Holloway

You talk b******s WG.  
Nallis was 37 years old when he was released.  He went to Swindon in league one and played in only 18 games that season. They didn't re-sign him.
Wotton had had a bad injury. He went to Southampton where they were relegated to league one in his first season. He played 30 games in three seasons.
Ebanks-Blake had a clause in his contract which enabled him to leave at a certain price. Nothing to do with Sturrock at all. He replaced him with Jamie Mackie at a tenth of the price.
Halmosi went to the premiership with Hull. What would you have done? Deny him the chance to play in the top league.
As for losing control of David Norris. Is that the Norris he himself had signed and nurtured.
Never let the facts get in the way of a good story eh.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Pulis is an interesting thread running through this. As Tring said the football was simply dreadful to watch. Maybe not as dreadful as the years that saw us constantly battling relegation but still dreadful.

During his year in charge all of the joy and excitement was sucked out of watching Argyle to be replaced by manful struggle, toil and attrition. I can't imagine anybody but a committed supporter renewing their season ticket after being put through that particular year. I think it was this year that saw attendances drop off and it cast such a long shadow that they never recovered. However in terms of functionality Pulis ruthlessly stripped out the deadwood and left Argyle lean with foundations ready to be built on. This was where Holloway got lucky. He inherited a club laden with opportunity and potential with all the nasty, horrible work done. It must be extremely rare for a manager to take a team on in such fine fettle.

You can tell we're in the middle of a football drought, can't you!

I do believe we've had this argument a time or two in the past but your belief that attendances started to fall because of the Pulis factor doesn't stand up to analysis.Attendances had already started to fall because of two factors;

a.The failure of the board/Williamson [depending on your point of view] to strengthen the team properly [Gudjohnsen,the scottish players,Taylor etc] in order to have a much better chance of finishing 17th in that first season back in the second tier and thus losing the momentum that the previous successes had created.

b.The awful signings of the following pre season [West,Brevett,the Portugese guy etc] which made it very clear to anyone with football nous that Argyle were trying to do it on the cheap again [ a not unknown phenomena to supporters of a certain vintage] and that another relegation struggle would ensue.

Argyle had already lost 3000 supporters from the previous season's average of 16000 by the time Williamson was sacked and had lost 2/3000 more by the time Pulis was appointed-the previous 2 gates were 10000 and 11000 against Crewe and Burnley respectively.The final 3 gates of the season were 14/15000 with some bigger ones in the interim,which would suggest that fans weren't entirely hacked off with what they were seeing.I actually thought there were some very good games at HP in the Pulis season-QPR,Stoke,Coventry,Wolves,Southampton,Palace etc were all beaten down here,in some cases pretty convincingly.Anyway,what subsequently happened at Stoke would surely prove that results are paramount in overcoming any alleged lack of style when it comes to attracting high attendances?

Rollo Tomasi wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Exactly.

And it was Iddlesleigh who upped and cleared out sharpish when the cricket club land purchase was proposed. He's been an extremely divisive and malignantly manipulative influence on the club for a very, very long time.

You only have to look at his almost complete media silence, his cowardly use of internet multis, him sitting next to Newell in the directors' box, his support for HHP, spineless acceptance of Webb as club President, the current brand mis-management, a long series of PR disasters, his "feck off and support Man Utd" comments...

Never mind the money. Where is the vision and integrity the club needs?

I suspect SFDs dislike of Peter Jones has clouded his judgement. Jones, Foot and Warren offered their resignations when Stapleton, Dennerley and Gill wanted to buy the cricket ground and rent it to PAFC. Argyle were to be the tenants, Stapleton, Dennerley and Gill, the landlords.
This was the first indication that personal gain was the goal.
Warren later withdrew his threat and stayed on (the)board for a while.
Jones and Foot were correct and you could argue, honourable, in their decision.
Peter Jones hasn't covered himself in glory of late but you are wrong to criticise him in this instant.

We could both be right here.

I thought that Argyle was offered the cricket club land first. The board was split 3v3 about whether the club should buy it with 3 of them thinking all money possible should go into the team immediately (Jones's side) and the other 3 wanting to buy the cricket club land.

From that point I have no reason to doubt what you say.

And there's nothing personal about how I feel about Jones, or Brent for that matter, because I barely know either. My opinion on each is formed by appraising what they have actually done not by looking deeply into their eyes or passing judgement on their families.

And by that ticket Brent and Jones have each been hugely disappointing.

The fact is that buying the cricket club land was a no-brainer and the club showed no brains by letting the opportunity pass.

The last time I walked through the park the cricket club was an overgrown grass mound with nothing having happened since they were evicted.

Is that still the case?

Greenskin wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Pulis is an interesting thread running through this. As Tring said the football was simply dreadful to watch. Maybe not as dreadful as the years that saw us constantly battling relegation but still dreadful.

During his year in charge all of the joy and excitement was sucked out of watching Argyle to be replaced by manful struggle, toil and attrition. I can't imagine anybody but a committed supporter renewing their season ticket after being put through that particular year. I think it was this year that saw attendances drop off and it cast such a long shadow that they never recovered. However in terms of functionality Pulis ruthlessly stripped out the deadwood and left Argyle lean with foundations ready to be built on. This was where Holloway got lucky. He inherited a club laden with opportunity and potential with all the nasty, horrible work done. It must be extremely rare for a manager to take a team on in such fine fettle.

You can tell we're in the middle of a football drought, can't you!

I do believe we've had this argument a time or two in the past but your belief that attendances started to fall because of the Pulis factor doesn't stand up to analysis.Attendances had already started to fall because of two factors;

a.The failure of the board/Williamson [depending on your point of view] to strengthen the team properly [Gudjohnsen,the scottish players,Taylor etc] in order to have a much better chance of finishing 17th in that first season back in the second tier and thus losing the momentum that the previous successes had created.

b.The awful signings of the following pre season [West,Brevett,the Portugese guy etc] which made it very clear to anyone with football nous that Argyle were trying to do it on the cheap again [ a not unknown phenomena to supporters of a certain vintage] and that another relegation struggle would ensue.

Argyle had already lost 3000 supporters from the previous season's average of 16000 by the time Williamson was sacked and had lost 2/3000 more by the time Pulis was appointed-the previous 2 gates were 10000 and 11000 against Crewe and Burnley respectively.The final 3 gates of the season were 14/15000 with some bigger ones in the interim,which would suggest that fans weren't entirely hacked off with what they were seeing.I actually thought there were some very good games at HP in the Pulis season-QPR,Stoke,Coventry,Wolves,Southampton,Palace etc were all beaten down here,in some cases pretty convincingly.Anyway,what subsequently happened at Stoke would surely prove that results are paramount in overcoming any alleged lack of style when it comes to attracting high attendances?

The only one of those games I recall was the Coventry one when Pericard scored the easiest hat-trick anybody ever scored in the entire history of professional football.

I agree that attendances showed steady decline but I'm pretty sure it was Pulis's season that saw ST sales significantly drop off and the effect of that bubbled to the surface the year after when Holloway was here.

Anybody who enjoyed Pulis's season is made of different material to me. I'll accept that it was effective and, maybe, necessary at a push but I'll never agree with it being fun, entertaining or enjoyable.

Was the Palace one when Chadwick scored after about 4 seconds?

Rollo Tomasi wrote:

You talk b******s WG.  
Nallis was 37 years old when he was released.  He went to Swindon in league one and played in only 18 games that season. They didn't re-sign him.
Wotton had had a bad injury. He went to Southampton where they were relegated to league one in his first season. He played 30 games in three seasons.
Ebanks-Blake had a clause in his contract which enabled him to leave at a certain price. Nothing to do with Sturrock at all. He replaced him with Jamie Mackie at a tenth of the price.
Halmosi went to the premiership with Hull. What would you have done? Deny him the chance to play in the top league.
As for losing control of David Norris. Is that the Norris he himself had signed and nurtured.
Never let the facts get in the way of a good story eh.

Read again what I said Mr Tomasi. I said SEB, Norris and Halmosi leaving were OUT of Sturrock's control. Hence more the reason he should have kept at least some of Holloway's team for continuity's sake. Nalis played excellently in his last season here. No reason he couldn't have been signed for 12 months. His undoubted ability more than made up for his lost legs. More than could be said about Fletcher, who Warnock had already seen was past his sell by date.. And after all the upheaval and concern of Holloway scarpering, why, why, why, boot out Mr Plymouth Wotton at such a crisis point. He was coming back well from injury. I say again, madness. Mackie was a good buy, but one amongst several other disasters. No one can say that second spell of Sturrock's was a success.
You need help.

Agreed, I misunderstood your viewpoint. However, Wotton and Nalis proved in the following season that the Championship would have been beyond them.
And where did I say that Sturrock's second spell was a success?

I'd have kept Nalis for another season and maybe even Wotton.

It was a mistake to let Abdou go and bring in Folly.

A midfield combination of Abdou and Nalis would have been better than Duguid and Summerfield IMO.

Nails was. Good player

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Greenskin wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Pulis is an interesting thread running through this. As Tring said the football was simply dreadful to watch. Maybe not as dreadful as the years that saw us constantly battling relegation but still dreadful.

During his year in charge all of the joy and excitement was sucked out of watching Argyle to be replaced by manful struggle, toil and attrition. I can't imagine anybody but a committed supporter renewing their season ticket after being put through that particular year. I think it was this year that saw attendances drop off and it cast such a long shadow that they never recovered. However in terms of functionality Pulis ruthlessly stripped out the deadwood and left Argyle lean with foundations ready to be built on. This was where Holloway got lucky. He inherited a club laden with opportunity and potential with all the nasty, horrible work done. It must be extremely rare for a manager to take a team on in such fine fettle.

You can tell we're in the middle of a football drought, can't you!

I do believe we've had this argument a time or two in the past but your belief that attendances started to fall because of the Pulis factor doesn't stand up to analysis.Attendances had already started to fall because of two factors;

a.The failure of the board/Williamson [depending on your point of view] to strengthen the team properly [Gudjohnsen,the scottish players,Taylor etc] in order to have a much better chance of finishing 17th in that first season back in the second tier and thus losing the momentum that the previous successes had created.

b.The awful signings of the following pre season [West,Brevett,the Portugese guy etc] which made it very clear to anyone with football nous that Argyle were trying to do it on the cheap again [ a not unknown phenomena to supporters of a certain vintage] and that another relegation struggle would ensue.

Argyle had already lost 3000 supporters from the previous season's average of 16000 by the time Williamson was sacked and had lost 2/3000 more by the time Pulis was appointed-the previous 2 gates were 10000 and 11000 against Crewe and Burnley respectively.The final 3 gates of the season were 14/15000 with some bigger ones in the interim,which would suggest that fans weren't entirely hacked off with what they were seeing.I actually thought there were some very good games at HP in the Pulis season-QPR,Stoke,Coventry,Wolves,Southampton,Palace etc were all beaten down here,in some cases pretty convincingly.Anyway,what subsequently happened at Stoke would surely prove that results are paramount in overcoming any alleged lack of style when it comes to attracting high attendances?

The only one of those games I recall was the Coventry one when Pericard scored the easiest hat-trick anybody ever scored in the entire history of professional football.

I agree that attendances showed steady decline but I'm pretty sure it was Pulis's season that saw ST sales significantly drop off and the effect of that bubbled to the surface the year after when Holloway was here.

Anybody who enjoyed Pulis's season is made of different material to me. I'll accept that it was effective and, maybe, necessary at a push but I'll never agree with it being fun, entertaining or enjoyable.

Was the Palace one when Chadwick scored after about 4 seconds?

It was and Capaldi scored after about 95 minutes to seal it.The Wolves game was when Ince scored a highly popular OG to clinch a well deserved Argyle win,Ipswich [forgot to mention that one] was Trigger's last game.I had no complaints about the home games under TP,must say that away from home was a different matter-i went to about 5 away matches that season,Argyle either lost 1-0 or drew 0-0,that was indeed turgid.But the drop off in support was far more pronounced after that first season back-Argyle lost 2700 fans per match compared to 700 in the post Pulis season.As i said earlier,the enormous increase in Stoke's gates from a standing position not dissimilar to Argyle's must show that results count far more than style as an attraction to would be fans,unpalatable though that may be.

Nallis was superb, we were f**ked with out him

Blobby lost us many fans with his terrible football, let alone the likes of Makel and Lasley.
After that, I had no problem at all with Pulis' style as I could see the progress he was making almost immediately. At least I could admire the method and thorough discipline. It was ten times better than what Blobby gave us. I was very disappointed to see Pulis go.

Mock Cuncher wrote:

hairy j wrote:

Forgetting all the village shite. Holloway's Argyle were really enjoyable to watch. That midfield were so good. Buzaky (who didn't actually seem to be liked by Holloway), Nalis, Norris and Halmosi; not a bad player amongst them. Shelly and Seip were class. Two superb keepers. Fallon ??????? Hayles and Ebanks-Blake got goals. They were the best team I've seen play at Home Park in green. They entertained us for such a brief period but I actually looked forward to watching them.

Interestingly enough (or not) Nalis played more games for us than he did any other club in his career. I don't remember him being here that long and I'd have certainly given him another season at the time (did we really see Nalis, Abdou, Hodges and Wotton all released in that single summer?). The fact that Fletcher was the man to supposedly replace Nalis only makes things worse. Why replace an ageing star with another whose legs are even further gone? Was that the summer that we were supposedly in for Charlie Adam? Crumbs what a shite summer.

Funnily enough I was going to bring up Charlie Adams as a yardstick to measure the draw of Luggy vs Ollie, Luggy tried and failed to sign Adams a couple of times, yet Ollie lured him to Blackpool and more importantly hung onto him for the season that they got promoted when other clubs were after him, that was the WORTH of Ollie. Players like Adams are good enough to go places, they have to believe that the club has the same ambitions, signing Showumni is a good case in point.

I think you're forgetting that Charlie Adam was already at Blackpool before Ollie arrived. The caretaker manager, Tony Parkes, had brought him in on loan from Rangers. He liked it there and Plymouth were never in with a chance.
It never was a Luggy v Ollie contest.

I think GS's point is some players will hang around somewhere because of the manager. I was amazed when Adam stayed so long at Blackpool as he was obviously the hot property at the time.
Barry Hales, an expert proponent of his style, who would never have dreamed of coming down here, did so, because of Holloway. We also pinched SEB from under the noses of several much more attractive clubs due to Holloway's picture painting.
I'm afraid by the time Sturrock came down here for his second stint, he had lost any ability to enthuse the better players, other than paying well over the top for characters that couldn't find a home elsewhere. Maclean and Gow were perfect examples of that. Further evidence of Sturrock's demise was the absolutely HUGE squad he stacked up. There must have been nearly 40 players. Crackers.

I always understood it was Stapes he fell out with because of his relationship with Sturrock. Apparently Stapes was always on phone to Luggy seeking advice.

Holloway is a gooby tw@ who couldn't manage his way out of a paper bag.

Two wins out of 15 at the 'Wall?

Him and Tw@sdale should make a filum, "Lose and Loser", except of course that they both get paid a fortune for being rubbish

stephensdad wrote:

I always understood it was Stapes he fell out with because of his relationship with Sturrock. Apparently Stapes was always on phone to Luggy seeking advice.

I think that was just one of a great many reasons, didn't Williamson say the same thing?

Lord Tisdale wrote:

Him and Tw@sdale should make a filum, "Lose and Loser", except of course that they both get paid a fortune for being rubbish

80% of the city of london get paid a fortune for being rubbish. That's the out of balance and rigged market we live under in many walks of life.  I think supply and demand is the usual excuse that is trotted out, so I guess if Holloway and Tisdale weren't paid those ridiculous amounts here, they would go abroad to practice their losing, or so the theory goes.

GOB wrote:

stephensdad wrote:

I always understood it was Stapes he fell out with because of his relationship with Sturrock. Apparently Stapes was always on phone to Luggy seeking advice.

I think that was just one of a great many reasons, didn't Williamson say the same thing?

And pulis, sure that he was quoted as saying the night before we were due to play Sheffield utd stapes went off for a curry with Luggy? Or was that Ollie?

There never seems to be any middle ground with a Holloway-led team. They'll either be chasing promotion, or get relegated.

Thing is, it can be difficult to tell which way it's gonna go. It woulda been interesting what odds you'd have got on him relegating a Leicester side backed by Mandaric's £££'s, but then followed up by promoting a Blackpool team to the Prem who were actual favourites to finish bottom of the Championship. Crazy.

Rollo Tomasi wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Exactly.

And it was Iddlesleigh who upped and cleared out sharpish when the cricket club land purchase was proposed. He's been an extremely divisive and malignantly manipulative influence on the club for a very, very long time.

You only have to look at his almost complete media silence, his cowardly use of internet multis, him sitting next to Newell in the directors' box, his support for HHP, spineless acceptance of Webb as club President, the current brand mis-management, a long series of PR disasters, his "feck off and support Man Utd" comments...

Never mind the money. Where is the vision and integrity the club needs?

I suspect SFDs dislike of Peter Jones has clouded his judgement. Jones, Foot and Warren offered their resignations when Stapleton, Dennerley and Gill wanted to buy the cricket ground and rent it to PAFC. Argyle were to be the tenants, Stapleton, Dennerley and Gill, the landlords.
This was the first indication that personal gain was the goal.
Warren later withdrew his threat and stayed on (the)board for a while.
Jones and Foot were correct and you could argue, honourable, in their decision.
Peter Jones hasn't covered himself in glory of late but you are wrong to criticise him in this instant.

Absolute nonsense. The plan was for the football club to by the cricket ground. Jones v1 was opposed to it. Stapleton Dennerley (rip) and Gill bought it and Jones and Foot resigned.

Holloway leaving had everything to do with his salary being tripled by Mandaric.


He was told quite clearly at interview what the business model was and how we would operate on spending out what came in. He understood that and agreed to it.

Damon.Lenszner wrote:

Rollo Tomasi wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Exactly.

And it was Iddlesleigh who upped and cleared out sharpish when the cricket club land purchase was proposed. He's been an extremely divisive and malignantly manipulative influence on the club for a very, very long time.

You only have to look at his almost complete media silence, his cowardly use of internet multis, him sitting next to Newell in the directors' box, his support for HHP, spineless acceptance of Webb as club President, the current brand mis-management, a long series of PR disasters, his "feck off and support Man Utd" comments...

Never mind the money. Where is the vision and integrity the club needs?

I suspect SFDs dislike of Peter Jones has clouded his judgement. Jones, Foot and Warren offered their resignations when Stapleton, Dennerley and Gill wanted to buy the cricket ground and rent it to PAFC. Argyle were to be the tenants, Stapleton, Dennerley and Gill, the landlords.
This was the first indication that personal gain was the goal.
Warren later withdrew his threat and stayed on (the)board for a while.
Jones and Foot were correct and you could argue, honourable, in their decision.
Peter Jones hasn't covered himself in glory of late but you are wrong to criticise him in this instant.

Absolute nonsense. The plan was for the football club to by the cricket ground. Jones v1 was opposed to it. Stapleton Dennerley (rip) and Gill bought it and Jones and Foot resigned.

Holloway leaving had everything to do with his salary being tripled by Mandaric.


He was told quite clearly at interview what the business model was and how we would operate on spending out what came in. He understood that and agreed to it.

Bet he wasn't told that the business plan involved selling £6m worth of players and reinvesting approximately £1.5m halfway through the season that we were supposed to be "going for it" though.

Greenskin wrote:

Damon.Lenszner wrote:

Rollo Tomasi wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Exactly.

And it was Iddlesleigh who upped and cleared out sharpish when the cricket club land purchase was proposed. He's been an extremely divisive and malignantly manipulative influence on the club for a very, very long time.

You only have to look at his almost complete media silence, his cowardly use of internet multis, him sitting next to Newell in the directors' box, his support for HHP, spineless acceptance of Webb as club President, the current brand mis-management, a long series of PR disasters, his "feck off and support Man Utd" comments...

Never mind the money. Where is the vision and integrity the club needs?

I suspect SFDs dislike of Peter Jones has clouded his judgement. Jones, Foot and Warren offered their resignations when Stapleton, Dennerley and Gill wanted to buy the cricket ground and rent it to PAFC. Argyle were to be the tenants, Stapleton, Dennerley and Gill, the landlords.
This was the first indication that personal gain was the goal.
Warren later withdrew his threat and stayed on (the)board for a while.
Jones and Foot were correct and you could argue, honourable, in their decision.
Peter Jones hasn't covered himself in glory of late but you are wrong to criticise him in this instant.

Absolute nonsense. The plan was for the football club to by the cricket ground. Jones v1 was opposed to it. Stapleton Dennerley (rip) and Gill bought it and Jones and Foot resigned.

Holloway leaving had everything to do with his salary being tripled by Mandaric.


He was told quite clearly at interview what the business model was and how we would operate on spending out what came in. He understood that and agreed to it.

Bet he wasn't told that the business plan involved selling £6m worth of players and reinvesting approximately £1.5m halfway through the season that we were supposed to be "going for it" though.

Ahhh but Stapleton said at the time the departures were ALL of Holloway's making and/or choosing. Of course it was nothing to do with bloating the balance sheet ready to shaft potential investors from Japan for personal gain.

Hitch wrote:

Greenskin wrote:

Damon.Lenszner wrote:

Rollo Tomasi wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Exactly.

And it was Iddlesleigh who upped and cleared out sharpish when the cricket club land purchase was proposed. He's been an extremely divisive and malignantly manipulative influence on the club for a very, very long time.

You only have to look at his almost complete media silence, his cowardly use of internet multis, him sitting next to Newell in the directors' box, his support for HHP, spineless acceptance of Webb as club President, the current brand mis-management, a long series of PR disasters, his "feck off and support Man Utd" comments...

Never mind the money. Where is the vision and integrity the club needs?

I suspect SFDs dislike of Peter Jones has clouded his judgement. Jones, Foot and Warren offered their resignations when Stapleton, Dennerley and Gill wanted to buy the cricket ground and rent it to PAFC. Argyle were to be the tenants, Stapleton, Dennerley and Gill, the landlords.
This was the first indication that personal gain was the goal.
Warren later withdrew his threat and stayed on (the)board for a while.
Jones and Foot were correct and you could argue, honourable, in their decision.
Peter Jones hasn't covered himself in glory of late but you are wrong to criticise him in this instant.

Absolute nonsense. The plan was for the football club to by the cricket ground. Jones v1 was opposed to it. Stapleton Dennerley (rip) and Gill bought it and Jones and Foot resigned.

Holloway leaving had everything to do with his salary being tripled by Mandaric.


He was told quite clearly at interview what the business model was and how we would operate on spending out what came in. He understood that and agreed to it.

Bet he wasn't told that the business plan involved selling £6m worth of players and reinvesting approximately £1.5m halfway through the season that we were supposed to be "going for it" though.

Ahhh but Stapleton said at the time the departures were ALL of Holloway's making and/or choosing. Of course it was nothing to do with bloating the balance sheet ready to shaft potential investors from Japan for personal gain.

'I'll never hear a bad word spoken about that man and his lovely family'   

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]