I can't help thinking that Mick's straightforward 'one of the blokes' style is one of the things that has made life so difficult for us since he left (setting aside whether or not this was the right decision).

He was like a tough but wise old uncle, the kind of bloke you go to when you're in trouble and you know he won't tell your folks but he won't go easy on you either - just tell it like it is, but with his arm round you.

I think the players missed him a lot (pretty obviously some more than others) and this made it even more difficult to switch to Stale's style, which would have been difficult any way, given how different it was, both in terms of man mangement and playing.

What exactly what was Stale's style? I know what he talked about but I saw no evidence of it on the pitch. He claimed that he would make us a better passing team and better at holding possession. But with the same players our possession stats were much lower than they have been under Saunders and even lower than many of the games under Connor.

That would be because he only had 25 games crikey.......i think it took fergie quite some time at man utd as well.
Thats football.
And mango, that second paragraph is the perfect description of Mick it think

Well show the full quote...

"I'll be gone sometime, somewhere
The players will be gone sometime somewhere
The fans will always be here, it's their club, it's not mine,
and it belongs to them...

and they're all mindless idiots, knuckle draggers, nuggets, morons...."

"Ferguson was appointed manager at Old Trafford on 6 November 1986. He was initially worried that many of the players, such as Norman Whiteside, Paul McGrath and Bryan Robson were drinking too much and was "depressed" by their level of fitness, but he managed to increase the players' discipline and United climbed up the table to finish the season in 11th place, having been 21st (second from bottom) when he took over"

Haha, the good old days when men were men :D

Now they all have psychological issues like our shameless rabble.........the moral of the story, go drink it off and carry on.

I agree with you cinci. Thank god he only had 25 games, we were getting worse and worse under his management as everyone knows. Good that you still defend him though. You like Mick but take every chance to knock him. You like Saunders and take every chance to knock him. And you would never say you are a fan of Solbakken but defend him every time. In England we call it being false. What do they call it in Cincinatti and Scotland?

Odem is at least talking sense

i dont knock mick about much Crikey, just the fact that it was his poor transfer record in the prem that left us with this poor squad.
And i have criticised Stale plenty, but to sack any manager after 25 games is ridiculous, especially when we were a long way from being in deep trouble.
As for deano, i have praised him more than criticised him, for finally ripping up that comedy defence he deserves a lot of credit.

Nothing false about any of that

but to sack any manager after 25 games is ridiculous

Connor was sacked after 13 games cinci. It was clear that he wasn't up to the task after this number of games.
Stale had twice as many games and again, wasn't up to the task.
I don't remember too many criticising the sacking of Connor!

As for Stale having us 'a long way from being in deep trouble', we were in 18th place in the league and had just been knocked out of the FA Cup by a non-league side.
My take on that is that we were 'in deep trouble'.

Deano didn't get a win in his first 8 games !

Should we have sacked him also......or is that to soon ?

Just curious ?

Come on Cyp, nobody truly thinks Connor was a manager do they, a completely different situation than the one offered to Stale.
Stale was given a brief, that was to change the philosophy at Molineux and to build for the future.......25 games is no time to go back on that.
As for losing a cup game, a completely irrelevant game, a bad result yes, but with no impact on the clubs future.
League wise we were up and down, a good run followed by a bad run and nearer the play offs than relegation when he was sacked.......like i say, nowhere near deep trouble.By the reckoning of a lot of these fickle fans mr morgan, then yes he should have been sacked surely

"League wise we were up and down, a good run followed by a bad run and nearer the play offs than relegation when he was sacked." - Cinci. - 18th April 2013
__________________________

"The reality is that we’re not cut adrift, there are sides struggling just as badly as us and we have the players to get us out of it." - Tim Spiers. 13th Feb 2012

Stale was a complete disaster at Wolves and Koln and no more a manager than Connor. We would never have gone anywhere but backwards under his lack of management. The entertainment in 90% of the games under his management was worse than under any management in my lifetime and the quality of performances in his last 4 games were quite unbelievably bad and we had no alternative but to call it a day with him as we were only going the same way as Koln

Bute i get the point, and as we have all covered a million times, the timing was pointless and wrong.
That said, his brief was too stabilize us and keep us out of trouble, however far fetched some may think that was.
Morgans words the season before were that he NEVER wanted to go through that again.......now those words have indeed haunted him.

And DJ i can understand why Stale was sacked, but i just do not believe you claim we would have just gone backwards after such a short period of time, it wasn't pretty but it WAS early days.......and he has had success elsewhere so he clearly is not an idiot.

comment by Peter Odemwingie (U16869)
posted 5 hours, 13 minutes ago
Me nah seh nah nah. Незабываемый миг. Столько в нем сказано. Biddly biddly biddly biddly bop.

comment by Uncle Herbert (U16263)
posted 2 hours, 18 minutes ago
Odem is at least talking sense
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Odemwingie (U16869) being none other than Pundito El Megabore (U16869) which will be demonstrated when Pundito changes his name back again.
I wonder who wears the trousers between Pundito and Uncle Herbert.

Aries, Did......did you think it was really Peter ?

Poor Aries - still taking both himself and football forums seriously.

Tell us, do you have an alarm that goes off every time a Wolves fan posts?

Tololol



#inhaler

No worries about Uncle Herbert - no one takes him seriously. And Steve, that is you isn't it? Where's Jez these days? Have you finally told him to keep his gob shut?

maybe you should take some of your own advice and take a look at the OP's thread title !

only saying.......

Read the OP........ the bit about changing the club name...... weren't you forced to change yours to include '1986' some years ago? Let's hope the club does better under you, Steve.........

Well Steve, I must say you've been a brilliant Chairman, best we've ever had








.................. for Ipswich

Steve - It is being widely reported that the highest paid Director in the West Midlands over the last year is Jez Moxey (£1.1m despite relegation).

Why?

Take me 50 pleasing you