The thing for me with PV is he always had a look and gave off the impression of resignation a lot of the time.

That's not what you want to see really, especially with a club like ours, is a manager who when things are going as badly as they were looks to have just accepted the situation as though he is completely apathetic towards, and has no influence, over it.

I have said previously that the team looked great when things were going our way however as soon as our backs were against the wall, and some fight was needed, we seemed to just throw in the towel and again I was left with the impression that it stemmed from the manager.

Football management surely has to go beyond having something constituting a philosophy, being nice to the players and picking XI each match, we could all do that, and I failed to see what PV was bringing beyond those basic requirements. That was his downfall from where I was sitting.

Now Zaha's got a bit of green grass ahead of him here... and finds Ambrose... not a bad effort!!!!

That is sort of my point Neillo.

His approach was one dimensional which was good when it worked but the pragmatism/solutions needed to combat a poor run of results and performances was not demonstrated. I do think it ironic if not hilarious to suggest PV brought a 'winning mentality' when we went three months without a single W! He didn't have any answers when things went south and a winning mentality cannot be attributed to someone who has no solutions to an inability to win.

Now Zaha's got a bit of green grass ahead of him here... and finds Ambrose... not a bad effort!!!!

Completely agree Nicholas. Strange that someone with Vieira's background as a player could be so passive as a manager.

Old, Ungifted and White

I did take his calmness to be a sign that he believed the players were good enough to turn things around and hence he wasn't panicking, but I also accept that it may instead have been him lacking the will or ability to shake things up. Ignoring the football side of things, I did like having a manager who looked like he could beat everyone up

Do you mean this one? [Link]

What is it that was disappointing for you? He seemed to say what you'd expect of any decent human being, unless I missed something in my skimming of the transcript?

Also, if you are really going to attack a man based on his punditry, remember the dullest most lifeless pundit in history. Step forward Sir Steve Coppell! After he spoke, his voice was so monotone and soporific I had no clue what he had just said. Simply didn't register. I wonder how he was perhaps our best ever manager who led the team to 3rd in the table and a cup final.

I can get that, I took it that he's just a really laid back guy, which is fine when you're playing well, but maybe doesn't play so well when your team is losing. The shape of his head and his size makes me think of the Honey Monster. He was struggling to get a tune out of the team by the end, but I think he'll bounce back. Maybe with a better coaching setup next time.

Harsh but I am inclined to believe there is a lot of truth in there.

Now Zaha's got a bit of green grass ahead of him here... and finds Ambrose... not a bad effort!!!!

Some posters keep on mentioning the £120m spent, but as I have explained elsewhere this sum had to be spent anyhow no matter who was manager, owing to that fact that the squad was depleted after Roy's first stint due to contracts being concluded and a number of players not of PL standard any longer. Some have managed to linger and are still here and one would expect that they won't be here next season.
Incidentally we did well with the acquisitions of Vieira's first season - Andersen, Guehi, Olise, Doucoure, and of course the loan of Gallagher was the icing on the cake. We didn't do so well with striker acquisition and this has been an ongoing problem since the departure of Murray.
I'd also add that the rebuild is only half complete, we'll have a few leaving and a few staying just to keep up numbers, until / unless the Academy players are ready for PL football.
To summarize: Vieira had £120 spent, it was a necessary expenditure, and we have acquired a number of decent players that should hold us in good stead.

Edited by southnorwoodhill (27 Apr 2023 7.03pm)

Agree with much of this.

For much of this season I was preferred to give Vieira the benefit of the doubt based on last season which was good.
I did have reservations about whether we had the players to play his preferred 433 system with one number 6 and two number 8s in midfield and also the lack of apparent fitness of the team.
Like many others I wanted to see two holding midfielders to give us a platform to play and to help the continually booked Doucoure.

However, it appears my analysis was incorrect and the problem may not have related to the system or lack of fitness but instead the poor coaching and man management under Vieira .

It is evident that Roy has kept the 433 system but Schlupp and Eze have been given a new lease of life in the two number 8 roles and Doucoure has not even looked like getting a booking in the holding role.
There is no evidence of a lack of fitness and we appear more dynamic getting more players forward and having more efforts on goal.
It’s early days, but some of the flaws demonstrated and seemingly baked in under Vieira have seemingly disappeared.
Some may argue that we have an easier fixture list under Roy than Vieira, but I would counter that with some of our worst performances under Vieira were against Bournemouth, Fulham, Villa and the away game v Everton.