Nigel Pearson sacked?

Pro. F

Sanity_Saviour wrote: »

oh dear.

I hope you can see the irony in all of this, this post is bizarre and I really hope you don't believe any of this. Just because it's your opinion that it's true doesn't make it so. It's important to understand that different people have different opinions (subjectivity!) than you.

In short, Pearson: Had personality and I liked that. Pro. F: does not like Pearson. Stop inventing things I say/mean/implied(?), it's actually maladaptive and will likely wind you up.

Keep on pretending that myself and the other 10 posters who agreed with my response to you were just misunderstanding you. Good job.

Pro. F

Trilla wrote: »

Distracting, derailing and tedious do come to mind when reading some of the more recent posts in this thread. Not sure if alot of posters would want to read them. Or maybe I'm just cranky cas I'm lying here sick in bed!

Nah, I doubt it's because you're sick. It's common enough for you to feel the need to pass comment on the fact that other posters are arguing.

Sanity_Saviour

Pro. F wrote: »

Keep on pretending that myself and the other 10 posters who agreed with my response to you were just misunderstanding you. Good job.

oh dear, this just keeps getting better:pac::pac:!

When did I mention any posters except from Pro. F? You can't seriously be using this? hahahaha

Can we admit we come from different perspectives on the manager Nigel Pearson? You disagree in the way he interacts with reporters, I do not, in fact I see it as a positive example of how he has personality, something which is not universally seen by managers in the Premier League (the one in England). You disagree with this. That is fine.

But actively rewording my posts, telling me about implications that don't exist, reading my mind to tell me what I mean my by words? weird and unhealthy I would say

Pighead

Sanity_Saviour wrote: »

You disagree in the way he interacts with reporters, I do not, in fact I see it as a positive example of how he has personality, something which is not universally seen by managers in the Premier League (the one in England). You disagree with this. That is fine.

This is the bit I don't get. You don't seem to grasp the fact that there are some good reporters, some average reporters and some bad reporters. Why should he treat them all with disdain? Treat the bad ones badly if you want but it makes no sense to tar them all with the same brush. That guy who he went off on his embarrassing 'ostrich rant' at had no previous with Pearson and asked him a pretty innocuous question before being verbally assaulted by him. That's just bad manners really.

Pro. F

Sanity_Saviour wrote: »

oh dear, this just keeps getting better:pac::pac:!

When did I mention any posters except from Pro. F? You can't seriously be using this? hahahaha
...
But actively rewording my posts, telling me about implications that don't exist, reading my mind to tell me what I mean my by words? weird and unhealthy I would say

You didn't. I brought them up.

I responded to your OP based on my interpretation of what you had said. 10 others agreed with that response, but according to you my interpretation of what you said was completely incorrect. Sure it was.

Sanity_Saviour wrote: »

Can we admit we come from different perspectives on the manager Nigel Pearson? You disagree in the way he interacts with reporters, I do not, in fact I see it as a positive example of how he has personality, something which is not universally seen by managers in the Premier League (the one in England). You disagree with this. That is fine.

I've no interest in discussing it with you now. There's no point as you won't stand over anything you've said when it doesn't suit you.

pmasterson95

pmasterson95 wrote: »

Pro & Sanity sitting in a tree..........

K-I-S-S-I-N-G!

Sanity_Saviour

Pighead wrote: »

This is the bit I don't get. You don't seem to grasp the fact that there are some good reporters, some average reporters and some bad reporters. Why should he treat them all with disdain? Treat the bad ones badly if you want but it makes no sense to tar them all with the same brush. That guy who he went off on his embarrassing 'ostrich rant' at had no previous with Pearson and asked him a pretty innocuous question before being verbally assaulted by him. That's just bad manners really.

Oh for sure, there most likely was no need to go off on him and, subjectively, it was rude (but quite funny).

However, if we turn it around to take the perspective of Pearson (the bit that is most important), he may not see the reporter asking the question as individual reporters, but just another press conference whether the people in front of him are asking rude and leading questions. If then we can comfortably say he is not fond of reporters, it doesn't matter who said it, simply that it was enough to elicit a negative reaction. It doesn't make sense from a subjective sense, but it's important to step into Pearson's shoes, especially if you do not like him. In short, it's not the right reaction from our perspective, but it's understandable why he acted in that way if you take his perspective.

Verbally assaulted is hilarious by the way, never heard that being used in the context of calling someone an ostrich, wonderful!

In addition, again with telling me that I'm confused with reporters. Where did I talk about good, bad, indifferent reporters? It doesnt matter if you have had constantly negative interactions with people who share a common trait (reporters), negative biases form very easily and rapidly.

Sanity_Saviour

Pro. F wrote: »

You didn't. I brought them up.

I responded to your OP based on my interpretation of what you had said. 10 others agreed with that response, but according to you my interpretation of what you said was completely incorrect. Sure it was.



I've no interest in discussing it with you now. There's no point as you won't stand over anything you've said when it doesn't suit you.

You can't actually be serious here. It is insanely arrogant to say that I'm not standing over anything I've said because what I said didn't fit the incorrect assumptions you made about what I really meant, even after I explained what I meant in intricate detail!

I've never encountered this kind of arrogance in actual life, this is really interesting.

Nalz

Sanity_Saviour wrote: »

this is really interesting.

Where do you think Pearson will go to next Sanity_Saviour? Think he'll go back into football straight away?

Sanity_Saviour

Trilla wrote: »

Where do you think Pearson will go to next Sanity_Saviour? Think he'll go back into football straight away?

haha

I hope he gets himself a good gig somewhere, it would be good to see him back in the Premier League some day. Is there any Championship clubs looking for managers at the moment? He took Leicester up, I'm sure he can do it again!

Pro. F

Sanity_Saviour wrote: »

You can't actually be serious here. It is insanely arrogant to say that I'm not standing over anything I've said because what I said didn't fit the incorrect assumptions you made about what I really meant, even after I explained what I meant in intricate detail!

I've never encountered this kind of arrogance in actual life, this is really interesting.

Keep pretending and complaining. Blah blah blah.

Pighead

Sanity_Saviour wrote: »

Oh for sure, there most likely was no need to go off on him and, subjectively, it was rude (but quite funny).

However, if we turn it around to take the perspective of Pearson (the bit that is most important), he may not see the reporter asking the question as individual reporters, but just another press conference whether the people in front of him are asking rude and leading questions. If then we can comfortably say he is not fond of reporters, it doesn't matter who said it, simply that it was enough to elicit a negative reaction. It doesn't make sense from a subjective sense, but it's important to step into Pearson's shoes, especially if you do not like him. In short, it's not the right reaction from our perspective, but it's understandable why he acted in that way if you take his perspective.

Verbally assaulted is hilarious by the way, never heard that being used in the context of calling someone an ostrich, wonderful!

In addition, again with telling me that I'm confused with reporters. Where did I talk about good, bad, indifferent reporters? It doesnt matter if you have had constantly negative interactions with people who share a common trait (reporters), negative biases form very easily and rapidly.

You're over thinking this. He was rude. It's not subjective. If he's feeling the pressure of his job and he takes it out on an innocent bystander that's his fault. Nobody else's' He acknowledged this himself by apologising to the journalist a couple of days later.

And I think you know he did more than just call him an ostrich.

NP I think you must have either your head in the clouds, or been away on holiday, or reporting on a different team, because if you don’t know the answer to that question . . your question is absolutely unbelievable, the fact you do not understand where I am coming from. If you don’t know the answer to that question then I think you are an ostrich. Your head must be in the sand. Is your head in the sand? Are you flexible enough to get your head in the sand? My suspicion would be no.

IB Probably not.

NP I can, you can’t. You can’t. Listen you have been here often enough and for you to ask that question, you are either being very, very silly or you are being absolutely stupid, one of the two because for you to ask that question, I am sorry son, you are daft.

IB There hasn’t been much harsh criticism of the players.

NP You are wrong. No, you are wrong. You have been in here, I know you have so don’t give that crap with me, please don’t give that crap with me. I will smile at you because I can afford to smile at you. Now do you want to ask a different question or do you want to ask it differently. Come on, ask it. Ask it or are you not capable?

IB I just don’t know what you, erm ...

NP (mimicking his voice) You don’t know. What’s ’erm’?

IB I don’t know how you’ve taken that question.

NP Well you must be very stupid. I’m sorry. (Pearson gets up and leaves)

Nalz

Sanity_Saviour wrote: »

haha

I hope he gets himself a good gig somewhere, it would be good to see him back in the Premier League some day. Is there any Championship clubs looking for managers at the moment? He took Leicester up, I'm sure he can do it again!

Not sure to be honest. Was a bit of a miracle he worked towards the latter stages of the season. I'm sure we'll see plenty of sackings in the PL and championship early doors.... if previous years are anything to go by!

edit: Have Wednesday got a manager?

Sanity_Saviour

Pighead wrote: »

You're over thinking this. He was rude. It's not subjective. If he's feeling the pressure of his job and he takes it out on an innocent bystander that's his fault. Nobody else's' He acknowledged this himself by apologising to the journalist a couple of days later.

And I think you know he did more than just call him an ostrich.

"interview"

Ah ha but you left out the important part!

"...is difficult and for the players to have to deal with the amount of criticism and negativity they’ve had to endure over the course of the season has tested us. Without wanting to talk too much, the players come out with awful lot of credit for dealing with setbacks and I expect them to deal with tonight’s setback as well.

Ian Baker What criticism are you talking about?

NP Have you been on holiday for six months? Have you been away for six months?

IB No, I am just not quite sure what specific criticism you are referring to?"

I did say it was rude subjectively, which is the same as saying that is rude objectively but acknowledges there are other elements at play

However, this bit above ties in to what I was saying re: negative interactions with reporters. Asking him to state exactly what criticisms he's been given (i.e. what have his side been criticised about) is a leading question, especially after such a great performance against Chelsea, and one which was likely to have elicited a negative reaction.

The most important thing to say here is that while it was quite clearly the wrong reaction for PR reasons (something I agree with you about), I can fully understand why he had the outburst when you reference the "amount of negativity and criticism for months" line. It is not a rational response, but is understandable when you step in his shoes. Apologising doesn't change this fact!

I'm not really sure what the "fault" thing is about, of course a leading question is going to elicit a reaction, not acknowledging the reporter's part in this is bizarre.

THIS is the most important part. It doesn't matter who said the specific quote about the "criticism", it was clear that it would evoke a negative reaction which it would appear had been building up as a result of the "months of negativity and criticism" and which, quite frankly, I enjoyed!

So, I enjoy this side of him because: he gives it back to reporters which I think embodies his personality.

Verbal Assault though? I really hope that retorts of this ilk will be the most severe "verbal assaults" that you will hear :pac:

Sanity_Saviour

Trilla wrote: »

Not sure to be honest. Was a bit of a miracle he worked towards the latter stages of the season. I'm sure we'll see plenty of sackings in the PL and championship early doors.... if previous years are anything to go by!

edit: Have Wednesday got a manager?

I would love to see Pearson at Wednesday, they're a team I would love to see back in the big time.

And before you said that I didn't even realise his history with them.

Added to the fact they've just been taken over, we might be seeing him sooner than later

Sanity_Saviour

Pro. F wrote: »

Keep pretending and complaining. Blah blah blah.

:pac::pac::pac:

hahahah this is wonderful

Nalz

Sanity_Saviour wrote: »

I would love to see Pearson at Wednesday, they're a team I would love to see back in the big time.

And before you said that I didn't even realise his history with them.

Added to the fact they've just been taken over, we might be seeing him sooner than later

put the house on it.... now

Pro. F

Sanity_Saviour wrote: »

:pac::pac::pac:

hahahah this is wonderful

Yeah, it's been a delight. Bye now.

Billy86

Let's all just unsubscribe from this thread, I think Sanity Savior and Pro F need some *ahem* alone time.

K-9

Who got the last word in anyway?

Pighead

Pighead wrote: »

NP You are wrong. No, you are wrong. You have been in here, I know you have so don’t give that crap with me, please don’t give that crap with me. I will smile at you because I can afford to smile at you. Now do you want to ask a different question or do you want to ask it differently. Come on, ask it. Ask it or are you not capable?

IB I just don’t know what you, erm ...

NP (mimicking his voice) You don’t know. What’s ’erm’?

IB I don’t know how you’ve taken that question.

NP Well you must be very stupid. I’m sorry. (Pearson gets up and leaves)

Even reading it is a bit toe curling. But the "what's erm" was the nadir.

fullstop

Sanity_Saviour wrote: »

Doesn't matter he's a football manager hired to win football games and, in the case if Leicester, keep them up.

He ticked both boxes. There is no obligation to pander to the very people who are dragging your name through the mud, that's absurd!

It does matter. He got sacked and his attitude towards the press most likely played a major part in that.

Paully D

It looks like Predrag 'Preki' Radosavljević (former Everton and Portsmouth player) will be appointed new Leicester manager. BBC Sport and others are reporting this. He has resigned from his position at Sacramento Republic who play in the 3rd division, yes 3rd division, of US football.

Jesus wept :pac:

thebaz

Paully D wrote: »

It looks like Predrag 'Preki' Radosavljević (former Everton and Portsmouth player) will be appointed new Leicester manager. BBC Sport and others are reporting this. He has resigned from his position at Sacramento Republic who play in the 3rd division, yes 3rd division, of US football.

Jesus wept :pac:

thats a bit like the leeds manager last year - so famous , i forgot his name - did he last 8 weeks ??
- it really isn't fair installing someone so out of there depth - that is if this is true

thebaz

Ranieri confirmed - much better appointment than above risk - if he keeps leicester up he will have done well

rob316

That's a very good appointment, he has managed albeit not very successfully some huge clubs. Experienced enough to get Leicester to a midtable finish.

Paully D

thebaz wrote: »

Ranieri confirmed - much better appointment than above risk - if he keeps leicester up he will have done well

Luckily for him they don't have to face his bogey team - the Faroe Islands. Robert Huth will be looking forward to playing wing back again I'm sure! :pac:

JPA

rob316 wrote: »

That's a very good appointment, he has managed albeit not very successfully some huge clubs. Experienced enough to get Leicester to a midtable finish.

It'll be a miracle if he gets them to a midtable finish.

Skylinehead

https://twitter.com/JamesHorncastle/status/620624727313268736

rob316

JPA wrote: »

It'll be a miracle if he gets them to a midtable finish.

Top half I meant

JPA

rob316 wrote: »

Top half I meant

Even bigger miracle.

Rikand

Delighted to see the tinkerman back in the premiership

Billy86

I wonder how much PR plays not this, because Ranieris career has been a disaster for the last few years... but he is also one of the most beloved managers of the last 20+ years in England, own and other fans included.

Paully D

15 months on and Leicester are Premier League champions. There's some cracking comments in this thread (including from myself, and not in a good way regarding the Ranieri appointment :pac:).

If only they had appointed Predrag 'Preki' Radosavljević as the BBC reported was happening last July. :pac:

K-9

K-9 wrote: »

Who got the last word in anyway?

Leicester.

Billy86

JPA wrote: »

rob316 wrote: »

Top half I meant

Even bigger miracle.

Or even biggest miracle of all!

What can I say though, I had it down as a possible PR-influence move.

thebaz

thebaz wrote: »

Ranieri confirmed - much better appointment than above risk - if he keeps leicester up he will have done well

job well done - there safe

kfallon

When you are asked in 20-30 years time by your Grandchildren to tell them the story of when Leicester won the league against all odds....

"Well, it all started when Nigel Pearson's son racially abused a Thai hooker in a Bangkok hotel orgy....."

yabadabado

Don't forget to mention the ostrich!

monkey9

Looks like I'm the only one to come out of this thread with any credit. Everyone else has made fools of themselves.

monkey9 wrote: »

Absolutely the correct decision to get rid of Pearson and there’s only one man for the Leicester job, step forward Mr Claudio Rainieri. I guarantee you, if they give him the job, he will win the league title in his very first season. No doubt whatsoever. In fact, not only do I firmly believe they will win the league, but they’ll also win it with two games to spare.

Yes, snigger all you like, you peasants. But when PaullyD bumps this thread on the night Leicester are confirmed Champions, I will quote this post to drown out all your mocking laughter.

Bounty Hunter

Pearson now the clear favourite for the Villa job.

Will support him if he gets it and he has got a team promoted before but... I really hope it does not come to pass and whomever the new buyers of the club are decide to go another direction

CSF

Bounty Hunter wrote: »

Pearson now the clear favourite for the Villa job.

Will support him if he gets it and he has got a team promoted before but... I really hope it does not come to pass and whomever the new buyers of the club are decide to go another direction

I think he comes out of this Leicester title win looking well. Not Ranieri well by a mile, but he signed like 90% of a team that has just won the Premier League. For transfer policy alone that's a win.

Kirby

CSF wrote: »

I think he comes out of this Leicester title win looking well. Not Ranieri well by a mile, but he signed like 90% of a team that has just won the Premier League. For transfer policy alone that's a win.

Thats one way to look at it. For sure.

However you can spin that the complete opposite direction.

"The same players who were good enough to win the league nearly got relegated under Pearson! All they changed was the manager but look at the difference it made! WTF was Pearson doing with such a talented team that nearly had them down?!?"

That makes him look terrible. It's all in how you phrase it to be honest.

CSF

Kirby wrote: »

Thats one way to look at it. For sure.

However you can spin that the complete opposite direction.

"The same players who were good enough to win the league nearly got relegated under Pearson! All they changed was the manager but look at the difference it made! WTF was Pearson doing with such a talented team that nearly had them down?!?"

That makes him look terrible. It's all in how you phrase it to be honest.

That would be as harsh a way to look at it as it would be generous of me to say he is responsible for them winning the league. Neither is true.

But credit where it's due for bringing the likes of Vardy and Mahrez to the Premier League. If he can do the same for Villa I'll be more than ok with his reign if he then gets sacked and somebody else comes in and does more with his signings.

cj maxx

There has ( obviously) been alot if people with connections to leicester on the radio these past few days.
Pearson is given alot of credit by them for this title win . He assembled the team that won the league .

MD1990

cjmc wrote: »

There has ( obviously) been alot if people with connections to leicester on the radio these past few days.
Pearson is given alot of credit by them for this title win . He assembled the team that won the league .

He played a part but wouldn't say he assembled the team. Simpson,Albrighton & Drinkwater were not regular's under Pearson. Ranieri & Walsh (chief scout) bought in Fuchs,Kante & Okazaki as well & started a very settled team.

CSF

MD1990 wrote: »

He played a part but wouldn't say he assembled the team. Simpson,Albrighton & Drinkwater were not regular's under Pearson. Ranieri & Walsh (chief scout) bought in Fuchs,Kante & Okazaki as well & started a very settled team.

I think it's fair enough to say that he deserves credit for having brought in Schmeichel, Drinkwater, Mahrez, Vardy, Huth, Morgan, Simpson, Albrighton, Ulloa who all played a massive role in Leicester's title win, while also being right minded to point out that it was another manager who actually turned them into Premier League winners, and that the same almost certainly wouldn't have happened with Pearson as manager.

eagle eye

CSF wrote: »

I think it's fair enough to say that he deserves credit for having brought in Schmeichel, Drinkwater, Mahrez, Vardy, Huth, Morgan, Simpson, Albrighton, Ulloa who all played a massive role in Leicester's title win, while also being right minded to point out that it was another manager who actually turned them into Premier League winners, and that the same almost certainly wouldn't have happened with Pearson as manager.

I don't think it's fair to say he wouldn't have won the league with them based on their incredible last two months of the previous season under him.

7 wins, 1 draw and 1 loss over their final nine games was more than just impressive.

CSF

eagle eye wrote: »

I don't think it's fair to say he wouldn't have won the league with them based on their incredible last two months of the previous season under him.

7 wins, 1 draw and 1 loss over their final nine games was more than just impressive.

I'd say it personally. What Ranieri has done is mammoth. Huge. Created a consistency and a calmness in them that I don't think Pearson could have created.

jmayo

JPA wrote: »

It'll be a miracle if he gets them to a midtable finish.

So if it was miracle to get them to a mid table finish what is when he wins the bloody league ?

What is above a miracle ?

kfallon wrote: »

When you are asked in 20-30 years time by your Grandchildren to tell them the story of when Leicester won the league against all odds....

"Well, it all started when Nigel Pearson's son racially abused a Thai hooker in a Bangkok hotel orgy....."

That would be quiet a hook to start a movie.

Kirby wrote: »

Thats one way to look at it. For sure.

However you can spin that the complete opposite direction.

"The same players who were good enough to win the league nearly got relegated under Pearson! All they changed was the manager but look at the difference it made! WTF was Pearson doing with such a talented team that nearly had them down?!?"

That makes him look terrible. It's all in how you phrase it to be honest.

Actually I thought Leicester were unlucky to be bottom of the league last year.
They played some good football, but just weren't winning.
In February alone they lost away to Everton and Arsenal when really they were better team for chunks of the matches.

Things finally came right at the end of the season.

BTW Pearson got peed off when people said they were unlucky.

Compared to this year no one can say Villa played anything close to good football.