sadoldgit

doc

I wasn't a big fan of Pearson's and recall the football was poor even though he did what he needed to do. In hindsight it would have been better to stick with him longer though.

Or maybe others just did things better? How much have Leicester spent compared to the Big Four? How much have Citeh spent on trying to be the biggest club in Europe? Out of 26 different managers since Ted Bates only Glenn Hoddle, Alan Pardew, Nigel Adkins and Ron K have a better win ratio. Burley had a better win ratio than Pochettino. Still, we will never agree so time to move on.

It seems that his only "crime" is to say he didn't have a meeting that BBC says he did. Seems are strange reason to sack someone. Apparently he has been completely cleared of any involvement with the girl who sadly took her own life.

I am not a Blackburn fan but it does look to me that he has been totally stitched up. No other views?

odds on

If I was a manager I wouldn't think that a 42% win ratio was too shabby.

Nigel Pearson lost 5% more of his games than Harry Redknapp did. Are you saying that if the periods of their tenure had been changed Pearson would have kept us up?

definately

if.

Going off at a bit of a tangent here but I think it is interesting to compare the various managers stats over the years as those we think of as good were sometimes not quite so good and those we think of as shyte sometimes not so bad. My original table was based on points won against matches played, this is is slightly different in that it just gives a win % and ignores drawn games, but it isn't far off the other table:- Bates 39.2%, McMenemy 41.8%, Nicholl 34.1%, Branfoot 28.9%, Ball 32.8%, Merrington 31.3%, Souness 29.2%, Jones 32.7%, Hoddle 42.3%, Gray 31.6%, Strachan 35.5%, Wigley 0%, Sturrock 38.5%, Wigley 17.7%, Redknapp 26.5%, Bassett & Wise 33.3%, Burley 41.3%, Gorman & Dodd 16.7%, Pearson 21.4%, Poortvliet 25%, Wotte 22.2%, Pardew 53.1%, Wilkins 0%, Adkins 54%, Pochettino 38.3%, Koeman 45.7%. It will be pointed out that managers managed in different divisions but they can only play what is in front of them and their squads would reflect the divisions they played in. To keep this on track I would say that only Pochettino has gone on to improve his performance with another club after us.

I think it is a bit harsh to lay the blame of administration with Burley unless you can prove that the wages and signing on fees were down to him and not the Board. Also he only had one full season with us in which we made the play offs, so I am not sure how he failed. When he left we were as close to the play offs as we were the relegation zone but I agree that had he stayed we probably would have ended up still mid table. I do accept that I am in the minority when it comes down to not thinking Burley was shyte.

also

cell

We also started to win matches away from home for the first time regularly under Burley including putting 6 past a decent Wolves side at their place. I will say again that at the point he left he was still the best manager in terms of points won per games including Bates and Lawrie Mac. I know he wasn't everyone's favourite but I didn't have a problem with him and we were unfortunate not to make the play offs finals. At the point he left he wasn't the only one to have lost the plot. He was having players sold from under him and the club wasn't being run particularly well. He wasn't the best manager we have ever had, but he certainly wasn't the worst IMHO. I do accept that his persistence in playing Germaine Wright was a bit odd though!

We didn't do too well the season before and I certainly wouldn't say we were anything like Manchester United in our circumstances. Yes we spent money but spending money is no guarantee of success. We had a decent side but lacked consistency. We were unlucky not to reach the play off finals. Getting into the play offs is an achievement no matter what your circumstances and it is something that Burley managed with 3 different clubs. It is a very tough division to get out of, as many "big" clubs have found out over the years.

Isnt that the point though, take someone and make them better? A player like Walcott took inspiration by watching Henri play and in training. Some players are naturals, some have ability but need others to help them get the most out of that ability.

You have to figure that coaches do make a difference, if not, why coach? If that is the case then I am sure every club you go to will have success stories as well as failures. How much of it is down to coaching and how much of it is down to maturing? I remember Mick Channon saying that Peter Osgood was the most gifted young player he had seen. Once he grew up and his body changed he wasn't as good. Bale on the other hand showed great promise as a youngster and really thrived as he grew. Or was that down to Arry's brilliant coaching?

Not a great loss to broadcasting, but fair play to him for at least coming out and accusing the Beeb of whitewash and cover ups.

Ah, the joys of the internet! Why did you leave out Frys contributions though? Him and Hypo are like herpes. Once you get them you've got them for life!

So about Yoshida's level then? Seriously, I thought he had improved.

Perhaps they should do away with this long drawn out farce of a circus and just have one big gunfight - last one left standing becomes President.

stalk

You could probably add Martina to this list as many here had written him off as a pub footballer when he first joined us but he has shown he can do a job since.

Or Chambers