WOULD MALKY HAVE KEPT US UP? THIS STAT PROVES IT

There seems to be much debate whether or not Malky would have kept us up. The general concensus seems to be that most supporters may have the gut feeling that he would have done. I don't include myself in that, as I feel the problems were already there in that we didn't address the goal scoring issue from last year and the defence although never say die was stil fragile. So my conclusion was, that although we would not have got stuffed by teams apart from your top 6, we would still have lost by the odd goal.
Just looking at the other messageboard, I copied this stat posted by Des Parrott, which I feel is the best evidence yet that Malky would have indeed failed to keep us up

"Malky ..... 4-5-9 13-28 17pts 0.944pts / game
Kerslake .. 0-1-1 2- 4 1pts 0.500pts / game
Solskjaer . 3-3-10 16-37 12pts 0.750pts / game

0.944 x 36 games = 34 points, 4 more than we have now."

I don't mean to rain on your parade, but those stats don't prove anything.

For a start you're giving Malky two more games than Ole, lets see how we do in the next two games (in all honesty though we'll probably lose) but also Ole is having to manage players that don't fit his system whereas the players Malky had were mostly bought in by him (interesting to note that they're all a shower of shite as well).

There is no stat that proves Malky would have kept us up, it's all speculation and guess work and there never will be a stat to prove it.

This stat proves nothing at all.

I liked Malky, I like OGS.

This stat proves nothing at all.

I liked Malky, I like OGS.

Thats not allowed Barry

If you back OGS then you back Tan is something I have learned today

You are getting confused, the vast majority of people that like Mackay also like Solksjaer.

The only people that hate one person are the ones that despise Mackay.

You are getting confused, the vast majority of people that like Mackay also like Solksjaer.

The only people that hate one person are the ones that despise Mackay.

Nah

If Tan had refused to sign Cornelius because he cost too much this forum would have exploded with rage and Annis would be starting threads titled "TAN MEDDLING IN TEAM AFFAIRS" etc.

People like Mario would be banging on about how Malky wasn't allowed to do his job probably and that if he were allowed to sign Cornelius, the best young striker in Europe we would be a top ten club.

If Tan had refused to sign Cornelius because he cost too much this forum would have exploded with rage and Annis would be starting threads titled "TAN MEDDLING IN TEAM AFFAIRS" etc.

People like Mario would be banging on about how Malky wasn't allowed to do his job probably and that if he were allowed to sign Cornelius, the best young striker in Europe we would be a top ten club.

thats the thing i guess, none of the fans knew what he would turn out like. Its all very well watching a 60 second film on youtube and going "wow, isnt he something amazing" but its not really true to life.

The biggest bug-bear i have with the cornelius signing was that the manager who signed him actually admitted his main marquee signing was not ready for premier league football.

Its truly unforgivable.

If Tan had refused to sign Cornelius because he cost too much this forum would have exploded with rage and Annis would be starting threads titled "TAN MEDDLING IN TEAM AFFAIRS" etc.

People like Mario would be banging on about how Malky wasn't allowed to do his job probably and that if he were allowed to sign Cornelius, the best young striker in Europe we would be a top ten club.

thats the thing i guess, none of the fans knew what he would turn out like. Its all very well watching a 60 second film on youtube and going "wow, isnt he something amazing" but its not really true to life.

The biggest bug-bear i have with the cornelius signing was that the manager who signed him actually admitted his main marquee signing was not ready for premier league football.

Its truly unforgivable.

i had doubts myself,and im sure many others did, i watched the you tube clips with people driving past and having picnics in the background.........but i trusted the manager knew better....{ Tans biggest mistake was to trust that he knew better too}.
trouble is he will never trust a manager again because of this.....

If Tan had refused to sign Cornelius because he cost too much this forum would have exploded with rage and Annis would be starting threads titled "TAN MEDDLING IN TEAM AFFAIRS" etc.

People like Mario would be banging on about how Malky wasn't allowed to do his job probably and that if he were allowed to sign Cornelius, the best young striker in Europe we would be a top ten club.

thats the thing i guess, none of the fans knew what he would turn out like. Its all very well watching a 60 second film on youtube and going "wow, isnt he something amazing" but its not really true to life.

The biggest bug-bear i have with the cornelius signing was that the manager who signed him actually admitted his main marquee signing was not ready for premier league football.

Its truly unforgivable.

i had doubts myself,and im sure many others did, i watched the you tube clips with people driving past and having picnics in the background.........but i trusted the manager knew better....{ Tans biggest mistake was to trust that he knew better too}.
trouble is he will never trust a manager again because of this.....

At the time of the signing, the media lead us to believe that there were a few Premiership clubs after him, Stoke tried to sign him the season before, even OGS when he arrived was stating that he was a fantastic prospect, so we have to believe that he has something about him. However, we as a newly promoted club should never, ever have signed a prospect, when what was needed, was an experienced striker, who was just not getting games i.e Puncheon. Malky & Moody got out of control.

It's getting like the American sports with all these extra stats bollocks. Fed up of hearing about possession percentages points per game ratio shit. The main stat is we've lost to many games under malky and ole because we were not good enough end of.

It's getting like the American sports with all these extra stats bollocks. Fed up of hearing about possession percentages points per game ratio shit. The main stat is we've lost to many games under malky and ole because we were not good enough end of.

Barcelona and Bayern both had over 70% posession against Real Madrid recently and both lost.

There seems to be much debate whether or not Malky would have kept us up. The general concensus seems to be that most supporters may have the gut feeling that he would have done. I don't include myself in that, as I feel the problems were already there in that we didn't address the goal scoring issue from last year and the defence although never say die was stil fragile. So my conclusion was, that although we would not have got stuffed by teams apart from your top 6, we would still have lost by the odd goal.
Just looking at the other messageboard, I copied this stat posted by Des Parrott, which I feel is the best evidence yet that Malky would have indeed failed to keep us up

"Malky ..... 4-5-9 13-28 17pts 0.944pts / game
Kerslake .. 0-1-1 2- 4 1pts 0.500pts / game
Solskjaer . 3-3-10 16-37 12pts 0.750pts / game

0.944 x 36 games = 34 points, 4 more than we have now."

that stat means absolutely nothing.

Not today it doesn't !

There seems to be much debate whether or not Malky would have kept us up. The general concensus seems to be that most supporters may have the gut feeling that he would have done. I don't include myself in that, as I feel the problems were already there in that we didn't address the goal scoring issue from last year and the defence although never say die was stil fragile. So my conclusion was, that although we would not have got stuffed by teams apart from your top 6, we would still have lost by the odd goal.
Just looking at the other messageboard, I copied this stat posted by Des Parrott, which I feel is the best evidence yet that Malky would have indeed failed to keep us up

"Malky ..... 4-5-9 13-28 17pts 0.944pts / game
Kerslake .. 0-1-1 2- 4 1pts 0.500pts / game
Solskjaer . 3-3-10 16-37 12pts 0.750pts / game

0.944 x 36 games = 34 points, 4 more than we have now."

that stat means absolutely nothing.

Not today it doesn't !

what does the day have to do with it?

In my opinion oles had much more winnable games, our first half of the season consisted of hard teams home and winnable away! This half has been winnable home where we should have picked the points up! Looking from the fixtures at the beggining of the season we should of won most of our points second half! I think malky done well, just some duff singings thats all

In my opinion oles had much more winnable games, our first half of the season consisted of hard teams home and winnable away! This half has been winnable home where we should have picked the points up! Looking from the fixtures at the beggining of the season we should of won most of our points second half! I think malky done well, just some duff singings thats all

How good is Damien Duff on Karaoke?

There seems to be much debate whether or not Malky would have kept us up. The general concensus seems to be that most supporters may have the gut feeling that he would have done. I don't include myself in that, as I feel the problems were already there in that we didn't address the goal scoring issue from last year and the defence although never say die was stil fragile. So my conclusion was, that although we would not have got stuffed by teams apart from your top 6, we would still have lost by the odd goal.
Just looking at the other messageboard, I copied this stat posted by Des Parrott, which I feel is the best evidence yet that Malky would have indeed failed to keep us up

"Malky ..... 4-5-9 13-28 17pts 0.944pts / game
Kerslake .. 0-1-1 2- 4 1pts 0.500pts / game
Solskjaer . 3-3-10 16-37 12pts 0.750pts / game

0.944 x 36 games = 34 points, 4 more than we have now."

that stat means absolutely nothing.

Not today it doesn't !

what does the day have to do with it?

It's Tuesday, mean's it's right today. Tomorrow it'll be wrong though.

We would have stayed up under Malky no doubt. The only spanner in the works was the Malaysian in charge and that is the only fact that matters. People are slagging off Malky because they need someone to blame and partly because they have been brainwashed by VT to do so. Put Peter Griffin in the chairmans seat instead of Tan and we would easily stay up under Malky.

We would have stayed up under Malky no doubt.

of course there is doubt.

There seems to be much debate whether or not Malky would have kept us up. The general concensus seems to be that most supporters may have the gut feeling that he would have done. I don't include myself in that, as I feel the problems were already there in that we didn't address the goal scoring issue from last year and the defence although never say die was stil fragile. So my conclusion was, that although we would not have got stuffed by teams apart from your top 6, we would still have lost by the odd goal.
Just looking at the other messageboard, I copied this stat posted by Des Parrott, which I feel is the best evidence yet that Malky would have indeed failed to keep us up

"Malky ..... 4-5-9 13-28 17pts 0.944pts / game
Kerslake .. 0-1-1 2- 4 1pts 0.500pts / game
Solskjaer . 3-3-10 16-37 12pts 0.750pts / game

0.944 x 36 games = 34 points, 4 more than we have now."

that stat means absolutely nothing.

Not today it doesn't !

what does the day have to do with it?

The day our fate is decided , that stat will mean , one way or another , everything !

We would have stayed up under Malky no doubt. The only spanner in the works was the Malaysian in charge and that is the only fact that matters. People are slagging off Malky because they need someone to blame and partly because they have been brainwashed by VT to do so. Put Peter Griffin in the chairmans seat instead of Tan and we would easily stay up under Malky.

You mean the "spanner in the works" that backed Malky with £50 million to spend? it's the managers number one task to work with the Owners, Malky knew exactly what Tan was like, as he had worked with him for 18 months, unfortunately him and Moody, got out of control and blew it

We would have stayed up under Malky no doubt.

of course there is doubt.

Well no doubt in the minds of the sane.

We would have stayed up under Malky no doubt.

of course there is doubt.

Well no doubt in the minds of the sane.

why, because with 20 games left we were a point or two outside of the relegation zone and dropping like flies

We would have stayed up under Malky no doubt.

of course there is doubt.

Well no doubt in the minds of the sane.

why, because with 20 games left we were a point or two outside of the relegation zone and dropping like flies

In my opinion oles had much more winnable games, our first half of the season consisted of hard teams home and winnable away! This half has been winnable home where we should have picked the points up! Looking from the fixtures at the beggining of the season we should of won most of our points second half! I think malky done well, just some duff singings thats all

i think both ourselves and watford had lots of winable home games in the second half of the season too...........but MALKYS stats show a tail off in results each year./............you dont have to be a rocket scientist to figure out that all that headless chicken anti football running in circles causes fatigue..........