Jump to content

How much time do we give Phil?


Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, RamNut said:

When everyone is fit, on paper we have a decent squad but the recent absentees are highlighted in bold

there are some gaps. Especially in the vital no9 position. 
he has to carry you know who, and at present the defence needs Davies to organise the troops.

But that is what he is given to work with.

 

                  marshall

byrne   Evans   Clarke    Buchanan

            Knight     Bielik

jozwiak        Sibley         Lawrence

                 Waghorn

                            Roos

Wisdom    Te wierik.    Davies    Forsyth

                 Bird     Shinnie

holmes             Rooney                Ibe

                       Whittaker 

Just chill out.

 

 

 

 

I would like to think that says it all.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Tyler Durden said:

You pick and choose what should be relevant to your own arguments if it serves your purpose. It's like trying to herd cats. You selectively choose what you wish to include if it furthers your agenda then selectively choose what to exclude if it doesn't back up your own argument.

This transcends the whole argument, it could be about how many atoms there are on the head of a pin or whatever.  Then you polarise the whole debate and choose to pigeonhole posters who disagree with your opinion into Cocu out advocates.

I like having a debate with anyone about anything but if salient points on whatever the debate is are being deliberately ignored than it makes the whole process pointless and is leading to a lot of the friction on here. 

 

Whereas your "tongue in cheek" comments are what?

Constructive? Entertaining? Amusing? What?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, angieram said:

I think that the sheer persistence and repetitiveness of the negative posters is currently having a depressing effect on the forum, so that it appears that there are a lot more people against Cocu than the reality. Even when someone tries to start a more balanced thread the same posters pile in to try and quickly smother any murmurings of hope!

I really can't be bothered to keep debating the same points over and over, which leads me to post less and gloss over most threads. I'm fairly certain that I am not alone in this and @Coconut sums up the situation perfectly for me.

Given the financial situation and current injuries I would like to see posters take a more realistic view for the season, maybe look for a few positives or offer more constructive solutions; things won't seem so bad then.

And there will be plenty of time to say "I told you so" to the rest of us later when/if things don't improve. 

Totally agree with this. There's a minority of 'Cocu Out' posters who are bordering on spamming.

Quite telling that there's been no 'Cocu Out' poll in the last couple of days. I suspect those who want a managerial change are well aware of the general feeling of the fanbase & are block posting to 'set the agenda'.

Its also much easier to be destructive than constructive. Have seen very little comment on what line up (given the current limitations) would get us results or what specifically needs to change from a tactical point of view - quite surprising given the tidal wave of complaints about style.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Coconut said:

The sheer irony of it all, eh?

I don't have an agenda, merely saying how I see it.

In my opinion Sheff Weds' results can't be used to back up anyone's opinion, one way or the other.

They're an entirely separate entity to us.

If you start doing so to judge Derby County you have to judge others by the same measure.

You've glossed over my pertinent points. I couldn't care less if we are debating about Cocu or anything else the subject matter is to a degree non relevant. If people choose to purposely exclude facts as being peripheral or tangential as it detracts from their argument then it makes for a very sorry place to have any kind of discussion. Which is where we are at the moment specifically at this point on this subject matter as the two sets of protagonists are completely entrenched. 

To further your point about you're saying it as you see it I completely endorse that but looking back over this thread I have seen comments about people being branded as being negative for doing exactly that. So basically it's ok to say it as you see it as long as your view conforms with another posters. Then you are being negative. Totally double standards. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, LeedsCityRam said:

Totally agree with this. There's a minority of 'Cocu Out' posters who are bordering on spamming.

Quite telling that there's been no 'Cocu Out' poll in the last couple of days. I suspect those who want a managerial change are well aware of the general feeling of the fanbase & are block posting to 'set the agenda'.

Its also much easier to be destructive than constructive. Have seen very little comment on what line up (given the current limitations) would get us results or what specifically needs to change from a tactical point of view - quite surprising given the tidal wave of complaints about style.

It's disappointing that we feel the necessity to have multiple threads about the same matter which then serves to skew the status quo on here and ultimately undermines the pertinent points that are being raised. 

The mods must be very busy merging identical threads. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Tyler Durden said:

You've glossed over my pertinent points. I couldn't care less if we are debating about Cocu or anything else the subject matter is to a degree non relevant. If people choose to purposely exclude facts as being peripheral or tangential as it detracts from their argument then it makes for a very sorry place to have any kind of discussion. Which is where we are at the moment specifically at this point on this subject matter as the two sets of protagonists are completely entrenched. 

To further your point about you're saying it as you see it I completely endorse that but looking back over this thread I have seen comments about people being branded as being negative for doing exactly that. So basically it's ok to say it as you see it as long as your view conforms with another posters. Then you are being negative. Totally double standards. 

 

You talk about people who 'exclude facts as being peripheral or tangential as it detracts from their argument' but that's exactly what I'm taking about! People disregarding any positives from our performances in their judgements.

I think you'll find a higher number of more positive/optimistic posters are also open to critical analysis and talking about the things they don't agree with than you'll find pessimistic/negative posters open to discussing any positives, but they're so busy fighting fires of negativity that they struggle to find time to voice their own concerns, not that they don't have any.

People aren't being branded negative for saying what they see, they're being called negative because there's no light & shade to their posts, and they're making no effort to post anything constructive. It drags everyone down! If that's all they can see... then, yes, they are negative!

A lot of the optimistic posts are reacting to the pessimistic posts, so end up coming over as over-positive to compensate. It's almost as if it's up to the positive posters to find the middle ground & justify their points, and have to find new and inventive ways of arguing their point, whereas the wholly negative posters can just repeat the same few lazy phrases and they'll receive backup from people falling over themselves to tell us "they're entitled to their opinions!"

Edited by Coconut
Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Coconut said:

An enjoyable post (I don't have to agree with posts to like them), but it falls down on one key premise

Cocu isn't blaming his personal life, adapting to a new country etc on his performance, nor are the vast majority of posters backing him against criticism for the job he's done.

If you'd have talked about your working conditions, the group of students you took on, the expectations of your manager against your chances of success it would be more relevant.

If you moved to your new school and found out on your first lesson that half of the computers didn't turn on, there weren't enough textbooks to go round, 2/3 of your students had been predicted failing grades,your star pupil then transferred to another school (plummeting your classes average to below the required levels of performance) but then you're judged as if all of the above was merely consequential to your chances, you'd be pretty pissed off!

The point I was making is that whether you are a teacher or a football manager or a DJ, you are judged on some kind of results, some kind of metric and if you don’t deliver, you’re out of the door.

I take your point that working conditions and student performance can play a factor in your success and it might cause frustration if circumstances are hindering you, but in reality, all of those examples you listed, I might not like them but my job would be to find solutions and have the answers.

It all falls under my job description at the end of the day. It might be tough but I still have to do what I am employed to do.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Coconut said:

 

You talk about people who 'exclude facts as being peripheral or tangential as it detracts from their argument' but that's exactly what I'm taking about! People disregarding any positives from our performances in their judgements.

I think you'll find a higher number of more positive/optimistic posters are also open to critical analysis and talking about the things they don't agree with than you'll find pessimistic/negative posters open to discussing any positives, but they're so busy fighting fires of negativity that they struggle to find time to voice their own concerns, not that they don't have any.

People aren't being branded negative for saying what they see, they're being called negative because there's no light & shade to their posts, and they're making no effort to post anything constructive. It drags everyone down! If that's all they can see... then, yes, they are negative!

A lot of the optimistic posts are reacting to the pessimistic posts, so end up coming over as over-positive to compensate. It's almost as if it's up to the positive posters to find the middle ground & justify their points, and have to find new and inventive ways of arguing their point, whereas the wholly negative posters can just repeat the same few lazy phrases and they'll receive backup from people falling over themselves to tell us "they're entitled to their opinions!"

I disagree with the point you've made about posters not being branded as being negative for saying what they see - it's exactly that. Their outlook has no bearing on the validity of their observations neither should be it used as label as it then doesn't fit in with someone else's opinion. Read back through this thread and it's disappointing though to read comments from posters doing EXACTLY that. 

Why would anyone feel the need to react to something that they perceive in their own mind? That's down to them not the content of the post itself. Not necessary. I don't agree with some of the content but what has negative/positive black/white right/wrong got to do with any of it? Nothing but then people are choosing to label this. Maybe because it makes them feel more comfortable as they then can reconcile someone having a differing opinion to themselves. Who knows. 

Edited by Tyler Durden
Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Coconut said:

I think you'll find a higher number of more positive/optimistic posters are also open to critical analysis and talking about the things they don't agree with than you'll find pessimistic/negative posters open to discussing any positives, but they're so busy fighting fires of negativity that they struggle to find time to voice their own concerns, not that they don't have any.

I'll be quite happy to wax lyrical about our positive aspects when we're higher in the table and so have something better to go on this season.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, RoyMac5 said:

I'll be quite happy to wax lyrical about our positive aspects when we're higher in the table and so have something better to go on this season.

Did you think we looked a bit fitter on Friday Roy? Cos that was a view coming out of the zoom chat yesterday. And several have remarked how half-cookef we seemed to fitness wise at the start of the season. 

Regardless of the why's and wherefores, if we are starting to look fitter and sharper that is positive id have thought.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Van der MoodHoover said:

Did you think we looked a bit fitter on Friday Roy? Cos that was a view coming out of the zoom chat yesterday. And several have remarked how half-cookef we seemed to fitness wise at the start of the season. 

Regardless of the why's and wherefores, if we are starting to look fitter and sharper that is positive id have thought.

Dunno VdM, thought Roo looked a bit fitter but still not fit enough for the role he had to play (which I don't think he was really expecting!). Was there really an opportunity to say we needed to be fitter against Watford? I don't know how Cocu judges our fitness, except it seems to be lacking (for him) in most of our new signings. Was surprised non of the nearly fit players were in the u23s game, but maybe they'll be on the bench Tues?

Edited by RoyMac5
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, RoyMac5 said:

Do you think he's reading this forum then? What difference will it make whether I and others discuss our mis-givings about Cocu. If you don't like the questioning of Cocu's competency don't read it?

But, unfortunately, that negativity manipulates the mindset of a selection of supporters who are incapable of accessing the reality of where we are. Consequently we have an element of support baying for Cocu’s removal and thus creating an illusion that all will be better with a new manager. False.

Where has this mindset got us over the past years? It is now some 13 years since we last visited the promised land and if we continue to sack proven managers at the current rate, be assured, it will be a further 13 years before it happens again.

For what it's worth I am of the belief that if Clough, Pearson or Rowett were allowed to run the full course we would now be in the Premier. Hindsight admittedly, but I’m reasonably confident one of the three would have delivered.

We are also fighting against this deluded idea that we can set up each game to play open and expansive football and win with ease. 

Reality check, that is not how it works. Proven and successful managers select their teams on the ability of the players available to them for selection with credence also given to the set up and capability of the opposition.

Morris has employed Cocu as he is a proven manager with an ability to develop and integrate academy players and implement a team structure and style that will ultimately take us to where we want to be. This will vary frequently which is the case for any successful manager with any tactical nous.

Two choices, give Cocu the time required, trust him to do the job, or spend another 13 years watching MOTD and dreaming about the what ifs.
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh dear. It seems it's become a bit of a competition as to who can denounce the 'negative' people the most which automatically must mean they are the bestest biggest Derby fans ever.

You're not in any way a better person, more fun to be around (all the other crap I've seen suggested) or more worthy of posting, you simply wish to give the current manager more time, and see green shoots whereas some see broken branches. 

This is a forum so of course, i expect to see opinions differing drastically from mine. However, recently there's been polls directly targeting a certain poster and numerous posts about 'us lot' piling on to threads and spouting rubbish whereas i have seen the opposite and its becoming very cliquey.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Pearson. said:

For what it's worth I am of the belief that if Clough, Pearson or Rowett were allowed to run the full course we would now be in the Premier. Hindsight admittedly, but I’m reasonably confident one of the three would have delivered.

But they haven't done since they left us? 

As for affecting the mindset of ...

22 minutes ago, Pearson. said:

a selection of supporters who are incapable of accessing the reality of where we are. Consequently we have an element of support baying for Cocu’s removal and thus creating an illusion that all will be better with a new manager.

Oh dear. Well perhaps all will be well if you stick your fingers in your ears and just not listen to them! Perhaps you'd care to enlighten us as to what is a suitable topic for the sensitive amongst us?

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Pearson. said:

But, unfortunately, that negativity manipulates the mindset of a selection of supporters who are incapable of accessing the reality of where we are. Consequently we have an element of support baying for Cocu’s removal and thus creating an illusion that all will be better with a new manager. False.

Where has this mindset got us over the past years? It is now some 13 years since we last visited the promised land and if we continue to sack proven managers at the current rate, be assured, it will be a further 13 years before it happens again.

For what it's worth I am of the belief that if Clough, Pearson or Rowett were allowed to run the full course we would now be in the Premier. Hindsight admittedly, but I’m reasonably confident one of the three would have delivered.

We are also fighting against this deluded idea that we can set up each game to play open and expansive football and win with ease. 

Reality check, that is not how it works. Proven and successful managers select their teams on the ability of the players available to them for selection with credence also given to the set up and capability of the opposition.

Morris has employed Cocu as he is a proven manager with an ability to develop and integrate academy players and implement a team structure and style that will ultimately take us to where we want to be. This will vary frequently which is the case for any successful manager with any tactical nous.

Two choices, give Cocu the time required, trust him to do the job, or spend another 13 years watching MOTD and dreaming about the what ifs.
 

The reality is we are being kept of bottom of the table by a team who started 12 points behind us and are now nudging our arse like a dog on heat.

We've just given the afore mentioned arse nudgers our only proper striker having brought in a couple of wingers to hopefully get him more chances.  We replaced him with an OAP with more variety of clubs than Jacobs.

We've scored two goals- one from open play- and not picked up a point on our own patch with 10% of the season gone.

If this continues we can dream about the what ifs from League 1.

As a club our supporters have probably seen the rollercoaster of ups and downs more than most -they've seen league champions and almost bankruptcy.  They are more capable than most in seeing the current situation screams danger ' high voltage'.

I haven't seen anyone suggesting we can play open expansive football and stuff teams. They have suggested we are too pedestrian and make life easy as we don't create enough chances. We are very easy to read.  I don't see Cocu changing his tactics to suit opposition in anyway.  

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Pearson. said:

give Cocu the time required

Jim Smith promoted 1st season

Billy Davis promoted 1st season

Mac play off final 1st season

Lampard playoff final 1st season

Rowett play off semi 1st season 

Why do we believe time will be the successful ingredient? I’d say it’s more about finding the right players to play the right way, I have seen zero evidence of that from Cocu

Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Pearson. said:

But, unfortunately, that negativity manipulates the mindset of a selection of supporters who are incapable of accessing the reality of where we are. Consequently we have an element of support baying for Cocu’s removal and thus creating an illusion that all will be better with a new manager. False.

Where has this mindset got us over the past years? It is now some 13 years since we last visited the promised land and if we continue to sack proven managers at the current rate, be assured, it will be a further 13 years before it happens again.

For what it's worth I am of the belief that if Clough, Pearson or Rowett were allowed to run the full course we would now be in the Premier. Hindsight admittedly, but I’m reasonably confident one of the three would have delivered.

We are also fighting against this deluded idea that we can set up each game to play open and expansive football and win with ease. 

Reality check, that is not how it works. Proven and successful managers select their teams on the ability of the players available to them for selection with credence also given to the set up and capability of the opposition.

Morris has employed Cocu as he is a proven manager with an ability to develop and integrate academy players and implement a team structure and style that will ultimately take us to where we want to be. This will vary frequently which is the case for any successful manager with any tactical nous.

Two choices, give Cocu the time required, trust him to do the job, or spend another 13 years watching MOTD and dreaming about the what ifs.
 

The negativity manipulates the mindset of a selection of supporters? Have you been listening to David Icke recently. The only non illusion as you allude to is that we are 4th from bottom of the league. You seem to totally discount a new manager being any better can I borrow your crystal ball please - you state this with a total assuredness and certainty that clearly you have some insight that other mortals do not posses.

I don't have time to pick holes in the rest of your post - I can't call it an argument as it's supported by cant and belief not facts. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Pearson. said:

But, unfortunately, that negativity manipulates the mindset of a selection of supporters who are incapable of accessing the reality of where we are. Consequently we have an element of support baying for Cocu’s removal and thus creating an illusion that all will be better with a new manager. False.

Where has this mindset got us over the past years? It is now some 13 years since we last visited the promised land and if we continue to sack proven managers at the current rate, be assured, it will be a further 13 years before it happens again.

For what it's worth I am of the belief that if Clough, Pearson or Rowett were allowed to run the full course we would now be in the Premier. Hindsight admittedly, but I’m reasonably confident one of the three would have delivered.

We are also fighting against this deluded idea that we can set up each game to play open and expansive football and win with ease. 

Reality check, that is not how it works. Proven and successful managers select their teams on the ability of the players available to them for selection with credence also given to the set up and capability of the opposition.

Morris has employed Cocu as he is a proven manager with an ability to develop and integrate academy players and implement a team structure and style that will ultimately take us to where we want to be. This will vary frequently which is the case for any successful manager with any tactical nous.

Two choices, give Cocu the time required, trust him to do the job, or spend another 13 years watching MOTD and dreaming about the what ifs.
 

Brilliant post .

So glad you are back

Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

 

Missing at kick off on Friday ( & most of the season so far ) Bielik, Sibley, Jozwiak, Waghorn, Lawrence, Ibe

If for example McClaren had Thorne, Bryson, Russell, Martin, Ward & Bamford missing for his games do the doubters think we'd have won many games ?

Plus, poor old Phil has had one poo storm after another to deal with that past managers haven't off the pitch

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account.

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.