Jump to content
oneBoro Forum

Warnock........is he worth it?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Been told he’s off

Easy enough to write patronising rubbish when you don’t actually support  the club? We are only Middlesbrough after all? Narrative seems to be ‘stop moaning, be grateful for what you have, with a bit

Revisionism and nonsense. 49 goals in a full season under Pulis, 68 and 63 in our seasons under Karanka. We might have been shot shy and moved the ball a bit ponderously under Karanka but we played ha

Posted Images

33 minutes ago, Brunners said:
35 minutes ago, Smokedsalmon said:

Craig Johns on Twitter saying he 100% hasn't walked/isn't being sacked.

I don't rate the Gazette as a source of information at all, but I feel like he would have kept quiet if he wasn't sure. Seems like we're stuck with NW.

He's NWs number one supporter right now too so I think if anyone would have known, it's him. Craig seems nice enough but his defending of NW is getting a bit tiring IMO.

I said something to this effect on Twitter the other day, but what annoys me about the way some of these results are being reported on desperately lack context.

For example, they'll say something like "defeats against QPR, Reading and Hull have soured the fans' opinion of Warnock", when it should really be "defeats against QPR (who were down to 10 men away from home), Reading (in the midst of an injury crisis which left them without any recognised centre backs and strikers) and Hull (who couldn't buy a home win before Boro strolled into town".

Both are saying the same thing, but the deliberate omission in the first sentence makes the fans seem far more unreasonable. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

In fairness, and I say this as someone who would literally go out right now and buy myself a 4 pack if Warnock was sacked in the next hour, I can see the logic in not getting rid of him.

We might have a long-term plan for after he's gone that we can't put into place right now. For all we know, they all want him gone, but the replacement isn't ready to come here yet. There's no point pulling the trigger if it's just going to be giving Leo caretaker charge for ages or something.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, McMordie said:

I have to say I agree with Erimus too. I personally think we are more likely to put a run together and make something of the season by sticking with him than by changing tack now.

I understand people's views on the style of play but at the end of the day it's a results business. Jack Charlton's team was renowned for being dreadful to watch because we soaked up pressure for 89 minutes and then (usually) exploited Foggon's pace to break away and nick a goal but no one complained about the style of play when we went 29 games unbeaten. (There were exceptions to that in 1974 once we'd been promoted).

I'm not saying we're going to go 29 games unbeaten any time soon but I think we are capable of putting together a good run of results.

Let’s say that it is just a results business and nothing else.  Since Warnock has been here we’ve lost more games than we’ve won. So immediately we can see that results haven’t been all that.  Splitting his time here, he had a 50% winning record in the 2019/20 season when he helped keep us up.  In the first half of last season this came down a bit to 43.48%.  In the second half of last season it came down again to 34.78%.  This season it’s currently standing at 27.27%.  In a results business, that would indicate a fairly clear trend, wouldn’t you say?

At no point have we had a set of results that would put us in the top 6.  Even that first little spell of games with the 50% win figure, we lost the other games so we’d have missed out on the play offs taking that over a full season. The first half of last season would have done the same as we won 10, drew 6 and lost 7 giving us 36 points for half a season.  It’s pointless even considering the other two periods because we would be miles off.  If at our absolute best under Warnock we weren’t able to put together the results to finish in the top 6, then what would the argument be for sticking with him purely in terms of results?  Factoring in that we clearly aren’t anywhere near that best now either, and haven’t been for months, results alone would suggest he should be replaced.

  • Like 9
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Smokedsalmon said:

In fairness, and I say this as someone who would literally go out right now and buy myself a 4 pack if Warnock was sacked in the next hour, I can see the logic in not getting rid of him.

We might have a long-term plan for after he's gone that we can't put into place right now. For all we know, they all want him gone, but the replacement isn't ready to come here yet. There's no point pulling the trigger if it's just going to be giving Leo caretaker charge for ages or something.

Completely understand this argument, and I'd like to think you're right. Only issue I have is: his recent comments in the press RE new signings and his players vs Scott's players could prove to be very harmful in our recruitment strategy long term, hence even getting rid now and giving it to, say Leo, for the end of the season until we can execute our *hopefully* well researched and developed long-term plan, seems like the better option. 

We don't know all the facts (we do know how badly he's spoken about them in the press/how far under the bus he's chucked them), but all it takes is the Payero/Silliki situation to get worse and young, foreign potential signings to be put off Boro in the future, let alone any January targets. Add in the horrendous toxicity of Hull and the angered fan base and it's a messy cocktail. 

In an ideal world we have a better manager solution ready to go, but I think Warnock has passed beyond being a harmless bide-ourselves-some-time plod along manager and into a genuinely harmful one for the club. 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Changing Times said:

Let’s say that it is just a results business and nothing else.  Since Warnock has been here we’ve lost more games than we’ve won. So immediately we can see that results haven’t been all that.  Splitting his time here, he had a 50% winning record in the 2019/20 season when he helped keep us up.  In the first half of last season this came down a bit to 43.48%.  In the second half of last season it came down again to 34.78%.  This season it’s currently standing at 27.27%.  In a results business, that would indicate a fairly clear trend, wouldn’t you say?

At no point have we had a set of results that would put us in the top 6.  Even that first little spell of games with the 50% win figure, we lost the other games so we’d have missed out on the play offs taking that over a full season. The first half of last season would have done the same as we won 10, drew 6 and lost 7 giving us 36 points for half a season.  It’s pointless even considering the other two periods because we would be miles off.  If at our absolute best under Warnock we weren’t able to put together the results to finish in the top 6, then what would the argument be for sticking with him purely in terms of results?  Factoring in that we clearly aren’t anywhere near that best now either, and haven’t been for months, results alone would suggest he should be replaced.

Lesson number one - you can’t argue against logic. Well put, Changing Times. Coupled with alleged unrest within the squad it is a no brainer to send him packing.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Smokedsalmon said:

In fairness, and I say this as someone who would literally go out right now and buy myself a 4 pack if Warnock was sacked in the next hour, I can see the logic in not getting rid of him.

We might have a long-term plan for after he's gone that we can't put into place right now. For all we know, they all want him gone, but the replacement isn't ready to come here yet. There's no point pulling the trigger if it's just going to be giving Leo caretaker charge for ages or something.

If the stuff about the bullying of younger players is true though (and I'm not saying it definitely is true) what damage is it doing to them and the morale of the squad?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Hendrie_7 said:

If the stuff about the bullying of younger players is true though (and I'm not saying it definitely is true) what damage is it doing to them and the morale of the squad?

Yeah I won't lie mate I'm mostly trying to cheer myself up and look on the bright side, can't really stand him and will personally be partying late into the night once he's gone.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Smokedsalmon said:

Yeah I won't lie mate I'm mostly trying to cheer myself up and look on the bright side, can't really stand him and will personally be partying late into the night once he's gone.

Maybe we should all start that now, being permanently bladdered might be the only way we can get through the next seven months.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably went into the meeting with a view to showing him the door, him leaving an hour or two late not only with his job in tact but also a bit of extra money to get Brady and the like on board.

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

  • Latest Posts

    • I'm not really understanding your argument, to be honest. We shot ourselves in the foot, nobody is denying that, but Derby indisputably cheated to finish above us. So Gibson has a case. The fact that Pulis led an implosion doesn't change that. This was the table at the half way point of the season, Derby were keeping pace with us long before our 6 game losing run near the end, it's not like we were out of sight and they just snuck in.
    • There was a point in time not so long ago where if Tav didnt play well or get enough touches we would definitely lose, His role now of being more of just an engine suits him better and he offers us a ton off the ball. I think frustrations for some fans are we have someone like Payero who is clearly more technically talented but we havent seen enough to know how the difference in work rate would effect our play. Could very easily see a future in which Crooks plays the deeper role and Payero comes in with Tav and everybody really rating Tav again just for the shift he puts in.
    • I've got a shitty Rise Against ankle tat from a 5am drunken tattoo shop venture in sunny beach, so I'll head down in flip flops so you can ID me.
    • I'm personally of the opinion that Derby should be deducted more points for being willing to pay £5m for Martyn Waghorn.
    • For me Taylor's been a greater attacking threat in his games for us than Bola at wingback. He looks good overlapping a winger in a 4, but a bit lost when the onus is on him to be the attacking outlet down that side. That said Bola's been either not playing under Woodgate or a defensive fullback under Warnock. Maybe with more time under Wilder & co's coaching we could have a decent attacking wingback on our hands. He certainly seems the type with good application and a willingness to listen & learn. The difference in his performance levels under Warnock was shocking from the player we saw under Woodgate. 

×
×
  • Create New...