Paul Warne appointed as Head Coach

[kevinhectoring]

5 minutes ago, Srg said:

Did a bobble hat touch you as a child?

My mum used to say there was an enormous slimy one beneath the bed;  and if I didn’t go to sleep it would slither up and engulf me, turning me into an enormous bald head without a body

 I’ve never told anyone that before 

[IslandExile]

2 minutes ago, kevinhectoring said:

My mum used to say there was an enormous slimy one beneath the bed;  and if I didn’t go to sleep it would slither up and engulf me, turning me into an enormous bald head without a body

 I’ve never told anyone that before 

I wish you still hadn't.

[Kernow]

I think Luton and Cov being in the playoff final is a real positive for clubs like us. They’re two clubs that have had managerial stability and build steadily towards and end goal without spending fortunes on a squad with big names.

Coventry have had Robins for 6 years and before the game last night he extended his contract til 2027. Luton obviously have a fairly new manager but built on about 6 years of work by Nathan Jones, only changing because he left twice.

Add Sunderland in to play-off mix who were looking at back to back promotions, and it shows that you can pull yourself out of a bleak situation fairly quickly.

[alram]

13 minutes ago, Kernow said:

I think Luton and Cov being in the playoff final is a real positive for clubs like us. They’re two clubs that have had managerial stability and build steadily towards and end goal without spending fortunes on a squad with big names.

Coventry have had Robins for 6 years and before the game last night he extended his contract til 2027. Luton obviously have a fairly new manager but built on about 6 years of work by Nathan Jones, only changing because he left twice.

Add Sunderland in to play-off mix who were looking at back to back promotions, and it shows that you can pull yourself out of a bleak situation fairly quickly.

what is that to do with us?

[Wolfie]

6 minutes ago, alram said:

what is that to do with us?

Did you read the post?

[Kernow]

3 hours ago, alram said:

what is that to do with us?

Is it really that hard to work out?

[duncanjwitham]

6 hours ago, kevinhectoring said:

In Warne’s defence, perhaps Chester’s injury was a defining point of the season and may have fuelled his dogged resistance to play 3 at the back which IMO was ultimately our best set up. 

Was it? If you're basing that on the uptick in results at the end of the season when we switched to a back 3, that entirely coincided with going back to playing poor teams again (Burton, Exeter, Bristol, MK Dons etc).  And as soon as we went back to playing decent teams again (Portsmouth, Sheff Wed), we picked up 1 point from 6 to end the season.  And over the whole season, the vast majority of our good performances were with a back 4.

[kevinhectoring]

2 minutes ago, duncanjwitham said:

Was it? If you're basing that on the uptick in results at the end of the season when we switched to a back 3, that entirely coincided with going back to playing poor teams again (Burton, Exeter, Bristol, MK Dons etc).  And as soon as we went back to playing decent teams again (Portsmouth, Sheff Wed), we picked up 1 point from 6 to end the season.  And over the whole season, the vast majority of our good performances were with a back 4.

I though we more consistently played good football with a back 3 and we looked more secure in defence. I accept the results don’t always back that up but that’s footie. Would you say for example that Wendies were better than us ?  I think it was an anomalous result 

[duncanjwitham]

1 minute ago, kevinhectoring said:

I though we more consistently played good football with a back 3 and we looked more secure in defence. I accept the results don’t always back that up but that’s footie. Would you say for example that Wendies were better than us ?  I think it was an anomalous result 

I'm not sure we played that much good football at all towards the end of the season, and what we did play was in fits and starts.  The only extended period of good football we had was the couple of months at the end of 2022, while playing a 4231.  But again, that almost entirely coincides with playing poorer teams (and being less tired etc).

Ultimately, the way we set against Wednesday cost us.  Their goal came from a ball into the huge gap behind our wingback, Forsyth gets caught up field and Curtis gets exposed and makes a pair of mistakes (the back-pass and the foul).  If we're playing a flat back 4, then quite possibly none of that happens.  That system forced too many players into unfamiliar positions IMO, whereas the biggest factor in the unbeaten run (again IMO) was players being comfortable in what they were asked to do.

[kevinhectoring]

42 minutes ago, duncanjwitham said:

I'm not sure we played that much good football at all towards the end of the season, and what we did play was in fits and starts.  The only extended period of good football we had was the couple of months at the end of 2022, while playing a 4231.  But again, that almost entirely coincides with playing poorer teams (and being less tired etc).

Ultimately, the way we set against Wednesday cost us.  Their goal came from a ball into the huge gap behind our wingback, Forsyth gets caught up field and Curtis gets exposed and makes a pair of mistakes (the back-pass and the foul).  If we're playing a flat back 4, then quite possibly none of that happens.  That system forced too many players into unfamiliar positions IMO, whereas the biggest factor in the unbeaten run (again IMO) was players being comfortable in what they were asked to do.

Curtis’ error is neither here nor there in the debate about what system best suits the players over the season. (I think it was right to play him tho’ but posted weeks ago that he’d had so little game time that a major error was a risk. We did it with Stearman last season. Left him on the bench for so long he got bungalow legs. That’s what happened to CD this term). There’s no substitution for minutes on the pitch 

Surprised you say 4 at the back (with wing backs advancing) suited us better. We started the season w Chester Stearman Fozzy Davies Cashin any 3 of who are - in div 1 - a starry back 3 sitting centrally. With good DM cover it’s exactly what you need if you’re missing prolific goal scorers. With 4 at the back we had at various times Smith, Sibley, Knight all playing out of position. With 3 at the back Roberts and Smith sit deeper out of possession and give wide protection. 
 

The way I saw it, we couldn’t put 2 good halves together until we went to 3 at the back. But we were admittedly better earlier in the season when legs were fresher 

[duncanjwitham]

4 minutes ago, kevinhectoring said:

Surprised you say 4 at the back (with wing backs advancing) suited us better. We started the season w Chester Stearman Fozzy Davies Cashin any 3 of who are - in div 1 - a starry back 3 sitting centrally. With good DM cover it’s exactly what you need if you’re missing prolific goal scorers. With 4 at the back we had at various times Smith, Sibley, Knight all playing out of position. With 3 at the back Roberts and Smith sit deeper out of possession and give wide protection. 
 

I really don't think that's a good group of centre halves for a back 3 though.  In a back 3, the wider centre halves basically have to be able to play as fullbacks, because they have to come out wide and support the wingback when attacks are coming down that side.  So they need to be able to deal with tricky wingers running at them.  Forsyth and Chester can both do it, but Chester barely played all season, and Forsyth is the wrong side of 30 and was being played on his wrong foot towards the end of the season.  Cashin, Davies and Stearman are all far better at tackling, winning headers, engaging physically with strikers etc, than dealing with pace running at them.  If you play them in the wider positions you're just exposing them to what they're weakest at.  

And if you don't have your wide centre halves coming out to support, you either have to have wingers helping out (in which case you aren't playing a back 3, you're playing a very negative back 5), or you get killed out wide because they've got an overload every single time they get the ball out there.

And it was like that all over the team.  We had Cashin forced into dealing with pace, Forsyth on his wrong foot, Knight and Roberts playing as wingbacks (when neither of them can cross, neither of them are particularly good dribblers etc), NML as a Number 10.  That's 5 players in positions they aren't totally comfortable with.  And if you start shuffling those players into positions they are comfortable with, it just creates problems elsewhere (NML, Barkhuizen at wingback etc). With the back 4, we had one of Knight or Smith at right back, and sometimes Sibley at left back. That's 1 or 2.

Fundamentally, I think the big reason we struggled to score goals last season was we seemed to lack any kind of game-plan going forward.  We didn't seem to be setting out specifically to do anything, it was just run around a lot and hope we can force them into a mistake.  So that meant we were very reliant on individual players winning games for us.  And if you're in that kind of position, the more players you have in positions they aren't comfortable with, the harder it's going to be to win games.

[Gerry Daly]

So are you saying the problem was we had loads of players playing in positions that they weren't comfortable in/suited to or that we had no game plan. Or both. Or was your more subtle point that a game plan was not possible because of all the players out of position? I think you made some good points but your post would have been more coherent if you had left off the last paragraph and gone and had something with your ham Duncan  

[duncanjwitham]

11 minutes ago, Gerry Daly said:

So are you saying the problem was we had loads of players playing in positions that they weren't comfortable in/suited to or that we had no game plan. Or both. Or was your more subtle point that a game plan was not possible because of all the players out of position? I think you made some good points but your post would have been more coherent if you had left off the last paragraph and gone and had something with your ham Duncan  

I don't think we ever really had a proper game-plan at any point in the season, even when we went however many games unbeaten.  The only thing we seemed to consistently be doing was letting them have the ball at the back and trying to bait them into a mistake, which worked at times (Bristol Rovers at home, for example), but most teams aren't going to try and play out against us.  Beyond that, we weren't setting out to get wide and cross for Collins, or play into McGoldrick's feet and build from there, or sit deep and play on the break, or anything else.  Sometimes we did some of those things, but we spent as much time with Roberts crossing into nobody, or Cashin playing big diagonals to McGoldrick's head etc.

Whether we genuinely didn't bother having a plan, or the players were just struggling to execute what they'd been told to do, it's difficult to tell from the side-lines.  But I certainly think the majority of games that we won, we basically won because we had better players than the other team.  I don't think we won many games because our tactics elevated us in some way, or we exploited a flaw in the opposition's system, or we out-thought them.  And I'm not ignoring the work-rate stuff, but I think there's only so far that can take you - it's important, but you aren't going to consistently win games by purely running around more than the other team.

To be clear... work hard, defend well and let your good players win you the game isn't the worst idea in the world.  I don't think it's the best idea either, but there's far worse ones out there.  But if you're going to do that, you have to get your best players in positions they're comfortable with, and I certainly don't think a back 3 does that with the squad we had.

[Gerry Daly]

Well I can’t knock you for the effort you put into making your argument or the quality of it. I hope you are wrong though because if you aren’t then we aren’t going to achieve very much with Paul Warne. I’m more hopeful. I think that with the opportunity he now has to strengthen the team we will see an evident game plan and consistent strategy next season. I think we do have some good players but it’s a very mixed bag and the squad and team was quite unbalanced. If you look at the players Warne had available to him in defence in particular I think he did really well. We got lucky with Didzy I think. He did a lot better than anyone could have reasonably expected and he stayed clear of injury. He could easily have been another Chester in that respect. We had very little else in the striking department, Collins is poor let’s be honest and with Osula going back we couldn’t change things by bringing someone on to stretch teams. Anyway we will see but I’m really looking forward to it 

[S8TY]

20 hours ago, duncanjwitham said:

I'm not sure we played that much good football at all towards the end of the season, and what we did play was in fits and starts.  The only extended period of good football we had was the couple of months at the end of 2022, while playing a 4231.  But again, that almost entirely coincides with playing poorer teams (and being less tired etc).

Ultimately, the way we set against Wednesday cost us.  Their goal came from a ball into the huge gap behind our wingback, Forsyth gets caught up field and Curtis gets exposed and makes a pair of mistakes (the back-pass and the foul).  If we're playing a flat back 4, then quite possibly none of that happens.  That system forced too many players into unfamiliar positions IMO, whereas the biggest factor in the unbeaten run (again IMO) was players being comfortable in what they were asked to do.

We totally outplayed Wednesday and I thought we set up well because they literally were not in the game until the unfortunate error from Curtis.But saying that I still don't think it was a penalty or a red card.

We played some good stuff it wasn't all long ball as some suggest, you clearly don't like Warne which is your opinion but to say we didn't have a plan and didn't play any good football suggests you're watching a different game to me 

[Tamworthram]

21 minutes ago, S8TY said:

We totally outplayed Wednesday and I thought we set up well because they literally were not in the game until the unfortunate error from Curtis.But saying that I still don't think it was a penalty or a red card.

We played some good stuff it wasn't all long ball as some suggest, you clearly don't like Warne which is your opinion but to say we didn't have a plan and didn't play any good football suggests you're watching a different game to me 

Up until the goal we were the better team but I think it's a bit of an exaggeration to say "they literally were not in the game....". Of course we had far more at stake (I can imagine their players had half a thought on not getting injured ahead of the playoffs) but we'll never know how things would have panned out if they had needed at least a draw. 

[duncanjwitham]

23 minutes ago, S8TY said:

We totally outplayed Wednesday and I thought we set up well because they literally were not in the game until the unfortunate error from Curtis.But saying that I still don't think it was a penalty or a red card.

We played some good stuff it wasn't all long ball as some suggest, you clearly don't like Warne which is your opinion but to say we didn't have a plan and didn't play any good football suggests you're watching a different game to me 

So what was the game-plan then?  Wildsmith has the ball in his hands, what stuff are we trying to make happen, to get the ball from there into the other teams net?

[Caerphilly Ram]

45 minutes ago, duncanjwitham said:

So what was the game-plan then?  Wildsmith has the ball in his hands, what stuff are we trying to make happen, to get the ball from there into the other teams net?

Specific to the run of 6 or so games towards the end of the season when we reverted to a back 3 with Sibley and NML playing as 2 “10s” behind McGoldrick you’re view is there was no plan? 
Whether you agree with the use of the players in the positions doesnt a clear shift in formation by definition show there was a plan? 3 central defenders to provide a base and defensive cover, Knight and Roberts as wing backs to provide both width and cover in midfield where Bird and Hourihane were looking to move the ball forward for NML and Sibley to attack alongside McGoldrick. He also wanted the team to press and win the ball back high up the pitch.
Cleverer people than myself can probably provide a clearer breakdown but there was definite attacking intent against MK Dons, Bristol, Exeter, Burton, Portsmouth and Sheff Weds. The issue that plagued us all season played its part in that we couldn’t convert the chances created. There were clear moments of incisive passing and movement in those games, we were just rubbish at actually taking the chances created. 
Warne got a lot wrong in terms of ingame management, substitutions, rotation of the squad throughout the season etc. he isn’t faultless and  I accept that and want to see him improve it this coming season. However to level the accusation that there wasn’t ever a plan and he just put players out on the pitch seems to ignore plenty of evidence to the contrary. 

Edited May 19, 2023 by Caerphilly Ram

[duncanjwitham]

3 minutes ago, Caerphilly Ram said:

Specific to the run of 6 or so games towards the end of the season when we reverted to a back 3 with Sibley and NML playing as 2 “10s” behind McGoldrick you’re view is there was no plan? 
Whether you agree with the use of the players in the positions doesnt a clear shift in formation by definition show there was a plan? 3 central defenders to provide a base and defensive cover, Knight and Roberts as wing backs to provide both width and cover in midfield where Bird and Hourihane were looking to move the ball forward for NML and Sibley to attack alongside McGoldrick. He also wanted the team to press and win the ball back high up the pitch.
Cleverer people than myself can probably provide a clearer breakdown but there was definite attacking intent against MK Dons, Bristol, Exeter, Burton, Portsmouth and Sheff Weds. The issue that plagued us all season played its part in that we couldn’t convert the chances created. There were clear moments of incisive passing and movement in those games, we were just rubbish at actually taking the chances created. 
Warne got a lot wrong in terms of ingame management, substitutions, rotation of the squad throughout the season etc. he isn’t faultless and  I accept that and want to see him improve it this coming season. However to level the accusation that there wasn’t ever a plan and he just put players out on the pitch seems to ignore plenty of evidence to the contrary. 

That's a formation though, not a game-plan.  "Attacking intent" isn't a game-plan either.  And neither is "moments of incisive passing and movement".  Like I said earlier in the thread, we did a load of different things at different times, some of it was good and some of it was bad, but there seemed to be no plan in place to maximise us doing the good stuff and minimise us doing the bad stuff.  And there seemed to be no overall idea of what we actually wanted to do attacking-wise, other than some vague notion of working hard and getting the ball forwards quickly. 

You pick out Knight and Roberts out wide, and that just sums the whole thing up to me.  Roberts is (AFAIK) a centre half converted to a left back, he's a good defender and he's a decent passer, but he's not a progressive, attacking wingback because he's not quick, he's not a great dribbler and he's not a great crosser.  Jason Knight is a really good box-to-box midfielder, he's good at pressing high up the pitch, running off the ball and getting into goal-scoring positions, he's not really a dribbler or a crosser.  If you play both of those players as wingbacks you're actively stopping them doing what they're really good at, and asking them to do stuff they're not good at.

There are similar issues with the front 3 and midfield.  NML and Sibley are both players that you want running with the ball, committing defenders.  McGoldrick needs balls into his feet and people running off him.  But with only 2 midfielders in behind them, we were regularly outnumbered in there, and struggled to control games and give that front 3 the service they needed.  We had moments where we managed to get the ball into them and they did well with it, but the rest of the team wasn't set up to make that happen on a regular basis.

Serious question - do you think Guardiola is standing up in front of his Man City team and saying "433 today lads, and show a bit of attacking intent".  Or is he figuring out how to get the ball to De Bruyne's feet as much as possible, how to get as many crosses on Haaland's head as possible, how to get Grealish/Mahrez/whoever into as many one-on-one situations against isolated defenders as he can?

[Caerphilly Ram]

17 minutes ago, duncanjwitham said:

 

Serious question - do you think Guardiola is standing up in front of his Man City team and saying "433 today lads, and show a bit of attacking intent".  Or is he figuring out how to get the ball to De Bruyne's feet as much as possible, how to get as many crosses on Haaland's head as possible, how to get Grealish/Mahrez/whoever into as many one-on-one situations against isolated defenders as he can?

No I don’t. Nor do I think Warne did that. It’s my somewhat limited summary of it, I just don’t get this idea that some people have of Warne sending the team out without instruction. He, his coaches and the players have given interviews talking about working on things in training. Yes we haven’t executed whatever those instructions are at times, yes he has repurposed players into positions that aren’t their natural positions with varying levels of success. 
It’s apparent to all that Warne has some limitations, that he’s stubborn in his approach and that he got some things wrong last season. He’s admitted that himself recently in the post season interview he gave. None of what happened last season can be changed now. Some people don’t like the bloke, fine that’s their right.

The formation, the pressing, the passing, the movement all linked to the “attacking intent” I observed. He must have given Roberts and Knight instruction for them to be playing the roles he put them in, same for NML and Sibley. I don’t know what they were cause I’m not part of the set up at the club, I simply don’t agree with your assessment that he sent the team out without a plan.

To paraphrase your serious question, do you really believe Warne just picks the team and tells them to run around?