Grayson sacked at Huddersfield

Clark spent an absolute fortune in league 1, players on 15k a week, all those games unbeaten yet didn't finish in the top 2, drew too many. Brilliant call sacking him, they then got promoted.

 

They were 4th when they sacked Lee Clark. They finished 4th under Grayson. Pretty certain Grayson wasn't forced to reduce the budget when he took over. So basically nothing changed.

 

They possibly can't afford to sack him

 

I think you're right, mate,

 

Where did they finish in the previous season under Clark? He had long enough and enough money to get them up.

 

Beaten play off finalists the previous year. When he was sacked in mid February they were 4 points off automatic promotion. They finished 12 points off. So arguably they got worse after he left.

 

But he achieved the key aim - promotion. I'm sure had they lost or not finished in the play off places that season Grayson would have been on his way. A managers fails to get promotion, sacked the following season, that same season the new manager wins promotion. I don't think you can argue with Hoyle's decision making there, especially with a squad on a division highers wages.

Be interesting to see who they get in next.

 

The only difference I see between the two is a bit of luck, Clark losses the play off final, Grayson wins on penalties. Can't see how Hoyle takes any credit out of the decision.

That said its a fair point that ultimately they did go up, but I don't think you can say this was due to the management change

 

That's intrigued me Ark. Why do you think we should have kept KH? Not having a go but genuinely interested.

 

it just goes to show how much they relied on jordan rhodes.

you sell a 20 goal a season striker,youre going to start to lose games.

Huddersfield may pay big wages but if the players arent doing it then ultimatley the manager gets the bullet.

wish we had simon grayson as our manager.

 

It's alright, I accept I'm in a significant minority and therefore probably wrong!

I posted this just before Hill was sacked.

http://v2.barnsleyfc.org.uk/showthread.php?179056-So-you-sack-keith-Hill

I genuinely think the board took a decision with very little consideration to any of those questions and have, through luck, ended up with a popular short term choice. I applaud the club for breaking even, but in doing that they have given a manager the smallest budget in the league and therefore there is a very real chance the strategy would result in relegation, and given those constraints the manager should have a chance at rebuilding in the division his budget resulted in.

That said, there is seemingly a new impetus and I am fully behind Flicker.

You reds

 

Fair play for your view and he did really well until the second half at Ipswich at home last season. It seemed that it fell apart from there and he had to go (for me) as despite no budget, you have to perform above that, and not to it. That's what we ask of a manager, be a little bit better than bottom 3. He couldn't do it and it cost him his job. That and the rubbish he spoke in the media.

 

So when would you have sacked keef?