|
Post by Jomo on Feb 2, 2020 10:09:54 GMT
It has been a dreadful start there's no 2 ways about it. I just think the timing of it was all wrong for a number of reasons, coming in at Christmas time when there are so many games, when the injuries were mounting up and players were knackered. There is however benefit to have had Garner in before the January window opened so it's not all bad on that front.
I do wonder whether the fact that GC was so successful and then he abruptly left, would have disrupted the players significantly, therefore making it more difficult for a new rookie manager to come in and have a bounce. Normally when a new manager comes in, it's to a losing team and they can "shake things up" and get a tune out of the players where previously they were underperforming. I think we were actually over performing in terms of results, and Garner therefore had a tough job on his hands selling a new system to players who were already getting results playing a different way.
I still hope Garner can be a success, but I just think we'd have been better off keeping the status quo for the remainder of the season with Maher and Mansell in charge, and then bringing in Garner in the summer, where he would have had a whole pre-season to implement new ideas etc.
All very easy to say in hindsight of course.
|
|
|
Post by xenongas on Feb 2, 2020 10:13:20 GMT
I don't think BG would have been hired if we were bottom half at Christmas. The situation has allowed for a low risk (in terms of relegation) gamble with possibly a high payoff. He's not been hired as a firefighter he's been hired to build for the future, as painful as that is turning out to be in the short term. It would be silly to say this is our plan for the next 2 years then rip it up after 2 months.
This situation has also meant that the new man who has been lauded for his coaching hasn't been able to coach for the first month of his job! Presiding over recovery sessions isn't helpful! On top of that a massively unfortunate and sad situation outside of football meaning he wasn't even here for some of those games.
Have we had such a situation before? If not is it a valid comparison?
Results have been crap and we desperately need that first win. Obviously it can't go on forever like this but I don't believe it will.
|
|
|
Post by Jomo on Feb 2, 2020 10:15:11 GMT
I don't think BG would have been hired if we were bottom half at Christmas. The situation has allowed for a low risk (in terms of relegation) gamble with possibly a high payoff. He's not been hired as a firefighter he's been hired to build for the future, as painful as that is turning out to be in the short term. It would be silly to say this is our plan for the next 2 years then rip it up after 2 months. This situation has also meant that the new man who has been lauded for his coaching hasn't been able to coach for the first month of his job! Presiding over recovery sessions isn't helpful! On top of that a massively unfortunate and sad situation outside of football meaning he wasn't even here for some of those games. Have we had such a situation before? If not is it a valid comparison? Results have been crap and we desperately need that first win. Obviously it can't go on forever like this but I don't believe it will. Good post xenon.
|
|
|
Post by gasandelectricity on Feb 2, 2020 10:38:35 GMT
The excuses and tolerance for Garners poor start really shock me and are beyond my belief. I’ve never been one of the negatives before yet now I seem to be in a minority.
I cannot believe how many are saying give the guy another window and up until next window. I’m sure we will be in deep sh** if that happens. Yet if you say otherwise apparently you’re one of these red faced negative Rovers fans that are an example of the modern day football supporter who shouts abuse at the manager from the off, screams abuse at the players and doesn’t give anyone a chance. But what I say on here, does not translate to my support on the terraces. I will cheer on the club from start of the game to the finish of the game.
Everyone deserves a chance but if it looks like a manager or player after 20 games is out of their depth, particularly with zero experience, they need to go. There are a number of red flags I’m seeing.
Due to a holiday which wasn’t planned by myself I found myself missing my first home league game in about 4 seasons yesterday but from what I’ve heard yesterday we played well first half poor second half. This is a worrying trend with Ben Garners sides. Numerous matches so far this season under both managers, we’ve started strong, gone into the dressing room and come out a different side. However, we were used to the opposite under GC and DC further back, what the hell is Ben saying in the dressing rooms? He seems unable to influence the match even if the original plan was sound.
Also look at where we started. You cannot talk in the same language of BGs appointment to the Dave Penney’s, Darrell Clarke’s, and the Paul Buckles. D.P. and DC took over a side who were in freefall, to relegation, DC and PB had to rebuild from scratch after a relegation. The squads were already broken and needed gelling and forming and time to come good in the latter, and in the former they clearly weren’t good enough to start with. BG so far has taken a side who were at their highest sustained position in 20 years and ripped the team and playing style apart because it doesn’t fit a textbook style modern way of playing, and because apparently it looks sh**. Does it really matter if it looks sh** if were winning?
GC was able to get these players playing, so perhaps the dead wood is BG and not the players? Yet some are blaming the players. How can they turn from promotion contenders to relegation contenders (yes I’m deadly serious, look at Southend last season and this) overnight at the change of a management appointment.
Some are saying well it’s okay because we’re not going to get relegated so let’s keep going and give him a chance until Christmas next year, I’d give two arguments to that, firstly we’ve chucked an opportunity at promotion away with that gamble and secondly it shouldn’t buy him extra time if he can’t get them going especially after this window just gone. The definition of stupidity is to continue making the same mistake and expect the outcome to change.
People are now saying we’ve had a strong transfer window. Some even strongest in decades or even ever. I’d ask the evidence of this. I’m not saying otherwise just how can you say this yet? If we were looking at ourselves on the other end of the shoe (say Southend), we’d be screaming that quantity isn’t quality. These kids look like they could be the real deal but how many times have we had young players with strong pedigrees who’ve disappointed. Not saying they will - just don’t get carried away . I’d rather we signed a Tony Craig style signing who will help those young players ground themselves and half the amount of signings.
This can’t be allowed to go on indefinitely. Beyond the season without significant development would be criminal by our board but I’d expect nothing less.
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Feb 2, 2020 10:42:54 GMT
Just maybe some of the blame lays at players door, where did the fight and passion shown at lincoln and ipswich go to? where was the aggression in midfield yesterday and over the last month, to many pretty boys and not enough sinclairs, give garner the summer and see what happens in august, if we are still poor come september then bye bye, just my view. Which club has ever sacked a full squad of players rather than just replace the manager? Whether you rate GC's football or not he clearly found a system which suited the players at his disposal, why would anybody try and completely change that system overnight rather than just tweak it over time. Surely TW must have realised that would be a mistake when he was on the interview panel. Whilst Buckle came across as a bit of a kn0b before his sacking I did have some sympathy for him as he had to completely rebuild the squad following our relegation, Garner reminds me of Dodson, trying to change something not even requiring that big a change just some tweaking in the January transfer window. It's like Sheff Utd now replacing Wilder, as the fans are complaining he's just grinding out result, and then trying to play like Man C, it just wouldn't happen. Fail to beat either Tranmere or Blackpool and it'll be late March when we play Rochdale when we get another remotely looking winnable looking game. A month or so ago we were top of this table: www.twtd.co.uk/league-tables/competition:league-one/daterange/fromdate:2019-Dec-22/todate:2020-Jun-01/type:home-and-away/
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Feb 2, 2020 10:47:31 GMT
I don't think BG would have been hired if we were bottom half at Christmas. The situation has allowed for a low risk (in terms of relegation) gamble with possibly a high payoff. He's not been hired as a firefighter he's been hired to build for the future, as painful as that is turning out to be in the short term. It would be silly to say this is our plan for the next 2 years then rip it up after 2 months. This situation has also meant that the new man who has been lauded for his coaching hasn't been able to coach for the first month of his job! Presiding over recovery sessions isn't helpful! On top of that a massively unfortunate and sad situation outside of football meaning he wasn't even here for some of those games.
Have we had such a situation before? If not is it a valid comparison? Results have been crap and we desperately need that first win. Obviously it can't go on forever like this but I don't believe it will. Which makes changing from GC's tactics all the more madness, if any of us went into a new job would we try and change the way it was running even if we had issues meaning we had to take time away from work? Even in the transfer window he doesn't seem to have dealt with the issue we can all see, our CM's are simply not good enough to play a Coventry type passing game.
|
|
|
Post by darkbluegas on Feb 2, 2020 10:49:20 GMT
Totally agree with your post Xenongas I think he will be given the rest of the season and summer almost come what may. The ALQ’s seem to have made a significant change in recruitment that takes into account our financial plight.
There was no way we could continue signing the likes of Payne, Bennett and Nichols on decent wages with no guarantee of success.
This next season or two could be painful and we will no doubt lose some supporters along the way but we may come out of it as the sustainable club we were told was the aim.
It’s obvious that there’s no new investor with their fantasy stadium on the horizon and I believe the ALQ’s see this as the clubs only hope for the future.
|
|
|
Post by althepirate on Feb 2, 2020 10:52:31 GMT
The excuses and tolerance for Garners poor start really shock me and are beyond my belief. I’ve never been one of the negatives before yet now I seem to be in a minority. I cannot believe how many are saying give the guy another window and up until next window. I’m sure we will be in deep sh** if that happens. Yet if you say otherwise apparently you’re one of these red faced negative Rovers fans that are an example of the modern day football supporter who shouts abuse at the manager from the off, screams abuse at the players and doesn’t give anyone a chance. But what I say on here, does not translate to my support on the terraces. I will cheer on the club from start of the game to the finish of the game. Everyone deserves a chance but if it looks like a manager or player after 20 games is out of their depth, particularly with zero experience, they need to go. There are a number of red flags I’m seeing. Due to a holiday which wasn’t planned by myself I found myself missing my first home league game in about 4 seasons yesterday but from what I’ve heard yesterday we played well first half poor second half. This is a worrying trend with Ben Garners sides. Numerous matches so far this season under both managers, we’ve started strong, gone into the dressing room and come out a different side. However, we were used to the opposite under GC and DC further back, what the hell is Ben saying in the dressing rooms? He seems unable to influence the match even if the original plan was sound. Also look at where we started. You cannot talk in the same language of BGs appointment to the Dave Penney’s, Darrell Clarke’s, and the Paul Buckles. D.P. and DC took over a side who were in freefall, to relegation, DC and PB had to rebuild from scratch after a relegation. The squads were already broken and needed gelling and forming and time to come good in the latter, and in the former they clearly weren’t good enough to start with. BG so far has taken a side who were at their highest sustained position in 20 years and ripped the team and playing style apart because it doesn’t fit a textbook style modern way of playing, and because apparently it looks sh**. Does it really matter if it looks sh** if were winning? GC was able to get these players playing, so perhaps the dead wood is BG and not the players? Yet some are blaming the players. How can they turn from promotion contenders to relegation contenders (yes I’m deadly serious, look at Southend last season and this) overnight at the change of a management appointment. Some are saying well it’s okay because we’re not going to get relegated so let’s keep going and give him a chance until Christmas next year, I’d give two arguments to that, firstly we’ve chucked an opportunity at promotion away with that gamble and secondly it shouldn’t buy him extra time if he can’t get them going especially after this window just gone. The definition of stupidity is to continue making the same mistake and expect the outcome to change. People are now saying we’ve had a strong transfer window. Some even strongest in decades or even ever. I’d ask the evidence of this. I’m not saying otherwise just how can you say this yet? If we were looking at ourselves on the other end of the shoe (say Southend), we’d be screaming that quantity isn’t quality. These kids look like they could be the real deal but how many times have we had young players with strong pedigrees who’ve disappointed. Not saying they will - just don’t get carried away . I’d rather we signed a Tony Craig style signing who will help those young players ground themselves and half the amount of signings. This can’t be allowed to go on indefinitely. Beyond the season without significant development would be criminal by our board but I’d expect nothing less. Yes I agree with this. Problem is Garner has managed to get a job with an 'insurance condition' and that is 'a long term plan' so I reckon he will be forgiven for ages whilst everyone says give him a chance. Its frustrating on two fronts. To chuck away a promotion chasing winning side and also to have to wait around for how long? watching football so much worse than GC's and losing almost every game as well. I have been utterly bored with most of the last two home games. We are riding on pure hope now.
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Feb 2, 2020 10:54:38 GMT
Totally agree with your post. I think he will be given the rest of the season and summer almost come what may. The ALQ’s seem to have made a significant change in recruitment that takes into account our financial plight. There was no way we could continue signing the likes of Payne, Bennett and Nichols on decent wages with no guarantee of success. This next season or two could be painful and we will no doubt lose some supporters along the way but we may come out of it as the sustainable club we were told was the aim. It’s obvious that there’s no new investor with their fantasy stadium on the horizon and I believe the ALQ’s see this as the clubs only hope for the future. Regardless you need a mix of experience, we're not going to develop/sell young talent if we're never winning games, although the likes of Blackman, M-L, Ginnelly and Abraham's are not going to have any sell on value when they are not even our own players.
|
|
|
Post by daniel300380 on Feb 2, 2020 10:57:44 GMT
I don't think BG would have been hired if we were bottom half at Christmas. The situation has allowed for a low risk (in terms of relegation) gamble with possibly a high payoff. He's not been hired as a firefighter he's been hired to build for the future, as painful as that is turning out to be in the short term. It would be silly to say this is our plan for the next 2 years then rip it up after 2 months. This situation has also meant that the new man who has been lauded for his coaching hasn't been able to coach for the first month of his job! Presiding over recovery sessions isn't helpful! On top of that a massively unfortunate and sad situation outside of football meaning he wasn't even here for some of those games. Have we had such a situation before? If not is it a valid comparison? Results have been crap and we desperately need that first win. Obviously it can't go on forever like this but I don't believe it will. Great post, someone who actually understands football. We have had one free midweek since he arrived and he was not here for part of that, as that is when he was off. So he's not had a proper weeks training yet. How's he supposed to effect things, without taking proper training sessions. When he was linked last season,I said it was the wrong time and that is was too big a risk. This season it was worth the gamble. Still too early to say whether it will work out long term or not. But it's unfair to judge him so far. People like topper gas had already written him and some player's off, after one game anyway.
|
|
|
Post by daniel300380 on Feb 2, 2020 11:02:30 GMT
I don't think BG would have been hired if we were bottom half at Christmas. The situation has allowed for a low risk (in terms of relegation) gamble with possibly a high payoff. He's not been hired as a firefighter he's been hired to build for the future, as painful as that is turning out to be in the short term. It would be silly to say this is our plan for the next 2 years then rip it up after 2 months. This situation has also meant that the new man who has been lauded for his coaching hasn't been able to coach for the first month of his job! Presiding over recovery sessions isn't helpful! On top of that a massively unfortunate and sad situation outside of football meaning he wasn't even here for some of those games.
Have we had such a situation before? If not is it a valid comparison? Results have been crap and we desperately need that first win. Obviously it can't go on forever like this but I don't believe it will. Which makes changing from GC's tactics all the more madness, if any of us went into a new job would we try and change the way it was running even if we had issues meaning we had to take time away from work? Even in the transfer window he doesn't seem to have dealt with the issue we can all see, our CM's are simply not good enough to play a Coventry type passing game. You keep saying that. He didn't change it at first. But he had to, because we had key player's injured, so we could not okay that way anymore. So GC probally would have had to change as well. When he changed, Ogogo and OC were both injured, who were key. Then he came back after family illness and said he was going to change. He's a different person and probally thought he couldn't do it that way. If it was that easy, anyone could be a manager. He needs to try his way. It might not work out, he might continue to be rubbish. But atleast he's now his own man.
|
|
|
Post by lpgas on Feb 2, 2020 11:07:01 GMT
Garner should have kept the changes until the end of the season. The sad demise of Bury has meant it is unlikely we go down. But what happend to a "new managers bounce?"
|
|
|
Post by daniel300380 on Feb 2, 2020 11:09:17 GMT
Totally agree with your post. I think he will be given the rest of the season and summer almost come what may. The ALQ’s seem to have made a significant change in recruitment that takes into account our financial plight. There was no way we could continue signing the likes of Payne, Bennett and Nichols on decent wages with no guarantee of success. This next season or two could be painful and we will no doubt lose some supporters along the way but we may come out of it as the sustainable club we were told was the aim. It’s obvious that there’s no new investor with their fantasy stadium on the horizon and I believe the ALQ’s see this as the clubs only hope for the future. Regardless you need a mix of experience, we're not going to develop/sell young talent if we're never winning games, although the likes of Blackman, M-L, Ginnelly and Abraham's are not going to have any sell on value when they are not even our own players. I agree you experience as well. If we could have moved on Bennett, then I expect we would have tried to bring in more experience. But experience costs more and we have to stay within scmp rules. We have experienced players in the squad. If they go at the end of the season, we need to replace that experience.
|
|
|
Post by lpgas on Feb 2, 2020 23:37:32 GMT
Dobson was sacked because the players wouldn't play for him. Before he was appointed Twentyman said him and Jocky could run the team.
|
|
|
Post by SleepyGas on Feb 3, 2020 14:32:00 GMT
Garner should have kept the changes until the end of the season. The sad demise of Bury has meant it is unlikely we go down. But what happend to a "new managers bounce?" It has been explained pretty well by somebody in a previous post.. but Garner did initially seem to try keeping the status quo in terms of formation, tactics and personnel - however we lost several players to injury and so it was necessary to deviate. We then lost Garner himself for a while.. and we just haven't had the rub of the green. The new manager bounce phenomenon is usually where teams are underperforming and the new gaffer can come in and shake things up.. motivate the players or try something new.. and starts getting results. In our situation we were clearly overperforming and given the circumstances (crowded festive fixture list, injuries and perhaps even heads going down because GC left abruptly) it was always going to be incredibly difficult to maintain. I really hope things start working out well for Ben Garner - particularly hope the new signings are decent and we start getting some positive results again. I don't think there is much to play for this season - so as fans we can just relax, get behind the team and manager and hopefully enjoy some entertaining football
|
|
|
Post by Gassy on Feb 3, 2020 15:17:00 GMT
Garner should have kept the changes until the end of the season. The sad demise of Bury has meant it is unlikely we go down. But what happend to a "new managers bounce?" It has been explained pretty well by somebody in a previous post.. but Garner did initially seem to try keeping the status quo in terms of formation, tactics and personnel - however we lost several players to injury and so it was necessary to deviate. We then lost Garner himself for a while.. and we just haven't had the rub of the green. Immediately in the first game Vs Wimbledon there was a change. The formation & team might have been the same, but the tactics were very different and we were much less direct. I remember the back 3 passing it amongst themselves for most of the first half. After 2 or 3 games there was an interview from Sercombe (I think) saying it will take us a while to play the football Ben wants. He came in and immediately changed it. I like the idea of waiting until the summer to give Ben a chance, but I feel these people who are saying it are under the presumption that we'll actually win some games. Whilst I'm sure we will eventually, 'when will we next win' is the bigger question. Ben's first 11 games have been P11 W0 D4 L7. What if the next 11 games make that P22 W0 D8 L14 - would people still say let's keep him? At that point we would have played half a season without a win. I'm sure we will win some games in that time, but the evidence so far does not tell me that we will.
|
|
|
Post by WeAreTheGas on Feb 3, 2020 15:24:08 GMT
but from what I’ve heard yesterday we played well first half poor second half. This is a worrying trend with Ben Garners sides. Numerous matches so far this season under both managers, we’ve started strong, gone into the dressing room and come out a different side. However, we were used to the opposite under GC and DC further back, what the hell is Ben saying in the dressing rooms? He seems unable to influence the match even if the original plan was sound. My guess is the disparity between our first & second half performances under BG is more to do with the players’ lack of fitness to play the way Garner wants us to without the ball. It’s become clear - and was particularly evident in the first half v Coventry - that the plan is for us to be a pressing side that tries to win the ball back off the opposition ASAP. That’s all well and good, but it takes a far higher base level of fitness to play like that than it does to play the low block, fairly passive defensive game that we did under Coughlan. So IMO, the players come out flagging in the second half of games atm having run themselves into the ground without the ball in the first, and it all goes downhill from there. Of course, when we start to keep the ball better ourselves, as BG wants us to, then we won’t have to spend as much time chasing the opposition around in the first place. Perhaps it’s a bit naive of Garner to try and get us pressing before he’s had a chance to put the squad through his own pre-season, but I guess he probably wants to assess who’s up to playing that way and who isn’t ahead of a summer re-build.
|
|
|
Post by Gassy on Feb 3, 2020 15:56:57 GMT
but from what I’ve heard yesterday we played well first half poor second half. This is a worrying trend with Ben Garners sides. Numerous matches so far this season under both managers, we’ve started strong, gone into the dressing room and come out a different side. However, we were used to the opposite under GC and DC further back, what the hell is Ben saying in the dressing rooms? He seems unable to influence the match even if the original plan was sound. My guess is the disparity between our first & second half performances under BG is more to do with the players’ lack of fitness to play the way Garner wants us to without the ball. It’s become clear - and was particularly evident in the first half v Coventry - that the plan is for us to be a pressing side that tries to win the ball back off the opposition ASAP. That’s all well and good, but it takes a far higher base level of fitness to play like that than it does to play the low block, fairly passive defensive game that we did under Coughlan. So IMO, the players come out flagging in the second half of games atm having run themselves into the ground without the ball in the first, and it all goes downhill from there. Of course, when we start to keep the ball better ourselves, as BG wants us to, then we won’t have to spend as much time chasing the opposition around in the first place. Perhaps it’s a bit naive of Garner to try and get us pressing before he’s had a chance to put the squad through his own pre-season, but I guess he probably wants to assess who’s up to playing that way and who isn’t ahead of a summer re-build. I missed the Coventry game, so I can't comment too much on the specifics but this does sound reasonable. However, it wasn't the entire half though was it? Wasn't it only 30 minutes before Coventry decided to actually play and we were losing 2-1 at half time?
|
|
|
Post by WeAreTheGas on Feb 3, 2020 16:32:00 GMT
My guess is the disparity between our first & second half performances under BG is more to do with the players’ lack of fitness to play the way Garner wants us to without the ball. It’s become clear - and was particularly evident in the first half v Coventry - that the plan is for us to be a pressing side that tries to win the ball back off the opposition ASAP. That’s all well and good, but it takes a far higher base level of fitness to play like that than it does to play the low block, fairly passive defensive game that we did under Coughlan. So IMO, the players come out flagging in the second half of games atm having run themselves into the ground without the ball in the first, and it all goes downhill from there. Of course, when we start to keep the ball better ourselves, as BG wants us to, then we won’t have to spend as much time chasing the opposition around in the first place. Perhaps it’s a bit naive of Garner to try and get us pressing before he’s had a chance to put the squad through his own pre-season, but I guess he probably wants to assess who’s up to playing that way and who isn’t ahead of a summer re-build. I missed the Coventry game, so I can't comment too much on the specifics but this does sound reasonable. However, it wasn't the entire half though was it? Wasn't it only 30 minutes before Coventry decided to actually play and we were losing 2-1 at half time? I don’t think Coventry just decided not to play for the first 30 minutes, we didn’t allow them to play by pressing them high and not letting them build out from the back like they wanted to. Then they changed their shape slightly, started to play through our press better and got their first goal - which seemed to rock us and make us resort to some bad habits in possession. But I guess that can happen when you try and defend in a completely new way against one of the slickest passing sides in the division; having sat deep and counter attacked (successfully, of course) for the last 6 months. JML threw up on the pitch twice on Saturday - so that shows that some of our players are struggling with the intensity BG is trying to get them to play at.
|
|
|
Post by gasandelectricity on Feb 3, 2020 16:34:43 GMT
but from what I’ve heard yesterday we played well first half poor second half. This is a worrying trend with Ben Garners sides. Numerous matches so far this season under both managers, we’ve started strong, gone into the dressing room and come out a different side. However, we were used to the opposite under GC and DC further back, what the hell is Ben saying in the dressing rooms? He seems unable to influence the match even if the original plan was sound. My guess is the disparity between our first & second half performances under BG is more to do with the players’ lack of fitness to play the way Garner wants us to without the ball. It’s become clear - and was particularly evident in the first half v Coventry - that the plan is for us to be a pressing side that tries to win the ball back off the opposition ASAP. That’s all well and good, but it takes a far higher base level of fitness to play like that than it does to play the low block, fairly passive defensive game that we did under Coughlan. So IMO, the players come out flagging in the second half of games atm having run themselves into the ground without the ball in the first, and it all goes downhill from there. Of course, when we start to keep the ball better ourselves, as BG wants us to, then we won’t have to spend as much time chasing the opposition around in the first place. Perhaps it’s a bit naive of Garner to try and get us pressing before he’s had a chance to put the squad through his own pre-season, but I guess he probably wants to assess who’s up to playing that way and who isn’t ahead of a summer re-build. All reasonable but in my eyes part of the skill of a good manager is seeing the style that your players as a group can play in and setting up to deal with that. In reality, BG doesn’t have complete flexibility to change the team overnight and whilst we can move towards a new style of play a complete transition is in my eyes naive as you’ve suggested. This was GCs strength was he could find a way for the team to play to get results given their strengths.
|
|