|
Post by jonbond on Oct 2, 2011 18:51:23 GMT 1
I always thought that Peters job in keeping us up that first season was overrated as I dont believe we were that bad to start with. Jimmy Quinn may well have kept us up in anycase. He did well 2 years later in getting us to Wembley I will give him that, he has a good eye for a player from a scouting viewpoint, but as a manager he was always far too worried about stopping the opposition, he over analysed them and his own teams mistakes, which meant his sides could never play with any freedom. He then broke up the Wembley team far too quickly and replaced it with some duds, and his style of play was not conducive to the new ground. Towards the end his manners and basic decency meant he had just about pi**ed off every supporter and staff member that he had certainly outstayed his welcome. Overall as a manager Id give him a 6.5/10 Simpson 3/10 Turner 9.5/10.
|
|
|
Post by mattmw on Oct 2, 2011 19:05:54 GMT 1
Think there's actually quite a few similarities between Turner and Peters
Both work best with a smallish squad where a good team spirit can be created, and both like hard working sides who are fit and work hard on the basics of the game. Both managers are also happy to give young players a chance, and often don't leave anyone up front for opposition corners
Where Turner differs from Peters is a more relaxed attitude to players, and is happy to give creative players more freedom on the pitch. I imagine Turner would also rather see us win 4.3 and entertain a bit, where as peters would happily win every game 1.0 if it got results.
I thought Simpson was a poor appointment at the time, and his time in charge didn't alter that view
|
|
|
Post by GrizzlyShrew on Oct 2, 2011 19:26:58 GMT 1
So true - I lost any respect for Simpson with his constant excuses blaming everyone but himself. Especially when he blamed the fans
|
|
|
Post by GrizzlyShrew on Oct 2, 2011 19:27:40 GMT 1
You beat me to it Sean. I find it incredible that anyone should even consider asking that question. When Gary Peters joined we were heading back to the Conference in a hurry. If that had happened who knows where we might be now, quite possibly still trying to get back out like so many other league clubs who have gone the same way since. His place in the history of STFC is a very important one in the scheme of things and we should be grateful and thankful we had the right man at the right time during those difficult seasons. For three and a half of his four seasons at the club Gary Peters did a good to excellent job. We progressed season on season and he left the club in a good state when he went after a disastrous final few months. Despite what people said about the squad at the time and despite Paul Simpson's attempts to publicly undermine it almost from the off. He made a small fortune for the club in the transfer market too. As Ant pointed out without Gary Peters joining the club Dave Edwards wouldn't be where his is now with Jimmy Quinn deeming him surplus to requirements and looking to offload. Look at who Paul Simpson inherited from Gary Peters and where they are now. Jimmy Ryan, Marc Pugh, Marc Tierney, James Constable, Chris Humphrey to name a few. Paul Simpson was given a huge budget to build on this squad, club record fee for Grant Holt, plus Graham Coughlan, Mike Jackson, Shane Sherriff and Paul Murray all big earners. He then managed to scr@pe 7th on the last day in the weakest League 2 for years wth four clubs having points deductions, without which he would have finished 9th. The least said about his record after that season the better! Gary Peters had his faults for sure, and plenty of them, but to even suggest that Paul Simpson is in any way on a comparable level in terms of his time in charge of STFC and the respective legacies they left behind is laughable. Top Post
|
|
|
Post by GrizzlyShrew on Oct 2, 2011 19:30:07 GMT 1
Good summing up - I'd agree but maybe Turner just a 9 at present, hope it is the full 10 by the end of the season though
|
|
|
Post by WindsorShrew on Oct 2, 2011 19:36:18 GMT 1
In truth I was that glad to get rid of Mr Peters I would have taken Prince Andrew in his place.
Hindsight of course offers lessons we choose or choose not to see.
Whether Mr peters kept us up where Mr Quinn would not have done is guesswork.
Mr Peters personnel skills are limited, his team selection using defenders everywhere he could get away with was never going to excite. His media skills were dismal when things were going wrong, I remember well his treatment of Mr Dunn and the rubbish the man expected us to believe.
But most of all I will remember Mr Peters for his handling of the Dave Edwards affair. In the first instance his failure to motivate Edwards and get him playing well if at all.
And secondly his arrogance and yes...ignorance for not including Edwards in the Wembley squad.
So my view about Simpson was biased from the start. With Hindsight both managers were poor overall.
|
|
|
Post by Dale on Oct 2, 2011 20:51:22 GMT 1
Gary Peters grabbed a persistently underachieving club by the scruff of its neck and made us all believe that our club could and should be doing better, it wasnt 'pretty football' by any means and rumour has it he wasnt a popular man but then he stopped us from becoming the laughing stock of the Football league and we became a credible force, an unusual blip in form cost him his job in the end but he worked his arse off for the club and I really enjoyed going to the Meadow during his era, and especially the derbies with Rexham
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2011 20:52:10 GMT 1
But most of all I will remember Mr Peters for his handling of the Dave Edwards affair. In the first instance his failure to motivate Edwards and get him playing well if at all. Bizarre owd lad.
|
|
|
Post by Jonah on Oct 2, 2011 20:57:03 GMT 1
But most of all I will remember Mr Peters for his handling of the Dave Edwards affair. In the first instance his failure to motivate Edwards and get him playing well if at all. Bizarre owd lad. Why so bizarre Ant owd lad?
|
|
|
Post by WindsorShrew on Oct 2, 2011 20:58:13 GMT 1
I guess your right Ant, it however peeed me big time then and like a stubborn mule it still irks me now tbh.
We each remember people for different reasons...Princess Di, George Best etc. Opinions vary.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2011 21:01:06 GMT 1
The fact that it was considered by several of us to be such a dissapointing decision not to include in Edwards in the squad at Wembley shows just how much he had developed as a player under GP's stewardship compared to JQ - also supported by the significant transfer fee paid by Luton when they bought us from him.
Hence I find the comment by Windy above bizarre.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2011 21:02:12 GMT 1
Windy - don't disagree about Wembley - would have loved to have someone like DE to bring on in the final 15/20 mins when we needed someone breaking from midfield.
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Oct 2, 2011 21:24:58 GMT 1
Gary Peters grabbed a persistently underachieving club by the scruff of its neck and made us all believe that our club could and should be doing better, it wasnt 'pretty football' by any means and rumour has it he wasnt a popular man but then he stopped us from becoming the laughing stock of the football league and we became a credible force, an unusual blip in form cost him his job in the end but he worked his arse off for the club and I really enjoyed going to the Meadow during his era, and especially the derbies with Rexham Yes.
|
|
|
Post by WindsorShrew on Oct 2, 2011 21:29:01 GMT 1
Hence I find the comment by Windy above bizarre. I don't see it that way at all Ant, for me Mr Peters didn't select Dave Edwards for personnal reasons. I firmly believe Mr Peters put his ego first and foremost before what was best for the Club with reagrds to the Edwards situation that day. That in my humble opinion both unproffessional and in my case unforgiveable. It's all old ground, been argued - discussed - debated countless times - I won't change my opinion because someone else disagrees with it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2011 21:33:41 GMT 1
Windy - read my post again - it was in reply to your comment about GP failing to get Edwards to perform well - not his decision re: Wembley (which I agree with you on).
|
|
|
Post by shrewsace on Oct 3, 2011 14:51:55 GMT 1
Anyone who thinks Peters didn't keep us up is forgetting just how desperate we were under Quinn.
We'd barely improved on the side that rode its luck all the way out of the Conference and were rapidly heading back from whence we came, having been found out at league level.
Signings like Langmead and Ashton were crucial for keeping us up.
He instilled a fighting, determined spirit that was lacking under Quinn.
And a new manager doesn't automatically have a 'bounce' effect on a team - look no further than one Paul Simpson for proof.
I agree with jonbond that, by the end of his tenure, he'd used up a lot of good will with his abrasive, unapologetic style and his position became untenable.
But let's not forget how bad we were when he over. Then remember we then finished ten points clear of relegation. The following season we finished tenth (would have been seventh if we'd beaten Lincoln a home on the final day of the season) and made the play off final the year after that.
Jimmy Quinn wanted to loan Dave Edwards to Forest Green Rovers and was making comments about him being like 'a fish up a tree' in training'. Dave Edwards has since said Quinn didn't speak to him for months!
Peters put Edwards in the first team. Total barsteward, eh?
Edwards could well be playing non-league football now if Quinn had remained at the helm.
As for Edwards' omission at Wembley - he hadn't played well for months. Going on form and forgetting the contract issue, there's very little evidence to suggest that Edwards in the team at Wembley would have resulted in a victory for us.
I'd say there's a case for him being in the squad, but not the starting XI.
We lost because of a combination of some poor defending on our behalf and some smart finishing by Richard Walker on the day.
Cooke, Symes and Asamoah also had decent chances to add to Drummond's opening goal.
Peters was the right appointment at the time, and probably left at the right time.
I thought Simpson was a good appointment, but was wrong. He did a poor job for us. He signed Holt? He had the money to sign a player of Holt's calibre, his predecessors didn't.
He also signed Coughlan, Jackson, Murray, Sherriff, Walker (loan) and Daniels (loan), as well as inheriting Ben Davies, and didn't get anywhere near the top three.
|
|
|
Post by Shrewed on Oct 3, 2011 15:16:47 GMT 1
Hence I find the comment by Windy above bizarre. I don't see it that way at all Ant, for me Mr Peters didn't select Dave Edwards for personnal reasons. I firmly believe Mr Peters put his ego first and foremost before what was best for the Club with reagrds to the Edwards situation that day. That in my humble opinion both unproffessional and in my case unforgiveable. It's all old ground, been argued - discussed - debated countless times - I won't change my opinion because someone else disagrees with it. Windy I see you are learning from David C about how to rewrite history. As many have already said Edwards was going nowhere when Peters arrived the club eventually sold him for close to half a million hardly the price a club pays for a player who hasn't developed. As for Wembley Edwards had made it very clear that he had no intention of playing for the Town the following season. Fact proved by his refusal to sign 4improved contracts. Barry Fry had also been reported that he would sign a town player the Monday after Wembley ( Edwards). Edwards was injured and not certain to be fit for Wembley. So Peters made the decision that he did not want a player in the squad who didn't want to play for the club. A valid decision whether the correct one we'll never know.
|
|
|
Post by ssshrew on Oct 3, 2011 16:05:02 GMT 1
Peters for me every time for all the reasons given above.
What irks me most about PS is the fact that he had the money, the players, the points deductions of other teams and we still didn't go up!
|
|
|
Post by Dale on Oct 3, 2011 16:10:25 GMT 1
what I could never get my head around was his dislike of the old ground when it was clear that went hand in hand of us being a unfashionable club. As soon as we moved grounds, the whole outlook of the club changed and I think thats is where it all went wrong for him GP did seem to have 'foot in mouth disease' at times, remember him making a brief speech at the 'Goodbye Gay Meadow' event at the Lord Hill after the Grimsby game where all he basically said that he thought the GM was a dump and he was glad to get out of there!!! But it was the more spacious surroundings of Oteley Road that proved to be his own downfall.... The Hereford players can look forward to training under the lights at Edgar Street on Christmas Day evening before staying at the local Premier Inn for the night should GP be appointed DoF there
|
|
|
Post by WindsorShrew on Oct 3, 2011 17:23:57 GMT 1
Windy I see you are learning from David C about how to rewrite history. Not at all Ed I try and view most things in fairness, I don't continually bow down to any person because of which party they represent. Interesting point about Edwards I agree his form was lower than average at the time yet why then did another manager both pay a small fortune for him and bring out the best in him. What did he see and do that Mr Peters could not. And question for you Ed, if this season we go to the play offs with lets say - a loan Goalkeeper from a higher club who was returning to said club at the season end. Would include that goalkeeper in the squad for the play offs ? i
|
|
|
Post by Shrewed on Oct 3, 2011 18:15:17 GMT 1
Windy, my recollection is that Edwards form dropped after he decided that his future did no lie at Shrewsbury.
As far as the loan keeper playing at Wembley my view is that if that keeper had said 4 times that he would not under any circumstances play for the town again, I wouldn't play him.
I am sure you remember the criticism Fred Davies received for his team selection for a Wembley Final. I agree total with the anger many Town fans felt that day.
|
|
|
Post by shrewsace on Oct 3, 2011 18:28:35 GMT 1
Windy I see you are learning from David C about how to rewrite history. Interesting point about Edwards I agree his form was lower than average at the time yet why then did another manager both pay a small fortune for him and bring out the best in him. What did he see and do that Mr Peters could not. Perhaps playing at a bigger club in a higher division enabled him to find a level of motivation he couldn't while still at Shrewsbury. Perhaps he felt Shrewsbury were holding him back and he wanted to move on and develop himself like he'd seen Joe Hart do? I'm not saying he was playing poorly on purpose, I know he's a Town fan himself, but these things could all have been a factor in his poor form.
|
|
|
Post by jonbond on Oct 3, 2011 18:40:30 GMT 1
what I could never get my head around was his dislike of the old ground when it was clear that went hand in hand of us being a unfashionable club. As soon as we moved grounds, the whole outlook of the club changed and I think thats is where it all went wrong for him GP did seem to have 'foot in mouth disease' at times, remember him making a brief speech at the 'Goodbye Gay Meadow' event at the Lord Hill after the Grimsby game where all he basically said that he thought the GM was a dump and he was glad to get out of there!!! But it was the more spacious surroundings of Oteley Road that proved to be his own downfall.... The Hereford players can look forward to training under the lights at Edgar Street on Christmas Day evening before staying at the local Premier Inn for the night should GP be appointed DoF there That was a bizarre and quiet ridiculous decision by GP think we were playing Walsall away at a 3pm kick off the next day, he basically said he couldnt trust the players not to have a drink on xmas day so made them stay in the Sleep inn on London Rd xmas night. it went down like a lead balloon with the players, and we lost the game 2-0 from recollection.
|
|
|
Post by BlueTone on Oct 3, 2011 19:12:08 GMT 1
You beat me to it Sean. I find it incredible that anyone should even consider asking that question. When Gary Peters joined we were heading back to the Conference in a hurry. If that had happened who knows where we might be now, quite possibly still trying to get back out like so many other league clubs who have gone the same way since. His place in the history of STFC is a very important one in the scheme of things and we should be grateful and thankful we had the right man at the right time during those difficult seasons. For three and a half of his four seasons at the club Gary Peters did a good to excellent job. We progressed season on season and he left the club in a good state when he went after a disastrous final few months. Despite what people said about the squad at the time and despite Paul Simpson's attempts to publicly undermine it almost from the off. He made a small fortune for the club in the transfer market too. As Ant pointed out without Gary Peters joining the club Dave Edwards wouldn't be where his is now with Jimmy Quinn deeming him surplus to requirements and looking to offload. Look at who Paul Simpson inherited from Gary Peters and where they are now. Jimmy Ryan, Marc Pugh, Marc Tierney, James Constable, Chris Humphrey to name a few. Paul Simpson was given a huge budget to build on this squad, club record fee for Grant Holt, plus Graham Coughlan, Mike Jackson, Shane Sherriff and Paul Murray all big earners. He then managed to scr@pe 7th on the last day in the weakest League 2 for years wth four clubs having points deductions, without which he would have finished 9th. The least said about his record after that season the better! Gary Peters had his faults for sure, and plenty of them, but to even suggest that Paul Simpson is in any way on a comparable level in terms of his time in charge of STFC and the respective legacies they left behind is laughable. Top post, exalted.
|
|
|
Post by mrmagoo on Oct 3, 2011 19:20:26 GMT 1
Reasons why Paul "Mr Motivator" Simpson wasn't a patch on Peters.. "That was a rubbish performance, and a group of players I've put my trust in really let me down." "We have to change the squad around as much as we can - hopefully the club will give me a big enough budget to bring in the new players we need." "The first three goals were absolutely pathetic!" he said. "You don't stand a cat in hell's chance of winning if you're going to defend like that." "The players put on a performance that was disrespectful to the football club,""We're all feeling frustrated, we all want to win, and fans should understand I don't go away and don't care" "And I do feel let down by the players. They've got ability. and we try to do everything right for them." "It's diabolical that sane human beings come in with that sort of mentality," “I find it an absolute joke, to be honest. I applauded the fans from the sidelines, but I’m not going to walk over and take abuse to my face"
|
|
|
Post by WindsorShrew on Oct 3, 2011 19:47:09 GMT 1
Windy, my recollection is that Edwards form dropped after he decided that his future did no lie at Shrewsbury. I don't remember it ike that Ed, still the passing of time blurrs the edges so we'll agree to disagree. I think your wrong with the imagined scenario though. And as I am in Egypt as of tommorrow I shall have to rely on your opinion after the Barnet game....
|
|
|
Post by jamo on Oct 3, 2011 19:49:20 GMT 1
Peters = saved a football club.
Simpson= destroyed a football team
Turner = building a football team
|
|
|
Post by The Shropshire Tenor on Oct 3, 2011 20:05:21 GMT 1
I'll always feel gratitude towards GP for giving a club, which looked doomed to slide back to non league, a sense of purpose, pride and professionalism.
Sadly, he lost the plot eventually, but Simpson never had a plot.
|
|
|
Post by Valerioch on Oct 3, 2011 20:09:57 GMT 1
I'll always feel gratitude towards GP for giving a club, which looked doomed to slide back to non league, a sense of purpose, pride and professionalism. Sadly, he lost the plot eventually, but Simpson never had a plot. Agree with this
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2011 21:06:26 GMT 1
But most of all I will remember Mr Peters for his handling of the Dave Edwards affair. In the first instance his failure to motivate Edwards and get him playing well if at all. Are you joking? Edwards was available for loan when GP arrived - The Reaper had just tried to loan him out to Forest Green. GP turned the lad's career around from a managerial point of view.
|
|