|
Post by trickydicky73 on Mar 16, 2018 11:54:47 GMT
What made you see the light about Hughes Geoff, given you were absolutely adamant he shouldn't have been sacked? Maybe the results of late when he was in charge? Stats starting from November: Lost: 2-1 to palace 3-0 to liverpool 5-1 at spurs 1-0 at burnley 3-0 to west ham 5-0 to chelsea 1-0 to newcastle 2-1 at coventry Drew: Huddesfield 1-1 Won: Swansea 2-1 West brom 3-1 Does them stats not speak for itself geoff321So thats 7 points out of a possible 33. Even the two wins were against teams at their lowest ebb.
|
|
|
Post by thegift on Mar 16, 2018 11:56:46 GMT
Maybe the results of late when he was in charge? Stats starting from November: Lost: 2-1 to palace 3-0 to liverpool 5-1 at spurs 1-0 at burnley 3-0 to west ham 5-0 to chelsea 1-0 to newcastle 2-1 at coventry Drew: Huddesfield 1-1 Won: Swansea 2-1 West brom 3-1 Does them stats not speak for itself geoff321 So thats 7 points out of a possible 33. Even the two wins were against teams at their lowest ebb. When you look at it, in detail, its actually quite embarrassing
|
|
|
Post by cheekycheddleton on Mar 16, 2018 12:05:50 GMT
the gift
for me good poster. new he was good poster when i sign up. enjoy your posts mate
|
|
|
Post by geoff321 on Mar 16, 2018 12:07:48 GMT
No, if you're a fan and you think Hughes has failed then you're quite entitled to say he should go, but that doesn't necessarily mean you are right. No, though there's more than enough evidence to suggest they were though. Possibly, but when sacking a manager all issues have to be considered including the replacement. This season Hughes had a win rate of 22.7%, so far Lambert has a win rate of 14.3%. Lets hope those vital win games start on Saturday!
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Mar 16, 2018 12:21:22 GMT
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Mar 16, 2018 12:23:36 GMT
No, though there's more than enough evidence to suggest they were though. Possibly, but when sacking a manager all issues have to be considered including the replacement. This season Hughes had a win rate of 22.7%, so far Lambert has a win rate of 14.3%. Lets hope those vital win games start on Saturday! The two aren’t mutually exclusive though. Just because you appoint the wrong bloke to replace your failing manager doesn’t mean you were wrong to sack him. It means you cocked up the succession.
|
|
|
Post by cheekycheddleton on Mar 16, 2018 12:23:38 GMT
Lambert has passion for stoke hughes never had that mr charisma i used to call him
|
|
|
Post by thegift on Mar 16, 2018 12:24:24 GMT
the gift for me good poster. new he was good poster when i sign up. enjoy your posts mate I'm just honest with my posting, and don't post stuff to make others happy. I respect the person who has brought the club where it is today, and we should be grateful for that.
|
|
|
Post by cheekycheddleton on Mar 16, 2018 12:30:32 GMT
Coates family never bring european manager in.
|
|
|
Post by pez75 on Mar 16, 2018 12:30:44 GMT
Lambert has passion for stoke hughes never had that mr charisma i used to call him Nah - he's just laughing his tits off becasue he never thought he would manage in this league again - if only for a few months...
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Mar 16, 2018 12:33:27 GMT
Lambert has passion for stoke hughes never had that mr charisma i used to call him Oh wow passion! We’ll definitely win the league next season then.
|
|
|
Post by thegift on Mar 16, 2018 12:35:12 GMT
Lambert has passion for stoke hughes never had that mr charisma i used to call him Nah - he's just laughing his tits off becasue he never thought he would manage in this league again - if only for a few months... Maybe so - but it simply couldn't of got worse no matter who we brought in. Hughes was at the point of no return and i honestly couldn't see us winning another game with him here.
|
|
|
Post by cheekycheddleton on Mar 16, 2018 12:37:24 GMT
Lambert has passion for stoke hughes never had that mr charisma i used to call him Oh wow passion! We’ll definitely win the league next season then. fraid to say we wont win league next year we will be down because of hughes. tru mate
|
|
|
Post by thegift on Mar 16, 2018 12:40:27 GMT
Lambert has passion for stoke hughes never had that mr charisma i used to call him Oh wow passion! We’ll definitely win the league next season then. Toxic come on mate. Interviews with Hughes was as dull & monotone as you could get. He seemed to have absolutely no personality and didn't really seem arsed about anything. It reminded me of listening to Michael Owen. Hughes would use the same practiced and pre-empted lines, no matter what the result or the score it was always 'clearly' this and 'clearly that' - surely you could see this? At least with lambent he actually comes across like he cares, even if he doesn't care, he says it how it is, and is a lot more enthusiastic.
|
|
|
Post by geoff321 on Mar 16, 2018 12:50:10 GMT
Possibly, but when sacking a manager all issues have to be considered including the replacement. This season Hughes had a win rate of 22.7%, so far Lambert has a win rate of 14.3%. Lets hope those vital win games start on Saturday! The two aren’t mutually exclusive though. Just because you appoint the wrong bloke to replace your failing manager doesn’t mean you were wrong to sack him. It means you cocked up the succession. If the Stoke Board felt that Hughes was going to relegate the club then your comment would have some merit, remember though only a few weeks earlier Coates had asked what was all the fuss about. If as a Board though you sack a manager without being confident that you have a better replacement, then surely you might as well have stuck with the present guy and reviewed the whole position in the summer. In reality we will only know the answers to these issues when we know who goes down and who stays up.
|
|
|
Post by iglugluk on Mar 16, 2018 12:53:40 GMT
Well I would have thought it obvious to people who watch Stoke ,which players were well below the fitness levels required to perform at Premier league standard ,but how about Berahino , Wimmer ( bought by Hughes at a cost of £30 M , a scandal in itself) Adam , Fletcher , Johnson. That is 5 from his 1st team squad , pretty sigUnlikenificant I would have thought. Unlike you I wouldn't pretend to know what the problems were with the players you mention, just to suggest that the five players in question were simply unfit because of Mark Hughes seems a bit simplistic. As I said in my earlier post Hughes was sacked because of results and poor transfer dealings, that shouldn't mean that we can't recognise that his overall record at Stoke and in the PL has been very good. Yes his overall record at Stoke was good..... you're right there. But he lost his way badly and that has left us in a real mess. The squad is poor and Hughes engineered a major degradation of our relative position over the last two seasons of his tenure. Where he has left us is why many fans posting on here find themselves to be less than grateful for his input to the club ultimately. Starting well but ending badly is not a good success vector and it rarely leaves gratitude behind it because all we now have is now and thanks to Hughes now isn't good.
|
|
|
Post by chigstoke on Mar 16, 2018 12:54:12 GMT
the gift for me good poster. new he was good poster when i sign up. enjoy your posts mate Fucking hell From the moment you signed you knew he was a good poster. What did you think of other posters when you signed up?
|
|
|
Post by cheekycheddleton on Mar 16, 2018 12:58:15 GMT
the gift for me good poster. new he was good poster when i sign up. enjoy your posts mate Fucking hell From the moment you signed you knew he was a good poster. What did you think of other posters when you signed up? new you were a pisstaker. funny man you are
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Mar 16, 2018 13:01:26 GMT
The two aren’t mutually exclusive though. Just because you appoint the wrong bloke to replace your failing manager doesn’t mean you were wrong to sack him. It means you cocked up the succession. If the Stoke Board felt that Hughes was going to relegate the club then your comment would have some merit, remember though only a few weeks earlier Coates had asked what was all the fuss about. If as a Board though you sack a manager without being confident that you have a better replacement, then surely you might as well have stuck with the present guy and reviewed the whole position in the summer. In reality we will only know the answers to these issues when we know who goes down and who stays up. We were going down under Hughes regardless Geoff. The choice was 'definitely relegated' or 'might be relegated'. Their replacement smacks of the kind of lack of imagination that's contributed towards this mess, but Hughes' momentum was only heading in one direction. He was given more than long enough to try and put things right and he couldn't. That doesn't mean he's a bad manager, but he'd made a right mess of things and his time was up.
|
|
|
Post by chigstoke on Mar 16, 2018 13:06:32 GMT
Fucking hell From the moment you signed you knew he was a good poster. What did you think of other posters when you signed up? new you were a pisstaker. funny man you are I'm seemingly funnier than this less than impressive troll account you're running. You're no Chugga or Slogger mate.
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Mar 16, 2018 13:07:31 GMT
the gift for me good poster. new he was good poster when i sign up. enjoy your posts mate For some bizarre reason my inner voice won't stop screaming Dumb and Dumber at me...
|
|
|
Post by geoff321 on Mar 16, 2018 13:16:14 GMT
If the Stoke Board felt that Hughes was going to relegate the club then your comment would have some merit, remember though only a few weeks earlier Coates had asked what was all the fuss about. If as a Board though you sack a manager without being confident that you have a better replacement, then surely you might as well have stuck with the present guy and reviewed the whole position in the summer. In reality we will only know the answers to these issues when we know who goes down and who stays up. We were going down under Hughes regardless Geoff. The choice was 'definitely relegated' or 'might be relegated'. Their replacement smacks of the kind of lack of imagination that's contributed towards this mess, but Hughes' momentum was only heading in one direction. He was given more than long enough to try and put things right and he couldn't. That doesn't mean he's a bad manager, but he'd made a right mess of things and his time was up. My gut feeling is Hughes would have delivered wins against Brighton, Watford and Southampton, of course it's possible he might have lost all three. It's also worth mentioning that those clubs that did change their manager are in the main still in deep trouble, even though some got a small new manager bounce results have turned down again in most cases.
|
|
|
Post by terryconroysmagic on Mar 16, 2018 13:17:46 GMT
Oh wow passion! We’ll definitely win the league next season then. Toxic come on mate. Interviews with Hughes was as dull & monotone as you could get. He seemed to have absolutely no personality and didn't really seem arsed about anything. It reminded me of listening to Michael Owen. Hughes would use the same practiced and pre-empted lines, no matter what the result or the score it was always 'clearly' this and 'clearly that' - surely you could see this? At least with lambent he actually comes across like he cares, even if he doesn't care, he says it how it is, and is a lot more enthusiastic. Some of the stuff that Lambert has come out with is as bad as anything Hughes said in the media Berahino a natural finisher, Ramadan very pacey, etc
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 16, 2018 13:21:39 GMT
Coates family never bring european manager in. Did you send that post via smoke signals whilst dancing around your totem pole?
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on Mar 16, 2018 13:29:41 GMT
The two aren’t mutually exclusive though. Just because you appoint the wrong bloke to replace your failing manager doesn’t mean you were wrong to sack him. It means you cocked up the succession. If the Stoke Board felt that Hughes was going to relegate the club then your comment would have some merit, remember though only a few weeks earlier Coates had asked what was all the fuss about. If as a Board though you sack a manager without being confident that you have a better replacement, then surely you might as well have stuck with the present guy and reviewed the whole position in the summer. In reality we will only know the answers to these issues when we know who goes down and who stays up. Why on earth would they have got rid at that stage of the season if they didn't think he was taking us down? They quite obviously did, regardless of Coates' ill-advised "why the fuss" comment. Anyway that was six games previous, a lot can (and did) change in six games. The very fact that they were prepared to gamble on getting rid without having a replacement lined up shows how desperate they judged the situation to be.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Mar 16, 2018 13:35:28 GMT
We were going down under Hughes regardless Geoff. The choice was 'definitely relegated' or 'might be relegated'. Their replacement smacks of the kind of lack of imagination that's contributed towards this mess, but Hughes' momentum was only heading in one direction. He was given more than long enough to try and put things right and he couldn't. That doesn't mean he's a bad manager, but he'd made a right mess of things and his time was up. My gut feeling is Hughes would have delivered wins against Brighton, Watford and Southampton, of course it's possible he might have lost all three. It's also worth mentioning that those clubs that did change their manager are in the main still in deep trouble, even though some got a small new manager bounce results have turned down again in most cases. What's your 'gut instinct' based on, because surely it can't be much we've seen this season? Was he really going to suddenly win three games in relatively quick succession having won five in about six months? Again, the clubs who've smartly changed their manager have improved. The ones who chose poorly (in the main by going for the merry go round of British has-beens) are the ones getting sucked back into the mire. You could just as easily say Stoke and Southampton wouldn't be in this mess if they'd got rid earlier.
|
|
|
Post by ravey123 on Mar 16, 2018 13:37:46 GMT
Not sure if it has been mentioned but what I can't understand is if his contract was terminated by Stoke you would assume they would still be paying his wages either as a lump sum with the proviso that he did not work for a competitor for the duration of his previous contract or monthly until the end of the contract.
Surely if he then goes into another job Stoke do not have to pay as much compensation - looks like win win for Hughes and lose lose for Stoke
|
|
|
Post by medwaypotter on Mar 16, 2018 13:39:48 GMT
Too many clubs are competing to be more shit than others this season, he may keep them as less shit than others. I meant your comment about being involved in transfers.
|
|
|
Post by geoff321 on Mar 16, 2018 13:48:10 GMT
My gut feeling is Hughes would have delivered wins against Brighton, Watford and Southampton, of course it's possible he might have lost all three. It's also worth mentioning that those clubs that did change their manager are in the main still in deep trouble, even though some got a small new manager bounce results have turned down again in most cases. What's your 'gut instinct' based on, because surely it can't be much we've seen this season? Was he really going to suddenly win three games in relatively quick succession having won five in about six months? Again, the clubs who've smartly changed their manager have improved. The ones who chose poorly (in the main by going for the merry go round of British has-beens) are the ones getting sucked back into the mire. You could just as easily say Stoke and Southampton wouldn't be in this mess if they'd got rid earlier. The performances at Burnley and Huddersfield showed a significant improvement and we were unlucky not to win both games. Compare that with the Southampton game, a side that had won just three games at home all season, where in effect we allowed them to dictate the game especially in the second half, this performance worries me especially. We have Everton tomorrow, a side struggling away from home, we need to get on the front foot and create chances and finish a couple of those chances, a draw is of little use.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Mar 16, 2018 13:51:09 GMT
What's your 'gut instinct' based on, because surely it can't be much we've seen this season? Was he really going to suddenly win three games in relatively quick succession having won five in about six months? Again, the clubs who've smartly changed their manager have improved. The ones who chose poorly (in the main by going for the merry go round of British has-beens) are the ones getting sucked back into the mire. You could just as easily say Stoke and Southampton wouldn't be in this mess if they'd got rid earlier. The performances at Burnley and Huddersfield showed a significant improvement and we were unlucky not to win both games. Compare that with the Southampton game, a side that had won just three games at home all season, where in effect we allowed them to dictate the game especially in the second half, this performance worries me especially. We have Everton tomorrow, a side struggling away from home, we need to get on the front foot and create chances and finish a couple of those chances, a draw is of little use. So the basis we'd have won three games is two games from which we took a grand, combined total of one point. I thought the Huddersfield performance was ok, nothing more. I don't think we deserved more than what we got. The Burnley game was another one where ridiculous substitutions helped cause our undoing wasn't it?
|
|