Kaizero

No. The Man U job is one of the top 3-5 in football. David Moyes shouldn’t have gotten it, he wasn’t qualified. The same goes for Solskjaer. Shearer took over from Joe Kinnear And we knew that was the road we were heading down again. Of course we wanted Shearer to stay. Not comparable. Absolutely comparable. Joe Kinnear was on paper much more qualified than Alan Shearer to manage Newcastle United if you look at their managerial history and not attachment to any one club. You have to be fucking joking, seriously. See edit:

No. The Man U job is one of the top 3-5 in football. David Moyes shouldn’t have gotten it, he wasn’t qualified. The same goes for Solskjaer. Shearer took over from Joe Kinnear And we knew that was the road we were heading down again. Of course we wanted Shearer to stay. Not comparable. Absolutely comparable. As much as it disgusts me to say it, Joe Kinnear was on paper much more qualified than Alan Shearer to manage Newcastle United if you look at their managerial history and not their attachment to any one club. Shearer wasn't even a manager at the time, what would your opinion be if Gary Lineker was the one appointed and not Shearer? Would you have wanted Lineker to get the job, or stay? Jaime Redknapp? Pochettino is essentially just as qualified on paper for the Man Utd job as Moyes was. It's a bit of a double standard if you say Moyes shouldn't have gotten the job, yet you think Pochettino should get it when you look at their managerial history up until the point Moyes took over Man Utd, or Pochettino now if he took over tomorrow. Neither have major honors, and their biggest achievements have been building a club that didn't compete much into a team that could compete. The Barcelona job is perhaps the biggest job in football, that went to a reserve team manager. In the end, the manager needs to be a proper fit for a club.

Third highest win rate in Man Utd managerial history = not very good Changing the toxic nature at Man Utd (as told by fans and players) = not very good Having toppled an essentially changed the nature of a one-team league with much lesser budgets = no experience and no playing style He's started badly in the league this season, so none of the above matters. Not sayin he hasn't started badly in the league this season, he has, but he still has the third highest win ratio of any Man Utd manager in their history and has had them on some of their best winning streaks in their history. He clearly works much on his tactics and aren't working on "throwing eleven players on the pitch hoping their quality make the team win". He's failed at tactics many times, but he's doing different things to counter the opponents. Over the course of one week he played three different tactics and won three matches, two against opponents perceived to be better than them at this stage in time. The SBR comparison was due to joeyt saying he shouldn't get a shot at Man Utd because he failed at Cardiff. That equivalence means SBR shouldn't have gotten another chance at a club because he failed at Fulham. Other arguments are saying he shouldn't have been given the job, and then using examples of managers that should be better fits for Man Utd when said examples started their own careers with less top level managerial experience than OGS. It's just dumb arguments when you look at objective facts, just look at joeyts rebuttal of my arguments by jumping on a stupid thing Froggy said rather than the actual arguments. Hence why I believe they're emotional opinions. I'm not saying they 100% are, but I legit dislike OGS, I support Rosenborg in Norway and I would love for OGS to fail. But as I said, I dislike stupid arguments more than any one person. Discussing OGS at Man Utd with anyone that doesn't follow Man Utd is like discussing the downsides of Donald Trump with someone that only watches Fox News, they've made up their mind and no objective fact can alter that even when it counters their own arguments. I'm fully open to being proven wrong, in fact, I'd welcome it. It would be a much better feeling looking at OGS and seeing failure than what I am currently seeing. I don't even need much convincing, as I've tried myself already.

No indeed, but solicitors generally need barristers when they're dealing with Crown/County courts and higher because they usually don't have rights of audience with judges Cool. Still don’t get why barristers HAVE to take someone on, but there you go. Because everyone is entitled to a fair trial.

And went on to do good things again at Molde, and let's not forget he started his managerial career with a great spell as Man Utd Reserves coach - where key players such as underperforming Pogba loved playing for him. Sir Bobby was sacked from Fulham with a 16.67% win rate. Where's the rule saying you can't get another chance because you failed one time during a completely different set of circumstances? OGS has the third highest win percentage in Man Utd history, nothing about him failing miserably at Cardiff changes that fact. The arguments against him are idiotic and fueled by dislike/emotion rather than objective stats and facts, which I dislike more than I dislike OGS.

So the PL have called their bluff in that case? Not sure if one of Europes top QC's would get involved in a bluff (potential). He would have little choice under the cab rank rule. What do you mean he would have no choice? It's not like he was forced to take the case on from the beginning? Unless I'm totally lost here. If approached by a client with a case in his field of law he has to accept regardless of who the client is. No way. There’s zero way that he would have to represent anyone he doesn’t want to. That’s a ridiculous notion. It's the law.

Again, it's a flawed argument as Pep Guardiola only had a promotion to his name when he was appointed Barcelona manager. Klopp got the Mainz gig after playing for them for 11 years. Pochettino got the Espanyol gig without the UEFA coaching license after having been the manager of their women's side. You have to start somewhere, and OGS actually had honors to his name - albeit in a lesser league, so what makes his appointment more shocking than those, for instance?

So the PL have called their bluff in that case? Not sure if one of Europes top QC's would get involved in a bluff (potential). He would have little choice under the cab rank rule. What do you mean he would have no choice? It's not like he was forced to take the case on from the beginning? Unless I'm totally lost here. If approached by a client with a case in his field of law he has to accept regardless of who the client is. Alright I see Cheers. Essentially (where the name stems from), say you're a cab driver and you see five people in the queue. In front there are four greasy pedos and in the fifth spot in the queue, prime Pamela Anderson is waiting, so you pass the four guys who have waited longer because you'd rather get Pamela in your cab. It's a law that prevents preferential treatment and secures everyone counsel on the same terms as everyone else. You have to let the first person in the queue into your cab no matter how sweaty he might be.

So the PL have called their bluff in that case? Not sure if one of Europes top QC's would get involved in a bluff (potential). He would have little choice under the cab rank rule. What do you mean he would have no choice? It's not like he was forced to take the case on from the beginning? Unless I'm totally lost here. If approached by a client with a case in his field of law he has to accept regardless of who the client is.

I joined NUST a few months ago cos i thought they might represent the supporters better if they had a voice backed by large numbers...i cannot however accept any supporters organisation that says the PL are acting reasonable.......They havn’t done that during this last 7 months I am not NUST. You are their representative , no ? Not on this forum no - I am myself. All views expressed are mine. Are you a NUST rep or not ? When I post on this forum I post as myself. As I have done since the day I joined over 15 years ago back in 2004. I represent nobody other than myself unless I explicitly tell you otherwise. Cool ? How is it hard to separate between personal opinions and professional/organizational opinions?

You say we've a top four squad. Ole got us third. Poch had 5 years at Spurs and got them second. Bielsa would be interesting Bielsa is god.

It's an objective fact that he did extremely well in Norway, sadly he couldn't replicate that elsewhere. I am stating exactly that point as well, as even though OGS did well here it does in no way equate he has to do well in a bigger league, just that it's a shit argument to say he's done nothing in the past. He'd done more than Pep when Pep got the Barca gig, for instance. I don't necessarily think he's done enough at all to warrant getting the Man Utd gig bar being a former player. But when Shearer was here, people wanted Shearer to stay on, and all Shearer had done at that stage was being a pundit - so I'm just annoyed at our own double standards when it's obvious why Man Utd fans want OGS to stay and it's fair-ish that he got the chance at the job. I'm in no way saying he's a great manager for Man Utd (or for anyone else other than Molde) or the right answer for them, just that I understand why he has the job and that I understand why Man Utd fans aren't up in arms as he's done a lot to change the entire toxic atmosphere at the club. I fully understand why a Man Utd fan at this stage would prefer to stick with OGS rather than switch to Poch, even though I personally would choose Poch.

Fergie couldn't have saved Cardiff. An awful argument from desperate people. Spurs had an excellent team. They probably had 6/7 players that would have walked into our side. Kane, Son, Eriksen, Alderweireld, Vertonghen etc. "A team like Spurs" indeed. This is three pages ago, and I know it's not at all remotely comparable, but OGS turned Molde from shit into the best team in Norway. It would be like someone coming to Hearts and turning them into the new Celtic in no time, watched them go to shit when he left, then turned them back good when he returned. Definitive playing style, great buys to bring the club forward and so on. Could that be replicated at the bigger stage? Obviously harder to do and there's more competitive clubs to challenge other than that one dominant force, but it's still a bit shitty to say OGS has achieved nothing - even if the league isn't a top tier league. IMO it's as mentioned comparable to toppling Celtics dominance in the SPL and establishing your team as that dominant force with a lesser team and budget than Celtic. FWIW, I really, really, dislike Molde. I am happy OGS is gone. And I believe what Knutsen is doing currently with Bodø/Glimt in our league with no money and focusing on local talent, running amok in the league two years running and almost going undefeated this year and outplaying AC Milan at the San Siro (even if they sadly lost) is perhaps the biggest managerial performance in our league in its existence. OGS is shit compared to that.

Been made to look bang average. Ole's tactics bang on in Europe again. Soaked up the pressure and hammered them at the other end. OK champ. Thought the tactics were good tbf. 3-5-2 against PSG, 4-3-2-1 against Chelsea, 4-4-2 diamond tonight. Almost as if he's planning the tactics for who his team is facing, madness.

I almost bet on them, fml.

The thing is, even with someone on ignore, I can't help myself from clicking "show" on their post because WHAT THE FUCK IS THAT CUNT SAYING NOW?!?! Also it doesn't work if they get quoted, so what is the purpose. I use the buddy list to see if the clique is on.

Anyone able to do this? Found it interesting actually. You should do a CL one and find the true champions of Europe. No interest at all in that. Not sure how that would work anyway? If BATE Barisov fluke a dead rubber against Bayern Munich for example and don’t play in the Champions League again then it’s kaput. They'd be reigning champions until they return... Or you follow boxing rules, and count them team no longer qualified as "retired" and arrange the fight for the title between the two next contenders, i.e. the champion before BATE against whoever they are up against. It's not hard at all, and both options work.

Anyone able to do this? Found it interesting actually. You should do a CL one and find the true champions of Europe.

I, for one, welcome our new Saudi overlords.

I'm with wormy, the true champion is down in the divisions below.

I will admit, I lost it with him last season for a spell. However, less than two years in charge - took a bottom half championship club (one which Bruce had churning out some awful, awful football) to promotion (including winning ten league games in a row), had to buy half a squad (Bruce's obsession with loan players left us with a squad of about 11 players at the end of the season), kept us up and got us to a cup final. Two Wembley trips in all that, too. Really, really early days yet and as pointed out, there are some awful managers who have had good spells, but remain awful. It's pretty hard to look at that list of achievements, though, and not be impressed. Lest we forget he did well with Brentford as well.

Dortmund fucking me in the ass.

fwiw there was a typo extra 0 in the Norway bet, only lost £50 - I may be an idiot but I'm not stupid

Aaaaand he subs Haaland, of course.

Stop putting out of form players on when we have one of the hottest prospects in Europe on the bench. Jesus fucking christ Lagerback needs to retire himself.