|
Post by JoeinOz on Dec 8, 2023 2:41:08 GMT
40 years since Richie Barker was sacked. By definition, 40 years since confirmation of what we'd known for a couple of months.... the pomo had failed.
|
|
|
Post by outspaced on Dec 8, 2023 11:42:55 GMT
Did he really see Watford's 2nd place finish in 82-83;and think "Yes, that's the way to do it". The Watford we had hammered 4-0 that season playing some scintillating nogger.
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on Dec 8, 2023 12:23:22 GMT
How did Barker justify the change in style from playing some really good stuff to just going aerial? I know it was the new vogue but to change it on the back of a strong 1982/83 campaign was just bizarre?
|
|
|
Post by Dutchpeter on Dec 8, 2023 14:30:18 GMT
How did Barker justify the change in style from playing some really good stuff to just going aerial? I know it was the new vogue but to change it on the back of a strong 1982/83 campaign was just bizarre? I think a big reason was the club didn’t have a pot to piss in. Chairman Percy Axon had died in the summer of 1983 no doubt ending a source of financial support. Paul Bracewell had been well undersold for a paltry £250k, he was probably worth double that. Stoke had relied on the sales of our home produced stars to finance transfers, once Bracewell had gone only Chamberlain had big value. The pool of valuable young stars was beginning to dry up. If you look at the summer transfer ins/outs then we were left with a slightly poorer squad than the previous season too. Barker must have looked at Watford and seen how there direct style (not long ball) had taken them to 2nd place for little outlay, and I wouldn’t be surprised if that was an influence. Problem was he didn’t quite have the players to do it, or at least ones who bought into the idea.
|
|
|
Post by march4 on Dec 8, 2023 15:37:21 GMT
How did Barker justify the change in style from playing some really good stuff to just going aerial? I know it was the new vogue but to change it on the back of a strong 1982/83 campaign was just bizarre? He went for his ‘space ball’ system - (it was a sub section of pomo) with the wrong players. The system he chose required powerful athletes with pace and stamina. We had Thomas, McIllroy, Chamberlain who were craftsmen. Pre-season we played a load of Scandinavian Sunday league teams and won every game by a cricket score. I think Barker thought he had found the magic ingredient to make us world beaters. In addition, the club was running out of money, so he could never bring in the type of player his system needed.
|
|
|
Post by silsdenstokie on Dec 8, 2023 18:00:14 GMT
Think Joe Fagan had just slagged us off for going to Liverpool and making absolutely no attempt to play. We lost 1-0 but barely got out of our own half, let alone have a shot. Don5 think RB took to kindly to the criticsm but he was gone soon after
Given what had happened the previous season, a massive opportunity missed by Barker
|
|
|
Post by JoeinOz on Dec 8, 2023 23:04:49 GMT
He attended a course at Lilleshall. Howard Wilkinson was involved in the course and might’ve even ran it.
In 1997 Barker said smaller clubs couldn't compete playing normal football. He missed out on the basic principle of playing to your strength.
|
|