|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Apr 29, 2024 17:41:07 GMT
Pretty much everybody had him down as a squad filler, including me, but he's actually pulled off some MoM performances which is way more than you would expect from a squad filler. Probably isn't going to be the main man but his versatility and attitude makes him a good asset and will keep everyone on their toes. Definitely worth keeping.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Apr 29, 2024 16:53:30 GMT
Last 9 games we have 4 3 2 = 15 points. 15:9 = 1.67 per game which isn't too bad I think. Over a season that would be around 76-77 points which is very good in my opinion. It would actually be so good that we would be fighting for the play-offs! [b can’t judge off just them games though , it’s got be all of them , i’m now in the camp of keeping him, but can completely understand the argument of fucking him off , he was bought here to improve us but we still ended up in a relegation fight , nothing shout about So do you think we weren't relegation candidates when he took over or do you actually think a "good manager" should have turned us from being relegation candidates to a top half side given a January transfer window and no pre season?
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Apr 29, 2024 16:48:51 GMT
The interview SS did for Stoke after the game on Saturday was spot on, basically said that there’s nothing to celebrate and it’s more relief, but this club and squad need to be focused on the other end of the table. The goal is 3 wins on the bounce. For me next season is having the ethos of having the mentality & belief to be a top 6 club. And that mentality has to include taking this league seriously. All this talk of it being shit is part of the problem. You don't get promoted but being the biggest egotistical bunch of twats in the league. You get promoted by taking every game seriously and accepting you are in a dog fight for 46 games and have no divine right to promotion. Until everybody associated with the club gets that we are doomed to look like a bunch of whining entitled bellends regularly losing to teams who treat the competition with the respect it deserves.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Apr 28, 2024 17:20:18 GMT
Kane is one of the most unassuming players you could find - he really isn't the sort who would make it all about him. The role he plays for England isn't Kane being the big i am - it's purely tactical. What he does in that role is completely unselfish - he forgoes being the main goal threat in order to pull defenders forward and create space for others. You really have got that all wrong. And I disagree. He comes across a massive arrogant cunt to me. Well you are entitled to your opinion but I've no idea how you have come to that conclusion. He comes over as calm and confident but in no way does he come across as arrogant.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Apr 28, 2024 15:54:45 GMT
I think that when he finally declared himself fit (somewhat fit) that Stoke's fortunes took a turn for the better. I'm not saying he alone saved us from relegation, but his presence made a difference. Nor am I saying that he is the best leftback since Paul Breitner, but he's the only one that we have been able to sign for years. Regardless of what one thinks of Tymon (who has apparently learned to defend at Swansea), letting him go before signing a proper replacement could have cost us very dearly. Same people who said Tymon couldn't defend now slag off Hoever. They think that FB is a primarily defensive role, I just think they're very old and out of touch. This article gives a pretty good definition of the modern fullback: "The modern full-back’s duties are at both ends of the pitch; they must support attacks and defend in almost equal measure." They key point is this: What are the disadvantages to playing with a modern full-back?Playing with a modern full-back can leave big gaps in wide areas into which the opposition can counter-attack. If they can access this space, the centre-backs may be left exposed with a fast attacker dribbling towards them at pace. If a coach asks the full-back to contribute to both the attacking and defending phases of the game, but the player isn’t capable of doing one or the other adequately, the team can suffer. The position requires immense physical capacity, particularly in terms of speed, stamina and endurance; if the player selected cannot keep up with the pace of the game, their team can be left with serious deficiencies at one or both ends of the pitch." The thing is to play this role well players have to be exceptional - they have to be able to attack, defend and cover more of the pitch (at speed) than any other position on the pitch. A modern fullback who cannot defend is a complete liability - any half decent opposition will make mincemeat out of a team with a modern fullback who can't defend properly. You cannot turn a blind eye to a fullback who can't defend. If you can't get a "modern fullback" to defend properly any sane coach will drop them and change formation to accommodate a more traditional, defensive minded fullback.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Apr 28, 2024 15:40:01 GMT
Ronaldo I agree but Kane? He's one of the most unselfish, team orientated strikers I can think of. The role he has for England as a withdrawn striker does make him the focal of point of the play but that's the job he's been asked to do, not because Kane wants the game to be all about him (unlike Ronaldo). If you don't like the way Kane plays for England you should really blame Southgate, not Kane. I can see why people think that but I think his motivation for is different to most others. If he’s not getting the ball up the pitch he will drop for it because he wants the game to be about him. I think he’s one of the most selfish players around and just gets in the way doing the job others should be doing. England would be much better off without him. We have better players who he gets in the way of. Southgate can get in the bin too Kane is one of the most unassuming players you could find - he really isn't the sort who would make it all about him. The role he plays for England isn't Kane being the big i am - it's purely tactical. What he does in that role is completely unselfish - he forgoes being the main goal threat in order to pull defenders forward and create space for others. You really have got that all wrong.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Apr 28, 2024 14:12:10 GMT
MANHOEF JUNHO BURGER TEZGEL? TCHAMADEU SIDBE? LOWE? Thin on the ground but let’s wait until Xmas and see where they are I agree, and think time will tell on those youngsters. I'd add the following: GOOCH VIDIGAL - our highest scorer after "own goal"! I also think Thompson, Laurant, Stevens, and Bonham are better than the flack they get on Oatcake. Three of them have played well recently, and justified their places in the match day squad. Walters has to find a spine: GK, 2× CBs, Striker. I'd sell Campbell to raise the money to buy. I can't see Walters leading on squad building - Dublin will be uncovering the talent and Schumacher deciding on formation and the type of player he wants.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Apr 28, 2024 13:52:11 GMT
Burger and Bae have looked knackered the last few games which isn't surprising given their age, the physical demands of this league and a 46 game season. They both need resting, no point risking a long term injury in a dead rubber. I'd go:
Iverson Hoever Wilmot McNally Stevens Cundle Thompson Laurent Million Campbell (a chance to say goodbye) Vidigal
and give Lowe, Junior and Sidibe a bit of game time if the game allows.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Apr 28, 2024 13:33:53 GMT
Hmmmmm. Goalscorers can be problematic I agree. But usually to the team they’re scoring against. Ronaldo did it at Juve and Man Yoo. It becomes all about them and not the team effort. Ronaldo I agree but Kane? He's one of the most unselfish, team orientated strikers I can think of. The role he has for England as a withdrawn striker does make him the focal of point of the play but that's the job he's been asked to do, not because Kane wants the game to be all about him (unlike Ronaldo). If you don't like the way Kane plays for England you should really blame Southgate, not Kane.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Apr 28, 2024 5:28:19 GMT
Done the job he was brought in to do and earned his right to see what he can do with us next season.
There have been some good signs recently of what he can do and some if the football has been good to watch. This was his first taste of leading a club through a difficult patch and credit to him for coming through. He'll be a better head coach for the experience and he will have earned the respect of the players for digging us out of a hole.
I'm pretty positive about next season and if we can sort the defence out I can see us getting our first top half finish since relegation. That might not be enough for some but for me that's finally turning the corner.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Apr 27, 2024 10:29:34 GMT
They won't make any of it back that way.They will manage to get some of his wages paid if they are lucky. Remember how we had to loan out players for years under MON and we didn't get any of our money back either. Mistakes in the transfer market are very costly nowadays and Leicester are going to have to pay the price. It will depend on the market won't it? Getting a loan fee and a wage contribution 2-3 times will help a lot towards covering the total outlay of his contract. Leicester have to sell but they can't afford to sell cheap. I think you are right - Souttar is more likely to be loaned out to avoid a big loss next year. One of the promoted sides might pay big money for him but I don't think any Championship sides could afford him, including us. Move on.
|
|
|
Campbell
Apr 26, 2024 14:03:44 GMT
via mobile
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Apr 26, 2024 14:03:44 GMT
Ty is soooo much more effective coming in off the left or right hand hand side, he struggles at centre forward and it has been shown time and time again. I want him to stay, he has real pace, can beat a man and he has got the scoring touch albeit he has not fired this season. I would like to see him and Million on either side with a decent number 9 and Junho as the 10 behind. Lovely stuff. There was an article a couple of months back that said Campbell told Schumacher his favoured position was as a central striker and that's how Schumacher was going to play him the rest of the season. You are right in that he scores more goals cutting in from the side but he just doesn't contribute to the team in the same way others do who are playing in that position. Campbell's main strength is finishing so I can see why Schumacher has given him a position where he only has one job. Problem is he isn't got the movement or physical presence to be that effective. As to building a game plan to accommodate a particular player that's really park football where you happen to have a player in a different class to everyone else in the league. Campbell really isn't in that category.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Apr 25, 2024 10:19:30 GMT
hoping the scouse connection with sjw and the boss could help with this. A true leader. If we got Coady in, I’d seriously consider trying to get McNally back to partner him. Luke is the kind of player who’d flourish better with a more no-nonsense defender alongside him. Agree with that but I also think Rose and Wilmott would be better with a no-nonsense defender alongside them. The problem we have at the moment is you can't put together a solid defensive unit between the three of them - they are too similar and none of them is a natural leader.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Apr 25, 2024 10:12:12 GMT
This squad is what happens when a manager brings his mate in to sign 20 players in a scattergun approach. Said manager then fails to piece it all together and creates a team with no consistent strategy to games that ends up with no confidence. That manager is then sacked. New manager has to come in and try and deal with not only trying to get a tune out of the mess he's inherited but also manage the fallouts, the bad behaviour and the poor morale. As is looking likely, if Schumacher steers us to a 17th place finish, he's done a very decent job. He probably wasn't the right manager for the very difficult situation we were in in all fairness. But this time its starting to look like JC has had a wild punt of his come off for once. I see bright things ahead personally. I reckon we got a good one 🙏 He obviously wasn't the right man if you were trying to employ a firefighter but doing that would have been extremely short-termist. I think they (Coates/Martin) saw what I saw and thought a team that was incapable of scoring goals needed someone who got their team scoring. In hindsight it didn't work as he was not able to get the team scoring at a significantly higher rate than the last bloke. However I think both of them were hampered by a squad bereft of goalscorers and am still keen to see what Schu can do with hopefully some better tools provided. The Plymouth game was the most enjoyable for a long time and I'm hoping for more of that style of football executed by some players with a better instinct and track record of goals to add to the successes of this season which there have been quite a few despite what a god awful season it's been. If you are fighting a fire you worry about putting the fire out, not wasting your time worrying about what curtains will go with your new colour scheme. If you need a firefighter by definition you need a short termist. Schumacher had some initial success building on the pragmatism introduced by Gallagher but when he went whole hog for his more attacking style the wheels fell off and we ended up in the relegation zone so, as you say, he went more pragmatic and as a result we have a decent chance of staying up. Are you saying he should have carried on playing entertaining football for the sake of it even if it increased the odds of us going down?
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Apr 25, 2024 8:09:44 GMT
Get rid at the end of the season. He has not improved the results or performances to a degree that he can take us forward to challenge for a play off place. SJW appears and then things started improving perhaps we are starting to sort the top of the club out but feel we need a manager with more tactical acumen than what we have. Even if we finish in 17th position its been another woeful underachieving season. nothing to celebrate here, beating Plymouth and getting to 50 points should be a bare minimum, much work to be done. Managers do not turn poor teams into good ones - the best any manager can do is to get the best out of what they have got. You are damning Schumacher because he's not done what no manager could do - turn a side only just good enough to avoid relegation into one that was capable of a comfortable mid table/top half finish. That was never going to happen. Just about surviving this season would be an achievement, not a failure. Relegation would be a failure.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Apr 24, 2024 8:31:41 GMT
He's done what he was hired to do. Saturday's performance hopefully has rejuvenated everybody. He has lots to learn but I've come down on the side of giving him the opportunity to build a side and having a pop at top six. He seems a nice bloke and it will be great if he we sing his name every week. I don't think he was initially hired to keep us up. Although that's what it sadly turned in to. There was talk of an outside run at the play-offs when he first came in. You might be right in that the people hiring him thought we were just underperforming and a new manager would just get the team performing at the higher level they were capable of. If they thought that they were wrong - both Neil and Schumacher are getting what they can out of this squad and that squad is a bottom half Championship side that is perectly capable of getting relegated - and still could. When we sacked Neil I thought we would be in for a relegation battle and that Schumacher was a high risk appointment for that role. He's actually doing ok and for me, if not others, he will have done his job if we avoid relegation. I suspect those wanting rid of Schumacher also thought we are capable of a top half finish and that a good/better manager would have got us there so in those terms he's failed. I think a good/better manager would have seen us safe earlier but I just don't think this squad is top half material.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Apr 23, 2024 12:48:18 GMT
There's no evidence he can make the club a top half team. On the other hand he hasn't exactly performed badly enough to be replaced. I guess it depends on what the clubs aspirations are. I completely agree. For ten years we were flying high in the Premier League and for three of those years we were the 9th best club in England! We played an FA Cup final and competed in Europe. Has all that been forgotten? Are there no aspirations to return to the top flight? Surely, the whole point of the Championship is to secure promotion to the Premier League? That's the essence of the very existence of the Championship. Each club starts the season in the hope of being promoted. I'm willing to give Schu another season to prove himself. All we need to do is finish 6th and we have a chance of promotion. Who knows if he can make it happen? Or will my son's kids have had their own kids and I am dead and buried before we get promoted to put the great city of Stoke-on-Trent on the sporting map once more? Of course supporters have aspirations for promotion but harking back to our Premier League days has become one of our problems. Under Pulis everyone wanted us to get promotion but no-one really expected it - the fans just got behind the team regardless, beat a lot of those ex Premiership sides who couldn't understand why they were slumming it with the likes of Stoke in the Championship and took the piss out their fans for thinking they were better than us. Now we've had our day in the limelight promotion has become an expectation and every manager that fails to get us back where "we belong" is derided as a failure. We have become the very fans we used to take the piss out of.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Apr 23, 2024 7:20:08 GMT
It isn't a photograph - it's a still from a video frozen played at slow speed at the moment the ball leaves the foot of the the person passing the ball. Strictly speaking it is more accurate than a linesman making the decision in real time but that isn't the point. Going for ridiculous levels of accuracy is just killing the live experience. VAR is for pendants and arm chair fans - it's ruining the experience for the fans actually at the game. VAR was supposed to get rid of controversy and it hasn't, if anything it's made things worse. I thought at the time the Coventry player was offside but has VAR actually made that game better? I'm sure Man Utd fans would be moaning their bag off in perpetuity about being robbed but I'm pretty sure the sum total of human happiness would have increased substantially had the goal stood and it would have been remembered as one of the greatest FA Cup semi finals of all time even if everyone knew the winning goal might have been millimeters offside. Fuck accuracy, it's the emotion that counts - people can live with mistakes, television pedantry is killing the live experience. If we were robbed by an offside goal in a semi final would we be moaning?...in fact decades later some still are about a game where they feel we were hard done by . I get that many wanted the big upset but clouding it Of course we would. And we would be moaning if VAR robbed us of possibly the greatest moment in our footballing history. How many football fans do you know who would say well to be fair VAR was right our strikers toe was in front of their defenders. Apart from the one on his own in the corner of the pub reading Pedants Monthly latest fascinating article on the impact of pixel density on the eradication of spontaneous joy in competitive sport.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Apr 23, 2024 6:35:04 GMT
Thats not true when the evidence presented is so inconclusive and ambiguous. There are so many questions over how this was applied. Whether the line used is accurate (I don't think it is) and the angle used distorts the reality (the angle and its application is not reliable) Why the photo used for decision making is not consistent with when the ball is actually kicked.The lino decided it wasn't offside so that seems alot more dependable in this case. at least he was actually more in line with play. VAR wasn't. The crux of the matter is the use of a 'photograph' to determine on or offside. It is impossible to determine the decisive moment when the ball was played and the receiving player moved. It's a dynamic team sport not a man jumping over a puddle at the Gare du Nor. Regardless of club loyalty or bias, any football fan watching that knows that Coventry were denied the greatest FA Cup semi final comeback in history (other decisions within the game prior to this offside are moot). It isn't a photograph - it's a still from a video frozen played at slow speed at the moment the ball leaves the foot of the the person passing the ball. Strictly speaking it is more accurate than a linesman making the decision in real time but that isn't the point. Going for ridiculous levels of accuracy is just killing the live experience. VAR is for pendants and arm chair fans - it's ruining the experience for the fans actually at the game. VAR was supposed to get rid of controversy and it hasn't, if anything it's made things worse. I thought at the time the Coventry player was offside but has VAR actually made that game better? I'm sure Man Utd fans would be moaning their bag off in perpetuity about being robbed but I'm pretty sure the sum total of human happiness would have increased substantially had the goal stood and it would have been remembered as one of the greatest FA Cup semi finals of all time even if everyone knew the winning goal might have been millimeters offside. Fuck accuracy, it's the emotion that counts - people can live with mistakes, television pedantry is killing the live experience.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Apr 23, 2024 6:06:30 GMT
If we stay up he's succeded and if we go down he's failed. It's pointless coming to a verdict now and it's daft to judge him on the basis that he hasn't come in and turned us into a top half team.
The fact is we have been relegation candidates all season and that would have been true under any manager. There is only one criteria for success this season and that is avoiding relegation and he hasn't done that yet. If we avoid relegation he stays for me and if we go down he goes.
We had a huge turnover last summer and the transformation of the squad was only half done. We tried to sort out the attack and it didn't come off and we made a complete pigs ear of the defence and have struggled all season as a result. However we've made in some really good players and get those other areas right we could do a lot better next season under Schumacher if we stay up. Go down and there will be a queue at the managers door wanting out and the job becomes a whole lot harder.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Apr 21, 2024 16:47:56 GMT
He attended a selective state school. His mother was a nurse and his father a toolmaker and both Labour party members. He was a man of the people, and he did very well at school and went to Leeds university and then Oxford for a postgrad and he became a barrister and did extremely well, ending up as Head of the CPS. Class isn’t about how much money you earn and how successful you are. Or are you saying nobody who is working class can be successful and be paid a lot? What about most footballers? Are they upper class? Wayne Rooney? Lord Alan Sugar? Are they upper class? The whole idea that you can’t move between “class” is stupid and really pays into the British psyche of the little lamb that must do what their “betters” command. He may well have had a normal beginning but he is 61. He’s spent far more of his life in luxury than without. Yes, footballers like Wayne Rooney absolutely are in the “Upper Class”. They can pretty much do what they want, when they want. The idea that “class” is more than money is archaic and degrading. The idea of class being more than money is not archaic - the definition of class and how it operates in British society hasn't changed. The idea that you have to have money and join the upper classes in order to be given the opportunity to have an important role in society is degrading. Why shouldn't someone from a working class background who hasn't dedicated their life to become rich not have the opportunity to be, for example, Prime Minister? Class in the country is still more than just about wealth in fact the traditional upper class have always sneered at people who have acquired wealth through their own gf are work. Places At the top universities and certain professions (law, journalism, the acting profession) is massively skewed to people in the upper classes and against those in the working classes. The answer isn't individual acquiring wealth in order to become "better" than they are but to get rid of the assumption that people of the upper classes are "better" than those from the lower classes. We are still a class based society. We need to get rid of the invidious role class and how it continues to distort perceptions of worth and life opportunity.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Apr 21, 2024 14:38:54 GMT
If Wednesday had lost we looked safe but it looks far from over now. All the teams below us have been pulling off results - at the moment the magical 50 points doesn't look enough.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Apr 21, 2024 7:18:47 GMT
His goal last week was crucial and was superbly taken. Tremendous today but up to this he’s been way off. If you were to judge on his overall contribution you’d probably pass on trying to sign him. I’d like to see him start last two games to see which Cundle turns up There were glimpses of what he can offer from day one and personally I thought he was getting a lot of unfair criticism. The big problem hasn't been individual performances, it's been teamwork. Yesterday we looked like a proper team and with everyone playing well individuals had the chance to shine and show what they can do, Cundle included
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Apr 19, 2024 6:55:39 GMT
Eustace has had less time than Schumacher to turn things round and yes my point was that he started by making them hard to beat and they are coming into good form at the right time. We are still a bit of a soft touch and our performances are still erratic. If you asked me which manager is better equipped to deal with a relegation battle I'd still say Eustace. The problem is there were people who didn't think we were a relegation threatened team when Schumacher was appointed and it was just a matter of steering them to a top half finish. If that were the case then Schumacher was a decent choice but it wasn't. We were in a relegation battle and we needed a manager with a track record of knowing what to do in a relegation battle. Schumacher is winging it, Eustace knows what he is doing. So by your logic, John Eustace's record of knowing what to do in a relegation battle, was from when he "winged it" last season (when they finished on 53 points, the same as Stoke) because he'd had no experience of one before then, if indeed that even was really a relegation battle? Birmingham were definitely in a relegation battle under Eustace - it's rather odd to question his credentials because he actually did so well. Even if Eustace's first relegation battle was with Birmingham the point is he succeeded so he had that experience when he was an option for Stoke and he's repeating the trick at Blackburn. Eustace's appointment by Birmingham may well have been a risk for Birmingham but now he has that experience under his belt it is less of a risk now. There's nothing wrong with my logic - Schumacher was a far riskier appointment for a club in relegation battle than Eustace. The fact it may have been a risk at the time for Birmingham is completely irrelevant.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Apr 18, 2024 11:28:05 GMT
So, we went and signed Cundle and Ennis on the say so of someone other than Schumacher then did we? Just one big coinkydinky they both happened to play for Plymouth while he was manager. While we were going out and signing them without direction from Schumacher he was going mad back at CW as we point blank refused his demands for a LB. A likely story No both of those are clearly Schumacher led Both are also cheap the big money went on Manhoef (& he looks a good signing) however it's been made publicly clear that Schumacher expressed dissatisfaction re RM (in charge of recruitment) not signing a left back it was sited at the time of RM sacking I think there mice on the moon who are aware that this was a row within the club in January The recruitment model has been a mixture of manager led signings and 'club' signings for quite some time now, it's usually pretty obvious which signings are which Moving forward now we have a bone fide football man rather than a bullshitting spreadsheet no mark in the role it seems probable that a more joined up to recruitment is on its way The best signings we made last summer and January (Burger, JunHo, Manhoef) were the ones made by the spreadsheet people, not the manager. Most of the clubs with a record for uncovering talent do it through specialist backroom staff, not the manager and data analysis plays a big part in that.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Apr 18, 2024 11:12:55 GMT
In the last 10 games Stoke Won 3 Drawn 3 Lost 4 Points 12 Blackburn Won 2 Drawn 5 Lost 3 Points 11 Eustace total blackburn record Played 14 won 2 drawn 8 lost 4 Points 14 Yeah, I was going to come on to make the same point, however, I think his point may be that they steadied the ship with draws and their more recent form is better than ours which is probably right. Definitely much of a muchness though, and Schumacher overall has a better record in terms of points gained. I would suggest our form/performances have probably been more erratic than Blackburn's. Eustace has had less time than Schumacher to turn things round and yes my point was that he started by making them hard to beat and they are coming into good form at the right time. We are still a bit of a soft touch and our performances are still erratic. If you asked me which manager is better equipped to deal with a relegation battle I'd still say Eustace. The problem is there were people who didn't think we were a relegation threatened team when Schumacher was appointed and it was just a matter of steering them to a top half finish. If that were the case then Schumacher was a decent choice but it wasn't. We were in a relegation battle and we needed a manager with a track record of knowing what to do in a relegation battle. Schumacher is winging it, Eustace knows what he is doing.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Apr 18, 2024 9:48:50 GMT
I think Schumacher has the potential to be a decent manager but it was a mistake to appoint him in the situation we were in because he hasn't got the experience to deal with it. At Plymouth he inherited a stable club on the up and ran with it - the situation here was the polar opposite. It was always a Mad Nath style wishful thinking appointment and very likely to go wrong. The fact he isn't doing any worse is an achievement and better than what Jones managed. The atmosphere behind the scenes looks to have improved but he really hasn't made much of an impact on the pitch - we are still woefully inconsistent, capable of conceding stupid goals and incapable of creating and taking many scoring chances. The football is a better watch at times but the results haven't improved much. I think it's 50/50 whether we stay up and if we do stay up he deserves a chance next season to show what he can do. If we go down I'm not convinced he's the right man for the job. I don't blame Schumacher for struggling - we were and are in a bad place and most managers would have struggled. I don't get the high handed expectation of some supporters that we were just there to be turned around and he's failed to do something dead easy so therefore he must be crap. He's not crap - the team he inherited just isn't very good and he doesn't have the experience to work out how to get the best from what he's got. Which is what you get if you go for a manager with very little experience and no experience of dealing with a team in a relegation battle. It was a very risky appointment. Good post. I'll caveat it by adding that any manager is a risk. We've had wet behind the ears to experienced. All failed/struggled, so suggests it's very hard job for any manager. Who was available at the time to replace the lamentable Alex Neil (who was experienced btw) Yes all new managers are a risk but lack of experience of dealing with a bad situation just makes the appointment even higher risk. Not an exciting appointment but I would have gone for John Eustace - been there done that at Birmingham and was sacked for no good reason when near the top of the league - and look where they are now. Doing a decent job in similar circumstances at Blackburn having taken over later than Schumacher. Eustace started by making Blackburn hard to beat and they are going into the business end of the season in good form while we are treading water with no consistency in terms of starting 11, formation or level of performance. I know who I would prefer in charge at this points of the season when you need to grind out results.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Apr 18, 2024 9:23:06 GMT
What happens at every other club bar Stoke? Managers make an instant change. It doesn’t happen every time but it happens a lot. We’ve tried it how many times now and have the same bollocks excuses. This article gives a pretty balanced view on the matter - socceranalytics.substack.com/p/is-the-new-manager-bounce-reallyBasically the conclusion is it happens sometimes but not alot and if it does it might be because the club sacked the manager at a particularly low point and would have improved anyway. The main conclusion is that any new manager bounce isn't that significant in terms of long term impact and isn't actually that important for medium/long term success.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Apr 18, 2024 9:05:31 GMT
I think Schumacher has the potential to be a decent manager but it was a mistake to appoint him in the situation we were in because he hasn't got the experience to deal with it. At Plymouth he inherited a stable club on the up and ran with it - the situation here was the polar opposite. It was always a Mad Nath style wishful thinking appointment and very likely to go wrong. The fact he isn't doing any worse is an achievement and better than what Jones managed.
The atmosphere behind the scenes looks to have improved but he really hasn't made much of an impact on the pitch - we are still woefully inconsistent, capable of conceding stupid goals and incapable of creating and taking many scoring chances. The football is a better watch at times but the results haven't improved much.
I think it's 50/50 whether we stay up and if we do stay up he deserves a chance next season to show what he can do. If we go down I'm not convinced he's the right man for the job.
I don't blame Schumacher for struggling - we were and are in a bad place and most managers would have struggled. I don't get the high handed expectation of some supporters that we were just there to be turned around and he's failed to do something dead easy so therefore he must be crap. He's not crap - the team he inherited just isn't very good and he doesn't have the experience to work out how to get the best from what he's got. Which is what you get if you go for a manager with very little experience and no experience of dealing with a team in a relegation battle. It was a very risky appointment.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Apr 18, 2024 7:13:10 GMT
There was a point where it looked like Southampton would have nothing to play for and might rest players against us with an eye on the playoffs but they are in decent form and very much back in the mix for automatic promotion. Looks like a regulation loss to me. We need the points from the Plymouth and Bristol games.
|
|