Foxello, you have made your point. You don't like Pearson, you don't think he is a very good manager.

Why do you insist on repeating it in a superfluous manner on such a large amount of threads?

If you want to critique Nigel Pearson as a manager or individual; fair enough. If you want to critique him with redundant, speculative or ill-founded comments, go for it, it's a free country. If you just want to stoke the fire and get a debate going, that's fine.

But start a new thread, or at least don't try to railroad every conversation in to that direction.

Have you considered that contributors provide light-hearted responses, not because they don't care about Leicester City or feel Nigel Pearson has areas of weakness, but because they would feel rude just complaining at you for having an opinion or ripping it apart.

At the very least, please try and refrain from just plain insulting other posters.

Simply haven't got the time, or frankly the patience, to reply to everything on this thread, but I'll have a go with some bits;

"I really can't fathom why some people feel so strongly in such a negative way."

Because he failed to achieve his minimum requirement (a sacking offense for many, but not for NP), he is dismantling a good squad and the players he is bringing in are not, IMO, as good as those who are leaving/likely to leave.

"Here's to telling johngee, Foxello and to a lesser extent Prawn 'I told you so' next season"

If I'm wrong about NP, you won't have to say it because I will be humble enough to accept I was wrong before that.

"Under Pearson we have had one promotion and a play off semi - final...."

I am aware of the history of this football club. I just don't tend to look through it when justifying my points. The LCFC of 4 years ago is very different to the LCFC of now. What he did before is irrelevant.

"Surely we're not calling for another managerial change"

But we can accept a culling of the current squad, meaning another pre-season of mass upheavel and 'needing time to gel'?

"But start a new thread"

Ok. Every time I have a grievance with NP I will start a new thread from now on.

"but because they would feel rude just complaining at you for having an opinion or ripping it apart"

I can take rudeness and I'm more than happy to be taken on and 'ripped apart'. But nobody has yet provided me with a valid reason why I should support NP being our manager. Prefer reasoned, heated debate to stupid wind-ups and sarcasm attempts.

"At the very least, please try and refrain from just plain insulting other posters"

Erm, have you ever read some of the comments I receive?

So Foxello - the culling has begun - apart from Bamba, who exactly of those culled would you have kept - Oakley, Howard, Vassell, Moussa, Weale, Chamberlain, Tunchev? As for the past, all I'm suggesting, over the past 5 years Pearson has brought more success than any other manager - is it just possible that when he went to Hull he built a side from nothing after culling the squad that ended up above us, that he could just do the same again next season?

"So Foxello - the culling has begun - apart from Bamba, who exactly of those culled would you have kept - Oakley, Howard, Vassell, Moussa, Weale, Chamberlain, Tunchev?"

Would have kept Vassell, Moussa (who is actually a good player) and Weale (in case we didn't get another sub keeper in). But would've also tried to persuade Abe to stay and would not have left Fernandes feeling isolated and frustrated.

"is it just possible that when he went to Hull he built a side from nothing after culling the squad that ended up above us, that he could just do the same again next season?"

Is it any coincedence that in NP's first season they finished 11th, then after he left they finished 8th?!!!! Under a very average manager as well may I add!

"But nobody has yet provided me with a valid reason why I should support NP being our manager"

I have seen plenty of opinions to provide 'subjective' reasons as to why we should support Pearson has our manager.

You have subjectively disagreed with them, fair enough - and as a result of this it seems you therefore feel they are not 'valid' reasons.

So ultimately, no one is ever going to be able to provide you with a valid reason are they?

All that we can do is accept that every opinion is valid and provide reasons why we do or don't agree with it. The one criticism I would say is that it appears that you sometimes provide objective 'facts' or statements so to speak, with the support of speculation, opinion, conspiracy or hunches.

It's fine to have the latter, in fact it's great for debate sometimes, but I'm sure you can see that by using that as evidence in relation to objective statements, it's quite difficult to riposte and have a reasonable debate.

If there were lots and lots of threads/comments going completely over the top about how great Pearson was, I'd probably lean more towards pointing out his faults. But that doesn't seem to be the case. In fact, the majority of comments supporting Pearson appear to usually be a defence against comments accusing certain fans of being blinkered, accepting of failure, part of the problem, etc.

All I am saying Foxello, is just try and be flexible with your debate, because nobody on here is trying to claim Pearson is perfect.

Edit - also, one my first point, would not even be entertaining the thought of letting Bamba, Mills, Konchesky or, especially, Beckford going. All big parts of a potential promotion winning team.

JA Fox - I would not be happier if City finished in the top six next season giving you the right to gloat from then onwards.

Like most fans on here, I am a dyed in the wool supporter but I do not wear rose/blue-tinted spectacles and try to be objective in my opinions.

Do I think Pearson is a bad manager - no. Sven is not a bad manager and neither is (for example) Holloway. This is all about their approach, their style and the club's expectation.

With a small budget and expectation of a mid to upper Championship position, there are few better than Holloway. Sven tried to impose a more continental approach, which didn't work in this more physical/pacey league but his past record is better than most could ever hope for. Pearson did a great job first time around in Division 1 and for a team with no money and whose initial ambition was to stay in the Championship.

This time is different. The owners want Premiership football as soon as. The fans called for consistency in the manager but then applaud him for wanting to undo everything that has gone before.

Yes, I think that people like me, Foxello and Johngee are being hard on him and focus on speculation of who might leave and could come in. But the manager and the club don't help themselves. I can't recall anyone saying that "our principle aim is to build on what we already have" but rather " I have been left with a shambles ....and there is going to be a big clear-out".

As I said JA, I sincerely hope you get the gloating rights and that I/we are wrong. I also hope the seriously weakened England team go on to win the Euros but looking at these things with an open-mind, I find both unlikely.

"nobody has yet provided me with a valid reason why I should support NP being our manager"

Foxello, this thread and many below are full of reasons. You're just assuming them to be invalid and the reason posters like me are getting driven up the wall by this is that we can't understand why you consider them invalid.

There are things happening right now that I wouldn't have done - I wouldn't have sold Bamba for instance. Similarly, I'd have preferred it if Pearson could've got the best out of Mills or hadn't had an argument with St. Ledger. But we don't /know/ what's going on behind the scenes; we can only make best guesses based on what we see and hear, and on previous records. What I've seen and heard is that the majority of the players are supporting the manager, as are the owners, saying positive things about him that they didn't actually need to, while a couple of players with known previous attitude problems and who haven't particularly impressed me when interviewed have kicked off. In the past, I've seen how Pearson has dealt with upstarts - the likes of Campbell and Mattock - and I've agreed with him completely. Their behaviour since has vindicated his treatment of them IMO.

He hasn't got everything right - I'd have preferred that he'd kept Gradel for instance - but mostly he's been a very good manager for Leicester. He's got an excellent record elsewhere as well and the Hull fans were pretty much unanimous in not wanting him to leave at the time.

He's had a tough season with us this year and no, we didn't achieve what we hoped at the beginning of the year. But it wasn't a catastrophe. We achieved a top-half finish. Call it an excuse if you will, but maybe he arrived to find that the squad didn't have proper foundations - such as an unreliable defence and poor relationships between teammates, thus the "unbalanced" comment - foundations that he felt he needed a proper pre-season to work on.

Most of the players who have gone are deadwood. there's clearly a problem with Mills and his continuing cost to the club makes him no great loss. The two Man U youngsters look like good purchases; Vardy is a gamble, a bit of an expensive one in my view but at the moment we simply don't know whether it'll work or not. Pearson and Walsh can be fairly judged on that - but after at least a season to see how he settles into the division. Drinkwater and Marshall look like good prospects for next season, Morgan's looked solid and surprisingly good on the ball and everyone else is just speculation right now and not worth commenting upon.

so why is none of that valid?

Ktf, I would honestly love to debate it further with you, but sadly I can't due to work commitments. But in reply to your quote;

"So ultimately, no one is ever going to be able to provide you with a valid reason are they?"

I'm very much open to persuasion. I was initially supportive of NP coming back. But ultimately I need to see a hell of a lot more from him and his team, and this hugely disappointing thus far pre-season, to be even contemplating being persuaded.

NP is probably the only person who can convince me he is right for this job. Maybe I'll start a thread about it next week....

On a couple of your other points:

"Would have kept Vassell, Moussa (who is actually a good player) and Weale (in case we didn't get another sub keeper in). But would've also tried to persuade Abe to stay and would not have left Fernandes feeling isolated and frustrated."

---------------------

So you don't accept that Vassell was aging, often injured and was a long way from setting the league on fire, Moussa's first touch consistently let him down, Weale and Abe wanted to leave and therefore would be less effective for us if we forced them to stay, and Fernandes would have stuck around here in January instead of going to a Serie A team if we'd treated him better?


Is it any coincedence that in NP's first season they finished 11th, then after he left they finished 8th?!!!! Under a very average manager as well may I add!

---------------------

I actually believe you're right on this. Isn't it a good job that Pearson laid a solid foundation for him?

Isn’t there some contradiction in this whole debate?

The biggest gripe seems to be that every season we start with a completely new squad of players that need time to gel. The owners have subsequently become impatient and sacked the manager, which has inevitably led to the new manager wanting to bring in his own players and the cycle starting all over again.

Foxello’s solution? sack the manager

Prawn - I wouldn't call it undoing everything, more correcting previous problems.

The biggest problem last season was the defence and, if rumours are to be believed, this is where most of the changes will take place.

Another problem was creativity so we sign a promising young midfielder from Man Utd who we hear has an eye for a pass (the new Scholes one fan said on a forum).

And I don't think we're being blinkered. I just think that any manager, whoever you are, needs to have time to do what they want with a club. For me, I feel a manager deserves at least a summer transfer window and pre-season before he can be fairly judged. Warnock took over QPR mid-season and was very inconsistent with them. He had a pre-season to change around the side and he got them promoted.

I'm not a person who blindly backs Pearson. I'm just a person who thinks it might be worth giving managers a proper chance.

“Is it any coincedence that in NP's first season they finished 11th, then after he left they finished 8th?!!!! Under a very average manager as well may I add!”

Well we went top of the Premiership under Taylor after O’Neil left....

Even putting aside the argument that it was Pearson who laid the foundations for this higher finish:

Under Pearson last season, Hull got 1.6pts per game
Without Pearson, Hull got 1.4pts per game.

Therefore if we are going to use stats and projections, I think it’s a ‘valid’ argument to suggest they would have finished higher under Pearson.

There is also the fact, that after he left they had a run during late winter/early spring, where they couldn’t even score in 10 out of 15 games!

“Like most fans on here, I am a dyed in the wool supporter but I do not wear rose/blue-tinted spectacles and try to be objective in my opinions.”

To be honest, I think there probably is an argument that some Leicester fans would always be influenced by their subjective perspective.

However, I do wonder if in an attempt to remove these so called spectacles, some comments go too far the other way.

I would also say that it can be slightly frustrating that when one disagrees with a comment criticising the club in some way; it is automatically assumed they must have blue-tinted specs on rather than a valid point.

I understand criticism of things Pearson has done, but I don't get the criticism of things he 'may' do or things that 'may' happen.

Perhaps we should defer this debate until November/December, by which time the die will be cast.

"I understand criticism of things Pearson has done, but I don't get the criticism of things he 'may' do or things that 'may' happen."

"Perhaps we should defer this debate until November/December, by which time the die will be cast."

Exactly my point

Prawn November or December may even be too soon IMO. The end product next May will be/should be what NP is judged by.