The "real" reason Reid should be sacked

[Stir]

Originally Posted by IanP

Poor logic there. The results under Ferguson bear no relation to the statistics presented in the initial post which were quite shocking.

A better statement may have been Ron Atkinson should NEVER have been sacked !

waht about Sexton !!!!!!!!

[Feed the Monster]

Impossible to argue with these facts, hence presumably the deafening silence from the Reid Inners. And bear in mind that these damming stats come for a team with the third biggest gates in the country, in a state of the art stadium and one of the most profitable clubs in the land, not a ramshackle organisation like Leicester.
When Gullit was in charge of the scum and was busy destroying them, ask yourself how many SAFC fans wanted him to keep his job. Just about all of us, he was so laughable. And now ask yourself how many mags want reid in. Every single one I know and I know a few. From the outside looking in they all know he's a joke and know that we will continue to falter under him. If there was a lost magpie poll on the topic here they would all vote for him to keep his job.
There is no excuse, Reid should be sacked now.

The comparison proves that Reid has achieved considerably more during his time at SAFC than Ferguson did during his first years at Man U. Especially if you compare where the two clubs where when they took over.

And it also proves that the Man U board showed a lot of patience. Much more than you are prepared to show.

[Homer]

Reid In. That's what these figures prove should happen. I can't believe you're all so blind.

[Feed the Monster]

Homer, your views do not surprise me. I will echo your final comment to all who support Reid - how can you be so blind.

[Stir]

Originally Posted by Boi

The comparison proves that Reid has achieved considerably more during his time at SAFC than Ferguson did during his first years at Man U. Especially if you compare where the two clubs where when they took over.

The argument could have been put forward by Spurs supporters under Gerry Francis and Christian Gross; by Mags under Dalglsih and Gullit, by Everton fans under Royle, Kendall and Smith; by Villa supporters under Venglos, Little and Gregory; by Man City supporters under Reid (!!), Horton, Ball, Coppell, Neal, Clark and Royle; the list is very long. Just because Man U are the one side who have won things doesn't mean that sticking with your manager is the correct thing to do. Otherwise they would have stuck with Atkinson, or Sexton, or Docherty. They stuck with Fergie cos he was good, had won things and not just for the sake of it.

Reid looks a lot more like the managers I've listed above, than he does look like Fergie.

So you stick with a manager who has won things elsewhere? And if he is "good"? So a "good" manager can have bad results two years in a row and you should still stick with him?

[WASTID]

Originally Posted by Boi

So you stick with a manager who has won things elsewhere? And if he is "good"? So a "good" manager can have bad results two years in a row and you should still stick with him?

get yourself down the farm, find the donkey stable and pinch a load of straw cos you are clutching at them very badly at the moment.

[Homer]

Originally Posted by Boi

So you stick with a manager who has won things elsewhere? And if he is "good"? So a "good" manager can have bad results two years in a row and you should still stick with him?

Are you trying to suggest Ferguson isn't a good manager ? Or that you are likely to have the same success as ManUre if you stick by Reidy and therefore Reidy is as good as Ferguson ?

HahahahahahahahahahahaSorry, couldn't resist.