Discussion in 'Leicester City' started by Jeff, Sep 16, 2017.
Not really looking forward to Liverpool twice in one week either
And that sums up my point exactly! Whether they come in with high stock or not, only time will tell whether they will be successful. Many Liverpool and Manchester City fans would rid themselves of their club's manager now if they could. Maybe if these kind of clubs did take a different approach instead of throwing money at the first 'big name' foreign manager to become available on the merry-go-round then they may have done a little better with the resources they have at their disposal. Of course, we will never know and therein sits the point.
Time and support is what we need to give CS now. If after this the club is still not moving forward after that then we can look to remove him in the knowledge that we were at least fair.
Quite ridiculous Pops.
Any important decision that will have an impact on the business performance should be made with according due diligence, you don't take wild punts when the stakes are this high.
Past performance, future ambitions and current stock should all play an important part in the decision making g process.
A business that refuses to take into account market intelligence and past performance of key staff has a much smaller chance of success.
I don't know how it will play out, of course not, but I can take an informed guess and use my own eyes and results since the honeymoon period ended.
We're currently stuck with the bloke for the time being because he completely fluked his probation period.
I didn't say those things shouldn't be taken in to account though.
I understand the logic of that approach of course but my point was that it is only ever an indicator and never a guarantee as my examples prove.
It also doesn't work in reverse. Just because a business chooses to hire someone with little experience and take a punt because they think it may work, doesn't mean that it will fail. Many risks with personnel have worked out phenominally well for businneses all over the world and in all different industries, sport included.
You may be unimpressed but that doesn't mean he has been given the same chance as any other manager, experienced or not. He simply hasn't and that is the fact of the matter. Perhaps the only fact we know. There's lots of supposition about why he was given the job, who is in control and all other such nonsense but it's all conjecture. All I am suggesting is that he is given the same chance as anyone else would be to prove himself.
Someone with credentials might not succeed so we might as well get someone with none.
Sorry. That is no way to run a business. I wouldn't run mine that way.
Selling the Big Issue is slightly different though, isn't it?
Except, that's not what I said. I'm assuming you have chosen to completely misunderstand for comic effect as it really isn't that difficult. Read my response above - I understand the logic behind sourcing staff based on performance.
As I hope you know, the point I was making is that expecting success of somebody because they have achieved elsewhere is as flawed as expecting failure because someone hasn't. I can't be bothered to try and explain it to you anymore, it would take a giant sized piece of paper and an infinite paint set to get you to understand the simplest of concepts.
We need a name and a proper manager, in the mouldy of either Redknapp or perhaps Koeman?
But no-one has made the point that experienced managers always fare better than inexperienced ones (not even give_us_a_wave who used it to support his larger point). The argument is that - all other things being equal - it is rational to choose someone with solid experience over someone without it. It's the dominant strategy. That there are exceptional cases (numerous of them, as you point out) doesn't affect that argument.
Of course, you could argue that all other things are not equal - that Shakespeare compensates for his lack of experience with other qualities. I just haven't seen any evidence of that yet and, given all the above, the burden of evidence is on the Shakey apologists I'm afraid
So how does one become an experienced manager?
Jesus, by gaining experience obviously.
By managing Leeds or some other shithouse club who have achieved **** all for 15 years.
Inevitably it's all speculation but it appears like the initial fantastic success under CS was due to the energy released by the players getting rid of CR. Once this initial burst was played out the performances and results have been poor. The performance against Huddersfield suggested that it's not just the top clubs that will give Leicester problems. For supporters it was hard to accept some of the pundits comments that the players largely ran the show and had engineered the change to CS but it looks to be broadly likely.
It's possible that things will pick up especially if the new signings actually get picked to play and are as good as we hope but the manager needs to manage and show that he and not the 'old guard' players run the show.
On the topic of managers, I watched the MU vs Everton match yesterday. I bet that £45m Icelandic bloke is really glad that he went to a big club with a big name internationally credible manager rather than lil’ old Leicester and CS.
Yes, it's a bugger the Forum's pets who got away don't perform any better than our resident scapegoats who get duffed up on here before, during and after every game
I'm sure he still is.
Their run of fixtures has been even worse than ours. They'll still finish above us.
Because we look so much more attractive.
Bet he's kicking himself that he's not been able to link up with Kingy and James.
In the remote chance that he had chosen to come to Leicester its unlikely that he would have yet had the chance to link up with anyone. All new Leicester signings are required to go through a lengthy injury spell as part of their induction.
All in all i'm with Shakey on this point, we are a mid table club. We are going to have results like this. Huddersfield did a number on Palace (granted they are poor atm), Newcastle and held southampton to a draw. They are very much like us when we went into the prem...No fear.
At home they were always going to come out and play their hearts out. I can personally see them doing a number on one of the big four clubs.
What we should have had is a bit more spirit. we wanted to score once they did and then sit back.. Mahrez was always being double marked and was never going to get a decent run out. I think he needs to come off the wing and into a central free roaming role or someone needs to be the man to support him once the ball is with him.
Uh-oh. Get your tin hat on.
Separate names with a comma.