|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Oct 21, 2018 13:53:07 GMT
We weren’t playing defensive football. Woods was playing mostly as a sweeper i would call that defensive football. I am sure he would be better off playing further forward & linking the play to our lone striker. He’s a holding midfielder. His job is to sit deep and ping it. He had an off day yesterday.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2018 13:58:31 GMT
Defensive football is trying to hold what you have and rarely looking to attack. THEY played defensive football (and very well too). We were trying to get on the front foot constantly and trying to break down their wall. Our decision making in the final third cost us. Defensive football is when you have no idea what to do or how to do it so piss about with the ball hoping something breaks in your favour, it didn’t, we lost.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2018 14:02:30 GMT
Defensive football is trying to hold what you have and rarely looking to attack. THEY played defensive football (and very well too). We were trying to get on the front foot constantly and trying to break down their wall. Our decision making in the final third cost us. Defensive football is when you have no idea what to do or how to do it so piss about with the ball hoping something breaks in your favour, it didn’t, we lost. We were constantly trying to break them down yesterday, it was patient, calm football. Aside from lacking a bit of intensity and final ball at times, i thought we were pretty good. A shitty defensive mistake gave them a scrappy win. It happens. Doesn't mean we weren't attacking because we were.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Oct 21, 2018 14:05:05 GMT
Defensive football is trying to hold what you have and rarely looking to attack. THEY played defensive football (and very well too). We were trying to get on the front foot constantly and trying to break down their wall. Our decision making in the final third cost us. Defensive football is when you have no idea what to do or how to do it so piss about with the ball hoping something breaks in your favour, it didn’t, we lost. No it isn’t. That’s bad football, but defensive football is all about, erm, defending. There’s a cunning clue in the term.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2018 14:07:28 GMT
Defensive football is when you have no idea what to do or how to do it so piss about with the ball hoping something breaks in your favour, it didn’t, we lost. We were constantly trying to break them down yesterday, it was patient, calm football. Aside from lacking a bit of intensity and final ball at times, i thought we were pretty good. A shitty defensive mistake gave them a scrappy win. It happens. Doesn't mean we weren't attacking because we were. I do agree with one point you made, lacking a final ball at times, just for the 90minutes We have a shit team
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2018 14:09:37 GMT
We were constantly trying to break them down yesterday, it was patient, calm football. Aside from lacking a bit of intensity and final ball at times, i thought we were pretty good. A shitty defensive mistake gave them a scrappy win. It happens. Doesn't mean we weren't attacking because we were. I do agree with one point you made, lacking a final ball at times, just for the 90minutes We have a shit team I don't think we do. We have a shit defence. The midfield and attack are pretty damn good at this level, even if i don't think McClean is great. As for the final ball, how many teams that sit back and camp in their own box are able to stop better teams from scoring? It happens all the time. I'm not worried.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2018 14:10:50 GMT
Defensive football is when you have no idea what to do or how to do it so piss about with the ball hoping something breaks in your favour, it didn’t, we lost. No it isn’t. That’s bad football, but defensive football is all about, erm, defending. There’s a cunning clue in the term. Ah right, get you, is that why they scored then? As you put it, a defending team defends, That’s something else we can’t seem to do very well.
|
|
|
Post by Roger Everyone on Oct 21, 2018 14:17:39 GMT
I don't think any manager would make us any different at the moment. How many games have we had with him in charge... And people honestly think we should get rid ? If we got rid how many games would anyone else have before people on here say we should get rid of them. I am quite happy with him to be honest. Long term it will work out i have no doubt. January will be interesting and i imagine a couple of players coming in and couple of players leaving. How far are we behind top spot ? It's 3 wins and in this division that nothing. It will come together have faith, stop moaning and support your team !
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2018 14:26:45 GMT
I don't think any manager would make us any different at the moment. How many games have we had with him in charge... And people honestly think we should get rid ? If we got rid how many games would anyone else have before people on here say we should get rid of them. I am quite happy with him to be honest. Long term it will work out i have no doubt. January will be interesting and i imagine a couple of players coming in and couple of players leaving. How far are we behind top spot ? It's 3 wins and in this division that nothing. It will come together have faith, stop moaning and support your team ! We're 3 wins away from the top but have only won 4 games from 13. We're much further away than people are making out if we're honest and that overly positive thought train isn't going to help the manager I don't think. Our average from 13 games has us on course for 56 points from 46 games, which will see us much closer to the bottom than the top. This year is all about stability in truth and about building for years 2 and 3, be that with or without Rowett. January, for me, would see the removal of Williams and Martina and the introduction of younger, permanent signings for those two positions, with Edwards being used as early as next week. McClean would be moved on for similar circumstances, as would Crouch. Woods is a solid signing and part of what should be (already) a new spine to build around.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Oct 21, 2018 14:42:26 GMT
No it isn’t. That’s bad football, but defensive football is all about, erm, defending. There’s a cunning clue in the term. Ah right, get you, is that why they scored then? As you put it, a defending team defends, That’s something else we can’t seem to do very well. Yes, they hit us on the break, one of the defining traits of ‘defensive football’. Yes, we’re crap at defending, agreed.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2018 14:54:22 GMT
Ah right, get you, is that why they scored then? As you put it, a defending team defends, That’s something else we can’t seem to do very well. Yes, they hit us on the break, one of the defining traits of ‘defensive football’. Yes, we’re crap at defending, agreed. And when they hit the bar, So their defensive team caused us more issues than our so called attacking team (which we should be, considering we should be pissing this league, and we were at home too)
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Oct 21, 2018 15:07:23 GMT
Yes, they hit us on the break, one of the defining traits of ‘defensive football’. Yes, we’re crap at defending, agreed. And when they hit the bar, So their defensive team caused us more issues than our so called attacking team (which we should be, considering we should be pissing this league, and we were at home too) They had the better chances, we had more chances I thought but yeah, they hit us on the break effectively. I’m not saying everything in the garden is rosy, far from it, but some of the reaction to yesterday is waaaaay OTT in my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by harlequin on Oct 21, 2018 15:11:27 GMT
It's semantics. You're both correct in my opinion.
It's counter-attacking football when your team does it. It's parking the bus when your opponent does it. (Liked it so nicked from reddit)
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2018 15:14:00 GMT
We have possession but can’t do nowt with it, we have no idea.
We can’t break teams down.
We can’t defend
So what is the point in Rowett?
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Oct 21, 2018 15:18:18 GMT
We have possession but can’t do nowt with it, we have no idea. We can’t break teams down. We can’t defend So what is the point in Rowett? I think it’s still just about too early to judge. I don’t particularly like the bloke, but do we just ignore the upturn before yesterday and the good stuff in the first half an hour yesterday and only focus on the bad stuff, get rid and start again? Or do we give it a run of games to see if we can find some more consistent cohesion and put some results together?
|
|
|
Post by terrorofturfmoor on Oct 21, 2018 15:21:09 GMT
It's about as funny as Tiny Penis for Tony Pulis, actually thinking about it then its not! Tiny Penis is actually funny though!!!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2018 15:23:40 GMT
We have possession but can’t do nowt with it, we have no idea. We can’t break teams down. We can’t defend So what is the point in Rowett? I think it’s still just about too early to judge. I don’t particularly like the bloke, but do we just ignore the upturn before yesterday and the good stuff in the first half an hour yesterday and only focus on the bad stuff, get rid and start again? Or do we give it a run of games to see if we can find some more consistent cohesion and put some results together? Honest answer, get rid, This is no knee jerk reaction either. If Rowett thinks £6 million on McClean who he chased all summer is what we need, if he thinks Martina is our best RB, if he thinks Williams is decent to start Then we have issues
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Oct 21, 2018 15:24:22 GMT
It's semantics. You're both correct in my opinion. It's counter-attacking football when your team does it. It's parking the bus when your opponent does it. (Liked it so nicked from reddit) It's not semantics - it's what actually happened on the pitch. A defensive team (like Birmingham yesterday - or every team Tony Pulis has ever set up) sits back, gives the opposition position and then tries to hit the opposition on the break or make the most of set plays. Stoke were the complete opposite - we kept possession and tried to break down a well organised opposition - which we failed to do. You can criticise Rowett for not having a side that can break down the opposition or for having a leaky defence. But to criticise him for being a defensive manager like Tony Pulis is just complete nonsense and nothing to do with semantics.
|
|
|
Post by terrorofturfmoor on Oct 21, 2018 15:35:40 GMT
I think it’s still just about too early to judge. I don’t particularly like the bloke, but do we just ignore the upturn before yesterday and the good stuff in the first half an hour yesterday and only focus on the bad stuff, get rid and start again? Or do we give it a run of games to see if we can find some more consistent cohesion and put some results together? Honest answer, get rid, This is no knee jerk reaction either. If Rowett thinks £6 million on McClean who he chased all summer is what we need, if he thinks Martina is our best RB, if he thinks Williams is decent to start Then we have issues Williams is actually getting better with each game..... Totally agree though where McClean & Martina are concerned!!!
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Oct 21, 2018 15:39:56 GMT
I think it’s still just about too early to judge. I don’t particularly like the bloke, but do we just ignore the upturn before yesterday and the good stuff in the first half an hour yesterday and only focus on the bad stuff, get rid and start again? Or do we give it a run of games to see if we can find some more consistent cohesion and put some results together? Honest answer, get rid, This is no knee jerk reaction either. If Rowett thinks £6 million on McClean who he chased all summer is what we need, if he thinks Martina is our best RB, if he thinks Williams is decent to start Then we have issues Knowing the kind of manager the owners like to go for, who would you like to see us replace him with, realistically?
|
|
|
Post by harlequin on Oct 21, 2018 15:42:24 GMT
It's semantics. You're both correct in my opinion. It's counter-attacking football when your team does it. It's parking the bus when your opponent does it. (Liked it so nicked from reddit) It's not semantics - it's what actually happened on the pitch. A defensive team (like Birmingham yesterday - or every team Tony Pulis has ever set up) sits back, gives the opposition position and then tries to hit the opposition on the break or make the most of set plays. Stoke were the complete opposite - we kept possession and tried to break down a well organised opposition - which we failed to do. Agree with this for the second half. For the first half they operated a high press. I wasn't at the game so maybe your better situated to describe the tactics, but it was frequently mentioned in commentary how high Birmingham were for most of the first half. You can criticise Rowett for not having a side that can break down the opposition or for having a leaky defence. But to criticise him for being a defensive manager like Tony Pulis is just complete nonsense and nothing to do with semantics. ? I'm not. I'm commenting on how they can be both described as counter attacking and parking on the bus. Which is the definition of semantics.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2018 15:43:29 GMT
It doesn't work so Rowshit has to change it or be removed from his job. We can't carry on as it stands. A change of system is needed ASAP which allows us to attack. We don't really have the personnel for 3-5-2 unless Clucus plays wing back and then the other issue is the one who could play right wing back he doesn't speak to, the immature twat that he is. Looks like 4-4-2 is the only option. In doing so, two of Allen, Woods, Etebo and Clucus won't play which he doesn't seem to want to happen. I suppose Clucus could play left. McClean is only ever going to be a sub in my eyes he is so limited (nice one pizza boys). The other alternative and my favourite is bring in a manager who can motivate and organise a team to play the polar opposite to what Rowshit does. Well win one or two here and there but the default for Rowshitt is what we we saw yesterday and I think always will be . Its called foresight , and the owners of this club seem to have none. Hes a mistake now move on. No win in next three and he has to be gone ASAP. Hate his interviews I cringe. I cringe when you call him Rowshit.
|
|
|
Post by loosestools on Oct 21, 2018 15:48:19 GMT
We weren’t playing defensive football. Woods was playing mostly as a sweeper i would call that defensive football. I am sure he would be better off playing further forward & linking the play to our lone striker. Woods was playing as a very deep defensive midfielder, Jack was obviously told to stop hoofing the ball and so was rolling it out to Woods to create right from the back. A good idea I think. The problem is, as always, its hard to beat a very well drilled team who park the bus, TP invented it! We were admittedly a bit toothless and held onto the ball just a bit too long (Ince) We need to be a quicker and take less touches.
|
|
|
Post by pavel on Oct 21, 2018 15:48:49 GMT
He’s not a defensive manager but he’s not an attacking manager either, 1 man up front! He’s not progressive is his set up, tactics, shape or substitutions, I’m not really sure I or even he knows what sort of manager he is.
The best I can describe him is that he’s a safety first manager who is tactically limited and appears to be shit scared of the opposition, setting up his teams to nullify the opposition rather than playing to our strengths, if he indeed knows what they are.
He is what he is, a manager who has done nothing exceptional in his managerial career, never won anything, never got anyone promoted, yet our board in their wisdom believed that he was the man to trust. Words fail me on why we always fish in our familiar stagnant small pool, rather than look beyond the archetypal British manager.
|
|
|
Post by loosestools on Oct 21, 2018 15:54:28 GMT
He’s not a defensive manager but he’s not an attacking manager either, 1 man up front! He’s not progressive is his set up, tactics, shape or substitutions, I’m not really sure I or even he knows what sort of manager he is. The best I can describe him is that he’s a safety first manager who is tactically limited and appears to be shit scared of the opposition, setting up his teams to nullify the opposition rather than playing to our strengths, if he indeed knows what they are. He is what he is, a manager who has done nothing exceptional in his managerial career, never won anything, never got anyone promoted, yet our board in their wisdom believed that he was the man to trust. Words fail me on why we always fish in our familiar stagnant small pool, rather than look beyond the archetypal British manager. The majority of managers have never won anything. Perhaps we thought we would be getting the next Eddie Howe?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2018 16:00:39 GMT
Honest answer, get rid, This is no knee jerk reaction either. If Rowett thinks £6 million on McClean who he chased all summer is what we need, if he thinks Martina is our best RB, if he thinks Williams is decent to start Then we have issues Knowing the kind of manager the owners like to go for, who would you like to see us replace him with, realistically? That’s another issue, the type of manger the owners go for. Constantly doing the same thing expecting different results. We need to change that way of thinking, Who would I go for, I’ve no answer to that, we are a struggling championship team, with a very poor set of players, any decent managers wouldn’t now come to us and the added bonus of working under Cartwright and Scholes too I can’t see us as an attractive team for a decent manager to join us now.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Oct 21, 2018 16:05:15 GMT
Knowing the kind of manager the owners like to go for, who would you like to see us replace him with, realistically? That’s another issue, the type of manger the owners go for. Constantly doing the same thing expecting different results. We need to change that way of thinking, Who would I go for, I’ve no answer to that, we are a struggling championship team, with a very poor set of players, any decent managers wouldn’t now come to us and the added bonus of working under Cartwright and Scholes too I can’t see us as an attractive team for a decent manager to join us now. We should change that way of thinking, but we won’t. That’s very much part of the problem. I disagree we’re not an attractive proposition, we’re still one of the biggest clubs in the league for now, especially with the squad we’ve got and the resources we have.
|
|
|
Post by RedandWhite90 on Oct 21, 2018 16:09:04 GMT
Knowing the kind of manager the owners like to go for, who would you like to see us replace him with, realistically? That’s another issue, the type of manger the owners go for. Constantly doing the same thing expecting different results. We need to change that way of thinking, Who would I go for, I’ve no answer to that, we are a struggling championship team, with a very poor set of players, any decent managers wouldn’t now come to us and the added bonus of working under Cartwright and Scholes too I can’t see us as an attractive team for a decent manager to join us now. I think we are still attractive enough, but purely down to budget and parachute payments. It's so difficult to guage whether or not it's players the manager or a bit of both. Key issues for me: System/Set-up for each game Substitutions Our left hand side Individual errors Signings/favouritism I'm definitely swaying a lot more towards Rowett being the problem but from a solution standpoint literally who is there? I would definitely be monitoring (Christ even I'm at it now!) the situation at Fulham as Jokanovic for me would be my go-to person.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2018 16:24:44 GMT
That’s another issue, the type of manger the owners go for. Constantly doing the same thing expecting different results. We need to change that way of thinking, Who would I go for, I’ve no answer to that, we are a struggling championship team, with a very poor set of players, any decent managers wouldn’t now come to us and the added bonus of working under Cartwright and Scholes too I can’t see us as an attractive team for a decent manager to join us now. I think we are still attractive enough, but purely down to budget and parachute payments. It's so difficult to guage whether or not it's players the manager or a bit of both. Key issues for me: System/Set-up for each game Substitutions Our left hand side Individual errors Signings/favouritism I'm definitely swaying a lot more towards Rowett being the problem but from a solution standpoint literally who is there? I would definitely be monitoring (Christ even I'm at it now!) the situation at Fulham as Jokanovic for me would be my go-to person. Jokanovic is a good call, even like Wagner but they not English / British so that’s a stumbling block for our board. We have so many players that need to be moved on, even the recent purchase players need to move on. Our recruitment team won’t help prospective new managers coming in either.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2018 16:27:55 GMT
That’s another issue, the type of manger the owners go for. Constantly doing the same thing expecting different results. We need to change that way of thinking, Who would I go for, I’ve no answer to that, we are a struggling championship team, with a very poor set of players, any decent managers wouldn’t now come to us and the added bonus of working under Cartwright and Scholes too I can’t see us as an attractive team for a decent manager to join us now. I think we are still attractive enough, but purely down to budget and parachute payments. It's so difficult to guage whether or not it's players the manager or a bit of both. Key issues for me: System/Set-up for each game Substitutions Our left hand side Individual errors Signings/favouritism I'm definitely swaying a lot more towards Rowett being the problem but from a solution standpoint literally who is there? I would definitely be monitoring (Christ even I'm at it now!) the situation at Fulham as Jokanovic for me would be my go-to person. I agree with the left side, McClean doesn't contribute. Subs can be annoying. Individual errors aren't his fault Signings have almost all improved us. System/set up has led to us dominating almost all games we've played since Wigan. Only individual errors have let us down.
|
|