Style v Substance

[JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta]

Seems to be a debate here regarding our performances.

The way I see it we are in the top six and results are good. Given that we have played decent football for a few seasons and got nowhere I can live with the change in style if it gets results. I get the impression a good amount of people on here do not agree and I am curious to see what the split is.

 

 

[Jack Willow]

The results are more important as they bring a possible promotion to PL, while performances are just eye catchers, flatter to deceive. 

[DRBee]

14 minutes ago, JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta said:

Given that we have played decent football for a few seasons and got nowhere

 

So winning over 50 % matches, playing attractive passing football and getting to the play-off final is nothing ....... 

 

[Leicester Ram]

I'm not calling you stupid mate but that's a stupid poll that you've very purposely crafted to suit your own agenda.

Obviously the most important thing in football is to get results but a lot of the criticism of Rowett's style is that it doesn't have an entirely reliable or effective way of creating chances and scoring goals. It can work really well like tonight but we can look seriously lost at times.

Playing attractive football doesn't mean you won't win.

Playing compromised, ugly football doesn't mean you will win.

And vice versa.

What no one likes are extremists. There are managers that firmly believe in results based football like Pulis and Mick McCarthy, which leads to ugly percentage football and playing for 0-0's away from home. That's basically what QPR were tonight.

It can also lead to managers like Paulo DiCanio who used to play a 4-2-4 or even my beloved Steve McClaren who went all guns blazing  when we lost our DM's to injury instead of switching system and killing our season.

None of us (hopefully) want either of those styles but it's important to be balanced.

Ultimately, I've paid £300 quid to stare at a field every other week, so as much as I want us to win every game I wouldn't mind if something entertaining happened.

[Zag zig]

Performances are likely to improve as confidence does from winning matches, right now though just for a change, give me promotion over all the eye catching style and substance that recent seasons has ended in failure.

I'd love to see us tearing teams apart 4 or 5 goals with slick football, but I hated seeing teams park the bus and us lose by the odd goal certain games, when we just never seemed to have another option or gear. 

Lets see how Gary's team and squad evolves over the season and more importantly the next couple of transfer windows. Any event, start of the season I'd have took top 6 by mid November and it's the results that are getting us there.

[ossieram]

21 minutes ago, DRBee said:

So winning over 50 % matches, playing attractive passing football and getting to the play-off final is nothing ....... 

 

He said it got us nowhere, and he is right.

[GeneralRam]

Results are what we need at the minute, not performances.

Performances come when there is confidence in the team, which comes from results.

The main problem for us the last few years was that if the game script didn't go to plan, heads dropped and everyone got on the players back. From what I can see, Rowett is trying to change that and add some steel.

 

[RiddingsRam]

Listening to Rowetts interview after the match , this is far from the finished article. It' a mere work in progress , his ideas are stating to come through and we'e seen some brilliant counters at times. Just going to take time. 

[archied]

Watched it on rams tv last night and though we were poor in first half in an attacking sense I thought we tried to put some slick fast passing moves together in the second half so personally I don't see this hoofball team of cloggers that some accuse rowett of trying to produce  ,yes that was mixed with some direct stuff too and hudds was superb and must be in the side as he can and does produce match winning quality ,, vydra brings nothing apart from goals? Are people blind or mad? He was all over the park and is growing into the ten role ,, will this team grow with results ,confidence and time playing together? I believe so 

sorry but all I see is some have an unbalanced dislike of rowett ( probably stems from Mac Hughes and ince martin love) and are being unfairly critical 

[TomBustler1884]

First half was horrendous, the second half I genuinely enjoyed.

 

[JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta]

7 hours ago, Leicester Ram said:

I'm not calling you stupid mate but that's a stupid poll that you've very purposely crafted to suit your own agenda.

Obviously the most important thing in football is to get results but a lot of the criticism of Rowett's style is that it doesn't have an entirely reliable or effective way of creating chances and scoring goals. It can work really well like tonight but we can look seriously lost at times.

Playing attractive football doesn't mean you won't win.

Playing compromised, ugly football doesn't mean you will win.

And vice versa.

What no one likes are extremists. There are managers that firmly believe in results based football like Pulis and Mick McCarthy, which leads to ugly percentage football and playing for 0-0's away from home. That's basically what QPR were tonight.

It can also lead to managers like Paulo DiCanio who used to play a 4-2-4 or even my beloved Steve McClaren who went all guns blazing  when we lost our DM's to injury instead of switching system and killing our season.

None of us (hopefully) want either of those styles but it's important to be balanced.

Ultimately, I've paid £300 quid to stare at a field every other week, so as much as I want us to win every game I wouldn't mind if something entertaining happened.

It's only as stupid as the constant moaning about performances when we are sat in the top 6. If we were lower mid table and way off the pace I would understand it.

The question isn't 'crafted' it's a very simple one. For all the entertaining football we played in recent seasons it didn't get us over the line. Time to try something different.

[i-Ram]

Really can’t remember it being very pretty or indeed entertaining under Pearson or Mac2. Even when Mac2 won 7 games in a row, the football wasn’t great, and we were lucky to pinch a few wins probably not deserving of our performance.  But everyone seemed jolly excited then.

Mel Morris will value results over performance. All those who think he might be worrying about attendances falling away a little l think are wide of the mark. He cherishes a position at the Big Table, and will fully accept ground out results to get there.  I suspect at the moment he is delighted with Rowett’s achievements of putting us in a competitive top 6 position, with some momentum and team spirit evident.

[JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta]

The entire promotion season under Davies was made up of ground out wins with the odd hammering thrown in. It was hardly vintage but it got the job done.

[Angry Ram]

1 hour ago, JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta said:

It's only as stupid as the constant moaning about performances when we are sat in the top 6. If we were lower mid table and way off the pace I would understand it.

The question isn't 'crafted' it's a very simple one. For all the entertaining football we played in recent seasons it didn't get us over the line. Time to try something different.

Why do I have to vote either or? I want both, surely we all do. We can all take the odd bad performance, that's football but it is an entertainment industry at the end of the day. 

What I don't get is why people think there is anything wrong with moaning about a performance.. If it was poo, then you can't really wrap it up any other way. We might be happy that we have won but the performnce was still poo. 

At this stage I am happy to sit through some poor performances, as long as I can see a bigger picture. I am struggling with that at the moment but I can't deny 6th place is good. 

Right now. when people say we got nowhere playing the football we did under Mac1 and it got us nowhere. I can't argue the fact that we fell short. BUT we did fall short and that always gave me hope that we had it in us to get those extra inches. Right now. if I am honest, I think when you marry performance with results, we have over achieved. I will take that of course but I am looking backwards instead or forwards. 

So, yes I would take Mac1 and hope at the moment. 

[ramsbottom]

IMHO the reason a lot of people appear to be obsessing over our performances, is because we're terrified of going up, and repeating our 11 points performance.  This team, at the moment, is very much like the King Bill-eh team that went up, solid, dogged, and nicking games by the odd goal.  That's fine for the Championship, but as we all know, it can get you slaughtered in the premier league.  The teams going up playing a decent brand of football, Southampton, Swansea etc. are the ones who've flourished, whereas the likes of Hull haven't.  Of course, Burnley have bucked the trend, but they've taken 5 years under the Ginger Mourinho to strike the right balance, and I think it's that type of performance GR is aiming for.  It will take time, and I think the likes of Huddlestone & Ledley are make-dos, due to not being able to shift more of the deadwood out in the summer.  If you look at it on the flip side, to be in and around the play offs, despite transitioning to a different style of play, is pretty impressive.

Now having said all that, it would be nice to start games quicker, and not have to wait til the second half before we start breaking in between the lines, open opening teams up.  Away from home, it's good to quieten the stadium down, but not at home...

[angieram]

10 hours ago, Leicester Ram said:

 

Ultimately, I've paid £300 quid to stare at a field every other week, so as much as I want us to win every game I wouldn't mind if something entertaining happened.

Only £300?

Totally agree; first half dreadful, it wasn't even bad - just BORING. QPR must take a lot of the blame for that and they nearly achieved everything they set out to do - slowing play down, offering no attacking intent, got the home crowd turning on the players. I was so happy when we did them right on the stroke of half time, just to serve them right!

Second half totally acceptable. I don't need 5-0 every week, just something to get me off my seat.

I was more frustrated at Fulham to be honest as I thought we could have won that match if we'd kept pressing. Still their result last night shows they were no mugs.

Not sure I can vote in the poll as no matter where we are in the table, I want to see some good football. I don't think the two things are mutually exclusive and just hope that Gary doesn't!

[Leicester Ram]

3 hours ago, JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta said:

It's only as stupid as the constant moaning about performances when we are sat in the top 6. If we were lower mid table and way off the pace I would understand it.

The question isn't 'crafted' it's a very simple one. For all the entertaining football we played in recent seasons it didn't get us over the line. Time to try something different.

We could be top of the league and I would still be critical of performances because no matter our league position there's always areas we could improve.

Even in 13/14 everyone was aware that, while the defence improved just because the attack was so good, it was still a clear weakness in the team; as we painfully found out at Wembley.

Derby fans are like battered housewives. The last few years manager wise has been really rough, we've switched styles so many times and had so many false dawns that it's hard to trust again to be honest.

As @i-Ram just mentioned we've seen a run like this under Mac2. We got results but the performances weren't great, it killed us off later in the season and we never made the play-off's. Is it unfair to worry that the performances aren't as good as the results given this squads history? Just because people were happy with that run, something that blew up in everyone's face later, should we be happy with this run?

Also, I was more comfortable with that run because Mac had been thrown into managing the most dysfunctional team since the Jewell/Early Clough days and was getting results, despite not having a summer to shape his squad. We all knew that how we were playing definitely wasn't the McClaren way, there was something else on the horizon. While I think Rowett is aware the performances aren't spectacular and believe we won't see his team until next season, I can't say I know where we're headed the same way I knew with McClaren. 

Rowett himself spoke about Reading being in a false position this season, a team that played us off the park and are clearly capable of special performances, that works the other way too. You could make the case that our performances don't justify our league position and I think that's a fair point because we've all seen Derby teams let alone other championship teams drop off after runs like this.

As bored as I was in the first half, I'm not completely worried about the team being entertaining. Winning a football match is a better high than being entertained. But I'm always worried if a team can't play competent attacking football. That's my crictism of this team, not that they aren't entertaining.

Rowett's successfully made us hard to beat but that's just the first step really. There are plenty of teams in the division that are hard to beat but the teams that tend to go up and have success are the teams that are hard to stop.

When it comes to attacking there's a lot of imbalance in the side. The gap between the defensive midfield and the attacking midfield is too big, we're so slow in midfield, while Vydra is scoring he's worryingly wasteful in the 10 role and I think we only got our first league goal this season from a winger last night. The attack is very reliant on the defence being outstanding, I don't think they have another gear if we go a couple of goals down. I'm a bit worried about that and that's completely fair. There's nothing wrong with wanting improvement.

Your poll question completely removed any nuance from the discussion, if turns us all into extremists. You've basically turned into the  parent asking their kid 'if they told you to jump off a cliff, would you?' because they got into a bit of trouble with their mate.

Depends how high the cliff is.

[GadFly]

1 hour ago, ramsbottom said:

That's fine for the Championship, but as we all know, it can get you slaughtered in the premier league.  The teams going up playing a decent brand of football, Southampton, Swansea etc. are the ones who've flourished, whereas the likes of Hull haven't.  Of course, Burnley have bucked the trend, but they've taken 5 years under the Ginger Mourinho to strike the right balance

Burnley have yoyo'd a bit as well, when they went up they came back down again the following season. 

When I think of teams that have gone up playing decent football, it's Bournemouth that spring to mind for me. They played scintillating attacking football in their promotion season, and have continued to do so in the premier league. Granted they're struggling a bit this season so far, but I do think they'll be fine in the end. They are proof that performances AND results are possible and aren't mutually exclusive though, even at this level. 

[cannable]

Sides that perform their way out of the Championship stay up and entertain.

Results football sees you straight back down or existing in some Tony Pulis fuelled half-life AT BEST.

[jagerbob]

Quote

1. Which do you value more highly, results or performance?

Results

Performance

 

Answer.

I dont give a stuff.

I will support this team no matter what.

Even if we go down to the third tier.

1 defeat in 10, continuing to win matches and pick up points in difficult fixtures.

1 defeat in 10, and still people moan that its not Steve McClaren football.

Let me remind you we probably have the equivalent of one good season where the "entertaining" and i use this word very loosly - actually worked.

It took us till autumn for us to start winning in 2014, in 2015, the wheels were coming off in december despite us making it to top spot on boxing day. Wasalls time and Mcclaren MkII were hugely inconsistant, and despite trying the same style, was on the whole boring, possesion for the sake of it, without any excitement, chances created, or shots on goal.

 

Anyone who thinks we used to play attractive football, and dismisses every time huddlestone puts a glorious ball through as long ball football. they have serious rose tinted glasses on, who can only ever remember good times in the past, and have learnt to blank out all those bad performances.

Support the club.

In our current run, if you still see fit to complain and demand Huddlestone be dropped, do us all a favour and go find another hobby, or perhaps you can support west ham they too are full of snobbish fans who behave more like the mob in the collesium than they do real football fans.