How would you rank the current PL Managers?

[Colos Short and Curlies]

I can't shake the feeling that Vieria is benefiting from a combination of player reputation bias and comparisons (in the media) to a very low set of expectations.

 

When Roy announced he was leaving there was a huge void at Palace with what seemed like 75% of the squad either being loans or having contracts expire over the summer. The expectation was for them to pretty much implode this year.

 

You have to give Paddy credit, he's definitely steadied that ship and the brand of football is more pleasing on the eye than Palace fans have been used to but no more than that so far. A solid c+ start.

 

As for player reputation bias? We all loved Vieria and that Arsenal team (through gritted teeth sometimes) and he has that in the bank with fans. Keane was respected but loathed outside of Old Trafford, Vieiria was the anti-hero standing up to him. We pretty much want him to succeed where it was funny to see Keane fail.

 

Vieira has managed three clubs, in three different countries, in their respective top flight leagues Steve McLaren has managed in three of the major European Top Flights and as an international manager. Pardew is in his third international league. As a CV point these would out rank the MLS

Vieira took charge of NYCFC in Jan 2016 and improved its position in the combined MLS standings in each of his years with the club, improving from 17th in 2015 to 4th in his first season in 2016 and then to 2nd in 2017 McLaren took Boro to a European final and won there first trophy. Pardew took us to 5th. In isolation both as impressive

Vieira left NYCFC with 44.44% win percentage and led the club to it's first ever playoff appearance Mclaren has a 44% overall win ratio and as above took Boro to a Eurpean final and won a trophy

Vieira took over OGC Nice in June 2018 after Lucien Favre, in his first season he bettered Favre's previous campaign by finishing 7th in Ligue 1, in his second season he bettered that again finishing 5th and qualifying for the Europa League, he left with a 39.33% win percentage I'll give yo uthat one, not going down the McLaren/Pardew wormhole any more!

At Crystal Palace, in his first 11 Premier League games he has managed to claim impressive victories over Manchester City (2-0) and Tottenham (3-0), whilst drawing with Arsenal, despite having a 27.27% win percentage in the Premier League, he has only lost 2 of the first 11 games, those coming from Liverpool and Chelsea Timing is everything. Until the City game they had only won 1 from 10 with 6 points from 33. Not taking away the wins v City and Wolves at all but from such a small sample of games a period of 7 days massively distorts the picture 

 

He basically has an extended period of grace where the positives will be highlighted and the negatives hushed. Hes got a crucial set of games up to Christmas. If he is as good as made out he will get another 4 wins out the 6 games, and there are 4 winnable games in the run. If he is a decent young manager with everything to prove he'll probably get 2. Any less and the first half of the season is likely to drop to a c / c-

[Abacus]

26 minutes ago, Froggy said:

 

I wouldn't really use this as a guide for judging someone's ability and achievements. Some shocking managers get jobs they have no right in getting. I know you're thinking of Solksjaer when I say that, but Solskjaer has managed in a top flight league also, and won multiple trophies including leading Molde to their first ever league title. So why would Solskjaer be bottom?

 

On top of that, why would Benitez who has won multiple league titles, multiple domestic cups, a European Cup and a UEFA CUP, be behind anyone but the likes of Klopp and Guardiola on that list?

 

Just a bit strange for me to be honest. But each to their own. We obviously have different parameters for judging managers. I personally don't think Vieira has done anything at all to warrant being that high.

 

 

 

 

Well, I suppose take someone like Mourinho. He's won virtually everything there is to win.

 

But I wouldn't want him at my club - his time is passed and he is toxic. That's why I wouldn't go all that far back into a manager's previous list of achievements.

 

Or as another example, Ranieri. A likeable guy, who achieved the almost impossible and perhaps the greatest footballing feat of all time with Leicester. But I wouldn't put him in the top rank of managers just for that.

 

The fact that Vieira hasn't won anything yet doesn't make him a worse manager than those two, judged from today imo.

[Clark]

23 minutes ago, Colos Short and Curlies said:

I can't shake the feeling that Vieria is benefiting from a combination of player reputation bias and comparisons (in the media) to a very low set of expectations.

 

When Roy announced he was leaving there was a huge void at Palace with what seemed like 75% of the squad either being loans or having contracts expire over the summer. The expectation was for them to pretty much implode this year.

 

You have to give Paddy credit, he's definitely steadied that ship and the brand of football is more pleasing on the eye than Palace fans have been used to but no more than that so far. A solid c+ start.

 

As for player reputation bias? We all loved Vieria and that Arsenal team (through gritted teeth sometimes) and he has that in the bank with fans. Keane was respected but loathed outside of Old Trafford, Vieiria was the anti-hero standing up to him. We pretty much want him to succeed where it was funny to see Keane fail.

 

Vieira has managed three clubs, in three different countries, in their respective top flight leagues Steve McLaren has managed in three of the major European Top Flights and as an international manager. Pardew is in his third international league. As a CV point these would out rank the MLS

Vieira took charge of NYCFC in Jan 2016 and improved its position in the combined MLS standings in each of his years with the club, improving from 17th in 2015 to 4th in his first season in 2016 and then to 2nd in 2017 McLaren took Boro to a European final and won there first trophy. Pardew took us to 5th. In isolation both as impressive

Vieira left NYCFC with 44.44% win percentage and led the club to it's first ever playoff appearance Mclaren has a 44% overall win ratio and as above took Boro to a Eurpean final and won a trophy

Vieira took over OGC Nice in June 2018 after Lucien Favre, in his first season he bettered Favre's previous campaign by finishing 7th in Ligue 1, in his second season he bettered that again finishing 5th and qualifying for the Europa League, he left with a 39.33% win percentage I'll give yo uthat one, not going down the McLaren/Pardew wormhole any more!

At Crystal Palace, in his first 11 Premier League games he has managed to claim impressive victories over Manchester City (2-0) and Tottenham (3-0), whilst drawing with Arsenal, despite having a 27.27% win percentage in the Premier League, he has only lost 2 of the first 11 games, those coming from Liverpool and Chelsea Timing is everything. Until the City game they had only won 1 from 10 with 6 points from 33. Not taking away the wins v City and Wolves at all but from such a small sample of games a period of 7 days massively distorts the picture 

 

He basically has an extended period of grace where the positives will be highlighted and the negatives hushed. Hes got a crucial set of games up to Christmas. If he is as good as made out he will get another 4 wins out the 6 games, and there are 4 winnable games in the run. If he is a decent young manager with everything to prove he'll probably get 2. Any less and the first half of the season is likely to drop to a c / c-

You're making the same mistake a couple of users have made. Giving a generic statement about a manager you don't rate very highly and comparing it (poorly) against one of my structurally sound points, Guess what? That doesn't damage that point. We have actual data on Vieira, you don't need to and shouldn't use Pardew and McClaren to tell me that Vieira is poor/overrated, if Vieira is poor/overrated then use his data to demonstrate it. I'll do this once:

 

'Steve McLaren has managed in three of the major European Top Flights and as an international manager. Pardew is in his third international league'

 

And how did they do? Because Vieira, he did fantastic.

 

'McLaren took Boro to a European final and won there first trophy. Pardew took us to 5th. In isolation both as impressive'

 

You know what wasn't an isolated incident? Vieira at NYCFC, where he improved them from 17th, to 4th, to 2nd and delivering their first playoff appearance. That's consistent success, consistent improvement over a two and a half year period. 

 

'Mclaren has a 44% overall win ratio'

 

Good for him, it's a shame this is about what Vieira has/is doing...

 

 

Edited November 16, 2021 by Clark

[Colos Short and Curlies]

8 minutes ago, Abacus said:

 

Well, I suppose take someone like Mourinho. He's won virtually everything there is to win.

 

But I wouldn't want him at my club - his time is passed and he is toxic. That's why I wouldn't go all that far back into a manager's previous list of achievements.

 

Or as another example, Ranieri. A likeable guy, who achieved the almost impossible and perhaps the greatest footballing feat of all time with Leicester. But I wouldn't put him in the top rank of managers just for that.

 

The fact that Vieira hasn't won anything yet doesn't make him a worse manager than those two, judged from today imo.

 

True, but you're comparing a manager at the beginning of his career to 2 who have done it all but who are now very much on the way down.

 

Vieria should be compared to the likes of Potter, Ole, Howe, Gerrard, possibly Rogers at a push. The question is does his achievements to date put him above or below this cohort? 

[Colos Short and Curlies]

2 minutes ago, Clark said:

You're making the same mistake a couple of users have made. Giving a generic statement about a manager you don't rate very highly and comparing it (poorly) against one of my structurally sound points doesn't damage that point. We have actual data on Vieira, you don't need to and shouldn't use Pardew and McClaren to tell me that Vieira is poor/overrated, if Vieira is poor/overrated then use his data to demonstrate it. I'll do this once:

 

'Steve McLaren has managed in three of the major European Top Flights and as an international manager. Pardew is in his third international league'

 

And how did they do? Because Vieira, he did fantastic.

 

'McLaren took Boro to a European final and won there first trophy. Pardew took us to 5th. In isolation both as impressive'

 

You know what wasn't an isolated incident? Vieira at NYCFC, where he improved them from 17th, to 4th, to 2nd and delivering their first playoff appearance. That's consistent success, consistent improvement over a two and a half year period. 

 

'Mclaren has a 44% overall win ratio'

 

Good for him, it's a shame this is about what Vieira has/is doing...

 

 

 

 

The problem here is that you are happy to use data in isolation to prove a point on how good Vieria is and ignore data in isolation that shows the same level of performance from managers we know to be below average. 

 

How did Mclaren do at Twente? He took them from 4th to 2nd to 1st with year on year progress in Europe. With Boro he took them from 14th to 12th to 11th to 7th in the Premier League, won a trophy and got to a European final.

 

You take them in isolation and you can make a case for Mclaren being a very good manager. These were his first 2 club jobs by the way, so very much a good comparison to Vieira

[Abacus]

5 minutes ago, Colos Short and Curlies said:

 

True, but you're comparing a manager at the beginning of his career to 2 who have done it all but who are now very much on the way down.

 

Vieria should be compared to the likes of Potter, Ole, Howe, Gerrard, possibly Rogers at a push. The question is does his achievements to date put him above or below this cohort? 

I don't think we disagree at all, I'm mainly trying to point out how difficult it is to compare them. Which I do know is the whole point 

 

For what it's worth, I think Rogers has been around the block enough to be counted as an experienced manager. I'm sure he'll get a crack at one of the top jobs soon.

 

As for the up & coming managers. I think Gerrard has picked the right route and has now been given every chance of making it at Villa. I'd worry that he may not have the same effect as he did at Rangers, though, since I don't think Smith did a lot wrong. The jury is out for me, and I'm happier with Howe.

 

Potter is doing an excellent job - probably at the top of that little group for me, but it's really hard to separate them. Howe has achieved a huge amount at a young age, and I like his self improvement ethos. Vieira has had a great start in the PL and likewise seems to take the job seriously, not trading on his star name. But maybe, it's a bit too soon to tell.

 

I think you could put those 3 in any order for lots of reasons, and I really wouldn't sensibly disagree with you.

 

Ole is a different kettle of fish altogether. He must be given huge credit for stabilising things at Man U, and as a relative novice at one of the biggest clubs in the world, that's incredible.

 

But he also seems tactically unaware, unable to affect the play and is patently shown up by the best managers, despite having some incredible talent at his disposal, as those are who he is judged against. Maybe it's just come too soon in his career and so this is unfair, but I don't see anything that suggests a consistent or considered approach to how he sets up or his team selection.

 

 

[Kaizero]

Please also don't forget Vieira took over the Man City of their league in the MLS, and that his successor has a better record. Note also that Clark  uses "first playoff appereance" to mean something, when the reality is the club had only existed for one season before this. As a point of consideration, the current longest Playoff drought of any club in the MLS is 4 seasons, meaning getting a club to the Playoffs is more what can be expected than anything else. There's 27 teams in the MLS currently, 14 make it to the playoffs. This means more than half of the teams in the league qualify. Now, when Vieria managed NYCFC it was 24 teams.

 

I do not see how one can qualify what Vieira di at NYCFC as "fantastic" rather than "minimum expected level of results".

 

Now, had he delivered an MLS Cup appereance, or even a Conference Final appareance, in his time with NYCFC, that would've been above expectations and I could be inclined to agree. His replacement, Torrent, actually took them to 1st in their division.

 

 

Edited November 16, 2021 by Kaizero

[gazza ladra]

7 minutes ago, Kaizero said:

Please also don't forget Vieira took over the Man City of their league in the MLS...

 

Kai,  please stop. You do not know what you are talking about.

[Clark]

49 minutes ago, Colos Short and Curlies said:

 

The problem here is that you are happy to use data in isolation to prove a point on how good Vieria is and ignore data in isolation that shows the same level of performance from managers we know to be below average. 

 

How did Mclaren do at Twente? He took them from 4th to 2nd to 1st with year on year progress in Europe. With Boro he took them from 14th to 12th to 11th to 7th in the Premier League, won a trophy and got to a European final.

 

You take them in isolation and you can make a case for Mclaren being a very good manager. These were his first 2 club jobs by the way, so very much a good comparison to Vieira

I used all the data available on Vieira to form my conclusion. If you think I was selective in my choice of data then you are more than free to point that out with evidence and examples regarding VIEIRA and HIS data, not Pardew and not McClaren. The question I asked regarding how Pardew and McClaren faired abroad was rhetorical... As in, this is irrelevant, please don't waste both our time answering, but you answered and I see you didn't mention Pardew (it's almost as if that was a poor comparison right?) and you only mentioned McClaren's time at FC Twente and not his time at VfL Wolfsburg, it's almost as if you're trying to 'use data in isolation to prove a point'... Please stop talking about completely irrelevant data/managers to try and discredit Vieira's body of work. Feel free to attack my points using relevant examples/evidence.

[The Butcher]

 Rank Klopp and Tuchel as the best.

 

Pep's teams play good football, but he's spent hundreds of billions in the process and he hasn't won the CL in a decade. I personally think he's a wee bit overrate. I know that's an unpopular opinion, mind.

 

I do love Rafa, but he last won a proper trophy in 2014. He hasn't really done anything really impressive in quite some time. Don't think he'll ever get a job at top job again.

 

Solskjær bought the league in Norway a few times and that's it. Clearly the worst in the PL for me.

[Kaizero]

48 minutes ago, gazza ladra said:

Kai,  please stop. You do not know what you are talking about.

 

I follow the MLS and have followed the MLS since the mid-00's. Please tell me more about how I do not know anything about the MLS. N-O's old friend Heneage even works at NYCFC, fwiw.

 

 

Edited November 16, 2021 by Kaizero

[Kaizero]

34 minutes ago, Clark said:

I used all the data available on Vieira to form my conclusion. If you think I was selective in my choice of data then you are more than free to point that out with evidence and examples regarding VIEIRA and HIS data, not Pardew and not McClaren. The question I asked regarding how Pardew and McClaren faired abroad was rhetorical... As in, this is irrelevant, please don't waste both our time answering, but you answered and I see you didn't mention Pardew (it's almost as if that was a poor comparison right?) and you only mentioned McClaren's time at FC Twente and not his time at VfL Wolfsburg, it's almost as if you're trying to 'use data in isolation to prove a point'... Please stop talking about completely irrelevant data/managers to try and discredit Vieira's body of work. Feel free to attack my points using relevant examples/evidence.

 

Vieira only got as far as the QF in the MLS with NYCFC. He had an amazing base to build on and David Villa (albeit not in his prime) leading the line, 80 goals in 124 appereances. Lampard, Pirlo and Iraola as well and a Mix Diskerud in his prime years (alebit just how good he was can be discussed given he only really shined in the MLS). Granted, having a great squad doesn't mean you're not a good manager - but it heightens expectations. Expectation wise he delivered on the minimum required during his time at NYCFC and both the men following him have done improvements to what he did. 

 

Vieira was sacked from OGC Nice. They're currently third. His time at Nice had him improve league positions from his predecessor up one the first year and up two the second, before unraveling in his third season and getting sacked. They are currently 3rd in the league with a new manager. Again he delievered on the minimum expected of him with the club.

 

Vieira at Crystal Palace has been a mixed bag. The club plays more entertaining football than during Hodgson's days, and he inherited a club in chaos. As mentioned earlier in the thread, a seven day period essentially made his start go from quite bad to acceptable. Time will tell if he has what it takes at Palace, or if he again will just deliver the minimum expected of him.

 

I don't know how he interviews or what values team owners put towards hiring him. I know he has had a decent amount of input on the organizational side of things, which is a positive for clubs that can't just sign the best players available to them. All in all Vieira's career has been alright and without any major fuck-ups, bar his end at Nice.

 

The argument style you use where you completely disregard any comparison is quite frustrating, as it leads nowhere. When people picks you up on your own hypothetical's and use them against you, they are then "rhetorical". If you are the sole arbitrator over what examples are "relevant" then there will be no way to discuss with you. It would be like discussing with a brick wall, which, to be fair, this is.

 

In the end, on Howe's side, there's the fact he took an unfancied side from League Two to become a somewhat established Premier League side. It is an incredible achievement and he has continually exceeded expectations set before him. This is why I believe he deserves a place higher than Vieira on the list, in my opinion. Vieira might still prove to be the better manager of the two but for me, right now, it's not even a competition.

 

 

Edited November 16, 2021 by Kaizero

[thomas]

 

 

[Clark]

16 minutes ago, Kaizero said:

 

Vieira only got as far as the QF in the MLS with NYCFC. He had an amazing base to build on and David Villa (albeit not in his prime) leading the line, 80 goals in 124 appereances. Lampard, Pirlo and Iraola as well and a Mix Diskerud in his prime years (alebit just how good he was can be discussed given he only really shined in the MLS). Granted, having a great squad doesn't mean you're not a good manager - but it heightens expectations. Expectation wise he delivered on the minimum required during his time at NYCFC and both the men following him have done improvements to what he did. 

 

Vieira was sacked from OGC Nice. They're currently third. His time at Nice had him improve league positions from his predecessor up one the first year and up two the second, before unraveling in his third season and getting sacked. They are currently 3rd in the league with a new manager. Again he delievered on the minimum expected of him with the club.

 

Vieira at Crystal Palace has been a mixed bag. The club plays more entertaining football than during Hodgson's days, and he inherited a club in chaos. As mentioned earlier in the thread, a seven day period essentially made his start go from quite bad to acceptable. Time will tell if he has what it takes at Palace, or if he again will just deliver the minimum expected of him.

 

I don't know how he interviews or what values team owners put towards hiring him. I know he has had a decent amount of input on the organizational side of things, which is a positive for clubs that can't just sign the best players available to them. All in all Vieira's career has been alright and without any major fuck-ups, bar his end at Nice.

 

The argument style you use where you completely disregard any comparison is quite frustrating, as it leads nowhere. When people picks you up on your own hypothetical's and use them against you, they are then "rhetorical". If you are the sole arbitrator over what examples are "relevant" then there will be no way to discuss with you. It would be like discussing with a brick wall, which, to be fair, this is.

 

In the end, on Howe's side, there's the fact he took an unfancied side from League Two to become a somewhat established Premier League side. It is an incredible achievement and he has continually exceeded expectations set before him. This is why I believe he deserves a place higher than Vieira on the list, in my opinion. Vieira might still prove to be the better manager of the two but for me, right now, it's not even a competition.

Dude, you've got to stop, you've got to stop replying to me and you have to stop lying about me, you've embarrassed enough already. For anyone else who reads this, I must state for the record:

 

• I have never disregarded a relevant comparison
• I haven't used a hypothetical in my argument

 

 

Edited November 16, 2021 by Clark

[Kaizero]

1 minute ago, Clark said:

Dude, you've got to stop, you've got to stop replying to me and you have to stop lying about me, you've embarrassed enough already. For anyone else who reads this garbage, I must state for the record:

 

• I have never disregarded a relevant comparison
• I haven't used a hypothetical in my argument

 

I don't see how in any way I've embarrassed myself, rather the contrary. You've consistently refused to engage in discussion regarding comparisons, and you consistently refuse to engage in discussion even when on the terms you've set - such as now, when instead of discussing the merits of Vieira's career, you decide to try to make points completely outside the debate. 

 

You stated this: "The question I asked regarding how Pardew and McClaren faired abroad was rhetorical" - I fully confess I might have worded myself wrongly, but again, the point was clear enough for everyone and nobody would assume otherwise.

 

Why is it so hard to actually discuss the subject up for debate? Why do you consistently try to alter the debate away from your own views?

 

[Guest HTT II]

FFS this is tedious… 

[Clark]

25 minutes ago, Kaizero said:

 

I don't see how in any way I've embarrassed myself, rather the contrary. You've consistently refused to engage in discussion regarding comparisons, and you consistently refuse to engage in discussion even when on the terms you've set - such as now, when instead of discussing the merits of Vieira's career, you decide to try to make points completely outside the debate. 

 

You stated this: "The question I asked regarding how Pardew and McClaren faired abroad was rhetorical" - I fully confess I might have worded myself wrongly, but again, the point was clear enough for everyone and nobody would assume otherwise.

 

Why is it so hard to actually discuss the subject up for debate? Why do you consistently try to alter the debate away from your own views?

 

You didn't word it wrongly, you lied, you've lied multiple times now, you've lied in your response... 

 

For the record, here are quotes where I've openly engaged in discussion regarding comparisons:

• 'I absolutley rate Howe, I think he has done fantastic things at Bournemouth, based on the above I put him below Vieira, only just, the whole ranking managers by list is extremely difficult and a lot of the positions are interchangeable. Again, much respect for owning a mistake.'
• 'Vieira had every right in getting those jobs, as demonstrated by his success as I listed previously. I've never mentioned Solskjaer in this specific debate and I'd rather stick to Howe/Vieira as that was what the initial debate was, but I will mention the criteria which lead to my ranking of Benitez (and therefore Solskjaer) next.'
• 'Benitez has excellent achievements, although his achievements (honours) are not comparable to those of Klopp and Guardiola, I suspect another 'Howe in the Conference' mistake. The reason for ranking Benitez 9th, is based on his ability, I don't believe he's a very good manager in todays game especially when compared to those in the Premier League. If I made just an ability ranking, Benitez would rank much lower than 9th, his achievements actually boosted his ranking in my table.'
• 'You've mentioned that Vieira hasn't 'done anything' to warrant being placed above six other managers (Howe, Gerrard, Lage, Smith and Solskjaer)... Why? What's that based on?'
• 'I see you didn't mention Pardew (it's almost as if that was a poor comparison right?) and you only mentioned McClaren's time at FC Twente and not his time at VfL Wolfsburg, it's almost as if you're trying to 'use data in isolation to prove a point''

 

I have allegedly 'consistently refuse to engage in discussion even when on the terms you've set', here is a quote from KAIZERO where HE set the terms:

• 'You have not addressed the following: The main and initial question, to you, Clark: Why do you believe Viera is better than Howe? The second question raised through adding points to the initial argument, what is your thought on all Viera's replacements performing better than he did in the clubs he left when it comes to portraying him as a manager with a better ability than Howe?'

 

Here is my response even though I 'refuse to engage in discussion':

 

'Now. Vieira and Howe. To clarify I ranked Vieira above Howe in an ability/achievement list, here is a brief breakdown as to why:

 

• Vieira has managed three clubs, in three different countries, in their respective top flight leagues
• Vieira took charge of NYCFC in Jan 2016 and improved its position in the combined MLS standings in each of his years with the club, improving from 17th in 2015 to 4th in his first season in 2016 and then to 2nd in 2017
• Vieira left NYCFC with 44.44% win percentage and led the club to it's first ever playoff appearance
• Vieira took over OGC Nice in June 2018 after Lucien Favre, in his first season he bettered Favre's previous campaign by finishing 7th in Ligue 1, in his second season he bettered that again finishing 5th and qualifying for the Europa League, he left with a 39.33% win percentage 
• At Crystal Palace, in his first 11 Premier League games he has managed to claim impressive victories over Manchester City (2-0) and Tottenham (3-0), whilst drawing with Arsenal, despite having a 27.27% win percentage in the Premier League, he has only lost 2 of the first 11 games, those coming from Liverpool and Chelsea'

 

You're a liar.

 

 

Edited November 16, 2021 by Clark

[Rich]

WWYPU?

[Kaizero]

As he calls me a liar, I just want to state that I see no point in continuing discussion with Clark on this subject. I have put my views out there and tried to engage in discussion and received no proper responses to the points I've tried to raise. I have held no ill will towards Clark and all I wanted out of this engagement was to discuss the merits of placing Vieira above Howe on a list of PL managers. He explained his viewpoint, and I countered said viewpoint and received no proper response. I do not see where I have lied about Clark - and it has certainly not been my intention. It's not as if this is not a public forum where everyone can read all the posts made, and thus would clearly see with their own eyes if I lied about something. 

 

This has become a tedious debate and serves no further purpose and I do not wish to be part of it. I had no intention of responding but given his last post I felt I had to do one last post on the matter. I apologize for not realizing this went nowhere sooner and for being part of making this thread a dire read for everyone else.

[Clark]

8 minutes ago, Kaizero said:

As he calls me a liar, I just want to state that I see no point in continuing discussion with Clark on this subject. I have put my views out there and tried to engage in discussion and received no proper responses to the points I've tried to raise. I have held no ill will towards Clark and all I wanted out of this engagement was to discuss the merits of placing Vieira above Howe on a list of PL managers. He explained his viewpoint, and I countered said viewpoint and received no proper response. I do not see where I have lied about Clark - and it has certainly not been my intention. It's not as if this is not a public forum where everyone can read all the posts made, and thus would clearly see with their own eyes if I lied about something. 

 

This has become a tedious debate and serves no further purpose and I do not wish to be part of it. I had no intention of responding but given his last post I felt I had to do one last post on the matter. I apologize for not realizing this went nowhere sooner and for being part of making this thread a dire read for everyone else.

I didn't just call you a liar, I proved it, multiple times, I stopped responding to you a while ago, but you kept replying, quoting and lying about me, others had also asked YOU to stop but you just kept going on and on. You're still going on and on.

 

 

Edited November 16, 2021 by Clark

[Rich]

That’s enough now, come on chaps.

[MrRaspberryJam]

What a shit argument. 

[Thumbheed]

Don't listen to what anyone says, you should both absolutely carry on doing God's work

 

Also, Potter>>>>>>OGS

[Superior Acuña]

This Clark guy is boringly argumentative and belligerent in multiple threads - is he some old banned person back with a grudge? Or just one of those teens that just got unsupervised computer time?

 

 

Edited November 16, 2021 by Inferior Acuña

[Fantail Breeze]

49 minutes ago, HTT II said:

FFS this is tedious… 

 

Expected to reach a resolution to the argument at 3pm on Friday.