duncanjwitham

Players are still human beings though, there's a limit as to how much effort they can actually produce.  If you look at a Guardiola team, for example, they also press really aggressively, but they can afford to do that because when they win the ball back, they keep it for 50 passes and let the other team chase it.  We literally do the opposite - press aggressively, win it back, then give it away again so we have to start all over.  It's the good old "work smarter, not harder" thing - so much of the effort we put in is just wasted by immediately lumping a big ball over the top back to their keeper. 

Players are still human beings though, there's a limit as to how much effort they can actually produce.  If you look at a Guardiola team, for example, they also press really aggressively, but they can afford to do that because when they win the ball back, they keep it for 50 passes and let the other team chase it.  We literally do the opposite - press aggressively, win it back, then give it away again so we have to start all over.  It's the good old "work smarter, not harder" thing - so much of the effort we put in is just wasted by immediately lumping a big ball over the top back to their keeper. 

Players are still human beings though, there's a limit as to how much effort they can actually produce.  If you look at a Guardiola team, for example, they also press really aggressively, but they can afford to do that because when they win the ball back, they keep it for 50 passes and let the other team chase it.  We literally do the opposite - press aggressively, win it back, then give it away again so we have to start all over.  It's the good old "work smarter, not harder" thing - so much of the effort we put in is just wasted by immediately lumping a big ball over the top back to their keeper. 

I think they're functionally the same thing as far as Warne is concerned. He's got one way of playing, and he's going to do that over and over again whether it works or not.  It happened to work for a while, partly for things Warne was doing (the fitness, work rate etc), but also partly because of other things (the getting the ball on floor and playing through the thirds etc, that I suspect was a hangover from Rosenior).  So Warne is just going to keep doing the fitness/work-rate stuff, even though it's less effective with tired players, and pay no attention to the other stuff because he only equates success with how much you've run around.

I think they're functionally the same thing as far as Warne is concerned. He's got one way of playing, and he's going to do that over and over again whether it works or not.  It happened to work for a while, partly for things Warne was doing (the fitness, work rate etc), but also partly because of other things (the getting the ball on floor and playing through the thirds etc, that I suspect was a hangover from Rosenior).  So Warne is just going to keep doing the fitness/work-rate stuff, even though it's less effective with tired players, and pay no attention to the other stuff because he only equates success with how much you've run around.

I think they're functionally the same thing as far as Warne is concerned. He's got one way of playing, and he's going to do that over and over again whether it works or not.  It happened to work for a while, partly for things Warne was doing (the fitness, work rate etc), but also partly because of other things (the getting the ball on floor and playing through the thirds etc, that I suspect was a hangover from Rosenior).  So Warne is just going to keep doing the fitness/work-rate stuff, even though it's less effective with tired players, and pay no attention to the other stuff because he only equates success with how much you've run around.

Because he doesn't actually understand what we were doing that was making us play well in those games...

Yet we’ve had people claiming all week that the first half against MK Dons was amazing, because we created loads of chances but just couldn’t put them away. You can’t have it both ways.

Yet we’ve had people claiming all week that the first half against MK Dons was amazing, because we created loads of chances but just couldn’t put them away. You can’t have it both ways.

Just left the game and that was an awful performance. Trying to play the s*** system Warne is seemingly wedded to is killing us. NML is not a wing back! The definition of madness is trying the same thing over and over expecting a different result and this is what Warne is doing. His tactical nous is non existent and he will take us nowhere. I hate his football.

I go to football to be entertained to be fair and I look at the football he serves up and I just think what absolute damage is gonna be done to the squad in the long term if he clogs it up with hoof merchants and athletes this summer. 

My concern is that I’m starting to think the mix of good football and direct football that we saw during the unbeaten run was more a hangover from Roseniors instructions and now we’re aimlessly launching it forwards with very little in terms of incisive good play on the ground. 
 
Let us be very clear, despite a tough start we had the higher xG than our opposition in every game under Rosenior and it was our finishing which was woeful. 
 
I think what worries me is we’re all hoping that he gets some players in that’ll make his style work and we’ll be successful but the other option is we fill the team with absolute cloggers and athletes at the expense of technical ability and we’re shown to still be falling short but we’re now left with a squad full of hoof merchants. 

Presumably can’t play against his parent club.

Presumably can’t play against his parent club.

I think part of the issue with these “one of the best squads in the league, oh no it’s not…” type arguments, is that our first XI probably is top 3 or 4 (barring obvious issues at right back), but there’s very little beyond that. So we’re capable of putting out a top team, but it can start to fall away very quickly if absences begin to pile up, or performance levels begin to drop in those first team players.
And obviously in cases like that, the onus is on the manager to find a way of keeping that XI on the pitch as much as possible, and playing at as a high level as possible…

This is actually one of my biggest arguments against Warne (and likewise Pearson, Rowett and any other manager that needs to radically reshape the squad to achieve anything).  I think the only way we're ever going to have any kind of sustained success is by relying on the academy (and for a club like us, 'success' probably means getting into the Prem and staying there, I'm not talking about winning the league or anything).  We probably aren't ever going to be in a position where we can compete on money-terms, so we're going to have to develop our own players instead.  And that means taking the long-view about what kind of club you want to be, what kind of football you want to play etc.  There's no point having an academy full of technical midfielders and tricky wingers, if your first team manager is playing 352 and just run around a lot (or vice versa, of course).  You need the entire club pulling in the same direction, and that will never happen if you keep switching managerial styles, bearing in mind it takes like 5-10 years for a player to progress through the academy.
Mel Morris's "Derby Way" stuff was one of the few things he was right about, it's just a shame he seemed to have no clue how to make it actually happen.  We *should* be wanting to have half the team filled with academy players, and we should be actively trying to make that happen.
For clarity, I'm not saying a manager shouldn't be able to put his own spin on things, but you can't go lurching between Pearson, McClaren, Rowett, Lampard and expect any kind of consistency or long-term progress.  We should have some rough idea of how we want to play, and only appoint managers who are going to play something close to that style.  If we'd gone e.g. McClaren, Wassall, Lampard, Cocu, Rooney, Rosenior, we'd be in a much better position, as they all played roughly similar styles of football, in roughly similar formations.  And we wouldn't have had a guy paying £12m+ for Vydra and Anya, and then the next guy not really wanting to use either of them.

I think part of the issue with these “one of the best squads in the league, oh no it’s not…” type arguments, is that our first XI probably is top 3 or 4 (barring obvious issues at right back), but there’s very little beyond that. So we’re capable of putting out a top team, but it can start to fall away very quickly if absences begin to pile up, or performance levels begin to drop in those first team players.
And obviously in cases like that, the onus is on the manager to find a way of keeping that XI on the pitch as much as possible, and playing at as a high level as possible…

90% of posters:


10% of posters:

This is actually one of my biggest arguments against Warne (and likewise Pearson, Rowett and any other manager that needs to radically reshape the squad to achieve anything).  I think the only way we're ever going to have any kind of sustained success is by relying on the academy (and for a club like us, 'success' probably means getting into the Prem and staying there, I'm not talking about winning the league or anything).  We probably aren't ever going to be in a position where we can compete on money-terms, so we're going to have to develop our own players instead.  And that means taking the long-view about what kind of club you want to be, what kind of football you want to play etc.  There's no point having an academy full of technical midfielders and tricky wingers, if your first team manager is playing 352 and just run around a lot (or vice versa, of course).  You need the entire club pulling in the same direction, and that will never happen if you keep switching managerial styles, bearing in mind it takes like 5-10 years for a player to progress through the academy.
Mel Morris's "Derby Way" stuff was one of the few things he was right about, it's just a shame he seemed to have no clue how to make it actually happen.  We *should* be wanting to have half the team filled with academy players, and we should be actively trying to make that happen.
For clarity, I'm not saying a manager shouldn't be able to put his own spin on things, but you can't go lurching between Pearson, McClaren, Rowett, Lampard and expect any kind of consistency or long-term progress.  We should have some rough idea of how we want to play, and only appoint managers who are going to play something close to that style.  If we'd gone e.g. McClaren, Wassall, Lampard, Cocu, Rooney, Rosenior, we'd be in a much better position, as they all played roughly similar styles of football, in roughly similar formations.  And we wouldn't have had a guy paying £12m+ for Vydra and Anya, and then the next guy not really wanting to use either of them.

This is actually one of my biggest arguments against Warne (and likewise Pearson, Rowett and any other manager that needs to radically reshape the squad to achieve anything).  I think the only way we're ever going to have any kind of sustained success is by relying on the academy (and for a club like us, 'success' probably means getting into the Prem and staying there, I'm not talking about winning the league or anything).  We probably aren't ever going to be in a position where we can compete on money-terms, so we're going to have to develop our own players instead.  And that means taking the long-view about what kind of club you want to be, what kind of football you want to play etc.  There's no point having an academy full of technical midfielders and tricky wingers, if your first team manager is playing 352 and just run around a lot (or vice versa, of course).  You need the entire club pulling in the same direction, and that will never happen if you keep switching managerial styles, bearing in mind it takes like 5-10 years for a player to progress through the academy.
Mel Morris's "Derby Way" stuff was one of the few things he was right about, it's just a shame he seemed to have no clue how to make it actually happen.  We *should* be wanting to have half the team filled with academy players, and we should be actively trying to make that happen.
For clarity, I'm not saying a manager shouldn't be able to put his own spin on things, but you can't go lurching between Pearson, McClaren, Rowett, Lampard and expect any kind of consistency or long-term progress.  We should have some rough idea of how we want to play, and only appoint managers who are going to play something close to that style.  If we'd gone e.g. McClaren, Wassall, Lampard, Cocu, Rooney, Rosenior, we'd be in a much better position, as they all played roughly similar styles of football, in roughly similar formations.  And we wouldn't have had a guy paying £12m+ for Vydra and Anya, and then the next guy not really wanting to use either of them.

This is actually one of my biggest arguments against Warne (and likewise Pearson, Rowett and any other manager that needs to radically reshape the squad to achieve anything).  I think the only way we're ever going to have any kind of sustained success is by relying on the academy (and for a club like us, 'success' probably means getting into the Prem and staying there, I'm not talking about winning the league or anything).  We probably aren't ever going to be in a position where we can compete on money-terms, so we're going to have to develop our own players instead.  And that means taking the long-view about what kind of club you want to be, what kind of football you want to play etc.  There's no point having an academy full of technical midfielders and tricky wingers, if your first team manager is playing 352 and just run around a lot (or vice versa, of course).  You need the entire club pulling in the same direction, and that will never happen if you keep switching managerial styles, bearing in mind it takes like 5-10 years for a player to progress through the academy.
Mel Morris's "Derby Way" stuff was one of the few things he was right about, it's just a shame he seemed to have no clue how to make it actually happen.  We *should* be wanting to have half the team filled with academy players, and we should be actively trying to make that happen.
For clarity, I'm not saying a manager shouldn't be able to put his own spin on things, but you can't go lurching between Pearson, McClaren, Rowett, Lampard and expect any kind of consistency or long-term progress.  We should have some rough idea of how we want to play, and only appoint managers who are going to play something close to that style.  If we'd gone e.g. McClaren, Wassall, Lampard, Cocu, Rooney, Rosenior, we'd be in a much better position, as they all played roughly similar styles of football, in roughly similar formations.  And we wouldn't have had a guy paying £12m+ for Vydra and Anya, and then the next guy not really wanting to use either of them.

This is actually one of my biggest arguments against Warne (and likewise Pearson, Rowett and any other manager that needs to radically reshape the squad to achieve anything).  I think the only way we're ever going to have any kind of sustained success is by relying on the academy (and for a club like us, 'success' probably means getting into the Prem and staying there, I'm not talking about winning the league or anything).  We probably aren't ever going to be in a position where we can compete on money-terms, so we're going to have to develop our own players instead.  And that means taking the long-view about what kind of club you want to be, what kind of football you want to play etc.  There's no point having an academy full of technical midfielders and tricky wingers, if your first team manager is playing 352 and just run around a lot (or vice versa, of course).  You need the entire club pulling in the same direction, and that will never happen if you keep switching managerial styles, bearing in mind it takes like 5-10 years for a player to progress through the academy.
Mel Morris's "Derby Way" stuff was one of the few things he was right about, it's just a shame he seemed to have no clue how to make it actually happen.  We *should* be wanting to have half the team filled with academy players, and we should be actively trying to make that happen.
For clarity, I'm not saying a manager shouldn't be able to put his own spin on things, but you can't go lurching between Pearson, McClaren, Rowett, Lampard and expect any kind of consistency or long-term progress.  We should have some rough idea of how we want to play, and only appoint managers who are going to play something close to that style.  If we'd gone e.g. McClaren, Wassall, Lampard, Cocu, Rooney, Rosenior, we'd be in a much better position, as they all played roughly similar styles of football, in roughly similar formations.  And we wouldn't have had a guy paying £12m+ for Vydra and Anya, and then the next guy not really wanting to use either of them.

This is actually one of my biggest arguments against Warne (and likewise Pearson, Rowett and any other manager that needs to radically reshape the squad to achieve anything).  I think the only way we're ever going to have any kind of sustained success is by relying on the academy (and for a club like us, 'success' probably means getting into the Prem and staying there, I'm not talking about winning the league or anything).  We probably aren't ever going to be in a position where we can compete on money-terms, so we're going to have to develop our own players instead.  And that means taking the long-view about what kind of club you want to be, what kind of football you want to play etc.  There's no point having an academy full of technical midfielders and tricky wingers, if your first team manager is playing 352 and just run around a lot (or vice versa, of course).  You need the entire club pulling in the same direction, and that will never happen if you keep switching managerial styles, bearing in mind it takes like 5-10 years for a player to progress through the academy.
Mel Morris's "Derby Way" stuff was one of the few things he was right about, it's just a shame he seemed to have no clue how to make it actually happen.  We *should* be wanting to have half the team filled with academy players, and we should be actively trying to make that happen.
For clarity, I'm not saying a manager shouldn't be able to put his own spin on things, but you can't go lurching between Pearson, McClaren, Rowett, Lampard and expect any kind of consistency or long-term progress.  We should have some rough idea of how we want to play, and only appoint managers who are going to play something close to that style.  If we'd gone e.g. McClaren, Wassall, Lampard, Cocu, Rooney, Rosenior, we'd be in a much better position, as they all played roughly similar styles of football, in roughly similar formations.  And we wouldn't have had a guy paying £12m+ for Vydra and Anya, and then the next guy not really wanting to use either of them.

This is actually one of my biggest arguments against Warne (and likewise Pearson, Rowett and any other manager that needs to radically reshape the squad to achieve anything).  I think the only way we're ever going to have any kind of sustained success is by relying on the academy (and for a club like us, 'success' probably means getting into the Prem and staying there, I'm not talking about winning the league or anything).  We probably aren't ever going to be in a position where we can compete on money-terms, so we're going to have to develop our own players instead.  And that means taking the long-view about what kind of club you want to be, what kind of football you want to play etc.  There's no point having an academy full of technical midfielders and tricky wingers, if your first team manager is playing 352 and just run around a lot (or vice versa, of course).  You need the entire club pulling in the same direction, and that will never happen if you keep switching managerial styles, bearing in mind it takes like 5-10 years for a player to progress through the academy.
Mel Morris's "Derby Way" stuff was one of the few things he was right about, it's just a shame he seemed to have no clue how to make it actually happen.  We *should* be wanting to have half the team filled with academy players, and we should be actively trying to make that happen.
For clarity, I'm not saying a manager shouldn't be able to put his own spin on things, but you can't go lurching between Pearson, McClaren, Rowett, Lampard and expect any kind of consistency or long-term progress.  We should have some rough idea of how we want to play, and only appoint managers who are going to play something close to that style.  If we'd gone e.g. McClaren, Wassall, Lampard, Cocu, Rooney, Rosenior, we'd be in a much better position, as they all played roughly similar styles of football, in roughly similar formations.  And we wouldn't have had a guy paying £12m+ for Vydra and Anya, and then the next guy not really wanting to use either of them.

This is actually one of my biggest arguments against Warne (and likewise Pearson, Rowett and any other manager that needs to radically reshape the squad to achieve anything).  I think the only way we're ever going to have any kind of sustained success is by relying on the academy (and for a club like us, 'success' probably means getting into the Prem and staying there, I'm not talking about winning the league or anything).  We probably aren't ever going to be in a position where we can compete on money-terms, so we're going to have to develop our own players instead.  And that means taking the long-view about what kind of club you want to be, what kind of football you want to play etc.  There's no point having an academy full of technical midfielders and tricky wingers, if your first team manager is playing 352 and just run around a lot (or vice versa, of course).  You need the entire club pulling in the same direction, and that will never happen if you keep switching managerial styles, bearing in mind it takes like 5-10 years for a player to progress through the academy.
Mel Morris's "Derby Way" stuff was one of the few things he was right about, it's just a shame he seemed to have no clue how to make it actually happen.  We *should* be wanting to have half the team filled with academy players, and we should be actively trying to make that happen.
For clarity, I'm not saying a manager shouldn't be able to put his own spin on things, but you can't go lurching between Pearson, McClaren, Rowett, Lampard and expect any kind of consistency or long-term progress.  We should have some rough idea of how we want to play, and only appoint managers who are going to play something close to that style.  If we'd gone e.g. McClaren, Wassall, Lampard, Cocu, Rooney, Rosenior, we'd be in a much better position, as they all played roughly similar styles of football, in roughly similar formations.  And we wouldn't have had a guy paying £12m+ for Vydra and Anya, and then the next guy not really wanting to use either of them.