sadoldgit

Fancied a draw today. Especially frustrating to lose to a late goal. Oh well, the run was going to end eventually and Chelsea are back on form again.

And McMenemy had Keagan etc. Where do you draw the line? Every manager has to work with what he has and what he is up against. Adkins inherited some quality players when he took over from Pardew. Does that lessen his achievement? You can never measure like for like as everyone managed in different conditions. What you can say though is how many points they achieved. I have already said that the win ratio measurement is not the be all and end all. But it does give you a measure of performance. Teams that win leagues might not be the best, but they have the most points. To gain most points they have to show a measure of ability even if they are not as good as other teams. If you take your argument about the quality of players then perhaps we should slag off McMenemy as being shyte as he failed to win the league when at one point he had 4 ex England players in his team? If we want to talk about really shyte managers, lets talk about Branfoot and Redknapp.

method

I have never said that the win percentages are the be all and end all but they do give an objective way of measuring a performance - as does the football league. Points on the board. You can say scraped in but it is the points total that counts and we finished sixth and qualified for the play offs. If you wanted to be picky you could say that we scraped promotion both times because we came second and not first. I have accepted that I am in a minority about Burley but as you say, it is all a matter of opinion, which we are all allowed to have, and is totally subjective. For the record, although Burley has a better win ratio than McMenemy, McMenemy was clearly a more successful manager. Its a no brainer. Other distinctions are not so clear cut and fall to personal preference. I expect a manager to win matches and to put out teams to play decent football. You say that Burley "higely underachieved." I would say that wasn't the case given that we qualified for the play offs and missed the final on penalties. If you think that is a huge underachievement that is your opinion. I disagree. Can we move on now please?

Koeman wins that one easily.

LOL, bizarre!

Well done. It must make you day. As you have pointed out, I should have said he had a 5% worse win ratio. I am such a terrible person.

It was tongue in cheek but feel free to be a ***t as usual.

They don't do they! I could never work out why. I know its an easy journey by train from Croydon but don't know why the rivalry. Anyone know?

Crystal Palace is about the same distance from Brighton as Southampton is from Bournemouth. Does that mean that Palace v Brighton is a derby game?

Is there a specific distance that determines whether a game is a derby or not? And do you have to be in the same county?

I thought we were talking about whether he was a shyte manager for us or not? I am not sure what the old men managing pub teams have to do with anything. I think that stats about Saints managers are relevant though. I would say that it is important for a manager to win games, wouldn't you? And if you win a lot of games it means that you are quite good doesn't it? If you were to define the top six Saints managers purely by the win per games ratio then they would be Adkins, Pardew, Koeman, Hoddle, Burley and McMenemy. But I am guessing that you would say at least one of that number was shyte so lets not bother with this anymore eh?

Yeah, a bit like you and Pelle. Jeez.

duck

Herpes returns The context isn't difficult to work out, even for someone like you.

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.