Why were the fans chanting 'Bates out' at the very first match against Southampton and then protesting at home to Middlesbrough? The reason, because it was clear we hadn't progressed the squad from finishing 7th due to a lack of funds/ambition. Then to make matters worse, Gradel was sold making us considerably weaker as nd making reaching the playoffs a very difficult task. Yet Bates still lives in dream land and expects promotion (or at least puts on an act to try and fool fans that he is doing everything possible to achieve it and if the club fails it isn't his fault). Therefore Grayson had to use the loan market Bates talked about at the beginning of August to secure Pugh's signing to fill in at LM as playing 4231 was no longer feasible due to Gradel's departure. Additionally players like Vayrynen and Forssell were signed in September (will hardly have been first choice given the late timing). Therefore i find it hard to criticise the manager when it is the failings of the club i.e. Bates that contribute to these poor signings in the first place. Also you can guarantee if Grayson had said no to the signing of the two Finns as he didn't see them as good enough, Bates would have said the Gradel money is there to be spent, but Grayson chooses not to spend it, yet as the transfer window was shut he was in a no-win situation, unless miraculously 2 players nobody else wanted turned out to be decent.
Actually on Hudds forums they wanted to bring him in as a DM because he's played very well there in the past and they already have a first choice RB.
In answer to your original question Ristac, no chance. He's the worst of the worst. Sptting at fellow players is worse than an accidental late challenge. I'd rather us stay where we were than have that little sh2t playing for us. Happy with what we've got, although, & depending on your point of view, an additional winger or forward would be useful.
Seems the general consensus - No to Diouf... I just wonder when Warnock signed Pearce how near to the squad he wanted have we managed to get? We know Ward was his first choice RB and we can probably safely say Austin was also a first choice but I do wonder about the rest. I think Snoddy leaving was a massive blow to Warnocks plans and just as was the case when Gradel left, I can't see us finding a replacement, not for a while anyway.
Ward may have been his first choice RB, but Diouff should not be anyone's choice for anything other than leaving firmly on a scrapheap where he belongs.
I've never rated Diouf that highly. He ended up at Doncaster for a reason and it wasn't just his previous offences. His reputation and on pitch atmosphere that he creates (see the Old Firm derby when he was at Rangers) can actually be detrimental to a team's success. Poor goal scoring record. Simply not good enough.
Grayson was a good manager who could have got us promoted if he was given the resources. As he wasnât he was forced to pick up freebies and loan signings and had his best players sold from under him. I would criticise the volume of players he brought in, but if someone had said to him âSimon, hereâs £5m to bring in some quality playersâ he would have got us promoted. Letâs just think about the side he could have had last season: Schmeichel Quality LB Quality CB Lees Quality RB Snodgrass Johnson/quality DM Howson Gradel Becchio McCormack To me that looks a better side than the one that Warnock has put together.
I don't think Grayson did himself any favours though, even with the players at his disposal. He continually played Johnson wide left until it finally dawned on him that he was better suited as a defensive midfielder. Then when he brought in a quality midfielder like Bannan on loan he hardly ever used him. Also the first game of last season at Southampton, he played the totally inept O'Dea at LB instead of White...too many examples to mention here. They may have only been his third or fourth choices but he never seemed to know what their best position was. Who's to say if he did have substantially more money to spend he'd have played them in their best position? A case in point the fact he wanted to sign Peltier for Huddersfield and play him as a DM. Grayson seems to like making things difficult for himself.
'He continually played Johnson wide left until it finally dawned on him that he was better suited as a defensive midfielder.' For the 1st half of the 2009/10 season we had Kilkenny, Doyle and Howson for the 2 CM spots and only Andy Robinson capable of playing on the left. Therefore given the fact that Johnson offered more protection for Hughes, i think it was a sensible decision to play him on the left. Even when Gradel arrived playing 2 attacking wingers in a 442 was a risky strategy, hence why Gradel was used more of an impact sub. Then when Beckford left and we switched to a 4231, Johnson could take up a more favoured position. 'Then when he brought in a quality midfielder like Bannan on loan he hardly ever used him.' It was essential just to get him in for cover, not necessarily to improve an already efficient midfield that were used to playing together. He came on as a sub in the 2-1 win over PNE. The same winning midfield of Kilkenny, Johnson and Howson were kept for the 0-0 draw with Ipswich. Then when he replaced Kilkenny for the games against Sheff Utd and Forest, came on as a sub at Millwall and started in the defeat at Derby. We weren't picking up the results with him in the team and at that stage of the season I can understand why he reverted back to the more familiar midfield trio. Though i have no answer for why O'Dea was started at LB.
Why are people so apologetic for Grayson? He didn't get promoted with a team featuring Schmeichel, Gradel, Snoddy, Howson, Johnson, Becchio, Somma and McCormack. Norwich got promoted that season but we had a better team. He spent money on defenders, so this 'he had a shoestring budget' argument doesn't really add up. His problem was he signed a hell of a lot of loanees - most pointless - and when he had money to spend he got guys like Collins, AOB, Pugh, McCormack (but didn't use him). He didn't have a massive budget, but we had the biggest wage bill in League One when he got us promoted. His transfer record for loanees is 1 a month for every month he was in charge, which is a shocking waste of money. He couldn't organise a defence, and ignored Aidy White at left back (despite him being very promising there) playing Hughes, McCartney and O'Dea there instead.
Best Fans, I don't know about your personal opinion but a lot have a go at Schmeichel's ability who you put in that list. Cardiff who also failed to gain promotion that season (with a massive helping hand from City with Bellamy) sold us McCormack as he wasn't required with Chopra, Bothroyd and Bellamy in their squad. Somma had only played in league 2 with Lincoln, although he did well in the Championship. Gradel was mainly used as a sub in league 1, and Leicester obviously didn't rate him, yet ended up being one of the best players in the Championship that year, so surely some credit has to go to the manager. Finally we had to completely adapt in a higher league minus our top scorer for the previous 3 seasons, Jermaine Beckford. I am very confident had Norwich lost Grant Holt they wouldn't have made the playoffs.
I think Grayson couldn't attract players. I think Warnock can, its all about reputation within the game. I hate this excuse that he never signed his 'first choices'. Many managers have to deal with not being able to get certain players and its also important to target players that you are able to get rather being a little bit unrealistic And not only that, Grayson struggled tactically during games and couldn't see when it needed to be changed, most managers should be able to change it before fans can see its a problem. I'm not gonna say he was a useless manager because he did well for us but I can't believe people think he shoulda stayed on. He wasn't gonna get us promoted so whats the point of him staying
The problem with Grayson's signings was that Portsmouth hadn't been relegated to L1 yet so he couldn't sign half the team. Actually, his main problem was not addressing the defence and lack of an ability to read a game and counter the opposing manager's tactics. He also, as someone else mentioned, didn't have the reputation that Warnock has, for attracting players. Last seasons signings were ridiculous. However, Bates is also blame by flogging any flair players whenever he can get a few quid for them.
Also, we'd look like major dickheads after the stick we gave him at the Donny home game if he signed for us. Hate situations like that, just avoid them.
