TeamTalk - Ian McParland

[forwardmagpie]

The 'abject failure' tag is based on his overall stint as manager. He was just an ordinary failure with the Munto team.

Previous elite quote - In which case you have to look at the season overall rather than individual games to make a rational judgement. That rational judgement can only conclude that McParland was an abject failure.

At least you are now amending your view that's progress Elite.

[Elite_Pie]

At least you are now amending your view that's progress Elite.

I think many of us know why MiG is so devoted to McParland, but I'm not sure where your worship comes from. Maybe it was his time as a player (when he was very good), I think that's why a lot don't like to be too critical of him. If I remember correctly, didn't you sponsor the home shirt when he was the boss? Perhaps you got to know him, and that's why you're ignoring the evidence the stats provide.

[DelroyFacey22]

Yes you are right to compare McParland to Mourinho, Sir Alex, Pep and Antonio Conte is not sensible, I haven't checked but I would say that they were a little more experienced that Ian. I am not saying he is a great manager (nothing like) but far better than some of here would have you believe.

But I know it's simple have a big budget sign some good players and a 50% win ration is abject failure, tell that is Mr Nolan and all the other managers with big budgets who have failed.

Yeah so as expected, even with my warning, you still complained that I was "comparing them", I will say it again just to see if it gets through this time, I'm merely comparing what is required of a manager that is managing a team with the expectation of winning the league, McParland was lucky he even got the chance to start the season as Notts manager after what he'd "achieved" previously.

You then compare it to Nolan this season, you're aware he was also sacked for failing to get the best out of an expensive team too right?

[forwardmagpie]

Yeah so as expected, even with my warning, you still complained that I was "comparing them", I will say it again just to see if it gets through this time, I'm merely comparing what is required of a manager that is managing a team with the expectation of winning the league, McParland was lucky he even got the chance to start the season as Notts manager after what he'd "achieved" previously.

You then compare it to Nolan this season, you're aware he was also sacked for failing to get the best out of an expensive team too right?

Funny so you are now comparing a 50% record with a 0% sometimes you couldn’t make it up

[Elite_Pie]

Funny so you are now comparing a 50% record with a 0% sometimes you couldn’t make it up

But you are making it up! You are still desperately cherry-picking isolated stats to try and back up your point. If you really want to compare the win ratio of McParland and Nolan do it properly and include all games. McParland's was 27.2%, Nolan's was 41.7%

[DelroyFacey22]

I really do wonder how you managed to run a company that made enough cash to sponsor a football team.

You brought Nolan into it, not me. You tried to use him as an example that having an expensive squad doesn't always mean results, I pointed out that Nolan failing to get results with an expensive squad got him sacked just as it did McParland.

[Mapperleypie]

These threads appear every now and again and it still amazes me that people actually think McParland did a good job as Notts manager. The football was awful and there was no plan B AT ALL!

It leads me to conclude that those defending him are either

a) Ian himself (hello Ian)
b) A close relative
c) attended so few of the matches whilst he was in charge that they have a restricted view
d) McParland has some compromising pics of them which he will release if they do not leap to his defence in these threads.

[forwardmagpie]

But you are making it up! You are still desperately cherry-picking isolated stats to try and back up your point. If you really want to compare the win ratio of McParland and Nolan do it properly and include all games. McParland's was 27.2%, Nolan's was 41.7%

Elite you don’t rate McParland but then you don’t seem to rate anyone in the last 20 (excluding half a season).

[forwardmagpie]

I really do wonder how you managed to run a company that made enough cash to sponsor a football team.

You brought Nolan into it, not me. You tried to use him as an example that having an expensive squad doesn't always mean results, I pointed out that Nolan failing to get results with an expensive squad got him sacked just as it did McParland.

I said it wasn’t easy to buy a good team - Ian was relatively successful with a 50 win ratio not good enough but not abject failure.

Kevin and Alan seemed to but a good team and failed miserably as it isn’t easy.

When you run businesses you go with what you believe and don’t be put off by others - it worked for me thanks.

[apieandpint]

Elite you don’t rate McParland but then you don’t seem to rate anyone in the last 20 (excluding half a season).

That's probably because the majority we've had since Warnock, haven't been very good.