Managers getting unwarranted praise?

NIMAN

I listened to reports on BBCs Final Score programme today and they were raving about how good a job Mark Hughes had done at QPR, as they had just scored a last minute winner.

I got to thinking about this, and on the report it was a corner, a flick-on by A.Ferdinand and Cisse scored.

How exactly did Mark Hughes have any part in this goal? What tactical call did he make that won them the game?

Say the corner was crap and it hit the 1st defender and it was cleared out, and the game finished 0-0, they would have been deflated and the fans would have been a lot more negative. Instead he was hailed as a hero.

Football is a funny old game.

Admittedly he has kept them fighting to the last day of the season for their survival, which could be considered an achievement, but wrt todays goal, can't see his part in it.

kryogen

He put Cisse on the field

cgpg5

Think Hughes has been very poor myself and benefited from having merely awful teams around them fighting relegation. Saying that they're still not safe. In january they were all but safe. Had they kept Warnock they wouldn't be in this mess imo.

Will struggle next season

kryogen

They were in serious trouble under Warnock I feel, that team were in a free fall, the home form has improved under Hughes, the away form is still atrocious but it wasn't going to be turned around over night, I remember thinking when he took over he was going to have a serious job on his hands, and tbf to him he is doing it atm.

Next season with a proper summer behind him I would expect improvement, haven't forgiven him for managing City yet though so wouldn't be that upset if he did fail.

cgpg5

kryogen wrote: »

They were in serious trouble under Warnock I feel, that team were in a free fall, the home form has improved under Hughes, the away form is still atrocious but it wasn't going to be turned around over night, I remember thinking when he took over he was going to have a serious job on his hands, and tbf to him he is doing it atm.

Next season with a proper summer behind him I would expect improvement, haven't forgiven him for managing City yet though so wouldn't be that upset if he did fail.

Didn't they go on an awful run though when he took over? Like lose at home to Wolves and fail to beat the likes of Bolton, Blackburn who were below them in the table. It's only recently they've started winning at home.

A lot of changes need to be made. If they happen to stay up they'll need to improve vastly as the prem will be a lot tougher next year. Think Barton is a liability as is Taarabt potentially, though he's a great player but he could cause unrest. Can see him leaving though tbh. Interesting to see who they bring in though alright.

Chucky the tree

cgpg5 wrote: »

Think Hughes has been very poor myself and benefited from having merely awful teams around them fighting relegation. Saying that they're still not safe. In january they were all but safe. Had they kept Warnock they wouldn't be in this mess imo.

Will struggle next season

They were in 17th one point above relegation when he was sacked. Up until then they had only won 3 games under Warnock and since then have won 6 with Hughes. Quite obvious sacking Warnock was the right decision even if they do go down.

kitakyushu

kryogen wrote: »

He put Cisse on the field

I'd actually give this one to Hughes. I know if I brought in a new player and he managed to get himself sent off twice in his first five games I'd seriously be considering whether to persevere with him or not.

NIMAN

My point wasn't to discuss his credentials overall for the season, but how a manager might actually keep a team up when its actually a totally random event like a flick on leading to a last minute goal.

Thats no great masterplan or a season of playing great attacking football, its just a random thing.

kryogen

NIMAN wrote: »

My point wasn't to discuss his credentials overall for the season, but how a manager might actually keep a team up when its actually a totally random event like a flick on leading to a last minute goal.

Thats no great masterplan or a season of playing great attacking football, its just a random thing.

You don't think corner routines get worked on in training?

Do you believe in tactics actually? Or do you just think all managers tell the players to just do what they like? See what happens?

NIMAN

kryogen wrote: »

You don't think corner routines get worked on in training?

Do you believe in tactics actually? Or do you just think all managers tell the players to just do what they like? See what happens?

I have no doubt set pieces are worked on in training, but makes you wonder why so many corners hit the 1st defender then?

kryogen

NIMAN wrote: »

I have no doubt set pieces are worked on in training, but makes you wonder why so many corners hit the 1st defender then?

Your right about that

cgpg5

Chucky the tree wrote: »

They were in 17th one point above relegation when he was sacked. Up until then they had only won 3 games under Warnock and since then have won 6 with Hughes. Quite obvious sacking Warnock was the right decision even if they do go down.

You're missing my point. Warnock was sacked after a number of poor results in very tough games. Hughes then took over and lost against Wolves and Fulham at home, Blackburn and Bolton away, and failed to beat Everton at home and Villa. These were awful results. If Warnock was still there he'd have gotten more out of these imo and they wouldn't be in the position that they're in. If they stay up, his test is next year though when no doubt they'll be expected to battle for survival. I think we can only truly assess him then

leeroybrown

NIMAN wrote: »

I have no doubt set pieces are worked on in training, but makes you wonder why so many corners hit the 1st defender then?

Because it you're whipping a fast paced corner in there's a fine line between hitting the first defender's jump, putting a great ball into the centre of goal and overhitting the ball out of the danger area.

cgpg5

NIMAN wrote: »

My point wasn't to discuss his credentials overall for the season, but how a manager might actually keep a team up when its actually a totally random event like a flick on leading to a last minute goal.

Thats no great masterplan or a season of playing great attacking football, its just a random thing.

Yeah the only reason they're staying up I feel is not down to flick on's or any of that but simply that Bolton and Blackburn and Wolves are merely awful. QPR are an extremely poor side imo

CSF

NIMAN wrote: »

kryogen wrote: »

You don't think corner routines get worked on in training?

Do you believe in tactics actually? Or do you just think all managers tell the players to just do what they like? See what happens?

I have no doubt set pieces are worked on in training, but makes you wonder why so many corners hit the 1st defender then?

Because set piece delivery against well-organised defences is much more difficult than we give credit for.

Chucky the tree

cgpg5 wrote: »

You're missing my point. Warnock was sacked after a number of poor results in very tough games. Hughes then took over and lost against Wolves and Fulham at home, Blackburn and Bolton away, and failed to beat Everton at home and Villa. These were awful results. If Warnock was still there he'd have gotten more out of these imo and they wouldn't be in the position that they're in. If they stay up, his test is next year though when no doubt they'll be expected to battle for survival. I think we can only truly assess him then

It's not like Warnocks results in the corresponding fixtures were great. Home draw to blackburn , beat Wolves, lost to Bolton 4-0 at home and lost 6-0 to Fulham. Also not sure why you just pick and choose those results. It doesn't matter really matter who you beat once you pick up points and that is what Hughes has done. If you look at the results Hughes has gotten in terms of points per game and goal difference QPR would be 12th in the league.

NIMAN

QPR will get stuffed by Man City next Sunday, and we will see what the thoughts are on Mark Hughes then.

Think he might need 2 flick-ons at least next week!

cgpg5

Chucky the tree wrote: »

It's not like Warnocks results in the corresponding fixtures were great. Home draw to blackburn , beat Wolves, lost to Bolton 4-0 at home and lost 6-0 to Fulham. Also not sure why you just pick and choose those results. It doesn't matter really matter who you beat once you pick up points and that is what Hughes has done. If you look at the results Hughes has gotten in terms of points per game and goal difference QPR would be 12th in the league.

Wasn't Bolton first game? Still an awful result but in fairness they recovered well from that bad start. The reason I picked them ones is that they were among the first games he was in charge for. And they are easy games as such. I'm just highlighting that he had an awful start and I don't think replacing Warnock had any difference tbh. Still think they'd have come good towards the end.

Being that high up in the latter stages of the season is not uncommon for teams battling relegation. They seem to always put results together near the end in the battle for vital points. Also many teams seem to be on the beach in the last group of games and will tend to drop uncharacteristic points. So this isn't really properly representative.

Hughes has picked up points but not an incredible amount. Any other season they'd be gone by now. he's been incredibly fortunate that there's such bad teams down there and it's frustrating to see people will say what a great job he's done keeping them up.

As I say his test is next year if they stay up. Bolton can very easily win at Stoke.

G.K.

I think I know who Paully would pick for this thread...

theoneeyedman

Maybe Hughes tied Jon walters laces together for said corner cause he was stuck to the ground and lost cisse.
Looking at the state of bolton wolves and blackburn and their respective managers, IF the r"s stay up they nor Hughes can claim much credit imo

cgpg5

theoneeyedman wrote: »

Maybe Hughes tied Jon walters laces together for said corner cause he was stuck to the ground and lost cisse.
Looking at the state of bolton wolves and blackburn and their respective managers, IF the r"s stay up they nor Hughes can claim much credit imo

Exactly what I'm getting at!

eagle eye

Mark Hughes has an excellent record. He had Blacburn finish 6th, 7th and 10th in his three full seasons in charge. He then went to City and they got taken over, he didn't get a fair chance there imo. He made some bad signings tbf but he made a lot of good ones such as Kompany, Lescott, Zabaleta, De Jong and Tevez who are all still key parts of the Manchester City team.

Anyways he then went to Fulham and they finished 8th, he made one major signing iirc and Dembele looks like a real bargain now at £5 million.

When he joined QPR they were in a right mess as has been revealed since. He has managed to keep them up by the looks of things and they will improve next year once he has the opportunity to really stamp his authority on the squad.

Richard Hillman

Mark Hughes is a strange one. He has tons of mates in the media and it helps with Kia Joorabchian as his agent. His spell at City was an absolute joke shop yet some of his mates in the media still said he was unlucky at City or treated unfairly. The vast majority of his signings for City are not even there any more, they all got turfed out on loan or sold for next to near nothing.

Paully D

G.K. wrote: »

I think I know who Paully would pick for this thread...

Not quite who you think (:pac:) but I'd have to give my vote to Steve Bruce here.

Lots of friends in the media who let him spout his usual ''they never gave me a chance because I was born in Newcastle'', ''finished 10th'', ****e.

Excellent article on it here actually (although I don't agree with the Henderson comment):

http://www.randrlife.co.uk/steve-bruce-comment/

The PR offensive that follows a manager’s sacking is always intriguing to watch.

The unemployed manager, looking refreshed after a few weeks on an exclusive Caribbean island, having had time to come up with every excuse under the exclusive Caribbean sun for his disastrous performance, appears on every TV and radio show available, repeating his version of events ad nauseum. A version of events that is designed to deflect any blame from himself, and remind gullible chairman up and down the country that he’s available for work, and that whatever failings he’s accused of aren’t his fault.

The latest example is Steve Bruce, who over the past few weeks has been doing the rounds relaying his version of events; a version that unfortunately is so far removed from reality that any journalist or presenter with a modicum of intelligence could challenge him for weeks.

Unfortunately, the press pack these days is an extended old boys network, in which they dare not utter a word of criticism for fear of doing the wrong thing, and would rather shy away from a question that could be perceived as tough than put a mate on the spot.

Bruce’s ‘charm offensive’, to anyone with a remote understanding of his tenure at Sunderland, is as blatant an attempt at rewriting history than you’re ever likely to see. A job at the Iraqi Ministry of (mis)Information surely beckons should he fail to secure further football employment.

Take his comments this week: Sunderland fans’ hatred of him due to his Newcastle supporting roots are to blame, losing players at the end of last season is to blame, and fans putting too much importance on the derby games is to blame. Oh, and not being given enough time. That was to blame too. The last excuse from the failed manager’s book of ready made excuses.

Of course, it was nothing to do with 29 wins in 98 games, a win ratio of below 29% (to put that in context, the much maligned Graeme Souness had a 43% win ratio north of the Tyne, and 41% on the Mersey; Avram Grant’s ‘disastrous’ spell at West Ham saw a win ratio of 32%, Paul Ince recorded 29% and Brian Kidd 27% at Blackburn, while even Chris Hutchings had a win ratio of 33% at Bradford. Hardly a glowing endorsement of Bruce’s abilities).
Nothing to do with 3 home wins in 2011.

Nothing to do with 2 wins in 13 games at the start of this season.

Nothing to do with signing too many players on loan.

Nothing to do with Bruce building up the derby matches, to the extent he was boasting about what celebration song he was going to play over the Tannoy system in January 2011 if Sunderland won. Which they didn’t.

It’s a pathetic, bitter assessment from a man who was welcomed and supported from the off, at a club who has a statue of a former Newcastle United captain outside its ground. Do the business at Sunderland or any football club, and it doesn’t matter if you’re from Newcastle, The Netherlands or Neptune. It’s downright insulting, inaccurate and irresponsible, and a smokescreen the Great Soprendo would be proud of.

He has even had the audacity to claim that he’s the reason Sunderland have done well since he left, as it’s all his hard work paying off. His signings are doing well (including James McClean, who’s been a revelation but who Bruce didn’t give a second of first team action). He doesn’t see the irony in this, or how insulting that is to his successor. He doesn’t see that Martin O’Neill has done incredibly better with the same set of players as he had at his disposal.
O’Neill has got Sunderland organised, motivated and working hard. They’re a fitter, more confident and more focused team, and that’s to do with the manager. The fact O’Neill is doing well with Bruce’s players is a reflection of both of their managerial abilities. And unfortunately for Bruce, under the slightest bit of scrutiny, it doesn’t reflect well on him.

The simple facts are that after a very good start as Sunderland manager, Bruce wasn’t up to it, and actually isn’t up to it. Sunderland went on prolonged periods without a win. The fast, pressing game he employed in the early days to maximise Bent’s effectiveness was abandoned for a slow passing style, which while it looked aesthetically pleasing was less effective. And as it became less effective, Bruce cut an increasingly hopeless figure on the sidelines, often looking up to heaven rather than his bench for inspiration.

The loss of Albanian club captain Lorik Cana without a fight was careless. The departure of Bent in similar circumstances was neglectful, and Gyan downright incompetent. Yes, they all wanted to leave (within 12 months of Bruce signing them), but part of a manager’s job is to keep good players happy and motivated.

Yes, he guided Sunderland to 10th last season. The league table doesn’t lie. The fact they were eight points off relegation suggests it was less than convincing. He took over a club that finished 17th, and left them in 18th position, via a 13th and 10th placed finish. Progress? Not quite.

His biggest success at Sunderland was using the media to convince the footballing world that the decidedly average Jordan Henderson was worth any more than a pocketful of loose change. And he’s now using the media again.You can’t blame him, but no matter what spin Bruce and his media chums put on his managerial record, the fact is, at Sunderland, he was a failure. Will prospective employers fall for the media spin? Probably. Because that’s the way it works. Expect Alex Ferguson to speak up for his former skipper again soon. Expect Bruce, fully resplendent in new club tracksuit, in a dug out near you soon. And in two or three years time, the whole media roadshow will start again.

kitakyushu

Paully D wrote: »

Bruce’s ‘charm offensive’

Made me laugh just at the thought of it.

Richard Hillman

Martin O'Neill is another one. In all comps they have won only 2 games out of the last 14 matches. Those wins came against Mark Hughes (who is doing a great job at QPR btw) and the imperious Liverpool, managed by that cheeky little scamp Kenny Dalglish who is another one we dare not speak ill about on TV.

cgpg5

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Martin O'Neill is another one. In all comps they have won only 2 games out of the last 14 matches. Those wins came against Mark Hughes (who is doing a great job at QPR btw) and the imperious Liverpool, managed by that cheeky little scamp Kenny Dalglish who is another one we dare not speak ill about on TV.

Tbf they were at 6's and 7's when he took over. They've dropped off a bit in recent weeks but are playing like they're already on the beach. As a Newcastle fan I'm afraid to say it but watch out for them next season.

Paully D

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Martin O'Neill is another one. In all comps they have won only 2 games out of the last 14 matches. Those wins came against Mark Hughes (who is doing a great job at QPR btw) and the imperious Liverpool, managed by that cheeky little scamp Kenny Dalglish who is another one we dare not speak ill about on TV.

To be fair we were going down until he came in. The fact he managed to go on such a great run with the bunch of players he has at his disposal now is unbelievable.

It's disappointing that we've been on the beach for the last month but it's no surprise that it happened after we lost the only important game left in our season (cup QF replay).

He kept us up when we only started playing in December. Not bad in fairness.

Paully D

Holy ****, Alan Shearer has just said the ''Bruce got a hard time because he was a Geordie'' **** on Match of the Day.

TO THE NEXT PUNDIT THAT SAYS THIS, GO AND FIND OUT WHERE THE MAN WHO WE BUILT A STATUE OF OUTSIDE OUR GROUND IS FROM AND COME BACK TO ME, YOU IDIOTS!

Jayob10

Owen Coyle, everyday of the week

Is peddled as one of the managers who likes to "get it down and play" when the stats say otherwise.

In fact, Jonathan Wilson went through the stats in details which pointed to the fact that Bolton are play the most agricultural style of football in league, a stat Coyle was so much at pains to hide that he called Wilson (a superb writer on the game in general) and told him to keep his stats to himself so not to blow his reputation as a forward thinking coach out of the water.

A genuine brown nose with the media and any other manager who is a level above him (which is all other 19 managers in the league- including Steve Kean) Ok maybe not Terry Connor

Richard Hillman

Jayob10 wrote: »

Owen Coyle, everyday of the week

Is peddled as one of the managers who likes to "get it down and play" when the stats say otherwise.

In fact, Jonathan Wilson went through the stats in details which pointed to the fact that Bolton are play the most agricultural style of football in league, a stat Coyle was so much at pains to hide that he called Wilson (a superb writer on the game in general) and told him to keep his stats to himself so not to blow his reputation as a forward thinking coach out of the water.

A genuine brown nose with the media and any other manager who is a level above him (which is all other 19 managers in the league- including Steve Kean) Ok maybe not Terry Connor

Agree about Owen Coyle. In reference to the brown nosing bit, i remember they played Arsenal a couple of years ago and he was whinging in every media outlet available about a tackle on one of his players. Days later he retracted everything he said, "heat of the moment" etc. The very next day after retracted everything, he coincidently got Jack Wilshire on loan from Arsenal :rolleyes:

flyswatter

kryogen wrote: »

He put Cisse on the field

That annoys me a good bit when commentators scream "What a substitution!" when such a player scores, praise the player, not the manager.

Richard Hillman

Another example. Avram Grant got Chelsea to the Champions League final, lost on peno's in the champs and would have won if Terry had not have slipped. Took over the job from the fan, player and media favourite Mourinho, who was having a fair few shabby results at the time. The media seen him as some sort of joke figure and didnt have a chance of getting the Chelsea job for keeps.

Roberto Di Matteo or "Robbie" as he is affectionately known as, must get the Chelsea job. He took over at a very rough time. He got them to the Champions League and FA Cup finals.

NIMAN

flyswatter wrote: »

That annoys me a good bit when commentators scream "What a substitution!" when such a player scores, praise the player, not the manager.

... and they never point out that the vast majority of subs doing sweet FA when they come on, so a managers tactical switch had little effect.