Official - Houllier leaves by mutual consent (p.28)

[KevinGage]

You're all laughing now you pack of hyenas, picking at the bones.

But when holtepaul takes his shoes and socks off and improves his mathematical aptitude two fold, you'll be sorry.

[holtepaul]

here is maths

Work all those out as points per game.

Then put them in order of who achieved the most points per game.

Tell me out of 1st , 2nd and 3rd - who came third

Then tell me the person in 3rd did a good job ! (and that is without all the off the field stuff that we had to put up with)

[Legion]

Manchester City.

[VillaZogmariner]

Apologies, I meant 42 points before Ars and Liverpool not 36

Anyway, the point is the same, no matter what the points / teams etc...

The fact was with two games to go, we could have gone down - for a team that less than 12 months ago had gone to Wembley twice, and finished 6th and was a whisker from getting Champions League. For a team that started to fight each other, for a team whose players started to slag off the club, for a team who had to banish players to train with the youth side, for a team who had the worst injury crisis in years (but the players actual said before the crisis occurred that they did not feel the new regime was working) ,

Shall I carry on ?

The season was a total disaster.

Luckily, and you have to give him credit, McAllister rallied the team enough to see us safe, but no matter how you look at it - it was a disaster !

I haven't got the figures to hand, but I wouldn't mind betting we earned more points per game with both KMac and GMac in charge than GH

So please don't tell me GH's tenure was nothing but a disaster- because it was !

Now, if he had stayed, he could have turned it around, remember, GT's first year in Div 1 ended with us staying up on the last day, we went on to finish runners up the next year - GH may have done the same - but he will not now, and we will never know, so he goes down in history as being as bad as an appointment as Dr Jo, Graham Turner and Co !

As I pointed out before the Arsenal game - if you were to put £1 on as an accumulator for what was required to happen for us to go down (losing both our games by 4 goals each match, Blackpool winning by 3 at Man Utd etc etc) you'd have won over £35million.

[Ger Regan]

Aha, nice try, but the issue isn't whether it was a good season or not. It was whether the season was a disaster, which you keep trying to say it was, and I keep telling you that it wasn't. And not to worry paul, maths isn't for everyone.

[ez]

I'd be lying if i said i was disapointed, in fact i'm excited about the future now.

[WALTERS WARRIORS]

I have just popped in for some hopeful excitng news update. After reading this ridiculous points "dispute which is not even a dispute" i am bordering on self harming .......

[Villanation]

Surely the point is, this is the same team with the addition of one of the best strikers in the Premiership at 24ml, for half a season, this is a team that finished consistently 6th, qualified for Europe consistently, Wembley cup finals, cup semi finals...blah blah blah, all in the last 4 seasons, and then we where contenders for relegation for a good part the season, by anybodies reckoning, that's a pretty poor season.

Also point out that in most other season 45pts would have placed us bottom half of the table, no problem... 

[Ger Regan]

I still struggle to understand how the signing of Bent is used as a stick to beat Houllier with. Other managers get credit for building sides capable of winning matches, but appears it's different for him.

And i presume you're being funny about 45 points, yeah?

[Chris Smith]

here is maths

Work all those out as points per game.

Then put them in order of who achieved the most points per game.

Tell me out of 1st , 2nd and 3rd - who came third

Then tell me the person in 3rd did a good job ! (and that is without all the off the field stuff that we had to put up with)

It's an artificial distinction to take GM as separate from GH given that he was just continuing with his work. Then you also have to take into account the worst run of injuries any of us have ever seen. It's a completely bogus argument.

The facts are that we finished 9 points and 9 places above the relegation places when  people like you were telling us for months that we were doomed. Now because you can't accept that you got it completely wrong you're trying to invent statistics to support a ridiculous position.

[john e]

Surely the point is, this is the same team with the addition of one of the best strikers in the Premiership at 24ml, for half a season, this is a team that finished consistently 6th, qualified for Europe consistently, Wembley cup finals, cup semi finals...blah blah blah, all in the last 4 seasons, and then we where contenders for relegation for a good part the season, by anybodies reckoning, that's a pretty poor season.

Also point out that in most other season 45pts would have placed us bottom half of the table, no problem... 

think you'l find any team that finished with 45 points this season would also have been in the bottom half

is this for real ?

[VillaZogmariner]

Dave

Sorry mate you are having a laugh.

On around May 1st (I haven't got the figures to hand) - we were out of the bottom three by 1 POINT , 1 POINT !!!!

On May 1st we were out of the bottom three by 6 POINTS, 6 POINTS !!!!

[holtepaul]

here is maths

Work all those out as points per game.

Then put them in order of who achieved the most points per game.

Tell me out of 1st , 2nd and 3rd - who came third

Then tell me the person in 3rd did a good job ! (and that is without all the off the field stuff that we had to put up with)

As I said, but people like you always emit things like this when you lose arguaments - I actually put "I don't have the figures to hand but if I remember it was......... , but forgetting the points, it is the point I am getting at.

And the POINT IS

We had three managers this year - two of them GMac and KMac - absolutely NO ONE wants as managers as they are clearly not good enough , yet - they performed better than Houllier ! - why - answer me.

GH - had to pick up the pieces you say - NO - KMac had to pick up the pieces - HE HAD A BETTER RECORD !

ONeill had left ni-on two months prior to Houllier coming. It was no ones fault but his own he tried to change things too quickly.

Banishing Dunne / Collins - who he eventually put back in (wierdly after they fought each other) and they kept us up , banishing others like Warnock when he had no replacement, slagging off Carew in the press the week he arrived , banishing Cueller

Of course it needed doing in time, but not straight away - there was no need, and it nearly took us down.

I know football fans have short memories but I am dumb founded people have forgotten the crap we have just endured after 9 days !!

[paul_e]

here is maths

Work all those out as points per game.

Then put them in order of who achieved the most points per game.

Tell me out of 1st , 2nd and 3rd - who came third

Then tell me the person in 3rd did a good job ! (and that is without all the off the field stuff that we had to put up with)

Nice idea but completely pointless when using samples of 5 games, 5 games and 28 games, basic statistics shows that the difference in standard deviation between the samples makes the results close to useless and certainly nothing a decent statistician would put their name to.

Aside from that we could just as easily compare Houllier before Bent (HbB) to Houllier after Bent (HaB) and prove that he made a statistically significant improvement to our performances with 1 signing.  Given that we could infer that further signings would likely have continued that trend.

Just for info -

HbB - 14 from 16 (0.875)
HaB - 19 from 12 (1.583)

Having worked those out it's fairly easy to suggest that GMac's stats of 1.6 are almost a direct continuation of the performance after we signed Bent.

[Legion]

Do 4 (four) exclamation marks lend anything to your argument?