Aww poor Nigel

[ossieram]

I couldn't give a toss what he's said.

[bcnram]

1 hour ago, jono said:

Foolish statement. A pity because given the circumstances he did a solid workmanlike job. He could spot a good player better than many other managers at this level but he lacked the skills to get the best out of them. It comes across as finding someone else to blame other than himself .. 

It wasn't a statement was it? He was answering a question.

"Leaving was an incredibly difficult decision and one, in many ways, I've always regretted – just not seeing it through.

"It was the chairman (Ben Robinson), ironically, who said at the time 'it's a great opportunity and you've got to go'.

"We worked our socks off for four-and-a-half years down the road and got kicked out anyway

What part of that answer do you have difficulty with? So many daft over-reactions.

[CumbrianRam]

Mediocre manager unhappy he was fired at a club where he did a mediocre job, why the outrage nearly three years ago now! Time to move on,

That also inculdes NC, he had five season and sure he was paid more than he would have got at Burton you were only out of work for one month, which is very short in football management.

[rynny]

3 hours ago, ronnieronalde said:

I didn't realise there was a time limit on it Rynny, just that you said clubs didn't want to loan to players to us and mentioned Liverpool, Chelsea and man Utd. I forgot about Livermore and didn't bother mentioning Barazite. (Aresnal)

The quality of the loan signings got better cos the league position improved. Of course that is down to Steve's input. I'll give you that. Clubs were more willing to loan better players to a team in and around the play off places.

The Keane deal got postponed, can you not remember why?

Whitbread came in on loan instead, the same Whitbread that NC wouldn't sign on loan because one of the conditions was the GUARANTEED permanent signing at the end of his loan period. NC spoke to Paul Lambert to ask him about Zak, said he was a good lad and a good player but unfortunately constantly injured.

Either Steve McC (before he was announced) or Sam Rush sanctioned the signing of Whitbread,with that condition attached so Keane was put on the back burner.

Is that because Barazite was signed by Jewell? 

Who wanted the loan of Whitbread to made permanent at the end? Leicester? He was out of contract at the end of the season so I doubt very much that will be true. Can't see Whitbread asking for that, surely he would want to have a free choice of who he can sign for when he is a free agent.

[ronnieronalde]

2 minutes ago, rynny said:

Is that because Barazite was signed by Jewell? 

Who wanted the loan of Whitbread to made permanent at the end? Leicester? He was out of contract at the end of the season so I doubt very much that will be true. Can't see Whitbread asking for that, surely he would want to have a free choice of who he can sign for when he is a free agent.

So it doesn't matter what I say, anyway you'll ignore it and have your own views on what happened.

Who did Whitbread sign for at the end of his loan? Despite only playing 4 games during his hampered bu injury loan spell.

[rynny]

6 minutes ago, ronnieronalde said:

So it doesn't matter what I say, anyway you'll ignore it and have your own views on what happened.

Who did Whitbread sign for at the end of his loan? Despite only playing 4 games during his hampered bu injury loan spell.

So I should just believe what you are saying as the truth and not question it and I am not allowed to have my own views? Is this not a forum?

So we signed an injury prone player, not the first time, won't be the last time, doesn't prove anything. So Whitbread said he wasn't going out on loan unless he got a permanent deal at the end of it? Leicester couldn't force that on us could they?

[ronnieronalde]

2 minutes ago, rynny said:

So I should just believe what you are saying as the truth and not question it and I am not allowed to have my own views? Is this not a forum?

So we signed an injury prone player, not the first time, won't be the last time, doesn't prove anything. So Whitbread said he wasn't going out on loan unless he got a permanent deal at the end of it? Leicester couldn't force that on us could they?

I don't know who forced it but I do know it was a condition attached to the loan.

He played three games in October (the first two after NC's sacking) then didn't play again until the Leeds game in May. Then he got another years extension but you won't/can't believe/accept that it was pre agreed?

Have your views, question mine but when I'm telling you it's a fact there's not a lot left to say, other than for you to keep arguing I'm wrong or making it up.

[rynny]

2 minutes ago, ronnieronalde said:

I don't know who forced it but I do know it was a condition attached to the loan.

He played three games in October (the first two after NC's sacking) then didn't play again until the Leeds game in May. Then he got another years extension but you won't/can't believe/accept that it was pre agreed?

Have your views, question mine but when I'm telling you it's a fact there's not a lot left to say, other than for you to keep arguing I'm wrong or making it up.

Like I said he was a free agent free choice of clubs.

Do you not think that maybe because of the form of Keogh and Buxton kept him on the bench for every game from 18th January? Maybe that suggests he was fit and given a new deal, actually I am going to say that is a fact.

[Bris Vegas]

Clough moaning shock horror. The guy moans about everything. He could be dying of thirst in the middle of the desert and when given water he'd complain it isn't cold enough. Moan, moan, moan.

 

[eddie]

People moaning because they are perceivng that Clough is moaning, and not praising Derby County to the hilt.

What a bunch of pathetic whining girls some of you are.

[ronnieronalde]

1 hour ago, rynny said:

Like I said he was a free agent free choice of clubs.

Do you not think that maybe because of the form of Keogh and Buxton kept him on the bench for every game from 18th January? Maybe that suggests he was fit and given a new deal, actually I am going to say that is a fact.

 Think whatever makes you feel better Rynny.

 

 

[Alex W]

12 hours ago, rynny said:

I started the thread off as I thought it was quite a funny comment, hence the title, Aww poor Nigel, people can react how the feel.

What we don't know is why the wage bill rose. Is it because we could loan a higher calibre because we had Steve in charge and the money was there but Nigel couldn't get players that were good enough on loan. I had heard from a few places that teams were reluctant to loan players to us. Is it a coincidence that Nigel leaves and we loan players from Liverpool, Manchester United and Chelsea within 4 months?

He signed Hendrie in a swap deal with Jordan Stewart.

How is it unfair to use both Keogh and Shackell? He spent money on them both. That is like saying it is unfair to say Thorne as the money we used to buy Thorne was essentially the money we gained by getting to Wembley, which we probably wouldn't have done under Nigel.

It's barely a comment, is it? 

We had numerous loanees from those clubs in Nigel's time period so that doesn't ring true. Fair point on Hendrie, I was mistaken on the deal, a good example of a player we'd never sink to grabbing now were he available and at the level of play that he was then however. 

I can only assume that the increase in funds were due to Mel's introduction, given he has openly said he's Chairman because he was the only person involved with enough financial clout who could write off the debts we had. The club decided Nigel wasn't up to it while that turnover happened.

The wage bill took a very clear hike when McLaren arrived. Either those funds weren't available before because they didn't exist or had been held back because they didn't believe in Nigel. Either way, there is an obvious difference in what each manager had to work with.

Thorne was a £3m signing, Nigel never made one of those for a start. The £1m is unfair to use as Shackell was sold for the fee used for Keogh. That is a net of £1m on the first purchase of Shackell. I agree it's likely that we may not have made Wembley that year with Nigel, though had he had the expenditure that Clement/McLaren had I'm curious as to how he'd have chosen to spend it

[Ewe Ram]

I got bored after 5 pages of this and I was bored stiff of the football under Clough. 

I see lots of plaudits for his steadying of the ship etc but you don't sit there devoid of excitement on a Saturday afternoon thinking 'don't matter because he's working hard behind the scenes steadying the ship' do you? 

Him saying he was 'kicked out' is classless, no two ways about it. Why not just say 'I was sacked'? Because he was sacked, because he wasn't doing a good job, a fact which he conveniently forgets. 

[Rev]

I just don't get why people are so obsessed with him, I really don't. 

He makes a flippant comment during an interview, the sort we all know he made 100's during his time here, and it leads to 10 pages of debate over his signings and actions which, in football terms,are in the distant past.

It can only be his surname that arouses such passion, rather than his record in charge, which was steady, nothing more and nothing less.

[BOB BIGGS]

When do next season's fixtures come out? The sooner the better if we can get 10 pages out of this....

[bigbadbob]

1 hour ago, eddie said:

People moaning because they are perceivng that Clough is moaning, and not praising Derby County to the hilt.

What a bunch of pathetic whining girls some of you are.

Stop moaning about moaning you sexist

[loughboroughRAM]

Was never anti-Clough and always felt he did an admirable job given his resources (as Im sure a lot you will agree) and although I did empathise with him following his dismissal I can't help but think it was the correct decision given what has followed and now the direction the club is heading. That said over the 4 years he was in charge when you take into account the circumstances compared with the post-Clough era then in my opinion he did a far better job with what he had available than those who followed, especially considering the amount of financial clout we've had lately. If I was him I'd feel peeved also when you did the job he did without getting the chance to see the job through. I feel he has a right to feel at least a little bit bitter about it all  Absolutely no reason why he couldn't have taken us to the playoffs with the squad we had which remains largely intact.and despite all the big money signings, and which seems to be our most capable of playing 'the Derby Way'. I don't disagree that Mac played a huge role in developing a lot of these players but likewise (as is often agreed) Clough is largely to thank for this and if I were to ever bump into him I'd buy him a pint to say thank you for saving us from the unholy mess we were heading towards. 

[ramesses]

10 hours ago, rynny said:

But more importantly with what has happened in since October 2013. The easy on the eye football for the most part, winning more games than losing, competing at the top of the table not towards the bottom or being happy with a 10th place finish.

The easy on the eye football that we saw way back in 13/14, and the way we’re competing now, was in part the product of an immense amount of work by Nigel Clough and was developed by him during a period of time when there was very limited financial backing. SM won the lottery when he inherited that team and in 13/14 SM had the sense not to tamper with it too much.

I don’t think there’s been very much ‘easy on the eye’ football since 13/14. After the play off second leg against Brighton we’ve never consistently fired on all cylinders.

At best, SMs second season was more like the Billy Davies’ promotion season - but without the all important promotion bit. I rate SM’s last match in charge against Reading as probably the worst performance by a Derby team at PP since Jewell was in charge.

The football under Clement was just dire. Even when we were winning, the football under Clement was just dire. I supported Wassall when he tried to return to a more attacking set up - but in the end he was out of his depth.

I don’t believe in voodoo so can’t blame the shortage of ‘easy on the eye’ football since 13/14 on Nigel Clough. I’m more inclined to blame that dissembling Geordie clown and the overrated PE teacher that followed him.

[jono]

11 hours ago, bcnram said:

It wasn't a statement was it? He was answering a question.

"Leaving was an incredibly difficult decision and one, in many ways, I've always regretted – just not seeing it through.

"It was the chairman (Ben Robinson), ironically, who said at the time 'it's a great opportunity and you've got to go'.

"We worked our socks off for four-and-a-half years down the road and got kicked out anyway

What part of that answer do you have difficulty with? So many daft over-reactions.

It starts off as a throroughly reasonable response but the last scentence is somewhat, shall we say, bottom lip stuck out.

As it happens, and as per my original post I think in the circumstances Nigel did a good job. I don't think he is a brilliant manager or tactician but I genuinely believe he is an excellent spotter of players with ability. I wish him and Burton well as long as they take points off our rivals and we beat them handsomely. 

[ramsbottom]

Can't be arsed reading the entire thread but I like Nigel, always have, but my estimation of him has gone down a few notches with this comment.  4 1/2 years is a lifetime in football management, especially if, in all that time, your team played dire percentage football and your win percentage is in the low 30%  What does he think would happen if you worked in the office for that amount of time and constantly delivered poorly written, badly presented reports to the share holders???  You'd last a lot less than 4 1/2 years.  Sorry Nigel but you've only got yourself to blame...