toddy Posted October 5, 2016 Share Posted October 5, 2016 1 minute ago, brady1993 said: Here's the thing you seem to be missing that tried to point. In previous seasons sure we've had some awful performances but they were in amongst mostly good performances. Under Pearson we have only performed badly. Maybe some of the players need to be moved in favour of more 'mentally strong' players but that doesn't change the fact that Pearson has chronically mismanaged the squad. I don't know what is remit was at the beginning, but suspect that it had charged by the end of August........... As for performances some good, but by the time we got into August we continued the Hull performance a standard, remember after the first game Pearson said players are suffering from lack of confidence and its continued. Maybe at the end of August when the remit changed it might have been, either you start to perform or you are out? I don't know, but all the issues now coming out, there is something going on...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anon Posted October 5, 2016 Share Posted October 5, 2016 7 minutes ago, toddy said: Yet again have a go at Pearson. Blame him for the appalling Hull play off game? Blame him for the QPR/ Cardiff and Wolves away games as well? Please the players have become a joke since Christmas, 3 managers and still we get the basics wrong [Reading goal] - the players yet again at fault. Unless you now wish to blame CP for the Reading game? The results don't back up your theory. If we were such a joke after Christmas I'm not sure how we managed to maintain a play off place. It is pointless cherry picking several bad performances because I can obviously do the same with good performances in the same period. I don't think any blame needs to be apportioned for the Reading game. If you want to make out that it's some kind of catastrophic disaster to compete well throughout the game and pick up a point away from home go right ahead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheron85 Posted October 5, 2016 Share Posted October 5, 2016 29 minutes ago, VulcanRam said: I don't, but there is a recurring theme developing McClaren went when Morris took full control... There is a fairly common precedent of managers being moved on when a club gets new ownership Clement was binned off because he didn't make the progress expected from him (some would argue we went backwards in terms of quality) Wassall was a temp Pearson obviously interviews well... However it seems may have exhibited some rather unprofessional behaviour since... I don't see any theme... All very different situations... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toddy Posted October 5, 2016 Share Posted October 5, 2016 1 minute ago, Anon said: The results don't back up your theory. If we were such a joke after Christmas I'm not sure how we managed to maintain a play off place. It is pointless cherry picking several bad performances because I can obviously do the same with good performances in the same period. I don't think any blame needs to be apportioned for the Reading game. If you want to make out that it's some kind of catastrophic disaster to compete well throughout the game and pick up a point away from home go right ahead. It is the underlying issue that has led to our own down fall, if the players fail to do as they are request to do, what chance as any manager got. The players failed Clement, Wassall and Pearson, is Chris Powell next? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brady1993 Posted October 5, 2016 Share Posted October 5, 2016 2 minutes ago, toddy said: I don't know what is remit was at the beginning, but suspect that it had charged by the end of August........... As for performances some good, but by the time we got into August we continued the Hull performance a standard, remember after the first game Pearson said players are suffering from lack of confidence and its continued. Maybe at the end of August when the remit changed it might have been, either you start to perform or you are out? I don't know, but all the issues now coming out, there is something going on...... Maybe his remit did change. Maybe Players were suffering from a lack of confidence. My view on it is Pearson is a volatile rigid character determined to do things 'his way'. Unfortunately 'his way' didn't align with the strengths and weaknesses of the squad, but rather than altering his stance or changing the playing staff in the summer, he tried to shoehorn players into what he wanted. This didn't work and in my opinion was never going to work and a good manager would have spotted this early in pre-season. Then as the season progressed rather than changing what he was doing, he got frustrated that squad couldn't execute what he wanted and bollocked them in the media. Which has potentially caused an unrepairable rift between him and the squad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carnero Posted October 5, 2016 Share Posted October 5, 2016 33 minutes ago, Ewe Ram said: Can I just point out that it's only rumour and supposition that Mel has a cat. Although some fans say that he sits in his huge office chair stroking it. It's a white fluffy one. Or is that a Bond film villain?? Truth and lies are a little mixed up here. "I've been expecting you Mr Rush" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anon Posted October 5, 2016 Share Posted October 5, 2016 5 minutes ago, toddy said: It is the underlying issue that has led to our own down fall, if the players fail to do as they are request to do, what chance as any manager got. The players failed Clement, Wassall and Pearson, is Chris Powell next? Players are requested to win every game whilst keeping a clean sheet. What you and I deem as failure obviously varies drastically. How did they fail Clement and Wassall? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VulcanRam Posted October 5, 2016 Share Posted October 5, 2016 8 minutes ago, cheron85 said: McClaren went when Morris took full control... There is a fairly common precedent of managers being moved on when a club gets new ownership Clement was binned off because he didn't make the progress expected from him (some would argue we went backwards in terms of quality) Wassall was a temp Pearson obviously interviews well... However it seems may have exhibited some rather unprofessional behaviour since... I don't see any theme... All very different situations... With a common theme in all of them, apart from Wassall possibly, that the players seemed to go through periods where they didn't want to play for the manager anymore for whatever reason, and so performances and results suffered. Saw it with McClaren, sliding from 1st to 8th. Saw it with Clement towards the end of his reign and we have seen it with Pearson. This is obviously my opinion from what I see with my own eyes and from what I pick up from people I know at the club. If I'm the only person on the planet who thinks this then fair enough, but it's what I think nonetheless! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carnero Posted October 5, 2016 Share Posted October 5, 2016 24 minutes ago, NottsRam77 said: Is he? Hes not an investor is he? unless I'm getting this arse about tit I thought the chief exec's merely took matters from the manager to the chairman/board/investment group etc etc and vice versa aka the go between Previous chief exec glick was the go between from manager to investment group and the way I see it rush is just the go between from Mel to manager and vice versa, aswell as the duties i mentioned previously I believe Sam Rush has something like a c.5% share in DCFC, with MM owning the rest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadioactiveWaste Posted October 5, 2016 Share Posted October 5, 2016 2 minutes ago, Saul Pimpson said: "I've been expecting you Mr Rush" Pearson was "suspended" as in Mel pushed the "drop into tank of piranhas" button? I dont know, im just saying, I saw it in a bond film and I dont know mel doesnt have a piranhas tank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anon Posted October 5, 2016 Share Posted October 5, 2016 23 minutes ago, Mostyn6 said: wow, did the season finish already? No. 1/5th of the season had passed and it was complete and utter garbage that was a marked downgrade on the preceding seasons. It is perfectly reasonable for me to highlight that when someone claims the performances this season are consistent with the previous three. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mostyn6 Posted October 5, 2016 Share Posted October 5, 2016 4 minutes ago, Anon said: No. 1/5th of the season had passed and it was complete and utter garbage that was a marked downgrade on the preceding seasons. It is perfectly reasonable for me to highlight that when someone claims the performances this season are consistent with the previous three. no not at all, in the interest of consistency, you should be showing the league positions after the same number of games, so show where we were after this many games last season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NottsRam77 Posted October 5, 2016 Share Posted October 5, 2016 10 minutes ago, Saul Pimpson said: I believe Sam Rush has something like a c.5% share in DCFC, with MM owning the rest Didn't know that Interesting, very interesting cant imagine it means Sam gets to make any big decisions but I'd wager there aren't many chief execs that have a share in the club very interesting, and a good idea imo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheron85 Posted October 5, 2016 Share Posted October 5, 2016 8 minutes ago, VulcanRam said: With a common theme in all of them, apart from Wassall possibly, that the players seemed to go through periods where they didn't want to play for the manager anymore for whatever reason, and so performances and results suffered. Saw it with McClaren, sliding from 1st to 8th. Saw it with Clement towards the end of his reign and we have seen it with Pearson. This is obviously my opinion from what I see with my own eyes and from what I pick up from people I know at the club. If I'm the only person on the planet who thinks this then fair enough, but it's what I think nonetheless! I'm not entirely sure I agree... Under McClaren the players still looked up for it... They were just naive and the injury problems whacked us... I also think the squad as a whole were a little bit "rabbit in the headlights" when it came to expectations as none of them had ever really dealt with the 'favourites' tag before... And McClaren didn't know how to resolve that... Clement for me was a problem with the style of football... I think there's a mindset difference between trying to beat teams and trying to not lose... I think Clement was trying to not lose... When you set up like that goals are harder to come by and you have to make sure from the 3 chances a game you get you take them... And hope that from the 3 chances the opposition get they don't take them... For me it's a VERY risky ploy (but then I'm a fan of the best defence is attack theory) and I think Clement came unstuck when we went through a sour patch (as all teams do) of not converting those minimal chances... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anon Posted October 5, 2016 Share Posted October 5, 2016 8 minutes ago, Mostyn6 said: no not at all, in the interest of consistency, you should be showing the league positions after the same number of games, so show where we were after this many games last season. 14th,6th,9th,21st - all after 9 games Considering that the manager was sacked for our poor start in the first of that sequence, there's still one jumping out at me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheron85 Posted October 5, 2016 Share Posted October 5, 2016 2 minutes ago, Anon said: 14th,6th,9th,21st Considering that the manager was sacked for our poor start in the first of that sequence, there's still one jumping out at me. Same manager who's current team are 3 points ahead of us in the league having assembled a squad of players for less than the cost of Vydra? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cannable Posted October 5, 2016 Share Posted October 5, 2016 1 hour ago, VulcanRam said: While I don't necessarily believe everything in the Sun, this tallies with other parts of the jigsaw that have dripped out, such as Pearson having a go at them after Blackburn (quite right to, they were pathetic) the players having a meeting, which Keogh was on about the other day, and obviously the meting between Morris and Pearson. All this underlines (if true) is yet again the players have all the power, and even further underlines my desire to see the back of half of them. We saw it with McClaren, Clement and Pearson. Professional football players who think they can decided when or not to play, or who or not to play for, infuriate me. Stick 'em all on the transfer list. Only three players were involved against Blackburn who were in our 13/14 squad. Hughes and Bryson missed near enough all of Clement's rein. Only a further three were involved in McClaren's full season - two of whom, Bent and Ince, were our stars during the collapse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mostyn6 Posted October 5, 2016 Share Posted October 5, 2016 11 minutes ago, Anon said: 14th,6th,9th,21st - all after 9 games Considering that the manager was sacked for our poor start in the first of that sequence, there's still one jumping out at me. no he wasn't. He was sacked because he'd had several poor starts, and finishes, and middles, and cup runs etc, AND he refused to change and move forward with the club. I don't know why I'm arguing with you. I ain't defending Pearson. I'd have not been upset if he was still manager etc, but what's done is done. I just don't think it's relevant comparing 46 games to 9 games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carnero Posted October 5, 2016 Share Posted October 5, 2016 28 minutes ago, NottsRam77 said: Didn't know that Interesting, very interesting cant imagine it means Sam gets to make any big decisions but I'd wager there aren't many chief execs that have a share in the club very interesting, and a good idea imo http://www.dcfc.co.uk/news/article/sam-rush-commits-his-long-term-future-to-derby-county-2769278.aspx Since his arrival Rush has overseen significant progress for the club both on and off the pitch and in November 2014, he claimed the fcbusiness Chief Executive Officer of the Year Award. He was a director and a shareholder within Derby’s previous ownership structure and, under the ownership of new Chairman Mel Morris, Rush will hold the same posts. Read more at http://www.dcfc.co.uk/news/article/sam-rush-commits-his-long-term-future-to-derby-county-2769278.aspx#UcGUyp6eDMXtSivg.99 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NottsRam77 Posted October 5, 2016 Share Posted October 5, 2016 4 minutes ago, Saul Pimpson said: http://www.dcfc.co.uk/news/article/sam-rush-commits-his-long-term-future-to-derby-county-2769278.aspx Since his arrival Rush has overseen significant progress for the club both on and off the pitch and in November 2014, he claimed the fcbusiness Chief Executive Officer of the Year Award. He was a director and a shareholder within Derby’s previous ownership structure and, under the ownership of new Chairman Mel Morris, Rush will hold the same posts. Read more at http://www.dcfc.co.uk/news/article/sam-rush-commits-his-long-term-future-to-derby-county-2769278.aspx#UcGUyp6eDMXtSivg.99 So how much say do we think he gets in the big decisions .... Don't say 5% lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.