-
Re: Who would have Warnock back?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rjk
Is that lilke Bacuna, only a bit rasher ?
A case of lean back when he shoots
-
Re: Who would have Warnock back?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gnojek
A case of lean back when he shoots
Yeah he makes a pig's ear of it alright
-
Re: Who would have Warnock back?
Not me. I don’t think I could stand the cloying insincerity of being told again that we are a great club with amazing fans. Then again, doesn’t he say that at every club he manages ?
-
Re: Who would have Warnock back?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rjk
Is that lilke Bacuna, only a bit rasher ?
:hehe:
-
Re: Who would have Warnock back?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ianto13
Agreed, no way we should go backwards! Give Harris until Christmas,if we’re still struggling Nigel Pearson anyone?
Yes,he is the one i wanted whem Warnock went
-
Re: Who would have Warnock back?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
the other bob wilson
Neil Harris said after last night's match that Osei-Tutu will be out for four to six weeks and that Wilson's injury is not too serious, he may have to miss Saturday but should be alright after that.
I agree that we should have got an out of contract right back in, it could still be done, but a lot of the more realistic targets have found clubs now.
After thinking about your post a little more i think when they let crowds back we could have him back selling 50/50 tickets outside before games i'm sure many will fall for his bullshit and spin and buy some
-
Re: Who would have Warnock back?
Harris is purely a transition manager to get us away - no matter how slightly away from Warnock's style of play. He might drift with the play offs but I dont think he will ever take us up. If he can steady the ship (and budget!) for this season or so he will be gone and hopefully somone more exciting taking over
-
Re: Who would have Warnock back?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
City123
We certainly aren't worse than we were at this stage last season. We were lucky to have won any games at all having relied on late winners (96th and 88th minute) against Luton and Huddersfield and an own goal at home to Middlesbrough. We'd also been ripped apart by a Reading side who'd go on to finish 15th and had a calamitous start away at Wigan
I am sure you are correct statistically. However, my thinking was our style of play is no better or arguably worse. Even at the moment we can win or draw games but the style of play is poor as many of the others on here have said.
-
Re: Who would have Warnock back?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Vindec
I am sure you are correct statistically. However, my thinking was our style of play is no better or arguably worse. Even at the moment we can win or draw games but the style of play is poor as many of the others on here have said.
We aren't worse now than we were then.
We aren't Barcelona now, but at least we're trying to move on to a more passing based game (which we are, but it will take time). We were getting poor results under Warnock and playing the same hoofball crap that dominated much of his reign
-
Re: Who would have Warnock back?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
City123
We aren't worse now than we were then.
We aren't Barcelona now, but at least we're trying to move on to a more passing based game (which we are, but it will take time). We were getting poor results under Warnock and playing the same hoofball crap that dominated much of his reign
In terms of results what’s actually wrong with Hoofball?
I’m tired of all this crap about hoofball as the most boring games I’ve ever seen is ‘perfect football’ from Barca and Pep’s city.
Some of the most entertaining games I’ve ever enjoyed have been lumping into the box.
There’s a few issues with Warnock football
It’s easy to plan to defend if you have the right players
When it doesn’t work it’s dreadful
It’s not fashionable
If people can accept were a hoofball team and sign players on that basis it’s not an issue
-
Re: Who would have Warnock back?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
WJ99mobile
In terms of results what’s actually wrong with Hoofball?
I’m tired of all this crap about hoofball as the most boring games I’ve ever seen is ‘perfect football’ from Barca and Pep’s city.
Some of the most entertaining games I’ve ever enjoyed have been lumping into the box.
There’s a few issues with Warnock football
It’s easy to plan to defend if you have the right players
When it doesn’t work it’s dreadful
It’s not fashionable
If people can accept were a hoofball team and sign players on that basis it’s not an issue
We'll never stay up if we play hoofball and if it goes wrong, it's bloody awful.
-
Re: Who would have Warnock back?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Pedro de la Rosa
We'll never stay up if we play hoofball and if it goes wrong, it's bloody awful.
And what we play now is any better? 🤷*♂️
I’m no advocate of hoofball but I put up with it whilst we were winning.
But THIS....🤦*♂️
-
Re: Who would have Warnock back?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bobby Dandruff
And what we play now is any better? *♂️
I’m no advocate of hoofball but I put up with it whilst we were winning.
But THIS....*♂️
Not really but why would you want to go back to something that had run it's course and wasn't working? Hardly any of our players can play and half of the ones that can have had their confidence shot to bits. Warnock built most of the squad we have and let's be honest, it isn't a stellar one by any means. Harris' signings have been pretty good. Moore, Ojo, JOT and Wilson all improve the side.
-
Re: Who would have Warnock back?
Just why did Neil Warnock decide to sign Aden Flint, a very ordinary 30 year Championship defender, for over £4m and where was the transfer committee?
It’s the lack of serious football people at the top of the club who allowed this sort of thing to happen that is continuing to hold us back.
VT is a businessman living in Malaysia, Ken is a former hotelier who divides his week between the club and running a car dealership in London and Dalman is a merchant banker living in Monaco.
There doesn’t appear to be any strategy In place. Until the structure of the club is placed on a more professional basis and VT hires some top football people to advise him and the board then I don’t really see us going anywhere anytime soon, hope I’m wrong.
-
Re: Who would have Warnock back?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
WJ99mobile
In terms of results what’s actually wrong with Hoofball?
I’m tired of all this crap about hoofball as the most boring games I’ve ever seen is ‘perfect football’ from Barca and Pep’s city.
Some of the most entertaining games I’ve ever enjoyed have been lumping into the box.
There’s a few issues with Warnock football
It’s easy to plan to defend if you have the right players
When it doesn’t work it’s dreadful
It’s not fashionable
If people can accept were a hoofball team and sign players on that basis it’s not an issue
As a style of play its pretty dull to watch, that's the issue
What's annoying about Warnock is when he let the shackles off we played good stuff. The start of the promotion season we played great football and blew teams away, then we reverted to lumping it long to get over the line. We were similar in the Premier League, there were a few games where we had a go at teams and looked good, only for us to revert to long ball tactics in the next game
-
Re: Who would have Warnock back?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Delbert
Just why did Neil Warnock decide to sign Aden Flint, a very ordinary 30 year Championship defender, for over £4m and where was the transfer committee?
It’s the lack of serious football people at the top of the club who allowed this sort of thing to happen that is continuing to hold us back.
VT is a businessman living in Malaysia, Ken is a former hotelier who divides his week between the club and running a car dealership in London and Dalman is a merchant banker living in Monaco.
There doesn’t appear to be any strategy In place. Until the structure of the club is placed on a more professional basis and VT hires some top football people to advise him and the board then I don’t really see us going anywhere anytime soon, hope I’m wrong.
I don't think you are wrong. Colin is a football man through and through. He has been around the block significantly more times than VT, MD or KC. I have no doubt that he was able to run rings around the lot of them and get his way. Colin has now gone but the same dilettantes ( in footballing terms) are still running the club. Perhaps VT's only strategy is to avoid losing any more more money on the project and establish an exit strategy ? The only big picture strategy I can bring to mind is VT's promise to convert all the debt owed to him to equity in 5 years. He made that promise in February 2016 so, in 4 months or so, that promise should be coming to fruition. Let's see if it happens.
-
Re: Who would have Warnock back?
Straight swap for Harris - yes.
-
Re: Who would have Warnock back?
I wasn't a fan of Warnock's football and thought it had run it's course here.
He has taken 17th placed finishing Middlesbrough and got 16 points from 9 games so far this season.
Harris has taken 5th placed Cardiff and is currently in 17th place with 10 points from 9 games.
Put bluntly. Yes I would.
-
Re: Who would have Warnock back?
Warnock spent badly with the premier league budget, spent badly with the first round of parachute payments and here we are. Going back to Warnock only makes sense if we're in a relegation battle and he's needed.
-
Re: Who would have Warnock back?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
surge
Warnock spent badly with the premier league budget, spent badly with the first round of parachute payments and here we are. Going back to Warnock only makes sense if we're in a relegation battle and he's needed.
Have you seen the table?
-
Re: Who would have Warnock back?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
blue lewj
Have you seen the table?
Earlier in this thread I said no pretty strongly but I didn't this time :hehe:
-
Re: Who would have Warnock back?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
surge
Earlier in this thread I said no pretty strongly but I didn't this time :hehe:
It is quite a feat to take a team who finished 5th and have them stuttering like we are.
I am of the thinking we are too good when looking at some of the teams down there but I wouldn't be the last to think that and for it to come and bite me on the @rse.
-
Re: Who would have Warnock back?
This thread is hilarious. Our biggest problem is that Warnock assembled a squad of incredibly limited footballers during his time here.
-
Re: Who would have Warnock back?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
LeningradCowboy
This thread is hilarious. Our biggest problem is that Warnock assembled a squad of incredibly limited footballers during his time here.
You think Harris is the man?
If so, what have you seen that suggests that?
If he isn't then the appointment is a waste of time and money surely?
-
Re: Who would have Warnock back?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
blue lewj
You think Harris is the man?
If so, what have you seen that suggests that?
If he isn't then the appointment is a waste of time and money surely?
I don't know if Harris is the right man, but I'd definitely stick with him instead of having Warnock back.
-
Re: Who would have Warnock back?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
blue lewj
It is quite a feat to take a team who finished 5th and have them stuttering like we are.
I am of the thinking we are too good when looking at some of the teams down there but I wouldn't be the last to think that and for it to come and bite me on the @rse.
But we only finished 5h because of Harris and, to be fair, Tomlin. He's taken a side that was looking like it was about to be in a relegation battle up to 5th and back in a year.
Asking for Warnock to come back is near enough the same as asking for Trollope to come back given where we were left when they exited the club.
-
Re: Who would have Warnock back?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
surge
But we only finished 5h because of Harris and, to be fair, Tomlin. He's taken a side that was looking like it was about to be in a relegation battle up to 5th and back in a year.
Asking for Warnock to come back is near enough the same as asking for Trollope to come back given where we were left when they exited the club.
My thinking behind it is that Warnock has more know how and experience and I would expect him to keep City up comfortably.
Harris fills me with dread as I'm not sure what he is trying to do. He hasn't settled on a starting 11, he rarely learns from mistakes, he has bought a tall, strong target man and actively got the team playing less balls and crosses into him. I think that under Harris this team could go into a tailspin and go down given that he appears to have little by way of answers and is very reactionary to what other managers do tactically.