Is Paul Warne the next Nigel Pearson?

[nottingram]

4 minutes ago, BramcoteRam84 said:

Actually from hearing his RD interview - it was their fault. He specifically mentioned players sitting back giving the ball to NML hoping he would do something. It’s not what he wanted or asked them to do. 

Yes that’s fine but I’ve previously heard him say that when the winger has the ball he doesn’t want anyone going to help them out with triangles, he wants them in the box.

I heard it picked up by the Sky microphone the other night. Barkhuizen had the ball on the wing, Dobbin went to help him out. I clearly heard him shout something along the lines of Dobbin just letting Barkhuizen cross.

So you can’t do that then moan when the players are leaving wingers isolated. Doesn’t add up.

[popside ossie end popside]

9 hours ago, Jourdan said:

Significantly worse?

In Rosenior’s last five league games, we picked up seven points from 15.

In Warne’s first five league games, we have picked up seven points from 15.

This talk of us going backwards in five league games is purely subjective and purely based on the kind of football you like to see.

Style is something that takes time to implement and there are many ways to play football and different styles can get results.

Perhaps it’s fairer to say that both styles have their flaws and that is what we’re witnessing?

 

Whoever is in charge, I will say again, this is a bang average squad. Mid table will be about right for this group. Not a stand out player amongst them

[Curtains]

2 minutes ago, popside ossie end popside said:

Whoever is in charge, I will say again, this is a bang average squad. Mid table will be about right for this group. Not a stand out player amongst them

You need to play to your strengths and it isn’t bang average either .

PW did play to our strengths 2nd half 

[popside ossie end popside]

5 minutes ago, Curtains said:

You need to play to your strengths and it isn’t bang average either .

PW did play to our strengths 2nd half 

Bang bang average

 

[Ram-Alf]

8 hours ago, Will Hughes Hair said:

We are stuck with Warne and this squad. This could be a tough watch.

Additionally I take umbrage with Warne’s post match comments that Sibley is ‘the worst tackler he’s ever seen’.

So why then did you move him to LWB after the Chester injury? A nonsense managerial  decision and not Sibley’s fault. Play to people’s strengths. What’s next? Play him in goal and berate him for being s*** at coming for crosses?

I questioned that decision, Has Warne had a falling out with Stearman?, Just didn't make sense to me ?‍♀️, Now thinking Sibleys confidence will be knocked...strange choice ?

[Ramifications]

RoyMac5 seems to have changed his opinion on Mr Warne's style of play somewhat. ?

[Curtains]

13 minutes ago, popside ossie end popside said:

Bang bang average

 

 

[duncanjwitham]

37 minutes ago, The Scarlet Pimpernel said:

This is going to end in tears reasonably soon imo.

I thought Warne's nice-guy personality and seemingly friendly attitude with the players would give him a big advantage over Pearson's "My way or the highway" style. But the stuff coming out of the dressing room after last night (Warne's comments to Dom Dietrich, the stuff about players faking injuries, Forsyth basically suggesting has nothing to offer other than "run around more"), suggests it's just Pearson all over again.  Utterly stubborn, no interest in what anyone else has to say, we're going to keep doing the same things over and over again until we get different results.

The other thing is, a lot of the players here clearly bought into what Rosenior was selling them.  It was a prohect and they wanted to join in.  Barkhuizen and NML both left previous clubs, at least in part, because they didn't want to play wingback.  Hourihane was convinced that we were going to play in a way to get the best out of him.  Bird, Knight, and Thompson clearly thought they would be allowed to develop in a decent, technical ball-playing side etc etc.  All of that is in the bin after 10 games. I wouldn't blame any of the players for being very unhappy about what's gone on.

[Srg]

31 minutes ago, nottingram said:

Yes that’s fine but I’ve previously heard him say that when the winger has the ball he doesn’t want anyone going to help them out with triangles, he wants them in the box.

I heard it picked up by the Sky microphone the other night. Barkhuizen had the ball on the wing, Dobbin went to help him out. I clearly heard him shout something along the lines of Dobbin just letting Barkhuizen cross.

So you can’t do that then moan when the players are leaving wingers isolated. Doesn’t add up.

I would argue the issue was we were giving NML the ball in our own half and expecting him to do wonders with it. Yes, that’s likely Warne’s tactics that first half too, but NML should have ran beyond their wing back a couple of times. You could tell their full back just knew a slow, cumbersome pass was going to roll to his feet and he was going to wait for it. Defender was on top of him by the time he received it every time. 

[Ram-Alf]

2 hours ago, duncanjwitham said:

The more I think about it, the more I'm concerned about the 2 post-match interviews on Radio Derby - Fozzy and Warne himself.  The Fozzy interview was weird, he sounded so demoralized, but the overriding impression was that the players clearly don't understand what they're being asked to do.  It sounded like the players were desperate for some guidance, but the only thing Warne could offer was telling them to run around more.  

And then Warne himself immediately comes out and says he takes full responsibility for the performance, and then spends the rest of the interview blaming the players for not running around enough and tackling enough.  There's clearly a massive disconnect between the squad and manager.

If Warne actually said "they need to run around more" then that's something you say to under 8 players, If Warne said, We need athletes, Who can run all day long then I'd possibly agree.

If the players aren't buying into Warnes style...there's only one way this is going to end up, Warne will be here, Those players wont, Clowes will not sack the man be believes will deliver what we all want...promotion.

[Ram-Alf]

48 minutes ago, BramcoteRam84 said:

Actually from hearing his RD interview - it was their fault. He specifically mentioned players sitting back giving the ball to NML hoping he would do something. It’s not what he wanted or asked them to do. 

There was a couple of instances last night where NML had ran the ball down well into their half and it looked like our midfield players braces had snapped...there was no support.

[IlsonDerby]

7 minutes ago, Unlucky Alf said:

If Warne actually said "they need to run around more" then that's something you say to under 8 players, If Warne said, We need athletes, Who can run all day long then I'd possibly agree.

If the players aren't buying into Warnes style...there's only one way this is going to end up, Warne will be here, Those players wont, Clowes will not sack the man be believes will deliver what we all want...promotion.

Brill. A squad full of Matt Crooks then whilst selling off and losing all technically gifted players. What a treat that’ll be for us. 

[RoyMac5]

21 minutes ago, Ramifications said:

RoyMac5 seems to have changed his opinion on Mr Warne's style of play somewhat. ?

I never had an opinion on Warne's style of play bar him asking players to get the ball forward quicker, less sideways passing. I hate 3/5 at the back and hoped he'd see we don't have the players for it. Some of his decisions have been 'odd' and his comments about the players a bit 'off' for saying he picks them and sets them up.

[RoyMac5]

19 minutes ago, Srg said:

I would argue the issue was we were giving NML the ball in our own half and expecting him to do wonders with it. Yes, that’s likely Warne’s tactics that first half too, but NML should have ran beyond their wing back a couple of times. You could tell their full back just knew a slow, cumbersome pass was going to roll to his feet and he was going to wait for it. Defender was on top of him by the time he received it every time. 

Maybe if he'd got the ball further up the pitch rather than having to start from way in our half - how much running can he do?! By the time we'd put a vague fullback on things had already gone Pete Tong.

Edited October 26, 2022 by RoyMac5

[Srg]

25 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

Maybe if he'd got the ball further up the pitch rather than having to start from way in our half - how much running can he do?! By the time we'd put a vague fullback on things had already gone Pete Tong.

I did say that it was likely down to Warne’s first half tactics too. Not debating that, but our slow play and NML being predictable didn’t help either. 

[May Contain Nuts]

10 hours ago, Bris Vegas said:

Rosenior:

Fleetwood A (17th)

Posh H (4th)

Plymouth H (1st)

Lincoln A (11th)

Wycombe H (13th)

 

Warne

Cambridge A (16th)

Port Vale H (15th)

Accy A (19th)

Ipswich A (2nd)

Exeter H (7th)

We played more difficult opposition under Rosenior. But created more chances, had more shots, more possession.

Another point to this is that reducing the discussion to points totals completely ignores the context under which these games were played.

The first 5 league games under Rosenior were immediately after he'd thrown a team together, when the players were lacking fitness (the infamous '2 weeks behind') and needed to be given time to gel. Toward the end of these performances our players looked leggy, as you'd expect, and we lost games to high energy pressing teams.

The first 5 league games under Warne came after a 2 week international break in which we didn't play, where others in our league continued without a break. It's hardly surprising that we started out life under Warne with more energy, is it? A rested squad with time to work on fitness, new manager bounce. It's also hardly surprising we've looked knackered recently under Warne with his extra focus on energetic play - and quite possibly not a coincidence that we've started to pick up injuries?

It's almost like this squad needed careful management, but looking in from the outside it seems to have had the opposite since Warne came in.

Edited October 26, 2022 by Kokosnuss

[Wolfie]

5 hours ago, duncanjwitham said:

 

And then Warne himself immediately comes out and says he takes full responsibility for the performance, and then spends the rest of the interview blaming the players

Rooney used to do that as well. Used to wind me up no end.

[vonwright]

3 hours ago, Unlucky Alf said:

If the players aren't buying into Warnes style...there's only one way this is going to end up, Warne will be here, Those players wont, Clowes will not sack the man be believes will deliver what we all want...promotion.

It never seems to work out that way though. If results take a dive, and there are no signs of improvement, and Warne loses the dressing room (not one or two players, but many or most) - it'll be him that goes. It's always the manager. It's so much easier than see a squad full of potentially good/valuable players walk away because the boss wants rid at all costs.

Pearson was on a three-year contract and all the noise at the time was that he had been given a remit to put a rocket up what was seen as a pampered, self-regarding, "soft" squad. He lasted, what? Four months? 

Clowes might think he's going to keep faith with Warne come what may. But then this is the first time he's owned a football club.  

Edited October 26, 2022 by vonwright

[FKANorwichExile]

I really want to get behind Warne, but can anyone actually deduce what his tactics are? I genuinely can't get my head around what he's asking of the players. We're not banging long balls up, not packing the box for crosses, kinda half playing out, half pressing. I'm feels like the whole plan is just to run about a lot and hope one of the quick players beats a man and does something special.

I feel like we've fallen into the Southgate trap where we pack the back and wait for one of the special players to do something special, except we have Collins not Kane, and Barks not Sterling.

[BramcoteRam84]

3 hours ago, nottingram said:

Yes that’s fine but I’ve previously heard him say that when the winger has the ball he doesn’t want anyone going to help them out with triangles, he wants them in the box.

I heard it picked up by the Sky microphone the other night. Barkhuizen had the ball on the wing, Dobbin went to help him out. I clearly heard him shout something along the lines of Dobbin just letting Barkhuizen cross.

So you can’t do that then moan when the players are leaving wingers isolated. Doesn’t add up.

They weren’t getting in the box giving him options that’s the point, they weren’t covering him, no one else tried to do anything. They were literally standing there and watching - very different to a deliberate tactic of leaving the winger 1 on 1.