There were various transfer sagas that blocked any other news from being seen; Gareth Bale’s longest ever journey to Real Madrid nearly killed The Centre Circle, Manchester United’s obscene approach for Cesc Fabregas and Chelsea’s pursuit of Wayne Rooney all added to the column inches. There wasn’t much space for Stoke, but after seven years they parted company with Tony Pulis and they rather swiftly appointed Mark Hughes as his successor.
The Potters were crying out for a change in philosophy. No longer was it enough at Stoke to grind your way to a lower mid table finish with a direct style that had to be seen to be believed. There were many (including The Centre Circle) who were very critical of Mark Hughes at QPR, and we stand by our opinions. He also failed at Manchester City, miserably if you ask many City fans. Sixth place after you spend £250 million is woefully short of acceptable and his sacking came as little surprise.
The problem was not that Mark Hughes was necessarily a bad manager; he just wasn’t the right manager for QPR or Manchester City and their style of play. It is easy to define his career by these failings and to forget everything else, but there have been times when he has used his management style to considerable success. A notable example would be his time at Fulham. He didn’t have a lot of money but what he did have he spent wisely and was able to get Fulham a team who played a very defensive style of football to eighth. He was also was very successful during his fledgling years at Blackburn, getting the best out of a very physical side. Over four seasons he finished fifteenth, sixth, tenth and seventh, something any Blackburn fan would bite your hand off for nowadays.
Hughes is very good at working with teams who are hard to break down and very physical, turning them in the process into top half teams. Stoke have one of those teams - tough tackling and hard to break down. It would be difficult for Stoke to have appointed someone in the mould of Martinez, Rodgers or many of the talented managers in Spain or Italy because quite simply Stoke just don’t have the players that can adapt to that style of play. Mark Hughes though offers a gradual transition to a less direct style of play, something a little easier on the eye but without drastic change, he works well with physical teams and can somehow get the best out of them.
Overhauling a club’s philosophy is of course risky business, and there have been examples of successes and failures of clubs who have adopted this strategy. It is often just a case of rolling the dice and standing by your decisions as a chairman. Charlton dropped two divisions when they swapped the ever reliable Alan Curbishley for Ian Dowie. It was too much too soon for them and Dowie, who was successful at Crystal Palace, found it hard to leave his imprint on the team. On the other hand however, when Chelsea appointed Jose Mourinho they went on to win two league titles after finishing second under Claudio Ranieri. They took a risk, changing managers to try and push their team to its full potential and it paid off. It is dangerous ground for Stoke to tread on – one could argue that sometimes premier league mediocrity is better than playing league one, but there comes a time when just existing is just a detriment in itself. We recall last season where Wigan finally ran out of luck and were subsequently relegated to the championship.
Overall, Mark Hughes strikes us as a sensible appointment, if you ignore his last two clubs and consider Stoke’s style of play. What we have seen from him so far is promising, making modest alterations rather than completely overhauling the squad, which proves he has learnt from his horrendous mistakes at QPR. His best piece of business was the signing of a full-back in the form of Eric Pieters - something that Tony Pulis seemed allergic to during his time as Stoke boss. Mark Hughes’ appointment, coupled with the signings that have been made, demonstrates that Peter Coates has gone for evolution, rather than revolution, and we think given time it will prove to be a success.
~John Robert Lavery
Overhauling a club’s philosophy is of course risky business, and there have been examples of successes and failures of clubs who have adopted this strategy. It is often just a case of rolling the dice and standing by your decisions as a chairman. Charlton dropped two divisions when they swapped the ever reliable Alan Curbishley for Ian Dowie. It was too much too soon for them and Dowie, who was successful at Crystal Palace, found it hard to leave his imprint on the team. On the other hand however, when Chelsea appointed Jose Mourinho they went on to win two league titles after finishing second under Claudio Ranieri. They took a risk, changing managers to try and push their team to its full potential and it paid off. It is dangerous ground for Stoke to tread on – one could argue that sometimes premier league mediocrity is better than playing league one, but there comes a time when just existing is just a detriment in itself. We recall last season where Wigan finally ran out of luck and were subsequently relegated to the championship.
Overall, Mark Hughes strikes us as a sensible appointment, if you ignore his last two clubs and consider Stoke’s style of play. What we have seen from him so far is promising, making modest alterations rather than completely overhauling the squad, which proves he has learnt from his horrendous mistakes at QPR. His best piece of business was the signing of a full-back in the form of Eric Pieters - something that Tony Pulis seemed allergic to during his time as Stoke boss. Mark Hughes’ appointment, coupled with the signings that have been made, demonstrates that Peter Coates has gone for evolution, rather than revolution, and we think given time it will prove to be a success.
~John Robert Lavery
No comments:
Post a Comment