If City go down and Villa - backed at a ridiculous 25/1 - win the league I trouser over a grand, a tale of 2 managers eh?
Adkins in.
Adkins in.
Adkins out
- Thread starter Amin Arrears
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
Bummers one of the last things you did before you went AWOL for a bit was convince me backing us for relegation was a good bet. Anyway i took 18/1, so all looking good at the minute. Last time i checked they were offering me about £40 to cash out
Adkins in
Good to know one of my 20,000 posts was worthwhile.
Wonder if Ehab will swallow his pride and have the guts to approach Slutsky to bring him back.
I very much doubt Nigel will have the same decency as the slut to agree to cancel his contract.
I very much doubt Nigel will have the same decency as the slut to agree to cancel his contract.
Begs the question why clubs here are so quick to sack, rather than place a no longer wanted boss on indefinite gardening leave?
In Italy (I know, bear with me...) managers are rarely if ever sacked. If the new boss doesn’t work the old guy is brought back no questions asked but if the new guy does work and the old guy wants to take another job they have to walk away from their existing deal, so they’re liable to no payout from the club.
Conceivably a club could end up with about 5 bosses on the payroll but they’d have to pay them money owed on their contracts anyway so they haven’t lost out.
Conflict of interests. They're all in each other's pockets.
I'll copy the post I stuck up on the MDT as its relevant here too:
Here are some stats
Under Slutsky
Played 20, Won 4, Drawn 7, Lost 9. Scored 34 Conceded 37, goal difference -3.
0.95 points per game, 32% of available points, 20% win ratio.
Scored 1.7 goals per game, conceded 1.85 goals per game.
Under Adkins
Played 9, Won 1, Drawn 4, Lost 4. Scored 5, Conceded 8, goal difference -3.
0.77 points per game, 25% of available points, 11% win ratio.
Scored 0.55 goals per game, conceded 0.88 goals per game.
So to sum it up, we are now winning nearly 50% less games, picking up 20% less points, scoring 68% less goals, and conceding 52% less goals per game. Speaks for itself who was doing the better job, no?
Here are some stats
Under Slutsky
Played 20, Won 4, Drawn 7, Lost 9. Scored 34 Conceded 37, goal difference -3.
0.95 points per game, 32% of available points, 20% win ratio.
Scored 1.7 goals per game, conceded 1.85 goals per game.
Under Adkins
Played 9, Won 1, Drawn 4, Lost 4. Scored 5, Conceded 8, goal difference -3.
0.77 points per game, 25% of available points, 11% win ratio.
Scored 0.55 goals per game, conceded 0.88 goals per game.
So to sum it up, we are now winning nearly 50% less games, picking up 20% less points, scoring 68% less goals, and conceding 52% less goals per game. Speaks for itself who was doing the better job, no?
No they're not.
They're both decent.
They have been undermined by the current owners who have left them an unbalanced and rag-tag squad to manage after systematically stripping out the best larkers.
Between them they’ve both got the squad doing exactly what you’d want - scoring freely and not conceding. That suggests it’s not the squad to me.
Another comparison 9 games in.
Under Slutsky
Played 9, Won 2, Drawn 3, Lost 4. Scored 15, Points 9, Conceded 16, goal difference -1.
1 point per game, 33% of available points, 22% win ratio
Scored 1.66 goals per game, conceded 1.77 goals per game.
Under Adkins
Played 9, Won 1, Drawn 4, Lost 4. Scored 5, Points 7, Conceded 8, goal difference -3.
0.77 points per game, 25% of available points, 11% win ratio.
Scored 0.55 goals per game, conceded 0.88 goals per game.
24% less points, 73% less goals scored, 50% less goals conceded.
Whichever way you look at it Slutsky did better with what he had available. And we were competing in every match, scoring goals, exciting to watch and actually looked like a team minus the individual defensive blunders.
Under Slutsky
Played 9, Won 2, Drawn 3, Lost 4. Scored 15, Points 9, Conceded 16, goal difference -1.
1 point per game, 33% of available points, 22% win ratio
Scored 1.66 goals per game, conceded 1.77 goals per game.
Under Adkins
Played 9, Won 1, Drawn 4, Lost 4. Scored 5, Points 7, Conceded 8, goal difference -3.
0.77 points per game, 25% of available points, 11% win ratio.
Scored 0.55 goals per game, conceded 0.88 goals per game.
24% less points, 73% less goals scored, 50% less goals conceded.
Whichever way you look at it Slutsky did better with what he had available. And we were competing in every match, scoring goals, exciting to watch and actually looked like a team minus the individual defensive blunders.
They've obviously both been dealt a ****e hand by the owners, but neither have done a great job of managing what they had, one can't set us up to score and the other couldn't set us up to stop everyone else scoring.
Conveniently looking at Slutsky's first 9, rather than the last 9 which were the reason he was sacked, and which were exactly the same number won, drawn and lost as Adkins' first 9 games. The 1 win in that time under Slutsky was an accidental 1-0 at Barnsley. The win under Adkins was a swashbuckling and dominant 3-2 against Brentford in which the '2' flattered them significantly. We've also won two cup games during that period. The defeats have all been tight 1-0s, whereas under Slutksy we were seriously embarrassed in those defeats.
