Shoody Posted May 1, 2011 Share Posted May 1, 2011 We should be judging the season as a whole and not micro assessing the season. Two wins on the bounce, yippee!! Big deal. This season has been shocking. Really not good enough. No no. This thread is about the last 28 days and is quite specific about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve-67 Posted May 1, 2011 Share Posted May 1, 2011 We should be judging the season as a whole and not micro assessing the season. Two wins on the bounce, yippee!! Big deal. This season has been shocking. Really not good enough. No no. This thread is about the last 28 days and is quite specific about it. Yeah I know mate. Sorry. This thread is a good idea but it doesn't concentrate the mind on the wider issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
picicata Posted May 1, 2011 Share Posted May 1, 2011 I voted 'Oui' because for the two games he was in charge we won. He still needs sacking at the end of the season though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFC-Prideofbrum Posted May 1, 2011 Share Posted May 1, 2011 Yes, because the two games in charge we won. I can't believe for that anyone who would vote "no" Just like the last one we had, why anyone would vote "yes" It's over 28 days not his whole tenure, answers can vary from yes/no all the time depending on how the month goes, some people can't seem to understand that it seems? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smetrov Posted May 1, 2011 Share Posted May 1, 2011 Given that he wasn't in charge for the Stoke and West Brom games, he does meet with my approval for the last 28 days. My thoughts exactly, cant believe some of us are blaming him for Stoke and West Brom te guy had a serious heart problem. Well some are still Blaming MON - whose been gone 9 months now. No for me. Think we need a poll for Randy as well - as come june if we have some half cocked managerial set up - or he is still on his ethical non poaching trip - I would seriously question his running of the club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coda Posted May 1, 2011 Share Posted May 1, 2011 Nah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve-67 Posted May 1, 2011 Share Posted May 1, 2011 Yes, because the two games in charge we won. I can't believe for that anyone who would vote "no" Just like the last one we had, why anyone would vote "yes" It's over 28 days not his whole tenure, answers can vary from yes/no all the time depending on how the month goes, some people can't seem to understand that it seems? Aimed at me? Like I say, month by month is a good idea because it brings out the up and down, love him hate him opinions of the fans. Also, like I said, he needs judging on the season as a whole too. Those two games, one was a good performance, the other was poor. I guess results count for more than performances at the bottom of the table. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFC-Prideofbrum Posted May 1, 2011 Share Posted May 1, 2011 Yes, because the two games in charge we won. I can't believe for that anyone who would vote "no" Just like the last one we had, why anyone would vote "yes" It's over 28 days not his whole tenure, answers can vary from yes/no all the time depending on how the month goes, some people can't seem to understand that it seems? Aimed at me? Like I say, month by month is a good idea because it brings out the up and down, love him hate him opinions of the fans. Also, like I said, he needs judging on the season as a whole too. Those two games, one was a good performance, the other was poor. I guess results count for more than performances at the bottom of the table. No, generally this thread. If someone wins all their games in charge - good month. If someone doesn't win any games in charge - bad month. He needs judging on the whole season, well there is a Houllier thread for just that debate which has been going on for months... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted May 1, 2011 Moderator Share Posted May 1, 2011 If someone wins all their games in charge - good month. If someone doesn't win any games in charge - bad month. Well if that is the criteria then all we need do is look at the results and there is no point in this thread is there? In which case I may as well lock it now or by your definition we will just have everyone voting yes because Houllier won the two games he was in charge of. Lets just ignore everything else, ignore his decisions within those games and ignore the performances within them. As I say if the question is purely down to results this thread and any future threads like it are absolutely pointless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houlston Posted May 1, 2011 Share Posted May 1, 2011 I couldnt careless what decisions he makes during the game if we win. In a perfect world yes i'd love us to play amazing football and whilst I wouldnt want to play like Stoke and I doubt we will, I really couldnt care less what happens as long as we win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted May 1, 2011 Moderator Share Posted May 1, 2011 Then as I said this thread is pretty much pointless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markavfc40 Posted May 1, 2011 Share Posted May 1, 2011 Some seem to just be disregarding the Stoke and West Brom games where we took a point. Houllier wasn't present at these games but the assistant/coaching staff he appointed were, his training methods I dare say were used and we set up formation wise and tactically the way he would have wanted us to. We certainly defended as we have always defended since he has been here. He therefore had a major influence on these games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFC-Prideofbrum Posted May 1, 2011 Share Posted May 1, 2011 If someone wins all their games in charge - good month. If someone doesn't win any games in charge - bad month. Well if that is the criteria then all we need do is look at the results and there is no point in this thread is there? In which case I may as well lock it now or by your definition we will just have everyone voting yes because Houllier won the two games he was in charge of. Lets just ignore everything else, ignore his decisions within those games and ignore the performances within them. As I say if the question is purely down to results this thread and any future threads like it are absolutely pointless. Firstly, if you win all your games within a month, how can anyone not be happy. Just like last month, I didn't understand how anyone would vote yes. I didn't say someone questioning the validity of the thread when a lot more people than just me said how can anyone be happy with the month? Mainly because you all agreed, how could anyone be pleased. As soon as the tables are turned, then the thread is questioned? Future threads can't be closed because we all have different standards. If in one month, we have won 2, drew 2. To some people that may be good, to some that may not be good enough. Although 100% record should be good to anyone and when you are in a relegation battle, it really doesn't matter how you win. The games we did win, Newcastle and West Ham, I thought we deserved both. Controlled the Newcastle game without playing that well but we battered West Ham and the win was completely deserved. Again, I didn't see people saying what the point of the thread is when people said "how can you vote yes" last month. Now that's changed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted May 1, 2011 Moderator Share Posted May 1, 2011 ....because we all have different standards. Quite. Yet you seem to be trying to dictate the standards by which people answer the question asked so you are kind of contradicting yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gringo Posted May 1, 2011 Author Share Posted May 1, 2011 Just like last month, I didn't understand how anyone would vote yes.One in Five did though. Funny old world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFC-Prideofbrum Posted May 1, 2011 Share Posted May 1, 2011 ....because we all have different standards. Quite. Yet you seem to be trying to dictate the standards by which people answer the question asked so you are kind of contradicting yourself. More so because of the previous threads. I could bring up plenty of comments of "how can you say yes, we didn't win a game" ...which was true, I voted no also but then suddenly, these people in this thread are now looking at the 'bigger picture' ... everyone has different standards, sure...but 100% winning ratio is hardly something anyone can be unhappy about? I don't get that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve-67 Posted May 1, 2011 Share Posted May 1, 2011 I think the thread serves two purposes: are we happy this month. I get that bit. The second one is: how fickle are we as fans. That's why I say that the thread is a great idea but it should never take away from the wider issue of the whole season. I see both sides of the debate but can only say from a personal point of view, whilst I am happy to have won back to back games, this is only the second time this season it has been achieved. Yes, there is a Houllier thread for that debate, I understand that, but this thread masks the wider problem. And that is why I answer "no". Why? I am deeply unhappy with Gary Mack and the press releases, tactics etc from this month. Houllier remains the Manager and the whole of the month is the target of the question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted May 1, 2011 Share Posted May 1, 2011 Some seem to just be disregarding the Stoke and West Brom games where we took a point. Houllier wasn't present at these games but the assistant/coaching staff he appointed were, his training methods I dare say were used and we set up formation wise and tactically the way he would have wanted us to. We certainly defended as we have always defended since he has been here. He therefore had a major influence on these games.Probably because Houllier wasn't actually managing us for those games. If we had won against Stoke and West Brom I wonder if people would be crediting the wins with him? Probably not. It would be all the players doing as it always is when we win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markavfc40 Posted May 1, 2011 Share Posted May 1, 2011 but 100% winning ratio is hardly something anyone can be unhappy about? I don't get that. It wasn't. We won 2 drew 2 lost one. Houllier wasn't present for two of those games but his influence certainly was felt as we were managed by the coaching staff he appointed, we set up formation wise and tactically the way he wanted and we most certainly defended in the fashion we have since he arrived. In fact the performances and results had Houllier written all over them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted May 1, 2011 Moderator Share Posted May 1, 2011 ....because we all have different standards. Quite. Yet you seem to be trying to dictate the standards by which people answer the question asked so you are kind of contradicting yourself. More so because of the previous threads. I could bring up plenty of comments of "how can you say yes, we didn't win a game" ...which was true, I voted no also but then suddenly, these people in this thread are now looking at the 'bigger picture' ... everyone has different standards, sure...but 100% winning ratio is hardly something anyone can be unhappy about? I don't get that. I can't speak for others but I was voting no in the previous threads and I voted no in this one too despite him winning the two games. His performance over those games didn't meet with my approval some of his decisions during those games were terrible and I didn't really think a great deal of the performances either especially given the opposition. The point is as you said we all have different standards and as such I would take issue with anyone appearing to dictate how others should vote or reach their conclusion not just you in this instance. I've voted no and I'm perfectly happy with my decision to do so just as I was in previous months, if others think different then fair enough so be it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts