Reasons to keep Steve Bruce as manager thread


Status
Not open for further replies.
For me its the Alan Durban scenario.

A good young side, probably a bit too young, but bags of potential. Some fantastic results on our day, but some fairly long losing runs too, and a fair few hammerings along the way, but uktimately, we'd hover just above the relegation places, which, let's face it, is as well as anyone apart from 2 years with Reid, has managed in over 50 years.

We got rid, Ashurst took us down in his first full season, and then we had McMenemy.

I actually enjoyed the game yesterday. True, I'd probably have been going mad if we'd had something to play for, but I thought we played some cracking football in the first half, and its nice to see us playing it along the deck not just lumping it forward. And this with only maybe one or two of our first choice players in their "normal" position. And that is only if you believe that Henderson is naturally a right sided midfielder, and Mensah is first choice centre back.

I also saw enough from Noble, Colback and Lynch to suggest that they have a future at this level (didn't see enough of Laing).

Of course its not all rosy, and yes, we still need to bring in a number of new players, but I'd give him another year.

an oasis of sense is a desert of absurdity...
 
We're safe as houses man and have been for a while. If you speak to anyone who isn't an SAFC fan, none of them thought we were anywhere near being in relegation contention and they have been proven correct. We always just fear the worst. And if you take into account the injury crisis that would be worth at least another couple of points which would see us in mid-table.
You said we were in 'mid-table obscurity'!!! We are safe but we've only just squeaked in and after next week it could look even sicker.

well you raise a few semi-valid points, but chairman and manager agreed to not replace bent.

the left back point is valid but the only reason Richardson has not been there is injuries.

you can't blame Bruce for the injuries, that's mental, if your saying that I'll say he has single handedly kept the players who have played, fit.

same with half time team talks. all these comments show is you've dug your trench and will now find anything you can to want him gone.

why?
KR is no LB and you have to question the fitness regime; both the owner and cahirman are doing so. Do you know something they don't?

I'm not in a trench btw; I prefer 'Blitzkrieg'. I can't understand the logic in giving a man who has palpably failed to manage, organise & motivate the football club a boatload of money to save his job. His record suggests he won't do it and he has had one too many blips for my liking.
 
Last edited:
that doesnt take into account injuries and luck..

the qualtiy of the side is the quality of the side.

youd sooner have whitehead than cattermole? or jones than gyan or delap than sessegnon just because of the table?

Oh no !!!!!!! Not bloody injuries and luck yet again.

Hard luck stories don't earn points.
 
I have the same nag, I've seen this one before.

Like most on here I'd be shot of Bruce if I knew we had a safe pair of hands with genuine talent lined up but that's true at any time, we should always be looking to upgrade on all fronts. Can I see us landing a tried and trusted gaffer from the top tier of the game, nope.

I suppose this is the crucial argument. Who's out there that is better & will come?
 
well you raise a few semi-valid points, but chairman and manager agreed to not replace bent.

the left back point is valid but the only reason Richardson has not been there is injuries.

you can't blame Bruce for the injuries, that's mental, if your saying that I'll say he has single handedly kept the players who have played, fit.

same with half time team talks. all these comments show is you've dug your trench and will now find anything you can to want him gone.

why?

Oh ? I thought he was the manager. It is Bruce who sanctions or encourages the training, medical and warm up routines. It is HIS responsibility, nobody elses's
 
Oh no !!!!!!! Not bloody injuries and luck yet again.

Hard luck stories don't earn points.



There is not a single manager in the league whose team would not have slumped given the injuries we have had.

When we had our full team were were 6th/7th for a long time and playing some excellent football. He has had appalling luck with injuries and lost a guaranteed 20 goal a season man in January.

Given those setbacks he has done well to secure safety and desrves our support
 
There is not a single manager in the league whose team would not have slumped given the injuries we have had.

When we had our full team were were 6th/7th for a long time and playing some excellent football. He has had appalling luck with injuries and lost a guaranteed 20 goal a season man in January.

Given those setbacks he has done well to secure safety and desrves our support
Of course. Where the argument becomes less sound is in Bruce's recriutment & retention programme: he buys too many crocks & injury prone player. In addition the chair & owner have seious concerns about his physio & fitness regimen.

As an added point I believe he tends on the whole to buy smaller players, who will always struggle against the bigger ones. Is this another reason why we get so many injuries?
 
Of course. Where the argument becomes less sound is in Bruce's recriutment & retention programme: he buys too many crocks & injury prone player. In addition the chair & owner have seious concerns about his physio & fitness regimen.

As an added point I believe he tends on the whole to buy smaller players, who will always struggle against the bigger ones. Is this another reason why we get so many injuries?

If it were injuries that were the only reason, and if it was his fault or if it were simply down to bad luck, he'd deserve a chance to make amends.

However, his absolute failure to address basics (set pieces) and key tactical issues (no left back for 2 seasons, no goals from midfield) are the real issues at stake.

He obviously has some positives as well - good signings, nice football, giving youth a chance (albeit a little forced!) - mean that any decision to keep/get rid will be marginal.
 
If it were injuries that were the only reason, and if it was his fault or if it were simply down to bad luck, he'd deserve a chance to make amends.

However, his absolute failure to address basics (set pieces) and key tactical issues (no left back for 2 seasons, no goals from midfield) are the real issues at stake.

He obviously has some positives as well - good signings, nice football, giving youth a chance (albeit a little forced!) - mean that any decision to keep/get rid will be marginal.
Oh I agree it's just that the apolgistas make such a fuss about injuries & of course in many ways some of these injuries are down to Bruce.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top