Jump to content

I now believe Hughes didn’t save us from the drop...’Not Pellegrino’ saved us


eddie

Recommended Posts

Maybe, but it's impossible to say for sure either way. Hughes did what he was appointed to do last season - as it turned out, we probably should have thanked him and sent him on his way at that point, but hey ho...

 

There was talk on here that Les was exploring that option and it was met by a slew of posts telling him to get it done, get Hughes in etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was talk on here that Les was exploring that option and it was met by a slew of posts telling him to get it done, get Hughes in etc.

 

I think that was more to do with people wanting the manager situation sorted quickly so we could get on with preparing for the new season, and not wasting the entire summer dithering over it like they did in 2017.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Swansea dropped off a cliff but Hughsie inspired that win against them amidst all their hotel and bus escort shenanigans. Would someone else have been able to do that? Maybe, maybe not. We’ll never know.

 

New chapter now with Hasenhüttl in. Let’s focus on that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Got to thank Hughes for changing the whole atmosphere at the back end of last season. He may not have won the games he could have (Everton and Chelsea) but we stayed up (and he collected his £2m). No point being revisionist about it, and the stats don't tell the whole picture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At that time we needed someone to come in try to give the players some confidence, get them attacking and taking risks, even if that meant being more ropey at the back. Hughes had some success in doing this. A more defensive coach might not have kept us up.

 

Unfortunately Hughes' inability to coach a defence / tactics in general means he wasn't a long term solution in the end, although I thought he deserved a chance based on his track record of mid table finishes at various clubs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hughes didn't keep us up. Swansea and Stoke did.

 

But we would still, in my opinion, have gone down if Pellegrino had stayed. You might think that "anyone else" could have saved us, and that perhaps Hughes should have done even better, but we needed an immediate appointment to breathe life back into the squad and prevent relegation. That's what he did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That works, yep.

 

Good. I do like it when people agree with each other on here. Long may it continue! ;)

 

p.s. if we finish in, say, 12th place this season, will that be something we can put down to Hasenhuttl replacing Hughes, or will it solely be due to 8 teams not getting as many points as us?

Edited by trousers
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe, but it's impossible to say for sure either way. Hughes did what he was appointed to do last season - as it turned out, we probably should have thanked him and sent him on his way at that point, but hey ho...

 

This, exactly. We gave him £1M to thank him for a job done, and then paid him more to keep us up again this season?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Had we been relegated under Hughes he would have been crucified therefore as we stayed up he deserves the credit !

Surprises me that people want to rewrite history, what's the point ?

Trousers' logic is correct - teams below you don't keep you up, you stay up by being above them !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Had we been relegated under Hughes he would have been crucified therefore as we stayed up he deserves the credit !

Surprises me that people want to rewrite history, what's the point ?

Trousers' logic is correct - teams below you don't keep you up, you stay up by being above them !

 

Does Pellegrino deserve equal credit as we were outside the relegation zone when he was sacked?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was a definite upturn in the players attitude (perceived or not) when Hughes stepped in, but it was a close run thing thats for sure, and hinged on the Gabbi goal v Swansea. Might have gone the other way but didn't. We got the win and stayed up, they didn't. Hughes gets slated for poor results so conversely must be due some credit when it goes our way. Right now I don't think he cares either way, he's tried his best and failed, got his money, although his reputation is severely dented. He may well blame the board and players, the players blame the manager, the fans blame both and so on....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does Pellegrino deserve equal credit as we were outside the relegation zone when he was sacked?
If you feel we'd have got the 8 points we ended up needing to survive with Pellegrino still at the helm then, yes, he would be worthy of the same level of credit as Hughes. (If you take those remaining games in isolation)

 

I happen to believe we'd have been relegated had Pellegrino stayed, ergo the appointment of Hughes was a factor in us staying up IMO.

Edited by trousers
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good. I do like it when people agree with each other on here. Long may it continue! ;)

 

p.s. if we finish in, say, 12th place this season, will that be something we can put down to Hasenhuttl replacing Hughes, or will it solely be due to 8 teams not getting as many points as us?

 

See, the issue is the role of a manager and their affect on the time is intangible.

 

Hughes took over when we were 17th, and we finished 17th, so from a basic point of view he had no effect.

 

If RaHa takes over with us 18th, and we finish 12th, we can say he had a positive effect.

 

However, in both instances only one thing is true. X teams scored more points, X teams scored less.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tadic, the man who hadn't played well for best part of 2 seasons and miraculously found his form under Hughes?

 

That was a lucky coincidence.

 

Whatever other criticisms are thrown at Hughes you have to acknowledge that he was able to unlock Tadic's ability and belief in the run in. i can't believe anyone would deny that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hughes took over when we were 17th, and we finished 17th, so from a basic point of view he had no effect.

 

 

That 'logic' assumes that we'd have finished 17th if Pellegrino had stayed at the helm. If, in that alternate reality, Pellegrino took Saints down to 20th, then the person who steered us to 17th had a positive effect on the outcome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whatever other criticisms are thrown at Hughes you have to acknowledge that he was able to unlock Tadic's ability and belief in the run in. i can't believe anyone would deny that.

 

Quite. I just hope you read my 'lucky coincidence' comment with the sarcasm it was intended... :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That 'logic' assumes that we'd have finished 17th if Pellegrino had stayed at the helm. If, in that alternate reality, Pellegrino took Saints down to 20th, then the person who steered us to 17th had a positive effect on the outcome.

 

But that's all theoretical. We have no idea what Pellegrino would have done in this last games.

 

We can only really work in actuals, and the actuals say he had no effect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But that's all theoretical. We have no idea what Pellegrino would have done in this last games.

 

We can only really work in actuals, and the actuals say he had no effect.

 

That's ridiculous, surely you watched the games and could see the difference? I'm pretty sure saldoldgit made a similar point and I thought he was the only person making that ludicrous argument!

 

As somebody who actually defended your point of view in the summer, and discussed your points with an open mind rather than shutting you down as being negative etc, I do find your reluctance to give him credit for ANYTHING a bit odd. It suggests to me that you just hate him no matter what.

 

People have mentioned the hotel shenanigans in Swansea, and Hughes appeared to deal with that very well, and those marginal things can a make a difference on such a crucial occasion. But I suppose Pellegrino might have dealt with it well too - so credit void!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you feel we'd have got the 8 points we ended up needing to survive with Pellegrino still at the helm then, yes, he would be worthy of the same level of credit as Hughes. (If you take those remaining games in isolation)

 

I happen to believe we'd have been relegated had Pellegrino stayed, ergo the appointment of Hughes was a factor in us staying up IMO.

I don't think someone who took us from 8th to 17th would deserve any credit for keeping us up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think Hughes had much of an effect really.

He had a tough run in of games but I imagine his 8 games and the previous 8 games prior to him taking over would have been similar points wise.

The question is if he had more of the supposed easier games would he have done better? Looking at his results against those teams this season I would say no.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

See, the issue is the role of a manager and their affect on the time is intangible.

 

Hughes took over when we were 17th, and we finished 17th, so from a basic point of view he had no effect.

 

If RaHa takes over with us 18th, and we finish 12th, we can say he had a positive effect.

 

However, in both instances only one thing is true. X teams scored more points, X teams scored less.

 

You are ignoring the fact that we had a run in from hell. Hughes has one bad result last season and that was his first game in charge.

Link to comment
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
×
×
  • Create New...