Sousa Sacked!

[Mawsley]

Remember O'Neil was on the brink of being sacked and he turned out to be our most succesful manager to date.

I'm SO bored of reading/hearing this as a justification to accept failure.

 

[Profondo Rosso]

Thanks for setting me straight, I always thought that the manager just said "OK lads, we're playing 4-4-2 today, you know where to stand".

Yes, I have said elsewhere that the full backs were pushing forward too much and leaving too many gaps. That is pretty obvious from the QPR and Norwich games. Sousa's system was akin to Newcastle's 'suicidal system' under Kevin Keegan where both full backs would push up at the same time. This left a back two.

By 4-4-2 I meant the team should have a flat back 4, which would not leave gaps in the RB and LB areas, 4 in midfield to make the team hard to break down, and Waghorn closer to Howard instead of on the wing. 4-3-3/4-5-1 either means playing Howard and keeping Waghorn on the wing where he is somewhat wasted, or dropping Howard and playing Waghorn by himself in the centre where he is outmuscled when the ball is passed straight to him. City need to stop the rot defensively and score more so 4-4-2 seems the better option at the moment.

You've just repeated the same thing again.

What you simply mean is: "have a flat back 4, which would not leave gaps in the RB and LB areas, 4 in midfield to make the team hard to break down, and Waghorn closer to Howard instead of on the wing." seems the better option at the moment, what you don't mean is that 4-4-2 seems the better option at the moment. They are 2 different things entirely.

4-4-2 does NOT mean having a flat-back 4 or having 4 players straight across the midfield to make the team hard to break down. 4-5-1 does NOT mean playing players on the wing. You can just as easily have a 4-4-4-2 or a 4-3-3/4-5-1 with 4 players playing centre-back and no full backs for example, or a midfield which includes holding players or attacking midfielder. A 4-3-3/4-5-1 could mean having 3 central strikers or 5 midfielders rather than having wingers.

What you give are 2 example of systems which are incorporated into the 4-4-2 or 4-3-3/4-5-1 formations, but 4-4-2 or 4-3-3/4-5-1 are not systems, they are formations. Saying that 4-4-2 is the best option we should play right now is far too simplistic and for some reason fans seem to think that simply changing formation is the answer to tactical problems and that's it, as said Pearson had some excellent results last season playing a 4-3-3/4-5-1 formation.

Pedantry over. :icon_lol:

 

[PEN3]

When I went onto the BBC web site to find out about Sousa's sacking, I saw the picture of Gaz Lineker below with Jose Mourinho and thought that our lad had flown out to Madrid to secure the deal with our new manager!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/

 

[Profondo Rosso]

No been out of the country on holiday so misse Cardiff, Qpr and Pompey games.

Yes was surprised at the amount of changes to the first eleven but put that down to injuries, suspensions and the fact that PS was still experimenting (trying to find his best team). Still believe he would have got it right but just like most clubs these days chairmen and fans don't give managers time.

Remember O'Neil was on the brink of being sacked and he turned out to be our most succesful manager to date.

O'Neill being our most successful manager to date is very debatable though some of our fans seem to think that our club didn't exist before 1972 and that Worthington, Weller and Bloomfield formed the club in an old bikeshed behind Vicky Park, but I don't want to start that debate again.

Secondly, MON's record when being considered for sacking was a damn sight better than Sousa's was.

Injuries? Yes, we did have some soft tissue injuries, but at this point of the season that shouldn't be happening and it's bad management and fitness coaching if it does. The lack of injuries under Pearson did not happen by accident.

If you haven't seen us play then what are you doing talking about our style of play? I'll tell you something now, it wasn't very attractive to watch.

 

[Dour]

Pedantry over. :icon_lol:

More to be done. Sousa liked 4-2-3-1.

 

[Dour]

If you haven't seen us play then what are you doing talking about our style of play? I'll tell you something now, it wasn't very attractive to watch.

Did you miss the Cardiff game?

 

[Filthy Rich]

MON's record when being considered for sacking was a damn sight better than Sousa's was.

O'Neill was never even close to being sacked by the board/chairman at that time.

 

[Stevie Lynex on the wing]

O'Neill being our most successful manager to date is very debatable though some of our fans seem to think that our club didn't exist before 1972 and that Worthington, Weller and Bloomfield formed the club in an old bikeshed behind Vicky Park, but I don't want to start that debate again.

I am old enough to remember the Bloomfield era and how great his squad was but O'Neil is still the most succesful due to the league cup wins along with the over achievment of finishing in the top ten in 3 consecutive seasons.

Weller, Worthington and co deserved much more success as they played the beautiful game that we would pay top dollar to see these days.

 

[Profondo Rosso]

Did you miss the Cardiff game?

Yes, we did play really well second half, but it was no more attractive than our first half performance the season before under Pearson when we were passing one-twos all about the place.

 

[Profondo Rosso]

I am old enough to remember the Bloomfield era and how great his squad was but O'Neil is still the most succesful due to the league cup wins along with the over achievment of finishing in the top ten in 3 consecutive seasons.

Weller, Worthington and co deserved much more success as they played the beautiful game that we would pay top dollar to see these days.

:icon_lol: You've just confirmed my point exactly. There is much more to Leicester's history than the MON and Bloomfield days. If you're counting league finishes then there are definitely more successful managers than MON or Bloomfield.

 

[David Gwilliam]

I might get shot down in flames but I honestly believe that PS should have been given atleast another 6 games to get it right, I am sure if he was still in charge tomorrow Scunny would be thumped as some team was due it sooner or later.
The championship is a difficult and unpredictable league and anyone can beat anyone ie: bottom team beating top team (Yes I know we lost to QPR).

I blame some of the players more than the manager, just like some of our so called fans certain players have never accepted PS and his style of play.

It's all so easy to think Nigel Pearson was god and yes he did a great job getting us promoted at first time of asking which I am indebited to him for doing so.

Pearson also did a good job last season getting us to a whisker of promotion to the Prem but he had an element of luck along the way winning games in the last few minutes that we would normally lose.

It wasn't pretty to watch but I know you are all thinking that todays game is a results game and Pearson was the right man for that, but I am a purist and like to be entertained so believe given just a bit longer PS might have just about got it right.

Whoever the next manager is (be it Sven, MON etc) under Mandaric will have a mountain to climb and could well put our great club back a step, remember 2008/2009.

I am reminded of Clement Attlee's letter to Richard Crossman after being sent some advice on the Middle East in 1949 "Thank you for your paper which shows a remarkable and complete misunderstanding of the situation."

You do not need to worry about the 2008-2009 analagy. This has already been superbly dealt with by someone in post 151 (authoritative version).

It is true that we tended to win matches in the later stages that in previous seasons we would have lost. One reason is that Pearson produced teams with what I believe Londoners call "bottle". Another reason was Pearson's teams were superbly fit.

It is difficult to regard Pearson as lucky. He made a brilliant signing of a Bulgarian international (thanks to Steve Walsh Sr). That player IMO the best player at the club then gets injured and is out for a season and a half.

I remember feeling our playoff chances were receding when our top scorer had his jaw broken. What bad luck and what happened was Nigel Pearson's favourite phrase "We deal with it."

There were poor signings under Pearson notably Verma and the unspellable from Liverpool. On the other hand no manager since MON has bought so astutely. Weale, Berner, Hobbs, Tunchev, Wellens and Dyer were good signings.

The remarkable improvement in King and Morrison is surely down to Pearson. Steve Bruce credited the Leicester staff with the improvement in Waghorn.

Sousa went about the job in a completely wrong way. Having inherited a squad that made the playoffs, having got youngsters - Hobbs, Morrison, King - who should be so much better this year he should have built on and improved the system not dismantled it.

Fans at the end of last season had reason to believe we might be among the contenders for automatic promotion. Normally any team that is bottom of the table with one win in nine and losing 6-1 to teams in the relegation zone can be said to be battling relegation. That was all due to the changes Sousa made.
This morning Milan Mandaric took the first serious step toward getting us out of the relegation zone.

 

[Filthy Rich]

Everyone on this forum should go here and listen to this interview with Milan Mandaric.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/l/leicester_city/9053696.stm


It is very hard to argue against what he says about Sousa and also about Nigel Pearson.

He confirms what I have said many times on here, that NP left because he wanted to despite MM's efforts to keep him. People who continue to say otherwise are delusional.

I remember him saying last season that he wished Nigel Pearson would be our manager forever. Why then would he want to oust him a couple of months later? Please don't say it's because the new owners wanted Sousa instead or I'll laugh at you.

 

[spionfox]

This morning Milan Mandaric took the first serious step toward getting us out of the relegation zone.

 

[okie fox]

but 4-4-2 or 4-3-3/4-5-1 are not systems, they are formations.

You may be right but then I am not the only one who is wrong! Andy Gray begins chapter 5 of his book Flat Back Four The Tactical Game by stating "4-4-2 is the system you are most likely to see ..." His first 2 figures in this chapter show the traditional 4-4-2 as I described. Then he talks about variations of 4-4-2 such as the diamond in midfield.

 

[Dour]

Yes, we did play really well second half, but it was no more attractive than our first half performance the season before under Pearson when we were passing one-twos all about the place.

We see matches differently then, I guess.

 

[Chrysalis]

I might get shot down in flames but I honestly believe that PS should have been given atleast another 6 games to get it right, I am sure if he was still in charge tomorrow Scunny would be thumped as some team was due it sooner or later.
The championship is a difficult and unpredictable league and anyone can beat anyone ie: bottom team beating top team (Yes I know we lost to QPR).

I blame some of the players more than the manager, just like some of our so called fans certain players have never accepted PS and his style of play.

It's all so easy to think Nigel Pearson was god and yes he did a great job getting us promoted at first time of asking which I am indebited to him for doing so.

Pearson also did a good job last season getting us to a whisker of promotion to the Prem but he had an element of luck along the way winning games in the last few minutes that we would normally lose.

It wasn't pretty to watch but I know you are all thinking that todays game is a results game and Pearson was the right man for that, but I am a purist and like to be entertained so believe given just a bit longer PS might have just about got it right.

Whoever the next manager is (be it Sven, MON etc) under Mandaric will have a mountain to climb and could well put our great club back a step, remember 2008/2009.

winning games in the last minute as we have recently seen is not just down to luck. To win games late on you need to be in a position to win the game at that point. ie. drawing or only behind by 1 goal. The late wins would be down to good fitness levels if anything else.

 

[Dour]

I remember him saying last season that he wished Nigel Pearson would be our manager forever. Why then would he want to oust him a couple of months later?

Didn't the MOF support Sousa yesterday?

 

[Mawsley]

<long stuff>

Top hole.

 

[bornslippy]

Rubbish Jeff. He actually made mostly very good appointments. Megson would have done a good if unpopular job, Pearson was exceptional. Holloway is clearly a very good manager as is Sousa. The only one he got wrong was Martin Allen and he nipped him in the bud immediately.

aaaaaaaarrrrrrrrggggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

aaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrrgggggggggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!

do you flying peniitisiums not get it????????????????????????
five f_kin managers names there who lasted about a day each... DO YOU NOT GET IT YET????????????????????????
is there not a common factor in all of this????????????????????

martin ofrigginneil is not comin to leicester you mentalists. sven goram muncheadisum might turn up - you can cheer all you friggin like - he is pleat - he is mr notts county - he will do nothin at leicester

you people are proper wrong upstairs. you have a tintersearch. you then repeat back what you've read like you have some special mi5googleworm.

rejoice at the 700th manager in as many hours all you like. the managers are not the problem!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

anyhow, all that aside, see yus tomorrow down the dry dock for a sweet sherry pre-match kiddas :icon_cool

 

[Graz]

Everyone on this forum should go here and listen to this interview with Milan Mandaric.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/l/leicester_city/9053696.stm


It is very hard to argue against what he says about Sousa and also about Nigel Pearson.

He confirms what I have said many times on here, that NP left because he wanted to despite MM's efforts to keep him. People who continue to say otherw*s* are delusional.

I remember him saying last season that he wished Nigel Pearson would be our manager forever. Why then would he want to oust him a couple of months later? Please don't say it's because the new owners wanted Sousa instead or I'll laugh at you.

"Milan, how many games do you think a manager should be given because it seems with you if they don't win 3 of their first 5 games"

"I don't think that's fair... I kept Ian Holloway for too long and he was losing games left and right" :icon_lol: