Paul Warne

[kevinhectoring]

3 minutes ago, Srg said:

Ok, crack on then. 

I’ll continue to safe Southgate is rubbish, unless he wins the euros then I’ll say he’s alright, but I don’t think he should be the man for the World Cup, until he wins that and then I’ll say well done. 

Repetition won’t make your facile and superficial simplification of my views any more accurate. 

I don’t expect you to read all or indeed any of my posts in which I’ve noted what I think are Warne’s strengths and his weaknesses. But if you don’t read them, probably best not to try to summarise them. Particularly in such glib fashion. 
 

But just scroll up a bit and read the post where I bemoan the fact that people’s views are so changed simply because we got promotion. Mine are not. You’ve got the wrong end of the stick 
 

Southgate? The Italy penalty debacle was the last straw for me - feckless wokeism. I would have sent him to the tower

[jimtastic56]

14 hours ago, Ram-Alf said:

Go on guess how Lampard got the job...give in...then I'll tell ya, Mel Morris was a mate of Uncle Harry...you know the gob s**** cockney spiv...who happens to be Lampard's Nephew.

Almost worked aint good enough...the wages paid out hung heavy on Morris, And don't get me started on the Wembley starting 11 😡

I notice “Uncle Harry” has been rolled out again for the Euros. He is seen as a lovable rogue . I pray that he does not offer his recruitment services to DCFC, ever again .

[kevinhectoring]

3 hours ago, jono said:

To me those are vastly more worrying than our managers actual ability to manage the players and pick a team. 

Overall I think the manager is usually the single most important factor 

[MadAmster]

19 minutes ago, kevinhectoring said:

Southgate? The Italy penalty debacle was the last straw for me - feckless wokeism. I would have sent him to the tower

To me, we really should have been 3 up at HT. As it was it was just the one. 2nd half Italy came out with a changed formation and tactics. Having been 2nd best all 1st half, they ruled the roost. That was obvious from the start of the 2nd half. 5 minutes in, Southgate should have changed tactics and/or personnel to counter the Italian changes. He didn't. We continued to struggle against the change and it went to penalties. That failure to change tack when necessary is what cost us, IMO.

[Ram-Alf]

47 minutes ago, jimtastic56 said:

I notice “Uncle Harry” has been rolled out again for the Euros. He is seen as a lovable rogue . I pray that he does not offer his recruitment services to DCFC, ever again .

This lovable rogue won his Tax case, My Daughter and her team worked 100s of hours to prove the case, It was a slam dunk they said, Until he came across as a simple man who didn't understand Tax returns especially when his Dog ate the forms.

The Jury were smitten with him, Pity Ken Dodd and Lester Piggott didn't get the same jury 🙄

[Ghost of Clough]

1 hour ago, Foreveram said:

I take it you weren’t at the the Stevenage away game, what Warne had to endure was about as far away from civilised debate as you could get.

1 hour ago, Foreveram said:

It’s a good job some of us, and Mr Clowes in particular have a bit more patience then.

Wasn't that the game Warne said he would have booed if he was a fan? If Warne was to be sacked, after that game was arguably the best time to do it - we were 9th after 14 games. We would have had enough games and points to play for to turn it around. The failure to beat Crewe after 2 attempts rasised concerns too. 

Unfortunately, when we didn't win, there wasn't much to cheer about. At least when playing more technical football there is more to justify giving a manager more time.

After Stevenage, we won the next 5 league games, followed by a draw then 4 more wins, which took us to 2 points off automatics. The management team deserved to at least see the season out to prove they could get us promotion. They succeeded and now deserve to be backed to prove they can meet the objectives in the Championship. 

The excuse in the past has been along the lines of Warne being restricted to players signed by other managers limiting the style of play. Ignoring academy graduates, there will only be 4 players next season signed by other managers (Rooney, Forsyth, Mendez-Laing and Barkhuizen) and 2 of those were given new contracts by Warne. This is now Warne's squad. I think it's now fair to say the quality of play should also improve as more signings are made to compliment exactly what Warne wants. Management also deserve a bit of time to prove this is the case.

Despite a couple of my original concerns from 2022 still being in place (academy and style of play), I'm still looking forward to what Warne can deliver next season.

[Leeds Ram]

On disagreement, I think the slogan from Wisdom of Crowds works nicely  "Agreement is nice. But disagreement is better. And we mean that."

On Warne, It's great he's took us up but I don't feel he should get that much slack on the rope. This year we need to avoid relegation simple as that. If we're in the bottom 3 after 15-20 games Warne should be gone. We did go up but that was to be expected in the second year. Warne's record makes me quite nervous about his capability at that level I won't lie. But he's got to be given a chance to succeed or fail on his own merits. 

[jono]

1 hour ago, kevinhectoring said:

Overall I think the manager is usually the single most important factor 

Indeed, but I think, regardless of what league and even if someone doesn’t like him, our manager has shown he’s got a reasonable grasp of the basics. It’s pre season right now so those other concerns are somehow higher up the worry rankings I suppose 

[MadAmster]

1 hour ago, Leeds Ram said:

On Warne, It's great he's took us up but I don't feel he should get that much slack on the rope. This year we need to avoid relegation simple as that. If we're in the bottom 3 after 15-20 games Warne should be gone. We did go up but that was to be expected in the second year. Warne's record makes me quite nervous about his capability at that level I won't lie. But he's got to be given a chance to succeed or fail on his own merits. 

 

He joined RUFC when they were in the relegation zone and couldn't save them. He took them up and down again, Then he took them up and down again. Then he took them up again. Following that 3rd promotion, he left them after 9 games to join Derby. At that point, he had RUFC in 8th with a game in hand over every team above them. Win that and they'd be 5th. He left and RUFC finished 19th that season and relegated again the next. It's likely that RUFC's relegations have more to do with RUFC and their inability to attract players who can keep them in the SBC than with any of the managers involved in those relegations. That's PW, his predecessors (Stubbs and Jackett and possibly Warnock) and his successors (Taylor and Richardson). RUFC is the one common denominator. Now, I'm not saying PW would have continued to have a good season with them had he not come to us, that would be pure conjecture, however, it does show he'd had a good start to that season and we'll never know if he'd have had them top half.

Edited June 13 by MadAmster

[Foreveram]

1 hour ago, Ghost of Clough said:

Wasn't that the game Warne said he would have booed if he was a fan? If Warne was to be sacked, after that game was arguably the best time to do it - we were 9th after 14 games. We would have had enough games and points to play for to turn it around. The failure to beat Crewe after 2 attempts rasised concerns too. 

Unfortunately, when we didn't win, there wasn't much to cheer about. At least when playing more technical football there is more to justify giving a manager more time.

After Stevenage, we won the next 5 league games, followed by a draw then 4 more wins, which took us to 2 points off automatics. The management team deserved to at least see the season out to prove they could get us promotion. They succeeded and now deserve to be backed to prove they can meet the objectives in the Championship. 

The excuse in the past has been along the lines of Warne being restricted to players signed by other managers limiting the style of play. Ignoring academy graduates, there will only be 4 players next season signed by other managers (Rooney, Forsyth, Mendez-Laing and Barkhuizen) and 2 of those were given new contracts by Warne. This is now Warne's squad. I think it's now fair to say the quality of play should also improve as more signings are made to compliment exactly what Warne wants. Management also deserve a bit of time to prove this is the case.

Despite a couple of my original concerns from 2022 still being in place (academy and style of play), I'm still looking forward to what Warne can deliver next season.

Stevenage was awful but there is a difference between booing and absolute foul mouthed rage from some of our so called supporters.

I would argue that 14 games into the second season of a four year contract was not the right time to get rid and start again.

As you have pointed out this season is Warnes team with hopefully a full preseason and I believe he should be given a chance to mould this new group of players into a team.

[AutoWindscreens]

3 hours ago, kevinhectoring said:

Southgate? The Italy penalty debacle was the last straw for me - feckless wokeism. I would have sent him to the tower

Sorry, I'm biting.

Feckless wokeism? Wha? You can criticise the decision to bring on players just to take a penalty for many reasons, but feckless wokeism ain't one. Reckless gamble maybe. He brought them on for pens because he thought they were going to score their penalties...

... not because they were black, or in favour of free school meals.

[jono]

5 hours ago, Chester40 said:

Think most of what you wrote was fair, sensible....

But, I totally disagree with this bit.

On the terraces there are more much extreme views expressed all the time. I'm quite liable to lean over and say to my mate 'oh ffs what the **** is abc doing today, he's been absolutely **** all game'.

Or...'why the **** is Warne not making any changes, any idiot see they are going to concede any minute' etc etc.

My mate may agree with my knowledgeable thinking... or say he thinks something totally different. 

The difference is that its left there. Its a brief moment. We both know its desire to see us win that's driving what we say. We move on. We feel better for a moan. On here, it just lingers, gets repeated...over and over at times, gets dissected, over analysed...  the devil makes work for idle hands.

 

That’s a really good point. There are a number on here (me included) who love to excercise their language, keyboard skills and the art of debate. I know I can sound a bit snotty at times, I never mean to, but when you spend time constructing and polishing your own argument it’s a bit of a blow when someone fails to admire the stunning, incisive debating genius ! Not only fails to admire it, they have the cheek to disagree ! Letting them get away with it scot free on the grounds of free speech is a travesty 🤣🤣🤣. 

[jono]

3 hours ago, MadAmster said:

He joined RUFC when they were in the relegation zone and couldn't save them. He took them up and down again, Then he took them up and down again. Then he took them up again. Following that 3rd promotion, he left them after 9 games to join Derby. At that point, he had RUFC in 8th with a game in hand over every team above them. Win that and they'd be 5th. He left and RUFC finished 19th that season and relegated again the next. It's likely that RUFC's relegations have more to do with RUFC and their inability to attract players who can keep them in the SBC than with any of the managers involved in those relegations. That's PW, his predecessors (Stubbs and Jackett and possibly Warnock) and his successors (Taylor and Richardson). RUFC is the one common denominator. Now, I'm not saying PW would have continued to have a good season with them had he not come to us, that would be pure conjecture, however, it does show he'd had a good start to that season and we'll never know if he'd have had them top half.

If we are 8th after 9 games it would be a brilliant start .. Lordy Lordy we need a couple of strikers and Ebou along with a Bird replacement. I can’t see a fast start am predicting a worry filled first few games as new players gel 
 

By the way any news on young Rooney ?  Getting him back fit would be a great help in the choices dept. 
 

Edited June 13 by jono

[kevinhectoring]

2 hours ago, AutoWindscreens said:

maybe. He brought them on for pens because he thought they were going to score their penalties...

Nicely put AW. Of course he didn’t want to lose!!  

But the reason he chose them was in part because he wanted them (not other teammates) to score. The reason he believed they would indeed score is the more complicated aspect…

(All of this reflects btw that Southgate is a deeply decent man ( albeit, as we all know, a one dimensional football manager). )

The racial abuse of black players and Sterling in particular in the run up was well documented and appalling. If you want to know how Southgate felt about it, go back and re-read the Dear England letter. It’s a letter about many things but I believe the reason he wrote it was to deal head on with the issue of racism. I think he felt deeply for the players who suffered - Sterling especially. 

The choice of Rashford, Saka and Sancho as penalty takers was all part of this and was an appalling decision. He had experienced players on the pitch and he chose three inexperienced penalty takers, none of them famed strikers of a dead ball, one a  player who only ever hits a ball sweetly if it’s moving, the second a player who had had a really lousy game and the third a player who had only just gone onto the pitch in the final of a major international tournament. To put it in Derby terms, 3 Kamil Jozwiaks.  It was madness. It reflected how much he believed in them, how much he wanted them to be heroes, how much he wanted to silence the racists. And in footballing terms, utterly feckless. And the result: a mountain of abuse on twitter for the hapless triumvirate. Oh and we lost.  
 

Feckless wokeism 
 

[Caerphilly Ram]

5 hours ago, Ghost of Clough said:

 

Unfortunately, when we didn't win, there wasn't much to cheer about. At least when playing more technical football there is more to justify giving a manager more time.

 

Disclaimer - not looking for a row, this is a genuine query.

What’s the rationale behind that statement in bold? Is it just a personal preference thing?

Personally I don’t feel a commitment to a particular type of play would afford me more leniency from one manager to the next. It’s the intent and what’s said and the motivation that stand out more for me. As in the intent to go and win games is more of a qualifier for me than the technical aspect of the team or squad, if we were brilliant at passing the ball and retaining possession but toothless in attack I’d be keen for the manager to address it. I think maybe that’s why I’ve been more receptive to the pragmatism of Warne’s approach during his tenure thus far. I want the team to win ultimately and was/am as happy with a Collins or Bradley header from a set piece as I am a Barkhuizen/NML counter attack goal or a Bird/Sibley long ranger or the Korey Smith team goal away at Blackpool. 

[DavesaRam]

22 hours ago, kevinhectoring said:

Funny you say that. In the ‘where will we finish?’ thread I started posting “2nd” about 8 matches before the finish. Check it. You’ll also remember how many thought the wheels would fall off in the run-in (consistent with what they call the Derby Way). None of that’s  got anything to do with whether we saw the best of our squad last season. We spent a lot of time watching the wrong players imo 

Some of the doubting was that many were sure that if we had finished 3rd, we would struggle to get through the play-offs. We ought to have been sure of beating Carlisle so that the play-offs weren't an issue. But despite the form in the last 8 games, no-one really knew!

[DavesaRam]

7 hours ago, Foreveram said:

I take it you weren’t at the the Stevenage away game, what Warne had to endure was about as far away from civilised debate as you could get.

Yes, but the football was about the same distance from good, as well, and was for quite a while either side of that match. However, personal abuse is unacceptable, whatever the reason.

[DavesaRam]

6 hours ago, MadAmster said:

To me, we really should have been 3 up at HT. As it was it was just the one. 2nd half Italy came out with a changed formation and tactics. Having been 2nd best all 1st half, they ruled the roost. That was obvious from the start of the 2nd half. 5 minutes in, Southgate should have changed tactics and/or personnel to counter the Italian changes. He didn't. We continued to struggle against the change and it went to penalties. That failure to change tack when necessary is what cost us, IMO.

That's got a familiar feel to it, Ammy!!! (Tin hat is at the ready!)

[Foreveram]

19 minutes ago, DavesaRam said:

Yes, but the football was about the same distance from good, as well, and was for quite a while either side of that match. However, personal abuse is unacceptable, whatever the reason.

Next 5 league matches after Stevenage.

Played 5.

Won 5.

For 13.

Against 1.

[DavesaRam]

8 minutes ago, Foreveram said:

Next 5 league matches after Stevenage.

Played 5.

Won 5.

For 13.

Against 1.

Oops. Thanks for pointing that out. It means that Stevenage was the watershed, then. But we had the debacles against Crewe, Cheltenham and Northampton before that, with terrible team selections and tactics. Warne deserved criticism, big time, I believe, but not personal abuse.