Sting wrote:
Just playing devils advocate here as I'm not really too concerned whether he stays or goes, but is he really that good?
Yes, the football at home has been a lot better to watch than it has been for a couple of seasons, but away from home we have been terrible and have suffered a few heavy defeats.
From Wiki, the stats show Williamson at MK has 20 wins, 5 draws and 13 defeats from 38 games which if they were all league games would be 65 points. GA at Bradford has 18 wins, 7 draws and 10 defeats from 35 games which would be 61 points.
I'm not saying we should have stuck with GA as the football was atrocious but are we looking at him through rose tinted spectacles?
The way GA had this team playing was a total insult to them. He had them playing as underdogs in pretty much every game we played. Sitting back as if we're a League 2 team playing a Prem team in the FA Cup.
Mike Williamson had an initially fairly simple job. He had a decent team at his disposal and simply just needed to remind them that they're decent footballers and to play the game the right way. The squad was capable of dominating games and we quickly showed that.
I am in no way underplaying the job MW did and how he advanced us up the table, but lets remember that this squad compared to some of the others in the league was far superior. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but I just wish we got to see a back line of Norman, O'Hora and Lewington for both play off games. Not using Norman, arguable our best defender, is a hard one to take.