New Back Room Staff

[Monty]

Because you are taking the opinion of fans about a coach as opposed to a professional about a coach. How does any fan really know what a coach does? We might see clips of what they do, but do we ever see what they do the rest of the day? Their preparation and study outside of the view of the cameras? I don't dismiss anything entirely but I am always going to be skeptical of fans views on coaches because we don't really see how much or little they do. The manager is much more public, much more visible and accountable by comparison.

We know plenty about Robertson and Walford as coaches, and most clubs are actually considerably less secretive than we are about this sort of thing. The Norwich fans tend to hear about what happens on their training ground (this same fan told me, as it happens, that one good thing about Lambert was that training sessions during the week would be geared to that week's opposition - we didn't see much of that at Villa, but Norwichers did) and Robson did not leave with his reputation enhanced.

[Mister E]

All I know is that the coaching role is pretty important in the scheme of things. Therefore, now that TS has made his first appointment there should rightly be scrutiny on the way that we play - particularly our attacking and our use and defence of set pieces; three areas of our play that have been piss-poor.
I know nothing about Robson; so, let's see in the next couple of games.
TS knows that the stakes are high: we need a result on Saturday, so he'd better have got this right.

[Dave]

Because you are taking the opinion of fans about a coach as opposed to a professional about a coach. How does any fan really know what a coach does? We might see clips of what they do, but do we ever see what they do the rest of the day? Their preparation and study outside of the view of the cameras? I don't dismiss anything entirely but I am always going to be skeptical of fans views on coaches because we don't really see how much or little they do. The manager is much more public, much more visible and accountable by comparison.

So why were we so happy to jump on Culverhouse and Karsa when things started to go wrong?

[Toronto Villa]

Because you are taking the opinion of fans about a coach as opposed to a professional about a coach. How does any fan really know what a coach does? We might see clips of what they do, but do we ever see what they do the rest of the day? Their preparation and study outside of the view of the cameras? I don't dismiss anything entirely but I am always going to be skeptical of fans views on coaches because we don't really see how much or little they do. The manager is much more public, much more visible and accountable by comparison.

So why were we so happy to jump on Culverhouse and Karsa when things started to go wrong?

Because they were bullying people and generally acting like complete wankers.

[Rudy Can't Fail]

It's a first team coach we are discussing which PL clubs have a number of. This role is very much in the background and shouldn't even be a significant topic of conversation. Having said that I think this is all part of a renewed interest in the club and new manager. We win Saturday and the sun comes out and Mark Robson is forgotten very quickly.

After reading that I just had to check the date to make sure you posted it in 2015 and not 1915.

As for Mark Robson, the biggest positive I can see from his CV is he obviously thinks Neil Adams is an arse who knows little about football and the importance of tactics.

you've lost me on the whole 1915 thing. It's 2015 and in the grand scheme of things hiring a first team coach should be a "who gives a fuck moment?"

Funny, that. Less than a week ago you said it was "absolutely critical" we bring in the right coaching staff, now you don't give a fuck.

I don't think he's saying that its not important. More that we don't know who's a good coach or not so how can we rush to judgments?

Precisely. And I said staff and not judging just an individual which people are doing. I'm glad you were bright enough to understand that. In the grand scheme of things the topic of a first team coach hiring is irrelevant. It is how does that person work as part of an overall staff.

You talk in riddles, TV. One minute it's so important, the next it's irrelevant. Now it's some bubbling excuse of how that person works as part of the overall staff? I wish you'd make your mind up. It would appear you prefer to bury your head in the safe knowledge that anybody would be better than Lambert's coaches. How shortsighted is that?

Remember Bibs and Cones and how most of us questioned what the hell went on at Bodymoor Heath? Culverhouse and that other idiot? The Marshall Twins? I'd say the appointment of a First Team Coach is a major appointment, especially when you have a manager nicknamed 'Tactics Tim' by his previous club or are you relying on Sherwood's personality to see us develop as a club? Great motivator he may be, a breath of fresh air we most certainly need but you don't have to be that bright to understand the importance of the role.

Don't you remember saying "Bring in a good coaching staff and prove us wrong Tim." Football has moved on so far that like in any other business, you need the best leaders in the field to compete, nevermind win things. For too long we've accepted whatever we're thrown and not questioned why we keep getting it wrong, why we have no football philosophy other than hoof and counter attacking.

[ozzjim]

I agree we were and if this guy is here long term let's hope he is better than his cv, or is little more than a gopher for better qualified assistant manager.

[Monty]

Because you are taking the opinion of fans about a coach as opposed to a professional about a coach. How does any fan really know what a coach does? We might see clips of what they do, but do we ever see what they do the rest of the day? Their preparation and study outside of the view of the cameras? I don't dismiss anything entirely but I am always going to be skeptical of fans views on coaches because we don't really see how much or little they do. The manager is much more public, much more visible and accountable by comparison.

So why were we so happy to jump on Culverhouse and Karsa when things started to go wrong?

Because they were bullying people and generally acting like complete wankers.

So, we do sometimes find out what happens with in the backroom, you're saying? I completely agree.

If all my Norwich friend of mine had said was 'oh he fell out with Adams, but it was all going to hell anyway and the results weren't good' then who knows, maybe it was all just a mix-up. However, what he said (after the disgusted silence) was that Robson's training sessions were famously terrible, trying only to do the most PE-teacher basics and failing even then. That doesn't make me optimistic.

[OCD]

Has it been confirmed that Robson's joined the coaching staff yet? I've only seen a Twitter post but nothing official.

With Norwich, the same fans that said Robson was useless also acknowledged that Adams left not long after that. So it goes back to TV's point about judging something by it's whole rather than sum of the parts. Clearly Norwich didn't have an upturn in fortunes when Robson left so if Robson did join as part of a 4 or 5 person first team coaching staff, could we as outsiders judge 1 person (other than the manager, who is ultimately responsible) by what we see on the pitch?

[Toronto Villa]

I can't be arsed with a quotathon. I am not saying coaching isn't important. What I am saying is evaluating a coach with limited information in isolation is less relevant than as part of a complete coaching structure. None of us know what specific role he will hold, who of the existing first team coaches will remain and who else Sherwood will recruit for first team duties. I'd rather we waited to see what Robson will specifically do than judge him on what he has done in the past elsewhere and the views of fans who had limited interaction with what he did.

[Monty]

I can't be arsed with a quotathon. I am not saying coaching isn't important. What I am saying is evaluating a coach with limited information in isolation is less relevant than as part of a complete coaching structure. None of us know what specific role he will hold, who of the existing first team coaches will remain and who else Sherwood will recruit for first team duties. I'd rather we waited to see what Robson will specifically do than judge him on what he has done in the past elsewhere and the views of fans who had limited interaction with what he did.

Well obviously, we'll all do that. I'm just saying that his reputation is not exactly that of someone who'll cancel out Sherwood's weaknesses - in fact, it sounds like he might exacerbate them.

[ciggiesnbeer]

Doesn't matter anyway, we are getting "the coach formerly known as Mark Robson" not Mark Robson.

He could be just entering his psychedelic phase.

[Hoppo]

With all due respect Monty.. Bore off. You have made your point.

[Toronto Villa]

With all due respect Monty.. Bore off. You have made your point.

Hoppo steady on. No need for that. We can disagree and still be friends.

[PeterWithesShin]

With all due respect Monty.. Bore off. You have made your point.

With all due respect, wind your neck in or find somewhere else to post.

[silhillvilla]

Mark robson may be relatively unknown but I'd put money on him being a better choice than either Karsa or Culverhouse