|
Post by leesandfordstoupe on Aug 19, 2022 15:01:30 GMT
It is when that's the default setting. The manager kept saying they've got to be braver on the ball last season which seemed to have been heeded somewhat vs Blackpool but we were back to default vs Boro. Are the players getting mixed messages ie you've got to be braver with the ball conjoined with a blame culture when they try things that don't come off? or is that just interview talk and he's the root of the caution? Against Blackpool Tymon and Clarke pushed up and the shape of the team from the outset was 352. Against Boro we had a Thompson filling in and Fosu who had been at the club for about 48 hours and from the outset Boro pressed and we ended up shaping up in a 532 and never got to take the game to the opposition until we went gung ho and chucked the kitchen sink at it and got lucky. The Boro performance was nothing to do with a blame culture or being overly cautious - it was a switched on opposition exploiting a patched up team that played badly on the day. Who's fault is that? Plenty of us have been banging on about lack of cover and quality in wide areas for literally months and your puddled mate keeps signing players he doesn't need instead. Also the patched up team might have worked a whole lot better if his midfield wasn't such an undisciplined mess. That's by design not due to injuries or poor squad building or anything else. He thinks it brings fluidity when in fact it's just a clusterfuck.
|
|
|
Post by phill51 on Aug 19, 2022 15:51:19 GMT
Against Blackpool Tymon and Clarke pushed up and the shape of the team from the outset was 352. Against Boro we had a Thompson filling in and Fosu who had been at the club for about 48 hours and from the outset Boro pressed and we ended up shaping up in a 532 and never got to take the game to the opposition until we went gung ho and chucked the kitchen sink at it and got lucky. The Boro performance was nothing to do with a blame culture or being overly cautious - it was a switched on opposition exploiting a patched up team that played badly on the day. Who's fault is that? Plenty of us have been banging on about lack of cover and quality in wide areas for literally months and your puddled mate keeps signing players he doesn't need instead. Also the patched up team might have worked a whole lot better if his midfield wasn't such an undisciplined mess. That's by design not due to injuries or poor squad building or anything else. He thinks it brings fluidity when in fact it's just a clusterfuck. But he did sign cover for Tymon - McCarron, who got injured. He did sign a disciplined midfielder - Laurent, who got injured. He did sign a young athletic wing-back - Clarke, who got injured. Who's fault is all that? I'm not convinced by the 3-5-2 formation either but, come on, who could have forseen all the above?
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Aug 19, 2022 15:53:37 GMT
Who's fault is that? Plenty of us have been banging on about lack of cover and quality in wide areas for literally months and your puddled mate keeps signing players he doesn't need instead. Also the patched up team might have worked a whole lot better if his midfield wasn't such an undisciplined mess. That's by design not due to injuries or poor squad building or anything else. He thinks it brings fluidity when in fact it's just a clusterfuck. But he did sign cover for Tymon - McCarron, who got injured. He did sign a disciplined midfielder - Laurent, who got injured. He did sign a young athletic wing-back - Clarke, who got injured. Who's fault is all that? I'm not convinced by the 3-5-2 formation either but, come on, who could have forseen all the above? So change formation til they’re fit again? And he still could’ve picked a balanced midfield without Laurent, picking Clucas defied explanation beyond at an absolute push getting him in the shop window.
|
|
|
Post by robwahlmann on Aug 19, 2022 15:54:41 GMT
Who's fault is that? Plenty of us have been banging on about lack of cover and quality in wide areas for literally months and your puddled mate keeps signing players he doesn't need instead. Also the patched up team might have worked a whole lot better if his midfield wasn't such an undisciplined mess. That's by design not due to injuries or poor squad building or anything else. He thinks it brings fluidity when in fact it's just a clusterfuck. But he did sign cover for Tymon - McCarron, who got injured. He did sign a disciplined midfielder - Laurent, who got injured. He did sign a young athletic wing-back - Clarke, who got injured. Who's fault is all that? I'm not convinced by the 3-5-2 formation either but, come on, who could have forseen all the above? He picked Clucas ahead of Killkenny FFS!
|
|
|
Post by phill51 on Aug 19, 2022 16:26:38 GMT
But he did sign cover for Tymon - McCarron, who got injured. He did sign a disciplined midfielder - Laurent, who got injured. He did sign a young athletic wing-back - Clarke, who got injured. Who's fault is all that? I'm not convinced by the 3-5-2 formation either but, come on, who could have forseen all the above? So change formation til they’re fit again? And he still could’ve picked a balanced midfield without Laurent, picking Clucas defied explanation beyond at an absolute push getting him in the shop window. I agree, but that wasn't what was being discussed.
|
|
|
Post by leesandfordstoupe on Aug 19, 2022 16:27:54 GMT
Who's fault is that? Plenty of us have been banging on about lack of cover and quality in wide areas for literally months and your puddled mate keeps signing players he doesn't need instead. Also the patched up team might have worked a whole lot better if his midfield wasn't such an undisciplined mess. That's by design not due to injuries or poor squad building or anything else. He thinks it brings fluidity when in fact it's just a clusterfuck. But he did sign cover for Tymon - McCarron, who got injured. He did sign a disciplined midfielder - Laurent, who got injured. He did sign a young athletic wing-back - Clarke, who got injured. Who's fault is all that? I'm not convinced by the 3-5-2 formation either but, come on, who could have forseen all the above? Honestly who else? Half this fucking board for a start all paid about -£400 a year to have such foresight, yet a bloke paid a cool £1.5M per year never crossed his mind. The disciplined midfielder is not a personel issue he's still got them he just won't designate discipline and structure to their roles.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Aug 19, 2022 16:29:16 GMT
So change formation til they’re fit again? And he still could’ve picked a balanced midfield without Laurent, picking Clucas defied explanation beyond at an absolute push getting him in the shop window. I agree, but that wasn't what was being discussed. It was though? You’re talking as if he had no other options available to him due to injury, but he did.
|
|
|
Post by phill51 on Aug 19, 2022 16:30:03 GMT
But he did sign cover for Tymon - McCarron, who got injured. He did sign a disciplined midfielder - Laurent, who got injured. He did sign a young athletic wing-back - Clarke, who got injured. Who's fault is all that? I'm not convinced by the 3-5-2 formation either but, come on, who could have forseen all the above? Honestly who else? Half this fucking board for a start all paid about -£400 a year to have such foresight, yet a bloke paid a cool £1.5M per year never crossed his mind. The disciplined midfielder is not a personel issue he's still got them he just won't designate discipline and structure to their roles. So, how many wing-backs do we need to sign to cover for all eventualities?
|
|
|
Post by phill51 on Aug 19, 2022 16:31:41 GMT
I agree, but that wasn't what was being discussed. It was though? You’re talking as if he had no other options available to him due to injury, but he did. Of course he did but the criticism was about not getting cover for the 3-5-2 system, which he clearly did.
|
|
|
Post by leesandfordstoupe on Aug 19, 2022 16:38:50 GMT
Honestly who else? Half this fucking board for a start all paid about -£400 a year to have such foresight, yet a bloke paid a cool £1.5M per year never crossed his mind. The disciplined midfielder is not a personel issue he's still got them he just won't designate discipline and structure to their roles. So, how many wing-backs do we need to sign to cover for all eventualities? Two each side. We have one player in the entire squad with any historty of playing the positions at this level or above. No other positions in the squad are so neglected.
|
|
|
Post by leesandfordstoupe on Aug 19, 2022 16:40:42 GMT
But he did sign cover for Tymon - McCarron, who got injured. He did sign a disciplined midfielder - Laurent, who got injured. He did sign a young athletic wing-back - Clarke, who got injured. Who's fault is all that? I'm not convinced by the 3-5-2 formation either but, come on, who could have forseen all the above? He picked Clucas ahead of Killkenny FFS! He looked an improvement when he came on even though I don't like to see such tiny players in the role.
|
|
|
Post by phill51 on Aug 19, 2022 16:41:30 GMT
So, how many wing-backs do we need to sign to cover for all eventualities? Two each side. We have one player in the entire squad with any historty of playing the positions at this level or above. No other positions in the squad are so neglected. So, where was McCarron and Fosu signed to play?
|
|
|
Post by leesandfordstoupe on Aug 19, 2022 16:46:58 GMT
Two each side. We have one player in the entire squad with any historty of playing the positions at this level or above. No other positions in the squad are so neglected. So, where was McCarron and Fosu signed to play? I've no idea but take McCarron for example which other position in the squad has such inexperienced cover. It's a bit like Tezgel being your first change option up front. I think it's fair to say Fosu was a bit of a panic move because the RWB position that people were highlighting had no cover went tits up inside 3 games. We had no need for Dwight Gayle but the manager blew the budget on him.
|
|
|
Post by Veritas on Aug 19, 2022 16:47:09 GMT
Two each side. We have one player in the entire squad with any historty of playing the positions at this level or above. No other positions in the squad are so neglected. So, where was McCarron and Fosu signed to play? There you go again with facts, facts, facts why cloud the debate with facts
|
|
|
Post by phill51 on Aug 19, 2022 16:54:04 GMT
So, where was McCarron and Fosu signed to play? I've no idea but take McCarron for example which other position in the squad has such inexperienced cover. It's a bit like Tezgel being your first change option up front. I think it's fair to say Fosu was a bit of a panic move because the RWB position that people were highlighting had no cover went tits up inside 3 games. We had no need for Dwight Gayle but the manager blew the budget on him. How many players do you think we can afford? Fox is 'cover', whether you rate him or not. Sparrow was clearly cover for Clarke but Fosu was signed because Sparrow was considered to not be ready just yet. Who says we don't need Gayle? Looks like a very good signing to me.
|
|
|
Post by robwahlmann on Aug 19, 2022 17:01:13 GMT
He picked Clucas ahead of Killkenny FFS! He looked an improvement when he came on even though I don't like to see such tiny players in the role. Unfortunately Clucas can't play as one of two in central midfield as it leaves us wide open with no protection for the defence. Clucas can only play as our attacking midfielder, but to be honest he looks finished to me. We certainly need to go for Baker and Kilkenny tomorrow. The earlier we can get rid of Clucas the better I think. Etebo, Fox and Clucas out before the window shuts and a left sided central defender in would be great!
|
|
|
Post by leesandfordstoupe on Aug 19, 2022 17:02:45 GMT
I've no idea but take McCarron for example which other position in the squad has such inexperienced cover. It's a bit like Tezgel being your first change option up front. I think it's fair to say Fosu was a bit of a panic move because the RWB position that people were highlighting had no cover went tits up inside 3 games. We had no need for Dwight Gayle but the manager blew the budget on him. How many players do you think we can afford? Fox is 'cover', whether you rate him or not. Sparrow was clearly cover for Clarke but Fosu was signed because Sparrow was considered to not be ready just yet. Who says we don't need Gayle? Looks like a very good signing to me. Doesn't matter whether I rate him the manager obviously doesn't rate him enough to even be cover. Signing a good player that you don't need whilst neglecting other positions that are criminally under strength is not a good signing.
|
|
|
Post by phill51 on Aug 19, 2022 17:06:23 GMT
How many players do you think we can afford? Fox is 'cover', whether you rate him or not. Sparrow was clearly cover for Clarke but Fosu was signed because Sparrow was considered to not be ready just yet. Who says we don't need Gayle? Looks like a very good signing to me. Doesn't matter whether I rate him the manager obviously doesn't rate him enough to even be cover. Signing a good player that you don't need whilst neglecting other positions that are criminally under strength is not a good signing. Perhaps he has signed the players that he feels will help make an effective squad when the window closes.
|
|
|
Post by march4 on Aug 19, 2022 17:09:22 GMT
Who's fault is that? Plenty of us have been banging on about lack of cover and quality in wide areas for literally months and your puddled mate keeps signing players he doesn't need instead. Also the patched up team might have worked a whole lot better if his midfield wasn't such an undisciplined mess. That's by design not due to injuries or poor squad building or anything else. He thinks it brings fluidity when in fact it's just a clusterfuck. But he did sign cover for Tymon - McCarron, who got injured. He did sign a disciplined midfielder - Laurent, who got injured. He did sign a young athletic wing-back - Clarke, who got injured. Who's fault is all that? I'm not convinced by the 3-5-2 formation either but, come on, who could have forseen all the above? Injury, injury, injury. Season after season after season. I don’t believe in coincidences.
|
|
|
Post by phill51 on Aug 19, 2022 17:10:14 GMT
But he did sign cover for Tymon - McCarron, who got injured. He did sign a disciplined midfielder - Laurent, who got injured. He did sign a young athletic wing-back - Clarke, who got injured. Who's fault is all that? I'm not convinced by the 3-5-2 formation either but, come on, who could have forseen all the above? Injury, injury, injury. Season after season after season. I don’t believe in coincidences. So, March, to what do you attribute the cause of the problem?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 19, 2022 17:24:17 GMT
But he did sign cover for Tymon - McCarron, who got injured. He did sign a disciplined midfielder - Laurent, who got injured. He did sign a young athletic wing-back - Clarke, who got injured. Who's fault is all that? I'm not convinced by the 3-5-2 formation either but, come on, who could have forseen all the above? Injury, injury, injury. Season after season after season. I don’t believe in coincidences. They are nearly all impact injuries (not sure about Clarke) but Tymon, Laurent and the long term ones are. It's not fitness which you are clearly inferring.
|
|
|
Post by themistocles on Aug 19, 2022 17:27:08 GMT
Injury, injury, injury. Season after season after season. I don’t believe in coincidences. They are nearly all impact injuries (not sure about Clarke) but Tymon, Laurent and the long term ones are. It's not fitness which you are clearly inferring. No it could be conditioning - lack of or over during preseason. The amount of injuries we get is no coincidence.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 19, 2022 17:32:51 GMT
They are nearly all impact injuries (not sure about Clarke) but Tymon, Laurent and the long term ones are. It's not fitness which you are clearly inferring. No it could be conditioning - lack of or over during preseason. The amount of injuries we get is no coincidence. Impact injuries have nothing to do with conditioning. Muscle injuries fair enough but I don't think any are muscle injuries are they?
|
|
|
Post by nottsover60 on Aug 19, 2022 17:33:56 GMT
But he did sign cover for Tymon - McCarron, who got injured. He did sign a disciplined midfielder - Laurent, who got injured. He did sign a young athletic wing-back - Clarke, who got injured. Who's fault is all that? I'm not convinced by the 3-5-2 formation either but, come on, who could have forseen all the above? Honestly who else? Half this fucking board for a start all paid about -£400 a year to have such foresight, yet a bloke paid a cool £1.5M per year never crossed his mind. The disciplined midfielder is not a personel issue he's still got them he just won't designate discipline and structure to their roles. Two players for each position is a squad of 22. You need an extra gk as it's a specialised position. That leaves two places for cover of cover. How do you decide which positions need that? Powell's cover probably need s it because he'll play half a season and a versatile defender. After that it has to be square pegs if both players are injured for a position. Be realistic.
|
|
|
Post by leesandfordstoupe on Aug 19, 2022 17:38:32 GMT
Honestly who else? Half this fucking board for a start all paid about -£400 a year to have such foresight, yet a bloke paid a cool £1.5M per year never crossed his mind. The disciplined midfielder is not a personel issue he's still got them he just won't designate discipline and structure to their roles. Two players for each position is a squad of 22. You need an extra gk as it's a specialised position. That leaves two places for cover of cover. How do you decide which positions need that? Powell's cover probably need s it because he'll play half a season and a versatile defender. After that it has to be square pegs if both players are injured for a position. Be realistic. It's very realistic it's the most physically demanding position on the pitch therefore not only do you need cover it should closer to equivalent quality to first choice as your cover for other positions because you're far more likeley to have to use it on a more regular and sustained basis due to fatigue both in game and rotating starts to keep these players fresh.
|
|
|
Post by themistocles on Aug 19, 2022 17:40:39 GMT
No it could be conditioning - lack of or over during preseason. The amount of injuries we get is no coincidence. Impact injuries have nothing to do with conditioning. Muscle injuries fair enough but I don't think any are muscle injuries are they? Yes. The incorrect conditioning of a player can increase the liklihood of injury, including impact injuries. To put it simply. Over conditioning/ training during preseason (common occurrence) can cause lower limb structure fragility. Getting an impact on a fragile ankle vs non fragile/ well conditioning ankle will result in a higher rate of injury.
|
|
|
Post by terryconroysmagic on Aug 19, 2022 18:18:01 GMT
Against Blackpool Tymon and Clarke pushed up and the shape of the team from the outset was 352. Against Boro we had a Thompson filling in and Fosu who had been at the club for about 48 hours and from the outset Boro pressed and we ended up shaping up in a 532 and never got to take the game to the opposition until we went gung ho and chucked the kitchen sink at it and got lucky. The Boro performance was nothing to do with a blame culture or being overly cautious - it was a switched on opposition exploiting a patched up team that played badly on the day. Never the manager’s fault is it… And amazing how their manager got them “switched on” and pressing away from home, if only our manager could weave that type of sorcery…
|
|
|
Post by Squeekster on Aug 19, 2022 18:19:20 GMT
From what I hear, any "value" and transfer potential that Clucas might have has been severely diminished by his recent very poor "shop window" appearances. We'd probably have to take a loss on him to get him out the door. No resale value and can't imagine anyone paying him more than we are....as such this is probably a dead duck. He will be with us until the end of his contract, unless there is a manager out there that has some kind of weird fixation on a peak Clucas playing 2 years ago and further back. I think I heard that when Clucas signed the new deal it was on reduced terms but over a longer period to spread the cost that way?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 19, 2022 18:21:04 GMT
Impact injuries have nothing to do with conditioning. Muscle injuries fair enough but I don't think any are muscle injuries are they? Yes. The incorrect conditioning of a player can increase the liklihood of injury, including impact injuries. To put it simply. Over conditioning/ training during preseason (common occurrence) can cause lower limb structure fragility. Getting an impact on a fragile ankle vs non fragile/ well conditioning ankle will result in a higher rate of injury. So now it's not the players are not fit enough, it's the players are over conditioned and over trained i.e. too fit.
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Aug 19, 2022 18:26:50 GMT
He mentions free agents as a possible pool for the left-sided CB, presumably if we can't get Clarke, and says loans are now "less attractive" due to the rule about 5 loanees max in the 18.
Can't see any LCB contenders on the free agent list though. Naby Sarr is the only one who stands out a bit, and he's been waiting to join Reading for about 3 weeks (and that probably tells you about how he's viewed even if that doesn't go through?)
|
|