People who never wanted Pearson....

[CornwallRam]

I thought Pearson was a brilliant appointment. I also believed that it would signal a period of transition and that things would get worse before they got better. Although I was surprised by the lack of transfer activity in the summer, I felt that we were on the right track. The 433 team needed breaking up and a more solid base needed creating that. Nine games is far too early to begin to pass judgement - Pearson couldn't have been judged until the end of the season, and even then, expectations shouldn't have been too high. 

At this point my opinion on Pearson hasn't changed. If I ever find out the facts behind these events then I might well have to amend that view point. If he's gone because of Allardyce style dodginess, then he was clearly the wrong manager in the first place. If he's gone becuse he has been a violent ********, then my opinion of him also goes through the floor. If he's gone because he wouldn't let Mel interfere in football decisions and he and Mel had a heated debate, then I fear that Mel is the problem. If he's gone because of player power then were are truly screwed as a club - the owner must always back the manager.

So I'm waiting for the real story to emerge before deciding whether I was right or wrong to want Pearson as our manager.

[eddie]

9 minutes ago, BathRam72 said:

This is the bit that worries me. Clement was given 8 months and when things started to falter, the excuse of not playing the Derby way or whatever got him sacked.

Pearson has gone for what ever reason but the early indications are because he got into an argument over results.

So how long will the next manager get before he gets the chop if he isn't an instant success?????

The reason given was 'non-footballing matters'.

[Dethorn]

Did not want him, never did. But once appointed I was prepared to(even hoping to) eat my words.

Was getting to the point where I was more hoping he knew what he was trying to do rather than believing that he did.

Overall sad to see our team be on there 6 manager in probably less time than Clough was here. Hope we are not going down that 'Dirty Leeds' route

But I do have an underlying feeling that I would prefer Powell, Wassal, Bruce, almost anyone else so generally happy.

[Uptherams]

I wasn't happy. But despite how poor we have been up until last night, every manager deserves an opportunity. That being said, he would not have been given more than half a season at this rate and I would have been fine with that. To my surprise the people who were most pleased with his appointment were the one's most happy about this. 

[JaguarRam]

I think I was one of the 4 that said no...

Would have been ecstatic to be proven wrong but like I said on the podcast I thought it would be DW not NP...I said when he started that he would either be brilliant or because of his attitude that he would crash and burn.

We need to rapidly draw a line under it and look to a good future with a good squad and hopefully Chris Powell as a great manager.

 

[RadioactiveWaste]

56 minutes ago, eddie said:

The reason given was 'non-footballing matters'.

I thought it was more weird that that because we were told is was footballing reasons but categorically not results? 

[Warwick Ram]

I have said it before the players did not like Nigel Pearson and did not perform for him resulting in his suspension and most likely sacking.

[lee_derby]

18 minutes ago, JaguarRam said:

I think I was one of the 4 that said no...

Would have been ecstatic to be proven wrong but like I said on the podcast I thought it would be DW not NP...I said when he started that he would either be brilliant or because of his attitude that he would crash and burn.

We need to rapidly draw a line under it and look to a good future with a good squad and hopefully Chris Powell as a great manager.

 

honest opinion ,i think the trouble was we left it to late to get a new manager in and by time we did the best had gone.to be fair wassall did a prity good job and now i think best all around to give powell some more time and not go gun ho and appoint a manager esp based on opinions of polls voted for by fans. whoever we appoint true fans get behind the manager through thick and thin and shouldnt be calling for heads 9 games in on a transitional season.the team in the last few seasons have been great at times but wernt good enough to get us there.just my thoughts

[DRBee]

I hoped that Person could deliver, but particularly over the last few weeks, my reaction has been to ask what is there to like about him and his performance as manager?

[Anon]

I didn't want Pearson because I would've preferred a more progressive candidate in keeping with our recent appointments. I was happy enough when he got the job though because I assumed he'd impressed in his interview and was willing to flex his style to suit our squad and our club philosophy. I couldn't have been more wrong. Admittedly, 9 games is a pathetically short amount of time to assess a new manager, but I've not even seen the slightest encouraging sign in the way he set up the team and dealt with the players. I'm very happy that he is no longer in direct control of the team.

[MackworthRamIsGod]

I wanted Pearson but was never sure how we would work?

We knew he would clash with Mel before long, I wasn't sure the players would suit a 442 and I knew we had too many players he wouldn't have liked.

I was therefore very surprised with the lack of tearing apart and rebuilding he had done in the summer.

[RadioactiveWaste]

Wasn't pro him coming in, but understood it. 

Clashing with Mel? Pretty sure Mel is fine with that as long as its professional. 

Sorting out the players mentality? Needed, they were hungry and together under clough and became comfy and a bit used to things. 

But, from the games ive witnessed, I wont lament him going. 

Its got to be fair to say, less than ten games isn't enough to make a decision based on results, this must be something more. 

Id rather it have worked, id rather we were back to "oh its ok being top but we dont have the flair we used to" but as it is, im not sad. 

I also believe, Mel isnt the nut case trigger happy Chairman Mel. I think hes trying to back them, he let clement buy Blackman for way more than his value for example, let peason ship martin out for vydra and so on. 

 

[jagerbob]

I wasnt anti - Pearson but I was sceptical.

Disciplinarians and motivators are fine. But I wanted a coach who I knew had similar beliefs and experience of bringing through teams who play in a similar way to how we were when Cloughh  left and through the McClaren years and to which Wasall brought us back to at the end of last season.

If i go back to the Burton defeat, when everyone was complaining that Hughes and Bryson are not deep lieing midfielders because they like the dirty side of the game. Its true what Pearson and the commentators were saying, that is not the reason we lost. (Bryon was one of our better players that night), but as been proven over the last 3 years, you find a way to play them further forward, and they always play better. They are possession and attacking half players. I really did think Pearson and Powell knew the championship division enough to know how bad they perform when asked to be sitting midfielders.

Which always brings me back to Eustace. he wasnt our greatest player, but put him in the side and Bryson and Hughes and infact the whole team always had better games when he was there, regardless of how well he played.

I'm just glad that pearson finally bit the bullet and agreed with Powell and the team that 3 in midfield and only 1 upfront was the way to get back control in games. As happened last night, and as Powell eluded too, it wasnt Powells decision soley to revert to that system.

[europia]

1 hour ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

Wasn't pro him coming in, but understood it. 

Clashing with Mel? Pretty sure Mel is fine with that as long as its professional. 

Sorting out the players mentality? Needed, they were hungry and together under clough and became comfy and a bit used to things. 

But, from the games ive witnessed, I wont lament him going. 

Its got to be fair to say, less than ten games isn't enough to make a decision based on results, this must be something more. 

Id rather it have worked, id rather we were back to "oh its ok being top but we dont have the flair we used to" but as it is, im not sad. 

I also believe, Mel isnt the nut case trigger happy Chairman Mel. I think hes trying to back them, he let clement buy Blackman for way more than his value for example, let peason ship martin out for vydra and so on. 

 

Agree with most of the the above. As you say Mel put the money in, but he does seem to lack judgement (or take bad advice) regarding managerial appointments. Many observers noted Clements lack of experience and Pearson's steadfast approach.  

[BathRam72]

4 hours ago, eddie said:

The reason given was 'non-footballing matters'.

Yes I know that is what we are being told. All I am concerned with is that we are turning over managers for whatever reason at an alarming rate. MM knew what he was taking on with Pearson

[Rammed79]

We all saw the effect him getting the boot had on Leicester let's hope we get something similar ?

[Mostyn6]

2 minutes ago, Ram79 said:

We all saw the effect him getting the boot had on Leicester let's hope we get something similar ?

yeah, but he'd binned all the uncommitted and trouble-makers from Leicester and left them with the right type of player to over-achieve and succeed.

[RadioactiveWaste]

1 minute ago, Mostyn6 said:

yeah, but he'd binned all the uncommitted and trouble-makers from Leicester and left them with the right type of player to over-achieve and succeed.

A bit like a slightly similar job to nigel clough.....

[ramit]

There's no use denying it, i was all smitten and even said on a podcast that a lunatic would be good for the club.  i don't get it wrong all the time but when i do, boy oh boy

[Mostyn6]

1 hour ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

A bit like a slightly similar job to nigel clough.....

well, Clough did half of what Pearson did, in twice the time.