[Archived] Steve Kean

[thenodrog]

JW looked to the likes of Shearer, and ultimately Ince.

i've a lot of respect for JW BUT I will never understand the thinking behind either of those as long as I live. Never.

I was due an explanation in his office but he had to postpone it whilst he sacked Ince instead. Consequently it never happened.

[Mattyblue]

If Venkys had said we’d be using the Jones money to pay off debts and we’ll spend 5 million on transfers, most including Kean would have been happy, disappointed by relatively happy. That would have constituted business as usual.

It was 'business as usual' under the Trust, as they were pulling up the bridge as they tried to get shut of the club.

But no, I would not be at all happy to hear that from Venky's. To see my club prostituted and its good name ruined for nothing in return is not what a takeover by 'billionaires' was supposed to achieve, was it?

[Jackson]

That's rubbish.

"Form" isn't half a seasons worth of games. Form is usually calculated over six games, so there's enough time for multiple peaks and troughs in form, as what usually happens with most teams over the course of a season.

Blackpool as I said followed the promoted team example we've seen many times before. Even when Blackpool were riding high most people who had any idea knew they'd be in the midst of a relegation battle come the end of the season. Fulham had Johnson AND Zamora long term injured at the start of the season. They came back in the second half.

The results Rovers had shown under Allardyce wasn't just over 17 games. For the remaining games under Sam in 08/09 we were the 10th best side in the league, in 09/10 we were the 10th best side in the league, and in 10/11 for almost half a season we were a point off being the 10th best side in the league.

And your utterly illogical approach to this discussion can be summed up with the phrase "As 3 examples have shown, the majority of teams did not show consistant form over 38 games" - :lol:

I never realised our league consisted of five teams.

No team shows consistent form, but what a team achieves in the first half of a season is USUALLY a fairly accurate predictor of what theyre going to achieve in the second half. Particularly if they've been achieving that level for the last two years.

And it would be pleasant of you to be able to substantiate your arguments without repeatedly calling people stupid. You really do strike me as a bitter individual. Thanks.

[tony gale's mic]

And it would be pleasant of you to be able to substantiate your arguments without repeatedly calling people stupid. You really do strike me as a bitter individual. Thanks.

I'd rather strike people as being bitter rather than inherently dim.

I've managed to substantiate my arguments and make a comment about how i percieve your intelligence.

Two birds with one stone.

[rebelmswar]

We will see who was the better manager come the end of this season.

I wouldn't be surprised if Sam was a premier league manager this time next year and Kean a championship one.

If he keeps his job.

We need five players at least, decent ones at that, just to reach a decent squad size. Quality like for like for players we have lost, and almost got us relegated with, is not going to happen.

I see no logical reason why we will not be scrapping for survival from game one.

[glen9mullan]

Hi all This is my first post on this site and I must say the creators have done a good Job with it.

Firstly I would like to say football is all about opinions be those good or bad, You may not want to hear them you may disagree with them but everyone has one, thats why we write on forums to share ours,

Everyday you read rumours some are just that

Everyday you read things claiming to be factual which are not backed up with hardcore facts

Everyday you read things from POTENTIAL in the know individuals who have heard or been told certain things about the club we all love,(This being the common thing whcih brings us altogether, we actually love our club so much we are willing to give our time to come on forums and discuss it with our fellow fans who love the club as much as us)

However this is when things get lost in transalation, An opinion is exactly that, many get snippedts from all over the place then base an opinion on it.

Others share opinions on boards but then get information from reliable sources and share those too, however too many then can't work out what is being given as an opinion or indeed what is being given as factual from a source. This causes disruption and in turn makes is difficult from people in the know to actually post anything without everyone going on their every word, because people determine that individuals opinion as FACTS, When he is merely just airing his opinion like you are yours.

I'm an active user on another site and check this site from time to time, but have always remianed true to the other site I use, People who have followed me for many years will vouch for info I give which is factual, however I also post on the forum with my opinion. Its important to not crucify people if things change, because with instability at Rovers this changes by the minute.

I prob aint worded this very well as thankfully I am not a journalist, and want our Club to do the very best it can and will always support the club through the good and bad times, after all when I first started going rovers we where at the bottom of the second division, had no cash and everything extra was only a dream.

I read lots of people hanging on every word certian individuals say, but by doing this you take away his/her ability to have an opinion and too many are quick to shoot the messenger when they have then indeed taken an opinion as fact.

Anyway keep up the good work we have been through worst times and i'm sure (OPINION) Things will all work out

[Exiled in Toronto]

but what a team achieves in the first half of a season is USUALLY a fairly accurate predictor of what theyre going to achieve in the second half. Particularly if they've been achieving that level for the last two years.

Since it is early here and I have no inclination to start work, I decided to test what is the crux of your repetitive 'argument' with some facts by looking at the table as it stood at 18th dec and comparing to the final outcome.

Taking where every club was in position on Dec 18th, only 6 finished in the same position, 3 of those in the top 5 (Man u, City, Spurs), all 3 having virtually the same points per game over both time frames. Another was WHU, bottom throughout, but they could not go down any more so had less opportunity to shift position.

Even in the highly consistent and stable top 4, Arsenal were 2nd with 30 points from 16 games (1.88 ppg), finished 4th having averaged 1.72 ppg for the remaining 22 games. Chelsea went from 4th to 2nd.

Below them, Sunderland went from 6th in dec having got 27 points from 18 games to finish 10th, accumulating a futher 20 points from their last 20 games.

Bolton: 7th in Dec finished 14th, won 26 from 18 then 20 from 20

Newcastle, 8th to 12th

Liverpool 9th to 6th

Taking their places in the top 10 were:

Fulham 17th in dec to 8th

Everton 15th to 7th

Villa 14th to 9th

The average change in league position for those clubs that did change position was 4.7 places, 4.4 if one excludes Blackpool, 3.3 if one includes all 20 clubs. We changed 3 places, less than the average

Do check your facts before showering insults around.

[thenodrog]

OK.. MATTY! some wanted him. but they werent making their voices heard on here believe me!

if you look back at my views on the ince appointment.. i was terrified!

and i consistantly said we shouldve fired sam after he kept us up!

Nothing like a show of gratitude and loyalty is there? It won't be long before you and yours will be begging for Allardyce to return. Best manager for a club with no money in both the Prem and then Championship.

[LeChuck]

The average change in league position for those clubs that did change position was 4.7 places

Why have you excluded those that didn't change position from your statistic? That is fudging the numbers if I ever saw it!

TGMs initial point was that we consistently showed top 10 form under Allardyce. Somehow being 1 point from 10th place at the time of his departure renders his statement void for some people. I'd call pedantry but it really doesn't do it justice.

[Exiled in Toronto]

Why have you excluded those that didn't change position from your statistic? That is fudging the numbers if I ever saw it!

It would average 3.3 in that case. Still leaving our change less than the average. If we excluded ther top 4 since that is structurally and financially so different from the rest of the league, the average place change would be 3.9

[Hughesy]

• Over-draft/ Debt = £18m
  
• Phil Jones Fee = £16m rising to £20.5m
  
• Venkys minimum budget per window £5m
  

Serious question - IF Venkys cleared our over-draft/ debt with the PJ money, would people be happy for them to only spend the £10m on fees this season and also sign freebies?

[Hughesy]

That is fudging the numbers if I ever saw it!

TGMs initial point was that we consistently showed top 10 form under Allardyce.

Who's Fudging, him or both of you?

Form is taken over 6 game spells....

28th Aug - 30th Oct 2010 - 9 games played, 1 win (Blackpool last minute), 4 draws, 4 losses (1 in cup).

Season before....

25th Nov 2009 - 14th Jan 2010 - 12 games played, 1 win (Chelsea in cup on pens), 5 draws, 6 losses.

I wouldnt say they show 'consistent top 10 form'

[Black Burn]

Hi all This is my first post on this site and I must say the creators have done a good Job with it.

Ah, yay! The man I have been quoting has finally personally come onto the board!

Maybe you could share the same info as you did on Vitalfootball.

[thenodrog]

And it would be pleasant of you to be able to substantiate your arguments without repeatedly calling people stupid. You really do strike me as a bitter individual. Thanks.

Surgeon v vet. You are both supercillious and conceited gits and both puffed up with self importance to be honest.... but TGM does seem to have a better memory than you Jackson.

(21/17)x38 would have left us on 46/47 points and mid table again with Prem safety guaranteed in April. All that with the poorest squad since Souness left. Poorer certainly than the one Ince inherited and poorer than the one that Kean began February with. Not pretty maybe but effective certainly.

[LeChuck]

Form is taken over 6 game spells....

Is it? Never knew it had such a precise definition.

[tony gale's mic]

Since it is early here and I have no inclination to start work, I decided to test what is the crux of your repetitive 'argument' with some facts by looking at the table as it stood at 18th dec and comparing to the final outcome.

Taking where every club was in position on Dec 18th, only 6 finished in the same position, 3 of those in the top 5 (Man u, City, Spurs), all 3 having virtually the same points per game over both time frames. Another was WHU, bottom throughout, but theyn they could not go down any more so had less opportunity to shift position.

Even in the highly consistent and stable top 4, Arsenal were 2nd with 30 points from 16 games (1.88 ppg), finished 4th having averaged 1.72 ppg for the remaining 22 games. Chelsea went from 4th to 2nd.

Below them, Sunderland went from 6th in dec having got 27 points from 18 games to finish 10th, accumulating a futher 20 points from their last 20 games.

Bolton: 7th in Dec finished 14th, won 26 from 18 then 20 from 20

Newcastle, 8th to 12th

Liverpool 9th to 6th

Taking their places in the top 10 were:

Fulham 17th in dec to 8th

Everton 15th to 7th

Villa 14th to 9th

The average change in league position for those clubs that did change position was 4.7 places, 4.4 if one excludes Blackpool. We changed 3 places, less than the average

Do check your facts before showering insults around.

All that trouble for a massively flawed argument. I wouldn't expect any less from you, given your track record on this board.

Your first flaw is that you conveniently disregard the fact that I was referring to Sam's record over two years, not just half a season.

Now under Sam, we achieved 1.33 ppg in 08/09 after Ince left, 1.31 ppg and 1.23 ppg in 10/11. Fairly consistent record right? Even 1.23 ppg would have had us (just about) in 10th in 2010/11, and if he'd been able to spend £5m in January then maybe things would have been better?

You use average change in position. Not exactly a scientific way to determine things really - I can't imagine you'll look at the table when Sam left, when we were only a couple of points off 7th despite being 13th and think that would be the correct way to assess things? Unless you twisted things to suit your argument, that is.

Points per game is a much better way of determining things.

Now what teams achieve in the first half is USUALLY a very good way of determining how they'll do in the second half - UNLESS there's a massive change at the club. This is just common sense. This is why it wasn't a great predictor for Rovers once Sam got sacked. That's why obviously our performance under Ince didn't accurately predict how we finish. This is basic football stuff which you seem to be mysteriously ignoring.

That's why you using Liverpool (change in manager), Villa (bought the most prolific English PL striker going) and Sunderland (lost that striker) don't support your point whatsoever. They had massive changes at our club just like we did. Villa - 1.00ppg before Bent arrived; 1.62 ppg after he arrived. Sunderland - 1.48 ppg before Bent's departure; 0.81 ppg after Bent's departure. Fulham lost their front two to long term injuries for a few months at the start of 2010-11 - how many teams does that happen to?

And let's now look at Rovers. 1.23 ppg before Sam's departure (which wouldve had us on 47 points, in line for a top 10 finish); 1.04 ppg after it (between 39 and 40 points, relegation form though surviving by half a point which doesn't exist obviously).

Using average positions from a table which was extremely tight isn't really wise. Seeing how many points the team had collected is a much more accurate description - and using teams which had similarly large upheavals (and had large shifts in their performance) doesn't really support your point whatsoever.

And seeing that Rovers under Sam produced a consistent level of performance for two years, not just six months, means it's highly likely they could have carried that on for another half season.

[den]

Serious question - IF Venkys cleared our over-draft/ debt with the PJ money, would people be happy for them to only spend the £10m on fees this season and also sign freebies?

Would I be happy?

I personally, aren't shallow enough to judge Venky's on whether they put 5 or 10m in, for three years, or even longer. If they were the richest people in the world and could match Man City's owners' financial clout, then maybe that could cover for their lack of footballing nous. Throw enough millions at players and you have a chance of success.

In our case though Hughesy, accepting that Venky's can't compete with the big boys in terms of finance, our first priority is to have owners who can run the club properly. I'm not too bothered about 10m for three years, because it makes little difference in this league.

So, for me the only thing that matters now is that they get their act together and run the club in a honest and professional manner. I wont be swayed by 10 or 20m.

But lots will.

[Kelbo]

Since it is early here and I have no inclination to start work, I decided to test what is the crux of your repetitive 'argument' with some facts by looking at the table as it stood at 18th dec and comparing to the final outcome.

Taking where every club was in position on Dec 18th, only 6 finished in the same position, 3 of those in the top 5 (Man u, City, Spurs), all 3 having virtually the same points per game over both time frames. Another was WHU, bottom throughout, but they could not go down any more so had less opportunity to shift position.

Even in the highly consistent and stable top 4, Arsenal were 2nd with 30 points from 16 games (1.88 ppg), finished 4th having averaged 1.72 ppg for the remaining 22 games. Chelsea went from 4th to 2nd.

Below them, Sunderland went from 6th in dec having got 27 points from 18 games to finish 10th, accumulating a futher 20 points from their last 20 games.

Bolton: 7th in Dec finished 14th, won 26 from 18 then 20 from 20

Newcastle, 8th to 12th

Liverpool 9th to 6th

Taking their places in the top 10 were:

Fulham 17th in dec to 8th

Everton 15th to 7th

Villa 14th to 9th

The average change in league position for those clubs that did change position was 4.7 places, 4.4 if one excludes Blackpool, 3.3 if one includes all 20 clubs. We changed 3 places, less than the average

Do check your facts before showering insults around.

Perhaps it may be wise also to check the upturn in points gained in the second half of the season from Rovers under Allardyce!!

[John]

So, for me the only thing that matters now is that they get their act together and run the club in a honest and professional manner. I wont be swayed by 10 or 20m.

But lots will.

I am exactly the same, some fans get far too carried away purely on what we potentially might spend.

[Exiled in Toronto]

Points per game is a much better way of determining things.

And let's now look at Rovers. 1.23 ppg before Sam's departure (which wouldve had us on 47 points, in line for a top 10 finish); 1.04 ppg after it (between 39 and 40 points, relegation form though surviving by half a point which doesn't exist obviously).

And seeing that Rovers under Sam produced a consistent level of performance for two years, not just six months, means it's highly likely they could have carried that on for another half season.

Really? Let's look at, say, Arsene Wenger - he's pretty consistent isn't he? Only been here 15 years. Ppg over 1st 17 games: 1.882, over remaining games: 1.714. Difference of -0.168. Compare that to our difference of -0.188

Or maybe Sam's last full year at Bolton - been there years. Games 1-17 ppg: 1.588, games 18-38: 1.381.

You're wrong. It is not highly likely we would have had the same number of ppg. Statistically it is very unlikely because it happens in only a small minority of cases.

[Guest Rovers4Good]

Let's face it we are stook with Steve Kean for the immediate future and i don't know if that's a good thing or not but i know he's no good for the future of this club.

Also, how many other premiership manager would fly out to India or anywhere for that matter to see the owners? Have they never heard of f**king Skype lol.

[Mercer]

Allardyce and his overinflated ego have left the building, that boat has sailed, lets move on, we have far more worry things to concentrate on surely.

So this Kean fellow, a victim of the clueless owners? Or made his bed and should lie in it?

After reports of a major bust up with the iron lady, I think hes been peddled a load of lies much in the same way we have.

What goes around comes around, if you can't stand the heat........, it you don't want to get burnt.......... etc etc

IMO, he's been part of it all along and I imagine very, very few supporters will have a shred of sympathy for this clown.

[Mr. E]

I've said it before. Rovers have had poor managers who weren't up for the job. But Kean just makes me physically ill.

[tony gale's mic]

Really? Let's look at, say, Arsene Wenger - he's pretty consistent isn't he? Only been here 15 years. Ppg over 1st 17 games: 1.882, over remaining games: 1.714. Difference of -0.168. Compare that to our difference of -0.188

Or maybe Sam's last full year at Bolton - been there years. Games 1-17 ppg: 1.588, games 18-38: 1.381.

You're wrong. It is not highly likely we would have had the same number of ppg. Statistically it is very unlikely because it happens in only a small minority of cases.

Well at least you've abandoned that silly positional change thing you were using before. But if we're being accurate and comparing drops in points per game, looking at that % difference in performance is arguably much more of a reliable indicator.

Because surely a manager dropping 0.2 ppg when he averages almost 2.0 ppg is less of a deal and will make less difference to the overall performance than when he averages closer to 1 point per game, would you not agree?

Under Wenger Arsenal dropped the number of points they got per game by 9% in the period they described. Even then fans were aghast by the drop in their performance over the second half of the season. Some were making the argument that maybe Wenger had lost it.

When we changed from Sam to Kean, we dropped the number of points per game we got by 16% in the same amount of time.

It's unlikely we would have had exactly the SAME since statistically alone thats unlikely, however it's likely we would have achieved a very similar level of performance. And again, we were a very consistent club maintaining a very consistent level of performance under Sam over two years, not just 17 games.

[Gav]

This would be true were Kean not totally complicit in the lies being told to the fans.

Like the interview today.

Or last season where he claimed we could challenge for the Champions League before too much time.

He's banging the drum to the same idiotic tune as the owners.

Why whats he said today?

The point in all of this is Venkys are telling the manager you have 40m to spend in the summer, Keans thinking I could challenge for the champions league with 40m and says as much. Now whether or not we believe thats possible is irrelevant for me, he's taking what the owners say as truthful and setting out his ambition, nothing wrong with that.

He’s a victim in all of this as much as we are, he's been fed lie after lie by the sounds of things also.