-
Latest Posts
-
I did not like him one bit when he was here BUT under pulis he was extrmeely isolated on his own. And In his defence he then went to have a very good season at QPR where he had runners in and around him. Which is what most target men need. The fact remains when Hugill plays regularly at this level (and you have bodies around him like you should and not play a 8.1.1 formation with him) then his record suggests he does well. Preston and QPR show that. He back up at Norwich to Pukki so wont judge him on that. -
By DanFromDownSouth · Posted
Everything in football (and life) has risk, the idea is to try and negate the size of that risk as much as possible. The main gripe I have is not that Gibson takes risk, but that he then compounds that risk. For example after relegation we brought in Monk, backed him heavily in the summer transfer market. Then after 6 months gave him the chop and brought in an almost direct opposite to him in terms of playing style. Then over 18 months many of Monk's signings got binned off normally for less than what we brought them for, then we replaced them with signings/loans that fit Pulis' style again at a big cost. Don’t get me wrong I wasn't the biggest fan of Monk, but we should have give him more time, before completely 180ing on who the man in charge should be and importantly that managers own brand of football (or anti-football). -
I agree we could be a much bigger and better club without him in charge. Equally we would be a much lesser and shi**er club if we was not in charge.
-
@BillyWoofs_shinpad. I get that logic but am also not willing to take a risk just for the sake of taking a risk. I will take the risk with Gibson remaining at the helm.
-
By BillyWoofs_shinpad · Posted
It’s just football mate, don’t let yourself get so wound up.
-