He's more or less done everything Moyes has done and surpassed his depths.
- Ole took these group of players down to the cliff training ground to remind them how he use to train in the good ol days,(which ironically is exactly where we're now heading - to the edge of a cliff) which is similar to Moyes showing Vidic and Rio old training videos of his everton defenders which left the team bemused
- Both looked clueless on the touchline and even taken on the look of sheer terror with his eyes bulging out of his skull like he doesn't know what to do
- Has lowered expectations with nonsense about ''On certain days you're lucky and you win games and sometimes you lose games.''
- He's gone to penalties against non league fodder Rochdale which was remininest of Moyes vs Sunderland in the league cup when we went to penalties
- Has made it so that crosses are our bread and butter method of play.
- Now he's had his let's make it difficult for newcastle with the we have to be at our best to stand a chance against Norwich
All that's left is for him to come out and say ''I don't know what we have to do to win'' and he can then take the mask off to reveal Moyes' face
Besides that, I would love if the Ole in boys would answer if City where wrong to let go of Stuart Pierce when he took over as caretaker manager. He was one of the big legends, big heart and everything about him epitomized passion. ''He got City'', ''knew the club'' as the sentimentalists would say
In his first half season in charge after taking over from Keegan, he was a point away from Uefa qualificatio, finishing in the top end of the table. He was subsequently hyped up to be the next England manager. City's fans loved him, the media loved him and England loved him. The following season they were toothless resulting in having the worst attack at home scoring only 10 goals all season and ended up around 14th before the owners decided to pull the plug.
Now did they make a mistake? Did he deserve more time? Where City and their fanbase impatient, spoilt, short sighted and ignorant for failling to see his plan?
I ask because his reign parallels that of oles and surely no one in their right mind would say there were no better managers that could have improved on what Stuart Pearce was doing to City, which is the argument for Ole remaining
The other main arguments I have heard for why Ole should continue is that he signed players and released some players, which is the very basics of what any manager should be doing.
He shouldn't be praised if as if did something miraculous that could never be done.
A boss/manager/consultants walks into new companies every day across this country and hire and dismiss staff. It's rudimentary aspect to their responsibly. If after hiring the new staff are doing good but the rest of the organization falls apart, the executive director isn't going to say ''well lets wait until the shop floor manager is allowed to bring more of his own staff in, even when the whole place is losing sales, workplace performance is at all time low and complaints from customers flood in.
Ultimately the manager is going to have to take the brunt of the blame eventually leading to dismissal and replaced.
