Leicester City v Derby County

[McMuffin]

Has Hughes played well since Clough talked about selling him?

Unsettled maybe?

[Ambitious]

Has Hughes played well since Clough talked about selling him?

Unsettled maybe?

 

Yes.

 

He has been our 3rd best player this season - and his second half performance at Millwall was an absolute masterclass in football.

[-JW-]

Has Hughes played well since Clough talked about selling him?

Unsettled maybe?

This is real world, not football manager ffs.

[WilkoRam]

Hughes lost the ball more times in that match than I remember any derby player doing in recent history, appalling performance.

An exaggeration?

I like your loyalty to Nigel but your stance of highlighting individual performances for poor results and constantly saying "no fault on Nigel for this result" is wearing thin in my eyes. I don't mean that as a personal dig but it seems that these 'sloppy' goals etc are nothing to do with Nigel, the players he's signed or the lack of organisation at the back. I'm getting to point of thinking that the manager is a superfluous role and all we need is someone to write the team sheet out and tell them to try and pass the ball. If anything goes wrong it's down to the players anyway.

I can understand it to the extent of Russell missing opportunities etc. That is an individual think that Nigel can't change (other than changing him or not signing him - although I like the guy and think he'll come good). The goals we're conceding are not just down to an error, such as a sloppy back pass or such like. They're down to defending poorly as a unit. We are not a unit at the back. There is no cohesion in the team. Only when we have possession in the middle of the park do we look good and that is just one of many areas where we need to be a unit. There seems a lot of work in that area but little elsewhere. So rather than it not being his fault, I see many things that I would say are his fault and some that aren't i.e. The Russell misses.

[Ambitious]

An exaggeration?

I like your loyalty to Nigel but your stance of highlighting individual performances for poor results and constantly saying "no fault on Nigel for this result" is wearing thin in my eyes. I don't mean that as a personal dig but it seems that these 'sloppy' goals etc are nothing to do with Nigel, the players he's signed or the lack of organisation at the back. I'm getting to point of thinking that the manager is a superfluous role and all we need is someone to write the team sheet out and tell them to try and pass the ball. If anything goes wrong it's down to the players anyway.

I can understand it to the extent of Russell missing opportunities etc. That is an individual think that Nigel can't change (other than changing him or not signing him - although I like the guy and think he'll come good). The goals we're conceding are not just down to an error, such as a sloppy back pass or such like. They're down to defending poorly as a unit. We are not a unit at the back. There is no cohesion in the team. Only when we have possession in the middle of the park do we look good and that is just one of many areas where we need to be a unit. There seems a lot of work in that area but little elsewhere. So rather than it not being his fault, I see many things that I would say are his fault and some that aren't i.e. The Russell misses.

 

Basically my stance on football managers is that their input is vastly over-exaggerated, okay, yes when it comes to identifying targets they are accountable in every single way, and picking the team is also their choice, as well as the formation, and roles given to players.

 

Everything else for me is down to the player, Nigel will script an ideal scenario out at set pieces and for the back 4...etc he won't tell them to pull out of position...etc it's just inconceivable  for me, this goes for all the good and bad things. Everyone plays to an ideal solution, but players themselves are not robots, when a mistake is made for me, it is down to the player - not the manager, if a player has tracked someone, or not seen the movement of someone then it is HIS fault, not Cloughs. When a set piece is not defended properly with 10 people in the box, how can that be Clough's fault? if we was defending a set piece with lets say 6 players in the box, then yeah, I would understand and criticise but we simply aren't doing that, we're set up in the correct manner, perhaps the lack of width at home, but our style works away - it's a piece of grass, and it's played by 11 men on each team, so everything else is psychological.

 

The manager is at fault for poor substitutions, poor quality signings (although this has to be reasonable, you get what you pay for, and for me value for money hasn't been a problem)...etc

 

when it comes down to players mis-placing passes, not watching the man, not being aware, making stupid tackles on the edge of the box - how is it his fault, yet when he comes out after a game and says this he gets blasted for hanging players out to dry?

 

Conor Sammon has brought a player down on the edge of the box, inexcusably - not Cloughs fault

Second goal, a player has just drifted off and 'whoever' hasn't been aware and he got a flick on that's gone into the goal, again that's not cloughs fault.

 

As I said, the job of a manager tends to be over-exaggerated - and in our case, we just seem to be losing concentration at times, nothing to do with the set up of the actual move - can Clough be blamed for players losing concentration, I'm not going to argue if that's your standing, but I certainly won't. 

[notts_ram]

I disagree vehemently with the above two posts, for me its all about accountability and where the buck stops - the manager directly influences everything on the pitch so to leave them blameless is incredible - if a player isnt performing then he gets subbed, if he is consistently underperforming then he gets dropped, if he is doing something wrong in his game then he needs to be coached, if a manager does not choose to do any of the above or if his direction isnt being followed by the player then this is down to the manager.

 

Clough certainly cant be blamed for a player like Russell missing an easy chance but at the end of the day the buck still stops with Clough - he bought him, he's playing him, is he coaching him to be more productive in front of goal?Same for any player at any football team, Clough has to accept the blame for what HIS players are doing or not doing on the pitch. 

[Ambitious]

I disagree vehemently with the above two posts, for me its all about accountability and where the buck stops - the manager directly influences everything on the pitch so to leave them blameless is incredible - if a player isnt performing then he gets subbed, if he is consistently underperforming then he gets dropped, if he is doing something wrong in his game then he needs to be coached, if a manager does not choose to do any of the above or if his direction isnt being followed by the player then this is down to the manager.

 

Clough certainly cant be blamed for a player like Russell missing an easy chance but at the end of the day the buck still stops with Clough - he bought him, he's playing him, is he coaching him to be more productive in front of goal?Same for any player at any football team, Clough has to accept the blame for what HIS players are doing or not doing on the pitch. 

 

I just can't agree - you get 3 subs in a match.

 

Forsyth, Freeman, Buxton, Keogh, Hughes, Sammon and Martin all under-performed yesterday.

against reading, Grant, Smith, Bryson, Martin, Ward, Russell, Eustace and Hughes under-performed.

against Bolton, Grant, and Eustace under-performed.

Against Burnley, Grant, Bryson,Keogh,Coutts, Ward, Russell, Freeman, Hughes and Buxton all under-performed

Against Yeovil, Bryson and Forsyth under-performed

Against Leicester, Forsyth Bryson, Keogh, Coutts, Hendrick, Martin and Hughes under-performed

Against Brighton, Russell under-performed

Against Oldham, Forsyth and Davies under-performed

Against Blackburn, Forsyth, Bryson, Keogh, Hendrick, Ward, Freeman and Buxton all under-performed

 

Now i'm not sure who was subbed, but usually a lot of them were - but in a lot of cases, there have been a lot of under-performers.

 

Bryson appears in 5 of them, yet in the other 4 games he played he has been very good. So, what do you do with him? drop him? and yet we have to think about who comes in, Keogh is in 4 of them - do we played Gjokaj there? or take a chance on Eustace at centre back? we have no viable options.

 

We aren't Leicester, our first team squad is half the size - we don't have the luxury of options, even in midfield now we're struggling with Coutts, Hendrick and Bailey out injured. We've got to play with what we have, and none of them have really been consistent this season.. 

[notts_ram]

Ambitious was talking about accountability holistically and pulled out examples of substitutions as just one - the point I was disagreeing with is when folks say its not the managers fault that so and so missed an open goal, that so and so brought their centre forward down for a sloppy penalty, it is - the buck stops with the manager not the players - managers get sacked not players as a direct result of what players do or dont do on the pitch.

 

So dont want to hear Clough coming out with so and so didnt do what you asked them to do, you take the rap Clough if you dont like the status quo then quit and get a job as a dustman. 

[Ambitious]

Ambitious was talking about accountability holistically and pulled out examples of substitutions as just one - the point I was disagreeing with is when folks say its not the managers fault that so and so missed an open goal, that so and so brought their centre forward down for a sloppy penalty, it is - the buck stops with the manager not the players - managers get sacked not players as a direct result of what players do or dont do on the pitch.

 

So dont want to hear Clough coming out with so and so didnt do what you asked them to do, you take the rap Clough if you dont like the status quo then quit and get a job as a dustman. 

 

I just can't agree with that, but it's all about opinions.

 

I expect what is reasonable from Clough, and I won't blame him for a players mistake - I will blame the player, not the manager.

 

Just as if we tried to defend a corner with 6 people in the box, and we conceded I would blame the manager. 

[notts_ram]

OK Ambitious would you agree that if a player was making the same mistakes game after game then this was within the managers sphere of influence to alter? Did he tell Sammon to defend our penalty area last night to bring down their player and thereby concede the equalizer? Did he tell Sammon not to defend the edge of our penalty area? Did he say nothing at all? I agree that the goal was world class but cause and effect, what was Sammon doing there in the first place? Clough contributes to that. 

[WilkoRam]

I just can't agree - you get 3 subs in a match.

Forsyth, Freeman, Buxton, Keogh, Hughes, Sammon and Martin all under-performed yesterday.

against reading, Grant, Smith, Bryson, Martin, Ward, Russell, Eustace and Hughes under-performed.

against Bolton, Grant, and Eustace under-performed.

Against Burnley, Grant, Bryson,Keogh,Coutts, Ward, Russell, Freeman, Hughes and Buxton all under-performed

Against Yeovil, Bryson and Forsyth under-performed

Against Leicester, Forsyth Bryson, Keogh, Coutts, Hendrick, Martin and Hughes under-performed

Against Brighton, Russell under-performed

Against Oldham, Forsyth and Davies under-performed

Against Blackburn, Forsyth, Bryson, Keogh, Hendrick, Ward, Freeman and Buxton all under-performed

Now i'm not sure who was subbed, but usually a lot of them were - but in a lot of cases, there have been a lot of under-performers.

Bryson appears in 5 of them, yet in the other 4 games he played he has been very good. So, what do you do with him? drop him? and yet we have to think about who comes in, Keogh is in 4 of them - do we played Gjokaj there? or take a chance on Eustace at centre back? we have no viable options.

We aren't Leicester, our first team squad is half the size - we don't have the luxury of options, even in midfield now we're struggling with Coutts, Hendrick and Bailey out injured. We've got to play with what we have, and none of them have really been consistent this season..

If we really have at least two players 'under-performing' in every game then that's worrying and also I feel is down to the manager.

Maybe it suggests that the manager can't get them to be consistently at their best. Surely getting the best out of a player is his job? No?

I would really like to see how another management team got this squad playing and where they saw recruitment needed.

[Ambitious]

If we really have at least two players 'under-performing' in every game then that's worrying and also I feel is down to the manager.

Maybe it suggests that the manager can't get them to be consistently at their best. Surely getting the best out of a player is his job? No?

I would really like to see how another management team got this squad playing and where they saw recruitment needed.

 

That happens in every single team... in every single division, nearly every single week. If you have a week where all your players are at a 6 or above (which we have in 2 games, both won 5-1) 

 

I would like to see how another management team would get on with this squad too - and, not for the same reasons as you. 

[WilkoRam]

That happens in every single team... in every single division, nearly every single week. If you have a week where all your players are at a 6 or above (which we have in 2 games, both won 5-1)

I would like to see how another management team would get on with this squad too - and, not for the same reasons as you.

If it happens in every single team, in every single division nearly every single week then why is it an excuse for our poor results?

[notts_ram]

If it happens in every single team, in every single division nearly every single week then why is it an excuse for our poor results?

My point exactly. The better coaches get the best out of their resources and cream naturally rises to the top. The poorer coaches continually highlight their players deficiencies when in fact it is the managers role to develop them. I could never understand a coach publically criticsing a player, all they are doing is criticising themself. 

[Ambitious]

If it happens in every single team, in every single division nearly every single week then why is it an excuse for our poor results?

 

It's not, but some people seem to think that every side we play comes at the same level every week.

 

The best side we've played this season was Bolton, they were really good - yet they're bottom after some awful performances. Yet their performance against us for me outshined Burnley, and Reading comfortably. 

[notts_ram]

Would you agree that our issue is that we dont play at the same level every week hence our just as likely to win a game than lose a game output over the past 2 seasons? Different players but same results, the only constant is the management team. 

[ronnieronalde]

I'm not abusing anyone here, just in case it goes off on one.

 

It's another one of those threads, not one of us will back down from the view that our football knowledge is better than the person we are arguing against.

 

I can't agree with Wilko because I see things so differently to him that it's not true. It's as if we watch different clubs. I think my view of what is going on is right.

 

Wilko can't agree with Ambitious because Wilko feels he sees thing so differently from him that it's not true. it's as if he's watching a different club, he thinks his view of what is going on is right.

 

The manager is there to tell players what he expects of them in certain situations,he;s there to teach them if they don't already know, the coaches are there to make sure the players practise those situations again and again. Sometimes on the training ground they'll set up to defend 100 different corners and you might even see the coaches or the managers physically putting a player where he wants them to be when the ball comes in. They'll be designated tasks for every different type of scenario.

 

Prior to the game they'll be given players to mark, jobs to do, tracking back or staying up top. They will know exactly what they should do in every given minute of every different game depending on the score.

 

In game situations though, we don't have the chance to stop and run through it again. We can't ask Knockaert to take it back and to try and chip one to the far post and see how we deal with that. We can't take play back to their goalie and ask them to try again but this time telling Conor Sammon not to trip him up. We can't even ask Reading before the second goal, to take the throw in again but this time make sure Eustace tracks Pogrebnyaks run (not one person has picked up on that by the way, at least not publicly, watch where Pogrebnyak first gets the ball, watch his run and watch Eustace totally let him go, Russell got slated but Eustace could have done more)

 

How can you blame the manager for that? Honestly, think about it. He doesn't get the chance to physically put them where he wants them to be, he doesn't get the chance to talk to the 8 defending the set pieces just before they come in.

 

I agree that If the level of performance was garbage, then the manager takes it on the chin, lock stock and barrell.

 

When we're showing that we 're able to smash teams one week yet concede to three ridiculous INDIVIDUAL errors, then how can anyone say it's the manager to blame.

 

By the way can anyone tell me when it was when Leicester last dropped out of the best 6 sides in this division.?

 

We got done 2-1 away from home thanks to two small mistakes (not even massive) and one piece of real class.

 

Again I fail to see why that brings out the usual need for crisis talks between the good and bad side of the forum?

[notts_ram]

 

Again I fail to see why that brings out the usual need for crisis talks between the good and bad side of the forum?

The bottom line is we are so inconsistent that every time we win a game everyone thinks everything is hunky dory then the next game we lose the Clough bashers like myself creep out of the woodwork. Win lose win lose, the only consistent factor is our total inconsistency. 

[ronnieronalde]

The bottom line is we are so inconsistent that every time we win a game everyone thinks everything is hunky dory then the next game we lose the Clough bashers like myself creep out of the woodwork. Win lose win lose, the only consistent factor is our total inconsistency. 

 

Not quite true that bit. I just think people see what they want to see on this forum, not actually reading anything, just here to argue. I see people posting false arguments all the time, Arguing about things that have never been said.

 

I saw a lot of the regular posters saying this week would be a bloody tough week, I saw masses or people predicting losses to Leicester (me included) I saw lots of positive posters predicting defeat. Nothing about hunky dory anywhere.

 

None of the positive posters claiming we've cracked it and we're going up.

 

I didn't even see too many people saying we're nailed of for top 6 after beating Millwall, however, the same can't be said for the opposite views.

 

Doesn't matter who we lose against or how good a team they have, Every single time we lose a game he's taken us as far as he can and he should be sacked. Every single time?

 

 

Necessary? Really? Fair? Really?

[notts_ram]

To be fair I dont want Clough sacked......I would expect him to take the honourable way out and resign