MARKakaJIM
Contrary Mary
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2010
- Messages
- 24,616
- Reaction score
- 3,455
Didn't the injuries clear up when they discovered a long term irregularity with his back?
Are you doing a Lambert and confusing him with Stevie G?Didn't the injuries clear up when they discovered a long term irregularity with his back?
No spine?
How can you hate Mick? Granted I'm so young that he is the earliest manager that I can properly remember but it's hard to deny his achievements. Got a team composed of shite to the play-offs in his first season, built a promotion winning team on a small budget which played good exciting and attacking football. The football did turn dull in the second half of 2009/10 when he started to regularly use the five man midfield but he didn't have the budget or the players to be try and play expansive football successfully. Staying up was the aim and that's what we did, with relative ease by the end. Second season I thought we were trying to play some better stuff, we were scoring far more at the least, and had some great wins over City, Liverpool, Chelsea, United, and that 3-3 draw with Spurs was a cracker.
IMO it would have been unfair to sack him at the end of the second Prem season. It was our aim to stay up and we did again achieve that. O'Hara looked to be signing and there was a general perception we were about to take the best pickings of the relegated teams so would be signing some (seemingly) Premier League-quality players like O'Hara and Roger Johnson and looking to establish ourselves. I was very pro-Mick though and it wasn't until the defeat to Albion that I thought his time was up. In hindsight I would say he should have gone after the draw to Swansea where we played atrociously and that comeback probably saved his job, or the home defeat by Stoke in December. I wonder who we would/should have gotten in if we had sacked him that summer or prior to January? Prior to him being sacked I had never considered who could replace him.
Comparisons to Warnock are very unfair and I don't see how similarities can go beyond their style of play and both being successful Championship managers (but then I would still say Mick is better). Mick doesn't encourage pushing the rules or hurting the opposition, nor is he as snide and bitter as Warnock, I found Mick very enjoyable to listen to. He just gets the best out of poor players with the style that best suits them. With the exception of Nuno I'd take him back over any of his successors, or his predecessors this century.
As regards Manager's then McGarry (in his first stint) was better than Mick (even I am not old enough to really remember the Cullis era) - Turner also possibly given where we had got to at that point.
Though Nuno's win percentage far exceeds anyone else for now - long may it continue
During my time McGarry was head and shoulders above any other manager we have had.
Love them interviews. Asks and answers the questions for them.In a less fond Mick memory, Stephen Hunt will be getting the Happy Shopper "This Is Your Life" treatment from Steve Daley at half time.
Love them interviews. Asks and answers the questions for them.
To this day that red card on Milijas grates on me and the fact it was upheld, utter bollocks.
Nuno has confirmed Douglas is fit again.
We were almost the best side around at that time - just not quite (didn't need much to push us to the top though)