New Manager Watch Thread

[SKD]

7 minutes ago, TWar said:

It very much is ownerships fault. Ralph has a style that works great and has us way overperforming the quality of our side. If he had proper investment we could rotate the squad and keep playing this great football, but we don't so we can't. When he is forced not to play the way we want to then we drop to the actual quality of the squad and are suddenly in trouble.

But again, Ralph knew what he had to deal with when he came and signed the contract. If his style isn’t working for us, is it fair to say he’s not the right man for us? 
 

That doesn’t make him a bad manager, although I’d suggest one that isn’t willing to change and adapt his style to the team isn’t a great one, it just means perhaps they’re not the right fit for us? 

[TWar]

9 minutes ago, SKD said:

But again, Ralph knew what he had to deal with when he came and signed the contract. If his style isn’t working for us, is it fair to say he’s not the right man for us? 
 

That doesn’t make him a bad manager, although I’d suggest one that isn’t willing to change and adapt his style to the team isn’t a great one, it just means perhaps they’re not the right fit for us? 

His style is working for us. He has done great for most of his tenure. It hasn't worked in the last two months, but the fixture congestion is broken now and won't be back next season so why sack him now? I feel like we are going in circles. You are judging him and his quality based off 12 games where he has had 14 major first team injuries and has been playing an abnormal number of games, I am judging him based off all 90 of his league games. Whos to say which is better? Saying he "knew the deal" isn't an excuse, just because he signed up for the challenge of being wildly underfunded doesn't mean it isn't a challenge. He is doing well given this challenge whether he knew about it or not.

[SKD]

24 minutes ago, TWar said:

Ralphs still in a job because he did very well for a long period of time and has been doing badly for a comparatively much shorter period of time and people who know what they are doing don't assume someone has lost all ability every time they have a couple of months of poor form. That is a fan mentality, and not a clever fan mentality at that.

Another Myth about to be debunked. 

according to https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/ralph-hasenhuttl

Ralph has been in charge of 102 Games with 1.32 PPG record. 

34 of these were in 2020 accumulating 56  points = PPG 1.64 

The remaining 68 are at 1.16 PPG. 

(these figures may be slightly skewed due to cup games (I don’t know how Transfermrkt works out the PPG), but that should be negligible.)

so in fact, we’ve actually been very poor for more than we’ve been good. Other than 1 run which boosts the appearance of his tenure, very average. 

Compare that to Puel, who’s 53 games = 1.38 PPG. 

[SKD]

7 minutes ago, TWar said:

His style is working for us. He has done great for most of his tenure. It hasn't worked in the last two months, but the fixture congestion is broken now and won't be back next season so why sack him now? I feel like we are going in circles. You are judging him and his quality based off 12 games where he has had 14 major first team injuries and has been playing an abnormal number of games, I am judging him based off all 90 of his league games. Whos to say which is better? Saying he "knew the deal" isn't an excuse, just because he signed up for the challenge of being wildly underfunded doesn't mean it isn't a challenge. He is doing well given this challenge whether he knew about it or not.

See above, you’re not. You’re judging him on C. 1/3rd of his time here. 

[TWar]

2 minutes ago, SKD said:

Another Myth about to be debunked. 

according to https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/ralph-hasenhuttl

Ralph has been in charge of 102 Games with 1.32 PPG record. 

34 of these were in 2020 accumulating 56  points = PPG 1.64 

The remaining 68 are at 1.16 PPG. 

(these figures may be slightly skewed due to cup games (I don’t know how Transfermrkt works out the PPG), but that should be negligible.)

so in fact, we’ve actually been very poor for more than we’ve been good. Other than 1 run which boosts the appearance of his tenure, very average. 

Compare that to Puel, who’s 53 games = 1.38 PPG. 

1.16 PPG still corresponds to 44 points a season, 1.16 isn't "very poor" it is actually pretty reasonable for our squad quality, only 2 pts less than Puel managed if maintained over a season. Why do you feel the need to split the points up arbitrarily? Why not just take his points per game in general and observe that on average he is doing perfectly well given investment. And I don't know why you keep comparing to Puel, Puel had a better team, it's not comparable.

Also the idea of splitting the data into two pools and noting one is longer hence is the one that should be taken into account is hilariously bad statistical analysis. Just deal with the full set and take total PPG. Any other use of statistics is just massaging the numbers and doesn't hold up to any logical rigour.

[TWar]

3 minutes ago, SKD said:

See above, you’re not. You’re judging him on C. 1/3rd of his time here. 

I have exclusively referred to his PPG over all 90 league games. Feels like you are projecting at this point, as you are desperate to find reasons to discount the entirety of 2020 whereas I discuss the whole set. What you are trying to do is very silly.

[SKD]

1 minute ago, TWar said:

1.16 PPG still corresponds to 44 points a season, 1.16 isn't "very poor" it is actually pretty reasonable for our squad quality, only 2 pts less than Puel managed if maintained over a season. Why do you feel the need to split the points up arbitrarily? Why not just take his points per game in general and observe that on average he is doing perfectly well given investment. And I don't know why you keep comparing to Puel, Puel had a better team, it's not comparable.

Also the idea of splitting the data into two pools and noting one is longer hence is the one that should be taken into account is hilariously bad statistical analysis. Just deal with the full set and take total PPG. Any other use of statistics is just massaging the numbers and doesn't hold up to any logical rigour.

Because you’re banging on that his whole tenure is some kind of raging success and this is a blip. It’s not, we’ve been average for more than we’ve been successful. The successful period was a blip. 

 

[TWar]

8 minutes ago, SKD said:

Because you’re banging on that his whole tenure is some kind of raging success and this is a blip. It’s not, we’ve been average for more than we’ve been successful. The successful period was a blip. 

 

What if neither are blips and are instead natural variation and you shouldn't discount either and just look at his overall PPG? Something you seem completely unwilling to do.

Also, if you were to refer to something as a "blip" it would be this period where we have gotten 0.33 PPG in the last 12. Our average discounting 2020 (which you seem to love to do) is still 1.16 so it is still an outlier with respect to that period, and is a dramatic outlier compared to his total PPG.

Edited 19 March, 2021 by TWar

[SKD]

1 minute ago, TWar said:

What if neither are blips and are instead natural variation and you shouldn't discount either and just look at his overall PPG? Something you seem completely unwilling to do.

You’re all over the place mate. 

You claimed that he’s miles better than Puel. Stats prove he isn’t. Regardless how you look at it. 

You can say Puel had a better squad, he did have a few better players, but he also had almost half the season with Stephens and Yoshida at CB. The core of this side is the same as the Puel days. I’m sure Puel would have died for Ings up top. 

1 win in 12 is shambolic, regardless of his 2020 record. If it continues, he needs to go.

Outside of 2020, his record has been average. 

It’s silly to just brush off and dismiss the idea that we couldn’t do better like he is some kind of super manager. 2 9-0’s and recording breaking runs without a win and PPG record being middle of the road would suggest he isn’t. 

I can’t even be bothered to continue arguing with you. We want the same thing, but see things slightly different. I don’t want to see you calling for his head if we get dragged into a relegation battle 👍🏻

[Ted Bates Statue]

Hasenhuttl just as bad as Hughes, is this for real? Happy to revise my opinion of Puel but had to check the win percentages, as my memory of recent times must be very different to others:

Puel: 37.74%

Pellegrino: 23.53%

Hughes: 18.52%

Hasenhuttl: 37.25%

 

So if the above is correct, Hasenhuttl could fail to win his next 98 matches and his win percentage would still be better than Hughes'.

Feel free to draw your own conclusions.

[TWar]

2 minutes ago, SKD said:

You’re all over the place mate. 

You claimed that he’s miles better than Puel. Stats prove he isn’t. Regardless how you look at it. 

You can say Puel had a better squad, he did have a few better players, but he also had almost half the season with Stephens and Yoshida at CB. The core of this side is the same as the Puel days. I’m sure Puel would have died for Ings up top. 

1 win in 12 is shambolic, regardless of his 2020 record. If it continues, he needs to go.

Outside of 2020, his record has been average. 

It’s silly to just brush off and dismiss the idea that we couldn’t do better like he is some kind of super manager. 2 9-0’s and recording breaking runs without a win and PPG record being middle of the road would suggest he isn’t. 

I can’t even be bothered to continue arguing with you. We want the same thing, but see things slightly different. I don’t want to see you calling for his head if we get dragged into a relegation battle 👍🏻

You are right, we do want the same thing. I will say though, Yoshida was a quality player and Ings only started banging in goals after Ralph did his work on him. When we signed him he was a pretty uninspiring move. Austin was a much more exciting signing at the time, given his great season with QPR a couple of seasons previous. For me the quality season Ings had is massively down to Ralph.

[SKD]

1 minute ago, Ted Bates Statue said:

Hasenhuttl just as bad as Hughes, is this for real? Happy to revise my opinion of Puel but had to check the win percentages, as my memory of recent times must be very different to others:

Puel: 37.74%

Pellegrino: 23.53%

Hughes: 18.52%

Hasenhuttl: 37.25%

 

So if the above is correct, Hasenhuttl could fail to win his next 98 matches and his win percentage would still be better than Hughes'.

Feel free to draw your own conclusions.

No it’s not for real, no one said that, you’ve just made it up.

[Teddeer]

2 hours ago, SKD said:

“I'd sack him if he performed worse than another manager could give us”

1 win in 12. That’s worse than any other manager we’ve had previously, so I think it’s fair to say that any other manager could do just as well, if not better. 

“If Ralph's points per game drop to relegation form over a long long period (say 6 months, not two)” 

You don’t get 6 months of being absolutely shite in the PL if you want to survive. 6 months is then too late. So you’d only sack him if we get relegated. 

You keep going on about this long period of time, you seem to be conveniently forgetting that we showed relegation form before a freak run, during freak circumstances in 2020.

2 months left of the season, if we get dragged in to the bottom 3, unlikely, but that’s down to the other teams and not us, would you still defend him?

“and we can get someone actually quality in who we believe can exceed the squad quality”

Getting someone who can change current form from 1 win in 12 would be a good place to start. 
 

“But not when he is still getting mid table with these funds, and not for the sort of managers we could attract to replace him. No way.”

Why did you want Puel sacked then? He wasn’t given a war chest, he pretty much worked under the same conditions. Yet managed to achieve above mid-table... 

 

It’s okay to admit that Ralph is just the hipsters choice. Let it go. 

Just to correct you, us getting dragged into the bottom 3 is not down to the other teams it is currently down to us alone.

[JustinSFC]

31 minutes ago, Ted Bates Statue said:

Hasenhuttl just as bad as Hughes, is this for real? Happy to revise my opinion of Puel but had to check the win percentages, as my memory of recent times must be very different to others:

Puel: 37.74%

Pellegrino: 23.53%

Hughes: 18.52%

Hasenhuttl: 37.25%

 

So if the above is correct, Hasenhuttl could fail to win his next 98 matches and his win percentage would still be better than Hughes'.

Feel free to draw your own conclusions.

I know this is going off track a bit but, I bet 10-1 if you asked the fan base who's football & manager they'd rather have out of those 2, it would overwhelmingly be Hughes.

Pellegrino was the worst manager I've ever seen manage us.

He must have lied his entire way through the Interview, he was abysmal.

Edit to add here: Don't forget Puel had Van Dijk. Ralph has had an awful backline.

I'm not Ralph out yet, but he's running out of credit.

Edited 19 March, 2021 by JustinSFC

[CB Fry]

3 hours ago, TWar said:

The team that is 100% his team only has 5 permanent signings since he joined? With two of them being young players clearly signed for the future. Seems weird to call it 100% his team when he has had next to no backing to build a team. And I didn't say the two 9-0's have nothing to do with the manager. I said that two freak results don't dismiss 90 league games where we have been markedly better than the proceeding 3 years.

So the good form of 2020 is really nothing to do with him then. Not his team. He's was just lucky to benefit from the inheritance Puel and Hughes left him? 

Clear.

[TWar]

The real test of a manager is how much he can improve a side. Ralph has had next to no money invested but has had the single biggest increase in form of any manager since we have rejoined the premier league. Puel has nominally the same stats as Ralph but as shown here, really decreased the quality of the team quite heavily. This is why people weren't satisfied with Puel but are with Ralph, its all about context.

[Streaky]

3 hours ago, TWar said:

The team that is 100% his team only has 5 permanent signings since he joined? With two of them being young players clearly signed for the future. Seems weird to call it 100% his team when he has had next to no backing to build a team. And I didn't say the two 9-0's have nothing to do with the manager. I said that two freak results don't dismiss 90 league games where we have been markedly better than the proceeding 3 years.

He's had 50m 

[CB Fry]

7 minutes ago, TWar said:

The real test of a manager is how much he can improve a side. Ralph has had next to no money invested but has had the single biggest increase in form of any manager since we have rejoined the premier league. Puel has nominally the same stats as Ralph but as shown here, really decreased the quality of the team quite heavily. This is why people weren't satisfied with Puel but are with Ralph, its all about context.

He had the benefit of taking over from the absolute worst manager we ever had and then a very drab Hughes era. The only way was up, or he'd be sacked too.

It's called "starting from a low base".

Ralph has got us to the same middling position that plenty of average Saints top flight managers have delivered before: Puel, Dave Jones, Adkins being close comparisons.

He's a long way from really good managers who actually achieved things: Strachan, Hoddle, Poch, Ball, Koeman.

If he gets us to a cup final, great.

But so far, he's just bang average all all the stats show. Most of his time, we've been weak. He's hugely fortunate to play so many matches with no crowds.

Nice leading graph though. You should go into government.

[TWar]

4 minutes ago, Streaky said:

He's had 50m 

50m over two seasons is nothing. Sheffield united spent basically that on Brewster and Ramsdale this summer and they are rooted to the bottom of the table. Not accounting for the fact that we lost a key player in that time and had to replace him (Hojbjerg). 

[TWar]

4 minutes ago, CB Fry said:

He had the benefit of taking over from the absolute worst manager we ever had and then a very drab Hughes era. The only way was up, or he'd be sacked too.

Nice leading graph though. You should go into government.

Is it really a benefit to inherit a team with 0 confidence who have been completely miss-managed for two years and have no idea what they are doing? Got to be honest, I think I'd prefer a team that just made the top 6 and had just been whipped into shape by the current managers of Barca and PSG. Given that as well as the disparity in squad quality, the fact Ralph has basically exactly the same stats as Puel is both a massive credit to him and a vindication of showing Puel the door, shame it took us so long to replace him properly.

And thanks, the graph isn't leading, it is data, its up to you how you analyse it. I promise I didn't omit anything!

Edited 19 March, 2021 by TWar

[Ted Bates Statue]

1 hour ago, SKD said:

No it’s not for real, no one said that, you’ve just made it up.

Had a quick look to double check. "He's not much better" apparently. To even consider comparing the two managers is insanity.

[SKD]

10 minutes ago, Ted Bates Statue said:

Had a quick look to double check. "He's not much better" apparently. To even consider comparing the two managers is insanity.

I’ve no idea what or who you’re going on about, but in fairness, current form isn’t much better than Hughes, is it. 

[Lord Duckhunter]

3 hours ago, SKD said:

 

It’s okay to admit that Ralph is just the hipsters choice.

This is all it is. There’s absolutely nothing in his record that suggests he’s doing anything other than average. The cult of Ralph wet themselves because we were top of the league for all of 1 day, and in the weirdest year football has ever known, we won the “5th in the calendar year” award. 
 

In the real world we’ve chucked away lead after lead, looked a shambles defensively 7 or 8 times, make tactical changes that have zero effect on the game, went on a record breaking running defeats and burst into tears when we actually win a game. 

[TWar]

3 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

This is all it is. There’s absolutely nothing in his record that suggests he’s doing anything other than average. The cult of Ralph wet themselves because we were top of the league for all of 1 day, and in the weirdest year football has ever known, we won the “5th in the calendar year” award. 
 

In the real world we’ve chucked away lead after lead, looked a shambles defensively 7 or 8 times, make tactical changes that have zero effect on the game, went on a record breaking running defeats and burst into tears when we actually win a game. 

Is someone going to explain what "hipsters choice" means in the context of football at some point? Seems like a meaningless buzzword still. People like Ralph because he has improved us, arguably more than any manager we've had has individually since rejoining the prem, see my lovely plot. 10 crap games in 12 doesn't change that (arguably not all crap, some dreadful luck in there too and injury but lets not split hairs).

Edited 19 March, 2021 by TWar

[Toadhall Saint]

2 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

In the real world we’ve chucked away lead after lead, looked a shambles defensively 7 or 8 times, make tactical changes that have zero effect on the game, went on a record breaking running defeats and burst into tears when we actually win a game.  
 

who would you have replace him?

 

[stevy777_x]

2 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

This is all it is. There’s absolutely nothing in his record that suggests he’s doing anything other than average. The cult of Ralph wet themselves because we were top of the league for all of 1 day, and in the weirdest year football has ever known, we won the “5th in the calendar year” award. 
 

In the real world we’ve chucked away lead after lead, looked a shambles defensively 7 or 8 times, make tactical changes that have zero effect on the game, went on a record breaking running defeats and burst into tears when we actually win a game. 

Looooool what a troll you lot are.

But don’t worry our form will pick up, and then you ll crawl back into your shells and shut your fucking months until our next bad run.

[SKD]

1 minute ago, stevy777_x said:

Looooool what a troll you lot are.

But don’t worry our form will pick up, and then you ll crawl back into your shells and shut your fucking months until our next bad run.

Hahaha are you okay darling? 
 

Ralph isn’t going to give you his used boots to sniff just for sticking up for him on an Internet forum. 

[SKD]

6 minutes ago, TWar said:

Is someone going to explain what "hipsters choice" means in the context of football at some point? Seems like a meaningless buzzword still. People like Ralph because he has improved us, arguably more than any manager we've had has individually since rejoining the prem, see my lovely plot. 10 crap games in 12 doesn't change that (arguably not all crap, some dreadful luck in there too and injury but lets not split hairs).

The trendy bloke for football hipsters who wank off over XG and spend their spare living hours playing football manager, fifa and live behind a football twitter account. 

Virgins as we used to call them back in my day. 

[Ted Bates Statue]

2 minutes ago, SKD said:

I’ve no idea what or who you’re going on about, but in fairness, current form isn’t much better than Hughes, is it. 

It's getting there, think we have a couple more games to go before we reach those depths. The difference is that Hasenhuttl has shown he can get a tune out of this side, whereas Hughes never did. That's why we have the odd scenario of goodwill towards a manager having presided over two massive defeats.

A defeat against Bournemouth would be a major turning point. 

[SKD]

Just now, Ted Bates Statue said:

It's getting there, think we have a couple more games to go before we reach those depths. The difference is that Hasenhuttl has shown he can get a tune out of this side, whereas Hughes never did. That's why we have the odd scenario of goodwill towards a manager having presided over two massive defeats.

A defeat against Bournemouth would be a major turning point. 

Agree. 

[CB Fry]

43 minutes ago, TWar said:

Is it really a benefit to inherit a team with 0 confidence who have been completely miss-managed for two years and have no idea what they are doing?

Pretty much all our great managers of the last 30 years had an element of turnaround/impact = Hoddle, Strachan, Alan Ball. Koeman came into an absolute meltdown. Pardew began the climb back. 

A few inherited and built: Adkins (from Pardew), Pochettino (from Adkins).

You realise that its pretty normal for managers to come in when a club is at a low ebb, don't you?

Edited 19 March, 2021 by CB Fry

[TWar]

5 minutes ago, SKD said:

The trendy bloke for football hipsters who wank off over XG and spend their spare living hours playing football manager, fifa and live behind a football twitter account. 

Virgins as we used to call them back in my day. 

Weird stereotype. Sounds like a convenient way to discount someone elses argument. Pretty much a garden variety ad hominem, "You don't agree with me, well you smell, and don't have much sex", that sort of schoolyard nonsense.

Also is posting about football on twitter inherently less cool than posting about it on a forum? We all seem pretty dorky when it comes to football for me. Also the swipe at xG gives the impression you don't appreciate statistics as a concept, which really would explain a lot.

[SKD]

1 minute ago, TWar said:

Weird stereotype. Sounds like a convenient way to discount someone elses argument. Pretty much a garden variety ad hominem, "You don't agree with me, well you smell, and don't have much sex", that sort of schoolyard nonsense.

Also is posting about football on twitter inherently less cool than posting about it on a forum? We all seem pretty dorky when it comes to football for me. Also the swipe at xG gives the impression you don't appreciate statistics as a concept, which really would explain a lot.

Clearly a football hipster. 

[TWar]

1 minute ago, SKD said:

Clearly a football hipster. 

Haha, guess I walked into that

[JustinSFC]

50 minutes ago, CB Fry said:

He had the benefit of taking over from the absolute worst manager we ever had and then a very drab Hughes era. The only way was up, or he'd be sacked too.

It's called "starting from a low base".

Ralph has got us to the same middling position that plenty of average Saints top flight managers have delivered before: Puel, Dave Jones, Adkins being close comparisons.

He's a long way from really good managers who actually achieved things: Strachan, Hoddle, Poch, Ball, Koeman.

If he gets us to a cup final, great.

But so far, he's just bang average all all the stats show. Most of his time, we've been weak. He's hugely fortunate to play so many matches with no crowds.

Nice leading graph though. You should go into government.

Grudgingly agree with all this.

To the exception of no crowds.

Having crowds wouldn't have made a difference, I sat through Pellegrino and the worst it got (collectively) was a few boo's at the end and early exits usually around 80th minute mark.

I sit in 43 Northam and I witnessed a fight break out amongst ourselves because some loudmouth start slagging off Pellegrino and some nutter hit him with his Crutch, we aren't Newcastle or West Ham fans.

If Ralph was at either of those, he'd be entering and exiting the stadium under personal protection detail. haha

[SKD]

3 minutes ago, TWar said:

Weird stereotype. Sounds like a convenient way to discount someone elses argument. Pretty much a garden variety ad hominem, "You don't agree with me, well you smell, and don't have much sex", that sort of schoolyard nonsense.

Also is posting about football on twitter inherently less cool than posting about it on a forum? We all seem pretty dorky when it comes to football for me. Also the swipe at xG gives the impression you don't appreciate statistics as a concept, which really would explain a lot.

I’ll tell you a statistic that I appreciate and does matter, rather than theoretical ‘he should have scored’ nonsense.
 

Puel - 8th place in the league and a cup final. 

Ralph - 11th place in the league, likely to be lower this term. 2 record breaking defeats and a recording breaking run without a win. 
 

[SKD]

1 minute ago, JustinSFC said:

Grudgingly agree with all this.

To the exception of no crowds.

Having crowds wouldn't have made a difference, I sat through Pellegrino and the worst it got (collectively) was a few boo's at the end and early exits usually around 80th minute mark.

I sit in 43 Northam and I witnessed a fight break out amongst ourselves because some loudmouth start slagging off Pellegrino and some nutter hit him with his Crutch, we aren't Newcastle or West Ham fans.

If Ralph was at either of those, he'd be entering and exiting the stadium under personal protection detail. haha

I’m not sure that’s true. I’m pretty sure if memory serves right, our form drastically improved at home when the crowds weren’t allowed in. 
 

Im sure Ralph himself said our little snowflakes couldn’t handle the moans from the crowd and it put them under pressure. 

[JustinSFC]

4 minutes ago, SKD said:

I’m not sure that’s true. I’m pretty sure if memory serves right, our form drastically improved at home when the crowds weren’t allowed in. 
 

Im sure Ralph himself said our little snowflakes couldn’t handle the moans from the crowd and it put them under pressure. 

Didn't the players have a meeting or something and some of them said the fans were too negative or whatever.

No fans in the Stadiums at the moment and our form is diabolical.

I'm not sure what point is being made here or what point I'm trying to make but one thing is certain, Ralph needs to change whatever the fuck he's currently doing and regain some form.

[Singapore Saint]

56 minutes ago, Ted Bates Statue said:

The difference is that Hasenhuttl has shown he can get a tune out of this side, whereas Hughes never did.

Oh please, Hughes kept us up, for that I will be eternally grateful 🙏 

[Singapore Saint]

42 minutes ago, SKD said:

Im sure Ralph himself said our little snowflakes couldn’t handle the moans from the crowd and it put them under pressure. 

No bigger snowflake than Ralph himself, kneeling and crying like a little girl just because he achieved a personal milestone - beating Klopp for the first time.

[notnowcato]

2 hours ago, SKD said:

I’ll tell you a statistic that I appreciate and does matter, rather than theoretical ‘he should have scored’ nonsense.
 

Puel - 8th place in the league and a cup final. 

Ralph - 11th place in the league, likely to be lower this term. 2 record breaking defeats and a recording breaking run without a win. 
 

You should mention this more often.

[Lord Duckhunter]

2 hours ago, Singapore Saint said:

No bigger snowflake than Ralph himself, kneeling and crying like a little girl just because he achieved a personal milestone - beating Klopp for the first time.

That’s when he started to lose me. It was fucking cringe and I dread to think what the players said to each other, out of his earshot. Of course, some of the loons on here lapped it up. 
 

Ive absolutely no doubt if his name was Ralph Higgins the hipsters wouldn’t be quite so generous or spin his record quite so much. 
 

 

 

[SKD]

1 hour ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

That’s when he started to lose me. It was fucking cringe and I dread to think what the players said to each other, out of his earshot. Of course, some of the loons on here lapped it up. 
 

Ive absolutely no doubt if his name was Ralph Higgins the hipsters wouldn’t be quite so generous or spin his record quite so much. 
 

 

 

What makes things worse is that every other team has beaten them as well. Awful looking back with hindsight. 
 

It’s been a season full of cringe to be honest, Ralph’s tears combined with ‘stop the count’ T-shirts actually being made. We deserve relegation. 

[hackedoff]

I Ralph employs the usual tactics tomorrow there is a very good chance of defeat. If he is that pig-headed,he deserves the chop.

[SKD]

2 hours ago, notnowcato said:

You should mention this more often.

Seems to be forgotten on this place. Wouldn’t have been if it was another manager though. 

[Dark Munster]

20 hours ago, CB Fry said:

If i had one criticism of Puel its that he really under used Lallana, Lovren, Wanyama, Lambert, Shaw, Mane, Pelle and Schneiderlin.

And he didn't even use VVD and Fonte at all for the second half of the season.

Puel out!

[Lighthouse]

21 minutes ago, Dark Munster said:

And he didn't even use VVD and Fonte at all for the second half of the season.

Puel out!

How many points would half a season with those two be worth, instead of having Stephens, Bednarek and Vest?

[Badger]

4 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

How many points would half a season with those two be worth, instead of having Stephens, Bednarek and Vest?

Might have been a League Cup win in there with those two under Puel though had they been available. 

[SKD]

10 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

How many points would half a season with those two be worth, instead of having Stephens, Bednarek and Vest?

If I remember rightly, our form improved second half of the season, when gabbi arrived. May be wrong on that though. 

[Dark Munster]

1 hour ago, SKD said:

If I remember rightly, our form improved second half of the season, when gabbi arrived. May be wrong on that though. 

You remember rightly, Gabbi ignited the side when he came in, but only for a while. We desperately needed a striker who could score goals, having lost Pelle and Mane before Claude arrived. Then Gabbi got injured, VVD and Fonte were gone/injured and replaced by Yoshi and Stephens, and Claude did his unappreciated best to make a silk purse out of a cow's ear.