MARK HUDSON SACKED

[A Quiet Monkfish]

Re: MARK HUDSON SACKED

There’s lots of candidates on SkyBet but I do wonder who actually would consider the vacancy.

Clubs looking for a new manager nearly always do so because their club is in the s**t.

[Loramski]

Re: MARK HUDSON SACKED

You know a lot about the game and I’ve been surprised and disappointed by your lack of constructive criticism - basically, all you say is everything is crap.

Well said, good luck with this.

[AdrianAlston]

Re: MARK HUDSON SACKED

There are two issues here; how the club is run ("what is the plan" is this mornings soundbite) and Hudson's ability as a manager.

Whatever the answer to the first is, the second has to be that Hudson clearly wasn't up to it. Whilst I don't believe in the chopping and changing of Managers, there appears to have been little tactical nous under Hudson and we have been completely shapeless going forward.

With hindsight, the Morison sacking as a joke. Getting rid of him with no replacement lined up was just plain stupid. Whatever the rights or wrongs of Morison as a manager, we would be higher up the table if he he hadn't been sacked,

[The Lone Gunman]

Re: MARK HUDSON SACKED

Whatever the rights or wrongs of Morison as a manager, we would be higher up the table if he he hadn't been sacked,

That’s an opinion, but I don’t think there’s much evidence to back it up.

[UNDERHILL1927]

Re: MARK HUDSON SACKED

It baffles me how some fans still think our board has a plan.

[blue lewj]

Re: MARK HUDSON SACKED

It baffles me how some fans still think our board has a plan.

If we have a plan and part of that plan had the appointment of Morison and Hudson and giving them virtually no money to rebuild a squad I think we can safely say that if there is one then it is far from a good one.

[splott parker]

Re: MARK HUDSON SACKED

That’s an opinion, but I don’t think there’s much evidence to back it up.

Correct, the evidence (results) during Morison’s time suggest we’d be, more or less, in the same position. There weren’t any pointers during his tenure that we were improving, certainly not improving enough to now be in a comfortable position in the table as some posters allude to. It’s not as if he was snapped up by another struggling club and turned them around to allow the pro Morison posters to say ‘I told you so’. Seems like he’s on ‘ignore’ in football circles.

[blue lewj]

Re: MARK HUDSON SACKED

Changing the manager in the style that we are, a cheap stab in the dark and that's being kind, is just putting a plaster on a gaping wound.

We need a huge rethink of how things are done at the club or a personnel change, however that comes about.

Carrying on as we are and running things on a shoestring with people with no footballing experience picking people with hardly any to manage us is going to end one way.

[UNDERHILL1927]

Re: MARK HUDSON SACKED

Correct, the evidence (results) during Morison’s time suggest we’d be, more or less, in the same position. There weren’t any pointers during his tenure that we were improving, certainly not improving enough to now be in a comfortable position in the table as some posters allude to. It’s not as if he was snapped up by another struggling club and turned them around to allow the pro Morison posters to say ‘I told you so’. Seems like he’s on ‘ignore’ in football circles.

We played better football and were slightly more threatening under Morison. I’m confident we’d be in a better position but we’ll never know

[Vindec]

Re: MARK HUDSON SACKED

Changing the manager in the style that we are, a cheap stab in the dark and that's being kind, is just putting a plaster on a gaping wound.

We need a huge rethink of how things are done at the club or a personnel change, however that comes about.

Carrying on as we are and running things on a shoestring with people with no footballing experience picking people with hardly any to manage us is going to end one way.

I agree with much of that. However the immediate priority must be to avoid relegation. So what do we need? A rookie manager or a man with experience? Surely the club can't continue with their continual sackings of people with no experience. I believe the Board must know that. I don't think either there was no substance in the Warnock rumours last week. It seems obvious to me that Warnock is the man if he agrees to come. That may well be the best we can get at the moment and let's face it he has a pretty good record.. At least a Warnock appointment until the end of the season would give the club time to find a longer term appointment.

[Nobody's Rep]

Re: MARK HUDSON SACKED

I agree with much of that. However the immediate priority must be to avoid relegation. So what do we need? A rookie manager or a man with experience? Surely the club can't continue with their continual sackings of people with no experience. I believe the Board must know that. I don't think either there was no substance in the Warnock rumours last week. It seems obvious to me that Warnock is the man if he agrees to come. That may well be the best we can get at the moment and let's face it he has a pretty good record.. At least a Warnock appointment until the end of the season would give the club time to find a longer term appointment.

It could be a cheap option as I am assuming he like countless others are still on our payroll🤔

[Dorcus]

Re: MARK HUDSON SACKED

Tan is probably wondering if we need a manager anyway. He's one of these Blue Sky radical thinkers

After all it would save him a couple of quid and if all the rumours are to be believed he picks and controls the team anyway.

[Pedro de la Rosa]

Re: MARK HUDSON SACKED

It’s a fair point I think about being opened up if we had a more attacking outlook, but, if it did lead to us scoring more, it’d a be a risk worth taking - apart from two freakish occasions when we scored three, we can only win games 1-0 this season and I don’t see that being enough to keep us up. Unfortunately, I’m not convinced we have the players to do it. You picked a team in another post which to me seems to be the way to go - three at the back with a fit Romeo and O’Dowda as wing backs because they’ve been our best and most consistent wing backs. I agree with Wintle and Rinomhota in midfield (the latter can be anonymous at times, but he’s played well recently and Ralls hasn’t- - unfortunately because he was a fine player at this level, all Sawyers has done is prove his legs have gone).

Robinson has to be a part of any front three and Davies caused Leeds the sort of problems for a defence that none of our players have done this season for forty five minutes at least - he was less effective yesterday mind. Having watched Etete yesterday, we need someone to become a reliable attacking focal point. You’ve mentioned Hugill, but is a Championship side going to allow one of their players to come here when all they need to do is ask us for a loan fee? I accept it’s very unlikely, but it’s still just feasible in such a tight division that we could go on a great run and become a Play Off rival for Norwich. Going for a Premier League striker probably means a youngster and a pretty untested one at that if there is no loan fee involved, so you start thinking would they be any better than Etete?

All I can think is that any new manager will be aware of our requirements and might be able to call in a few favours from old mates - we really need a quick appointment and it has to be someone who is an improvement on our last four managers -of course, the question then becomes are our lot capable of doing that?

For me, we have 3 players who have to start. Kipre, O'Dowda and Robinson. I think when McGuinness officially comes back, he will join that 4. He's the best player in League One and he has to come back in. For me, Wintle and Romeo should, and given our predicament, probably Davies to utilise his pace.

We absolutely have to open up and try to score more often, it is a risk we have to take. Sorry if I wasn't clear I was trying to say I don't believe our defenders are as good as believed. I think they're very well protected and we are genuinely pretty hard to break down and that helps them no end. I'm not a huge fan of Ng.

Re Hugill, he's not had a sniff at Norwich, has he? He's played 62 minutes this season and he rarely makes the bench. If he's on about 20 grand a week as has been reported, we could save Norwich 500k over the course of half a season. He can't play against Norwich and in all honesty, we are far more likely to take points off their playoff rivals than catch them. I think it makes a lot of sense. It probably won't happen, we've got 16 days left of the transfer window and we haven't started looking for a manager.

Maybe we can hope Forest sign another 20 players or so and we can get some of their cast offs on loan.:hehe:

I really, really hope we get a new manager to tells Tan he will take the job if Tan takes a back seat. I'm fed up to the back teeth of inexperienced managers and clueless board members making terrible decisions.

[Sloop_Jon_Bee]

Re: MARK HUDSON SACKED

There are two issues here; how the club is run ("what is the plan" is this mornings soundbite) and Hudson's ability as a manager.

Whatever the answer to the first is, the second has to be that Hudson clearly wasn't up to it. Whilst I don't believe in the chopping and changing of Managers, there appears to have been little tactical nous under Hudson and we have been completely shapeless going forward.

With hindsight, the Morison sacking as a joke. Getting rid of him with no replacement lined up was just plain stupid. Whatever the rights or wrongs of Morison as a manager, we would be higher up the table if he he hadn't been sacked,

Agree with this.
Spedger

[Dorcus]

Re: MARK HUDSON SACKED

Agree with this.
Spedger

Yes it's true.

If ever there were seminars available to prospective owners how NOT to manage a club, that episode would make for essential presentation.