Manager for next season

[supertom]

I think i've gone off Moyes now. I'd like Warburton

I'm more a Hovis man myself.

[Phil from the upper holte]

I think i've gone off Moyes now. I'd like Warburton

I'm more a Hovis man myself.

Boom boom

[Villa in Denmark]

....and what would you prefer? A nice comfortable clean cut manager like Southgate who will nod and smile and say the nice things and charm the press or someone who actually has experience of turning round the fortunes of football clubs? Albeit by upsetting Pat Murphy

It's not just Pat Murphy though, is it?  Pearson offends lots of people.  He's also not the only manager out there who has experience of turning round the fortunes of football clubs, although he may be the only one who does it less often than he gets himself fired for being a liability.  I really don't understand this clamour for a bully; Keane, Karsa and Culverhouse proved demonstrably that it doesn't work with these players - the latter pair of idiots even got fired for their behaviour.  How is Pearson legally going to be more extreme than they were, then?  Would it even work?  I'd have thought the very last thing we need in our basket case of a dressing room is a volatile loon throwing his weight around. 

I think we need someone with a calm head (which Pearson doesn't appear to possess) who copes well under pressure (which Pearson apparently can't) and will be here to see through a long term plan (which Pearson has never done).  It's not just an either/or between a Southgate and a Pearson, there is a lot of middle ground there.  As others have said, a bit of charisma would be welcome.  That's charisma, not aggression.  Pearson seems to bring almost guaranteed disgrace and embarrassment sooner or later; haven't we had enough of that this season?     

they didn't get fired for bullying

Didn't they?  I thought there were allegations of bullying, Karsa was suspended and both were subsequently fired after an internal investigation.  Apologies if I'm wrong.  Still doesn't mean a bully is what we need.

they were fired for not doing their jobs, which Lambert was unaware of. He only kept his job because he agreed to them being fired

Well the individual investigations that led to their dismissals were both instigated following allegations of bullying.  There was plenty of discussion on here at the time about how it might have affected the younger players.

Guardian article on dismissal
Daily Mail article on suspension

Culverhouse's Wikipedia page which he'd presumably have altered if it wasn't true, as if it's untrue it's libellous.


Unless of course you have incontrovertible evidence to the contrary, are privy to the clubs legal dealings or represented one of Karsa, Culverhouse or the club.

[Toronto Villa]

I watched Athletico run through brick walls last night to beat Barca, they worked harder and wanted it more. We need a Villa squad to embrace that ethic.   

Atletico are managed by that "unhinged" lunatic, Diego Simone.*

*No, Monty, I'm not comparing Simone and Pearson.

As has been already said though, you can get away with being a bit of a twat if you're extremely successful - Ferguson, Mourinho, Simeone.

If could also be argued that they were all a bit nuts in their own way prior to being successful and it helped them gain and maintain control of their environments. That their subsequent success only helped to allow them to grow in that reputation but really it was always there.

[Monty]

Simeone's a weird man who uses his own rage very deliberately and always has. Pearson isn't 'using' anything - he just loses it.

[robbo1874]

Pearson just looks like he wants to lamp murphy in that press conference. Understandable, inexperierienced manager getting knocked down a peg or two, by experienced and well regarded local reporter. I'd be the same. Whoever comes in just needs to focus on results.

[ozzjim]

Simeones as much of a nutter. Mourinho and his eye gouging, his physio treatment and his way with the press is equally unhinged. Fergie and clough were the last of the old school that would physically intimidate their own players. None of which matters if you win all the time. Pearson has a huge amount to prove.

[Locko]

....and what would you prefer? A nice comfortable clean cut manager like Southgate who will nod and smile and say the nice things and charm the press or someone who actually has experience of turning round the fortunes of football clubs? Albeit by upsetting Pat Murphy

I just want a good manager. Pearson has the record try of a mediocre Championship manager with one standout season.

I'm in the Pearson in camp, upsetting Murphy is surely a  bonus!

[Tony Erdington]

....and what would you prefer? A nice comfortable clean cut manager like Southgate who will nod and smile and say the nice things and charm the press or someone who actually has experience of turning round the fortunes of football clubs? Albeit by upsetting Pat Murphy

I just want a good manager. Pearson has the record try of a mediocre Championship manager with one standout season.

I'm in the Pearson in camp, upsetting Murphy is surely a  bonus!

wasn't the captain from Mike Bassetts England team based on Pearson??

[FatSam]

I've always thought we were the good guys. In the constant battle between good and evil, this would be an almighty coup for Team Evil.

This is how I feel about it. It's incredibly frustrating that we have ended-up in such a position of weakness that we don't seem to be able to uphold these values.

As a side issue, I was thinking last night about how we had three 'Villa men' in a row as managers in the 90s, which cast D'OL's subsequent  lack of empathy with supporters into sharp relief. Although nice, I don't think its essential for the manager to be a 'Villa man', that's increasingly unrealistic given the paucity of contenders and the globalised nature of modern football. I was pleased with dignity that RG seemed to bring to the role, and don't accept that he was a walk-over, or that he wouldn't have been more successful in other circumstances.

[ClaretAndBlueBlood]

....and what would you prefer? A nice comfortable clean cut manager like Southgate who will nod and smile and say the nice things and charm the press or someone who actually has experience of turning round the fortunes of football clubs? Albeit by upsetting Pat Murphy

It's not just Pat Murphy though, is it?  Pearson offends lots of people.  He's also not the only manager out there who has experience of turning round the fortunes of football clubs, although he may be the only one who does it less often than he gets himself fired for being a liability.  I really don't understand this clamour for a bully; Keane, Karsa and Culverhouse proved demonstrably that it doesn't work with these players - the latter pair of idiots even got fired for their behaviour.  How is Pearson legally going to be more extreme than they were, then?  Would it even work?  I'd have thought the very last thing we need in our basket case of a dressing room is a volatile loon throwing his weight around. 

I think we need someone with a calm head (which Pearson doesn't appear to possess) who copes well under pressure (which Pearson apparently can't) and will be here to see through a long term plan (which Pearson has never done).  It's not just an either/or between a Southgate and a Pearson, there is a lot of middle ground there.  As others have said, a bit of charisma would be welcome.  That's charisma, not aggression.  Pearson seems to bring almost guaranteed disgrace and embarrassment sooner or later; haven't we had enough of that this season?     

they didn't get fired for bullying

Didn't they?  I thought there were allegations of bullying, Karsa was suspended and both were subsequently fired after an internal investigation.  Apologies if I'm wrong.  Still doesn't mean a bully is what we need.

they were fired for not doing their jobs, which Lambert was unaware of. He only kept his job because he agreed to them being fired

Well the individual investigations that led to their dismissals were both instigated following allegations of bullying.  There was plenty of discussion on here at the time about how it might have affected the younger players.

Guardian article on dismissal
Daily Mail article on suspension

Culverhouse's Wikipedia page which he'd presumably have altered if it wasn't true, as if it's untrue it's libellous.


Unless of course you have incontrovertible evidence to the contrary, are privy to the clubs legal dealings or represented one of Karsa, Culverhouse or the club.

newspapers don't always print the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. And anyone can edit Wikipedia

internal investigation and off-field matters would appear to be correct, the bullying aspect less so

and yes, I remember well all of the discussions on here at the time. Bullying, or aggressive coaching methods, might actually be better than the truth

[Jimbo]

One thing about that Pat Murphy interview with Pearson. Murphy goaded and goaded, and Pearson tried not to rise against it despite his obvious anger. Murphy could have left it there, point made, but once he realised he was on safe ground, he continued the goading. If he'd tried that against Ferguson at Old Trafford he'd be out on his ear.   

My issue was more that he completely lacked the whit or wisdom to change the crux of the conversation, he just sulked.
The whole thing could have been avoided if he hadn't acted a tit, and once caught out he could have simply apologised or changed the topic.

He didn't handle it brilliantly, but for a psychopath - according to some on here - he was very restrained. Ferguson would probably have pulled Murphy's tongue out with his bare hands and beaten him to death with it.

I'm not saying Pearson is the answer, but I doubt he's as bad as some are making out.   

[SheffieldVillain]

....and what would you prefer? A nice comfortable clean cut manager like Southgate who will nod and smile and say the nice things and charm the press or someone who actually has experience of turning round the fortunes of football clubs? Albeit by upsetting Pat Murphy

It's not just Pat Murphy though, is it?  Pearson offends lots of people.  He's also not the only manager out there who has experience of turning round the fortunes of football clubs, although he may be the only one who does it less often than he gets himself fired for being a liability.  I really don't understand this clamour for a bully; Keane, Karsa and Culverhouse proved demonstrably that it doesn't work with these players - the latter pair of idiots even got fired for their behaviour.  How is Pearson legally going to be more extreme than they were, then?  Would it even work?  I'd have thought the very last thing we need in our basket case of a dressing room is a volatile loon throwing his weight around. 

I think we need someone with a calm head (which Pearson doesn't appear to possess) who copes well under pressure (which Pearson apparently can't) and will be here to see through a long term plan (which Pearson has never done).  It's not just an either/or between a Southgate and a Pearson, there is a lot of middle ground there.  As others have said, a bit of charisma would be welcome.  That's charisma, not aggression.  Pearson seems to bring almost guaranteed disgrace and embarrassment sooner or later; haven't we had enough of that this season?     

they didn't get fired for bullying

Didn't they?  I thought there were allegations of bullying, Karsa was suspended and both were subsequently fired after an internal investigation.  Apologies if I'm wrong.  Still doesn't mean a bully is what we need.

they were fired for not doing their jobs, which Lambert was unaware of. He only kept his job because he agreed to them being fired

Well the individual investigations that led to their dismissals were both instigated following allegations of bullying.  There was plenty of discussion on here at the time about how it might have affected the younger players.

Guardian article on dismissal
Daily Mail article on suspension

Culverhouse's Wikipedia page which he'd presumably have altered if it wasn't true, as if it's untrue it's libellous.


Unless of course you have incontrovertible evidence to the contrary, are privy to the clubs legal dealings or represented one of Karsa, Culverhouse or the club.

newspapers don't always print the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. And anyone can edit Wikipedia

internal investigation and off-field matters would appear to be correct, the bullying aspect less so

and yes, I remember well all of the discussions on here at the time. Bullying, or aggressive coaching methods, might actually be better than the truth

If you don't mind me asking, if you're disregarding the newspapers and the internet, where do you have your information from? Is it actually from a reliable source or just your opinion? Genuine question.

[peter w]

....and what would you prefer? A nice comfortable clean cut manager like Southgate who will nod and smile and say the nice things and charm the press or someone who actually has experience of turning round the fortunes of football clubs? Albeit by upsetting Pat Murphy

I just want a good manager. Pearson has the record of a mediocre Championship manager with one standout season.

Not really did well enough with leicester and Hull given their status at the time.

Also, saw this:

Pearson took a hard line on controversial Leicester defender Wayne Brown, who had publicly admitted in front of his team mates – including some of ethnic minority backgrounds – that he had voted for the far right British National Party in the general election on 6 May. He dropped Brown from the side for the playoffs. During the close season, Brown left the club to sign for Preston North End.

Not as much of a twat as first appears, then.

[peter w]

I don't know the exact stats but my remedial maths calculates he's managed about 300 games at non premier league level and he's won over half of them, approx win percentage of 40 odd % and a proven (this is unequivocal) of getting teams promoted. Surely this is our pre-requisite?

Steve Bruce went to his mid-table Hull team the season after Pearson left, and in his first season got them promoted.

So he was hardly proving it at Hull when he did a vastly inferior job there to Steve Bruce.

That's very misleading though. he turned a failing and poor team around and made them stable. bruce was able to add to it by attracting players who wouldn't have necessarily gone the season before when hull were struggling.