Printable View
They finished 4th last season and he’s been heavily backed. I’m not sure he can claim things were terrible for him at all. Infact I don’t think he could realistically expect to be set up for success more than he was.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibernia&Alba
Sacking him when we did was 100% correct and arguably should have happened sooner. The results were *****, the football was honking, he was extremely boring and uninspiring and there was no indication that anything was going to change in a positive sense so punting him was the only thing to do.Quote:
Originally Posted by J-C
Unfortunately we replaced him with a ventriloquist's puppet lookalike who knew as much about football management as an actual ventriloquist's puppet.
Ross will struggle to get a job now and his ego will need to allow him to drop at least a division in Scotland if he wants to continue to be a manager. If not, then he'll be perfectly suited to sitting alongside the other ******s on Sportsound.
Yeah you’re probably not far off there, he could go on to do well. Although his teams didn’t create much he did improve our defence and had Porteous playing really well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stubbsy90+2
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You're right, but I think it's his only hope. He can only say the club panicked and sacked him far too quickly. Clutching at straws, as it's terrible for him.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stubbsy90+2
Probably the worst team to ever finish fourth. Sure they went months without a win.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stubbsy90+2
TYou have to ask if he actually 'had' the dressing room at all at any time. Mellon bailed, Courts bailed so it sounds as if there is another factor at play in their backroom structure / player engagementQuote:
Originally Posted by J-C
Yeah. Not saying he’s a good manager as there was no evidence of that either but I remember the threads asking what everyone thought the 11 should be for the next game during maloneys tenure and every one of them was a disaster waiting to happen.Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenGray
They've played City and Liverpool in their first 4 games.Quote:
Originally Posted by MWHIBBIES
It's harsh and it's ridiculously early. Even given Saturdays result. They'll go down whoever they appoint.
Sent from my SM-G991B using Tapatalk
It seems to be more about his criticism of the owners and the players that triggered it, not the results.Quote:
Originally Posted by Just_Jimmy
Unfortunately there’s no way back after a 9-0 home defeat
Wonder if United have taken advantage of the 3 month probationary period to get rid off, min pay off
Similar to Stubbs at St Mirren and Kenny Miller at Livvi
I'd agree but I go back to my previous post. Clearly happy to pocket the big league money rather than back their manager to stay in that league. They'll be down by Christmas.Quote:
Originally Posted by Iain G
Sent from my SM-G991B using Tapatalk
You could also argue we were one of the worst teams ever to finish 3rdQuote:
Originally Posted by Since452
We were one of the lower points totals for 3rd in recent times I’m sure.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zambernardi1875
We got two points more than Hertz did last season did we not?Quote:
Originally Posted by Stubbsy90+2
Definitely a problem there. Courts leaving didn’t make sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by hibbyfraelibby
Meanwhile looks like 9 is the magic number. There’ll be a few managers keeping there fingers crossed against Celtic.
Yup. I’m sure it’s still lower than most seasons over the last decade or so though.Quote:
Originally Posted by oneone73
Media narrative will be trigger happy American owners so we will definitely get mentioned.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicho87
Dreadful decision to sack Jack Ross. Same goes for Scott Parker and to a lesser extent Michael o'Neill.
Imagine giving your manager all summer to build a team only to sack him after a few poor results? Bizarre from those club owners.
Only a Hibs fan would say that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zambernardi1875
Since the 12 team league began the max points for 3rd is 73 (when Hearts were at peak financial doping stage and finished 2nd), the minimum is 56 and the average is 63.7.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stubbsy90+2
In the 22 seasons of a 12 team league, the team finishing 3rd has got more than 63 points 10 times, less than 63 points 8 times and finished on 63 points 4 times. 63 points is the most common 3rd place points total since the 12 team league began. Ross's Hibs team were average for a third place finishing team, not near the bottom, or one of the worst as someone else has suggested.
I don't see why people have to try to revise history to bash him. 3rd was a good achievement even though the football wasn't good.
To be fair, I did say in recent times, I couldn’t be arsed going back 22 years. In the last decade, we’ve had one of the lower points totals I think.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sergio sledge
What i would give to have a low 3rd place points total these days.
Likewise.Quote:
Originally Posted by Since452
Jack Ross wouldn’t be the one to deliver it though. His managerial record would suggest that was a complete fluke rather than something to expect.
5 clubs, 3 sackings, a relegation and only 1 unarguable successful job.
Skewed by the fact that 4 of those 10 seasons there was no Rangers in the league so you could argue the quality of the league was lower then allowing a higher points total.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stubbsy90+2
Even so, the average points total in those 10 seasons is 64, so a massive 1 point above what we got (the big caveat being that the Covid shortened season is worked out on a points per game average and there's no knowing for sure how many points 3rd place would have got that season). I think my point still stands.
Your arbitrary 10 season cut off is convenient given that no team in the 5 seasons before that got more than 63 points.... :greengrin
If that’s the case then you could argue our 3rd place finish was skewed by not having a Hearts side in the league who knocked us out the cup that season and then romped 3rd the next season.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sergio sledge
The teams in the league are the teams in the league. It doesn’t skew anything imo.
Tell that to the 'we only finished third cause the league was rank' brigadeQuote:
Originally Posted by Stubbsy90+2
[emoji23]
Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk
Yup, not something I really buy into.Quote:
Originally Posted by Callum_62
There are some results managers just can’t recover from and that was the case for Ross at the weekend. Maybe if it wasn’t so close on the back of a 7-0 he’d have stood more of a chance. His players had clearly chucked it so they didn’t have any option.Quote:
Originally Posted by KeithTheHibby
We should have got rid of Fenlon after malmo. We all knew it was coming but held in to him for a couple of months which didn’t work out well
Hearts who romped to third with less points than we had got the season before?Quote:
Originally Posted by Stubbsy90+2
Hearts are a bit different to Rangers and Celtic though, there's a strong argument that for most teams in the league you can pretty much write off a minimum of 7-9 points per season against Rangers and Celtic (more if you get into the top 6) because they are so far ahead of all the other teams. You can't say the same for teams facing Hearts. Or do you go into the season not expecting any points from games against Hearts?
Anyway, if that is your argument, then why are you bothering to compare points totals season to season, surely the teams in the league are the teams in the league and finishing the best of the rest is an achievement no matter how many points you get?