MrsRam Posted October 22, 2016 Share Posted October 22, 2016 1 minute ago, lrm14 said: There's a difference between people saying Pearson was awful at his job and saying the players were deliberately throwing games by not trying. You have just called Pearson a lunatic tho'... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cannable Posted October 22, 2016 Share Posted October 22, 2016 8 minutes ago, McLovin said: That's what I don't understand by some members on this forum. Apparently it's ok to call Pearson all names under the sun and how he ruined the team but if you say anything bad about the players it's apparently libel. Doesn't seem very fair or balanced imo It's actually called 'defamation of character'. Character being; 'the mental and moral qualities distinctive to an individual.' Does saying somebody is **** at their job have anything to do with their moral qualities? No. Does saying players essentially threw games to oust the manager attack their moral qualities? Yes… Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sexydadbod Posted October 22, 2016 Share Posted October 22, 2016 1 minute ago, MrsRam said: You have just called Pearson a lunatic tho'... The hypocrisy is unreal. I'm done with this particular thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bris Vegas Posted October 22, 2016 Share Posted October 22, 2016 35 minutes ago, McLovin said: With Pearson I saw a good honest man trying to implement his own philosophy but was facing a losing battle from the get go as the players didn't want to work hard enough to match his demands. Not as if Pearson told the players to go out and play like they did but the players wanted him out just like they wanted Wassall out and Clement before him and just how they will eventually want McClaren out Of course he didn't want the players to play rubbish, neither did Paul Jewell or Phil Brown. Every manager in the world wants to play winning football, and 95% will want to do it in a manner which entertains the onlookers, observers, pundits and most importantly the club's supporters. But wanting those things and talking a good game is all well and good. But what really matters is the coaching, and what was evident was the players weren't responding to Pearson's coaching methods. You could see when players were caught in two minds. Butterfield and Bryson often went to press the ball, only to be shouted at by the managerial staff to get back in shape. Pearson wanted us to play deep, turnover the ball and quickly spring counterattacks. But those specific tactics didn't suit the majority of our players, not least Chris Martin upfront. The amount of absolute ****** written on here about how lazy he was etc. It really wasn't his game to go chasing long balls to the corner, harrying defenders in wide areas and stretching the play. It wasn't his game. The amount of criticism our players got for not adapting was simply a joke. It's not that they were purposely performing badly to make a point, they were performing badly because the team's shape, style of play and personal instrcutions were making them perform badly. Wassall got the same bunch of players playing to playoff standard last season, so there was absolutely no need to scrap that and go for a completely different mentality. We just needed better quality in key areas. As for Tottenham example, seriously there is no comparison to be had. Pochettino played exactly the same shape as Tim Sherwood and Harry Redknapp before him, the only difference being is he tweaked to add a higher pressing game, got the players fitter and gradually bought in better players. I'd have been all for Pearson doing that, but let's be honest, he did nothing of the sort. He scrapped what we had before in order to implement his ideas on the team instead of working to the players' strengths. We've gone over this a million times now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sexydadbod Posted October 22, 2016 Share Posted October 22, 2016 Just now, cannable said: It's actually called 'defamation of character'. Character being; 'the mental and moral qualities distinctive to an individual.' Does saying somebody is **** at their job have anything to do with their moral qualities? No. Does saying players threw games to oust the manager attack their moral qualities? Yes… Once again, state where I put they threw games because I stated no such thing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cannable Posted October 22, 2016 Share Posted October 22, 2016 Just now, McLovin said: Once again, state where I put they threw games because I stated no such thing You're being pedantic… Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrsRam Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 3 minutes ago, cannable said: You're being pedantic… No, I've read it back, and I think you maybe are... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cannable Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 7 minutes ago, MrsRam said: No, I've read it back, and I think you maybe are... No, I've read it back, seen users banned for saying similar sort of stuff for pretty much the same reasons… Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrsRam Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 OK, I'm fair - quote him, and I'll apologise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
May Contain Nuts Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 16 minutes ago, MrsRam said: You have just called Pearson a lunatic tho'... It's not like he has a history of strange, irrational public outbursts or anything that could lead somebody to this conclusion. I like the way you say nobody knows anything and it's all speculation, as a way of defending your posts in which you've claimed something to be 100% painfully true because, oh, um, ah... what was your point again? He's such a good, honest man, yet you paint a picture of a whole squad disliking him. Your two truths appear to clash somewhat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sexydadbod Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 5 minutes ago, cannable said: No, I've read it back, seen users banned for saying similar sort of stuff for pretty much the same reasons… That's a load of nonsense and you know it is. If you are going to make up a lie at least make it sound convincing.It would be one thing me saying that they deliberately threw games(which I didn't say) but it's another me saying that they didn't match Pearson's demands. I've seen Daveo himself say worse things in the pub section. He should have probably given himself a ban if everything little negative thing was bannable. I know I said I wouldn't reply but I mean it this time, wanted to get it off my chest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cannable Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 Just now, McLovin said: That's a load of nonsense and you know it is. It would be one thing me saying that they deliberately threw games(which I didn't say) but it's another me saying that they didn't match Pearson's demands. I've seen Daveo himself say worse things in the pub section. He should have probably given himself a ban if everything little negative thing was bannable. I know I said I wouldn't reply but I mean it this time, wanted to get it off my chest. Remember DCFCArmy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrsRam Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 1 minute ago, Coconut said: It's not like he has a history of strange, irrational public outbursts or anything that could lead somebody to this conclusion. I like the way you say nobody knows anything and it's all speculation, as a way of defending your posts in which you've claimed something to be 100% painfully true because, oh, um, ah... what was your point again? I'm not sure.....what was yours? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
May Contain Nuts Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 4 minutes ago, MrsRam said: I'm not sure.....what was yours? Got confused and thought I was quoting McLovin! My post was meant to be in his direction Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve How Hard? Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 56 minutes ago, McLovin said: 31 minutes ago, McLovin said: That's what I don't understand by some members on this forum. Apparently it's ok to call Pearson all names under the sun and how he ruined the team but if you say anything bad about the players it's apparently libel. Doesn't seem very fair or balanced imo You are quite correct the players are definitely partly to blame for the predicament we find ourselves in. However the fact that Chris Powell said Pearson had decided to revert back to 4-3-3 before he was suspended proves he was undecided on our best formation. Apparently he used various formations the season he kept Leicester up. This leads me to believe that he's just a lucky chancer or in our case unlucky nutcase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alph Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 Put this in Udders thread but belongs here: Really frustrating. As a McClaren fanboy I secretly hoped we'd instantly come to life. But reality set in pretty quick. I'm massively disappointed that it's not going to happen like that. I'm also massively dissapointed Megan Fox doesn't use me for sex. But you can't openly lose your cool because your fantasy had been crushed. To go from Pearson's team to the 2014 team inside 8/9 days? On the flipside I hate Nigel Pearson. I hate his face, his voice, his crazy antics. I hated the team style after a whole summer of work. I hated him being here. But I didn't want him sacked because he set out on a job and what he was trying to do, the philosophy needed time. I'd have gone for the season. I'm glad he fooked up and gave us an excuse. But when you commit to him then so be it. Give him time. So now you can't expect Mac to turn it back in 9 days where he's had 3 matches to prepare, play and recover. I'm shocked that I hoped for it to happen. Not half as shocked that some people genuinley expected to see it instantly and are angry that it hasn't. For real? The other thing. "Get rid of the mercenaries" And bring in what? A young hungry team? You called them bottlers. That's why we bought "mercenaries". Because we wanted to improve. So you want good players (for free) that will try hard (against other teams that try hard?) to sort their **** out in 9 days when a "proven" manager that "takes no nonsense" and "demands 100%" managed to make them worse in a whole summer and 2 months of the season? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alph Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 1 hour ago, McLovin said: With Pearson I saw a good honest man trying to implement his own philosophy but was facing a losing battle from the get go as the players didn't want to work hard enough to match his demands. Not as if Pearson told the players to go out and play like they did but the players wanted him out just like they wanted Wassall out and Clement before him and just how they will eventually want McClaren out Which players? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrsRam Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 6 minutes ago, Alpha said: Which players? If he said who, you'd probably ban him for defermation or whatever. You can't have it both ways. Oh and your other post is good Alpha. We can't expect it in a few days. "On the flipside I hate Nigel Pearson. I hate his face, his voice, his crazy antics. I hated the team style after a whole summer of work. I hated him being here." You should have said..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brammie Steve Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 Steve Mc wants to manage us. He is brilliant when he puts his heart into a team. Chris Powell is a thoroughbred Ram who wants to be here. Pearson was treading on too many heads. Onwards and upwards. And we'll lose a few in the process. Defence is sorted. Get them up front earning their keep! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lrm14 Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 2 hours ago, MrsRam said: You have just called Pearson a lunatic tho'... Calling a man a lunatic when he's famous for behaving erratically, intimidating people and making absurd decisions at Derby alone is not the same. Saying people deliberately did their job badly so their manager was sacked is a significantly worse thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.