Winning trophies just feeds egos........

[Monty92]

You talk as if it’s a binary choice between sentiment andpragmatism, but the truth is that it’s entirely possible to immerse yourself in the sentimentality of football while keeping enough of a grip on reality to not act like a pathetic child when your club’s manager makes a decision that is in the best long term interests of the club, even if it risks short term disappointment.

We know this to be true because I am living proof of it.

There’s no better way of demonstrating this than saying that were I a spurs fan I’d have been hugely disappointed that Erikkson didn’t start yesterday. But in my heart of hearts I’d have known it was the right decision.

Anyway, it's football; like love, the unreality, sentimentality, of the thing is the whole point

[redgunamo]

You talk as if it’s a binary choice between sentiment andpragmatism, but the truth is that it’s entirely possible to immerse yourself in the sentimentality of football while keeping enough of a grip on reality to not act like a pathetic child when your club’s manager makes a decision that is in the best long term interests of the club, even if it risks short term disappointment.

We know this to be true because I am living proof of it.

There’s no better way of demonstrating this than saying that were I a spurs fan I’d have been hugely disappointed that Erikkson didn’t start yesterday. But in my heart of hearts I’d have known it was the right decision.

Yes, but don't forget you are also the chap who refused to believe a manager would toe the party line on finances merely in order to keep .. His job

[Burney]

You talk as if it’s a binary choice between sentiment andpragmatism, but the truth is that it’s entirely possible to immerse yourself in the sentimentality of football while keeping enough of a grip on reality to not act like a pathetic child when your club’s manager makes a decision that is in the best long term interests of the club, even if it risks short term disappointment.

We know this to be true because I am living proof of it.

There’s no better way of demonstrating this than saying that were I a spurs fan I’d have been hugely disappointed that Erikkson didn’t start yesterday. But in my heart of hearts I’d have known it was the right decision.

This is nonsense. If George Graham had kept Charlie Nicholas on the bench in 1987, we'd not have won that 'shít' cup and it's arguable that for the last 30 years we'd have basically been Aston Villa.
Look at Ferguson in 1990. Wrighty makes his hat-trick and it's game over. No Treble, no 'greatest club in the world', no 'Theatre of Dreams.
You think Wenger is still in the job in 2003 with an empty trophy cabinet? Bóllocks.
Winning 'shít' cups is what great managers and ambitious clubs do on the way to somewhere better. Vulgar or not, trophies are the currency of footballing success. Without them, you're an also-ran.

[Monty92]

You seem to be arguing against a position that noone has actually taken.

Every manager wants to win **** cups. Every manager *tries* to win **** cups.

Pochettino tried to best Palace. Wenger tried to win cups with Fabianski and Ospina in goal.

They just balanced their efforts to do so against other, more important ambitions

Your point would be valid if I or anyone was advocating that managers deliberately don’t try to win **** cups. But no-one on earth is doing that.

This is nonsense. If George Graham had kept Charlie Nicholas on the bench in 1987, we'd not have won that 'shít' cup and it's arguable that for the last 30 years we'd have basically been Aston Villa.
Look at Ferguson in 1990. Wrighty makes his hat-trick and it's game over. No Treble, no 'greatest club in the world', no 'Theatre of Dreams.
You think Wenger is still in the job in 2003 with an empty trophy cabinet? Bóllocks.
Winning 'shít' cups is what great managers and ambitious clubs do on the way to somewhere better. Vulgar or not, trophies are the currency of footballing success. Without them, you're an also-ran.

[Monty92]

Sure, but if I were to ask who that says more about, me or Him, we both know what the answer would be.

But thanks for reminding me of another reason why forcing him out was not only harsh in its execution but fundamentally immoral.

Yes, but don't forget you are also the chap who refused to believe a manager would toe the party line on finances merely in order to keep .. His job

[Luis Anaconda]

This is nonsense. If George Graham had kept Charlie Nicholas on the bench in 1987, we'd not have won that 'shít' cup and it's arguable that for the last 30 years we'd have basically been Aston Villa.
Look at Ferguson in 1990. Wrighty makes his hat-trick and it's game over. No Treble, no 'greatest club in the world', no 'Theatre of Dreams.
You think Wenger is still in the job in 2003 with an empty trophy cabinet? Bóllocks.
Winning 'shít' cups is what great managers and ambitious clubs do on the way to somewhere better. Vulgar or not, trophies are the currency of footballing success. Without them, you're an also-ran.

That Palace final still irks you doesn't it b

[redgunamo]

Sure, but if I were to ask who that says more about, me or Him, we both know what the answer would be.

But thanks for reminding me of another reason why forcing him out was not only harsh in its execution but fundamentally immoral.

Well, we know you got it wrong and that he outstayed his welcome so long that even our notoriously tone-deaf board noticed it and felt compelled to act.

Harsh? Fundamentally immoral? I would suggest you show your workings, but your use of "immoral", especially, suggests you don't actually have any