So having more defensive stability and conceding less goals counts for nothing if you score less goals? And there is not a huge difference between 5 points and 2 points.Quote:
Originally Posted by tetsujin1979
Printable View
So having more defensive stability and conceding less goals counts for nothing if you score less goals? And there is not a huge difference between 5 points and 2 points.Quote:
Originally Posted by tetsujin1979
Mallorca only won 5 out of 17 games? If they were Real Madrid, Barca, Atletico Madrid or Valencia, they would be expected to win more. It's harsh to accuse Hutton of having a hand in them getting relegated when he played half a season with them. Besides they wanted to make the loan permanent.Quote:
Originally Posted by tetsujin1979
Ah come on now. Are you being serious? I am judging Stevens on his performances not the results of the team. In any case, he helped Villa to three clean sheets and in the same time frame they conceded 15 goals against Chelsea (a), Spurs (h) and Wigan (h) without him in the team.
Fine. Rangers and Celtic have a monopoly over the rest of the League. In any case, two League Championships and last 16 in the Champions League in which they went out on away goals to (at that point one of the best teams in Europe) Villarreal.
If that's how every manager is judged then how does Trapattoni get any praise whatsoever for Ireland's performances under his stewardship? They were, by and large, rancid.
Eh, I'm a Rovers fan and I want to see Enda do well as much as anyone, but he hasn't made the grade at Villa and has all but been shown the door. If he can make it at Championship level, I'll be absolutely delighted for him.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOneWhoKnocks
Just to continue the admittedly small point on his managerial 'success' in Scotland.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOneWhoKnocks
That is right, it was a two team league throughout his tenure at Rangers (4.5 - 5 seasons). Yet he managed to guide Rangers to third spot in season 05/06 - hence his departure at the end of that season. He also won no silverware 03/04. He did win two titles which you rightly state (one by +1 GD, the other by +1 point) one of which was part of a treble but it was fine margins with his two league titles , he also managed to guide Rangers to 7 straight losses against Celtic. Whilst no doubt Big Eck won some trophies in Scotland - I certainly wouldn't use that as any testament to his managerial credentials.
Celtic also had the distraction of the UEFA Cup Final during one of those league wins.Quote:
Originally Posted by Junior
Are we really going to start trivialising League Championships because they were only won by the odd point or odd goal? I think you can put that any number of ways. The cynical would say it's fluky, others would call it strength in endurance. The League title was essentially lost before McLeish arrived at the club in his first season (yet he still managed to win two trophies) so fundamentally, he won two out of a possible four League Championships, spending a pittance compared to Celtic in the process. In his first full season, he won the Domestic treble - including the first of two League titles. He also consolidated Rangers position as a decent force in European football again after overseeing Rangers become the first Scottish team to progress through a European group stage. He did all this with little or no money to spend after the nonchalant spending of the Advocaat reign. He inherited an aging squad, lost players like Amoruso, McCann and Ferguson and then had to replace them with Bosman free transfers and loan signings.
He also won a trophy and got a top 10 finish for Birmingham City, finished SPL runners up with Motherwell and garnered a Scottish Cup runners-up medal with Hibernian, so he is clearly not that bad a manager.
He didn't run Aston Villa in to the ground like a lot of people think. He done as good a job as Lambert is doing and look at the amount of silly signings he's made. As someone else pointed out, Aston Villa might have scored ten less goals under McLeish in the League but they conceded sixteen more under Lambert the following season. So much for steadying the ship. :rolleyes: For all the Villa fans vitriol, three more points was the difference between the McLeish and Lambert reigns, and Villa are in another relegation battle this year after wasting money left, right and centre on unproven players and ostracising several other experienced pros.
Claudio Cannigia of Rangers said the only reason they won the league was because of Celtic's UEFA cup run.
Celtic finished the season very strong that year, as Charlie would no doubt concur, even beating Rangers at Ibrox.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuttgart88
Chris Sutton had a more precise explanation, to do with Dunfermline lying down belly-up at Ibrox, meanwhile Kilmarnock were wasting time, diving, playing the corners, to hang on to a 4 goal deficit against Celtic
Semantics.
Teams like Real Madrid, Barcelona and pre David Moyes Man Utd used to get an extra 8 or 9 points a season because of refereeing decisions. Italy is self-explanatory. The Old Firm had favourable decisions that season and every other. Whatever about Kilmarnock, you have to give Dunfermline the benefit of the doubt.
Can you provide examples of such favourable decisions, and, if what you claim was indeed the case, why would it make any difference to referees now that Moyes is in charge?Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOneWhoKnocks
There was a remarkable statistic - I'll try and find it for you - where Manchester United didn't concede a single penalty at Old Trafford for something like 14 years until Arsenal won one around the turn of the century.Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
Hehe, so was it a case of remarkably good defending or remarkably bad refereeing? In other words, were there clear instances where visiting teams were probably deserving of penalties but had their appeals waved away by (cowardly or agenda-driven?) referees?Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
I don't think anybody would suggest it was a result of remarkably good defending. Alex Ferguson's teams, for all their virtues, were always well capable of cynicism.Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
Surely there was a bit of it because visiting teams would not have spent very much time in possession, proportionally, in the home penalty area, to get a penalty, due to the dominance of that side through that era ? Particularly at home. I say, a bit of it owing to that, not totally, but it is a factor.
I'd say that's a lot of it, yeah. The corollary is true too - people would complain about United always getting penalties at Old Trafford, but a lot of that was the fact they were constantly running at defenders in the box. Arsenal and Liverpool have had a lot of penalties in recent seasons too for the same reason.
What is this argument about exactly? That McLeish is a "proven" Premier League manager?
We can easily prove that he's managed in the Premier League but the jury is certainly out, at best, that he did anything particularly good on a consistent basis.
It remains to be seen whether Lambert is any better. If pushed, I'd have to say that I see more in Lambert than I do in McLeish. The latter is very old school and I'm not sure he'll land another decent role again. He could be a short term fix for a defensively fragile squad lacking discipline, but he's not a manager who'd take a team with potential and turn them into the next Swansea. McLeish has peaked, Lambert still has time to prove himself.
I am pretty sure that statistic is incorrect.Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
Baffled to how anyone can think Mcleish is a decent manager. Hell even Lennon is winning titles in Scotland. Whats Mcleish doing these days?
The same Neil Lennon that has been linked with the managerial job at Norwich?Quote:
Originally Posted by bennocelt
Top 10 PL finish. League Cup. Automatic promotion to the PL. Numerous trophies with a downsizing Rangers. Good European run. 2nd place SPL finish with Motherwell. Cup final run with Hibs.
It's not that bad to have on the CV.
IDK why I'm defending him. He isn't even Irish! I guess he signs/plays a lot of Irish players i.e. Fahey, O'Shea and Stevens so that's something. :p
You're defending him because you made a slightly contentious claim that someone had the temerity to counter. As usual you then follow up with about two dozen posts getting progressively firmer in conviction. You rattle off stats where a subjective judgement would be more telling (such as why is no club showing even the remotest interest in hiring McLeish) and you just won't let another opinion go unchallenged until you flog your argument to death and everyone just gives up out of boredom. I'd say that's why - it's what you do :)
Statistics are not the full story.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOneWhoKnocks
Statistics do not show how thoroughly lily-livered McLeish was as Villa manager. How he regularly set his teams up, against even middling opposition, with no plan or conception of winning the game. How he had zero attacking plan throughout his reign. How he often shrugged his shoulders post-game and pretty much said 'ah well, we're just a small club, my hands are tied' when he was well supported financially, had a much stronger squad than Lambert and yet was completely cowardly in his usage of it.
Just go back and watch Villa under McLeish and then watch them under Lambert. Still limited? Sure. But at least Lambert has some idea of an attacking game plan. At least he doesn't give up when facing bigger clubs, meaning under him Villa have recorded unexpected, and fantastic wins, against the likes of Arsenal, Manchester City, Liverpool and others. At least Villa are competing.
There is simply no contest between the reigns of the two, and until you let go of your statistics and actually do some research into the issue, you'll fail to see this point. The 'Lambert is no better than McLeish' argument is pure Sky Sports barstoolery.
There was one I remember not so long ago against Fulham at Old Trafford, near the end of the game, some Fulham guy was blatantly tripped in the box, the ref waved play on.Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
MU won 1-0.
In general, as regards the penalty stats (conceded and won) they're much of a muchness.
At least Alex McLeish has a concept of how to perform the basic concept of fundamental defending. The ineptitude and erratic nature of the way Villa are set out to attack doesn't cover their well-known defensive failings.Quote:
Originally Posted by SwanVsDalton
I did do research. People call Alex a crap manager yet he had a better goal difference and his Villa team finished just 3 points worse off than Lambert's yet the latter isn't a crap manager; despite Villa being entrenched in another relegation battle, in what is a weak bottom half of the table.
But they had no concept of basic defending. Defending under McLeish was completely awful. Comparing two rank-bad defences is not going to help your argument, particularly when McLeish had two experienced centre halves (Dunne and Collins) unlike Lambert who has had to rely on Vlaar (new to the PL) with either Clark or Baker. Dunne has also never looked worse than when he played in that season under McLeish. He was terrible for Villa, unrecognisable from the player who went to Moscow at the same time and performed heroics.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOneWhoKnocks
With Villa, McLeish was a give-up artist who enervated a decent bunch of players with unrelenting negativity. If you can't see how this differs from Lambert's approach which, is actually far more positive than McLeish's, then I think it's best to just move on.
Is there a statistic that can illustrate your point? If not it's not really much of an opinion.
McLeish has a much better record north of the border than south where he rarely rose above mediocre. He did very well with Scotland, in hindsight probably should have stayed there but I guess it didn't pay very much.
Lennon would be wise to stay in celtic, cant even win the treble, he would be found out quick enough down south. What you can do in the SPL means SFA.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOneWhoKnocks
Where is this great manager Mcleish nowadays?
Is this the one?Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
Three penalties conceded at Old Trafford between 1993 and 2004.
Course, that doesn't necessarily say anything about referees. It could just be that they only conceded three penalties in that time.
Could be it, I read it in a book recently but there's no index annoyingly. I'll have a look tomorrow hopefully.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
http://www1.skysports.com/football/n...-at-stoke-city
Stoke want to sign Ireland on permanent deal.
He's already on a permanent deal. They want to extend it.
Maybe that'll be the club security he needs to make a decision on his international appetite. He should make himself available for May / June now or else eff off.
Last chance saloon.
He hasn't signed the deal yet,
"does Mark Hughes really appreciate me?"
"do they really value me enough?"
I expect the state of emotional and contractual insecurity to drag on through the summer.
It's quite draining actually, how can we expect him to be of sound body and mind to put himself on the line for his country?
Had a stonking game for Stoke yesterday, albeit just v. West Ham.
Games like that, just underline the frustration of his being in the. international wilderness.
Of his own making...
One can't. History has proved that he is in fact, a nutball.Quote:
Originally Posted by geysir
I think Stephen Ireland can be a valuable member of the team. He is too talented to ignore. However, he really needs to make a firm decision after he signs a long-term contract at Stoke. No more faffing about.
Nutball? Since when are modesty, intelligence and humility traits associated with footballers?
Stephen Ireland should watch this and if he doesn't feel proud to be Irish and eligible to represent his country he should never be mentioned again
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXt6GtMxOI8
I don't even think he should be discussed at all.
Stephen has signed a three year deal at Stoke.
No more excuses now.