Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Beefy is a legend

Is anyone willing to give CH credit

Recommended Posts

Well, Beefy, as regards your specific point, let''s wait until 2pm tomorrow to see if Wes actually does feature in the squad before we get too hasty over this.I''m not too sure what you mean by ''sticking to his guns''. Basically whether or not Wes was sold was a matter for DMcN, not Hughton. Him and the powers that be elsewhere; particularly at Aston Villa, who evidently did not want to increase their offer for the player. It was always going to come down to that in the end.If  Hughton starts to pick him, and, as several people believe, the form improves as a result, then I''ll give them both a big pat on the back. I''m certainly not blaming Hughton for this whole spat . It''s up to him who he picks and will stand or fall accordingly. But equally,I''m not sure if we need to give him ''credit'' either. Time will tell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has he stuck to his guns though Mr Beefy or is he getting so desperate now that he''s willing to play someone who called us a  SH*THOLE last week?

Wes crossed a line when he made that comment sorry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How has he stuck to his guns?
What were his guns?
Why does he deserve credit for allowing a player who said those things about this club back into the first team?
I don''t care how Hoolahan feels he''s been treated, maybe it is terribly, but the manager has decided he''s not good enough to build the side around, something Lambert did to get the best out of Hoolahan. The only way we''ve ever seen him look dangerous. So he hasn''t played that much. Even when he has played, how many goals and assists? But regardless of all that, what Hoolahan said to a journalist was just ridiculous. He can''t have thought she wouldn''t say anything. Many people get upset with where they work, but you don''t go around letting your manager and your ''customers'' know how sh!t you think the place is, you''d get sacked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Actually I have come to the conclusion that this is all some conspiracy lead by Aliens to disrupt the East Coast prior to using it as a landing pad for their invasion of mankind.

We''ll all be slaves by Christmas, you wait and see.

Hughton is actually a lizard person from outer space with a very convincing disguise. Some how, he must have the ability to control the minds of the board but not be able to focus on more than them. Or perhaps they are lizard people too?

Delia clearly a scout sent to work her way into our society and influence so that she can fill reports back to her intergalactic masters.

With all of the locals in disarray over poor results the area will be ripe for the picking.

It had been planned before but the lizard-kin felt that people were becoming suspicious with a too hefty decline and so postponed for fear of their plans becoming known.

So there you have it.

But in answer to the original post: Yes.

Anything that has been written stating otherwise are just alien puppets or people who believe in conspiracies . . . . . . . . oh, wait!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well Jimbo, what Wes said and specifically in what context he said it is not clear. I wouldn''t like to speculate or draw snap judgments based upon speculation.

Reggie, I''d dispute that ''whether or not Wes was sold was a matter for DMcN, not Hughton''. The Club has already said that it was CH''s decision that he did not want Wes to leave the Club. The Club therefore backed CH''s decision. If CH said that Wes wasn''t part of his plans then he''d most likely be gone to free up his wages.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would question what any manager would achieve by freezing a player out. If you''re not prepared to play him, let him move on. Having disgruntled footballers in a squad can eat away at morale and make for a poisonous atmosphere which can be quite difficult to eradicate. Man-management involves keeping footballers happy and feeling valued. PL was a master at it. CH does not seem to be

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Beefy is a legend"]For sticking to his guns on Wes and now getting him to knuckle under and fight for his place to the point that he may be back in the 18 for the Citeh game.

Anyone?[/quote]Yes. Both Chris and the club as a whole are slowly improving the clubs reputation by only selling players under contract on our terms not just because others / they want to move on.A refreshing change having only ever experienced the last 20 years from Chase onwards of selling any half decent player the minute an offer came in before needlessly wasting the cash received on poorer players. The degradation of our starting striker from Dean Ashton to Robert Earnshaw to 32 year old Jamie Cureton being a fine example of this (and we still got further into debt over that 3 year period).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Beefy is a legend"]Well Jimbo, what Wes said and specifically in what context he said it is not clear. I wouldn''t like to speculate or draw snap judgments based upon speculation.

Reggie, I''d dispute that ''whether or not Wes was sold was a matter for DMcN, not Hughton''. The Club has already said that it was CH''s decision that he did not want Wes to leave the Club. The Club therefore backed CH''s decision. If CH said that Wes wasn''t part of his plans then he''d most likely be gone to free up his wages.[/quote]Well, Beefy I don''t suppose we''ll ever know as regards that. All clubs have a track record in saying things in public that are not borne out in private. Are you seriously suggesting that if Lambert and the CEO at Villa had tabled a bid of 3m for Wes on Jan 31st that either McN would have rejected it or moreover there would have been anything that Hughton could have done about it !?It''s OK the Club saying these things after the event in an official capacity, but none of us have any idea what was said behind the scenes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I find this man management thing really strange.

People bang on about Lambert being a great man-manager. How do they know? From all reports he has pretty minimal contact with the players and it''s Culverhouse that took training and engaged with the players on a more personal level.

The one thing Lambert did do was rotate players a lot. The problem with that is that he used pretty much every player and some were not really up to it. However I think it kept the players all fighting for their place.

I believe he did have his favourites.

Hughton is a different man, he is from a coaching background rather than a straight management one. So I think he is more likely to sit down and talk to a player.

You can see strengths and weaknesses in either.

Personally though, I think Lambert was perhaps always a bit sneaky. I think he would drop a player as quickly as he had told them they were important and vital.

Just consider the list of players he wanted to get rid of after our first season in the prem. Holt and Hoolahan in there despite essentially being the core of the success that he was riding on. No one else finds that strange?

For me, I much prefer to work for a manager that is more human than one that sits in an office and issues commands by proxy or by email etc.

And despite what has been said I really don''t think Hoolahan ever had an issue with Hughton per se, every player that has worked with him only appears to have good things to say about him.

Look how keen the likes of Redmond, Hooper, Bassong and Gutierrez were to come here. Without Hughton would we have signed them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Whilst I accept, Reggie, that not every public pronouncement may be entirely reflective of the facts, simply because such pronouncements are fulfilling a certain public image agenda, I cannot recall a case of the current management of Club making a statement that they have subsequently reneged on.

At the start of this saga the Club said that CH did not want WH to leave. By the end of the saga, he had not left. Those are the facts and are all we really need concern ourselves with. Now, I accept that there will likely have been a financial tipping point where a certain amount of money would have allowed us to replace Wes with an ''upgrade'' and then it may have been in our interests to let him go, but the fact is that no such offer was made, and therefore CH maintained his original stance that he wanted Wes to remain part of the squad.

My point in this thread, is that numerous posters came on here criticising CH, saying he''d treated Wes badly and that it was clear that Wes wouldn''t play again so we should just sell him. That simply isn''t the case. Still, any excuse to have a moan at the manager isn''t to be passed up I suppose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote user="chicken"I find this man management thing really strange.

People bang on about Lambert being a great man-manager. How do they know? From all reports he has pretty minimal contact with the players and it''s Culverhouse that took training and engaged with the players on a more personal level.

The one thing Lambert did do was rotate players a lot. The problem with that is that he used pretty much every player and some were not really up to it. However I think it kept the players all fighting for their place.

I believe he did have his favourites.

Hughton is a different man, he is from a coaching background rather than a straight management one. So I think he is more likely to sit down and talk to a player.

You can see strengths and weaknesses in either.

Personally though, I think Lambert was perhaps always a bit sneaky. I think he would drop a player as quickly as he had told them they were important and vital.

Just consider the list of players he wanted to get rid of after our first season in the prem. Holt and Hoolahan in there despite essentially being the core of the success that he was riding on. No one else finds that strange?

For me, I much prefer to work for a manager that is more human than one that sits in an office and issues commands by proxy or by email etc.

And despite what has been said I really don''t think Hoolahan ever had an issue with Hughton per se, every player that has worked with him only appears to have good things to say about him.

Look how keen the likes of Redmond, Hooper, Bassong and Gutierrez were to come here. Without Hughton would we have signed them?/quote

Good post chicken. And there are a ton of Villa players who might take issue with Lambert''s man-management, ask Dunne, Given, Ireland, Bent and Hutton for starters, and even Benteke has hardly performed to last season''s standards.

Rose-tinted spectacles being worn with regard to our previous manager. Take Nathan Redmond''s recent comments that he loves working under CH and that CH hasn''t seen him go far wrong in his career so far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Personally, i''m glad he didn''t go to Villa on a cut price deal, but i''d rather we''d gone one better and replaced him for a better version by now, i''m talking the kitoyakes of the world. Someone who can both hold their own in most premiership matches and provide that spark that Wes can.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I''d willingly accept, Beefy that in the end we have little choice but to take at face value what''s been said over this, but many of us feel that there''s more to it than meets the eye.Your point about Hughton being moaned at by posters on here is a bit questionable too. Frankly, those who wish to have a pop at him have far bigger and more tangible sticks with which to beat him right now than some question as to what he said and when re playing  Wes Hoolahan !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think that''s pretty simplistic Jimmy.

Finding a Wes replacement isn''t easy. Finding one that is an improvement on him is even harder and will cost more money.

Just look at the figures mooted for Quagliarella (I know, I know he has his own thread).

Say we have around £20-25million to spend every season, that could represent half of our spending bringing in a player like that. His wages may well then effect what we have left.

And people are already suggesting areas of the team to develop over the summer.

Eg: Right back, central defensive cover, an improved defensive/holding midfielder, another striker, and the attacking midfielder.

That''s the real problem. How do you get it all balanced? There are bargains to be had out there. But it is so very easy to say you would have liked a better replacement by now, but it''s not like we know or not if the club has tried.

Well actually that is not true, we did go in for Toivonen and Quagliar . . ok I''ll stop with that now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote user="Reggie Strayshun"I''d willingly accept, Beefy that in the end we have little choice but to take at face value what''s been said over this, but many of us feel that there''s more to it than meets the eye.Your point about Hughton being moaned at by posters on here is a bit questionable too. Frankly, those who wish to have a pop at him have far bigger and more tangible sticks with which to beat him right now than some question as to what he said and when re playing  Wes Hoolahan !/quote

questionable? Maybe take a look at the posts by, inter alia, Long Drives Home, Norfolkngood, lharman7 in the thread below.

http://services.pinkun.com/forums/pinkun/cs/forums/2/3062821/ShowPost.aspx#3062821

As to what you feel, it''s irrelevant. In this world it is evidence that justifies a claim or belief.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Beefy is a legend"]

As to what you feel, it''s irrelevant. In this world it is evidence that justifies a claim or belief.[/quote]Hmm....if only it was indeed as simple as that Beefy ! If it was, there''d be no wars, no terrorism, no torture, and everyone would get along just fine.But, unfortunately ,it is not that simple .As for you earlier point. You misunderstand what I said. I''m not saying that it''s questionable that thee are moaning posters on here. Self evidently there are. all I''m saying is that currently the moaners have bigger and more pressing bones to pick with him than the Wes question.! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is not that simple Reggie because a number of people have beliefs that are not based upon evidence, or based upon very low standards of evidence.

Those beliefs are not rationally justifiable. That is the only point I am making - that because you ''felt'' there was ''more to it'', is totally irrelevant. Your feelings are not rationally justified with any evidence.

It seems as though we''re getting a little off-topic!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Doesn''t make these beliefs ''irrelevant'', Beefy. You may not happen to agree with them, but they are not irrelevant.Are all the billions of people in the world who believe in Jesus Christ or Mohammed (or indeed ''God'') ,for whom there is absolutely no concrete evidence, irrelevant?But, yes this is off topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The questionable this is the intelligence of much of what is written by fans and so called supporters. I am not a huge fan of CH but he has virtually every little thing that so called supporters of NCFC can think of. There are many justifiable points raised and I am sure that many supporters are just concerned about the wellbeing of the team, team members and club but some appear to wallow in all that is negative and some seem to want the team and the club to fail so that they can write more bile and state we told you so.

Why not for the last 14 games no matter what get behind the team and see where some positivity takes us? What’s to lose?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Your feeling that there is no more to it as regards Wes is irrelevant because it adds nothing to the debate. I could just as easily tell you that I feel that Chris Hughton is a lizard with mind-control powers and likewise it would add nothing to the debate.

All we can do if we are trying to come to some consensus is consider the evidence.

The views of those billions are certainly irrelevant to the point that their beliefs add nothing to the truth value of their claims.

Sadly, they are not irrelevant in the fact that their beliefs inform their actions and cause most of the difficulties that we have in the world right now.

All this stuff makes the Hughton debate feel somewhat irrelevant now! However, to try to bring this back on-topic, what I will say is that many ''Outers'' also hold certain beliefs without good evidence. I''ve seen posters say things like ''with the players we''ve got we should be doing much better''. Is that really justified looking at all of the other squads in the league, the wages and fees that other Clubs pay?

There also seems to be a natural conflict between some fans'' objectives and the Club''s objectives. These fans want to see attacking, entertaining football. The Club wants to stay in the Premier League. Sometimes those two objectives do not coincide. I accept that and decide that, as a ''supporter'' of the Club what is most important to me is that the Club fulfils its objectives, rather than fulfilling my desire to see lots and lots of goals every week, because I understand that the only way for the Club to grow, get better players and, at some stage, a better manager, is to stay in this league and build on a steady, consistent basis.

However, this is just unacceptable to the ''want it all now'' group who, in my view, rather than being supporters are more like ''consumers'' of NCFC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I''m not sure that Hughton had much of a say in the decision not to sell. Perhaps McN asked whether Hughton could use Wes, and the answer was yes, although I suspect that the rejection of Villa''s bid was as much to do with a derisory offer from a club in competition with us and who had behaved badly in enticing our last manager away.

Hughton is a man who does not change policy, player or method very readily, but I suspect that if Wes has expressed contrition then Hughton may have him in the squad. At the moment the manager is desperate to achieve, and in the end he may have to try Wes as nothing else seems to be working.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote user="Salopian"I''m not sure that Hughton had much of a say in the decision not to sell. Perhaps McN asked whether Hughton could use Wes, and the answer was yes, although I suspect that the rejection of Villa''s bid was as much to do with a derisory offer from a club in competition with us and who had behaved badly in enticing our last manager away.

Hughton is a man who does not change policy, player or method very readily, but I suspect that if Wes has expressed contrition then Hughton may have him in the squad. At the moment the manager is desperate to achieve, and in the end he may have to try Wes as nothing else seems to be working./quote

Without wanting to get repetitive, on what have you based your entire first paragraph? CH said he didn''t want Wes to leave, so how on earth did he ''not have much of a say in the decision not to sell''?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Beefy is a legend"]

Sadly, they are not irrelevant in the fact that their beliefs inform their actions and cause most of the difficulties that we have in the world right now.[/quote]Precisely the point I was making. You may want them to be irrelevant vis a vis a ''debate'', but in the grand scheme of life in general they are not.I take it from your comments, Beefy, that you are one of those people who look at things verbatim, and do not tend to read between the lines. Nothing wrong with that per se , but, not ,as you suggest, the only way to form opinions and make decisions. I''d be interested to see how long you''d last amongst the throng of pilgrims at St Peters or the Hajj in Mecca !TBH, I do not really see what relevance your penultimate paragraph is to the debate . Different fans have different objectives. Some are similar to those of the club. Others are not. Again you cannot survive long on a ''one size fits all'' policy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"For sticking to his guns on Wes and now getting him to knuckle under and fight for his place to the point that he may be back in the 18 for the Citeh game.

Anyone? "

jeez, there is an awful thought that this isn''t a pi sstake and the OP means it.

Hughton has been publically humiIiated over this, just as he was over Becchio.

To have the board picking the squad cannot be right. Likewise to have them back the player over the manager is not a good position to be in.

If this gutless, yes man had any integrity he would walk now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...