|
Post by mickmillslovechild on May 11, 2017 18:34:52 GMT
Bad choice or phraseology basically Paul.That's why i said "Actively" (i.e. they had the chance to be passionate one way or the other in the poll and didn't "Act" one way or the other....only way i could think of to phrase it really). As you rightly say, we have no idea what their thoughts are, but if we're using the poll merely as a guideline to presume/infer/guess (as alster is) then it's points more towards general apathy than backing up any idea it's a general feeling that most want him gone.
The simple fact alster seems to be missing by using a representative sample and then the way electoral polls work is that, if a constituency has say 100k people and they poll 10k people as a representative sample then fine as their sample is 10k people that have all given their opinion. However, alster seems to think that 17.5k members on here is a representative sample (fine no problem with that) but is ignoring the fact that it is only a representative sample if all of those 17.5k actually vote in that poll. He's saying one minute 17.5k is enough, but then using the outcome of a poll that only 2% of that figure voted in. No polling company would ever say "Stoke have a fanbase of 200k people, we'll use 17.5k as a representative sample then. Oh, we only actually have the opinions of 400 people in total? Fuck it, we'll use that then"
With respect mate (and you do know that ordinarily I have the greatest of respect for your posts) I think you're still doing what you were accusing alster of doing earlier.
The only 'apathy' it is demonstrating, is apathy towards making a mark on the poll of an internet website. It demonstrates nothing at all with regard to their feelings towards the position of the current manager.
FriendCalledFive has just posted the final figures for the Oatcake poll on the tenure of Tony Pulis as, 384 to 186.
Just because a piddly total of 570 out of the entire Stoke City fan base voted at that time, do you think, that that in itself also demonstrated that there was a general apathy across the entire fan base towards the future of Tony Pulis at the time?
I'd say on reflection (and without the aid of any science ), that a ratio of about 2:1 wanting TP gone across the whole supporter base would probably have been just about right, if you'd had canvassed each and every supporter.
I think the Oatcake does provide a pretty representative reflection of the entire fan base.
Maybe you didn't actually say that it didn't but rather you were taking umbrage with alster over his methodology, so please don't think I'm suggesting that you did.
Talking of 'apathy'. More and more I'm seeing people saying that they're not actually bothered if he stays or if he goes. I (obviously) don't know what the percentages are but I would suspect if you took the people who aren't bothered if he continues of if he leaves and then added them to the people who definitely do want him gone, then I'd be surprised if that didn't turn out to be a rather large percentage of the total out there.
Agree with that mate and i certainly wasn't trying to say that i believe the lack of people voting proves or implies anything. I was saying that if you HAD to try to infer 1 thing out of it (simply because alster seemed insistent to do so), it certainly wouldn't be that most want him gone. It was simply a response to how he was manipulating stats. I was being facetious basically. Re: apathy....made the same comments in one of my previous posts about that poll i.e. the only real thing you can take from it, is that it indicates nothing other than apathy towards filling in the poll or apathy towards the issue itself. I also mentioned (as you do) that more and more people on here (and in "real life" with those around me, myself included) seem to be slipping into the jaws of the "Meh crocodile". My sole issue was the idea of using the number of registered members on here as a "representative sample", but then thinking we can somehow use the poll (of just 400 people) to say that's also now a representative sample of the original representative sample as it were. There are some on here that are VERY vocal about wanting him gone (fair play to them) but that's only a tiny percentage of the representative sample of the representative sample...to try to use that to back up an idea that most of the fanbase want him gone is just a bit ludicrous in my opinion. Basically i was being fucking anal for the sake of it ....and alster (if you can be arsed to read all this), i genuinely wasn't trying to piss you off mate, just didn't like the way the evidence was presented and appreciate i could have just left well alone ages ago. Apologies
|
|
|
Post by Davef on May 11, 2017 19:03:41 GMT
He's had one bad season in 4. If it becomes (or looks like becoming) 2 in 5 then get rid. For now, I'd prefer us to stick with what we have and give a previously successful manager the chance to get back to what he'd previously done well. Its been more than one season. It has, but it hasn't been the three that someone further up the thread riduculously claims it's been.
|
|
|
Post by Bera’s Beano on May 11, 2017 19:12:20 GMT
For me it is the early exits from the cups that hurts and really puts nails in his coffin too.
Not just the early exits but the manner and opposition we went out to, it multiplies the sub par league performances and makes it even worse.
I just haven't enjoyed any part of this season, and most people I talk to haven't either. I dare say Mark Hughes hasn't enjoyed it at all, which may lend to an ill feeling that he may mutually leave without being 'sacked'.
I've been reflecting and all in all if he stays then he needs to be backed, if he leaves, then I'll be happy enough and just hoping the next appointment is ambitious by the club.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2017 19:32:44 GMT
Its been more than one season. It has, but it hasn't been the three that someone further up the thread riduculously claims it's been. Our points totals under Hughes have been 50, 54 and 51. In the third of those seasons we were beaten on penalties in the semi of the League Cup. The season finished badly, but I don't get how you can look at the seasons overall and say that the first two were good seasons yet the third wasn't. If the bad finish had been in the middle of the season and we'd had a good end of season but still finished on the same points, would you still be saying it's been more than one bad season? Or is it more to do with the level of performances, bearing in mind there were some bloody good ones last season. Genuinely curious.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2017 19:39:09 GMT
He won't walk and we won't sack him, unfortunately.
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on May 11, 2017 19:55:28 GMT
Equally, were we to win them both, we'd match the best the previous manager coil muster...an achievement he was lauded for Yes except I'd say we are likely to lose both and have fuck all chance of winning both. And I'm not sure its really fair to compare the achievements of the jim-crack operation we had in those wild and windy days early days of our Prem-hood with the expensively assembled array of galatica we have on parade today. Tony pulis spent his fair share of cash so it does compare. In net spend terms it compares favourably. For a long while we were in the top 3 for net spend under the stewardship of the previous manager. We are currently in the bottom 3 of that particular table, even taking into account our last 4 signings.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2017 19:56:31 GMT
no need for apologies friend its a message board and most if us are adults ! I take on board what you say but personally i think end of season was the time for him to go and this season has reinforced that. If we had and god forbid had an even worse season then ........... ! Take care friend Cheers Wayne. By the way, you might not have clocked my edit to my previous post. I did Cheers friend, i was amending all over the place bud, 6 hour course, arriva train and trying to comunicate on the Oatcake on a Samsung is really hard ! Well it is with my fat fingers. Take Care Mate Gooooooarrrrn Stoke
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2017 19:58:51 GMT
Cheers Wayne. By the way, you might not have clocked my edit to my previous post. I did Cheers friend, i was amending all over the place bud, 6 hour course, arriva train and trying to comunicate on the Oatcake on a Samsung is really hard ! Well it is with my fat fingers. Take Care Mate Gooooooarrrrn Stoke There's nowt wrong with a trusty Samsung mate! 😊
|
|
|
Post by Gods on May 11, 2017 20:24:28 GMT
Yes except I'd say we are likely to lose both and have fuck all chance of winning both. And I'm not sure its really fair to compare the achievements of the jim-crack operation we had in those wild and windy days early days of our Prem-hood with the expensively assembled array of galatica we have on parade today. Tony pulis spent his fair share of cash so it does compare. In net spend terms it compares favourably. For a long while we were in the top 3 for net spend under the stewardship of the previous manager. We are currently in the bottom 3 of that particular table, even taking into account our last 4 signings. We got to the prem with a record signing of £1m for Ryan and got 46 points in our first season with Sidibe and Dick Cresswell up front, it's laughable to suggest we didn't sweat our playing assets harder in those crazy early days. We now regularly drop £10m here and £15m there today without blinking there simply is no comparison. Anyway it's all about wages and relatively our wages now will be in the stratosphere.
|
|
|
Post by Bera’s Beano on May 11, 2017 20:42:57 GMT
Tony pulis spent his fair share of cash so it does compare. In net spend terms it compares favourably. For a long while we were in the top 3 for net spend under the stewardship of the previous manager. We are currently in the bottom 3 of that particular table, even taking into account our last 4 signings. We got to the prem with a record signing of £1m for Ryan and got 46 points in our first season with Sidibe and Dickinson Cresswell up front, it's laughable to suggest we didn't sweat our playing assets harder in those crazy early days. We regularly drop £10m here and £15m there today without blinking there simply is no comparison. £5.5m on Kitson £5m on Tuncay £2m on SONKO £2.75m on Collins £3m on Arismendi £2.5m on Shea £8m on Palacios £10m on Crouch just 12 months after spending £8m on Jones... He basically scrapped £8m because he spunked over the prospect of getting Crouch to the point he spunked another £8m on Palacios to seal the deal. He has spent a lot of money on a lot of useless junk and even more decent players who he just couldn't fit into any kind of usable system. I'm not using this to defend Hughes but to say there is no comparison is utterly ludicrous. The problem is Hughes is slowly turning into the previous manager in a few too many ways.
|
|
|
Post by march4 on May 11, 2017 20:46:35 GMT
Yes except I'd say we are likely to lose both and have fuck all chance of winning both. And I'm not sure its really fair to compare the achievements of the jim-crack operation we had in those wild and windy days early days of our Prem-hood with the expensively assembled array of galatica we have on parade today. Tony pulis spent his fair share of cash so it does compare. In net spend terms it compares favourably. For a long while we were in the top 3 for net spend under the stewardship of the previous manager. We are currently in the bottom 3 of that particular table, even taking into account our last 4 signings. The difference is that TP took a team destined for the Third Division and apart from a year when he went to Plymouth, he performed a miracle to not just get us promoted but to solidify our place in the Prem. That takes money but compared with the resulting income from TV money, TP's spending is the greatest bargain in the club's history. Hughes on the other hand took over a stable, established, well organised outfit that could be improved with attacking flair. To begin, the union of TP's legacy added to Hughes' flair players was a winning combination. However, as TP's established organisation has faded, we started to ship goals (9 four goal humiliations in around 12 months). Hughes responded to this by tightening things defensively, to the extent that we are struggling in an attacking sense and the overall picture has gone from 2016's stagnation to 2017's decline. What is particularly concerning is the way in which Hughes has spent money to build us back up. His expensive signings have been patchy if you are generous (catastrophic if you're not). And who are we still relying on? - TP's signings, who (if we are realistic) should now be slipping further and further into the background. Hughes has of course made successful signings, but some of those aren't really playing a role at the moment. We have reached a critical point in our status as a Prem club. Carry on as we are and trouble lies ahead. Can Hughes alter things for the better? - I think the last 18 months gives us the answer.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2017 20:56:08 GMT
Tony pulis spent his fair share of cash so it does compare. In net spend terms it compares favourably. For a long while we were in the top 3 for net spend under the stewardship of the previous manager. We are currently in the bottom 3 of that particular table, even taking into account our last 4 signings. The difference is that TP took a team destined for the Third Division and apart from a year when he went to Plymouth, he performed a miracle to not just get us promoted but to solidify our place in the Prem. That takes money but compared with the resulting income from TV money, TP's spending is the greatest bargain in the club's history. Hughes on the other hand took over a stable, established, well organised outfit that could be improved with attacking flair. To begin, the union of TP's legacy added to Hughes' flair players was a winning combination. However, as TP's established organisation has faded, we started to ship goals (9 four goal humiliations in around 12 months). Hughes responded to this by tightening things defensively, to the extent that we are struggling in an attacking sense and the overall picture has gone from 2016's stagnation to 2017's decline. What is particularly concerning is the way in which Hughes has spent money to build us back up. His expensive signings have been patchy if you are generous (catastrophic if you're not). And who are we still relying on? - TP's signings, who (if we are realistic) should now be slipping further and further into the background. Hughes has of course made successful signings, but some of those aren't really playing a role at the moment. We have reached a critical point in our status as a Prem club. Carry on as we are and trouble lies ahead. Can Hughes alter things for the better? - I think the last 18 months gives us the answer. It isn't 18 months. That's a timescale that's been attributed by some, possibly to exaggerate how bad things have become, but it's starting to stick and it's just wrong. Our form from the beginning of January to the match on 2nd April 2016 was completely in line points wise with the total for the two previous seasons. We then had a dreadful month when we were without Butland and Johnson (who up to that point had been excellent) and with Shawcross looking particularly ropey. That's when the rot set in, 13 months ago. We were giving Man City and Man Utd a footballing lesson 17 months ago.
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on May 11, 2017 21:05:40 GMT
Tony pulis spent his fair share of cash so it does compare. In net spend terms it compares favourably. For a long while we were in the top 3 for net spend under the stewardship of the previous manager. We are currently in the bottom 3 of that particular table, even taking into account our last 4 signings. We got to the prem with a record signing of £1m for Ryan and got 46 points in our first season with Sidibe and Dick Cresswell up front, it's laughable to suggest we didn't sweat our playing assets harder in those crazy early days. We regularly drop £10m here and £15m there today without blinking there simply is no comparison. Anyway it's all about wages and relatively our wages now will be in the stratosphere. Relative to what? Relative to the league we are playing in we've outperformed our position in the wages table for each of mark Hughes 3 seasons in charge and are likely to do so again this season.
|
|
|
Post by baystokie on May 11, 2017 21:23:24 GMT
beware of what you wish for. thankfully the oatcake is not representative of stoke city. he has a good relationship with peter coates and that is all what matters. Of course the Oatcake is a representative sample of Stoke City's support it has enough registered users to be a very indicative sample of our overall supporter base. The original poster said the Oatcake is NOT representative of Stoke City which is true. The Oatcake IS representative of Stoke City's supporters which is not the same thing
|
|
|
Post by thevoid on May 11, 2017 21:25:53 GMT
The difference is that TP took a team destined for the Third Division and apart from a year when he went to Plymouth, he performed a miracle to not just get us promoted but to solidify our place in the Prem. That takes money but compared with the resulting income from TV money, TP's spending is the greatest bargain in the club's history. Hughes on the other hand took over a stable, established, well organised outfit that could be improved with attacking flair. To begin, the union of TP's legacy added to Hughes' flair players was a winning combination. However, as TP's established organisation has faded, we started to ship goals (9 four goal humiliations in around 12 months). Hughes responded to this by tightening things defensively, to the extent that we are struggling in an attacking sense and the overall picture has gone from 2016's stagnation to 2017's decline. What is particularly concerning is the way in which Hughes has spent money to build us back up. His expensive signings have been patchy if you are generous (catastrophic if you're not). And who are we still relying on? - TP's signings, who (if we are realistic) should now be slipping further and further into the background. Hughes has of course made successful signings, but some of those aren't really playing a role at the moment. We have reached a critical point in our status as a Prem club. Carry on as we are and trouble lies ahead. Can Hughes alter things for the better? - I think the last 18 months gives us the answer. It isn't 18 months. That's a timescale that's been attributed by some, possibly to exaggerate how bad things have become, but it's starting to stick and it's just wrong. Our form from the beginning of January to the match on 2nd April 2016 was completely in line points wise with the total for the two previous seasons. We then had a dreadful month when we were without Butland and Johnson (who up to that point had been excellent) and with Shawcross looking particularly ropey. That's when the rot set in, 13 months ago. We were giving Man City and Man Utd a footballing lesson 17 months ago. He can't keep dining out on those two results forever. We wouldn't give a football lesson to Salford City at the minute.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2017 21:40:28 GMT
It isn't 18 months. That's a timescale that's been attributed by some, possibly to exaggerate how bad things have become, but it's starting to stick and it's just wrong. Our form from the beginning of January to the match on 2nd April 2016 was completely in line points wise with the total for the two previous seasons. We then had a dreadful month when we were without Butland and Johnson (who up to that point had been excellent) and with Shawcross looking particularly ropey. That's when the rot set in, 13 months ago. We were giving Man City and Man Utd a footballing lesson 17 months ago. He can't keep dining out on those two results forever. We wouldn't give a football lesson to Salford City at the minute. You're right. He can't. I'm just correcting an inaccuracy that people are starting to accept as a fact. Nothing more.
|
|
|
Post by Gods on May 11, 2017 21:40:39 GMT
We got to the prem with a record signing of £1m for Ryan and got 46 points in our first season with Sidibe and Dickinson Cresswell up front, it's laughable to suggest we didn't sweat our playing assets harder in those crazy early days. We regularly drop £10m here and £15m there today without blinking there simply is no comparison. £5.5m on Kitson £5m on Tuncay £2m on SONKO £2.75m on Collins £3m on Arismendi £2.5m on Shea £8m on Palacios £10m on Crouch just 12 months after spending £8m on Jones... He basically scrapped £8m because he spunked over the prospect of getting Crouch to the point he spunked another £8m on Palacios to seal the deal. He has spent a lot of money on a lot of useless junk and even more decent players who he just couldn't fit into any kind of usable system. I'm not using this to defend Hughes but to say there is no comparison is utterly ludicrous. The problem is Hughes is slowly turning into the previous manager in a few too many ways. That whole lot over 5 long years adds up to less than Imbula, Joselu and Berahino, and don't forget our start point was a league 2 team, I think you proved my point with that. For what its worth I'd stick with Hughes but its a joke to pretend we didn't sweat our minimal playing assets much harder in the Pulis years.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2017 21:43:41 GMT
£5.5m on Kitson £5m on Tuncay £2m on SONKO £2.75m on Collins £3m on Arismendi £2.5m on Shea £8m on Palacios £10m on Crouch just 12 months after spending £8m on Jones... He basically scrapped £8m because he spunked over the prospect of getting Crouch to the point he spunked another £8m on Palacios to seal the deal. He has spent a lot of money on a lot of useless junk and even more decent players who he just couldn't fit into any kind of usable system. I'm not using this to defend Hughes but to say there is no comparison is utterly ludicrous. The problem is Hughes is slowly turning into the previous manager in a few too many ways. That whole lot over 5 years adds up to less than Imbula and Berahino, and don't forget our start point was a league 2 team, I think you proved my point with that. Fees as good as doubled when the big money came in a couple of years ago.
|
|
|
Post by Gods on May 11, 2017 21:51:02 GMT
That whole lot over 5 years adds up to less than Imbula and Berahino, and don't forget our start point was a league 2 team, I think you proved my point with that. Fees as good as doubled when the big money came in a couple of years ago. I accept fees have gone up but we regulary have £40 million of 'talent' on the bench these days and another £20 million out on loan, it was about £4 million when Tone was making a silk purse out of a pigs ear. Repeat I'd keep Hughes but the incremental points return (about an additional 5 a season on average) since Hughes arrival doesn't match the increased investment IMHO And if Mr. Coates doesn't also take that view I'd be astonished.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2017 22:03:54 GMT
Fees as good as doubled when the big money came in a couple of years ago. I accept fees have gone up but we regulary have £40 million of 'talent' on the bench these days and another £20 million out on loan, it was about £4 million when Tone was making a purse out of a pigs ear. Repeat I'd keep Hughes but the incremental points return (about an additional 5 a season on average) since Hughes arrival doesn't match the increased investment IMHO And if Mr. Coates doesn't also take that view I'd be astonished. If you compare Pulis' last three seasons with Hughes' three full seasons it's actually more than 7 points per season on average, but I accept you can make stats sing and dance to whatever tune you want to play. On that basis though, particularly given that for the first couple of years Hughes spent very little in up-front fees, I think Hughes performance up to the end of last season has been perfectly acceptable. This season has been a clusterfuck and I've never said anything else. But I'll keep maintaining that this is one bad season out of four, so yeah, I'd keep him too.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2017 22:16:33 GMT
For me it is the early exits from the cups that hurts and really puts nails in his coffin too. Not just the early exits but the manner and opposition we went out to, it multiplies the sub par league performances and makes it even worse. I just haven't enjoyed any part of this season, and most people I talk to haven't either. I dare say Mark Hughes hasn't enjoyed it at all, which may lend to an ill feeling that he may mutually leave without being 'sacked'. I've been reflecting and all in all if he stays then he needs to be backed, if he leaves, then I'll be happy enough and just hoping the next appointment is ambitious by the club. Yes I agree. Top half finishes are probably the best we can hope for with the size of the club. We will always aspire to do better, but it is very difficult. However if we reach a final or even better win a cup and then avoid relegation we would be very contented
|
|
|
Post by Gods on May 11, 2017 22:29:26 GMT
I accept fees have gone up but we regulary have £40 million of 'talent' on the bench these days and another £20 million out on loan, it was about £4 million when Tone was making a purse out of a pigs ear. Repeat I'd keep Hughes but the incremental points return (about an additional 5 a season on average) since Hughes arrival doesn't match the increased investment IMHO And if Mr. Coates doesn't also take that view I'd be astonished. If you compare Pulis' last three seasons with Hughes' three full seasons it's actually more than 7 points per season on average, but I accept you can make stats sing and dance to whatever tune you want to play. On that basis though, particularly given that for the first couple of years Hughes spent very little in up-front fees, I think Hughes performance up to the end of last season has been perfectly acceptable. This season has been a clusterfuck and I've never said anything else. But I'll keep maintaining that this is one bad season out of four, so yeah, I'd keep him too. Factor this seasons final tally in (likely 41 or 42 max) in and you'll be back at near enough 5, let's agree to call it 6! Either way for me his first 3 seasons more than enough justify him getting a season 5 even though season 4 all went Pete Tong. I just get jumpy when folks try to ridicule the Pulis years, what he did was no less than give us back our pride after a quarter of a century in the wilderness washing aimlessly around between the old divisions 2 and 3.
|
|
|
Post by Pugsley on May 11, 2017 22:34:54 GMT
People are desperate for Hughes to fail. He's outperformed the previous manager time and time again. Get over it, the toxic prick ain't coming back.
|
|
|
Post by Gods on May 11, 2017 22:44:30 GMT
People are desperate for Hughes to fail. He's outperformed the previous manager time and time again. Get over it, the toxic prick ain't coming back. No they're not and I haven't seen one single person calling for Pulis return, thats just complete tosh (respectfully)
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2017 22:46:04 GMT
If you compare Pulis' last three seasons with Hughes' three full seasons it's actually more than 7 points per season on average, but I accept you can make stats sing and dance to whatever tune you want to play. On that basis though, particularly given that for the first couple of years Hughes spent very little in up-front fees, I think Hughes performance up to the end of last season has been perfectly acceptable. This season has been a clusterfuck and I've never said anything else. But I'll keep maintaining that this is one bad season out of four, so yeah, I'd keep him too. Factor this seasons final tally in (likely 41 or 42 max) in and you'll be back at near enough 5, let's agree to call it 6! Either way for me his first 3 seasons more than enough justify him getting a season 5 even though season 4 all went Pete Tong. I just get jumpy when folks try to ridicule the Pulis years, what he did was no less than give us back our pride after a quarter of a century in the wilderness washing aimlessly around between the old divisions 2 and 3. In many ways I feel the same about the Hughes years for various reasons, so I get where you're coming from and I'm happy with your suggestion over the average points. Compromise can be a good thing. A bit more of it on here wouldn't go amiss at times.
|
|
|
Post by GoBoks on May 11, 2017 23:07:22 GMT
And, it doesn't matter how many people are in the sample, it can still not be a representative sample if the membership is biased. E.g. ( not saying any of these are true of the Oatcake, just illustrating the point) Only fans with computers are members of Oatcake, or only fans who have a largely inflated opinion of their own point of view sign up, etc. What you mean like the type of people who are used for all other forms of statistical forecasting. I'm sure you're right they should get out and speak to people without phones or housing, the deaf and the mute but face facts they don't and they still manage to predict the outcome of most things. well up until last year they did anyway and they did get the Scot independence vote and French election pretty close, so somehow they still work even if they do only talk to people who are up their own arse. errr I hope you do realize that there is a difference between professional opinion survey companies who actually GO OUT AND POLL PEOPLE and simply saying that people that spout drivel on here are representative of all Stokies? (Just like there is a differenve between finishing 8th and 17th)
|
|
|
Post by peterthornesboots on May 11, 2017 23:08:24 GMT
I can't help but wonder if some supporters are just talking themselves into a completely negative mindset on their own accord.
No one is denying that Hughes has made mistakes over the last twelve months but as a fan base we are hardly in open revolt. I would argue there's a minority who want him sacked and the vast majority are in between.
But literally every single day there is a 'Hughes out" thread with a different title and the same posters keep throwing out the same negative themes.
I mean this thread (all six pages) is based on someone's "sneaky feeling". Jesus, come on guys have a look at yourselves!
There are issues to be resolved over the summer but you would think judging by some posters that this was the Leyton Orient or Coventry City message board!
|
|
|
Post by boskampsflaps on May 11, 2017 23:55:41 GMT
Its been more than one season. It has, but it hasn't been the three that someone further up the thread riduculously claims it's been. No its not been three, it isn't just the bad seasons that worry me with him, sate of the squad, game management and subs are the biggest for me, 2 of which will never change because its just how he is/see things.
|
|
|
Post by hanibal7 on May 12, 2017 8:04:44 GMT
People are desperate for Hughes to fail. He's outperformed the previous manager time and time again. Get over it, the toxic prick ain't coming back. I agree totaly, the attitude of I TOLD YOU SO, wreaks of Narcissistic tendencies. There are defo a few on this board who want us to fail, without a question of doubt in my mind. Maybe we have outperformed the firsat three seasons, maybe this season has been a glitch for many many reasons, the buck stays with Coates not Hughes.
|
|
|
Post by hanibal7 on May 12, 2017 8:07:39 GMT
I can't help but wonder if some supporters are just talking themselves into a completely negative mindset on their own accord. No one is denying that Hughes has made mistakes over the last twelve months but as a fan base we are hardly in open revolt. I would argue there's a minority who want him sacked and the vast majority are in between. But literally every single day there is a 'Hughes out" thread with a different title and the same posters keep throwing out the same negative themes. I mean this thread (all six pages) is based on someone's "sneaky feeling". Jesus, come on guys have a look at yourselves! There are issues to be resolved over the summer but you would think judging by some posters that this was the Leyton Orient or Coventry City message board! We should have just said two words to this ridiculous post, and the second is off. What a fkn waste of oxygen to even make sneaky feelings without any realistic info, i despair.
|
|