Ronald Koeman discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
Thomasc said:
All that is happening here IMO is, people who were still not satisfied with his first season, despite him improving us and despite him getting us european football again and going to be on the offensive until things turn around.

We have had a poor run so far that is all.

Ronko is not to blame for Lukaku leaving, nor Barkley being a mentally weak character, but some are using that against him also.

He isn't going to win with everyone. I personally look forward to him turning it around and the team getting back on track.
Click to expand...

He's made mistakes this season, and in all fairness doesn't look like he knows what his best team is.

Four losses, conceding 13 goals and scoring 0 is rank bad by any stretch.

So yeh, he's to blame for the tactics and the defeats. But he gets more time to turn it around.
 

The results speak for themselves. As far as I'm concerned, Koeman has to prove himself all over again because I haven't got much reason to back him or defend him.
 
Papa Shango said:
Yeah that makes sense but there is strengthening and then there is overkill. Getting Klaassen and Rooney in made sense, then paying 50M or whatever for Sigurdsson doesnt add up for me when we were glaringly weak in other areas. None of them are bad players either which makes it more annoying.

Barkley was getting prostituted out because he refused to sign a contract. There is no real hidden motive there.
Click to expand...

I dont think he had much choice with Rooney as we bent over and took it from United and getting rid of Rooney was part of their deal that we were forced to accept by them, seems a good move on their part now reading todays head lines. Koeman met Rooney beforehand and questioned his lifestyle, but he had to accept the deal and make the best of it, Koeman should be looking at the board and saying `I told you so `

I also think Koeman knew Rooney cant play every game hence the other players. I think he was building but was dependent on the striker replacement he kept saying he needed a striker the boards view was `we got you one Wazza` they strung him along no one else was coming in unless Barkley was sold. The board let Koeman down with his most important part of the re build to criticize Koeman seems harsh
 

Thomasc said:
I agree with this, he is 100% open to criticism when producing results like this.

I just think the calls for his head are a bit Geordie esque and rather over the top at this point.
Click to expand...
Agree, but he must produce results and performance in the next 3-4 games or I'm afraid his time maybe up.
 
hktoffee said:
The board failed to sign him the option A or option B striker plus a center back and we have to play Williams as starter.
Click to expand...

Nobody knows this! We do not know how the transfers work at the club and anybody who claims to do so is a liar.

Koeman should be more than capable of signing a defender seeing as that was his position (and indeed he was one of the best of all time). As for a striker wll obviously we had a few lined up but as Koeman said himself once the first few said no to coming here (Which is not the boards fault really is it?) and after that it was not worth getting the 4th, 5th choice striker etc. I am not sure I agree with that as we need an option no matter what but we may have had a bit more leeway in who we signed if he didnt spend 70 odd million on two players for one position and then paying big wages for another one.
 
eddy said:
I dont think he had much choice with Rooney as we bent over and took it from United and getting rid of Rooney was part of their deal that we were forced to accept by them, seems a good move on their part now reading todays head lines. Koeman met Rooney beforehand and questioned his lifestyle, but he had to accept the deal and make the best of it, Koeman should be looking at the board and saying `I told you so `

I also think Koeman knew Rooney cant play every game hence the other players. I think he was building but was dependent on the striker replacement he kept saying he needed a striker the boards view was `we got you one Wazza` they strung him along no one else was coming in unless Barkley was sold. The board let Koeman down with his most important part of the re build to criticize Koeman seems harsh
Click to expand...

The buck always stops with the manager for me. If we DID need to sell to buy (and there is zero evidence of this) then that's what he should have done. Play with the cards you are dealt.
 
eddy said:
I dont think he had much choice with Rooney as we bent over and took it from United and getting rid of Rooney was part of their deal that we were forced to accept by them, seems a good move on their part now reading todays head lines. Koeman met Rooney beforehand and questioned his lifestyle, but he had to accept the deal and make the best of it, Koeman should be looking at the board and saying `I told you so `

I also think Koeman knew Rooney cant play every game hence the other players. I think he was building but was dependent on the striker replacement he kept saying he needed a striker the boards view was `we got you one Wazza` they strung him along no one else was coming in unless Barkley was sold. The board let Koeman down with his most important part of the re build to criticize Koeman seems harsh
Click to expand...

Koeman wanted Rooney

But, he didn't want him as the only proven striker at the club...
 

Papa Shango said:
The buck always stops with the manager for me. If we DID need to sell to buy (and there is zero evidence of this) then that's what he should have done. Play with the cards you are dealt.
Click to expand...

The manager was denied funds at the end of the window to get the striker he wanted.

I don't know the reason why, but it happened.
 
Papa Shango said:
Nobody knows this! We do not know how the transfers work at the club and anybody who claims to do so is a liar.

Koeman should be more than capable of signing a defender seeing as that was his position (and indeed he was one of the best of all time). As for a striker wll obviously we had a few lined up but as Koeman said himself once the first few said no to coming here (Which is not the boards fault really is it?) and after that it was not worth getting the 4th, 5th choice striker etc. I am not sure I agree with that as we need an option no matter what but we may have had a bit more leeway in who we signed if he didnt spend 70 odd million on two players for one position and then paying big wages for another one.
Click to expand...

Koeman publicly stated he wanted a striker and a centre back for about 3 times, putting pressure on the board to deliver. It's crystal clear and no doubt. To think we sell Lukaku and Koeman does not want a replacement is delusional.

Um I actually blame the board because they should make deals happened but they failed. And we sell to buy so without selling Barkley and Niasse we got no chance.
 
JLW said:
Agree, but he must produce results and performance in the next 3-4 games or I'm afraid his time maybe up.
Click to expand...

Who would we replace him with? Koeman would likely write about his experiences at the club and what it was like to work
for a professional theatre mogul who specialises in `my fair lady on drury lane` and an Iranian accountant who wants to double his share value
by way of planning gain.

He would state how he was forced to sell his top striker for a cheap part exchange deal with a washed up has been drunk
in return, and when he questioned said players lifestyle was largely ignored but proved right a matter of weeks later .....
He could also expose the `project` for what it is smoke and mirrors, sell to buy, and incompetence from a pathetic board
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Register

Shop

Back
Top