was about it being a sign of Lowe's ability as a businessman, nit the merits or otherwise of the reverse takeover.

I've got Oakley, but you're quite right with Phillips. Not sure we can include Wise (unless of course you're putting him forward as manager). It's getting a bit stronger now and maybe it could hold it's own in the top flight: -------------------Flahavan------------------- Cranie---------Monk----Baird--------------Bale Walcott------Oakley-------Howard-------Bridge ------------McDonald-----Phillips---------- Still think we need another keeper (definitely weak), centre half (neither really Prem standard) and maybe centre mid (although Oaks did the business and Howard was being tapped up). There's definitely some talent in there though.

When he walked in the door we were 18th. He wasn't really in charge when we slipped lower after immediately losing at Plymouth (down to 20th I think). At that point we had achieved 38 points from 33 games (1.15 per game and sat 20th I think). Then when he left we were 20th and managed 16 points from his 13 games (1.23 points per game). So during his tenure he stabilised a fall and managed to improve on the points per game haul of the previous 33 games. In the context, a result all round.

And do you know how many shares he has bought and how much that has cost him, compared to with how much he was paid by the Club. PS I don't expect an answer, but before you make these outlandish claims it would be best to have an understanding of the sums involved, particularly in the context that SW11 was talking of.

Don't want to incrimnate anyone, but where and when did that happen??? Must say, I never liked him. Had the DB7 and the yacht/cruiser but did fck all for the money.

And where is he saying that you thought we were a top of the league team? Even in our relegation season we convincingly beat a team at their place who finished 7th in the Premiership. The performance in one match is nothing to base the rest of a season on, 28 games is a much better judge of how good a team is and perhaps more importantly, how good a manager you have. If there is talent there to such a degree as you state, then pray tell why the "successful" Poortvliet managed to nurture it such a way that he left us second bottom staring relegation squarely in the face. We've probably got a slightly lower than average squad, who for the first part of the season were overseen by probably the worst manager in our history. (all of the above is IMHO blah, blah, blah).

Fck me Mr Sanctimonious, not content with ripping into people for some gallows humour on one thread, you're now going to town here. You may have missed the IMHO in my post and you have also subtlely overlooked that most things posted on a nerdy, anonymous internet message board are peoples opinions and take on things (unless they are talking about factual things such as number of appearances etc). Maybe just for you, everyone should prefix or suffix their posts with IMHO so you don't blow a fuse. And I would counter that maybe the odd game playing well above your station (and when the opposition underperform) does not suggest you have the ability to play like that ll the time and ultimately you will settle down to a more averagec / reflective level, which will be reflected in your league position over 28 games as opposed to just looking at one result. All IMHO of course. If you were confident under Poortvliet when we were in the bottom 3, playing sht, then you're more of an optimist than I am. IMHO of course. (All of the above is subjective and my personal opinion only, unless it is specifically noted as fact. TM Um Pahars © 2009)

I understand what you're saying, but they were still produced by the Academy so I think they should be included. Of course if this team of Academy players was challenging for a Champions League place then they may have stayed put!!!! However, I would counter that looking at that team, even including those 3, it is not of a Premiership standard.

If you take one game in isolation, you could probably read anything you wanted into it. Much more powerful is a sustained period of performances and results, and IMHO 28 games is certainly enough to give you a much better feel for what the team was capable of. We were going nowhere fast, Poortvliet was looking increasingly more and more bemused as each game passed. He may have stuck with the same rigid formation, but he was continually tinkering with the line up. Contrary to what Chris Iwelumo would tell you, we didn't play football the "right way" and just because Wotte hasn't managed to get us to play a "proper Championship style" so far, I don't think we should get all misty eyed and grab our rose tinted spectacles and wish for success under Poortvliet. He had more than enough games (as well as a pre season) to make his mark and he failed, disastrously. We've had enough rewriting of history without trying to suggest that under Poortvliet we were on the cusp of something beuatiful and successful.

I was just going to post that. Maybe it's slowly releasing toxic fumes into the boardroom that is interfering with decision making ability of our Board. Those pesky Tykes.

He was on their books as an Associate Schoolboy, but came here just before his 16th birtheday so I think that qualifies him for this team. So far this would be my team: -------------------Flahavan------------------- Baird---------Monk--------Cranie----------Bale Walcott------Oakley-------Howard-------Bridge ------------McDonald-----Blackstock---------- Certainly good in places, but definitely weak in others. Any changes to the above???? I'd have that team down as a high scoring, high conceeding Championship team. Mid table/Challenging playoffs. Any different views on how "good" this team would be???