dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
Last season was 90% SISU's fault.
They admitted that themselves when does that ever happen.
They admitted that themselves when does that ever happen.
Cwr call in (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Nick
- Start date
georgehudson
Well-Known Member
wrong, that was only a loan
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
He never said it was a permanent, he said we got 1m from the transfer, AT was allowed to get a replacement and he got Nimely...
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
If I was to blame 1 factor on our relegation (the notion is flawed because many things together made relegation happen) I'd blame Thorn. Cue the response, but wait.
Why do I blame Thorn? Firstly, I'd like to say the board backing did not make his job easier.
Thorn had a difficult job from June/July, when Gunnar, King, Westwood left (not really anyone's fault tbh), until 'Deadline Day' we brought in 2 GK', then we signed Cody, for 400k, good backing from one player, I had high hopes, this has turned out badly (thus far), the significance of the deal, to me, is that we spent a lot of money on 1 player (like Eastwood) and the board coughed up money for him, probably more than most of the teams around us, so to blame SISU entirely is naive at best. I appreciate that Turner had been sold to fund this deal.
Thorn had many contradictory tactics, one particularly annoying one being (though not that important) is the obsession with throwing the ball to Platt from every throw-in, losing possession 90% of the time, very annoying as A) it was naive and B) weren't we supposed to be a passing side. He delayed subs up to the point they were pointless, and was very reactive, never really proactive. He also appears to shift blame, too much so, off his players and blame the refs etc. for the loss (or last minute draw), e.g. 'Away Days' interview, the start, and every post-match interview. He also seemed to lack motivational skills. He also was at fault for the players fitness, or should I say, lack of fitness, which so dearly cost us and was a chronic disease until the 1st 3 odd months of the 'Revolutionary Reign' of MR, which brings me on to my next point:
Over 46 games, we dropped 30 (give or take, most likely give) points from winning positions, and did not win from a losing position, we also dropped many points in thelast 10m (fitness again!) so there's clearly signs that we weren't that bad that "Fergie couldn't keep us up" and the stats suggest, to me, that, with a better manager, we could've survived.
We also failed to deliver in the big games.
Thorn most certainly had a very difficult job indeed, but he failed disastrously and was not up to the task.
I think we sacked him at the right time, because we (or some) realised it was same old same old and the board were proactive about it and might have saved our season, yet people are against its timing.
Why do I blame Thorn? Firstly, I'd like to say the board backing did not make his job easier.
Thorn had a difficult job from June/July, when Gunnar, King, Westwood left (not really anyone's fault tbh), until 'Deadline Day' we brought in 2 GK', then we signed Cody, for 400k, good backing from one player, I had high hopes, this has turned out badly (thus far), the significance of the deal, to me, is that we spent a lot of money on 1 player (like Eastwood) and the board coughed up money for him, probably more than most of the teams around us, so to blame SISU entirely is naive at best. I appreciate that Turner had been sold to fund this deal.
Thorn had many contradictory tactics, one particularly annoying one being (though not that important) is the obsession with throwing the ball to Platt from every throw-in, losing possession 90% of the time, very annoying as A) it was naive and B) weren't we supposed to be a passing side. He delayed subs up to the point they were pointless, and was very reactive, never really proactive. He also appears to shift blame, too much so, off his players and blame the refs etc. for the loss (or last minute draw), e.g. 'Away Days' interview, the start, and every post-match interview. He also seemed to lack motivational skills. He also was at fault for the players fitness, or should I say, lack of fitness, which so dearly cost us and was a chronic disease until the 1st 3 odd months of the 'Revolutionary Reign' of MR, which brings me on to my next point:
Over 46 games, we dropped 30 (give or take, most likely give) points from winning positions, and did not win from a losing position, we also dropped many points in thelast 10m (fitness again!) so there's clearly signs that we weren't that bad that "Fergie couldn't keep us up" and the stats suggest, to me, that, with a better manager, we could've survived.
We also failed to deliver in the big games.
Thorn most certainly had a very difficult job indeed, but he failed disastrously and was not up to the task.
I think we sacked him at the right time, because we (or some) realised it was same old same old and the board were proactive about it and might have saved our season, yet people are against its timing.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
That would be because had he gone in April and Robins been allowed a full pre season with his own signings, we would surely be sat in the top 6. The decision to keep him for that spell was disastrous and has jeapordised any such hope.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Extrapolating his games in charge in L1, we would have gone the whole season unbeaten and surrendered 92 points from winning positions. Oh the power of statistics.
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
I suppose you can't disagree with that really.
As I've said, AT begged to keep his job, made promises, but didn't keep them so got sacked, which I'm glad happened.
We'll make playoffs with MR.
Had MR started off, I think we'd win this league quite easily.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Malaga was shipped out to Nuneaton as well as being transfer listed soon after Robins' arrival-hardly a ringing endorsement. So many players were signed that inevitably a few would turn out OK.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Which is why I actually no longer place blame on Thorn for this situation-his superiors failed to get rid sooner and his terrible management allowed to continue too long.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Can I say FFS leave it alone to you now.
You introduced it this time.
MMM started it by referring to his wife.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
You want get anyone disagreeing with you other than Don, his pantomime dame and CJ "AT is the next best thing since Jimmy Hill" Parker.
Which ones Harpo and which is Groucho? I know which one is Chico.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
If you read the quote at the time I point to his poor Championship record, but hoped to be proven wrong in due course.
Mary_Mungo_Midge
Well-Known Member
If you know your maths dear chap, and I very much think you do, then 3 games into a 40-odd game season isn't sufficiently sizeable to draw an extrapolation from. To naughtily claim to is for you to build a debate upon ground so shaky as to the territory only Grenduffy strays toward
Mary_Mungo_Midge
Well-Known Member
I feel remarkably benevolent this Monday morning, so I'll spare your youthful blushes be not quoting your views at the time verbatim
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
I disagree to some extent, Shaw should've been able to get 4-6 pts (minimum) before a new manager was selected, the signs were worrying under Thorn, but Shaw made a right 'pigs ear' of it!
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
Personally I think last season blame wise.
Owners 80%
Thorn 10%
Players 10%.
Last season they even took responsibility for it themselves.
This season owners 70%
Thorn 10%
Shaw 20%
The owners should never have allowed him to sign players through the summer if they were that unsure about him they were going to make the call after three games and one bad result.
Then they took too long. If they knew they were going to get rid then they should have had one or two names ready to approach.
They get credit for making 15 signings this season and finally getting Robins.
Shaw yes he would have has a demotivated squad as the manager who signed or scouted the players has been treated poorly. However 5 defeats in the bounce! It was his job to pep them up.
Owners 80%
Thorn 10%
Players 10%.
Last season they even took responsibility for it themselves.
This season owners 70%
Thorn 10%
Shaw 20%
The owners should never have allowed him to sign players through the summer if they were that unsure about him they were going to make the call after three games and one bad result.
Then they took too long. If they knew they were going to get rid then they should have had one or two names ready to approach.
They get credit for making 15 signings this season and finally getting Robins.
Shaw yes he would have has a demotivated squad as the manager who signed or scouted the players has been treated poorly. However 5 defeats in the bounce! It was his job to pep them up.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Ah yes back to the old wage size determines league position debate. Do you think Tranmere have one of the biggest wage bills in this league? Personally I doubt it.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Says the man who offers a defence to the worst manager since 1917. Of course there are no shaky stats to defend your fat friend - there are no stats at all. Carry on though I need a laugh Monday morning.
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
It's not always the case you do get the odd exception.
The usual trend is 'you get what you pay for'
21 Sc-unithorpe 28 -19 26
22 Bury 28 -15 23
23 Portsmouth 27 -17 21
24 Hartlepool. 28 -27 16
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
Oh behave!
This season MR has done 10x better with, largely, the same team as Shaw and AT. McG was pretty average for Shaw, then top class for MR.
I also get the feeling the board this season can't win with you, on 1 hand you moan at them for their backing, but had they not backed him, you'd soon moan! :facepalm:
Thorn got sacked because he made promises and he didn't/couldn't keep them, you will say 3 draws, shouldn't have got sacked etc. 2 were half acceptable, and 1 was poor, the significance of all the games though are this: we dropped 6 points, we conceded late on, suggests players were unfit (which MR has corrected), and we were making the same mistakes as last season, he should've got sacked, and quite frankly, I'm glad he got sacked.
I backed him as last season was difficult for a rookie manager, but this season proved he wasn't up for it.
Quick question for any Thornite apologists:
Many of you bemoan the sacking of Thorn after 3 games, yet, moan at the board for getting in MR after 4 league games, so my question is: how long would you have given Thorn?
Do we give him, say, 10 games, and a few more under Shaw as caretaker? So it would kill our season off completely!? Naive.
I acknowledged that Thorn isn't the only 1 at fault, but, if 1 person was to be blamed, it's Thorn, it's unarguable. The amount of points we dropped suggests that the team wasn't that bad, factor in the big matches we lost: Forest, Bristol C, Millwall, Donny and the draw to Peterborough killed us off. That's not to mention little things like losing to Palce in stoppage time etc. it is pragmatic to believe had we had a better manager, we could've stayed up, in fact, if you don't agree with that, you're somewhat delusional.
I get the feeling it is like 'talking to a brick wall' with you though.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
It wasn't a serious comment which I thought was clear enough. 'I shall spare your senior blushes'.
Mary_Mungo_Midge
Well-Known Member
lordsummerisle
Well-Known Member
You keep saying that we had a squad funded in the bottom three of the league last season. Any proof for that at all?
Doncaster, Peterborough, Barnsley i'd imagine had less funds than ourselves.
Even if we were in the bottom three for squad funds, we should have still mananged to get out with the bonus of an imploding Portsmouth having 10 points deducted.
A good manager would outperform his resources anyway, with either scouting the right players or tactics/coaching.
Thorn isn't a good manager.