|
|
Post by Hudson1883 on Jan 9, 2020 21:57:20 GMT
This thread is a real gem.
Joined in 6th place and 5 points from the automatics with a game still in hand & 23 matches to come.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2020 0:59:09 GMT
Remember when old man Johnson took over the sh**e and lost his first 9 games? Promoted the following season iirc.f**king ridiculous to write off any manager after 5 games. The problem is a lot of comparisons that are going on are with managers who had already established themselves. This is the guy’s first managerial job, the margin for error is much less than that of a Gary Johnson. He may just be a crap manager, and that’s that. It’s hard to argue the contrary at this particular point in time because he has no record anywhere else of turning round a losing run or of motivating players. |
|
|
|
Post by worrelsterlingalbion on Jan 10, 2020 7:47:09 GMT
How anyone can be written off after 5 games in beyond me. When GC was leading us to 4th I lost count of the number of posts that labelled us as lucky to be where we were. Remember Southend ? The general concensus on here was we should have been out of the game but we're gifted a win by them being so bad and we couldn't keep getting away with it.
We've had a number of injuries that's not an excuse it's a fact and the same players have had to battle on over the festive period with no break no doubt a number of them have been playing with injuries.
Garner deserves time, unfortunately that's something a lot don't seem prepared to give him.
|
|
|
|
Post by brads213 on Jan 10, 2020 7:58:01 GMT
I am not going to write the guy off after a few weeks in charge in arguably the busiest period, must be hard to get ideas across and practice them. However we cant let losing become a habit, so the balance needs to be right. 4 games in 11 days. With another 2 games within a week. Injuries, fatigue and a very thin squad doesn't help. What might help is if we don't start getting on Garners back and do our usual full on support from the terraces. Gee whizz 4 games in 11 days poor sods when I was working it was a 6 day week at least 10 hours a day grow some balls and get on with the job you are paid for |
|
|
|
Post by peterparker on Jan 10, 2020 8:06:00 GMT
4 games in 11 days. With another 2 games within a week. Injuries, fatigue and a very thin squad doesn't help. What might help is if we don't start getting on Garners back and do our usual full on support from the terraces. Gee whizz 4 games in 11 days poor sods when I was working it was a 6 day week at least 10 hours a day grow some balls and get on with the job you are paid for It's all relative though. can they manage it? yes probably as they are professional athletes. But in the context of whom and what they are playing matters.
They may be fit enough to play 4 games in 11 days, but it stands to reason if we are playing a team that only 2 games in 11 days the opposition will be fitter and fresher
|
|
|
|
Post by peterparker on Jan 10, 2020 8:08:47 GMT
This thread is a real gem. Joined in 6th place and 5 points from the automatics with a game still in hand & 23 matches to come. and the only thing that is changed is we are now 8th, 5 points of the automatics with a game in hand |
|
|
|
Post by lastminutewinner on Jan 10, 2020 8:18:19 GMT
This thread is a real gem. Joined in 6th place and 5 points from the automatics with a game still in hand & 23 matches to come. and the only thing that is changed is we are now 8th, 5 points of the automatics with a game in hand
Just makes you wonder what could have been if GC had not left and caused all this disruption at the busiest part of the season.
|
|
|
|
Post by gasandelectricity on Jan 10, 2020 8:41:07 GMT
Personally speaking, I didn’t agree with the appointment of Garner - I thought he was the wrong profile of manager brought in at the wrong time. HOWEVER, now the appointment has been made, which was clearly an appointment made with a view to the long-term, we have to give it time IMO. Certainly a lot longer than 17 days. I always thought it was going to be a tough job for any external manager coming in. There was never going to be a ‘new manager bounce’ for a side that had just won away at 2nd in the league to go 4th. There just wasn’t. Not to mention we’re currently suffering what must be one of our worst periods in terms of injury in a long, long time. It’s hardly surprising that we’re lacking the steel and bite of the GC days when the two players who gave us that bite and steel in midfield - Clarke & Ogogo - have barely been fit since BG arrived. But the biggest reason of all to give this appointment time is that as of yet, the manager we hired has had almost no time at all to use what must be his biggest strength - his coaching. To appoint a Premier League level coach and then get on his back before he’s even been able to use his skillset properly is madness, IMO. I understand the doubts (I have some of them myself) and I understand the unhappiness at seeing what was a very promising league position slip away since he got the job, but to call for Garner’s head now is perhaps the biggest knee-jerk reaction I can ever remember - even for our toys-out-the-pram fanbase. I don’t think anyone’s calling for his head, most are just very worried. And rightly so. This isn’t an experienced head but a first time manager whos football is opposite to what we’ve been playing before. He has come out and said evolution not revolution, and done quite the opposite. We’d have been fine with that if we were 20th and facing possible relegation but we were the complete other end of the table with a system which was working. It’s the manner he has chucked in that style and ripped up what was working that scares me. If it was José many wouldn’t bat an eyelid but Ben Garner needs to prove himself. I read with interest Ollies article in the post on his first week at Grimsby and match against Mansfield and wished we’d have picked someone with his man management skills and experience. He set up sessions to kick off the club, I expect Ben had sessions pointing at his coaching badges. |
|
|
|
Post by peterparker on Jan 10, 2020 9:18:39 GMT
Personally speaking, I didn’t agree with the appointment of Garner - I thought he was the wrong profile of manager brought in at the wrong time. HOWEVER, now the appointment has been made, which was clearly an appointment made with a view to the long-term, we have to give it time IMO. Certainly a lot longer than 17 days. I always thought it was going to be a tough job for any external manager coming in. There was never going to be a ‘new manager bounce’ for a side that had just won away at 2nd in the league to go 4th. There just wasn’t. Not to mention we’re currently suffering what must be one of our worst periods in terms of injury in a long, long time. It’s hardly surprising that we’re lacking the steel and bite of the GC days when the two players who gave us that bite and steel in midfield - Clarke & Ogogo - have barely been fit since BG arrived. But the biggest reason of all to give this appointment time is that as of yet, the manager we hired has had almost no time at all to use what must be his biggest strength - his coaching. To appoint a Premier League level coach and then get on his back before he’s even been able to use his skillset properly is madness, IMO. I understand the doubts (I have some of them myself) and I understand the unhappiness at seeing what was a very promising league position slip away since he got the job, but to call for Garner’s head now is perhaps the biggest knee-jerk reaction I can ever remember - even for our toys-out-the-pram fanbase. I don’t think anyone’s calling for his head, most are just very worried. And rightly so. This isn’t an experienced head but a first time manager whos football is opposite to what we’ve been playing before. He has come out and said evolution not revolution, and done quite the opposite. We’d have been fine with that if we were 20th and facing possible relegation but we were the complete other end of the table with a system which was working. It’s the manner he has chucked in that style and ripped up what was working that scares me. If it was José many wouldn’t bat an eyelid but Ben Garner needs to prove himself. I read with interest Ollies article in the post on his first week at Grimsby and match against Mansfield and wished we’d have picked someone with his man management skills and experience. He set up sessions to kick off the club, I expect Ben had sessions pointing at his coaching badges.yet some people hated Coughlan's football.
What do people Dam want
as for your last part, you have just done a character assassination based on nothing. How do you know what BG's man management skills are?
What are Ollie's man management skills exactly?
|
|
|
|
Post by gasandelectricity on Jan 10, 2020 9:32:10 GMT
I don’t think anyone’s calling for his head, most are just very worried. And rightly so. This isn’t an experienced head but a first time manager whos football is opposite to what we’ve been playing before. He has come out and said evolution not revolution, and done quite the opposite. We’d have been fine with that if we were 20th and facing possible relegation but we were the complete other end of the table with a system which was working. It’s the manner he has chucked in that style and ripped up what was working that scares me. If it was José many wouldn’t bat an eyelid but Ben Garner needs to prove himself. I read with interest Ollies article in the post on his first week at Grimsby and match against Mansfield and wished we’d have picked someone with his man management skills and experience. He set up sessions to kick off the club, I expect Ben had sessions pointing at his coaching badges.yet some people hated Coughlan's football.
What do people f**king want
[/b]as for your last part, you have just done a character assassination based on nothing. How do you know what BG's man management skills are?[/p]
What are Ollie's man management skills exactly?
[/quote] Actually I had no issue with Coughlan at all (I’m a pragmatic kind of person and believe in what gets results and not what’s fashionable or pretty - football or else) but would have issue with those who gave him sh** every week because they’ve got what they deserved. Yeah my comment was a bit flippant and probably unfair but point is he’s unproven, either way. It’s not possible for anyone to demonstrate anything either way unless they happen to have worked with him before. Ollies article is available for everyone to read and he has got results previously. www.bristolpost.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/ian-holloway-waited-vain-see-3721481 |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2020 9:53:05 GMT
I don’t think anyone’s calling for his head, most are just very worried. And rightly so. This isn’t an experienced head but a first time manager whos football is opposite to what we’ve been playing before. He has come out and said evolution not revolution, and done quite the opposite. We’d have been fine with that if we were 20th and facing possible relegation but we were the complete other end of the table with a system which was working. It’s the manner he has chucked in that style and ripped up what was working that scares me. If it was José many wouldn’t bat an eyelid but Ben Garner needs to prove himself. I read with interest Ollies article in the post on his first week at Grimsby and match against Mansfield and wished we’d have picked someone with his man management skills and experience. He set up sessions to kick off the club, I expect Ben had sessions pointing at his coaching badges.yet some people hated Coughlan's football.
What do people f**king want
as for your last part, you have just done a character assassination based on nothing. How do you know what BG's man management skills are?
What are Ollie's man management skills exactly?
I was a vociferous opponent of Coughlan’s approach because, to my mind, football is evolving and coaches are getting smarter. It stands to reason that anyone who does their homework should be able to take a percentage football team apart because it’s so basic and if it was effective a lot more teams would be trying to play that way and yet, even in the lower leagues we are seeing more of an effort to play actual football. So to build a squad around long ball football is short termism at it’s finest. The wins meant little because it seemed to me we would get found out soon enough But I have to hold my hands up that when you go on an 11 match unbeaten run culminating in a win away to the team in second at Christmas you have to concede that, for whatever reason this approach that really should have limited utility in any sane world actually works. It seems a fair few others realised this too to the point that pretty much everyone (on here at least) put aside their reservations and were buying into it after that Ipswich game. We will never know how that would have panned out because we got shafted 10 minutes after the final whistle. But the reaction to the Ipswich win to me clearly indicates “what people f**king want”. We want a proven winning team. We want a shot at promotion. The style of football will become less of an issue over time if we can prove that it wins matches and is sustainable. A few of us, myself chief amongst them, have definitely learnt a lesson about “careful what you wish for”. Would I swap a hoof downfield that wins games vs 30 sideways passes that loses games? Not a chance! But it’s all been ruined now. Even if Mansfield sacked GC tomorrow I wouldn’t have him back. The man is a total fraud (although saying that I’m not entirely convinced he wasn’t pushed and had got wind of Garner waiting in the wings to take his job because of the low crowds). The whole thing is a mess and we’re nailed on to go right back where we came under this guy on the evidence we have seen so far. A total playstation manager who doesn’t have a clue how to navigate the most difficult part of the games: opening up opponents in the final third with intricate football, hence the 1 shot on goal in 3 games or whatever it is. It’s patently obvious. GC to his credit didn’t have a clue how to do that either so he kept it simple, played to the players strengths and (by contrast with Garner) it resulted in big shots on goal number which won football matches. That, ultimately, is what people want. |
|
|
|
Post by WeAreTheGas on Jan 10, 2020 10:23:07 GMT
Personally speaking, I didn’t agree with the appointment of Garner - I thought he was the wrong profile of manager brought in at the wrong time. HOWEVER, now the appointment has been made, which was clearly an appointment made with a view to the long-term, we have to give it time IMO. Certainly a lot longer than 17 days. I always thought it was going to be a tough job for any external manager coming in. There was never going to be a ‘new manager bounce’ for a side that had just won away at 2nd in the league to go 4th. There just wasn’t. Not to mention we’re currently suffering what must be one of our worst periods in terms of injury in a long, long time. It’s hardly surprising that we’re lacking the steel and bite of the GC days when the two players who gave us that bite and steel in midfield - Clarke & Ogogo - have barely been fit since BG arrived. But the biggest reason of all to give this appointment time is that as of yet, the manager we hired has had almost no time at all to use what must be his biggest strength - his coaching. To appoint a Premier League level coach and then get on his back before he’s even been able to use his skillset properly is madness, IMO. I understand the doubts (I have some of them myself) and I understand the unhappiness at seeing what was a very promising league position slip away since he got the job, but to call for Garner’s head now is perhaps the biggest knee-jerk reaction I can ever remember - even for our toys-out-the-pram fanbase. I don’t think anyone’s calling for his head, most are just very worried. And rightly so. This isn’t an experienced head but a first time manager whos football is opposite to what we’ve been playing before. He has come out and said evolution not revolution, and done quite the opposite. We’d have been fine with that if we were 20th and facing possible relegation but we were the complete other end of the table with a system which was working. It’s the manner he has chucked in that style and ripped up what was working that scares me. If it was José many wouldn’t bat an eyelid but Ben Garner needs to prove himself. I read with interest Ollies article in the post on his first week at Grimsby and match against Mansfield and wished we’d have picked someone with his man management skills and experience. He set up sessions to kick off the club, I expect Ben had sessions pointing at his coaching badges. “He has come out and said evolution not revolution, and done quite the opposite. We’d have been fine with that if we were 20th and facing possible relegation but we were the complete other end of the table with a system which was working. It’s the manner he has chucked in that style and ripped up what was working that scares me.“ Now, that I can agree with - and it’s the reason I was opposed to his appointment in the first place. No external appointment was ever going to come in and be happy changing nothing IMO; especially someone like Garner in his first managerial job who, understandably in a way, seems keen to put his own stamp on the team and show what he can bring to the party. I’m hoping Wednesday’s failed experiment will have told him this squad isn’t suited to a back 4 or ultra possession-based style, and he’ll be happy to go more pragmatic until he can really get the time to implement his football for next season. |
|
|
|
Post by 2nd May 1990 on Jan 10, 2020 10:29:33 GMT
Tuesday was the only time he has changed the system so in my opinion some of these comments are OTT. The game was in a meaningless cup competition when we desperately needed to rest some players. I suspect it will be back to the tried and tested on Saturday.
|
|
|
|
Post by lastminutewinner on Jan 10, 2020 10:31:30 GMT
People have to remember Coughlan had already been at the club coaching for a while before he took over from DC.
This new guy has had loads of games during the festive period meaning opportunities to assess the squad and work with them would be very limited.
|
|
|
|
Post by landrover on Jan 10, 2020 10:31:53 GMT
yet some people hated Coughlan's football.
What do people f**king want
as for your last part, you have just done a character assassination based on nothing. How do you know what BG's man management skills are?
What are Ollie's man management skills exactly?
I was a vociferous opponent of Coughlan’s approach because, to my mind, football is evolving and coaches are getting smarter. It stands to reason that anyone who does their homework should be able to take a percentage football team apart because it’s so basic and if it was effective a lot more teams would be trying to play that way and yet, even in the lower leagues we are seeing more of an effort to play actual football. So to build a squad around long ball football is short termism at it’s finest. The wins meant little because it seemed to me we would get found out soon enough But I have to hold my hands up that when you go on an 11 match unbeaten run culminating in a win away to the team in second at Christmas you have to concede that, for whatever reason this approach that really should have limited utility in any sane world actually works. It seems a fair few others realised this too to the point that pretty much everyone (on here at least) put aside their reservations and were buying into it after that Ipswich game. We will never know how that would have panned out because we got shafted 10 minutes after the final whistle. But the reaction to the Ipswich win to me clearly indicates “what people f**king want”. We want a proven winning team. We want a shot at promotion. The style of football will become less of an issue over time if we can prove that it wins matches and is sustainable. A few of us, myself chief amongst them, have definitely learnt a lesson about “careful what you wish for”. Would I swap a hoof downfield that wins games vs 30 sideways passes that loses games? Not a chance! But it’s all been ruined now. Even if Mansfield sacked GC tomorrow I wouldn’t have him back. The man is a total fraud (although saying that I’m not entirely convinced he wasn’t pushed and had got wind of Garner waiting in the wings to take his job because of the low crowds). The whole thing is a mess and we’re nailed on to go right back where we came under this guy on the evidence we have seen so far. A total playstation manager who doesn’t have a clue how to navigate the most difficult part of the games: opening up opponents in the final third with intricate football, hence the 1 shot on goal in 3 games or whatever it is. It’s patently obvious. GC to his credit didn’t have a clue how to do that either so he kept it simple, played to the players strengths and (by contrast with Garner) it resulted in big shots on goal number which won football matches. That, ultimately, is what people want. Agree totally with this. But here’s the thing. It’s called a League table and someone has to finish at the top and someone at the bottom. They can’t all win. Playstation football is all very theoretical but it’s about leadership and passion. It’s about players buying in to what their manager is telling them. GC had it in spades, Garner not so. This was all so predictable. My opinion is that we’ve gone down the wrong road. |
|
|
|
Post by lastminutewinner on Jan 10, 2020 10:55:08 GMT
I was a vociferous opponent of Coughlan’s approach because, to my mind, football is evolving and coaches are getting smarter. It stands to reason that anyone who does their homework should be able to take a percentage football team apart because it’s so basic and if it was effective a lot more teams would be trying to play that way and yet, even in the lower leagues we are seeing more of an effort to play actual football. So to build a squad around long ball football is short termism at it’s finest. The wins meant little because it seemed to me we would get found out soon enough But I have to hold my hands up that when you go on an 11 match unbeaten run culminating in a win away to the team in second at Christmas you have to concede that, for whatever reason this approach that really should have limited utility in any sane world actually works. It seems a fair few others realised this too to the point that pretty much everyone (on here at least) put aside their reservations and were buying into it after that Ipswich game. We will never know how that would have panned out because we got shafted 10 minutes after the final whistle. But the reaction to the Ipswich win to me clearly indicates “what people f**king want”. We want a proven winning team. We want a shot at promotion. The style of football will become less of an issue over time if we can prove that it wins matches and is sustainable. A few of us, myself chief amongst them, have definitely learnt a lesson about “careful what you wish for”. Would I swap a hoof downfield that wins games vs 30 sideways passes that loses games? Not a chance! But it’s all been ruined now. Even if Mansfield sacked GC tomorrow I wouldn’t have him back. The man is a total fraud (although saying that I’m not entirely convinced he wasn’t pushed and had got wind of Garner waiting in the wings to take his job because of the low crowds). The whole thing is a mess and we’re nailed on to go right back where we came under this guy on the evidence we have seen so far. A total playstation manager who doesn’t have a clue how to navigate the most difficult part of the games: opening up opponents in the final third with intricate football, hence the 1 shot on goal in 3 games or whatever it is. It’s patently obvious. GC to his credit didn’t have a clue how to do that either so he kept it simple, played to the players strengths and (by contrast with Garner) it resulted in big shots on goal number which won football matches. That, ultimately, is what people want. Agree totally with this. But here’s the thing. It’s called a League table and someone has to finish at the top and someone at the bottom. They can’t all win. Playstation football is all very theoretical but it’s about leadership and passion. It’s about players buying in to what their manager is telling them. GC had it in spades, Garner not so. This was all so predictable. My opinion is that we’ve gone down the wrong road.
You are Ian Holloway and I claim my £5
|
|
|
|
Post by WeAreTheGas on Jan 10, 2020 10:56:30 GMT
I was a vociferous opponent of Coughlan’s approach because, to my mind, football is evolving and coaches are getting smarter. It stands to reason that anyone who does their homework should be able to take a percentage football team apart because it’s so basic and if it was effective a lot more teams would be trying to play that way and yet, even in the lower leagues we are seeing more of an effort to play actual football. So to build a squad around long ball football is short termism at it’s finest. The wins meant little because it seemed to me we would get found out soon enough But I have to hold my hands up that when you go on an 11 match unbeaten run culminating in a win away to the team in second at Christmas you have to concede that, for whatever reason this approach that really should have limited utility in any sane world actually works. It seems a fair few others realised this too to the point that pretty much everyone (on here at least) put aside their reservations and were buying into it after that Ipswich game. We will never know how that would have panned out because we got shafted 10 minutes after the final whistle. But the reaction to the Ipswich win to me clearly indicates “what people f**king want”. We want a proven winning team. We want a shot at promotion. The style of football will become less of an issue over time if we can prove that it wins matches and is sustainable. A few of us, myself chief amongst them, have definitely learnt a lesson about “careful what you wish for”. Would I swap a hoof downfield that wins games vs 30 sideways passes that loses games? Not a chance! But it’s all been ruined now. Even if Mansfield sacked GC tomorrow I wouldn’t have him back. The man is a total fraud (although saying that I’m not entirely convinced he wasn’t pushed and had got wind of Garner waiting in the wings to take his job because of the low crowds). The whole thing is a mess and we’re nailed on to go right back where we came under this guy on the evidence we have seen so far. A total playstation manager who doesn’t have a clue how to navigate the most difficult part of the games: opening up opponents in the final third with intricate football, hence the 1 shot on goal in 3 games or whatever it is. It’s patently obvious. GC to his credit didn’t have a clue how to do that either so he kept it simple, played to the players strengths and (by contrast with Garner) it resulted in big shots on goal number which won football matches. That, ultimately, is what people want. Playstation football is all very theoretical but it’s about leadership and passion. It’s about players buying in to what their manager is telling them. GC had it in spades, Garner not so. I get what you’re saying to an extent, but let’s not forget that Garner has coached under the likes of Pulis, Holloway & Pardew - the sort of managers who exude leadership & passion from every pore. Garner’s a bright bloke. I just don’t believe that he’s spent years working alongside blokes like that and not picked up on any of the intangibles that help to make a team successful. |
|
|
|
Post by landrover on Jan 10, 2020 10:57:17 GMT
Ollie would have been the perfect short term fit. We’ll never know.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2020 11:23:23 GMT
Playstation football is all very theoretical but it’s about leadership and passion. It’s about players buying in to what their manager is telling them. GC had it in spades, Garner not so. I get what you’re saying to an extent, but let’s not forget that Garner has coached under the likes of Pulis, Holloway & Pardew - the sort of managers who exude leadership & passion from every pore. Garner’s a bright bloke. I just don’t believe that he’s spent years working alongside blokes like that and not picked up on any of the intangibles that help to make a team successful. Which begs the question can leadership be learnt or is it an inherent trait? He strikes me as an introvert and a reflector which aren't bad traits by any means, I'm just doubtful that they go hand in hand with effective lower league management. He's clearly articulate and talks a good game, and no doubt has some really interesting experience and perspectives given the diverse roles he's fulfilled to date. For all his flaws GC exuded leadership qualities as he did throughout his playing career, which no doubt helped him in the dressing room and gave him a level of authority. BG doesn't strike me as the type of person who would play bad cop and galvanise an ineffective side, and if he did, I wonder how it would be perceived given his lack of any kind of management credentials or playing career. Let's hope the results pick up and these doubts get brushed aside quickly. |
|
|
|
Post by peterparker on Jan 10, 2020 11:27:35 GMT
the thoughts of an experienced pro
He said: "Yeah they're different, they're different people, different characters. In football I've had loads of different managers and coaches, you see this, it's just about getting your name and playing well when they do come in because you want to impress.
"I think it is pressure, because a couple of bad games and you'll be in trouble. You have to hit the ground running with new managers and whether they've seen you play before or not, it's always good to get yourself out there.
"It's quite different (to Coughlan). There's a lot of tactical and very technical play. I think things we can definitely do more of, we can definitely be better on the ball. Everyone has to want the ball at all times for that to happen and I think that's something he want to see.
"It makes my life easier when I've got the ball and I've got five or six options and it's all about training ground and getting on there and putting in the work.
"You see them patterns in training and you bring it into matches. I said in an interview a couple of weeks ago that you have to be adaptable and sometimes the old manager we went directly and I do fit into that system as well, but ideally I like to get the ball down and play and that is my game.
"The more we can do that the better but it's just all about getting results."
|
|
