Following relegation from the Premier League, the vast majority of Hull City fans stayed behind after the 0-0 draw with Manchester United to applaud their efforts despite a long and disappointing season for the club. Louis van Gaal described it as a sight he had never before seen in European football, and praised the Tigers faithful. Even during his most testing period as Hull City manager, over the winter months when the club were in horrific form and plagued by injuries, the support for Bruce was unerring. A banner reading ‘In Bruce We Trust’ was put up at the KC Stadium, and it was fitting support for a man who most regard as the club’s greatest ever manager. Promotion, survival, FA Cup final and European qualification all ensure that Steve Bruce has great respect in East Yorkshire and has given him time that most would not have been given in the modern game, following a miserable last 18 months in terms of results. The case for Steve Bruce remaining Hull City manager and the case for him departing the role are equally strong and plentiful. Aside from his track record at the club, Bruce has always had a tremendous record in the second tier, and should the club part companies with Bruce, they will not find a man with a better success rate in the Championship. He is also a markedly honest man. He is not a man without his failings but he admits and acknowledges them when they are identified. For this reason, as well as his success, he has developed an affinity with the clubs fans. Given all that is written above, it is easy to see why Steve Bruce has kept his job despite a season in which most would not have lasted. It is also worth noting that Bruce forked out £42 million in the transfer window, although the figure was closer to £20 million in terms of net spend, it is still a considerable outlay for a club of Hull’s size. Furthermore, due to what I have said, I would not begrudge Bruce another season, or at least another six months, to prove his worth and take the club back to the Premier League. Deep down though, one feels as though both parties may be better off parting ways this summer. Bruce has had a very successful career, on and off the pitch, he most certainly does not need the money and his wife supposedly thinks he is ready to have more leisure time, away from the stress and demands of football management. Looking at the man, she may have a point. Recently he has not looked a picture of health, and one wonders whether he would be better off leaving the game, despite only being 54 years of age. As for the club, they recently released Liam Rosenior, and whilst the focus from supporters and the media has been on his emotional attachment to the club, his departure also signaled major tactical repercussions. Rosenior is as good a full-back as you are likely to find in the Championship, and him leaving suggests that the Hull City manager is remaining loyal to his 3-5-2 approach. The formation worked in Bruce’s first two seasons. Robbie Brady and Ahmed Elmohamady were tailor-made for the wing-back positions, whilst a back three made the team defensively solid and allowed Bruce to play with his favoured two strikers. This season though, Bruce recruited the likes of Hatem Ben-Arfa, Gaston Ramirez, Tom Ince and Robert Snodgrass. Unlike in previous years, the players were no longer best suited to the 3-5-2 formation, yet Bruce persisted with it. In the Championship, even after losing the likes of Dame N’Doye, Abel Hernandez, Nikica Jelavic and others, Hull City should have one of, if not the best, squad in the division. These talented forward players should no longer be hamstrung in a conservative formation against weaker opponents. Rosenior’s release signals a worrying persistence from Bruce. Any potential new manager would inherit a gifted group of players, at that level, and should they be freed up and allowed to play their football, Hull City could flourish and return to the Premier League. They say there is no room for sentiment in football, and perhaps they are right; but it is difficult not to with Steve Bruce. The man has done a great deal for Hull City and has always had the club’s best interests at heart. Unless the club is sold or Bruce leaves of his own accord, he will remain as manager, as the Allams have great faith in the man they appointed three years ago. I sincerely hope, not just as a Hull City fan, but also for Bruce himself, that he can turn things around, but I cannot help but feel he will persist with a negative formation which restricts the talented individuals that he himself brought to the club. http://tbrfootball.com/sad-truth-steve-bruce-go/
The irony of the last sentence is that Bruce was being praised for being innovative with his 3 man defence only a few seasons ago, swings and roundabouts isn't it
Probably because a few seasons ago he was the only ****er using it in the Championship. The only other team to attempt it was Watford.
But that was back when we were pretty much the only side in England playing 3-5-2 and other teams had no idea how to play against it. Now, there are loads of teams doing it (probably because of us) and managers know it's strengths and weaknesses inside out. We should've changed it as soon as we started getting beaten. Bruce's biggest issue, for me, is that if a team wins a game, he sticks with it. Take Palace and Liverpool, back to back wins using the same formation and players. Both opponents like to hit you on the break with pacy wide men (in CP's case Bolasie and Zaha, while the Scousers use Ibe and Sterling) and Bruce set up to stifle them, which he did. Then, we had to play Burnley and he stuck with the same team and formation again. Burnley are a different animal, they're scrappy, they work hard and they know that they have to give more than they have to win games. So instead of putting out a team to match them, perhaps a trusted 4-4-2 with Meyler and Quinn in the middle, he played the same formation and the players, man for man, were beaten. That's just one example, but it's an example that keeps being made over and over again and has been for the last 18 months. We're too easy to work out and unless Brucey starts being a bit less predictable, I think some of our fans are in for a bit of a shock this season.
Bruce started the season playing 4 at the back but we looked too open with Elmo and Robertson at full backs. I think he had every intention of playing a 4-4-2/4-2-3-1 this season after signing Ben Arfa, Ramirez, Snodgrass, Ince but it didn't work out and he switched back to tried and trusted 3-5-2 which worked against the bigger teams. His mistake was using 3-5-2 against the teams at the bottom were we needed to take the initiative and attack more.
What a crap article. Does little to address the real reasons we were relegated. IN BRUCE MOST STILL TRUST.
I think it was pretty much spot on. The reason we were relegated was because the team didn't perform enough. Who is to blame for the team's performance?
I tend to think the players themslves should be disappointed in themselves, e.g. Livermore, Davies etc. but the style of play was shocking, and only Bruce can be held accountable for that.
Thankfully our owners don't over react like other owners, and are doing the right thing in sticking by him. The article seems a lot of words to just complain about formation choices and Rosie leaving.
other owners like West Broms, Villas, Sunderlands over reacted and changed managers and ending up avoiding relegation - our numpties kept persisting with Bruce and look what happened
I'd say if he was innovative once Sterling Archer then he can be again, but the fact is he doesn't need to be innovative in the Championship with the players we have. If we get back up though then time for a change isn't it, I don't disagree.
Why should he go? I dont get it. If we had won two more games (Burnley x2) he'd have pretty much the same record. If we stayed 17th every year for the next ten years, we'd win roughly 10 games a season. I'm sure his record would look **** but it wouldnt be really to us. All this about formations and teams "working" us out is a load of bollocks too. Performance is what let us down. Hudd Davies Livermore Mcgregor, spine of the team-piss poor. Bruces and Phelans mistake was trusting them too long.
You're forgetting too Sterling that Brucey also had a superb motivator in Phelan with him, lets not overlook the Burnley performance for example, what can management do when the likes of Livermore and Huddlestone are ambling around aimlessly versus an already relegated team, we were crying out for Diame or Snodgrass, players who would have picked them apart. I agree with Tickler and Happy, this article is a load of bollocks in truth
