i am anti Malpas for these reasons:
1. He took the job accepting the backroom staff here, he couldnt believe his luck getting this job, any manager with a ounce of success bring his own staff in because they have been sucessful together in the past, as we know Malpas has had no sucess.
2. He hasnt brought in any of his own players, McNamee and Kanyuka were Sturrocks targets, Cox was here under Sturrock already, as was Timlin and Malpas openly admitted as part as the McNamee deal Watford said we had to take Ashikodi as he needs games, when the fuck as any half decent manager took a player he didnt even want!!
3. Plays players out of positions too much, finally today McGovern goes back to the right, Easton in the middle a Right footed right back and a left footed left back, hey presto a balanced team and a win!
there is no escaping the fact we have a good bunch of players here, they played well under Sturrock but not under Malpas, that has to be down to how the manager wants them to play, he spouts this shit bout being unlucky all the time, 1 game being unlucky to lose i can accept, 2 games ok fair enought, but 1 win in 10 games was not good enough, even today first half was poor, second half was alot better tho
1. I get the feeling Fitton/Malpas did not want too much change too quickly and rightly so. See what happens next season. Malpas has already started bringing in his own staff (scouts) so he
is bringing staff with him.
2. Timlin may have been here under Sturrock but how the hell was Malpas supposed to know how well he performed? Byrne wasn't Sturrock's assistant then either so I think that is a false argument. It does appear that McNamee/Kanyuka weren't Malpas' doing but at least he saw they (well McNamee, dunno about kanyuka yet) would be good acquisitions and had the brain to go through with the deals. McNamee has been our best player since Malpas' arrival - that speaks volumes imo. Also, if Malpas didn't sign Cox, with the money there to do it, most of the fans would have been disappointed, would you not agree?
3. Playing people out of position has been a shortfall in this team. However, you can argue with the likes of Peacock and Roberts, it's worked out in the past for Sturrock. It has sort of worked some games and not others. Hopefully it's Malpas testing things out.
I think the last point is your only valid one. The rest of your arguments are almost non-sensical. It's what makes the Malpas argument so frustrating, because people make these rediculous points just because they don't like him. For the record, I'm not yet sure of Malpas, his tenure so far has left me unconvinced - but it's the football we have (not) played and the results which make me think this.
