[cite]Posted By: nolly[/cite]nothing wrong with that squad as ooh ah said plent players gone on to better things so that cannot be a excuse,the jackass management is to blame and also plenty time to keep us up as well..............next
Nothing wrong with that squad? You must have had one boxing bout too many Mr. Nolly!!!
Two centre-halves - one of them the perenially crocked Jon Fortune - and reduced to playing pint-sized and declining midfielder Matt Holland at center-half? We even resorted to bringing in a 37 year-old crocked Linvoy Primus into the team at one point!
Parky got given that shower of shite and the only money he had was for Matt Spring!!!
You can blame PP all you like for the current squad but that CCC relegation squad was a Pardew special.
Spot on Ormiston. And we didn't pay anything for Matt Spring either; his previous contract at luton was cancelled so he could sign for us as a free agent.
That squad was woeful at best. I thought we did well to come bottom to be honest. Watching Matt Holland trying to play at Centre half was just pitiful. The present squad is better than that and I'm just hoping that they do start to gel soon.
Firstly, football needs the Holloway's of this world big time IMO. Don't know about anyone else but I am fed up to the eye balls with the bland, corporate, say nothing, characterless, dullards that modern managers and those players that can string two words together seem to be these days. Lets face it, they might as well not bother with the interviews on MOTD as we can all predict exactly what they're goign to say before they've said it. Holloway's like a breath of fresh air in the Premiership and football is supposed to have some element of enjoyment attached to it isn't it?
Secondly, I'd have him here in a heartbeat and would have done so when this was first posted but there's no point us keeping going over old ground.......unless it's to point out that I was first to suggest Eddie Howe as a credible alternative but was shouted down ;-)
there was enough in that squad to get close too if not to have stayed up, the crap players are still left with us and are getting worse thanks to our shit coachimg methods but at the time some would have believed they were top end championship players.......... and yep no one could have done worse than parky's attempt at staying up
[quote][cite]Posted By: oohaahmortimer[/cite]there was enough in that squad to get close too if not to have stayed up, the crap players are still left with us and are getting worse thanks to our shit coachimg methods but at the time some would have believed they were top end championship players.......... and yep no one could have done worse than parky's attempt at staying up[/quote]
In the final third of the season after he bought Darren Ward in, we became much tighter and quite difficult to beat. There was nothing too much wrong with that defence or midfield. Our problem was the same that we still have under Parky, we couldn't create enough chances to convert draws into wins. When he finally let the shackles off, we murdered Norwich in the last game of the season.
[cite]Posted By: oohaahmortimer[/cite]there was enough in that squad to get close too if not to have stayed up, the crap players are still left with us and are getting worse thanks to our shit coachimg methods but at the time some would have believed they were top end championship players.......... and yep no one could have done worse than parky's attempt at staying up
That's why I agreed a better manager would have made a better fight of it. Problem was finding that better manager. Holloway and Poyet among others weren't obvious improvements at the time.
I've never said he was the right manager to keep us up, we needed a fresh start at the time. It just wasn't helped by the awful squad we had and several other managers would have failed.
The midfield is the only reasonable part of that squad, and most of them all played central midfield.
In the end if we had finished 1 point of 20 points off 21st, whoever the manager was, they would have been seen as a failure. Just like last season.
Saw brighty say 'What are you talking about Holloway, that's slavery'. What a disgustingly moronic comment. No signing a five year lucrative contract is not slavery, Rooney can decide to walk away at any poin and not get paid. That is not slavery. If you follow through Holloway's arguement it is not slavery.
There was some semblance to having to offer every player an increase of wages at the end of their contract in order to hold their registration. Tribunals were not favourable to the selling club, so it wasn't a sit they'd want to end up in.
If only we had a similar socialist structure to sport like the US, and one where free agency or breaking contracts had absolutely definite actions that had to be taken. A generous but fixed wage structure for players up to say 24, whereby if not offered they become free agents but enabling poorer clubs to retain registration of promising players without paying marquee wages. Once players become free agents they can neogtiate DESERVED lucrative contracts. If someone wants to break a contract, punitive defined action is taken in favour of the club holding registration of said player; in the US the team the player signs for gives up a certain multiple of top draft picks.
Top level football is unfeasibly boring in this country. There is no variation of top competitors, and no risk for the abuse of money that we suffered when Chelsea unsettled our main asset. Until some equality comes into the Prem I'll quite happily ignore most of that competition.
Could be wrong but get the feeling by then they knew Weaver wasn't going to get a contract extension. We probably needed to give Elliot games ready for the next season and to see how he did.
Creating chances and taking them was a bigger problem than goalkeeping.
[cite]Posted By: ColinTat[/cite]Saw brighty say 'What are you talking about Holloway, that's slavery'. What a disgustingly moronic comment. No signing a five year lucrative contract is not slavery, Rooney can decide to walk away at any poin and not get paid. That is not slavery. If you follow through Holloway's arguement it is not slavery.
I think Holloway’s comparison to a human being as being the equivalent of a possession (a house or a car were his examples) is probably where Mark Bright was coming from. Perhaps a little insensitive of him to compare a professional footballer to a slave, but also ludicrous of Holloway to make his comparison.
[cite]Posted By: oohaahmortimer[/cite]there was enough in that squad to get close too if not to have stayed up, the crap players are still left with us and are getting worse thanks to our shit coachimg methods but at the time some would have believed they were top end championship players.......... and yep no one could have done worse than parky's attempt at staying up
That's why I agreed a better manager would have made a better fight of it. Problem was finding that better manager. Holloway and Poyet among others weren't obvious improvements at the time.
More revisionism. In the eyes of certain people there's always a reason why someone like Hollaway or Poyet or Davies or Lambert wouldn't be good enough for us. For a club like us, it's never going to be "obvious" because if someone was so good that they were 100% guaranteed to bring success, they would have better options. Folk can turn their noses up at smart options and find some reason why they're not going to work out, but as long as our fanbase remains complacent we'll keep getting the failure that's been getting dished up for the last few years.
[cite]Posted By: oohaahmortimer[/cite]there was enough in that squad to get close too if not to have stayed up, the crap players are still left with us and are getting worse thanks to our shit coachimg methods but at the time some would have believed they were top end championship players.......... and yep no one could have done worse than parky's attempt at staying up
That's why I agreed a better manager would have made a better fight of it. Problem was finding that better manager. Holloway and Poyet among others weren't obvious improvements at the time.
More revisionism. In the eyes of certain people there's always a reason why someone like Hollaway or Poyet or Davies or Lambert wouldn't be good enough for us. For a club like us, it's never going to be "obvious" because if someone was so good that they were 100% guaranteed to bring success, they would have better options. Folk can turn their noses up at smart options and find some reason why they're not going to work out, but as long as our fanbase remains complacent we'll keep getting the failure that's been getting dished up for the last few years.
All I'm saying is I don't blame Murray for not going out and replacing Pardew with Holloway or Poyet.
How were any of us or Murray supposed to know they were better options. Neither had proven anything. How do you choose between say 5 managers, all with unconvincing records, including some who have never managed before?
A lot of fans would have questioned it at the time, because he had got relegated with Leicester the year before.
[cite]Posted By: Scoham[/cite]How were any of us or Murray supposed to know they were better options.
The hilarious trial period might have been a clue that there wasn't any worse options.
Seriously, why do people who thought we had a fair chance of promotion from the CCC at the start of the season think that relegation was inevitable. I'm ready to be proved wrong, but I don't think any of us predicted that we'd go down that season - I reckon most would have gone for playoffs...
[cite]Posted By: Scoham[/cite]
Creating chances and taking them was a bigger problem than goalkeeping.
you only have to look at the upsurge our binary boys received at the end of last season when randy (by fluke) took over in goal .....
The upsurge in fortunes took us from drifting to outside the play offs form to nearly the automatics
this was not down to parkinson seeing that elliot needed to be dropped it was just lucky for him elliot got injured
I know you're referring to our most dismal of seasons but I still stand by the fact that no one would have done worse than parky's abysmal attempt to stay in the championship and he had had the head start of being at the club coaching/or whatever he did for those wank footballers for 22 months previously
Holloway's made 10 changes from his line up last Saturday. Will the League have something to say about that? Hope they do and Holloway tells them where to go 'cos if the likes of United, Liverpool etc can do that so cna Blackpool.
His after match interview on sky is well worth a listen. For what it's worth i think he's spot on, football is a squad game and who is some sky reporter to question his team selection.
I think it's ridiculous that the premier league can fine a club when they don't field what is deemed to be their "strongest" 11. Due to the physical demands on players these days, who the hell are they to decide what is the strongest team? They don't take things like tiredness or current form in training into account. It's also very demeening to those players picked for the league to effectively say "you're not good enough". Is that not the whole point of having a squad? What next, managers considering signing a new player having to ask the "suits" permission to decide whether the player is deemed good enough to grace their glorious league? As far as i'm concerned, a manager has every right to select any proffessional on their books, end of.
And what exactly did the League do when Liverpool made a similar number of changes and lost to Fulham which helped them to stay up. Absolutely nothing. But when Wolves and Blackpool do it somehow it's different.
[cite]Posted By: Addick Addict[/cite]And what exactly did the League do when Liverpool made a similar number of changes and lost to Fulham which helped them to stay up. Absolutely nothing. But when Wolves and Blackpool do it somehow it's different.
Spot on AA, Fulham were down in the muck until Liverpool handed them a lifeline that season and nothing was said, Blackpool and Wolves make changes to their teams and they are bollocked eternally for it- the luvvies of Liverpool and their ilk will always get off scot free. Remember poor old Swindon back in 1990, imagine that happening to one of the big boys!
If the FA decide what players are good enough, whats next, Telling teams that have been promoted that they can't join their little exclusive league because "we don't think your players are good enough"? And yeah, it only seems to be the little clubs that get punished. Just because the likes of man utd have 30 internationals on their books.
Of course, this isn't anything new. They've been punishing small clubs for years. I seem to recall, even before the premiership was formed, when we were in the old 1st div under lennie i'm sure we were either punished or at least threatened with this stupid ruling............i wait to be corrected though
Putting out a weakened team for one game has so much less of an impact than being allowed to loan players to teams in the same division.
Take Man City loaning Joe Hart to Birmingham last season. Man City were able to have an impact on every single game Birmingham played in, by effectively having one of their players playing in that game. And to make it even worse, City were allowed to have 2 easier games than anyone else against Birmingham because they had to use their reserve keeper.
By contrast, Blackpool have influenced ONE game, a game which they nearly got something out of, by utilising their squad like any sensible manager would. They've done nothing wrong.
It would be interesting to see the logical arguement which proves Holloway put out a weakend side. The FA needs to take a good long look at itself and decide if that rule can still be applied given that it is now a squad game.
We were relegated from the prem partly because Liverpool fielded a weakened team against relegation threatened Fulham, because Liverpool wanted to rest players, Fulham won = no action was taken
[cite]Posted By: falconwood_1[/cite]Holloway's been bleating off a bit too much recently and will cop some back soon.
I tend to agree. The "some complete person" interview was cringeworthy. At some stage he'll move from being 'a colourful character' to being 'annoying'
The rule is stupid and only affects the smaller clubs, but Holloway can have no excuses. At least when McCarthy did it, it was almost unheard of to punish a manager for picking a weak team.
Comments
That squad was woeful at best. I thought we did well to come bottom to be honest. Watching Matt Holland trying to play at Centre half was just pitiful. The present squad is better than that and I'm just hoping that they do start to gel soon.
Secondly, I'd have him here in a heartbeat and would have done so when this was first posted but there's no point us keeping going over old ground.......unless it's to point out that I was first to suggest Eddie Howe as a credible alternative but was shouted down ;-)
Agree 100%.
He signed Luke Varney on a Bosman, for starters.
Decent manager, but the rant is cringeworthy.
In the final third of the season after he bought Darren Ward in, we became much tighter and quite difficult to beat.
There was nothing too much wrong with that defence or midfield. Our problem was the same that we still have under Parky, we couldn't create enough chances to convert draws into wins.
When he finally let the shackles off, we murdered Norwich in the last game of the season.
I've never said he was the right manager to keep us up, we needed a fresh start at the time. It just wasn't helped by the awful squad we had and several other managers would have failed.
The midfield is the only reasonable part of that squad, and most of them all played central midfield.
In the end if we had finished 1 point of 20 points off 21st, whoever the manager was, they would have been seen as a failure. Just like last season.
There was some semblance to having to offer every player an increase of wages at the end of their contract in order to hold their registration. Tribunals were not favourable to the selling club, so it wasn't a sit they'd want to end up in.
If only we had a similar socialist structure to sport like the US, and one where free agency or breaking contracts had absolutely definite actions that had to be taken. A generous but fixed wage structure for players up to say 24, whereby if not offered they become free agents but enabling poorer clubs to retain registration of promising players without paying marquee wages. Once players become free agents they can neogtiate DESERVED lucrative contracts. If someone wants to break a contract, punitive defined action is taken in favour of the club holding registration of said player; in the US the team the player signs for gives up a certain multiple of top draft picks.
Top level football is unfeasibly boring in this country. There is no variation of top competitors, and no risk for the abuse of money that we suffered when Chelsea unsettled our main asset. Until some equality comes into the Prem I'll quite happily ignore most of that competition.
Could be wrong but get the feeling by then they knew Weaver wasn't going to get a contract extension. We probably needed to give Elliot games ready for the next season and to see how he did.
Creating chances and taking them was a bigger problem than goalkeeping.
I think Holloway’s comparison to a human being as being the equivalent of a possession (a house or a car were his examples) is probably where Mark Bright was coming from. Perhaps a little insensitive of him to compare a professional footballer to a slave, but also ludicrous of Holloway to make his comparison.
How were any of us or Murray supposed to know they were better options. Neither had proven anything. How do you choose between say 5 managers, all with unconvincing records, including some who have never managed before?
A lot of fans would have questioned it at the time, because he had got relegated with Leicester the year before.
Seriously, why do people who thought we had a fair chance of promotion from the CCC at the start of the season think that relegation was inevitable. I'm ready to be proved wrong, but I don't think any of us predicted that we'd go down that season - I reckon most would have gone for playoffs...
you only have to look at the upsurge our binary boys received at the end of last season when randy (by fluke) took over in goal .....
The upsurge in fortunes took us from drifting to outside the play offs form to nearly the automatics
this was not down to parkinson seeing that elliot needed to be dropped it was just lucky for him elliot got injured
I know you're referring to our most dismal of seasons but I still stand by the fact that no one would have done worse than parky's abysmal attempt to stay in the championship and he had had the head start of being at the club coaching/or whatever he did for those wank footballers for 22 months previously
Spot on AA, Fulham were down in the muck until Liverpool handed them a lifeline that season and nothing was said, Blackpool and Wolves make changes to their teams and they are bollocked eternally for it- the luvvies of Liverpool and their ilk will always get off scot free. Remember poor old Swindon back in 1990, imagine that happening to one of the big boys!
Of course, this isn't anything new. They've been punishing small clubs for years. I seem to recall, even before the premiership was formed, when we were in the old 1st div under lennie i'm sure we were either punished or at least threatened with this stupid ruling............i wait to be corrected though
Take Man City loaning Joe Hart to Birmingham last season. Man City were able to have an impact on every single game Birmingham played in, by effectively having one of their players playing in that game. And to make it even worse, City were allowed to have 2 easier games than anyone else against Birmingham because they had to use their reserve keeper.
By contrast, Blackpool have influenced ONE game, a game which they nearly got something out of, by utilising their squad like any sensible manager would. They've done nothing wrong.
Link: Holloway saying it as it is ....
"Because we've lost the questions are easy, aren't they?
Well think of some harder ones."
Quality! lol
Holloway's been bleating off a bit too much recently and will cop some back soon.
I tend to agree. The "some complete person" interview was cringeworthy. At some stage he'll move from being 'a colourful character' to being 'annoying'
The rule is stupid and only affects the smaller clubs, but Holloway can have no excuses. At least when McCarthy did it, it was almost unheard of to punish a manager for picking a weak team.
http://www.birminghammail.net/multimedia/sport/aston-villa/video/2010/11/11/blackpool-manager-ian-holloway-rages-at-reporters-at-villa-park-press-conference-97319-27639911/