Chris Hughton

[2sheds]

Frazzle wrote:

I explained why it looked like you were defending the decision.

Aaah now it just 'looks like' I was defending the decision.

Like I said comprehension isn't your strong point.

 

No-one in their right mind would say sacking Robson was worse than appointing Hughton (for the reasons I gave), it seems you're playing down what would literally be the worst decision in the clubs recent history and the only reason I can think anyone would do this is to try and defend Ashley.

Sacking Robson was the worst decision this club has made since I started going to matches (mid 70s)

Nothing comes close to a disaster of such epic proportions, certainly not this news.

 

On the grand scale of NUFC fuck ups this is on a par with signing Rush and Barnes up to play in our first team - nothing more.

 

Do you think it is a good decision then?

It's good from the point of view we need someone in the managers chair.

It's good from the point of view that it should bring some much needed stability.

It's good that Hughton gets at least until the end of the season to prove himself.

 

It's bad that the job hasn't gone to Mourinho/Hitzfeld/Sven etc etc etc but that's called being realistic.

 

FWIW Ashleys is a sack of shit.

 

Is that clearer for you?

 

 

[Frazzle]

 

Do you think it is a good decision then?

It's good from the point of view we need someone in the managers chair.

It's good from the point of view that it should bring some much needed stability.

It's good that Hughton gets at least until the end of the season to prove himself.

 

It's bad that the job hasn't gone to Mourinho/Hitzfeld/Sven etc etc etc but that's called being realistic.

 

FWIW Ashleys is a sack of s***.

 

Is that clearer for you?

 

 

So Hughton gets until the end of the season to prove himself but Shearer can be written off as being **** after eight games?

 

I am indeed having difficulty comprehending this.

[chicago_shearer]

Given the absence of a reasonable alternative and Ashley staying put, it makes sense.  Decent results, so no surprise is it? I don't understand all the face palming, unless some people are really excited about the possibility of Kinnear, Dave Jones, Curbishley or the other alternatives.  I don't see much improvement there personally.  Nothing to get so wound up about.

 

After 660 pages of nothing, some people might want to consider the possibility that nobody with any serious interest or money wants to buy us.  This isn't a case of Ashley fending off interest from wealthy Arabs hoping to appoint Mourinho.  And even if Moat & his American friends did take over, it is very unlikely they would sack Hughton and re-appoint Keegan, which seems like the only thing that will make some people happy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Dave]

What a load of shite.

[johnnypd]

Curbishley or Dave Jones would be a pretty fucking big step up from Hughton tbf

[chicago_shearer]

What is the realistic alternative, since Ashley isn't going?  Names please.

[Yorkie]

Whilst Ashley's here there's no alternative so i can't get myself too worked up about it. It was pretty obvious that Ashley wasn't going to sell. What's frustrating is that it's not another end-of-year jobbie like Kinnear's was. We'll know by Sunday whether or not Hughton can get us up (six points and he's proved he can drag the lads back up/3 points or less and it's looking grim)... personally i think he can. The fact that it's a long term deal means that there's nowt to build on, though. He's not astute in the transfer market and he's not ballsey enough to make any sort of difference in that respect. We'll do nothing under him should we get to the Premiership.

[Dave]

What is the realistic alternative, since Ashley isn't going?  Names please.

 

You named two yourself.

[Dave]

Oh, and Moat wouldn't have to sack anyone if they weren't appointed manager...

 

The Keegan comment is just daft.

[Yorkie]

What is the realistic alternative, since Ashley isn't going? Names please.

 

You named two yourself.

 

Why would Dave Jones or Alan Curbishley (especially) come here? They just wouldn't. Agree with your next post though.

[Dave]

What is the realistic alternative, since Ashley isn't going?  Names please.

 

You named two yourself.

 

Why would Dave Jones or Alan Curbishley (especially) come here? They just wouldn't. Agree with your next post though.

 

Never said they would tbf. He said they weren't much better, which I disagree with hugely.

 

Settling for Hughton might be inevitable but it doesn't mean we should be content with it. It's a fucking joke.

[Ashley17]

I can't see anybody who's read the Keegan tribunal evidence wanting to manage us, unless they're desperate for a shot at a "big" club.* Someone like Curbs won't entertain the idea of working with a set of idiots (again), but maybe Dave Jones or another 'football league' manager would.

 

*Don't want to begin an "are we a big club debate," I mean we're simply big for this division and people actually care enough to report about us.

[Yorkie]

What is the realistic alternative, since Ashley isn't going?  Names please.

 

You named two yourself.

 

Why would Dave Jones or Alan Curbishley (especially) come here? They just wouldn't. Agree with your next post though.

 

Never said they would tbf. He said they weren't much better, which I disagree with hugely.

 

Fair enough; you worded it as 'alternatives' though, so i just picked up on that - cos they're not. It's all coolies.

[Dave]

What is the realistic alternative, since Ashley isn't going?  Names please.

 

You named two yourself.

 

Why would Dave Jones or Alan Curbishley (especially) come here? They just wouldn't. Agree with your next post though.

 

Never said they would tbf. He said they weren't much better, which I disagree with hugely.

 

Fair enough; you worded it as 'alternatives' though, so i just picked up on that - cos they're not. It's all coolies.

 

He called them alternatives first.

[chicago_shearer]

I don't think the appoint of Jones, Curbishley or anyone else from the 'b' list of football managers is going to make us play any better.  I don't think either of those two, or anyone on the realistic shortlist would make any sort of impact in the Premiership.  And we know that nobody - including Hughton - is going to be given any control in the transfer market. 

 

So you either string on Hughton until we have a takeover, sack him and appointed an experienced 'b' lister who will work under Ashley.

 

The argument that we should retain him on a temporary basis so we can sack him easily in the unlikely even that we get taken over soon is just stupid.  Call me old fashioned, but he should at least be given the opportunity to fail before we sack him as a failure.

[Cronky]

It's still not clear how 'permanent' the offer is. I suspect it's until the end of the season, when the ownership of the club and the management will come under review again.

 

Hughton has experience and brains, and I can see him getting us promoted. It's best that, in the current position, he gets that vote of confidence so his position is clear, at least for this season. Longer term, I've got doubts about caretakers / ex-coaches being promoted in this way. Hughton has chosen to remain a coach in the past for whatever reason, so whether he can adjust to a new role long-term is questionable. There's also the syndrome where players who effectively got the coach the manager's job then have to face being dropped or replaced. That can breed resentment.

 

It's not an ideal choice, but we're not in an ideal situation so we just have to hope it works out. I can't see a more experienced manager (eg Curbishley) wanting to join the club right now. Even if Ashley announces that he's taking the club off the market, he's clearly not happy and it would be some time before any new manager felt that he really was committed.

[chicago_shearer]

I'm also assuming this is a one year deal btw, and that we aren't tying him down to 3 years or something ridiculous.

[Robster]

I'm also assuming this is a one year deal btw, and that we aren't tying him down to 3 years or something ridiculous.

If there is no long term plan, whats the point then ?

I dont buy the "it gives us stability" line because we are, apparently, still on the market and being run by an incomptent bunch of fuckwits. Having a bloke in charge with the official title of "manager" doesnt change that one iota.

 

The best way to give us some stability would be to appoint a full time manager, employ a proper MD from a football background and, most importantly, strengthen the squad.

[Frazzle]

I'm also assuming this is a one year deal btw, and that we aren't tying him down to 3 years or something ridiculous.

If there is no long term plan, whats the point then ?

I dont buy the "it gives us stability" line because we are, apparently, still on the market and being run by an incomptent bunch of fuckwits. Having a bloke in charge with the official title of "manager" doesnt change that one iota.

 

Agreed.  Changing Hughton's job title and giving him a bigger wage does not give us stability.

[johnnypd]

waiting til the end of the season to 'review' both the managerial and ownership situation is a recipe for catastrophe. we need the best possible set up this season so that A/ we actually go up at the first time of asking and B/ so that we already have a manager in place who knows what is needed in the close season. Even if, fortunately, we go up, it is a bad time to change managers. there'll also be pressure (coming from ashley himself, he's a bit of an idiot) to reward Hughton's success by sticking with him. it's bound to happen and Hughton is simply not the man to establish us in the Premiership. But there's a big chance we won't even go up and the club will be in tatters.

 

And as much as the managerial instability will wreck havoc, trying to sell the club again at the end of the season will sabotage rebuilding efforts and leave us in limbo once again. If Ashley can't sell he needs to commit to the club, something he has failed to do since arriving here in 2007. That means appointing someone on a long term basis. Going for a cheap 'yes man' who is out of his depth, cheap and won't complain when Ashley fails to strengthen the squad/weakens the squad in january is not a recipe for success. as usual with Ashley it's a train wreck in slow motion, 99% of us can see it but none of us can do anything about it.

[dustynrg]

I'm also assuming this is a one year deal btw, and that we aren't tying him down to 3 years or something ridiculous.

If there is no long term plan, whats the point then ?

I dont buy the "it gives us stability" line because we are, apparently, still on the market and being run by an incomptent bunch of fuckwits. Having a bloke in charge with the official title of "manager" doesnt change that one iota.

 

The best way to give us some stability would be to appoint a full time manager, employ a proper MD from a football background and, most importantly, strengthen the squad.

 

Hell will freeze over and we'll still be owned by Ashley, have a fuckwit like Llambias as MD and have a squad like the pub down the road, except we might be in the Conference by then - or lower.

[TRon]

 

And even if we do get promoted, what then? It's hardly an appointment to f***ing build upon.

 

I don't think we'll go up now, I think the players will possibly lose any hope they may of had in being managed by a proper manager later in the season.

 

Are they willing to take less pay for their dispirited performances then?

 

 

[2sheds]

 

Do you think it is a good decision then?

It's good from the point of view we need someone in the managers chair.

It's good from the point of view that it should bring some much needed stability.

It's good that Hughton gets at least until the end of the season to prove himself.

 

It's bad that the job hasn't gone to Mourinho/Hitzfeld/Sven etc etc etc but that's called being realistic.

 

FWIW Ashleys is a sack of s***.

 

Is that clearer for you?

 

 

So Hughton gets until the end of the season to prove himself but Shearer can be written off as being **** after eight games?

 

I am indeed having difficulty comprehending this.

Now why are you bringing Shearer up?

[Kimbo]

Ah wanted wor Sheera like, get a fookin jawdee in ya kna!

[Frazzle]

 

Do you think it is a good decision then?

It's good from the point of view we need someone in the managers chair.

It's good from the point of view that it should bring some much needed stability.

It's good that Hughton gets at least until the end of the season to prove himself.

 

It's bad that the job hasn't gone to Mourinho/Hitzfeld/Sven etc etc etc but that's called being realistic.

 

FWIW Ashleys is a sack of s***.

 

Is that clearer for you?

 

 

So Hughton gets until the end of the season to prove himself but Shearer can be written off as being **** after eight games?

 

I am indeed having difficulty comprehending this.

Now why are you bringing Shearer up?

 

Your approach to judging the respective managers just seems really strange.  One is given a full season (and pre-season to prove himself) while the other only got a handful of games.