| Welcome to The Arab League, one of the longest established Dundee United Football forums, with many members from the old ArabFC forum. New members are always welcomed, so to join the debate, just sign up - registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join The Arab League! If you're already a member please log in: |
| Houston; Support? | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Oct 26 2011, 09:45 AM (5,184 Views) | |
| Setenza | Oct 26 2011, 09:45 AM Post #1 |
Knitting with only one needle
  ![]](http://z5.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)
|
My morning scan of other message boards seems to be reaching that point where there's more than just the odd overly negative contrarians or reactionary calls for sacking, there seems to be a lot of people who seem to have lost faith in his ability to manage the team. Here, despite quite a few saying we're heading for relegation, I've not seem much in the way of calls for Houston to go. Does anyone think we should sack him? Or is it the thought that we can't really afford to sack him that's meaning it's not worth considering? Or do we all still support him? |
 |
 
|
| whatsthatonyourback | Oct 26 2011, 10:04 AM Post #2 |
Waldo Jeffers
|
I was wondering when we would have our own Houston topic. Thought of starting one earlier in the week, but figured nah - wait until the Falkirk game. I'm getting to the point where it might be time for him to leave. His results overall have been pretty good, but there are a lot of negative provisos: He inherited a really good squad. How much he contributed to building that squad is not clear, but my suspicion is that it was mostly SCL's work. Webster was instrumental in sorting out problems, and even at the time it raised questions why Houston wasn't doing it. The Scotland gig does seem to be a distraction. He does persist in making odd selections - the subject of too many central midfielders and not enough penetration or width has been done to death. Despite a young squad, seems determined to pick the young guys as little as possible. The Scott Allan fiasco. The squad is now much more his own work, and it isn't working. From various reports, many of our out of contract players are going to leave. Moaning about small squad when he has a bigger budget and better starting point than most of our rivals. We are fkn shite at defending corners. A general off-field air of mischief, indiscipline and bad behaviour, often leading to criminal charges, which he seemed to tolerate. A continuing habit of starting games poorly, going behind, then waking up and pulling things back, suggesting the players are not going on to the pitch with a great attitude. He didn't think he was up to the job in the first place. He seems weak, easily cowed by players with a strong personality and unable to take difficult decisions. Hmmm, that was more than I thought I had in the Houston Out locker. Was it just the good results that we liked about him? |
|
|
|
| Ivan | Oct 26 2011, 12:12 PM Post #3 |
F*cking plebs.
|
I'm not entirely clear who is culpable for the poor state of the club at present and on that basis, I'd be against pinning the blame on Houston. Obviously this state of affairs cannot continue indefinitely but I think that clubs function better with continuity and managers improve with age and experience. Until and unless it becomes clear that Houston has lost the plot and isn't learning from his mistakes then I would stick with him. On a more productive note, I'd like to see more positive action being taken by the club. There seems to be a lack of direction coming from Thompson and Houston. It's not clear where they are going or whether either they have a long term plan for the team or the club other than "grin and bear it". |
|
|
|
| Naebody | Oct 26 2011, 12:37 PM Post #4 |
Twat
|
I'm undecided, not least because I'm unsure what a manager does. Under Levein, Houston was first-team coach, right? The players didn't really see Professor Craig on a daily basis, and it was Houston's job to run the exercises every morning? Now, Houston has moved up to Professor Craig's "director of football" role and Hegarty's doing Houston's old job? Is that right? If so then, yes, I don't think it's working out as hoped. However, we can't discount the mitigating circumstances. The squad's unbalanced, though that would seem not to be entirely Houston's fault. It would appear his budget changed halfway through pre-season. In fact, it's not even clear if he was ever given a specific budget. So he ended up outbidding direct competitors to bring in Flood, Gunning and Rankin early on, then was left taking on two 20-year-olds (one on loan and the other from Airdrie United) to replace the squad's undisputed MVPs of recent times. I'm struggling to believe this was anyone's plan on June 1. The Allan fiasco shows that Houston is a liability when near a microphone, though again I doubt he's setting the wage bands and leading the contract negotiations. If he is that's terrifying, given he'd have had only limited experience of such things before stepping into The Professor's shoes. I'm cautious of holding him to account for decisions that are (or should be) made at board level. I've not seen United enough this season to know the specifics of where the team's failing. Limited evidence suggests to me a painful lack of pace and/or invention from the wings (by dint of having no wingers), along with a clumsy back four and a lack of water carrying from the midfield. It's easy to perm a squad that might solve these problems, though that remains a theoretical exercise. All this talk of dragging in teenagers to be our salvation has unpleasant echoes of the last days of Craig Brewster. Personally, I think three of Houston's pre-season signings were ill advised and his team line-up is persistently wrong. I wouldn't be sorry to see him go. However, I've no confidence that another manager would be able to cut a better suit from the same misshapen cloth, so I can't make a convincing argument in favour of changing managers. If that sounds like resignation, that's because it is. Well put. |
|
|
|
| Ivan | Oct 26 2011, 01:26 PM Post #5 |
|
F*cking plebs.
|
Flood, Gunning and? |
|
|
|
| Naebody | Oct 26 2011, 01:44 PM Post #6 |
|
Twat
|
LDV. |
|
|
|
| Setenza | Oct 26 2011, 02:58 PM Post #7 |
|
Knitting with only one needle
|
The whole budget cut and squad issues seems to be too similar to the end of McCall time for comfort. It's going to have an impact, but despite talking about positive restructuring and getting the youth playing, we seem to be trying our best to avoid reality. I agree there's no clear plan from the board, which is worrying, even if the strict budget stuff does make bit of sense. On the field, the team aren't playing badly enough to make me want to get rid of the manager, but his decisions seem strange at times, and he gives mixed messages to us and the players all the time. I'll keep on supporting Houston for a while yet. It might be a rough ride, but if we can just get a bit of excitment back into the team, it might seem a lot better, and people might be willing to give it time. If it's the same old faces not improved come christmas, and no signs of the players we need to get experience geting that experience ready for next season after Exodus II, then I think it might be too much. |
|
|
|
| IainArab72 | Oct 26 2011, 03:35 PM Post #8 |
|
Craig Brewster
|
I wish Houston would stop saying stuff like "we worked our socks off" (as be said in tonight's Tele) and "the players gave their all." It is a requisite that all United players (and all players of every single other team) that the players give maximum effort. Afterall, it is their job. I give 100% effort (no such thing as 110% effort Mr J Redknapp) in my job. We desperately miss Swanson when he's not playing. We also need to play with wingers- not a converted left back in Douglas who was poor last night. We also miss Dillon, be it at centre half or full back. Dixon was good last night. Gunning - I'm still to be convinced. Armstrong and Russell both looked good when they came on. |
|
|
|
| Ivan | Oct 26 2011, 03:46 PM Post #9 |
|
F*cking plebs.
|
Seriously? I rarely go beyond 40% in my job. Thankfully I'm awesome at my job which means that 40% is more than enough. |
|
|
|
| yasser | Oct 26 2011, 03:50 PM Post #10 |
Ivan Golac
|
United had at least 10-15 good scoring oppertunities last night. Hit the bar twice, keeper had a couple of really good saves. Should have had the games done and dusted by half time. How do you blame Houston for that? Through no fault of his the team had the heart ripped out of it during the summer. It's gonna be a long season. |
|
|
|
| Naebody | Oct 26 2011, 04:42 PM Post #11 |
|
Twat
|
I'd say I give 70% effort about 30% of the time, and 20% effort 60% of the time. The other 10% can involve either 0% effort or 90% effort, depending on whether I'm drunk or rushing to finish something in preparation of getting drunk. I could work out a median effort over the entire day, but that's too much effort. |
|
|
|
| Conan the Destroyer | Oct 26 2011, 05:08 PM Post #12 |
I prefer it when we're pish
|
From 33% - 42% depending on your effort in the variable period. |
|
|
|
| Naebody | Oct 26 2011, 05:12 PM Post #13 |
|
Twat
|
Is that a weighted average? It sounds a bit high. |
|
|
|
| IainArab72 | Oct 26 2011, 06:03 PM Post #14 |
|
Craig Brewster
|
Are the previous posters saying it is acceptable for United players not to give 100% effort at all times because they (the posters) don't at their place of employment? I, for one, think that every single player must try their hardest all of the time. Otherwise, they are conning the people who care most about OUR club - namely the fans. |
|
|
|
| Naebody | Oct 26 2011, 06:10 PM Post #15 |
|
Twat
|
Effort's overrated. For example, I'm applying 10-15% of my potential effort into this reply and it's still the most incisive thing on this f*cking board. |
|
|
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Any Football · Next Topic » |
4:50 PM Jul 13