Holloway out

[teblin]

Don't know if this has been posted.

Win percentage whilst at leicester:

Micky Adams 36.93%
Peter taylor 35 %
Gary Megson 33.33%
David Pleat 32.02 %
Rob Kelly 32.81%
Craig Levein 27.7%
Ian Holloway 25%

I'm not sure whether he should be sacked or not but its not good reading.

 

[Hazzman]

To me, I see this as a sign of a Manager underperforming, not as a positive.

If it's anything, it's a sign he can't motivate. Ok, we were lumped with a lot shite before January and we still head above water in January. Ollie's brough in proven performers and failed.

He'll quit after WBA IMO. I said a few weeks ago Taggart would end the season our manager.

 

[Matt_B]

explain what the feck you mean?

He doesn't need to, he ended it with FACT

 

[jas123]

sorry holloway but u gotta go, before we do to league 1. billy davies in please or bryan robson, big sam wont go to us, id be very surprised if he did.

 

[teblin]

sorry holloway but u gotta go, before we do to league 1. billy davies in please or bryan robson, big sam wont go to us, id be very surprised if he did.

The man is a proven failure.

 

[Melton Fox]

I don't think it matters who we get in TBH.

Same as when Levein was sacked, it didn't matter that it was Rob Kelly that took over, the important factor is that Levein was removed his position.

Holloway is having a negative influence on the players, remove him and that negative influence is gone.

The only other explanation to defend Holloway is that there is another negative influence that Holloway can do nothing about.

 

[Boy Genius]

i dont think Holloway is the problem at the club, its Milan, he is a virus to our club...FACT

come on explain your post, if its a FACT then explain. Cannot be that hard can it if its a FACT

 

[Boy Genius]

sorry holloway but u gotta go, before we do to league 1. billy davies in please or bryan robson, big sam wont go to us, id be very surprised if he did.

Why won't he? Throw enough money at anybody and they will be here in a flash.
Like I have said before, football is all about money, and the situation we are in is a win win one for any manager now. They would have MM by the bollux, if city go down, well, they were in the bottom 3 and way off safety when they took over it was an impossible job, if they stay up a massive bonus would have to be paid. Big Sam is a real candidate in my books as the BBC proved he likes his money.

 

[reality fox]

IMO If Ollie does get the boot then MM will get in someone along the lines of Peter Reid till the end of the season then will sign new manager in summer(like he did with Nigel Worthington).
Ollie needs to go though as we have no chance of survival with him at the helm.With comments like its tighter than an old biscuit tin when we are in the bottom three being his attitude then its time for a change.

 

[DesertFox]

I've read this thread thoroughly, but I'm still struggling to understand something.

I have always been unsure of Holloway's credential from day one, and have continually had verbal shit thrown at me for asking questions about his ability, I'd like to ask again in the hope that one of the more intelligent of you can put me straight;

FAO all those saying Holloway shouldn't be sacked, and that he is the right man for this club;

Other than our current circumstance of manager turnover, why is he the right man for this club? I would prefer answers based on evidence rather than emotional and circumstantial please.

Mainly replying to the "asking questions about his ability" and doing so "from day one" part, and in no way presuming to be "intelligent"...

I think this is a bit of a non-argument. He's had success in the recent past, at this level. So if the "ability" you seek is that of running a successful Championship football club, then it's plain to see that, yes, Holloway has proven he has the ability to do that.

If you want evidence of someone's ability to run this football club, right now (or any other club, or ask the question again of a successful manager this time next year) then it's impossible to answer - it's totally random.

1. Holloway - got QPR relegated, got QPR promoted, did well at Plymouth, ****ed up at City
2. Megson - did well at West Brom, then ****ed up at West Brom, ****ed up at Forest, did nothing much at City
3. Allen - did well at Brentford, MK Dons, ****ed up at City
4. Worthington - did well and then ****ed up at Norwich, did nothing much at City
5. Kelly - did well at City, ****ed up at City
6. Levein - did well in Scotland, ****ed up at City, doing well again in Scotland
7. Etc etc etc, with the only notable blip in the past several decades being MON

You can keep going back and back. Almost all managers have good spells and bad spells. Very few have prolonged good spells. Most that have prolonged bad spells find new careers, quickly.

With the exception of Rob Kelly who was untried, all the above managers had some strong points on their CVs, and only Megson and Worthington (ironically the two who were least welcomed by fans, and who perhaps ****ed up the least) came into the job having failed at the previous one. The others were all "on the up".

So how can you possibly tell right away if the manager is going to be a success at this particular club? Call me a BM but I'm going to bring up the stupid MON-Sheffield Utd reference again, because it's completely relevant in this case.

I'd agree that it's not looking good for Ollie at present, and IMO his time is up - or very close to it.

But you have to give a manager some time and a chance at dealing in the transfer market to show what he can do. We were in a terrible state when Holloway arrived and there was never going to be a quick fix (there still won't be).

So on that basis I think it's only become apparent recently that sufficient progress - in terms of the quality of football, confidence and club structure, as well as points on the board - was not being made.

But what the **** do I know about it? I live in a desert...





:icon_wink

 

[Tamworth Fox]

" Rome wasn't built in a day."

 

[bocadillo]

Mainly replying to the "asking questions about his ability" and doing so "from day one" part, and in no way presuming to be "intelligent"...

I think this is a bit of a non-argument. He's had success in the recent past, at this level. So if the "ability" you seek is that of running a successful Championship football club, then it's plain to see that, yes, Holloway has proven he has the ability to do that.

If you want evidence of someone's ability to run this football club, right now (or any other club, or ask the question again of a successful manager this time next year) then it's impossible to answer - it's totally random.

1. Holloway - got QPR relegated, got QPR promoted, did well at Plymouth, ****ed up at City
2. Megson - did well at West Brom, then ****ed up at West Brom, ****ed up at Forest, did nothing much at City
3. Allen - did well at Brentford, MK Dons, ****ed up at City
4. Worthington - did well and then ****ed up at Norwich, did nothing much at City
5. Kelly - did well at City, ****ed up at City
6. Levein - did well in Scotland, ****ed up at City, doing well again in Scotland
7. Etc etc etc, with the only notable blip in the past several decades being MON

You can keep going back and back. Almost all managers have good spells and bad spells. Very few have prolonged good spells. Most that have prolonged bad spells find new careers, quickly.

With the exception of Rob Kelly who was untried, all the above managers had some strong points on their CVs, and only Megson and Worthington (ironically the two who were least welcomed by fans, and who perhaps ****ed up the least) came into the job having failed at the previous one. The others were all "on the up".

So how can you possibly tell right away if the manager is going to be a success at this particular club? Call me a BM but I'm going to bring up the stupid MON-Sheffield Utd reference again, because it's completely relevant in this case.

I'd agree that it's not looking good for Ollie at present, and IMO his time is up - or very close to it.

But you have to give a manager some time and a chance at dealing in the transfer market to show what he can do. We were in a terrible state when Holloway arrived and there was never going to be a quick fix (there still won't be).

So on that basis I think it's only become apparent recently that sufficient progress - in terms of the quality of football, confidence and club structure, as well as points on the board - was not being made.

But what the **** do I know about it? I live in a desert...




:icon_wink

It's clear that you know a lot about it and what you say makes absolute sense. Our appalling record stretches over many managers and more than one owner. The changes have not improved us at all. At some time we have got to realise that stability is what is required and somehow we have got to achieve it.

 

[escos66]

Why do you need evidence, what do you think this is, CSI Miami?

I actually feel Holloway is the first manager we have had who has actually tried to put things right. He has brought in some very good players. The likes of Hendrie, Oakley, Howard etc are in my opinion very good players at this level.

I appreciate that results have not gone our way, but he is doing his very best to try and get the team playing football in my opinion.

What I would like to know for all those people who are now saying "I told you so" or calling for Holloways head who they want to see replace him?

I think the fact he has brought in very good players and still cant get a win is evidence enough he may not be the right man.

 

[CORNISH FOX]

I think the fact he has brought in very good players and still cant get a win is evidence enough he may not be the right man.

Which good players? Sorry i must have been in the bog when they played!!

 

[TommyK]

WHY? All MM was to take him on. I blame IH 100% and nothing less. He is being paid good money to do a job he is not capable of.

Why does everybody think MM can look into the future. What a fcuking stupid statement to make

Are you saying Milan isn't at all responsible if we go down?
Because it was Milan who fecked us up in the summer by appointing Martin Allen and giving him an open to cheque book to sign a bunch of shit players. (Some of which i have no doubt he signed himself).

Yes Holloway has been shit. No doubt. But its hard to argue that the players he has signed have not improved the playing squad. He just can't/is incapable of getting them to win fecking football matches.

This whole season has just been embarrasing.

 

[PFKAKTF FOX]

I think the fact he has brought in very good players and still cant get a win is evidence enough he may not be the right man.

I agree, Ollie has made some decent signings maybe he isn't cut out to manage "bigger" name players.

 

[Boy Genius]

Are you saying Milan isn't at all responsible if we go down?
Because it was Milan who fecked us up in the summer by appointing Martin Allen and giving him an open to cheque book to sign a bunch of shit players. (Some of which i have no doubt he signed himself).

Yes Holloway has been shit. No doubt. But its hard to argue that the players he has signed have not improved the playing squad. He just can't/is incapable of getting them to win fecking football matches.

This whole season has just been embarrasing.

have you ever interviewed someone for a high position? Then you will know what I mean, you cannot see into the future and how the person turns out. All you go on is the case the person puts forward to you,in to how he will tackle the position you are offering. A good look at his CV is also an option. You then have to back this person for him to be able to do his job, and set a timescale.
Now if this person fcuks up and things go pearshaped, he is booted out. So how can you blame MM for appointing a person he believes is the right person for the job, available at that time?
Up until yesterday I would have backed IH, but the score last night was really a bridge too far for me.

 

[Polar Bear]

The reason to sack Holloway would be if it was believed that the team would perform better - specifically, score some sodding goals - if this happened. I don't like Holloway at all (especially his absolute cluelessness when it comes to effective use of substitutes), but I am very unconvinced that a change of manager will make Howard move faster than a cow, Hume or Fryatt shoot straight or Campbell get to the right place at the right time.

I think he's a dead man walking, but as for our fortunes improving? Nope. This has been coming for a while, and maybe it will be a good thing. Get rid of that 'We're a big club really' rubbish that too many people seem to believe.

 

[TommyK]

have you ever interviewed someone for a high position? Then you will know what I mean, you cannot see into the future and how the person turns out. All you go on is the case the person puts forward to you,in to how he will tackle the position you are offering. A good look at his CV is also an option. You then have to back this person for him to be able to do his job, and set a timescale.
Now if this person fcuks up and things go pearshaped, he is booted out. So how can you blame MM for appointing a person he believes is the right person for the job, available at that time?
Up until yesterday I would have backed IH, but the score last night was really a bridge too far for me.

I believe that appointing a football manger is a little different to other industries. Mostly because of the incestious aspect of it (i.e. everyone knows everyone in the game.) "A good luck at his CV is also an option" is quite a strange statement - most managers are appointed on this alone.

"All MM was to take him on." - Isn't that enough?

 

[bocadillo]

have you ever interviewed someone for a high position? Then you will know what I mean, you cannot see into the future and how the person turns out. All you go on is the case the person puts forward to you,in to how he will tackle the position you are offering. A good look at his CV is also an option. You then have to back this person for him to be able to do his job, and set a timescale.
Now if this person fcuks up and things go pearshaped, he is booted out. So how can you blame MM for appointing a person he believes is the right person for the job, available at that time?
Up until yesterday I would have backed IH, but the score last night was really a bridge too far for me.

What did you expect last night's result to be? I would have thought that a one-goal defeat at Southampton is as good as it gets.