Gerard's tactics

[TheSandman]

I don't really see too much wrong with his tactics yesterday.

Personally, I thought the decision to play Clark in midfield was inspired and most people I've spoken to agreed with me when I said he was our best player. So I really don't get what people are saying there.

I was not happy that Sidwell played as he is not good enough but we were limited by our other options. Ireland has been poor ever time he's played and I think GHou is right when he says that he lacks the form and mental toughness.

A further key point is the way Blues played. If we were negative then fuck knows what they were. We had very little chance with how resolute and organized they were in defence. This limited us a lot I felt.

We are also missing our best central midfielder, our best striker and our best wide player. This would be impossible for most teams to get through and that is before you think about what Houllier has inherited. Our starting line up yesterday was so poor due to these injuries that the journalist in the Times suggested that Gardner would walk into our team. I agree and that is how bad we are on injuries and form.

Further, we were badly let down by some senior players yesterday. A Reo-Coker who was spoling for a fight from an off and an Ashley Young who seems determined to make the wrong choice on the ball whenever he has it.

It is for me ludicrous that we are calling for the man's head 5 league games into his career. 5 GAMES! If we'd lost them all 6-0 or even one of them 6-0 then I'd understand. Christ, it's beyond ludicrous. Lets look at it after 10, 15 games... See where we are and how we've done at Christmas. The man has come into an intolerable situation with a small, clearly unfit squad with some players who most definitely should have no future at the club and will need time to rectify it.   

[pauliewalnuts]

Well said that ^^^^ man.

[hawkeye]

well said Sandman

[dave.woodhall]

Good point by Gerard as well - we played for 20 hard minutes on Wednesday with ten men.

[WarszaVillan]

and blues went to penalties on tuesday. I'm glad we didn't lose but we've got to start picking up some points soon.

[Ad@m]

I'm sorry Sandman but I don't agree with a few things you've said there.

We are also missing our best central midfielder, our best striker and our best wide player

I assume you are suggesting these are Petrov/Delph, Gabby, and Albrighton?!  I'll agree on Gabby but I think our best centre mid and winger is Ash.  He was poor on Sunday but then he didn't really get much space because he was stuck in the midfield melee with the majority of other players on the pitch!  I'm not Downing's biggest fan either but I think he's more of an asset than Albrighton at the moment - Marc's had a few good games but he still goes missing in the second half as he gets tired.  That's not a criticism but we need to appreciate he's still young and is nowhere near the finished article.  Stan's frailties are well documented and we've seen so little of Delph (albeit what we have seen has been promising) that you could never class him as our best centre-mid.

It is for me ludicrous that we are calling for the man's head 5 league games into his career. 5 GAMES! If we'd lost them all 6-0 or even one of them 6-0 then I'd understand. Christ, it's beyond ludicrous.

Who's calling for his head?  I  certainly wasn't.  I just raised a concern about the recent tactics of a manager with form for being defensive and who sent a team out on Sunday, at home, against a poor side with the primary objective of not losing.  There are plenty of people on here who found MON's tactics dull.  I wasn't one of them, but I dread to think what they will make of GH's if his default position is to not lose.

As I said before, we've scored 6 goals in our last 9 league games and we're only just off being the lowest scoring team in the division. Playing one up front is fine as long as that one is supported.  On Sunday GH sent out three very defensively minded centre-mids and then didn't appear to tell Ash and Downing to push on to support Ivanhoe.  As a result we created hardly any chances - this is more to do with our set up than the Blues' set up and is the main reason we didn't score.

[TheSandman]

On Petrov I wouldn't say he's the greatest player but in terms of being an all round midfielder who can pass or tackle he is better than anything else we have. Our central midfield is terrible with two limited players in NRC and Petrov being the pick. It is less who is the best but who is least bad.

I'll agree on Albrighton but he has been our most exciting player this season in my view and in how he has done so far he was a big loss on Sunday. The irony is, had he not been suspended we'd not have seen the three defensive midfielders. Ireland hasn't quite excelled yet so that might be why he didn't play (though Sidwell has excelled less...). If Petrov had been fit we probably wouldn't be seeing Clark in midfield.

I didn't specifically see your original post as calling for his head but others were more extreme in their points than yourself. I'm not going to trawl through this thread to find them but this post on the pre-Fulham thread kind of shows my point.

Well, as our manager believes we are a 8-12th placed club that are not good enough to attack I expect to lose 2-0.  Whats more I expect to lose every game (or draw 0-0) until GH buggers off or he starts to play positive football.

 

I think if we are seeing negative tactics in a few months then we will have a lot of cause to complain but it's too early and with too many important players missing to make a call.

[peter w]

Good point by Gerard as well - we played for 20 hard minutes on Wednesday with ten men.

These aren't pub team players but primed athletes. They can quite easily play 120 minutes on a Wednesday and then do it again on a Sunday. No excuses. I can never understand it when managers use that nonsense to explain a negative attitude and a poor performance.

Say what you like about what we had available but knowing how the Shit were going to set themselves up for the game questions why we felt the need for playing a 4-5-1, or 4-4-1-1 formation. If we are going to put Clark in the middle in the holding role then there is no place for Reo-Coker. Why not either try Ireland and give him free licence to get at them, or even Downing and play Young/Hesley as a two up front.

it smacks of not wanting to lose first rather than wanting to win.

[Toronto Villa]

Good point by Gerard as well - we played for 20 hard minutes on Wednesday with ten men.

These aren't pub team players but primed athletes. They can quite easily play 120 minutes on a Wednesday and then do it again on a Sunday. No excuses. I can never understand it when managers use that nonsense to explain a negative attitude and a poor performance.

The thing is though Peter, they are playing against other primed athletes and not pub players. It would be an excuse and not a reason if they actually played against pub players and were knackered.

[dave.woodhall]

You can get away with 99% fitness for a pub team. Try that in the Premier League and you'll get battered.   

[peter w]

They play every weekend with the odd midweek game thrown in. They will also train after that. They have no problem in competing at the highhest level for an hour and a half/ 2 hours every week more than once a week. To suggest otherwise is giving players and managers excuses that they don't need, or hide behind, because of a poor result, or tactics.

Players are 100% fit (usually) before every game, and could play a lot more if they needed to.

[dave.woodhall]

 

They play every weekend with the odd midweek game thrown in. They will also train after that. They have no problem in competing at the highhest level for an hour and a half/ 2 hours every week more than once a week. To suggest otherwise is giving players and managers excuses that they don't need, or hide behind, because of a poor result, or tactics.

Players are 100% fit (usually) before every game, and could play a lot more if they needed to.

Just because you say so doesn't mean it's true.

[peter w]

They play every weekend with the odd midweek game thrown in. They will also train after that. They have no problem in competing at the highhest level for an hour and a half/ 2 hours every week more than once a week. To suggest otherwise is giving players and managers excuses that they don't need, or hide behind, because of a poor result, or tactics.

Players are 100% fit (usually) before every game, and could play a lot more if they needed to.

Just because you say so doesn't mean it's true.

Not sure what you're trying to get at here, as I could say the same about your point.

I've played to a level where I've been very fit and could play more than twice a week and that was a lot lower than the Prem. International level sees players at an even higher fitness level. The fitness levels of the Conference player's standard is frightening. I once trained with the first team at Stafford Rangers and was absolutely bollocksed, and I know that that was nowhere near the fitness levels of Pros in the top flight.

The human body can do a lot more than top-flight players have asked of them. Over a 9 month period this will of course take its toll and players will need a good rest after that. But expecting these highly-trained, extremely fit, top athletes to play 2 hours of football on a Wednesday, and then be expected to be on the ball the following Sunday is far from being beyond what their bodies are capable of. As I said, anything else is just an excuse.

[dave.woodhall]

And as I said before, there's a difference between what anyone else would call fit, and the extra edge that provides the difference between winning and losing at the top level in any sport. It's not about excuses, it's a fact. Otherwise the same eleven players would be in the team for 90 minutes every match.

[Ad@m]

And as I said before, there's a difference between what anyone else would call fit, and the extra edge that provides the difference between winning and losing at the top level in any sport. It's not about excuses, it's a fact. Otherwise the same eleven players would be in the team for 90 minutes every match.

It worked in 1980/81...

;o)