Post Match Leicester 2 Watford 0

[Volpone]

Well I think Matty James is turning into a good Premiership midfielder. To say he is a championship player is a real insult. His passing and decision making are excellent and as BN says, he has excellent upper body strength and is able to hold others off the ball. If he can get a year of injury free football under his belt I think we will have a very good premiership player (who is still only 26).

I totally agree with you Micky.

BN is way off the mark this time saying he is miles away from being good enough and far too slow.

He isn't 4th choice by any means. He is keeping Iborra and Silva out of the team on merit.

Puel would have known next to nothing about James before he came here and for him to trust Matty and realise his capabilities speaks volumes.

 

[Volpone]

Totally in command of the whole game, and looking good all over the pitch. Should have won by four or five, because they truly stunk

You watched a different game to me because Watford were in it right up to Mahrez scoring at the end. They weren't pretty or accomplished but they were effective and knew how to stifle us. Credit to them they really went for it and to get rid of their manager afterwards is the craziest sacking this season by many a mile.

 

[Volpone]

.
Mahrez was complete turd throughout, but you cannot take away from the brilliance of his goal.

He is an enigma. I also thought he was poor for 89 minutes. Far too languid, lost the ball too frequently.

His final passes were many times far too casual and either didn't reach the intended recipient or forced a 50/50 situation.

Also guilty of doing too many short corners with Albrighton this season which ended up being either off-side or totally hashed and giving a breakaway attack to the other team.

Then, having moaned at him all game, he produces a flash of genius.

 

[Jeff]

to get rid of their manager afterwards is the craziest sacking this season by many a mile.

They've got five points from their last eleven games (three of them came against us).
They'll be relegated if they keep that points return going for the rest of the season.

 

[give_us_a_wave]

Nobody at Watford seems to be paying any attention. They seem to have missed the fact that they're Watford. They do this every season don't they? Start OK, have a good run...then tank in the 2nd half of the season. They have 10 of their squad out injured currently. WTF do they expect?

Then they sack the manager. It's just become a habit (they did it before they came up too) I'd imagine they'll have gone through another 2 by this time next year...& they'll be sitting 10th - 14th. Maybe, just maybe, you break a repeating cycle by not repeating the part that YOU are in control of? Just a thought. Or maybe just accept that if you're Watford then sitting 10th in the PL with a 5 point cushion from the drop is about as good as it gets.

 

[Lako42]

He is an enigma. I also thought he was poor for 89 minutes. Far too languid, lost the ball too frequently.

His final passes were many times far too casual and either didn't reach the intended recipient or forced a 50/50 situation.

Also guilty of doing too many short corners with Albrighton this season which ended up being either off-side or totally hashed and giving a breakaway attack to the other team.

Then, having moaned at him all game, he produces a flash of genius.

Agreed


The corners were pure incompetence at times.

 

[Volpone]

They've got five points from their last eleven games (three of them came against us).
They'll be relegated if they keep that points return going for the rest of the season.

10th in the league with an injury list as long as your arm. What more do they want ffs?

 

[glyn]

Although I think given our circumstances we were well within our right to let Ranieri and Shakespeare go, it’s now made me very wary of criticising a sacking by another club. It’s clear from our experience that people on the ‘outside’ really have little awareness of what is going on at a club or the level of performance - remember all those people who felt we were doing ok under Shakey, and thought Claudio was going to turn it round any minute.

 

[atlantafox]

Don't want to be getting too far ahead but the last few matches have shown that we probably don't need to make any overpriced January signings. Amartey has shown he can be an alternative to Simpson at full back and with Dragovic looking solid when Morgan and Huth are back, we have lots of options to partner Maguire who has to play ever match. Plenty of options in midfield with James looking excellent and Silva finally coming in. Assuming we can keep hold of Mahrez, if Iheanacho can keep improving we can score enough goals with what we have to finish in the top 7 which based on our inconsistent first few months would be a good result. We should use the window to clean house either transfers or loan - get rid of Benalouane, Musa, Ulloa and Slimani and maybe even time for Andy King to leave. Bright times ahead for us

 

[Brown Nose]

10th in the league with an injury list as long as your arm. What more do they want ffs?

Unless a manager is exceptional, they really aren't that important any more. They don't have anything to do with the structure of the club, the Development Squad or Academy. They don't sign players or negotiate contracts. Most have very little to do with their own fans or owners either.

I think the whole attitude of many fans and pundits that deride clubs that change manager is outdated and simplistic. First team managers are largely interchangeable. Watford's approach has been exceptionally effective at growing their club year on year.

We got rid of an old fashioned 'whole club manager' when Pearson left. Nobody could argue that we didn't benefit from ditching him. We then got rid of his replacement when it became apparent that things just weren't working - just like Watford have now. I'm not even remotely attached to Puel and couldn't care less how long he stays with us. Our owners will sack him when they think he can be improved upon.

All that matters with a manager is that he makes the best of what he's got. If a club and/or their fans decide that the incumbent is not doing this, they're quite right to ditch him for another option. Something clearly went on between Silva and Watford when he was prevented from going to Everton. Their owners have decided that this has fatally affected their prospects together and recent results would seem to suggest that they're right.

It doesn't mean that Silva is a bad manager or that Watford have delusions of grandeur (to borrow a phrase from our ex).

 

[Brown Nose]

And there in in your paragraph highlights to me all that is wrong in football,

King has been a loyal player to us and over the years delivered as part of a squad some exceptional performances. He has earned the right to stay with us a few years yet and be part of our squad - some people on here completely underestimate what a player is worth both on and off the pitch - do you know his influence in all other areas where he may affect the squad and particularly young players, no - of course not.

James has been injured horrifically but prior to that was a very good (squad) player, both deserve the loyalty we have shown.

He has come back strong but it will take time for him to regain match fitness - who knows maybe he will become a better player than he was before his injury, just a thought like?

If only loyalty were still important in life?

I'm afraid that you're living in cloud cuckoo land.

Should we have kept Matt Oakley til he retired because, by all accounts, he was a smashing lad who was popular and influential off the pitch? There have been loads of similar examples and if we kept hold of them out of some misguided sense of loyalty, our squad would be double the size.

I don't necessarily think that Choudhury is going to be anything special, but what if we let him leave because we don't want to stop James and King from clogging up the squad? What if he then goes on to be a top player elsewhere whilst we fund the James and King pension funds?

Players have to come and go. A squad of 25 ages by 25 years a season. More players need to go than are recruited otherwise there is never going to be any opportunity for young players to progress. We're not good enough at moving on players that have served their purpose.

 

[fitz]

Silva is fortunate that he has the interest from Everton as an excuse for his form dipping. Similarly to his last job he had an impact (this time against some duffer teams) to start with and then all went to shit. His stock will probably remain high and he'll be in with a chance of the next job that comes up. I would expect his first 5 or 6 games at Newcastle or Southampton to go brilliantly and then revert to type.

 

[Miles Away]

I'm afraid that you're living in cloud cuckoo land.

Should we have kept Matt Oakley til he retired because, by all accounts, he was a smashing lad who was popular and influential off the pitch? There have been loads of similar examples and if we kept hold of them out of some misguided sense of loyalty, our squad would be double the size.

I don't necessarily think that Choudhury is going to be anything special, but what if we let him leave because we don't want to stop James and King from clogging up the squad? What if he then goes on to be a top player elsewhere whilst we fund the James and King pension funds?

Players have to come and go. A squad of 25 ages by 25 years a season. More players need to go than are recruited otherwise there is never going to be any opportunity for young players to progress. We're not good enough at moving on players that have served their purpose.

James is a first choice midfielder. Every single time he’s fit he’s involved in the first team. Across 4 different managers.

 

[Micky]

Unless a manager is exceptional, they really aren't that important any more. They don't have anything to do with the structure of the club, the Development Squad or Academy. They don't sign players or negotiate contracts. Most have very little to do with their own fans or owners either.

I think the whole attitude of many fans and pundits that deride clubs that change manager is outdated and simplistic. First team managers are largely interchangeable. Watford's approach has been exceptionally effective at growing their club year on year.

We got rid of an old fashioned 'whole club manager' when Pearson left. Nobody could argue that we didn't benefit from ditching him. We then got rid of his replacement when it became apparent that things just weren't working - just like Watford have now. I'm not even remotely attached to Puel and couldn't care less how long he stays with us. Our owners will sack him when they think he can be improved upon.

All that matters with a manager is that he makes the best of what he's got. If a club and/or their fans decide that the incumbent is not doing this, they're quite right to ditch him for another option. Something clearly went on between Silva and Watford when he was prevented from going to Everton. Their owners have decided that this has fatally affected their prospects together and recent results would seem to suggest that they're right.

It doesn't mean that Silva is a bad manager or that Watford have delusions of grandeur (to borrow a phrase from our ex).

I enjoy reading your posts Brown Nose and I often think they are well thought out and accurate but I am afraid this is complete horseshit (in my opinion).

 

[camberwell fox]

James is a first choice midfielder. Every single time he’s fit he’s involved in the first team. Across 4 different managers.

Never, ever let facts get in the way of total ‘finger In the air’ point.

 

[camberwell fox]

I'm afraid that you're living in cloud cuckoo land.

Should we have kept Matt Oakley til he retired because, by all accounts, he was a smashing lad who was popular and influential off the pitch? There have been loads of similar examples and if we kept hold of them out of some misguided sense of loyalty, our squad would be double the size.

I don't necessarily think that Choudhury is going to be anything special, but what if we let him leave because we don't want to stop James and King from clogging up the squad? What if he then goes on to be a top player elsewhere whilst we fund the James and King pension funds?

Players have to come and go. A squad of 25 ages by 25 years a season. More players need to go than are recruited otherwise there is never going to be any opportunity for young players to progress. We're not good enough at moving on players that have served their purpose.

Please show me in my post where I suggest we keep anyone due to them being ‘smashing’.

My post points out that loyalty is important but unfortunately rare and that none of us ‘laymen’ know what overall contributes to a good player on and off the pitch.

 

[City Fan]

James is a first choice midfielder. Every single time he’s fit he’s involved in the first team. Across 4 different managers.

I’ll give you 3 different managers.

 

[LoopisDeLupis]

I enjoy reading your posts Brown Nose and I often think they are well thought out and accurate but I am afraid this is complete horseshit (in my opinion).

Hmm. I agree with BN to an extent. Game by game and tactically, they are key. In terms of building the football club, they have very little impact and any football club allowing a manager to make decisions on long term issues like new training grounds is foolish.
The chairman of Watford has been interviewed and stated this previously - it's a methodology that should be applauded considering the utter short terminal of manager involvement.

Backing BN!

 

[Micky]

So in reference to managers, BN says: '...they really aren't that important anymore'.

How the hell can this be the case. I absolute guarantee that if we had kept Ranieri we would have gone down. How is this not important?

This would have resulted in the loss of Vardy, Mahrez, Chilwell, Ndidi and more.

 

[homer]

And had we not appointed Ranieri we would never have won the Premier League

Ever