|
Post by lawrieleslie on Dec 12, 2020 22:02:58 GMT
Fair point. But imo the demise of our PL status falls at the feet of Hughes and the transfer team for bringing in some mediocre players for huge (for us) transfer fees and loanees all on big money. Bringing in failures or bad attitude players like Imbula, Wimmer, Berahino, Jesse, Badou and possibly more, who should have formed the backbone of our PL squad was a disaster. As I said earlier, as bad as Lambert's record was, the damage was already done and he was no way to blame for relegation. Of course there are 101 differing opinions on the reason for our demise so best to agree to disagree on this very emotive subject. Think that’s harsh on Badou who played well, but otherwise would agree. Hughes was the overwhelming architect of the relegation. With three months of the season to play though, I don’t think we were dead and buried and a more imaginative appointment could’ve saved us. Absolutely. But who......Flores and Rowett appeared to renege on a deal and MON wasn’t interested. It seemed that Lambert was the only other candidate or just wait.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Dec 13, 2020 9:33:53 GMT
Wimmer was a player we didn’t need and one who turned out to be awful, but again, it’s still hindsight. He actually came here with some pedigree at the time. Frustrating because it was unnecessary and an appalling use of the Arnautovic money at the time, but a lack of ability or quality wasn’t cited as an issue when he actually signed. The more I read of your reasoning the more I get the image of the Nuremberg trials, “yes we did invade Poland, France, Holland etc, and we admit that millions of people were executed, but we were just following orders and we didn’t have the advantage of hindsight “ I’m sure if I used that expletive JESSE you could come up with a rational perspective. Absolutely pathetic.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Dec 13, 2020 9:35:19 GMT
Think that’s harsh on Badou who played well, but otherwise would agree. Hughes was the overwhelming architect of the relegation. With three months of the season to play though, I don’t think we were dead and buried and a more imaginative appointment could’ve saved us. Absolutely. But who......Flores and Rowett appeared to renege on a deal and MON wasn’t interested. It seemed that Lambert was the only other candidate or just wait. Does that not just speak to our complete lack of imagination and scope though? Southampton got rid of Hughes and found Hassenhuttl. We wouldn’t do something like that in a million years.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Dec 13, 2020 9:35:51 GMT
Think that’s harsh on Badou who played well, but otherwise would agree. Hughes was the overwhelming architect of the relegation. With three months of the season to play though, I don’t think we were dead and buried and a more imaginative appointment could’ve saved us. Absolutely. But who......Flores and Rowett appeared to renege on a deal and MON wasn’t interested. It seemed that Lambert was the only other candidate or just wait. I’d rather Scholes had a go than Lambert. The pits until Jones arrived but I still think I despise Lambert more. A shambolic appointment.
|
|
|
Post by Gabrielzakuaniandjuliet on Dec 13, 2020 9:59:29 GMT
The last part of his first year is underrated too I think, some of the stuff with Ireland, arnie and assaidi was great to watch.
It's a shame that the way it fell apart has made some people associate hard working with defensive/pragmatic football, as though the two can't be mutually exclusive. Include the owners in the 'some people', or surely we could have ended up with Graham Potter or Dean Smith instead of Lambert and rowett.
|
|
|
Post by onefatcopper on Dec 13, 2020 10:21:59 GMT
The more I read of your reasoning the more I get the image of the Nuremberg trials, “yes we did invade Poland, France, Holland etc, and we admit that millions of people were executed, but we were just following orders and we didn’t have the advantage of hindsight “ I’m sure if I used that expletive JESSE you could come up with a rational perspective. Absolutely pathetic. Now that’s not very nice is it ? But by using hindsight of which you are overwhelmingly blessed with can you explain how did Hughes rejuvenate the spine of the team that had been underperforming ? Was it a tactical change, or a gradual change in personnel by replacing the previous managers players for a better quality option or was Hughes a master motivator on the training ground/ dressing room ?
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Dec 13, 2020 10:28:02 GMT
You seem to basically agree with my argument which apparently 'doesn't hold water'. Make your mind up. Why would they sack him? The same reason they sacked a manager who took the club from the bottom half of the Championship into Europe - he'd lost the plot and results were drying up. I can see why they persisted with him after the third season despite a rotten second half of it. But he should have gone at the end of the season after that at the latest. It was clear by that point that he was getting it badly wrong. He definitely helped destroy the spirit. The same one that he'd renewed and revitalised. He deserves the credit for one and censure for the other. It’s called sarcasm that you think that ninth place is the highest position that we should be happy with ? Wigan, FA Cup winners, Leicester City Premier League champions, Burnley qualifying for Europe due to league position, all clubs of a similar size to Stoke apart from Wigan which makes their achievement even greater that can look back with a sense of pride, I’m sure fans of the future will notice that Stoke City came ninth three times when they are looking at teams honours. The spirit between fans and players was nurtured long before Hughes came on the scene, he gradually dismantled it to a point where you could count more empty red seats than fans. Half the fans fucking hated TP, that spirit is a bit made up 😂
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Dec 13, 2020 10:57:15 GMT
Now that’s not very nice is it ? But by using hindsight of which you are overwhelmingly blessed with can you explain how did Hughes rejuvenate the spine of the team that had been underperforming ? Was it a tactical change, or a gradual change in personnel by replacing the previous managers players for a better quality option or was Hughes a master motivator on the training ground/ dressing room ? I’d say it’s nicer than invoking Godwin’s Law, which was unpleasant and unnecessary. Hughes’s training sessions were reportedly varied and enjoyable and presumably that made an impression after years of repetitive shape work. So that was likely a factor. Prior to Pulis leaving the dressing room was reportedly split between those who wanted to be more adventurous and those who favoured ‘the old way’. Hughes wiped the slate clean so everyone had a chance and sound something of a halfway house by building (in his first season) around Nzonzi with pace on the counter attack, which meant we were still pretty solid but had an attacking threat as well. The likes of Arnie, Assaidi and later Odemwingie really helped us here. Shawcross stepped up and had perhaps his best season for the club as if he had a point to prove - with no Huth and more responsibility he really showed his organisational and leadership qualities. Crouch was revitalised because when called on he fit Hughes’ system way better than he ever fit Pulis’. Whelan also had probably his best season in a Stoke shirt, because he was the best option for the role he was given and because the midfield wasn’t being bypassed. Nzonzi too looked markedly better than the year before. Adam was another who didn’t fit Pulis’ system but who made a vita contribution under Hughes.
|
|
|
Post by onefatcopper on Dec 13, 2020 11:39:03 GMT
It’s called sarcasm that you think that ninth place is the highest position that we should be happy with ? Wigan, FA Cup winners, Leicester City Premier League champions, Burnley qualifying for Europe due to league position, all clubs of a similar size to Stoke apart from Wigan which makes their achievement even greater that can look back with a sense of pride, I’m sure fans of the future will notice that Stoke City came ninth three times when they are looking at teams honours. The spirit between fans and players was nurtured long before Hughes came on the scene, he gradually dismantled it to a point where you could count more empty red seats than fans. Half the fans fucking hated TP, that spirit is a bit made up 😂 Who mentioned Pulis? He’s he constantly worming away at you, can you go a whole day without that little Welsh Druid pecking away at your brain, I bet you’re waiting to pounce on anyone or thing that may be about to utter “TONY “
|
|
|
Post by lawrieleslie on Dec 13, 2020 12:09:35 GMT
Absolutely. But who......Flores and Rowett appeared to renege on a deal and MON wasn’t interested. It seemed that Lambert was the only other candidate or just wait. I’d rather Scholes had a go than Lambert. The pits until Jones arrived but I still think I despise Lambert more. A shambolic appointment. If, as you say, he was a shambolic appointment then surely your venom should be aimed at those who appointed him. As I previously stated, Lambert was a scrape the barrel appointment and he tried his best to avoid relegation and, in hind sight, probably made wrong priorities in trying to sort out the obvious indiscipline in the squad instead of concentrating on how to get those illusive extra few points we desperately needed to avoid the drop. IMO I don’t believe any new manager could have saved us as the damage had already been done with the shithousery senior players we had. We will never know of course. One thing I’ve never fathomed out is why the board gave Lambert a 2.5 year contract or was it all dependent upon us avoiding the drop?
|
|
|
Post by onefatcopper on Dec 13, 2020 12:21:37 GMT
Now that’s not very nice is it ? But by using hindsight of which you are overwhelmingly blessed with can you explain how did Hughes rejuvenate the spine of the team that had been underperforming ? Was it a tactical change, or a gradual change in personnel by replacing the previous managers players for a better quality option or was Hughes a master motivator on the training ground/ dressing room ? I’d say it’s nicer than invoking Godwin’s Law, which was unpleasant and unnecessary. Hughes’s training sessions were reportedly varied and enjoyable and presumably that made an impression after years of repetitive shape work. So that was likely a factor. Prior to Pulis leaving the dressing room was reportedly split between those who wanted to be more adventurous and those who favoured ‘the old way’. Hughes wiped the slate clean so everyone had a chance and sound something of a halfway house by building (in his first season) around Nzonzi with pace on the counter attack, which meant we were still pretty solid but had an attacking threat as well. The likes of Arnie, Assaidi and later Odemwingie really helped us here. Shawcross stepped up and had perhaps his best season for the club as if he had a point to prove - with no Huth and more responsibility he really showed his organisational and leadership qualities. Crouch was revitalised because when called on he fit Hughes’ system way better than he ever fit Pulis’. Whelan also had probably his best season in a Stoke shirt, because he was the best option for the role he was given and because the midfield wasn’t being bypassed. Nzonzi too looked markedly better than the year before. Adam was another who didn’t fit Pulis’ system but who made a vita contribution under Hughes. I can readily accept some of your rationale but the key name that you have mentioned is N’zonzi, that’s when the decline started, he was never replaced and that’s when the drive and pace left the team and it still hasn’t been rectified. One of everyone’s pick in a top 10 of games, Everton 3 v Stoke City 4, a famous win from the last days of 2015 but look closely at what happened afterwards, we started to seap goals and began to find ourselves on the wrong end of 0-3 results. Granted the footballing gods shone on us that last game of 2015/16 and we finished 9th again but the rot had set in, that rejuvenated defence hadn’t lasted as goal difference showed 15/16:- GA 55 GD -14, 16/17:- GA 56 GD -15, 17/18:- GA 68 GD -33. Hughes had no plan of how to correctly replace the spine of previous regimes team and while we were getting wrapped up in a Stokealona love in, we had been duped by one of the biggest narcissists in premier league history.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Dec 13, 2020 12:36:51 GMT
I’d say it’s nicer than invoking Godwin’s Law, which was unpleasant and unnecessary. Hughes’s training sessions were reportedly varied and enjoyable and presumably that made an impression after years of repetitive shape work. So that was likely a factor. Prior to Pulis leaving the dressing room was reportedly split between those who wanted to be more adventurous and those who favoured ‘the old way’. Hughes wiped the slate clean so everyone had a chance and sound something of a halfway house by building (in his first season) around Nzonzi with pace on the counter attack, which meant we were still pretty solid but had an attacking threat as well. The likes of Arnie, Assaidi and later Odemwingie really helped us here. Shawcross stepped up and had perhaps his best season for the club as if he had a point to prove - with no Huth and more responsibility he really showed his organisational and leadership qualities. Crouch was revitalised because when called on he fit Hughes’ system way better than he ever fit Pulis’. Whelan also had probably his best season in a Stoke shirt, because he was the best option for the role he was given and because the midfield wasn’t being bypassed. Nzonzi too looked markedly better than the year before. Adam was another who didn’t fit Pulis’ system but who made a vita contribution under Hughes. I can readily accept some of your rationale but the key name that you have mentioned is N’zonzi, that’s when the decline started, he was never replaced and that’s when the drive and pace left the team and it still hasn’t been rectified. One of everyone’s pick in a top 10 of games, Everton 3 v Stoke City 4, a famous win from the last days of 2015 but look closely at what happened afterwards, we started to seap goals and began to find ourselves on the wrong end of 0-3 results. Granted the footballing gods shone on us that last game of 2015/16 and we finished 9th again but the rot had set in, that rejuvenated defence hadn’t lasted as goal difference showed 15/16:- GA 55 GD -14, 16/17:- GA 56 GD -15, 17/18:- GA 68 GD -33. Hughes had no plan of how to correctly replace the spine of previous regimes team and while we were getting wrapped up in a Stokealona love in, we had been duped by one of the biggest narcissists in premier league history. I agree with most of that apart from the last line. I don’t think he ‘duped’ anyone. I think he did well until it came to solving certain problems that he couldn’t. That’s on him, he got it badly, badly wrong. So did the people who didn’t replace him sooner. TP was sacked at the early stages of a downward spiral. Hughes was sacked right in the thick of it by which point a lot of the damage had been done.
|
|
|
Post by onefatcopper on Dec 13, 2020 13:29:47 GMT
I can readily accept some of your rationale but the key name that you have mentioned is N’zonzi, that’s when the decline started, he was never replaced and that’s when the drive and pace left the team and it still hasn’t been rectified. One of everyone’s pick in a top 10 of games, Everton 3 v Stoke City 4, a famous win from the last days of 2015 but look closely at what happened afterwards, we started to seap goals and began to find ourselves on the wrong end of 0-3 results. Granted the footballing gods shone on us that last game of 2015/16 and we finished 9th again but the rot had set in, that rejuvenated defence hadn’t lasted as goal difference showed 15/16:- GA 55 GD -14, 16/17:- GA 56 GD -15, 17/18:- GA 68 GD -33. Hughes had no plan of how to correctly replace the spine of previous regimes team and while we were getting wrapped up in a Stokealona love in, we had been duped by one of the biggest narcissists in premier league history. I agree with most of that apart from the last line. I don’t think he ‘duped’ anyone. I think he did well until it came to solving certain problems that he couldn’t. That’s on him, he got it badly, badly wrong. So did the people who didn’t replace him sooner. TP was sacked at the early stages of a downward spiral. Hughes was sacked right in the thick of it by which point a lot of the damage had been done. Hughes is a Narcissist, it wasn’t his fault, he should have been given more time, even now I’m in the firm belief that I could have saved them ? He’s a strikers manager because it’s a position that he can relate to, but he was caught between two stools when it came to building those strong foundations, should he stick with what he inherited or build his own house ? I happen to think he got his fingers burned with the Wholly, Huth scenario it didn’t make Shawcross a more complete footballer it made him a nervous wreck ! Hughes knew he had fucked up and so decided to leave well alone for to long, which caused to many on and off the pitch leaders to depart en-mass with no bedded in replacements. with the aid of hindsight the time to part company was at the end of the 15/16 season, he could have left with his reputation intact and we may have found some exotic manager like Big Sam. But that’s hindsight and this the world of Stoke City.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Dec 13, 2020 13:42:36 GMT
I agree with most of that apart from the last line. I don’t think he ‘duped’ anyone. I think he did well until it came to solving certain problems that he couldn’t. That’s on him, he got it badly, badly wrong. So did the people who didn’t replace him sooner. TP was sacked at the early stages of a downward spiral. Hughes was sacked right in the thick of it by which point a lot of the damage had been done. Hughes is a Narcissist, it wasn’t his fault, he should have been given more time, even now I’m in the firm belief that I could have saved them ? He’s a strikers manager because it’s a position that he can relate to, but he was caught between two stools when it came to building those strong foundations, should he stick with what he inherited or build his own house ? I happen to think he got his fingers burned with the Wholly, Huth scenario it didn’t make Shawcross a more complete footballer it made him a nervous wreck ! Hughes knew he had fucked up and so decided to leave well alone for to long, which caused to many on and off the pitch leaders to depart en-mass with no bedded in replacements. with the aid of hindsight the time to part company was at the end of the 15/16 season, he could have left with his reputation intact and we may have found some exotic manager like Big Sam. But that’s hindsight and this the world of Stoke City. Shawcross was excellent under Hughes until the injury problems caught up with him. 2013-14 was his best season form-wise. 14-15 he was really good too. Even 15-16 when he was fit he was excellent. There was an argument for getting rid at the end of 15/16, agreed. Winning that West Ham game arguably did us not favours long term. Of course he thinks he could’ve turned it around, all managers convince themselves that.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Dec 13, 2020 16:19:55 GMT
I’d rather Scholes had a go than Lambert. The pits until Jones arrived but I still think I despise Lambert more. A shambolic appointment. If, as you say, he was a shambolic appointment then surely your venom should be aimed at those who appointed him. As I previously stated, Lambert was a scrape the barrel appointment and he tried his best to avoid relegation and, in hind sight, probably made wrong priorities in trying to sort out the obvious indiscipline in the squad instead of concentrating on how to get those illusive extra few points we desperately needed to avoid the drop. IMO I don’t believe any new manager could have saved us as the damage had already been done with the shithousery senior players we had. We will never know of course. One thing I’ve never fathomed out is why the board gave Lambert a 2.5 year contract or was it all dependent upon us avoiding the drop? It was but Lambert was so appalling and deserves lots of stick.
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Dec 13, 2020 17:24:57 GMT
I agree with most of that apart from the last line. I don’t think he ‘duped’ anyone. I think he did well until it came to solving certain problems that he couldn’t. That’s on him, he got it badly, badly wrong. So did the people who didn’t replace him sooner. TP was sacked at the early stages of a downward spiral. Hughes was sacked right in the thick of it by which point a lot of the damage had been done. Hughes is a Narcissist, it wasn’t his fault, he should have been given more time, even now I’m in the firm belief that I could have saved them ? He’s a strikers manager because it’s a position that he can relate to, but he was caught between two stools when it came to building those strong foundations, should he stick with what he inherited or build his own house ? I happen to think he got his fingers burned with the Wholly, Huth scenario it didn’t make Shawcross a more complete footballer it made him a nervous wreck ! Hughes knew he had fucked up and so decided to leave well alone for to long, which caused to many on and off the pitch leaders to depart en-mass with no bedded in replacements. with the aid of hindsight the time to part company was at the end of the 15/16 season, he could have left with his reputation intact and we may have found some exotic manager like Big Sam. But that’s hindsight and this the world of Stoke City. What specific traits that Hughes posseses point towards narcissism in your opinion?
|
|
|
Post by behindthemanager on Dec 13, 2020 17:25:19 GMT
dont like shitty pulis but better manager than hughes.
some on ere are to young to remember waddington. he was our best manager. better than hughes no matter what the toxic avenger says.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Dec 13, 2020 17:30:07 GMT
dont like shitty pulis but better manager than hughes. some on ere are to young to remember waddington. he was our best manager. better than hughes no matter what the toxic avenger says. Try reading what I actually write.
|
|
|
Post by onefatcopper on Dec 13, 2020 18:20:27 GMT
Hughes is a Narcissist, it wasn’t his fault, he should have been given more time, even now I’m in the firm belief that I could have saved them ? He’s a strikers manager because it’s a position that he can relate to, but he was caught between two stools when it came to building those strong foundations, should he stick with what he inherited or build his own house ? I happen to think he got his fingers burned with the Wholly, Huth scenario it didn’t make Shawcross a more complete footballer it made him a nervous wreck ! Hughes knew he had fucked up and so decided to leave well alone for to long, which caused to many on and off the pitch leaders to depart en-mass with no bedded in replacements. with the aid of hindsight the time to part company was at the end of the 15/16 season, he could have left with his reputation intact and we may have found some exotic manager like Big Sam. But that’s hindsight and this the world of Stoke City. What specific traits that Hughes posseses point towards narcissism in your opinion? Being Welsh, isn’t it !
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Dec 13, 2020 18:27:54 GMT
What specific traits that Hughes posseses point towards narcissism in your opinion? Being Welsh, isn’t it ! Looking at our other 2 recentish managers that came from Wales I can see why you'd base it on that I suppose.
|
|
|
Post by CalgaryPotter on Dec 13, 2020 22:03:10 GMT
Both Pulis & Hughes had spells where Stoke were playing great, but very different football.
The Boxing Day evening demolition of Liverpool under Pulis was one of my favourites under him. The flying wingers spell with Pennant & Ethers, Fuller seemingly able to turn the best inside out & Beattie seemingly finding form from 10 years previous.
Hughes came in & changed everything & for a while we played the best football I’ve seen. Completely outplaying Arsenal instead of just kicking the shit out them, we could take anyone apart.
Then came Wimmer, Imbula, Jese, Choupo Moting & Saido. Everyone of them bastards that took the soul of our club. They were Hughes signings.
For those saying we should be happy with 9th, I give you the Dingles. A team who made Europe on merit, not cause they lost a cup final. We could and should have done so much better.
|
|
|
Post by longdistancekiddie on Dec 13, 2020 23:25:31 GMT
It is a simple as this, Hughes got pissed of being forced to play the owners favorites /lickareses,
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Dec 14, 2020 8:22:49 GMT
It is a simple as this, Hughes got pissed of being forced to play the owners favorites /lickareses, Hughes wasn't forced to play anybody. No Stoke manager has been. Even Triggy and Ziggy didn't get picked. Etebo didn't get picked by Rowett more often than not. It's not a thing.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Dec 14, 2020 8:24:41 GMT
Both Pulis & Hughes had spells where Stoke were playing great, but very different football. The Boxing Day evening demolition of Liverpool under Pulis was one of my favourites under him. The flying wingers spell with Pennant & Ethers, Fuller seemingly able to turn the best inside out & Beattie seemingly finding form from 10 years previous. Hughes came in & changed everything & for a while we played the best football I’ve seen. Completely outplaying Arsenal instead of just kicking the shit out them, we could take anyone apart. Then came Wimmer, Imbula, Jese, Choupo Moting & Saido. Everyone of them bastards that took the soul of our club. They were Hughes signings. For those saying we should be happy with 9th, I give you the Dingles. A team who made Europe on merit, not cause they lost a cup final. We could and should have done so much better. Is it not also true that Wolves were backed significantly more heavily than even our two well-backed Premier League managers were? They were spending £20m+ on individual players when they were in the Championship.
|
|
|
Post by tachyon on Dec 14, 2020 9:33:30 GMT
Our underlying problems were well flagged up during the 2016/17 season. Attachment DeletedThe two big orange peaks around mid season. It was a defensive problem, we were allowing historically bad levels of chances & a mid/lower half PL team is never going to create enough good quality chances of their own to offset such a slump. Prior & post that potential relegation alert, we were meandering along in the mid table comfort zone, with the odd good run (blue) balancing out the slightly below par, orange underlying performances. Defensively, we spiralled out of control in 2017/18, but the signs had been there for anyone to see.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Dec 14, 2020 14:47:14 GMT
Our underlying problems were well flagged up during the 2016/17 season. View AttachmentThe two big orange peaks around mid season. It was a defensive problem, we were allowing historically bad levels of chances & a mid/lower half PL team is never going to create enough good quality chances of their own to offset such a slump. Prior & post that potential relegation alert, we were meandering along in the mid table comfort zone, with the odd good run (blue) balancing out the slightly below par, orange underlying performances. Defensively, we spiralled out of control in 2017/18, but the signs had been there for anyone to see. He should have been sacked in the tunnel after the defeat at home to Arsenal. The optimist in me thought they'd do it as well.
|
|
|
Post by Miles Offside on Dec 14, 2020 19:27:09 GMT
Hughes was so lucky to pick up a very decent squad after Pulis had done the graft of getting us promoted and establishing us in the Prem. He was doubly lucky in being backed big time in the transfer market. There's no denying that he gave us a great spell, but he definitely left us broken in more ways than one. I don’t think that’s quite true. The ‘very decent squad’ he inherited had one three times in five months and were reportedly dispirited and divided, and he did better with it than his predecessor ever did. He was backed eventually, and with disastrous consequences, but in his first two (and best) seasons, we were among the lowest spenders and had one of the lower wage bills in the Premier League. The squad Pulis left was a model of unity to the one Hughes left. The job Pulis left was an attractive vacancy. The job Hughes left could only be filled after the club was reduced to touting it round Glasgow dole office.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Dec 14, 2020 19:54:54 GMT
I don’t think that’s quite true. The ‘very decent squad’ he inherited had one three times in five months and were reportedly dispirited and divided, and he did better with it than his predecessor ever did. He was backed eventually, and with disastrous consequences, but in his first two (and best) seasons, we were among the lowest spenders and had one of the lower wage bills in the Premier League. The squad Pulis left was a model of unity to the one Hughes left. The job Pulis left was an attractive vacancy. The job Hughes left could only be filled after the club was reduced to touting it round Glasgow dole office. Neither were a model of unity. Both were a mess. Let's not deify one because the other was worse. It was an attractive vacancy because the board acted when they should've done. It would've been one if they'd done the same with Hughes.
|
|