Not sure I agree jck - before the **** hit the fan we were looking pretty good in 15th/16th, a good half dozen points above drop zone. In my opinion Games against Palace, Southampton, Sunderland & West Ham could all have been won if it were not for the Tan/Mackay debacle.
Wiffletree! I've tried doing my job with one arm behind my back and also failed to carry out the task.
Ah I see it all now...it was Tan telling the players to defend deep and I thought it was Malky and it was Tan leaving our best players on the bench not Malky. So we could have won all those games but because Malky was arguing with Tan we lost them all. So the arguing took Malkys mind off actually winning some games to prove a point...that was so clever. To sum up Malky could have won all those games but didn`t. I see. jck
How was he having one arm tied behind his back? Tan backed him and he wasted good money on players not up to the task, then went to the media to ask for more. That's not having one arm tied behind your back, that's being not up to the job.
I have made my point through reasoned comments so I won't continue to spoil a thread by arguing with someone who is intent to oppose all dissent in the ranks when it comes to Tan.
The players were 100% behind Mackay - they didn't like the way their manager was being shafted & performances dipped accordingly - as I said we were looking reasonably safe up 'till that point.
Mackay's negative tactics cost City the opportunity to win at eminently winnable away games at Norwich, Villa, Stoke & Palace. Why didn't he allow City to play like they did at Fulham where City took the game to them? Kerslake's ridiculous substitutions cost City a win v Sunderland. If he had kept on Noone, left Cornelius in the stands and taken off KTC City would have won. Mackay was vicariously responsible for those decisions. OGS cannot be blamed if City go down. Mackay's woeful signings and tactics will be the reason.
Sorry Whiffle and Bob, but that is a load of bollucks (only my opinion of course). Players underperforming because of off-field politics is a fallacy perpetuated by the press who like a good angle on any story. The performances on the pitch for the Palace, Stoke and Southampton games in particular was nothing to do with Tan. Villa was another case in point. They were glaring examples of negative tactics suppressing the enterprise that exists in the squad. Noone should have featured well before he did, and the persistance with Odemwingie up front was bloody diabolical. Malky got us the ponts he did, that can't be denied, but we'll never know how many more we could have got with a more positive approach. The same could be said for the Sunderland game under Kerslake. More Malky tactics applied taking off two flair players in Noone and Kim for "safe" options Cowie and Gunnar when we were 2-0 up. Classic conventional thinking, but the wrong option when we had Sunderland reeling. We definitely dropped the two points that could make all the difference come May. It's not a question of Malky bashing for the sake of it, many on here including me went on record saying that the tactics were understandable against top 8 clubs, but far more enterprise should have been shown against other sides around our standard - and in all honesty there are quite a few who we could be above right now.
Think we need to see how the next 10 games go before making that comment. He's getting a couple of players added to a squad that has proven it can at least compete at this level. He is being given the chance to bring in possibly 4 players. That's almost half the outfield players, he certainly wont be 100% responsible but if we're playing Championship football next season he'll have certainly played his part.
If you win only 4 games out of 17 and maintain that strike rate you get relegated. Ole now has to win 7 games out of 18 to keep us up. Ask yourself why does he need to win twice as many games as Malky and the answer is clear...he has been left in a mess. jck
Can't argue with those facts other than there are 17 games to go not 18 and I would prefer 8 wins or 7 and 2 draws as a minimum. It will be an interesting second half to the season - now that is an understatement.
We have absolutely no chance of winning 8 Blue. I'm hoping the bar falls low enough for us to stay up on 38 ish. I honestly think we'll desperately struggle to get many more than that.
There are people on here who feel Malky well capable of getting us 7 or 8 wins but I am not one of them, as far as I am concerned Ole cannot do much worse. jck
Rightly or wrongly Malky is history. Apart from what ever legal issues arise. Little point in further debating what might or might not have been. We have OGS now and it is up to him and his players to pull us through.
Agreed Bluey, however that doesn't stop some wishing he was still here. All about opinions of course, but on the evidence of the recent past, I'd prefer change to what we had. Clinging to the hope that Malky would have kept us up with his flawed players purchase history and tactics is a bridge too far for most.
Yes, time to put this to one side and forget our different opinions on MM Big ask for any manager and beating those around us is now very important. Attacking play is great, but we need a definite goalscorer now, WHU showed we can create chances.
