It's quite strange as I moved to Leicestershire when I got married five years ago and have gone to a few games with my father in law, so have a bit of a soft spot for them now.
In both circumstances, I feel it was way too soon that he got sacked. He was starting to build a good team for both and unfortunately wasn't given the time that I believe he deserved (you have to remember where we finished before he took over).
The common denominator between both is that both had Thai owners at the time who, after some initial investment, were desperate for success and, I believe, thought it would come a lot quicker due to their lack of knowledge of Football in general. In fact, you could argue it was a similar situation when he went to Notts County, so he should really have learned by now!
I find it difficult to judge any manager over the short time frame that he had in both roles, however at the time I liked him for us, and I know plenty of Leicester fans that liked him as well.
Unfortunately, I'm not sure how many more chances he will get now. Shame, though. I think he is a good manager who was underrated when he was managing England.
Just my thoughts, though.
He should never have been sacked at City,he would almost certainly have done a better job than Hughes who I think was the catalyst for most of the portrayal of city as an extremely arrogant club which is far from the truth
I didn't rate Sven much at all. He had a great first half of the season, but that can be attributed to a 'hneymoon period'; many new players, some of whom failed to make the grade at other clubs or had problems, eager to prove a point and restore some self pride.
At first it all clicked, bit inevitably the cracks started to appear. And Sven wasn't competent enough to deal with it. The second half of the season was relegation form.
I don't think he should have been sacked, but at the same time I didn't rate him either.
And when you look at his career since City, has he held down a job for more than 6 months?! Can't just be coincidence.
His fitness regime was zilch, that's why we ran out of steam after Christmas.
It was a little premature I thought, but I dont think unfair either, our form after xmas was terrible and Sven should take the blame for that really especially since he had bought quite a few players, however when it was good we were playing good football. I dont think Sven would have taken us anywhere near as far as Mancini has even with the money spent, because the first thing Mancini did when he took over was make us organised and very hard to beat, which we wernt under Sven and Hughes, it meant that Mancini had to suffer being called a boring negative manager for a period of time, but short term pain = long term gain and we are reaping the rewards for being so organised now, just look at Milner and Silva's positional awareness in the 6-1 win for an example of this. Even if Sven or Hughes had stayed they would have never instilled this level of organisation.
I'll never forgive him for signing Jo.
Shinawhateverhisnamewas............virtually announced to the world in January that Sven was going.
THAT was why the 2nd half of the season was carp.
He knew he was going.......the players knew he was going.
WTF was bound to happen??
Hughes had an entire close season to sort his squad.
Sven had 5 weeks till the window closed.
He opened his contacts book and put together a team that not only beat United home and away but played football, (with Elano etc), in a manner that we hadn't seen for 20yrs.
Got a lot of time for the guy.
Why are clubs still giving Sven the time of day
"I'll never forgive him for signing Jo."
Jo was a Hughes signing wasn't he?
Page 1 of 1
First
Previous
1
Next
Latest
Sign in if you want to comment
What were your thoughts
Page 1 of 1
posted on 28/10/11
It's quite strange as I moved to Leicestershire when I got married five years ago and have gone to a few games with my father in law, so have a bit of a soft spot for them now.
In both circumstances, I feel it was way too soon that he got sacked. He was starting to build a good team for both and unfortunately wasn't given the time that I believe he deserved (you have to remember where we finished before he took over).
The common denominator between both is that both had Thai owners at the time who, after some initial investment, were desperate for success and, I believe, thought it would come a lot quicker due to their lack of knowledge of Football in general. In fact, you could argue it was a similar situation when he went to Notts County, so he should really have learned by now!
I find it difficult to judge any manager over the short time frame that he had in both roles, however at the time I liked him for us, and I know plenty of Leicester fans that liked him as well.
Unfortunately, I'm not sure how many more chances he will get now. Shame, though. I think he is a good manager who was underrated when he was managing England.
Just my thoughts, though.
posted on 28/10/11
He should never have been sacked at City,he would almost certainly have done a better job than Hughes who I think was the catalyst for most of the portrayal of city as an extremely arrogant club which is far from the truth
posted on 28/10/11
I didn't rate Sven much at all. He had a great first half of the season, but that can be attributed to a 'hneymoon period'; many new players, some of whom failed to make the grade at other clubs or had problems, eager to prove a point and restore some self pride.
At first it all clicked, bit inevitably the cracks started to appear. And Sven wasn't competent enough to deal with it. The second half of the season was relegation form.
I don't think he should have been sacked, but at the same time I didn't rate him either.
And when you look at his career since City, has he held down a job for more than 6 months?! Can't just be coincidence.
posted on 28/10/11
His fitness regime was zilch, that's why we ran out of steam after Christmas.
posted on 28/10/11
It was a little premature I thought, but I dont think unfair either, our form after xmas was terrible and Sven should take the blame for that really especially since he had bought quite a few players, however when it was good we were playing good football. I dont think Sven would have taken us anywhere near as far as Mancini has even with the money spent, because the first thing Mancini did when he took over was make us organised and very hard to beat, which we wernt under Sven and Hughes, it meant that Mancini had to suffer being called a boring negative manager for a period of time, but short term pain = long term gain and we are reaping the rewards for being so organised now, just look at Milner and Silva's positional awareness in the 6-1 win for an example of this. Even if Sven or Hughes had stayed they would have never instilled this level of organisation.
posted on 28/10/11
I'll never forgive him for signing Jo.
posted on 29/10/11
Shinawhateverhisnamewas............virtually announced to the world in January that Sven was going.
THAT was why the 2nd half of the season was carp.
He knew he was going.......the players knew he was going.
WTF was bound to happen??
Hughes had an entire close season to sort his squad.
Sven had 5 weeks till the window closed.
He opened his contacts book and put together a team that not only beat United home and away but played football, (with Elano etc), in a manner that we hadn't seen for 20yrs.
Got a lot of time for the guy.
posted on 29/10/11
Why are clubs still giving Sven the time of day
posted on 29/10/11
"I'll never forgive him for signing Jo."
Jo was a Hughes signing wasn't he?
Page 1 of 1