[Archived] Steve Kean

[yeti-dog]

I'm going to say this only once, unlike other people who like to repeat everything again and again... Venky's should have kept Big San until the season ended or had someone in to replace him. They didn't. That is truly daft. Instead, they appointed someone who has been offered the managers job at other clubs but turned them down. Why, now, should we support him? How about because he has been given the chance and we need him to do well. He has his own ideas and wants to change the way this team plays. Not like Ince though, that is obvious if you actually watch the games. It hasn't worked yet but Kean has only had a week and a bit to work with the players in icy, snowy conditions. Has he had enough time? No, not even slightly.

Give him a chance. It's not like we have much of a choice us it? The only benefit there is in getting on his back is to our opposition.

Ivan,I admire your tenacity and,for what it's worth I tend to agree with you,but you have zilch chance of persuading the assorted drama queens,doom-merchants and provocateurs that there is any efficacy to your thinking. They have a vested interest in wanting the 'told you so' outcome as they've been anti-Venky's from day one. Philip is a typical exponent of this but,as you're finding out,there are plenty of others.

[Jimmy612]

I'm going to say this only once, unlike other people who like to repeat everything again and again... Venky's should have kept Big San until the season ended or had someone in to replace him. They didn't. That is truly daft. Instead, they appointed someone who has been offered the managers job at other clubs but turned them down. Why, now, should we support him? How about because he has been given the chance and we need him to do well. He has his own ideas and wants to change the way this team plays. Not like Ince though, that is obvious if you actually watch the games. It hasn't worked yet but Kean has only had a week and a bit to work with the players in icy, snowy conditions. Has he had enough time? No, not even slightly.

Give him a chance. It's not like we have much of a choice us it? The only benefit there is in getting on his back is to our opposition.

Give him a chance? The team started 3-5-2 against Stoke before it became a rabble. So what was that about? Pennant and Etherington are good quality players so why leave massive space down the flanks for them to exploit? Last time we played 3-5-2 to the best of my knowledge was in the Championship when we had better players than the rest and wanted to utilise Berkovitz's incredible creativity. Unfortunately Souness kept it like that against Arsenal in the cup and we got battered. Once we were promoted he rightly abandoned the formation.

Our best and most accurate free kick taker Paul Robinson has now been confined to his own area presumably through fear of upsetting the owners. The Stoke keeper then collected our free kicks with ease because they were put in the wrong areas. So whats that about too?

Unfortunately you are right with one thing, it's not like we have much choice.

[imy9]

That's ridiculous - once you start factoring in wages it changes the parameters completely. The average first teamer wage in this league is probably around 30-40k, so maybe the surplus on top of that can be counted, but including wages to twist your particular argument distorts it completely. You wouldn't do it with good signings - would you say Samba cost Rovers £500k or would you say Samba cost Rovers almost £10 million if you include wages? Every player in this league gets a wage, Viduka was on an excessive wage though so maybe the excess 20k or so could be counted. No worse value than Michael Owen has been for Man United.

More guess work I see, point is that paying someone £65k a week and for them to score 7 goals in TWO years in 16 apps cannot be classed as successful can it? He wasnt a FREE was he?

I never said they're not there. But http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/football-transfers/5487742/Premier-League-Transfers-Summer-2010.html let's see that. Will Jean Basejour be worth £3.3 million? What about Rafik Halliche at £1.3 million? Poulsen was signed for £5 million by the great Hodgson and is ridiculed by Liverpool fans. Ditto Konchesky at £4 million. James Perch for £1.5 million at Newcastle has been a flop. Angeleri signed for £1.5 million for Sunderland - 27 years old and made his first appearance as a sub at the weekend. Marc Antoine Fortune for £2.5 million? Pablo Barrera for £4 million hasn't exactly been setting the world on fire at West Ham. Mauro Boselli - £6 million, still waiting for his first league goal. Franco di Santo - £2 million, still waiting for his first goal.

WILL IGNORE THESE AS YOU SAID £1 MILLION AND UNDER, I CAN NAME LOTS WHO WERE SUCCESSES, I CAN GUARANTEE THAT THERE ARE AT LEAST 6 MANAGERS WITH A BETTER RECORD FOR BUYING PLAYERS THAN SAM.

McArthur isn't even a regular for Wigan, he's played all of 6 games. He might turn out to be good though. Larsson and Ferguson were both in previous summers - I'm sure I could bring up lists for those summers too and bring up at least as many players who cost a million (and over) who turned out to be failures.

MY MISTAKE WRONG PLAYER, IT WAS HIS TEAM MATE JAMES MCCARTHY, THOUGH MCARTHUR WILL BE A SUCCESS TOO.

As I said before, Hughes was a better manager for Rovers than Sam but the gulf isn't that big. Funny you haven't included my point about the league being easier for Hughes at Rovers than it was for Sam. However what Sam achieved at Bolton far outstrips what Hughes achieved at Rovers.

OK SAM BUILT A LEGACY AT BOLTON, RIGHT? NAME SOME PLAYERS BAR ANELKA THAT WENT FOR SAY MORE THAN £2 MILLION ONCE HE LEFT... THERE WONT BE MANY AS HE SPENT HIS TIME BUYING OLDER PLAYERS WHO WERE GOOD FOR THE SHORT TERM BUT DID NOTHING FOR BOLTON IN THE LONG WRONG, WHICH IS WHY THEY COLLAPSED WHEN HE LEFT, I AM GLAD THAT WE HAVE OUR YOUTH TO FALL BACK ON AS WE CERTAINLY CANT WITH HIS SIGNINGS. EASIER LEAGUE? OK IF YOU SAY SO, CLUBS WERE STILL SPENDING MONEY, FAR OUTSTRIPPING ROVERS, DIFFERENCE IS THAT THE QUALITY OF PLAYER HUGHES BOUGHT IN WAS MUCH BETTER.

And Hughes had 4 years at Rovers. Sam had two. Of course in four years you're going to build a squad. Hughes made some great signings but had multiple windows in which to spend money, a little bit each January (like when we signed Samba) and £3-5 million each summer which he spent very well. Sam's only really had one summer transfer window where he's had money to spend, so how can you possibly expect him to build a squad in half the time?!

YOU FORGOT TO MENTION THAT HE SOLD PLAYERS TO COMPENSATE.

Because Nelsen is getting on and doesn't have the best injury record, and he can also do a job at left back (though has had a few poor games there). Even many of the most staunch anti Sam people would say Givet has been a successful signing. You are definitely in the minority here.

HE WASNT TWO YEARS AGO!

Why do you only count the players that cost money? Surely free transfers are to greater credit? And, according to your argument before, don't the wages players recieve count in how much money is spent on them? You've just defeated your own argument there. Okocha, Djorkaeff, Campo, Gary Speed, I could go on...

THEY ARE WHEN THEY WORK, THE ABOVE DID, A LOT OF HIS DID NOT!

SWP has made three appearances for City this season. Not part of the first team. Jo has made 18 league appearances and one league goal for City since Hughes signed him for £18 million. £36 million by Hughes on RSC and Jo combined for 38 league appearances and 4 goals between them. Give me Sam spending just wages on Mark Viduka any day of the week. Jo was also bought before the Abu Dhabi lot took charge when funds weren't quite as free flowing.

AS I HAD SAID IN THE QUOTE YOU USED! INTERESTING HOW YOU USED RSC WHO WAS BOUGHT BY THE ABU DHABI GROUP, NOT HUGHES.

Zabaleta and Kompany were good signings though, for sure.

NOT OUTSTANDING SIGNINGS? INTERESTING CHOICE OF WORDS.

No, I named some of the most respected managers in Europe currently. If I was naming some of the greatest managers of all time, I wouldn't have mentioned Wenger and Van Gaal for one, and I would've named the likes of Bob Paisley, Rinus Michels, Matt Busby, Ernst Happel...

VAN GAAL NOT A GREAT MANAGER? OK.. WENGER NOT EITHER, INTERESTING, THATS WHY FOOTBALL IS WONDERFUL I SUPPOSE, THE DIFFERING OPINIONS, I COULD EASILY MAKE A CASE FOR EITHER.

Inter had finished 6th the season before Hodgson took over, they spent quite a bit of money, and they'd won the UEFA Cup in both 1990 and 1994. As regards being respected, apparently he was pelted with coins and lighters after they lost the final. Not sure that's really a sign of respect, and I'm not sure if he was that highly respected he would've have ended up coaching the likes of UAE, Viking, FC Copenhagen and the Finnish national team.

WHERE WERE INTER WHEN ROY TOOK OVER? BOTTOM 5 AS I SAID. MORATTI HAS SAID THAT ROY HAS A JOB FOR LIFE AT INTER, WHENEVER HE WANTS, SO TRAPPATONI IS NOT A RESPECTED EUROPEAN COACH? HE HAS COACHED IN AUSTRIA AND IRELAND? COMPARE ROYS RECORD IN HIS CAREER AND HE HAS PERFORMED 'MIRACLES' AT CERTAIN CLUBS, I WOULD SUGGEST READING HIS CV AGAIN. PART OF UEFA TECHNICAL COMMITTEE TOO. I SUPPOSE WHEN THE NEXT TOP 7 JOB IS VACANT SAM WILL BE LINE OR WILL HE APPLY FOR A BOTTOM 3 CLUB, WHY DO YOU THINK THAT IS, IF AS YOU SAY HE HAS DONE SUCH BRILLIANT JOBS?

Also it's funny you hold Sam's transfer record against him so much when Woy has signed some real flops for Liverpool over the summer and who had an apalling record with money for Rovers. Double standards, surely?

WHO MEIRELES? BOY IS TOP CLASS JUST NEEDS A LITTLE TIME, COLE IS PROVEN, WILSON IS AN UP AND COMING PLAYER, THE ONLY FLOP IS JOVANOVIC BUT HIS FREE SO HE DOESNT COUNT DOES HE

Look at his record, he's had more clubs than Tiger Woods. You talk about building squads with Hughes, Hodgson spent three years at Fulham but before that hadn't spent more than a couple of seasons at any club since Malmo in the 80s.

[Fife Rover]

Having read loads of posts on the subject of "winning football matches" versus "entertaining football", I feel the need to add my two pennorth to the debate, and this seems to be the best thread to discuss it without starting another one, so here goes.

How many teams in the current EPL always play entertaining football at the same time as winning the match? I submit there are actually very few and would even suggest that there are NONE that do it all the time. However let's look at the candidates for this particular accolade. I would suggest the best candidate has to be Arsenal, closely followed by either Chelsea or Man U. That's it really there are no others that can even lay claim to that title. Some would probably argue Man C or Spurs on a good day, but then you could apply the "on a good day " argument to most of the teams in the EPL (yes, even Rovers).

So what conclusion can we draw from this analysis? The stand-out obvious answer is that to have any chance at all of playing winning football combined simultaniously with high entertainment you MUST have a squad (not just a team) of absolute top-notch players with a combined value of several hundred millon pounds, and if the Venky's want this they had better face the fact right now that that is what it will cost them to achieve it.

Then there is also the added cost of hiring a proven top-notch and highly experienced manager, plus a considerable number of supporting coaches,physios, etc etc. All before you can even begin to think about consistently challenging the winning combined with high entertainment that some seem to think can be achieved with our squad of players. All I can say to them is ...come into the real world and stop dreaming!!

[Andy]

The general 'feel' of watching the players in the last two matches reminds me a lot of when Ray Harford was in charge.

Players looking demotivated, half-arsed and without a great deal of organisation.

Something has clearly gone wrong, as you don't go from being a well-drilled, organised and determined side to to what we've just seen in the last two matches overnight.

I was absolutely pro-Sam - he did a fantastic job at Ewood and that is beyond doubt - and I've always been one of the most glass-half-full fans, even in the worst of times in recent history.

However, right now things in general look bad. Very bad.

I'm hoping to be pleasantly suprised in the transfer window, but as has been said, who wants to play for an unknown dead man walking, managing a club managed by some trigger-happy football novices?

I don't care how good of a 'presser' Kean can do - that is completely irrelevant to his managerial ability.

What matters, as it always did under Sam, is results and if he can't get them, he won't be with us much longer.

[yeti-dog]

Gosh we are desperately struggling for arguments to support Kean if we are trying to say that in terms of salvaging Premier League survival and building with limited resources, the Hughes and Allardyce managerial periods were anything other than incredible successes. League tables and financial statements usually don't lie and read in conjunction with each other point to Hughes and Allardyce both achieving miracles at Ewood.

It seems the indefensible is being supported by the indefensible twaddle.

I desperately want Kean to succeed and Rovers to finish top half of the Premier League this season- in other words to end up where we would have done anyway under Allardyce. It is not looking good because if we consider on field balance of play in the last three games, a side which gave Bolton one heck of a fright and came away unlucky to lose from the Rebok has now been given a bit of a footballing lesson at home by West Ham and an absolute thumping at home by Stoke.As for whispers coming out, I could have older stuff than Steve Kean's post match soothing balm following the Stoke defeat but EHD, Samba and Robbo are still being talked about.

Never mind accountancy,you should have been a politician.Your ability for disengenuousnes is second to none. So the last match of Sam's reign is held up by you as something to be proud of? Absolute balderdash,I left that game even more infuriated than the last two..Bolton,let's not forget, played a large chunk of that match with 10 men yet we still gifted them two goals and left with nothing.

[philipl]

Ivan,I admire your tenacity and,for what it's worth I tend to agree with you,but you have zilch chance of persuading the assorted drama queens,doom-merchants and provocateurs that there is any efficacy to your thinking. They have a vested interest in wanting the 'told you so' outcome as they've been anti-Venky's from day one. Philip is a typical exponent of this but,as you're finding out,there are plenty of others.

Just shows you do not read my posts then doesn't it?

[yeti-dog]

Just shows you do not read my posts then doesn't it?

Come off it Philip...I've read plenty.

You've been sniping from the sidelines like a spoilt child from day one because your preferred outcome regarding the tyre-kicker didn't happen.

At least be man enough to admit it eh?

[philipl]

I have been consistent in saying I'd have gone with the people with the money- and Rothschilds were convinced Syed had the money. I have also been consistent in backing Mrs Desai and vehemently opposing Kentaro/Jerome Anderson.

They have dropped an utter clanger in sacking Sam when they did it and I have been consistent in saying that.

[yeti-dog]

I have been consistent in saying I'd have gone with the people with the money- and Rothschilds were convinced Syed had the money. I have also been consistent in backing Mrs Desai and vehemently opposing Kentaro/Jerome Anderson.

They have dropped an utter clanger in sacking Sam when they did it and I have been consistent in saying that.

I think we can all agree that the timing of Sam's sacking was poor but it's done now and we really have to try and salvage something positive out of it to move forwards.

[Yorick]

So the last match of Sam's reign is held up by you as something to be proud of? Absolute balderdash,I left that game even more infuriated than the last two..Bolton,let's not forget, played a large chunk of that match with 10 men yet we still gifted them two goals and left with nothing.

Yeti-Dog

I think you'l agree that when we played at the Reebok we controlled much of the play and limited them to rare chances.

When Bolton went down to 10 we conceded straight away and this allowed them to defend for their lives.

To our credit we were able to get a goal back after deserving at least a draw, and but for an awful lack of concentration from our midfield we would have walked away with a point.

Compare this to the WHU game at home against a team bottom of the league. Our starting line up in midfield consisted of three wingers and an old crock on the left hand side.. none of whom could tackle their way out of a paper bag. We created very few chances and in my opinion were lucky to come away with a draw.

Then we can go to the Stoke game.. again 3 wingers and an old crock, this time in central midfield.

We created 3 shots on target, one of which was a freekick by ped, comfortably saved by Begovic.. and a header by Hanley well saved by Begovich.. (please enlighten me on the other one as I cannot recall it).

All in all we were comfortably beaten by a better Stoke team, who but for Robinson could have won by 3 or 4.. We on the other hand would not have scored if we were still playing now!

The tactics are all wrong and i wouldn't be at all surprised if Kean has been told to change formation and stifle any so called 'unattractive football' with one example being Robbo's freekicks.

To say that you walked away from an away match against a high flying Bolton, after a decent performance more frustrated than the last two catastrophe's is quite ridiculous!

[yeti-dog]

The point I was making was our ineptitude in terms of grabbing a game against 10 men by the scruff of the neck and leaving with 3 points.

Regarding the last two games. Yes,we've been poor..the West Ham game could have gone either way...both teams looked horribly exposed at times.Stoke was worse but they are a truly horrible team to play against,football's equivalent of playground bullies.Samba and Jones were badly missed,without them we looked frankly feeble.

I stand by my comment..I was incredibly frustrated because those 3 points were there for the taking.

[King Kenny's Magic]

I have been consistent in saying I'd have gone with the people with the money- and Rothschilds were convinced Syed had the money. I have also been consistent in backing Mrs Desai and vehemently opposing Kentaro/Jerome Anderson.

They have dropped an utter clanger in sacking Sam when they did it and I have been consistent in saying that.

Say If they would of let Sam continue without offering him another deal in due course,then that would of led to unrest with the players too.

[AggyBlue]

Would you like me to say it again?

I think you've said far too much, over and over.

We know your point of view, now sit back and wait to be proved right or wrong.

[Andy]

Say If they would of let Sam continue without offering him another deal in due course,then that would of led to unrest with the players too.

It would, but not in the same way.

Big difference between letting somebody's contract run out and ending it suddenly and unexpectedly.

[tony gale's mic]

More guess work I see, point is that paying someone £65k a week and for them to score 7 goals in TWO years in 16 apps cannot be classed as successful can it? He wasnt a FREE was he?

Of course my guess at the average wage of a first team Premier League player is guess work, but 30-40k is a very fair guess wouldn't you say? Are all your quotes about wages all guesswork too or do you have access to their salary slips? And he was a FREE transfer, like I said every player gets a wage. If you're not willing to call him free, as I asked previously,do you want to start addressing Chris Samba as an £8 million signing for Rovers?

And later on in your post you mention Jo being a "first teamer" with the implication he was a good signing - Viduka did a hell of a lot better than him.

WILL IGNORE THESE AS YOU SAID £1 MILLION AND UNDER, I CAN NAME LOTS WHO WERE SUCCESSES, I CAN GUARANTEE THAT THERE ARE AT LEAST 6 MANAGERS WITH A BETTER RECORD FOR BUYING PLAYERS THAN SAM.

Why ignore them? Players who cost more than a million prove my point even more. My point was that 1 million and under rarely buys you quality in this league, so therefore if I can name players who cost SEVERAL times that, it reinforces the point that £1 million is nothing in Premier League terms. And this is very relevant when appraising signings like Diouf (success) or Chimbonda (failure), though they cost a bit more than a million they still cost a lot less than all of the above.

6 managers with a better record than Sam? With the money he's had to spend? Okay, go on. Including managers like Ferguson and Redknapp would be ridiculous. Similarly, Pulis has had a lot more to spend in recent years.

OK SAM BUILT A LEGACY AT BOLTON, RIGHT? NAME SOME PLAYERS BAR ANELKA THAT WENT FOR SAY MORE THAN £2 MILLION ONCE HE LEFT... THERE WONT BE MANY AS HE SPENT HIS TIME BUYING OLDER PLAYERS WHO WERE GOOD FOR THE SHORT TERM BUT DID NOTHING FOR BOLTON IN THE LONG WRONG, WHICH IS WHY THEY COLLAPSED WHEN HE LEFT, I AM GLAD THAT WE HAVE OUR YOUTH TO FALL BACK ON AS WE CERTAINLY CANT WITH HIS SIGNINGS. EASIER LEAGUE? OK IF YOU SAY SO, CLUBS WERE STILL SPENDING MONEY, FAR OUTSTRIPPING ROVERS, DIFFERENCE IS THAT THE QUALITY OF PLAYER HUGHES BOUGHT IN WAS MUCH BETTER.

Well, for one, I didn't actually say that be built a legacy at Bolton, but do you think they'd be in the position they are now - an established Premier League side - if it wasn't for Sam? Or do you think they would've been in the Championship, or a yoyo side at best?

And yes he bought Okocha, Hierro and Campo. In addition to Anelka he also bought Ben Haim (signed on a Bosman by Chelsea but could easily have been sold for money too). He also bought Davies who has been an integral player for them through the years. Kevin Nolan was brought through under Sam too. Even someone like Michael Ricketts, his name induces laughter these days but Sam signed him for 500k, he was one of the top scorers in the Premier League in one season, won an England cap then got transferred to Boro for £3 million.

That's not to mention the extra money from Premier League placing, or the pride the Bolton fans felt about seeing their club which had been mid table in Division One finish close to the big boys and have regular European football.

The league WAS easier for Hughes at Rovers than it was for Sam at Rovers. Around about 2006-07 (towards the end of Hughes' reign), an influx of rich foreign owners arrived at clubs from Villa to Man City to Sunderland. Carson Yeung at Birmingham arrived later. Clubs like Stoke are massively outspending us, Hughes never had this. Even Everton - Fellaini's transfer fee was about £15 million, Biliyatdenov £9 million..they never spent like that when Hughes was in charge at Ewood. It's no coincidence that Hughes' last season at Rovers produced the worst football and had us finishing in 10th place -- exactly the same finish as Sam last season.

Yes clubs were still spending money, that's bloody obvious, but there were nowhere near as many clubs far outstripping Rovers (outside Man U Chelsea Arsenal and Liverpool) than Sam had to deal with. And at the same time Hughes never had to sell players to balance the books like Sam did.

So yes, clearly Hughes' job with Rovers was easier than Sam's was.

YOU FORGOT TO MENTION THAT HE SOLD PLAYERS TO COMPENSATE.

How many big players were sold in Hughes' reign then?

THEY ARE WHEN THEY WORK, THE ABOVE DID, A LOT OF HIS DID NOT!

Free transfers are never a certainty. When a manager signs a free he usually knows there's a high chance the player won't succeed, but the low price makes it worth the risk. Sam got those right a lot more often than he got them wrong, as is evidenced by his league success at Bolton. He also combined those experienced heads alongside younger heads like Nolan in that Bolton side.

AS I HAD SAID IN THE QUOTE YOU USED! INTERESTING HOW YOU USED RSC WHO WAS BOUGHT BY THE ABU DHABI GROUP, NOT HUGHES.

Hughes wanted RSC before the Abu Dhabi group took over at City. He might not have negotiated the final transfer fee but he knew full well what the release clause was. Hughes was the driving force behind that particular transfer, not the Abu Dhabi group. Robinho is a different story.

VAN GAAL NOT A GREAT MANAGER? OK.. WENGER NOT EITHER, INTERESTING, THATS WHY FOOTBALL IS WONDERFUL I SUPPOSE, THE DIFFERING OPINIONS, I COULD EASILY MAKE A CASE FOR EITHER.

Stop changing the words...you said I had named some of "the greatest managers of all time". A man who takes charge of Holland and fails to qualify for a WC is not one of the greatest managers of all time. Great manager but only notable European success came with Ajax which means he isn't among the greatest. Wenger is someone who I have huge admiration for, but someone who has won as comparatively little silverware as he has also does not qualify as one of the greatest of all time.

They're both among the most respected coaches in Europe though. Unlike Hodgson.

WHERE WERE INTER WHEN ROY TOOK OVER? BOTTOM 5 AS I SAID. MORATTI HAS SAID THAT ROY HAS A JOB FOR LIFE AT INTER, WHENEVER HE WANTS, SO TRAPPATONI IS NOT A RESPECTED EUROPEAN COACH? HE HAS COACHED IN AUSTRIA AND IRELAND? COMPARE ROYS RECORD IN HIS CAREER AND HE HAS PERFORMED 'MIRACLES' AT CERTAIN CLUBS, I WOULD SUGGEST READING HIS CV AGAIN.

And where were Inter the season before Roy took over? 6th. They just had a terrible start to the season and he was hired pretty early on. You seem to count "building squads" as a key parameter for judging a manager. How many squads has Woy built? Trappatoni hasn't been respected as a coach since the 90s, he did a pretty shocking job with Italy and since then has been taking lower profile jobs towards the end of his career (he's now 71). People respect him for the coach he was rather than what he is now.

Totally different to Roy having to go to UAE for work when he should have been in his prime.

[imy9]

You are going round in circles and having done a good job of editing and pasting bits and pieces so I will sum up what I have said:

A good transfer in my eyes is one that works, whereby the player performs well in the team/is value for money/makes money for the club once they are sold- to be a good transfer you would need to cover two of these.

Based on that Sam has not well at either Newcastle or Blackburn but did well at Bolton.

So paying £40K a week for Jay Jay is fine as performed well in the team and was value for money, £65K a week for Viduka to score 7 goals in 16apps in TWO years was clearly not.

You said:

Hughes inherited a side which finished 6th under Souness and had won a domestic cup but who had lost their way.

Finished 15th season before and near bottom of the league with a dire squad when he took over, 10th, 7th and 6th and built a SQUAD.

Hughes at Rovers- winning % = 43.62%

Hughes at City- 46%

Sam at Rovers- 35%

Sam at Bolton 41%

So Hughes has a better winning % than Sam at ANY of his previous clubs.

You said:

Also some of the most respected coaches in Europe are Mourinho, Ferguson, Wenger, Guardiola, Van Gaal etc etc. Hodgson is not one of them.

Yet he has managed two of the biggest sides in Europe and is currently in Liverpool-, how does that work again? He has been part of the UEFA technical group, CURRENT LMA manager of the year (there is only so much you can edit from his wiki)

What is the biggest club Sam has managed? Newcastle for...6 months, ok...

Top 6/7 manager according to you, so that would translate as, if Liverpool, Man City, Spurs fired their managers then Sam would be hot favourite? So why do I get the feeling that he is destined for a club in the bottom 3? Why would such a revered manager not be considered for the top jobs (maybe his winning % at the clubs he has been at and the legacy he has left behind has played a part in that)

Tried PMing this to you but your box is full, I will post there from now as this is getting way off topic- sorry mods.

[broadsword]

Yes I did. Now why won't you give him a chance

Doesn't matter whether Phil gives him a chance or not. What matters is how long Venky's give him.

I would maintain that if he is a success then that is pure serendipity. If he makes an imperial ar5e-up of it then he will have to be changed, and further turmoil will ensue.

I think for everyone's sakes we have to hope against hope that he succeeds. I don't think the signs are good at all, but it won't stop me hoping. We need a win out of our next three games, as a minimum, just to take the pressure off.

[chris]

imy9 and tony gale's mic

Agree to disagree, I have never in 13 years on the board seen two opinions so completely opposite.

I agree with Tony mind.

Actually keep going it is kinda funny.

[Amo]

Actually keep going it is kinda funny.

If by 'funny' you mean overbearingly tedious, then yeah.

[Amo]

The point I was making was our ineptitude in terms of grabbing a game against 10 men by the scruff of the neck and leaving with 3 points.

If Kean had been in charge when we got mauled 7-1 at Old Trafford or lost to ten man Bolton, the snipers would be gunning for his tactical naivety and lack of defensive organisation. But because it's 'Big Sam', he gets a free pass. I'm not saying Sam should have been sacked on the basis of those results, but there's definitely some blinkered views on here regarding the old and the new.

[Tim Southampton Rover]

Well done Steve on your first win as Blackburn manager.

[imy9]

Congratulations mate, positive play and well deserved first win the PL, now lets beat Sunderland!

[tony gale's mic]

Great stuff. It's still an uphill battle for any manager making his way in the league for the first time, but this win was absolutely crucial. Points on the board and it should instill a confidence in the squad and the manager which has been desperately lacking recently.

[Hasta]

Despite all my angst against his appointment that I have given on this thread - well done Steve Kean. Mediocre first half improved much in the second. Whatever he said worked.