What sort of reception will Sparky get?

[Rhys Lightning 63]

As the most successful Wales manager in my lifetime, I'll be giving him a huge round of applause

[Matt Inglis]

If Stoke are doing badly then we'll just take the piss I imagine.
If Stoke are doing well it'll have more of an angry feel to it.

[Lighthouse]

Did he do us any harm? In my opinion he didn't other than his comments at when he left. He now has made it fairly clear it was a mistake. I don't buy into all the rubbish what players said he did this or that. Jol has had the same from unhappy players and it all should be treated the same. Did we play some good football under Hughes? Yes we did. Yes we played some poor stuff too. Same can be said for any manager.

I don't buy into Hughes as a hate figure. He was a manager who should have stayed and should have done better. His comments about ambition have come back to bite him in the posterior but he was right about Fulhams lack of it. He is what he is. A manager of another club having spent a season with us. I don't care enough to make any reaction other than a polite one.

[cmg]

For somebody who, as a manager, has achieved precisely Jack Sh*t, Hughes gets a remarkably good press.

The benevolent attitude of the fans of the team he rather publicly gave two fingers to is excelent evidence of what wonderful, understanding people we are.

[Motown]

The man's delusional. He did OK-ish with Blackburn with a half way decent squad he inherited. He spent like a kid in a sweet shop with Citeh, bought the wrong sweets and looked all bewildered when he got the nudge. He and his Taffia did exactly the same at the Ha-Ha's and deservedly got booted. Let's look at what he did for us: achieve a halfway decent position with a squad largely not of his making (in the end!) Now for the cruncher: He left us because the Villa job was up for grabs and thought it was his. Unfortunately for him, even the Villain board baulked at his cheap "lack of ambition" jibe as a ploy for leaving us and he was left in the boonies where he belongs. Stoke are welcome to him and by all accounts are not too enchanted by the prospect.

As for his reception at CC: How about a giant raspberry?

[cmg]

Obviously (as the great man himself would say) our friends down the road have less reason than ourselves for fond memories of the Welsh wizard, but this (lifted from another MB) is a well-written, entertaining and generally accurate critique of Hughes's managerial career, and the English approach to managers in general.

http://www.fansnetwork.co.uk/football/queensparkrangers/fb_news.php?storyid=32087

[Wimbledon_White]

Easy question; he will get dogs abuse of course.

[Travers Barney]

Obviously (as the great man himself would say) our friends down the road have less reason than ourselves for fond memories of the Welsh wizard, but this (lifted from another MB) is a well-written, entertaining and generally accurate critique of Hughes's managerial career, and the English approach to managers in general.

http://www.fansnetwork.co.uk/football/queensparkrangers/fb_news.php?storyid=32087

I read that earlier CMG...sums it up really....very good player...arrogant which given his ability we can live with but a wrongun...except for that punch in the air when bairdinihio socked it to em.

If he ever picks that thug wilkinson after his antics in the league cup he'll go even further down my pecking order

coyw 

[Fulham Tup North]

The man's delusional. He did OK-ish with Blackburn with a half way decent squad he inherited. He spent like a kid in a sweet shop with Citeh, bought the wrong sweets and looked all bewildered when he got the nudge. He and his Taffia did exactly the same at the Ha-Ha's and deservedly got booted. Let's look at what he did for us: achieve a halfway decent position with a squad largely not of his making (in the end!) Now for the cruncher: He left us because the Villa job was up for grabs and thought it was his. Unfortunately for him, even the Villain board baulked at his cheap "lack of ambition" jibe as a ploy for leaving us and he was left in the boonies where he belongs. Stoke are welcome to him and by all accounts are not too enchanted by the prospect.

As for his reception at CC: How about a giant raspberry?

Spot-On.  He has spent his career getting plaudits for spending large amounts of money or by doing well with a side he inheritted.  He was found out at QPArse and made himself unemployable at Villa.  Stoke will be the same story IMO.
Ambition to win trophy's is great, but not by bankrupting the club enroute. 

[cmg]

I can't disagree with anything in the last few posts.

My feeling on his departure was, and still is, that of relief. His mate, Joorabchian, is to the financial wellbeing of a football club what myxomatosis was to bunny rabbits. A theory not undermined by events at Loftus Road and something that Stoke have to look forward to.

[sunburywhite]

I can't disagree with anything in the last few posts.

My feeling on his departure was, and still is, that of relief. His mate, Joorabchian, is to the financial wellbeing of a football club what myxomatosis was to bunny rabbits. A theory not undermined by events at Loftus Road and something that Stoke have to look forward to.

Fully agree, Joorachabin is a picture of the worst side of football. The fact Hughes has him as an gent speaks volumes about Hughes standards

Don't forget our season with him in charge was saved after "the players revolt" following the West Ham game

[Burt]

His comments about ambition have come back to bite him in the posterior but he was right about Fulhams lack of it.

I would maintain that the club don't lack ambition. As I mentioned earlier, it is to stay in the premier league on a self-sustaining (i.e. living within our means) basis, which is the right thing to do given our size and resources. It is a realistic ambition. We will never win the league, or qualify for the Champions Leage, etc. etc.

The club's ambition was just different than what Sparky was shooting for, which would mean having a board willing to splash the cash. We weren't.

[Lighthouse]

His comments about ambition have come back to bite him in the posterior but he was right about Fulhams lack of it.

I would maintain that the club don't lack ambition. As I mentioned earlier, it is to stay in the premier league on a self-sustaining (i.e. living within our means) basis, which is the right thing to do given our size and resources. It is a realistic ambition. We will never win the league, or qualify for the Champions Leage, etc. etc.

The club's ambition was just different than what Sparky was shooting for, which would mean having a board willing to splash the cash. We weren't.

Before Hughes left we had a squad that was short of a few players. This is always up for debate but we looked good. Now by not investing in a couple of players and selling others we are a squad of old men and short contracts. So instead of investment two seasons ago we now are in need of investment now. I see only several backward steps since Hughes has left. The ambition may be just to stay in the Prem and not spend any money. But eventually we have to spend money just to stay in the Prem. Instead of investing and improving the squad. We now are having to fight for free transfers and out of contract players plus a few transfers.

Short sighted economics and in the end it will fail. Our youth team may promote a few players good enough for the Prem. If we go down through lack of investment, several more youth players may be good enough. Hughes may have been wrong about the price and quality of players we were able to get. But our lack of ambition since Jol has come has been clear to see for everybody, on and off the field. There is a difference between splashing the cash and spending it all on Ruiz and old men.  Ambition not to go down is not ambition. We ARE a Prem side and have been for a long time. Shame the club seem to think we are just visiting.

[Me-ate-Live, innit??]

For me, it's time to call a halt to the Hughes baiting, so it'll be the silent treatment from me.  How will others welcome Sparky back at the Cottage?

I might give him a clap  :022:
When he was with us I like him, I was quite proud of him really  and I did think he was the step -up everyone talked about.  I liked the football we played away from home, even when we were beaten, all of the team  turned up.

Look at this his last interview of the 2011 season,  great interview seemed a happy bunny and all was well 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/13441010

So what happened between then and 1st June 2011 ??????? I still believe he was pushed into leaving , as Mo wanted Jol which may account for his bitter  comments when he left.
As an ex -Fulham manager I wish him well at Stoke

[cmg]

I might give him a clap  :022:

I think that's going a bit far, even if Joorabchian is the footballing equivalent of the bubonic plague.

....oh, sorry, misread it. You said a clap

[Buffalo76]

Considering the mess he left ha ha in the red carpet should be laid out when Stoke next come to town 064.gif

[Burt]

His comments about ambition have come back to bite him in the posterior but he was right about Fulhams lack of it.

I would maintain that the club don't lack ambition. As I mentioned earlier, it is to stay in the premier league on a self-sustaining (i.e. living within our means) basis, which is the right thing to do given our size and resources. It is a realistic ambition. We will never win the league, or qualify for the Champions Leage, etc. etc.

The club's ambition was just different than what Sparky was shooting for, which would mean having a board willing to splash the cash. We weren't.

Before Hughes left we had a squad that was short of a few players. This is always up for debate but we looked good. Now by not investing in a couple of players and selling others we are a squad of old men and short contracts. So instead of investment two seasons ago we now are in need of investment now. I see only several backward steps since Hughes has left. The ambition may be just to stay in the Prem and not spend any money. But eventually we have to spend money just to stay in the Prem. Instead of investing and improving the squad. We now are having to fight for free transfers and out of contract players plus a few transfers.

Short sighted economics and in the end it will fail. Our youth team may promote a few players good enough for the Prem. If we go down through lack of investment, several more youth players may be good enough. Hughes may have been wrong about the price and quality of players we were able to get. But our lack of ambition since Jol has come has been clear to see for everybody, on and off the field. There is a difference between splashing the cash and spending it all on Ruiz and old men.  Ambition not to go down is not ambition. We ARE a Prem side and have been for a long time. Shame the club seem to think we are just visiting.

I don't disagree. The club's ambition is safety first, and living within it's means. This is ambition enough for some, but not for others.

[Jack Fulham]

boos.

[RaySmith]

Re ambition - there is the question of how realistic is it to have ambitions beyond being a mid table Prem club, and, hopefully, having good cup runs?

Are the club happy as long as the ground is full every home game - even if with many tourists and casual 'fans'. who just want to see Prem Football? Which is  different from what actual supporters of the club want - ie to keep improving, getting into Europe, winning trophies. Well, all supporters  probably would like this, even those of us who think it's a great achievement just to maintain Prem status, and find the annual battle to do this very compelling in itself.

But, as I said, how realistic is it for the club to have greater ambitions ?- welll, the answer is we just don't know.

[RaySmith]

I think the reception for Sparky will be one of polite applause, and cries of 'all the best to best to you sir'.

Seriously - probably a few boos, and defintely  some chants, especially if the game goes our way, but I think many will feel indifferent.