Hypocrites

[St Marco]

sigh..

I`ll repeat,worded for the simpletons: FACTS about NP`s results/performance,cannot be changed whatever JP does. so your whole comparison-nonsense between the two are of no use whatsoever in this context.

 

if Jan loses his 100 next matches,that wont alter how many points NP got/how NP`s team played-and those points are what most fans base their opinions on.

 

going by your twisted logic,the first world war must have been a nice stroll in the park..just because one worse followed !

you`re one crazy individual if you cant see that two things can be quite bad,even though one seems slightly better than the other ATM.

 

Seriously the fact that you don't get the point of it is quite funny. The "twisted logic" you try and accuse me of is actually perfect sense. A group of people cannot base their views on one persons results and not do the same for the other. You cannot say Pearson's results were bad and JP's were good. That is double standards and wrong. If someone is to be judged on a fans merits (whatever they maybe) then they must account to all. That is the point. So you may not understand what i'm saying and can call me all the names you like but the facts remain Pearson had a hard job to do and he was more succesful at it then our current manager. That is fact. Deal with it.

[OldNick]

Seriously the fact that you don't get the point of it is quite funny. The "twisted logic" you try and accuse me of is actually perfect sense. A group of people cannot base their views on one persons results and not do the same for the other. You cannot say Pearson's results were bad and JP's were good. That is double standards and wrong. If someone is to be judged on a fans merits (whatever they maybe) then they must account to all. That is the point. So you may not understand what i'm saying and can call me all the names you like but the facts remain Pearson had a hard job to do and he was more succesful at it then our current manager. That is fact. Deal with it.

He ddi have a hard job butr all managers at our club since WGS have had a hard jib as our expectations were raised.

NP was able to bring in some highly paid and experienced players. Jan has had to rid the club of those and use inexperienced young players.I dont think Jan is up for the job but I am to be convinced that NP would have been able to do the same under the same circumstances.Unless we quickly get investment it is going south whoever is in charge.

[Thedelldays]

Yeah but Pearson had it far harder. Came in with the ship sinking fast. .

did he?

 

the band of brothers on here will tell you that burley was doing a grand job hence why a "top" international team came calling!!!

 

 

which was it?

[CB Fry]

Not at all. Im guessing you didn't go to many games last year then because there was many people up until the Sheff Utd game who didn't want him because of his results (mainly the Hull game). The forum is just a small representation of the actual fans.

 

 

I think you need to get your head round who you are actually aiming your rants at, mush.

 

While Pearson was here, his record, at absolute, absolute best was patchy and included some right tonkings. It was under Pearson we slipped from not being in the relegation zone to having relegation out of our hands on the final day. To have a go at fans for not being universally delighted at that at that point is just stupid on your part.

 

And, close season, It didn't stop the fanbase, pretty much as a whole, saying NP deserved his chance this season.

 

And as others have said (I doubt it will ever sink in, though) it doesn't make a blind bit of difference what JP's record is now. Even if JP loses the next twenty games it doesn't make Pearson's record at Saints any better than patchy.

 

Pearson never was some football messiah that saved us from relegation. He delivered on the bare minimum requirement of the job, winning just the minimum number of games required to keep us up.

 

He seemed like a decent bet to stick with for this season and I wish he was still here.

 

But noone here is a hypocrite, and I don't really think you have a clue what you're actually moaning about here.

[St Marco]

I think you need to get your head round who you are actually aiming your rants at, mush.

 

While Pearson was here, his record, at absolute, absolute best was patchy and included some right tonkings. It was under Pearson we slipped from not being in the relegation zone to having relegation out of our hands on the final day. To have a go at fans for not being universally delighted at that at that point is just stupid on your part.

 

And, close season, It didn't stop the fanbase, pretty much as a whole, saying NP deserved his chance this season.

 

And as others have said (I doubt it will ever sink in, though) it doesn't make a blind bit of difference what JP's record is now. Even if JP loses the next twenty games it doesn't make Pearson's record at Saints any better than patchy.

 

Pearson never was some football messiah that saved us from relegation. He delivered on the bare minimum requirement of the job, winning just the minimum number of games required to keep us up.

 

He seemed like a decent bet to stick with for this season and I wish he was still here.

 

But noone here is a hypocrite, and I don't really think you have a clue what you're actually moaning about here.

 

What a complete load of ******** once again. You have a habbit of that don't you?

You are a prime example of the hypocrite im talking about. Trying desperatly hard to be little the feat of which he pulled off. By saying his tenure was "patchy" and we had "some right tonkings" again just shows you don't go to the games at all thus have no clue what your talking about. Lets look at some numbers shall we?

The previous 13 games BEFORE Pearson took over.

P13 . W1. D4. L5. F10. A18. Points = 7

Now lets look at those teams we played to get that awesome points total of 7

Preston,Colchester,Barnsley,Watford,S****horpe,Plymouthx2,Norwich,Crystal Palace,QPR,Stoke. 8 of the 13 games were against teams at the bottom or just out of the relegation zone.

 

Now lets look at Pearsons 13 games

P13. W3. D7. L3. F14. A15. Points = 16

Now lets look at those teams.

S****horpe,Ipswich,Wolves,Blackpool,Leicester,Hull,Coventry,Cardiff,Bristol City,Charlton,Burnley,West Brom,Sheffield United.

7 teams chasing promotion of which 2 actually got promoted.

 

So this "average" spell of which you talk about had a increase of over 120% of points then the previous 13 games. And these "tonkings" you talk about were actually just one game. Which are now the team 3rd in the premier league having lost ONLY 1 GAME! But i guess we were expected to beat them right?

 

So Pearson might not have been the messiah but his figures compared to those before him and after him proove without a shadow of a doubt he had a more succesful time with the club. So you might be one of those thinking "he was average" but i would expect that from someone such as yourself. But the facts and figures show your view is pretty stupid, just like your post,mush.

[alpine_saint]

What a complete load of ******** once again. You have a habbit of that don't you?

You are a prime example of the hypocrite im talking about. Trying desperatly hard to be little the feat of which he pulled off. By saying his tenure was "patchy" and we had "some right tonkings" again just shows you don't go to the games at all thus have no clue what your talking about. Lets look at some numbers shall we?

The previous 13 games BEFORE Pearson took over.

P13 . W1. D4. L5. F10. A18. Points = 7

Now lets look at those teams we played to get that awesome points total of 7

Preston,Colchester,Barnsley,Watford,S****horpe,Plymouthx2,Norwich,Crystal Palace,QPR,Stoke. 8 of the 13 games were against teams at the bottom or just out of the relegation zone.

 

Now lets look at Pearsons 13 games

P13. W3. D7. L3. F14. A15. Points = 16

Now lets look at those teams.

S****horpe,Ipswich,Wolves,Blackpool,Leicester,Hull,Coventry,Cardiff,Bristol City,Charlton,Burnley,West Brom,Sheffield United.

7 teams chasing promotion of which 2 actually got promoted.

 

So this "average" spell of which you talk about had a increase of over 120% of points then the previous 13 games. And these "tonkings" you talk about were actually just one game. Which are now the team 3rd in the premier league having lost ONLY 1 GAME! But i guess we were expected to beat them right?

 

So Pearson might not have been the messiah but his figures compared to those before him and after him proove without a shadow of a doubt he had a more succesful time with the club. So you might be one of those thinking "he was average" but i would expect that from someone such as yourself. But the facts and figures show your view is pretty stupid, just like your post,mush.

 

An excellent and detailed analysis, completely debunking this crap smeared about NP being worse than JP and Burley.

 

And you missed one leeeettle detail. The fact that NP didnt buy a single player, and Burley spent over £10M. Even JP got to spend more than NP..............

[jam]

What a complete load of ******** once again. You have a habbit of that don't you?

You are a prime example of the hypocrite im talking about. Trying desperatly hard to be little the feat of which he pulled off. By saying his tenure was "patchy" and we had "some right tonkings" again just shows you don't go to the games at all thus have no clue what your talking about. Lets look at some numbers shall we?

The previous 13 games BEFORE Pearson took over.

P13 . W1. D4. L5. F10. A18. Points = 7

Now lets look at those teams we played to get that awesome points total of 7

Preston,Colchester,Barnsley,Watford,S****horpe,Plymouthx2,Norwich,Crystal Palace,QPR,Stoke. 8 of the 13 games were against teams at the bottom or just out of the relegation zone.

 

Now lets look at Pearsons 13 games

P13. W3. D7. L3. F14. A15. Points = 16

Now lets look at those teams.

S****horpe,Ipswich,Wolves,Blackpool,Leicester,Hull,Coventry,Cardiff,Bristol City,Charlton,Burnley,West Brom,Sheffield United.

7 teams chasing promotion of which 2 actually got promoted.

 

So this "average" spell of which you talk about had a increase of over 120% of points then the previous 13 games. And these "tonkings" you talk about were actually just one game. Which are now the team 3rd in the premier league having lost ONLY 1 GAME! But i guess we were expected to beat them right?

 

So Pearson might not have been the messiah but his figures compared to those before him and after him proove without a shadow of a doubt he had a more succesful time with the club. So you might be one of those thinking "he was average" but i would expect that from someone such as yourself. But the facts and figures show your view is pretty stupid, just like your post,mush.

 

I really don't want to seem rude (and I have had a couple of drinks, so my eyesight might be decieving me) but do these figures add up?

 

And I really don't understand why you are comparing a run of games that includes the total disaster that was Dodd and Gorman's tenure in charge of a team that should have been challenging for the play offs (that's the criteria that mad Burley ****, remember?) with Jan's results with what is for the most part our youth team.

[Rod Le Shearer]

I think you need to get your head round who you are actually aiming your rants at, mush.

 

While Pearson was here, his record, at absolute, absolute best was patchy and included some right tonkings. It was under Pearson we slipped from not being in the relegation zone to having relegation out of our hands on the final day. To have a go at fans for not being universally delighted at that at that point is just stupid on your part.

 

And, close season, It didn't stop the fanbase, pretty much as a whole, saying NP deserved his chance this season.

 

And as others have said (I doubt it will ever sink in, though) it doesn't make a blind bit of difference what JP's record is now. Even if JP loses the next twenty games it doesn't make Pearson's record at Saints any better than patchy.

 

Pearson never was some football messiah that saved us from relegation. He delivered on the bare minimum requirement of the job, winning just the minimum number of games required to keep us up.

 

He seemed like a decent bet to stick with for this season and I wish he was still here.

 

But noone here is a hypocrite, and I don't really think you have a clue what you're actually moaning about here.

 

 

well said,echos my thoughts excactly. If Pearson was still here,I`d be behind him. just as I was/am right behind JP(for now)

the original poster is talking out of his arse,and clearly hasnt got a clue what sort of opinion/feelings the average fan has got. if I were him,I`d shut up and stop looking for a Innernet fight,especially when his arguements are just utter incoherent nonsense.

[Rod Le Shearer]

 

Now lets look at Pearsons 13 games

P13. W3. D7. L3. F14. A15. Points = 16

Now lets look at those teams.

S****horpe,Ipswich,Wolves,Blackpool,Leicester,Hull,Coventry,Cardiff,Bristol City,Charlton,Burnley,West Brom,Sheffield United.

7 teams chasing promotion of which 2 actually got promoted.

 

.

 

I see you didnt mention that we played two teams which were relegated. and how many points did we get from those matches..? 6,you say ??

and how many did we get from those in the top-6..? 1 point from three matches,what a marvelous effort !!

 

note for the future,mush: if you are going to make a comment about stats,please make sure you mention every little detail,and not just what suits your arguement.

[St Marco]

I see you didnt mention that we played two teams which were relegated. and how many points did we get from those matches..? 6,you say ??

and how many did we get from those in the top-6..? 1 point from three matches,what a marvelous effort !!

 

note for the future,mush: if you are going to make a comment about stats,please make sure you mention every little detail,and not just what suits your arguement.

 

 

points from the top 6

Bristol City were top when we played them = 3

WBA were 2nd when we played them = 1

Wolves were 5th when we played them = 1

Ipswich were 6th when we played them = 1

Palace were 6th when we played them = 1

 

So i make that 7 points from the teams near the top. Losing only to Hull from the top lot. And your right he did have 2 games against teams who were relegated and won one and drew the other which was an away game. So not quite sure how that is of any relevence exactly mush?

[NickG]

An excellent and detailed analysis, completely debunking this crap smeared about NP being worse than JP and Burley.

 

And you missed one leeeettle detail. The fact that NP didnt buy a single player, and Burley spent over £10M. Even JP got to spend more than NP..............

 

NP did have some of those players at his disposal tho. Lets face it none of them have been great and we all have things we like about them/dislike.

 

I wanted NP to stay and think he did pretty well, not a legend but instilled some grit when needed. I was looking forward to seeing what he could do with a full season.

 

St Marco -one thing with your analysis, not disputing stats at all, but the time directly before he came was a decent team that had completely lost its shape and confidence. He should be applauded for turning that around -which he did quickly and effectively. However, it is a bit misleading to show the dramatic increase in form -as the decrease had been just as dramatic. What I am trying to say is that he had a half decent team that only a few week before were playing at the level he achieved.

Anyway he is gone now and don't think there really have been any hypocrites over it.

[alpine_saint]

NP did have some of those players at his disposal tho. Lets face it none of them have been great and we all have things we like about them/dislike.

 

I wanted NP to stay and think he did pretty well, not a legend but instilled some grit when needed. I was looking forward to seeing what he could do with a full season.

 

St Marco -one thing with your analysis, not disputing stats at all, but the time directly before he came was a decent team that had completely lost its shape and confidence. He should be applauded for turning that around -which he did quickly and effectively. However, it is a bit misleading to show the dramatic increase in form -as the decrease had been just as dramatic. What I am trying to say is that he had a half decent team that only a few week before were playing at the level he achieved.

Anyway he is gone now and don't think there really have been any hypocrites over it.

 

If NP has reached cult and/or legend status, you can only blame the utter crap that proceeded and followed him for that.

[NickG]

If NP has reached cult and/or legend status, you can only blame the utter crap that proceeded and followed him for that.

 

how do you think he would be remembered if he had been sandwiched between Chris Nichol, Lawrie Mc, Hoddle or WGS?

 

He's bit like James Dean died before he got fat and old! -left us wondering what if....