[Archived] Paul Ince

[broadsword]

I'm sorry...some of it is justifiable (injuries have been unbelievable),

Yes, but hwo many of these injuries are down to sheer bad luck?

There was even a quote from Ince saying that he wondered if he was doing something wrong, there'd be that many injuries.

I'm looking for one crumb of comfort, just one good thing about the season so far, that indicates that there's still room for hope.

Can someone help me on that?

[Exiled in Toronto]

I don't think anyone would have seen the appointment as a slam-dunk guaranteed success. Some thought it a risk worth taking and others either an unnecessary or too great a risk. I think that was at the root of the divide between the fans.

Two subsequent questions spring to mind: why is Ince getting the stick and not Williams as it was he who took the risk? Ince just took the job. And secondly, why do a small minority of the 'too risky' thinkers feel the need to pollute this messageboard with endless posts aimed solely at belittling Ince and painting everything he does as a horrendous error? That I cannot understand.

After all, he has made some big errors that we can all agree on: the backroom team, too many players out of position, none of his signings having as yet had a major impact; these are why we are where we are. Fowler was another big mistake as that really had to work or Ince would lose a lot of credibility with fans and I would guess at least some of the players. But everything else is just chickensh!t and there have been a few good things in there as well: Warnock as a midfielder, MGP being dropped and then miraculously playing his best game for 2 years, Robinson etc.

But the pros and the cons have not cancelled out, and with the transfer window looming, a lot of the 'looks risky but I'll wait and see' are now swinging to get rid while there is time for a new man to evaluate the squad, bring his lackeys in and spend some dosh.

[tony gale's mic]

I don't think anyone would have seen the appointment as a slam-dunk guaranteed success. Some thought it a risk worth taking and others either an unnecessary or too great a risk. I think that was at the root of the divide between the fans.

Two subsequent questions spring to mind: why is Ince getting the stick and not Williams as it was he who took the risk? Ince just took the job. And secondly, why do a small minority of the 'too risky' thinkers feel the need to pollute this messageboard with endless posts aimed solely at belittling Ince and painting everything he does as a horrendous error? That I cannot understand.

After all, he has made some big errors that we can all agree on: the backroom team, too many players out of position, none of his signings having as yet had a major impact; these are why we are where we are. Fowler was another big mistake as that really had to work or Ince would lose a lot of credibility with fans and I would guess at least some of the players. But everything else is just chickensh!t and there have been a few good things in there as well: Warnock as a midfielder, MGP being dropped and then miraculously playing his best game for 2 years, Robinson etc.

But the pros and the cons have not cancelled out, and with the transfer window looming, a lot of the 'looks risky but I'll wait and see' are now swinging to get rid while there is time for a new man to evaluate the squad, bring his lackeys in and spend some dosh.

And why do people like you see it as polluting the messageboard? This is what gets up other people's noses. Most people's posts aren't aimed solely at belittling Ince, but we find ourselves in the relegation zone and we have every right in the world to express our disapproval. We're expressing our opinions and if this board wasn't more negative opinions than positive ones in our current position and predicament then there'd be something wrong. If we just kept posting that Ince was an idiot without any substance to back it up then that would be one thing, but most things he's doing are erroneous.

The bad things you mentioned - those are massive things, worthy of far more discussion than dropping MGP for one game and MGP playing alright the next game. Warnock as a midfielder worked okay at the start but now it isn't really working; our defence is terrible, he's having to play Ooijer at left back and we have a great left back in Warnock who isnt getting played in his strongest position.

Robinson - jury is still out for me. Before the Sunderland game I was really warming to him but he's made a fair few errors this season too, Sunderland game included. As Gomes at Spurs has demonstrated you can be a brilliant shot stopper (see the rest of the Spurs - Fulham highlights) but if you make too many errors you're still a liability. Having said that he's certainly not been a bad signing and better than Gomes, he's had a few excellent games but if he keeps making errors every few games then he won't be a positive either.

[Exiled in Toronto]

And why do people like you see it as polluting the messageboard? This is what gets up other people's noses. Most people's posts aren't aimed solely at belittling Ince, but we find ourselves in the relegation zone and we have every right in the world to express our disapproval. We're expressing our opinions and if this board wasn't more negative opinions than positive ones in our current position and predicament then there'd be something wrong. If we just kept posting that Ince was an idiot without any substance to back it up then that would be one thing, but most things he's doing are erroneous.

The bad things you mentioned - those are massive things, worthy of far more discussion than dropping MGP for one game and MGP playing alright the next game. Warnock as a midfielder worked okay at the start but now it isn't really working; our defence is terrible, he's having to play Ooijer at left back and we have a great left back in Warnock who isnt getting played in his strongest position.

Robinson - jury is still out for me. Before the Sunderland game I was really warming to him but he's made a fair few errors this season too, Sunderland game included. As Gomes at Spurs has demonstrated you can be a brilliant shot stopper (see the rest of the Spurs - Fulham highlights) but if you make too many errors you're still a liability. Having said that he's certainly not been a bad signing and better than Gomes, he's had a few excellent games but if he keeps making errors every few games then he won't be a positive either.

It sounds like we are in agreement then: posts that are designed solely to belittle rather than ones expressing genuine concerns are polluting the board, and the pros don't outweigh the cons.

So what was your point again?

[tony gale's mic]

I don't know, in many ways those two achievements with the lower league teams were much more difficult and against the odds that what Hughes achieved (which was failing to qualify for a major tournament despite having a squad not much worse than quite a few - Poland, Slovenia etc. - who have managed to qualify in recent years). He got close but not quite there, and had some decent enough players - Giggs, Bellamy, Savage, Simon Davies.

You can argue that Ince did not have the chance to work with International players like Hughes which is a problem for an international coach, but then you could argue that Hughes did not have any experience running a day to day club (you bet that would have been cited as the irrefutable reason for failure if Hughes had stumbled) which would fate him to do badly. Why is one argument more valid than the other?

Essentially in any manger you have to count experience- but it is not the be all and end all. Massively experienced managers have been rubbish at some clubs. Inexperienced managers have done well in some situations. The fact of the matter is the chairman has to look at someone and see what they can offer a team like Rovers. JW made that choice, and it looks like the wrong one. But I am not sure that we can say that Ince is definitively up to the job because of lack of experience. There are so many factors and so many examples.

True but most of that same squad had been 94th in the world when he took over and he managed to take them 50 places up the rankings. He narrowly lost to Russia and considering Wales have only qualified for one major tournament in their history - that being 50 years ago - was a very big factor. It was an unqualified sucess without a shadow of a doubt.

In terms of tactics, I would say Hughes had much the better experience. Coming up against teams, managers and players like those countries I mentioned and beating/holding so many of them despite having inferior players is a much better indicator than what Ince did at Macclesfield and MK Dons. At Macclesfield he did a great job but over a small period of time - was the team really that bad or was it just massively mismanaged before Ince came in? Either way he went straight to MK Dons who had by far the most resources in that league and then won League Two - well done but in a league much lower than Rovers and against tactical minds much more inferior to what Hughes succeeded again repeatedly.

For Hughes coming up against the likes Sunderland after you've beaten the likes of Italy isn't any kind of a step up. For Ince, a similar challenge when you've only really beaten Brentford, Bury etc in your career is considerably more of a step up.

In terms of day-to-day management, I'm sure that the day-to-day dealings of MK Dons and Macclesfield are massively different to those at Rovers, sure its experience but not that significant - especially when he'd only been doing it for less than two seasons.

It sounds like we are in agreement then: posts that are designed solely to belittle rather than ones expressing genuine concerns are polluting the board, and the pros don't outweigh the cons.

So what was your point again?

Because there's hardly anyone polluting the board and trolling, most people are offering genuine concerns and points and are being jumped on by folks like Tris. Maybe you're not doing so but it is a bit much...oh and even the points you mentioned as 'pro' aren't really IMO.

[Paul Mellelieu]

I never thought we'd ever be relegated with Hughes at the helm, even when we were in the most difficult situations. Just by sheer force of personality I was confident that we'd be OK. Ince doesn't 'tick that box' I'm afraid. Hopefully with the injured players back and with a run of easier home games, things might improve. But that involves risking the club's future.

[RevidgeBlue]

Certainly would, Rev.

There has been no consistency over his tenure.

If we scrape a win, jag it with a last minute goal after 91 minutes scrappy play, then he has to go.

He needs to show that a team under his control can win games, rather than the opposition losing them.

Ok, so according to you and 47 er, we have to win the next two (away) games, and by about 0-5 and 0-6 otherwise Ince gets the bullet.

That sounds perfectly fair, I'll go with that.

[gumboots]

Ok, so according to you and 47 er, we have to win the next two (away) games, and by about 0-5 and 0-6 otherwise Ince gets the bullet.

That sounds perfectly fair, I'll go with that.

If we scrape a win in either game with a 94th minute winner off Roberts backside I'll be delighted. Yu can't have it both ways. at this stage it's points that matter. get some on the board then start worrying about how we win them. Footballers like to play pretty but most of all they like to win.

[Exiled in Toronto]

Ok, so according to you and 47 er, we have to win the next two (away) games, and by about 0-5 and 0-6 otherwise Ince gets the bullet.

That sounds perfectly fair, I'll go with that.

I think what Dave is saying, which I agree with, is that a couple of scabby wins should not make the decision to keep Ince in the job if the powers that be feel he is not up to it. If, however, we win convincingly with a united and committed team, then that surely must give the bloke a reprieve, if only temporary, to see if a corner has genuinely been turned.

But it is all hypothetical - Williams won't sack him or back him with cash, so I fear the worst.

[RevidgeBlue]

I think what Dave is saying, which I agree with, is that a couple of scabby wins should not make the decision to keep Ince in the job if the powers that be feel he is not up to it. If, however, we win convincingly with a united and committed team, then that surely must give the bloke a reprieve, if only temporary, to see if a corner has genuinely been turned.

But it is all hypothetical - Williams won't sack him or back him with cash, so I fear the worst.

Fair comment - if the Board still believe the man they appointed just three or four months ago is the man for the job, they should give him their full backing and a substantial warchest in January.

[Amo]

I never thought we'd ever be relegated with Hughes at the helm, even when we were in the most difficult situations. Just by sheer force of personality I was confident that we'd be OK. Ince doesn't 'tick that box' I'm afraid.

You can say that again. First sign of pressure and he's sweating. He either moans about his players, money, or other teams. It's never his responsibility to get results.

[imy9]

True but most of that same squad had been 94th in the world when he took over and he managed to take them 50 places up the rankings. He narrowly lost to Russia and considering Wales have only qualified for one major tournament in their history - that being 50 years ago - was a very big factor. It was an unqualified sucess without a shadow of a doubt.

He actually took Wales to 94th in the world, he may have risen 50 places in the world but how many games did Wales actually win and what does that tell you about the world rankings from 50-100?

He did well but there is no way that this is comparable to taking on the WORST job in the league- 12 points adrift and no money and getting them to survive, but hey that is just my opinion

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

I read this last night and after some pondering have decided to wade in.

1. No top flight experience, management wise. He had been away from the top flight for too long.

2. Rovers had significantly progressed under Hughes the criteria used to select Hughes where not applicable.

3. Past history, IE playboy lifestyle at pool.

4. His lack of qualifications never bothered me, the licence are just like a driving licence.

5. Rovers did not need a gamble, we needed to be inspired. Hughes leaving was a kick in the balls, Ince felt like another.

6. Comparing the pedigree of the other one in the frame to Ince it was really a no-brainer, well at least I thought so.

7. Inces previous comments about Rovers, now whilst I don't take them personally it does say a lot about him, his words could have been chosen better (something he seems to struggle with)

8. You always knew he would bring his MK Dons staff with him.

9. BFS's withdrawal showed the board was not capable of having the strength of its convictions.

10. The giant gulf between league two and the prem, meant it was always going to be a learning curve. Something we could not afford.

11. When you heard the names that where linked considering our status in the prem, it was disheartening. What surprised me most was the completely ignoring of managers who publicly stated they where interested but not even interviewed IE Advocaat, Terim.

12. Ince felt like the cheap option.

Even though I'm sure Ince and Hughes have similarities, the trouble was the club situation had changed when Hughes took over we where relegation fodder, when Ince took over we where European candidates. Thats a big difference in the prem.

Now when Ince was appointed I was far from happy, that may have been partly down to my bet on laudrup at 40-1. I watched his press conference and heard his quip. Now for me it wasn't so much the comment that made me think (I chuckled when he said it) but what got me was JW's reaction, he was ###### you could see it in his face. Ince made us promises IE proven experienced premiership coaches. Now whilst we got one I was not expecting Knox with his two years premiership experience, and the rumours that came with him. It was the most important decision the club was going to make in recent history, we'd just lost a talisman and where expecting to lose another one in Bentley, we needed something to galvanise us (the fans).

When your comparing the two, I just don't think you can. When Hughes came in we where going down, when Ince came in we had just missed out on Europe, its just not the same. I think Hughes time in the international scene put him on the map, he almost beat Italy with wales. It also gave him a huge advantage over Ince, players Hughes must have had plenty of time to watch football. Hughes was a student of the game, I remember reading a interview with Giggs who said that the second training finished Hughes would write down what they had done and so on. All I've ever heard about Ince and bettering himself, is his contractual obligation to get his badges, Christ he even moans about it.

Brilliant post, I agree with every word of that.

[cn_barlow]

He actually took Wales to 94th in the world, he may have risen 50 places in the world but how many games did Wales actually win and what does that tell you about the world rankings from 50-100?

He did well but there is no way that this is comparable to taking on the WORST job in the league- 12 points adrift and no money and getting them to survive, but hey that is just my opinion

I think one of the main differences between the two was that Hughes had a lot of experience in managing premiership ego's.

Ince may have been able to bully and use his reputation to his benefit while in league two, but it wont cut it in the premiership.

Also, if he's going to be a success he needs to change his attitude and approach big time in my opinion.

[philipl]

I am expecting a slew of glossy Paul Ince profiles in the national press this week-end.

If there isn't it will be a clear sign that the Rovers are on the point of abandonning PI.

[Paul]

Earlier this evening I was considering the complete abscence of anything in the media reagrding Ince or Rovers is probably a strong indication the club are standing by him.

[RevidgeBlue]

I am expecting a slew of glossy Paul Ince profiles in the national press this week-end.

If there isn't it will be a clear sign that the Rovers are on the point of abandonning PI.

Errrr..................

Why to both of those assertions?

[John]

The fact is that Paul Ince could not believe he was offered the BRFC job. He said it himself.

The fact is that he struggled to get his back room team in.

The fact is that he struggled big time in the transfer market.

The fact is he struggles to speak in front of the camera.

The fact is he has struggled to get his tactics right and the balance between playing football 'the right way' and the need/art of defending.

To make a lot of these points above you would have to follow our team. However, speak to most other football fans and they think the same.

I am not saying sack him now, but I am not happy with life at BRFC at the moment. Not because I hold a grudge against PI personally but things just don't feel right. Maybe it is a case of going into the unknown with a new manager, but I just hope my worries prove completely unfounded.

[RevidgeBlue]

Earlier this evening I was considering the complete abscence of anything in the media reagrding Ince or Rovers is probably a strong indication the club are standing by him.

Agreed Paul. I would imagine it hasn't even occurred to the powers that be at this stage that Ince has 2 games to save his skin or whatever. That might change if results continue to deteriorate.

Plus, we tend not to conduct our business through the media. I think we like to pride ourselves on having a lot more class than that.

[philipl]

Anybody with any marketing savy would see it is the obvious thing to do.

1) Rovers average gate is down 2,000 in raw numbers and probably 3,000 in reality

2) Liverpool tickets are about to go on sale. The nearest equivalent fixture (ie sell out last season), Man U was down 4,000 a few weeks ago so the club needs to address those 4,000 missing supporters.

3) The Manager's perception is desperately low- see the top of this page.

If PAPR is there to do anything, it will have been actively placing interviews and favourable profiles in this week-end rags.

If they haven't then its a sign that the board is considering its options.

[ABBEY]

talking to a lad at work today and he says his brother always waits to xmas for a 1/2 season ticket off his mum ,but hes told her he will disown her if she gets him one.

[gumboots]

don't know where else to put this because it's not really on any topic already open and not worth its own but did anyone else see the SSN article about the way results could change the table this weekend shown about half 4 today? They showed this table of the current, worst and possible best position after this weekend's fixtures for the clubs in the bottom half, basically to illustrate how close it is down there. Bottom was WBrom 19th Spurs and 18th Newcastle. We did not appear in the table at all. So either they think we're too good to be down there or they've got us already gone or someone made a massive typing error!

[stuwilky]

Anybody with any marketing savy would see it is the obvious thing to do.

1) Rovers average gate is down 2,000 in raw numbers and probably 3,000 in reality

2) Liverpool tickets are about to go on sale. The nearest equivalent fixture (ie sell out last season), Man U was down 4,000 a few weeks ago so the club needs to address those 4,000 missing supporters.

3) The Manager's perception is desperately low- see the top of this page.

If PAPR is there to do anything, it will have been actively placing interviews and favourable profiles in this week-end rags.

If they haven't then its a sign that the board is considering its options.

Sorry phillip, this is YOUR OPINION on what YOU personally MIGHT consider doing.

It is most definitely not a SIGN on any thinking in the Rovers camp.

[T4E]

Earlier this evening I was considering the complete abscence of anything in the media reagrding Ince or Rovers is probably a strong indication the club are standing by him.

Part of me thinks that the club are doing the right thing keeping quiet. Numerous manager backing interviews with the players and staff will only be construed as the club desperately trying to paint the picture of a rosy garden, and will undoubtedly be criticised by a good number of people. Possibly even myself included. Kind of a "they doth protest too much" scenario.

The likelihood is, if we don't get a win in our next 3 or 4 games, Ince will be gone. No amount of positive press is going to alter that fact. The club are likely better served doing their talking on the pitch.

[ABBEY]

rev define "deteriorate" because surely to hell we cant go any worse......can we?