• Welcome, guest!

    This is a forum devoted to discussion of Wolverhampton Wanderers.
    Why not sign up and contribute? Registered members get a fully ad-free experience!

Ipswich (H) 23/12 Build Up Thread

Yep.

And he asked all the journos if they thought it deserved a red card...only one said yes. Nashy wonders why Mick didn't like him...

That's it. Good stuff.

Would love to watch that presser again.
 
I'm with Slink. I couldn't stand him as our manager. A total dinosaur whose brand of anti football was exposed as complete shite as soon as we had to play teams that were halfway decent. I'll not let the odd decent battling performance erase the endless.hours of utter drivel we played in the PL. We frequently went entire games without forcing a meaningful save out of opposition goalkeepers. You know how horrible Sunderland and Birmingham were the other week? That was us 8 out 10.games under Mick. Utter bilge.

So much wrong with that !!!!

we beat

Most of the top teams under Mick, may have been only Arsenal we failed to beat.

Liverpool, home and Away
Man Utd Home
Spurs Home and |Away

Mick was th emost successful manager we have had in over 30 years and was fantastic.

I lost it with him when we lost to that lot 5 - 1, but that will not taint my thoughts of him as a top top manager
 
Bringing the debate together. The last time we beat Ipswich at home was early in Mick's first season. This was the state of the side he had to work with.
bb2d3e82711d84af285c19be2d936f40.jpg
 
Murray was immense that day.


(Didn't we finish with 10 men. Cort sent off?)
 
To this day that red card on Milijas grates on me and the fact it was upheld, utter bollocks. The Wigan sending off was the end for Henry aswell without that edge he really wasn't the same.

MM handled both very well, glad to see hes getting some love on here.
 
Mick has been our most successful manager in the last 20 years.

He polished turds and got our players playing above their levels. I always thought in that respect he didn't get the credit he deserved. He wasn't a dinosaur, he knew what to do to win games with what he had.

I always look forward to him commentating
 
His major issue was his loyalty to players. When he should have been upgrading them and moving them on he stuck by them because of what they had done for him.
 
He polished turds and got our players playing above their levels. I always thought in that respect he didn't get the credit he deserved.

This is so true.

One of my biggest issues, however, was it was almost as if he would rather have average players who he could get to play above their level than go for the next level of player from a skill perspective, who might be less inclined to "put a shift in" / "do a job" (both awful, awful barometers of a footballer in my view).

His strengths derive from the exact same traits as his weaknesses. What made him a straight-talking, no nonsense man-manager also made him belligerent and stubborn when results were going against us.

I remember in his first season, reading a match report where we'd won 1-0 in a blood-and-thunder match and the journalist said "the different between the teams was the Wolves players just wanted it more" - something I'd never heard said about a Wolves team for most of my life.

I also remember his second season and lots of our time in the prem where we'd let teams pass us off the pitch because we didn't value possession of the ball the way we should have. It was like we'd rather work really hard to stop the other team from playing rather than try to be creative ourselves. Hence why Dave Edwards was a favourite.

I'll always feel ambivalent about McCarthy.
 
Ah happy memories. Language that made both Paddy and Wombat blush.

If ever there was a hall of fame forum on TWF, then "the" meltdown thread should be a contender for it.
 
I also remember his second season and lots of our time in the prem where we'd let teams pass us off the pitch because we didn't value possession of the ball the way we should have. It was like we'd rather work really hard to stop the other team from playing rather than try to be creative ourselves. Hence why Dave Edwards was a favourite.

To be fair Edwards was a lot more bit-part under Mick than people care to remember. 74 starts in a tick over four years. Jackett and Lambert were the ones who loved him and played him continually.
 
I will always thank Mick for coming here & rescuing us from the apathy that had been instilled by his predecessor (who will be unnamed so as not to frighten the horses) to the extent that most of us could have had a frontal lobotomy & not noticed.

Yes he was/is stubborn & over loyal (though thats what enabled him to get more out of players than they should have been able to give) - hit his ceiling & was kept on longer than he should have been (though thats not that unusual for Managers) - some decent football during his time here & should be given a sensibly warm welcome
 
Mick will go into a club that has lost its way and sort the basics out but you wouldn't want him long term he hasn't the vision.
 
To be fair Edwards was a lot more bit-part under Mick than people care to remember. 74 starts in a tick over four years. Jackett and Lambert were the ones who loved him and played him continually.

He was injured for long spells under Mick tbf. After Mick left he learned to tone down the pointless energizer bunny act and the injuries dried up.
 
He was injured for long spells under Mick tbf. After Mick left he learned to tone down the pointless energizer bunny act and the injuries dried up.

There were 28 sub appearances and 13 times he was an unused sub under Mick, he was on the bench a fair bit.

He actually made more total league appearances (44) than anyone bar Foley (45) in 2008/9 but 21 of them were as a sub.

Compare that to Lambert playing him for 90 minutes in all but three of his games in charge - one vs PNE when he was banned, one at Stoke in the cup when he came on as sub and one against Villa when he had to go off with a head injury.
 
Back
Top