1. Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!

In hindsight...

Discussion in 'Hull City' started by Willson, Apr 24, 2015.

?

Should we have sacked Bruce in January?

  1. Yes

    30.6%
  2. No

    69.4%
  1. PLT

    PLT Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Messages:
    27,106
    Likes Received:
    18,122
    Completely agreed, but Bruce's job is to assemble a decent team. He took one which was alright but with one or two big areas for improvement, spent a **** load and we've ended up with an even more unbalanced team with even bigger weaknesses.

    The Long thing was a gamble, we all supported it at the time because of the fee received but fees received don't keep you up, players do. We had a few days to replace one of the most important players and we had to take an even bigger gamble on Hernandez. Bruce has to be responsible for all of that. In hindsight, we shouldn't have sold Long for £12m. It'll cost us more than that in TV money
     
    #21
  2. TigerRoo

    TigerRoo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2011
    Messages:
    3,301
    Likes Received:
    607
    I agree except for the fact that it 'looked' like we had a winner with Hernandez and everyone was singing Bruces praises for signing him but after he went pear-shaped then Bruce is an @rsehole. Can't agree with that. Terribly unlucky with Snodgrass and also Diame and we can only speculate as to where we might have been if both had played as often as Elmo.
     
    #22
    Fez likes this.

Share This Page