| The difference 10:09 - Dec 30 with 7704 views | sotd78 |
Between MM and both Hurst and Lambert is that by now McCarthy would have gone all defensive. A solid 442 with a don’t concede mentality. It would be deadly dull and might mean we had the points to be a little closer to safety. But MM was papering over the cracks of Evans continual under investment. We are now at best a league one club. The only difference between us and Coventry or Charlton is that they got to the depths faster. |  |
| Blue shirts/white shorts - sotd78 |
| |  |
| The difference on 10:11 - Dec 30 with 6782 views | Pecker |
The real difference between MM and PL is that PL is now our manager. |  | | |
| The difference on 10:13 - Dec 30 with 6761 views | No9 |
Didn't MM say he had a good squad?
Obviously he aquired the players he needed to do what he wanted = 78 of them )according to the EADT) do you remember them & how many never played at the MM old timers academy? That all costs money so it is not surprising an Owner of a small town football club is cagey about chucking money at the problem.
PL has a lot of convincing to do. |  | | |
| The difference on 10:18 - Dec 30 with 6727 views | 3_5_2 |
MM was a defensive minded manager with a better squad than now which could have played more expansive football than it did mainly but chose not to
Hurst had no clue as to what to do with a "throw names at a wall and see what sticks" plan, supposedly better sports science and an assistant who would threaten senior players who didn't like it, after ripping the guts out of a reasonable Championship side and some promising youth players
I don't miss either, we are where we are and have to hope PL is given the support from both ME and fans to get the job done. Either in the championship or L1 |  |
| |
| The difference on 11:08 - Dec 30 with 6615 views | C_HealyIsAPleasure |
No, the difference is that one of them built up a good squad, achieving 1.4ppg over the period they were in charge of the club
One of the others destroyed that squad in one transfer window and achieved a paltry 0.64ppg by comparison, and then third hasn’t had a chance to do anything with the squad yet but has achieved an even worse 0.6ppg to date
But booo that defensive solidity |  |
| |
| The difference on 11:14 - Dec 30 with 6582 views | Bluebell |
The difference between MM and Hurst was that MM was experienced in the Championship as is Lambert.
MM brought in players that Hurst wouldn't have dreamed of. In the last year we got Waghorn, Garner, Celina, Carter Vickers, Webster ( I could go on) and they made the difference.
Hopefully Lambert will have the chance to prove that he can get a team together who can compete. It won't be easy this window as he is stuck with Hurst's players but he will try his utmost I am sure. |  | | |
| The difference on 15:38 - Dec 30 with 6338 views | RobTheMonk |
I think Lambert may need to tweak the play from the back approach slightly. There were times in the game yesterday where Gerken was 10 yards out and was passing the ball backwards. That really shouldn't be happening. |  | | |
| The difference on 15:50 - Dec 30 with 6283 views | blueislander |
| The difference on 15:38 - Dec 30 by RobTheMonk |
I think Lambert may need to tweak the play from the back approach slightly. There were times in the game yesterday where Gerken was 10 yards out and was passing the ball backwards. That really shouldn't be happening. |
He needs to change the players, not the tactics. Neither of the goalkeepers are comfortable with the ball at their feet. McCarthy always wanted them to hoof it . Similarly Chambers and Knudsen. Pennington did appear to have more ability on the ball, but it looks like his confidence may be shot. The midfielders have to show for the ball, and make the back four’s job easier. I think (hope) that is what Lambert is working towards. | | | |
| The difference on 16:19 - Dec 30 with 6212 views | badadski |
| The difference on 15:50 - Dec 30 by blueislander |
He needs to change the players, not the tactics. Neither of the goalkeepers are comfortable with the ball at their feet. McCarthy always wanted them to hoof it . Similarly Chambers and Knudsen. Pennington did appear to have more ability on the ball, but it looks like his confidence may be shot. The midfielders have to show for the ball, and make the back four’s job easier. I think (hope) that is what Lambert is working towards. |
It wouldn't work as we don't have a decent back four to play defensive. As soon a berra went, or even Smith who I didn't rate to begin with but was growing into the position each year and were not replaced we were screwed. No Carter vickers, no Webster.
It's not co icidence that chambers was dropped by forest and was playing right back for so long by us. He's not a good centre back, Pennington is fresh and still young but is positionally poor. Spence is shocking and knudsen is knudsen. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| The difference on 16:47 - Dec 30 with 6156 views | No9 |
| The difference on 11:08 - Dec 30 by C_HealyIsAPleasure |
No, the difference is that one of them built up a good squad, achieving 1.4ppg over the period they were in charge of the club
One of the others destroyed that squad in one transfer window and achieved a paltry 0.64ppg by comparison, and then third hasn’t had a chance to do anything with the squad yet but has achieved an even worse 0.6ppg to date
But booo that defensive solidity |
Looking at it another way -
Paul Hursts time at ITFC was too short to get a relaibe record
On the other hand MM's record was: 279 played; 105 won; 78drawn, & 96 lost with a win of 37.6%
To put it in plain language MM teams only won 9 more games than they lost, not very impressive really.
Source Wki | | | |
| The difference on 17:32 - Dec 30 with 6077 views | Mullet |
| The difference on 16:47 - Dec 30 by No9 |
Looking at it another way -
Paul Hursts time at ITFC was too short to get a relaibe record
On the other hand MM's record was: 279 played; 105 won; 78drawn, & 96 lost with a win of 37.6%
To put it in plain language MM teams only won 9 more games than they lost, not very impressive really.
Source Wki |
Are you serious? You could see the bloke was utter toot after a month or so.
All this peeling it back to Mick after "don't mention Mick he's gone" type posturing from his critics over the summer is delicious. |  |
| |
| The difference on 17:41 - Dec 30 with 6038 views | PJH |
| The difference on 17:32 - Dec 30 by Mullet |
Are you serious? You could see the bloke was utter toot after a month or so.
All this peeling it back to Mick after "don't mention Mick he's gone" type posturing from his critics over the summer is delicious. |
It took you a month to work out what Hurst was Mullet?I thought you were quicker than that. [Post edited 30 Dec 2018 17:41]
|  | | |
| The difference on 18:03 - Dec 30 with 5992 views | No9 |
| The difference on 17:32 - Dec 30 by Mullet |
Are you serious? You could see the bloke was utter toot after a month or so.
All this peeling it back to Mick after "don't mention Mick he's gone" type posturing from his critics over the summer is delicious. |
Whatever but, you can't compare anyone in any job over a few weeks with one who had nearly six years at it.
The long & the short of it is that MM only won 9 more games than he lost during his time at ITFC
By any standards that isn't very good, is it? | | | |
| The difference on 18:48 - Dec 30 with 5919 views | Mullet |
| The difference on 18:03 - Dec 30 by No9 |
Whatever but, you can't compare anyone in any job over a few weeks with one who had nearly six years at it.
The long & the short of it is that MM only won 9 more games than he lost during his time at ITFC
By any standards that isn't very good, is it? |
You're taking one stat out of context though, and compared to his peers, where he started, took us and ended it's quite clear that Mick wasn't only the best manager we've had in nigh on 20 years, he knew way more than his critics and proved it time and again.
As for the stuff about Hurst it only shows how absurd your argument is to ignore what actually happened here on his watch, let alone failing to apply your own criteria. | |
| |
| The difference on 22:37 - Dec 30 with 5703 views | C_HealyIsAPleasure |
| The difference on 16:47 - Dec 30 by No9 |
Looking at it another way -
Paul Hursts time at ITFC was too short to get a relaibe record
On the other hand MM's record was: 279 played; 105 won; 78drawn, & 96 lost with a win of 37.6%
To put it in plain language MM teams only won 9 more games than they lost, not very impressive really.
Source Wki |
It’s an unbelievable record compared to those that have come after him
Or indeed, for a number of years before him | |
| |
| The difference on 22:58 - Dec 30 with 5637 views | StNeotsBlue |
| The difference on 22:37 - Dec 30 by C_HealyIsAPleasure |
It’s an unbelievable record compared to those that have come after him
Or indeed, for a number of years before him |
Unbelievable is a stretch. The fact it is better than others before is down to the man doing the appointing. MMC time here was done, with the benefit of hindsight he should have gone after the Lincoln defeat.
My first doubts with Hurst were at the Barnet friendly we didn't look better, fitter or sharper than them and I thought it was a concern that Andre Dozzell spent the time after the final whistle talking to his old man in the stand opposite the management team, didn't scream happy camp to me. |  | | |
| The difference on 02:33 - Dec 31 with 5496 views | m14_blue |
| The difference on 22:37 - Dec 30 by C_HealyIsAPleasure |
It’s an unbelievable record compared to those that have come after him
Or indeed, for a number of years before him |
Paul jewell and Roy Keane both had win percentages over 34% and Jim’s was higher than Mick’s. | | | |
| The difference on 03:56 - Dec 31 with 5463 views | harlingblue |
The difference is MM lost our chance of the big time, top of The Championship then he decided to played a reserve team away in the Cup against Manchester United.
Over 8,000 Town fans traveled to that game. We lost, he lost the fans trust, we just made the play offs, but then lost. It has been downhill from that day.
MM are you pleased of your achievements at ITFC? | | | |
| The difference on 09:04 - Dec 31 with 5308 views | Mullet |
| The difference on 03:56 - Dec 31 by harlingblue |
The difference is MM lost our chance of the big time, top of The Championship then he decided to played a reserve team away in the Cup against Manchester United.
Over 8,000 Town fans traveled to that game. We lost, he lost the fans trust, we just made the play offs, but then lost. It has been downhill from that day.
MM are you pleased of your achievements at ITFC? |
That's some spectacular revision.
Anyone who had followed us for even a couple of years would know that Mick would focus on the league, that United would beat us regardless. If anyone went for more than just the chance to tick off OT or see a big club etc. they were setting themselves up for failure.
Given that annoyance was replaced and barely mentioned after specific games like
Lincoln etc. I think it's a massive stretch to pretend there was some long campaign there on in.
The answer to your last question is rightly yes. He said as much since.
What we'd give to have results and achievements parallel with Mick's now eh? Instead we stare ruin in the face. | |
| |
| The difference on 09:06 - Dec 31 with 5297 views | Reuser_is_God |
If we had kept MM for this season he'd have already left for ROI. |  |
| |
| The difference on 09:18 - Dec 31 with 5255 views | PJH |
| The difference on 09:06 - Dec 31 by Reuser_is_God |
If we had kept MM for this season he'd have already left for ROI. |
Quite possibly-and we would almost certainly have enough points not to be too worried about relegation. | | | |
| The difference on 09:20 - Dec 31 with 5248 views | bluelou |
| The difference on 03:56 - Dec 31 by harlingblue |
The difference is MM lost our chance of the big time, top of The Championship then he decided to played a reserve team away in the Cup against Manchester United.
Over 8,000 Town fans traveled to that game. We lost, he lost the fans trust, we just made the play offs, but then lost. It has been downhill from that day.
MM are you pleased of your achievements at ITFC? |
Except we were 8th in the league when we went to OT.
We had lost back to back games against Brighton (close) and then 5-1 to Reading before that.
Excellent Revisionism | |
| |
| The difference on 09:21 - Dec 31 with 5243 views | Reuser_is_God |
| The difference on 09:18 - Dec 31 by PJH |
Quite possibly-and we would almost certainly have enough points not to be too worried about relegation. |
Yeah, mainly because we wouldn't have had the upheaval.
I'm still of the opinion that parting ways with MM was the right thing, even he said so, the issue was what happened with Hurst & his recruitment. | |
| |
| The difference on 09:31 - Dec 31 with 5203 views | PJH |
| The difference on 09:21 - Dec 31 by Reuser_is_God |
Yeah, mainly because we wouldn't have had the upheaval.
I'm still of the opinion that parting ways with MM was the right thing, even he said so, the issue was what happened with Hurst & his recruitment. |
Although I never wanted MM to leave I can fully understand why it was seen as necessary.
If the person that followed him had been anything approaching competent we would not be in the state that we are in now. | | | |
| The difference on 09:33 - Dec 31 with 5192 views | Reuser_is_God |
| The difference on 09:31 - Dec 31 by PJH |
Although I never wanted MM to leave I can fully understand why it was seen as necessary.
If the person that followed him had been anything approaching competent we would not be in the state that we are in now. |
Indeed. | |
| |
| The difference on 11:15 - Dec 31 with 5068 views | Keaneish |
| The difference on 09:04 - Dec 31 by Mullet |
That's some spectacular revision.
Anyone who had followed us for even a couple of years would know that Mick would focus on the league, that United would beat us regardless. If anyone went for more than just the chance to tick off OT or see a big club etc. they were setting themselves up for failure.
Given that annoyance was replaced and barely mentioned after specific games like
Lincoln etc. I think it's a massive stretch to pretend there was some long campaign there on in.
The answer to your last question is rightly yes. He said as much since.
What we'd give to have results and achievements parallel with Mick's now eh? Instead we stare ruin in the face. |
Not for me Mullet. I'd rather wade through the Shi* we're in now than have anything resembling a Mick McCarthy ever come back through the door. Despite our lowly position I love that PL has galvanised the fan base and there's actually an atomosphere back in PR again. You can laud MM as much as you like. Reality is, he's outdated, unfashionable and soon to be obsolete.
FYI - Magilton was statistically a better manager than MM and I'd rather watch a Jim or a Lambert side than an MM one. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
