I'd say that I thought Hursts reappointment was sensible rather than exciting, but I have been really impressed by what he has been able to achieve.

I've not seen anyone describe the situation as I see it, or shared many states to back things up, so I did a few mins digging to see if the stats match my feel for what happened...

I thought that our run before and during the transfer window was what might relegate us. I recall specifically thinking the Cambridge game at the start of the window mattered a lot.

Table after that game: https://www.twtd.co.uk/league-tables/competition:league-two/daterange/fromdate:2020-Aug-01/todate:2021-Jan-03/type:home-and-away/

Looking back, had we won it, we would have been 20th, so with 4 teams below us and prospective signings would see a concern but not be too hung up about relegation. Instead we look somewhat nailed on for relegation given points and extra games played. Come mid and late transfer window there is no way in my mind the table doesn't limit Hursts ability to sign better players in the window.

Mid: https://www.twtd.co.uk/league-tables/competition:league-two/daterange/fromdate:2020-Aug-01/todate:2021-Jan-16/type:home-and-away/
End: https://www.twtd.co.uk/league-tables/competition:league-two/daterange/fromdate:2020-Aug-01/todate:2021-Feb-02/type:home-and-away/

I understand Hurst is the manager but it's not his players, the players we had were questionably not good enough, and as I saw someone else point out (though it's not mentioned enough) he lost 2 of the best players (in terms of creativity and changing a game) in Edwards and Windsor at start of the window so was really playing with his hands behind his back. Injuries didn't help either.

Jump forward a little and despite any impact of league position on who he could get in, our form is not relegation form. I'm allowing a month from window closed for Hurst to start getting his message across and team settled. (BTW I'm old school and am of the opinion a manager needs 1 or 2 seasons to build a team, an approach, and influence an entire club, not weeks, but that's a diff discussion). So given only a month, form from start of March to now:

https://www.twtd.co.uk/league-tables/competition:league-two/daterange/fromdate:2021-Mar-01/todate:2021-Aug-15/type:home-and-away/

I personally think that if we played these games again a few times, on average we would get more points than we did. I felt we we could easily have added 4+ points and possibly a fair bit more. Even without that, this form over a whole season would see us with 56ish points and around 16th ish.

Don't get me wrong, 16th isn't good enough, but with the massive restriction on bringing players in, no preseason etc, I think thats positive and suggests he could do well with his own players and a preseason.

Its also telling that every opposition commentary I listened to during this run of games said we didn't look like a relegation team, and that we can't have played like this for the whole season else we wouldn't be near the bottom.

I for one am very hopefully for next season and beyond. New owners, new focus, new professionalism. Bring on 21/22.

So to sum up you think he is amazing but still got us relegated after transfer window and half a season in charge.

Genuinely interested to hear the views of those who disagree. As I said I wasn't over the moon when he arrived or certain he would improve us.

Should he have got more from Holloway's players? Should he have got in better quality players?

Is the thought that most other managers who we could attract would have been able to do one or both of these?

Quoted from drbell

Genuinely interested to hear the views of those who disagree. As I said I wasn't over the moon when he arrived or certain he would improve us.

Should he have got more from Holloway's players? Should he have got in better quality players?

Is the thought that most other managers who we could attract would have been able to do one or both of these?

I think Hurst has turned us into a half decent team but along the way made errors that properly put the nails in our coffin.

It’d be wrong to say Hurst caused our relegation in the same way it’d be wrong to say he’s done a great job. You could argue he’s probably underachieved on the whole, given that we’ve been comfortably relegated.

There are signs though he’s the right man for the job next season, I feel pretty comfortable with him here but let’s not kid ourselves on the job he’s done so far.

After inheriting the players that the previous incumbent left him, he had to be ruthless and send most of the loanees back because they were either under performing or didn't play the style of football Hurst wanted. Having recruited 11 players in the January window (plus a few days for Coke) it would have been impossible to have everyone being at the same level of fitness or be match ready. To be honest I'm surprised he started getting results as quick as he did from March onwards. If he had had only two or three new players then things would have hopefully come together sooner. The players he both inherited and signed are only lower league standard and could not be expected to gel straight away.

I think his recruitment process will have been refined for next season and let's hope he steers clear of signing anyone who has played under him before......mentioning no names.

To say that an analyst doesn't get you 3 points on a Saturday, results started to pick up for Hurst once the analyst arrived.

I think Limbrick did a lot of analysis too and the wheels started to fall off for Holloway when he wasn't around.

Quoted from drbell

I'd say that I thought Hursts reappointment was sensible rather than exciting, but I have been really impressed by what he has been able to achieve.

I've not seen anyone describe the situation as I see it, or shared many states to back things up, so I did a few mins digging to see if the stats match my feel for what happened...

I thought that our run before and during the transfer window was what might relegate us. I recall specifically thinking the Cambridge game at the start of the window mattered a lot.

Table after that game: https://www.twtd.co.uk/league-tables/competition:league-two/daterange/fromdate:2020-Aug-01/todate:2021-Jan-03/type:home-and-away/

Looking back, had we won it, we would have been 20th, so with 4 teams below us and prospective signings would see a concern but not be too hung up about relegation. Instead we look somewhat nailed on for relegation given points and extra games played. Come mid and late transfer window there is no way in my mind the table doesn't limit Hursts ability to sign better players in the window.

Mid: https://www.twtd.co.uk/league-tables/competition:league-two/daterange/fromdate:2020-Aug-01/todate:2021-Jan-16/type:home-and-away/
End: https://www.twtd.co.uk/league-tables/competition:league-two/daterange/fromdate:2020-Aug-01/todate:2021-Feb-02/type:home-and-away/

I understand Hurst is the manager but it's not his players, the players we had were questionably not good enough, and as I saw someone else point out (though it's not mentioned enough) he lost 2 of the best players (in terms of creativity and changing a game) in Edwards and Windsor at start of the window so was really playing with his hands behind his back. Injuries didn't help either.

Jump forward a little and despite any impact of league position on who he could get in, our form is not relegation form. I'm allowing a month from window closed for Hurst to start getting his message across and team settled. (BTW I'm old school and am of the opinion a manager needs 1 or 2 seasons to build a team, an approach, and influence an entire club, not weeks, but that's a diff discussion). So given only a month, form from start of March to now:

https://www.twtd.co.uk/league-tables/competition:league-two/daterange/fromdate:2021-Mar-01/todate:2021-Aug-15/type:home-and-away/

I personally think that if we played these games again a few times, on average we would get more points than we did. I felt we we could easily have added 4+ points and possibly a fair bit more. Even without that, this form over a whole season would see us with 56ish points and around 16th ish.

Don't get me wrong, 16th isn't good enough, but with the massive restriction on bringing players in, no preseason etc, I think thats positive and suggests he could do well with his own players and a preseason.

Its also telling that every opposition commentary I listened to during this run of games said we didn't look like a relegation team, and that we can't have played like this for the whole season else we wouldn't be near the bottom.

I for one am very hopefully for next season and beyond. New owners, new focus, new professionalism. Bring on 21/22.

Good post that. In terms of recruitment, like I said in another thread, it would be interesting to see who was top of Hurst’s shopping list in Jan. I remember in most interviews with him around that time he mentioned being turned down by targets for a variety of reasons, most notably saying that the league position was playing a part and that some players didn’t fancy a battle at the bottom of League 2.

Looking again at what Hurst did when he joined Shrewsbury, he had an extra couple of months there that he didn't have here. That would have been crucial in him getting them above the line in time.

Given six or seven more games, I believe we would have pulled us to safety too, but I also acknowledge we weren't in the bottom two when he took over.

Essentially, Hurst has never been an 'impact' manager. There was never going to be a honeymoon period. He builds squads; he doesn't come in and turn things around instantly through simple motivation and charisma. That's more for (dare I say) a Holloway character to do — which he did with us, initially.

Any managerial appointment at that time was a gamble. There's no way of knowing whether Hurst would've fared any better playing Holloway's signings more, or whether we'd have stormed to safety under another manager.

We can drill down into specifics until we're blue in the face, but the macro view is that we have ourselves a very level-headed and competent manager who, for various reasons, still divides the fan base to a degree, despite what he achieved with us first time round.

For me, there are more pros than cons. Good managers are like good strikers — difficult to find. We have to accept that anyone who comes to manage us in this situation, at this level, won't be faultless.

But after what we've been through since he left in 2016, I'm sort of glad that we can have some sensibility around squad building now. Steady, if not spectacular (although I still have some very fond memories of big wins under Hurst — Gateshead away, Stockport, Halifax and Alfreton at home, Amond, Bogle, Disley, etc, you get my point).

I'd keep Hurst.  We didn't lose that many games under him at the end - lots of shitty draws, but the guy is dealing with a bad hand.  

One of my weaknesses is that I'd stick rather than twist a lot of the time,  but I'm not sure we'd get better than Hurst right now.

I never really understood the anti Hurst thing when we were in the conference......

Quoted from Yossarian

I never really understood the anti Hurst thing when we were in the conference......

People always felt we were too big for the conference and were upset that we were not walking the league. Along with the fact Hurst has opinions and called out fans on their entitlement made a lot of people upset, GTFC's fanbase tends to enjoy managers who suck up to them more for whatever reason. I think it was mostly that people expected us to just be able to walk the league though and saw Hurst as failing when we lost out on promotion a couple of times before we won the playoffs. There are still some people who just hate the guy in general because he felt the fans were wrong in their impatience and lashing out at players when things were not going our way.

Quoted from drbell

I'd say that I thought Hursts reappointment was sensible rather than exciting, but I have been really impressed by what he has been able to achieve.

I've not seen anyone describe the situation as I see it, or shared many states to back things up, so I did a few mins digging to see if the stats match my feel for what happened...

I thought that our run before and during the transfer window was what might relegate us. I recall specifically thinking the Cambridge game at the start of the window mattered a lot.

Table after that game: https://www.twtd.co.uk/league-tables/competition:league-two/daterange/fromdate:2020-Aug-01/todate:2021-Jan-03/type:home-and-away/

Looking back, had we won it, we would have been 20th, so with 4 teams below us and prospective signings would see a concern but not be too hung up about relegation. Instead we look somewhat nailed on for relegation given points and extra games played. Come mid and late transfer window there is no way in my mind the table doesn't limit Hursts ability to sign better players in the window.

Mid: https://www.twtd.co.uk/league-tables/competition:league-two/daterange/fromdate:2020-Aug-01/todate:2021-Jan-16/type:home-and-away/
End: https://www.twtd.co.uk/league-tables/competition:league-two/daterange/fromdate:2020-Aug-01/todate:2021-Feb-02/type:home-and-away/

I understand Hurst is the manager but it's not his players, the players we had were questionably not good enough, and as I saw someone else point out (though it's not mentioned enough) he lost 2 of the best players (in terms of creativity and changing a game) in Edwards and Windsor at start of the window so was really playing with his hands behind his back. Injuries didn't help either.

Jump forward a little and despite any impact of league position on who he could get in, our form is not relegation form. I'm allowing a month from window closed for Hurst to start getting his message across and team settled. (BTW I'm old school and am of the opinion a manager needs 1 or 2 seasons to build a team, an approach, and influence an entire club, not weeks, but that's a diff discussion). So given only a month, form from start of March to now:

https://www.twtd.co.uk/league-tables/competition:league-two/daterange/fromdate:2021-Mar-01/todate:2021-Aug-15/type:home-and-away/

I personally think that if we played these games again a few times, on average we would get more points than we did. I felt we we could easily have added 4+ points and possibly a fair bit more. Even without that, this form over a whole season would see us with 56ish points and around 16th ish.

Don't get me wrong, 16th isn't good enough, but with the massive restriction on bringing players in, no preseason etc, I think thats positive and suggests he could do well with his own players and a preseason.

Its also telling that every opposition commentary I listened to during this run of games said we didn't look like a relegation team, and that we can't have played like this for the whole season else we wouldn't be near the bottom.

I for one am very hopefully for next season and beyond. New owners, new focus, new professionalism. Bring on 21/22.

The simple stats are that despite bringing in 11 new players and currently been in charge for 24 games (5 more than Holloway) he still hasn't even achieved the points per game total that Holloway had when he left. Plus he has only just managed the same amount of wins and his teams have scored less goals although conceded less.

I think Hurst has done a decent job overall and in light of the circumstances. We became much better defensively (and in midfield) but failed to turn draws into wins because we couldn't score goals. Yes, we were relegated but I think he can build a decent team next season and he has an eye for a player.

There is another factor that I haven't seen discussed anywhere else - our improvement coincided with a very similar improvement from most of the teams around us. Southend's record over the last 5 games (maybe 10) has been almost identical to ours, Barrow's has been similar and when Colchester were deep in the sh*t they managed a couple of great results to drag themselves out of it. We were partly doomed by that and the fact that the clubs who nosedived (Scunny etc) had just enough points before the wheels came off. You can see this in the points total needed to survive this year - it's going to be 47 or 48 points when the season ends,  which is around 6 points more than was needed in a fair few of the most recent seasons.

This is not an excuse, we didn't get enough points over the season and we deserved to relegated. Hurst has made an impact but it came too late to save us.

But, he took over a poisoned chalice and I remain optimistic that we will be a much better side next season.

Quoted from arryarryarry

The simple stats are that despite bringing in 11 new players and currently been in charge for 24 games (5 more than Holloway) he still hasn't even achieved the points per game total that Holloway had when he left. Plus he has only just managed the same amount of wins and his teams have scored less goals although conceded less.

You are right but we had started 'well' (relatively) and were obviously faltering when Holloway left. We were going in the wrong direction, already on the edge of the relegation picture and getting sucked into it. Performances were already poor.

Quoted from Kris2

People always felt we were too big for the conference and were upset that we were not walking the league. Along with the fact Hurst has opinions and called out fans on their entitlement made a lot of people upset, GTFC's fanbase tends to enjoy managers who suck up to them more for whatever reason. I think it was mostly that people expected us to just be able to walk the league though and saw Hurst as failing when we lost out on promotion a couple of times before we won the playoffs. There are still some people who just hate the guy in general because he felt the fans were wrong in their impatience and lashing out at players when things were not going our way.

I think a lot of the anger directed at Hurst was really anger at the situation the club had fallen to.  He wasn't responsible for the collapse of the club into non-league, but hey was taking the brunt of the stored-up frustration that really should have been directed elsewhere.  This only served to magnify any frustrations that were specific to him.

I'm very much in the camp that had the season run for 4 more games, we would stay up.  Unfortunately the season is 46 games long and we're down.  That's the ultimate stat.

The one thing the stats don't show is that Hurst inherited a squad in late December/January that not only was imbalanced but hadn't had a pre-season.  There and through the remainder of the season we picked up knocks and niggles because of this.  The lack of pre-season, above all else, screwed us over.  

Hurst came in with a squad that was unfit.  A couple of players playing catch-up midway through a season is do-able and common.  A whole squad?  Nah.  It isn't going to happen.

Be it budget, be it our position, be it our reputation, Hurst had to scrape the absolute bottom of the barrel to bring players in.  Conference North players and lads who haven't played for 1-2 years.  They're not going to come in all guns blazing and pick the pace up straight away.  So the time on the training ground has to be spent on getting them (and the existing unfit players) up to speed and relatively fit.  That comes at the expense of working on shape.   It's no wonder it took so long for Hurst to get going.  

I honestly don't think you can judge Hurst since he arrived here, it's just not a normal situation.   The more and more that comes out of the club over what he inherited the more it looks like an impossible task.  It's to his credit that he's managed to make us respectable in our performances and results before the season has ended.  

Quoted from BobbyCummingsTackle

You are right but we had started 'well' (relatively) and were obviously faltering when Holloway left. We were going in the wrong direction, already on the edge of the relegation picture and getting sucked into it. Performances were already poor.

I fully accept that, I think Holloway was a complete knob, but according to the Board statement today Hurst was given the funds required to bring in the extra players he wanted. Trouble is he came in and just about slagged off the current squad then took too long to find his best team.

Personally I believe the question is, if Hursty was with us from May 2020 then I think we can almost guarantee we wouldn't have gone down. That is almost factual in my eyes.

Unfortunately he arrived inheriting a squad which suffered from an incredible lack of quality, to the point that judging by his interviews he was pretty gobsmacked. Usually it's just a case of one manager not getting a tune out of a group of players so he is sacked. It's not often to the extent that the new manager comes in and thinks, 'there is literally nothing here for me to work with!'

On top of having a group of players below the required standard, they were also no way near fit enough. I know that Paul had to almost squeeze a mini pre season into all of them to get them some where near. There is no doubt that we are finishing with a team that is physically more robust and has the quality that were it September again, I've no doubt we'd be finishing well clear of the bottom two.

I really feel for Hurst that he finds himself in this position again and I respect him for not walking away. We will lose to dreadful teams next season but we must not lose our minds when we do but continue to support him and the players. The club deserves to go down again but I'm not sure it's what Paul deserves. In Paul Hurst I trust (especially with an ambitious boardroom behind him!).

I've never been the biggest fan of Hurst. I don't hate him either though and think he is actually a decent manager, I've just never been overly excited about his style of play.

In the last couple of seasons in the Nation League he always seemed to start the season with quite good football but as the season wore on he would always become more attritional. Sometimes, I think to the detriment of getting the result.

Kris2 made a good point to of which I was probably guilty. When we went down last time I did think we would get promoted quicker. I did expect us to get promoted as Champions and a lot earlier than we did. For the last couple of seasons though and after 2 11th places in the first couple of years, reality had altered my expectations somewhat. However, I don't think we ever were in a proper battle for the title and at best were comfortable play-off contenders. I did still expect us to challenge for automatic promotion though and that is where I thought Hurst just fell short.

This time I think the National League is a different animal to 5 years ago and I think it will be even tougher this time around. Anything in the top 3 or 4 would be very good IMO.

Given the take over and the recent turmoil around the club through last season I actually think keeping Hurst on is a no brainer. We know what he offers. He is organised, he will organise those around him and the new owners will want an experienced steady hand in charge. He wants to rebuild the club internally and I think he is a pretty decent man to hand that responsibility too.

Quoted from arryarryarry

I fully accept that, I think Holloway was a complete knob, but according to the Board statement today Hurst was given the funds required to bring in the extra players he wanted. Trouble is he came in and just about slagged off the current squad then took too long to find his best team.

He's far from perfect and that was pretty short sighted of him.

I'm not sure I believe much of that statement, I think it's an attempt to get ahead of the narrative when the truth begins to come out in the next few weeks.

So, again, we have been relegated after Hurst has been in charge for half a season and that can't be ignored. But, it must have been very difficult to recruit decent players to a team in the bottom 2 (Southend brought Nile Ranger back!). He was very unlucky that some of the players he brought in got injured very quickly and either went back to their clubs or missed most of the time they were here. He lost 2 players at a critical time because they were fighting on the pitch (in a game we could have conceivably won with 11 players). And he had to get this new group going in the right direction at a club that was on it's knees and a complete shambles.

Matete, Menayese and LJL (but not enough goals) have made big contributions to our improvement and Coke has lately shown that he's a good player but he probably needed too much time for us in our situation. He was massively let down by the 2 fighting. Lamy looks like he might be a very useful player in the NL if he joins us.

My optimism about Hurst is that with a proper pre season and the chance for him to bring in 'his own' players we will be a much better team than we were when he took over. Will we play exciting, expansive football? No.

Quoted from MarinerMal

I've never been the biggest fan of Hurst. I don't hate him either though and think he is actually a decent manager, I've just never been overly excited about his style of play.

In the last couple of seasons in the Nation League he always seemed to start the season with quite good football but as the season wore on he would always become more attritional. Sometimes, I think to the detriment of getting the result.

This is an interesting point.

Years ago, when we were still non-league and Hurst was on his way to delivering promotion via the play-offs, I wrote an article about how our margins of victory were consistently better in the first half of the season compared to the second.

Just off the top of my head, using our promotion season as an example, I can remember winning 4-1 three times (Barrow, Bromley, Aldershot I think) and 4-0 at Southport, 7-0 v Halifax, and a smattering of 3-1s (Barrow again, maybe Welling too?). After Christmas we had a run of games where we won by the odd goal (Forest Green, Southport at home, Wrexham... that 4-3 win at Aldershot).

I distinctly remember it being the reason why I thought we wouldn't overturn the 1-0 lead Braintree had on us in the play-offs. Turned out I was right, but I didn't anticipate extra time ;)

Quoted from RichMariner

This is an interesting point.

Years ago, when we were still non-league and Hurst was on his way to delivering promotion via the play-offs, I wrote an article about how our margins of victory were consistently better in the first half of the season compared to the second.

Just off the top of my head, using our promotion season as an example, I can remember winning 4-1 three times (Barrow, Bromley, Aldershot I think) and 4-0 at Southport, 7-0 v Halifax, and a smattering of 3-1s (Barrow again, maybe Welling too?). After Christmas we had a run of games where we won by the odd goal (Forest Green, Southport at home, Wrexham... that 4-3 win at Aldershot).

I distinctly remember it being the reason why I thought we wouldn't overturn the 1-0 lead Braintree had on us in the play-offs. Turned out I was right, but I didn't anticipate extra time ;)

That was also the picture on his full season at Shrewsbury. Results petered off towards the end after an excellent start to the season.

Quoted from arryarryarry

I fully accept that, I think Holloway was a complete knob, but according to the Board statement today Hurst was given the funds required to bring in the extra players he wanted. Trouble is he came in and just about slagged off the current squad then took too long to find his best team.

I wouldn’t place much credence on what the board say.

Scott and Hurst did the same thing when they took over, slagging off the squad they inherited. The assessment might have been correct but I think it’s classless to announce it publicly. A simple ‘we need to make some improvements to the squad if were to achieve promotion/survival’ type statement would have done.

When it comes to stats I find the form table useful:- https://www.soccerstats.com/formtable.asp?league=england4

We finished the season (last 12 games) as a mid-table team i.e. we got consistently better under Hurst, under Holloway our form must have been dropping and we had a bad start under Hurst.

I tend to agree Hurst is a long term manager and at he has us on a performance improving path. It will be tough in National League but he is as well equipped as anyone to get us out.

Thing is, you've got to look at it like this.

We are about to start our first season back in the National League and we're on the lookout for a new manager. Would you bring Hurst back?

You want a manager who has ideally enjoyed success at that level, maybe above. You want a manager who knows how to build a squad, because you're going to need togetherness in a hard, physical league. You want a manager who is going to get the best out of players who aren't going to be world-beaters, and someone who can spot a good player languishing in someone's reserves, or tearing it up in a league below.

There are a lot of things Hurst isn't, and he's by no means without faults. History should work in his favour here, having got us promoted from the NL, but people also remember the ear-cupping, the Parslow Point and the comment about being spoilt. Sadly, that festers away and grows over time.

The fact remains, he ticks a lot of boxes, and a lot of the qualities you need in a manager at this level. The fact that he wants to be here, despite probably thinking he could still manage in the football league, with new owners giving him greater scope to build a club rather than just a team, and I think you have to say it's hard to think of anyone better without speculating massively.

Quoted from RichMariner

Thing is, you've got to look at it like this.

We are about to start our first season back in the National League and we're on the lookout for a new manager. Would you bring Hurst back?

You want a manager who has ideally enjoyed success at that level, maybe above. You want a manager who knows how to build a squad, because you're going to need togetherness in a hard, physical league. You want a manager who is going to get the best out of players who aren't going to be world-beaters, and someone who can spot a good player languishing in someone's reserves, or tearing it up in a league below.

There are a lot of things Hurst isn't, and he's by no means without faults. History should work in his favour here, having got us promoted from the NL, but people also remember the ear-cupping, the Parslow Point and the comment about being spoilt. Sadly, that festers away and grows over time.

The fact remains, he ticks a lot of boxes, and a lot of the qualities you need in a manager at this level. The fact that he wants to be here, despite probably thinking he could still manage in the football league, with new owners giving him greater scope to build a club rather than just a team, and I think you have to say it's hard to think of anyone better without speculating massively.

You say that but having been sacked by his last two EFL clubs, and allegedly applied for others before GTFC and not getting them may suggest he wasn't probably going to get another job soon.

Despite saving Shrewsbury he has his detractors there as well.

https://blueandamber.proboards.com/thread/98817/get-hurst?page=4

Quoted from arryarryarry

You say that but having been sacked by his last two EFL clubs, and allegedly applied for others before GTFC and not getting them may suggest he wasn't probably going to get another job soon.

Despite saving Shrewsbury he has his detractors there as well.

https://blueandamber.proboards.com/thread/98817/get-hurst?page=4

every manager has their detractors - even Sir Alan! You've also ignored the whole host of salient points that Rich has made.
He is maligned, largely i think, because he is Paul Hurst .

PS just 1 other point - January was a crucial month but what didn't help was that we were playing twice a week & the weather & training facilities were awful. i bet there was very few days when Hurst and Doig could do any proper work with the squad they wanted, which was precisely when we needed them to be hands on, day in, day out

It's hard to imagine Holloway gained more points than Hurst.  I know which team I'd rather watch.  Once we went 1 down under Holloway it was curtains.  The lads under Hurst at least gave us hope and showed a bit of fight. One thing that the stats can't tell us is how the 'feeling' was around the camp.  I am sure there was a lot of negativity when PH arrived and that takes a lot of time to turn around.  True other teams can bounce back after a manger leaves (Barrow for example) but that could be for a number reasons, such as a bit of luck that gains you three points or a group of players who actually wanna wear that shirt.

Quoted from arryarryarry

I fully accept that, I think Holloway was a complete knob, but according to the Board statement today Hurst was given the funds required to bring in the extra players he wanted. Trouble is he came in and just about slagged off the current squad then took too long to find his best team.

And of course everything in that statement was " the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth". Was Hurst told "to bring in, he had to ship out"? We don't know any caveats attached to the statement " funds required to bring in the extra players he wanted".

Quoted from arryarryarry

You say that but having been sacked by his last two EFL clubs, and allegedly applied for others before GTFC and not getting them may suggest he wasn't probably going to get another job soon.

Despite saving Shrewsbury he has his detractors there as well.

https://blueandamber.proboards.com/thread/98817/get-hurst?page=4

It may be unfair to Hurst to see Ipswich as a 'normal' sacking. That club looks unmanageable at the moment - you think we have high expectations, they're a club who have won in Europe and a string of decent managers have made little or no impact. When he went there I thought it might be a mistake.

Quoted from arryarryarry

I fully accept that, I think Holloway was a complete knob, but according to the Board statement today Hurst was given the funds required to bring in the extra players he wanted. Trouble is he came in and just about slagged off the current squad then took too long to find his best team.

I don't believe it, why should we. After all, the board are now blaming Holloway, who was a fellow director but failed to sack him.

The old saying is throw enough sh!t and some will stick.