|
Post by charliesghost on Sept 27, 2017 16:29:03 GMT
I have an issue with this notion that we have slumped because there is lack of intensity, fight or passion. What posters are actually saying is 'they're not trying'. And just as it is balls when that criticism, which is lowest common denominator stuff, is levelled at England in major tournaments, I'm sure it is balls here. It's way more nuanced than that. The team which looks like it isn't trying is often trying too hard. Which is why passes go astray or tackles are missed. It's 1.01 of sports psychology. So in fact our chief problem is, seemingly, that we are playing with too much fear or pressure and too little joy and freedom. Now, against Bradford and Gills the players were doing the opposite. So there has been a significant switch. An additional problem in this context is that if you have average players (which I think our squad, sadly, is) playing with joy and freedom they look much better than they are. Which is great management. And despite there being undoubted issues with pace in the squad, Mous at RB, Ricardinho being unable to defend and a striker issue, these should all be solvable or tweakable. However, average players who are playing with fear. That's a shitstorm and recipe for relegation battle. You can't tweak that. You obviously weren't at Blackpool. There was no fear there, just total lethargy (Williamson said so himself afterwards). The idea that a sports team is not giving of its absolute best is hardly controversial. See recent comments about playing for Sunderland in recent seasons. It's not about anyone deliberately chucking games, it's about the absence of that edge to performances that comes from being right "at it" and keyed up. Nerves? Ballocks. We're talking about several players here who are at the tail ends of their careers and have seen much bigger stages than Gigg Lane. I remember Mike Atheron writing that he time to retire from Test cricket is when you are no longer nervous. Subsequent failure is inevitable. You SHOULD be nervous. I was bloody nervous before the biggest football games I ever played and always did better as a result. So I am more hopeful than you. I honestly think that if Pep can get some edge into the squad, and ensure that they understand that anyone who does not win the second balls is going to get dropped, we will see an improvement in team spirit and performance.
|
|
|
Post by shaunrice on Sept 27, 2017 16:51:01 GMT
Just watched the highlights too. Soft penalty, but we've all "seen them given". It's not an out and out mistake by the ref; there is some pressure, but probably 4 times out of 5 you get away with it. But what is much more interesting/ worrying is the sheer number of chances that we gave Bury. Quite apart from the three they DID score, there were another 4 or 5 very clear chances. And we had, maybe, two? So I'm not overly keen on the narrative that is coming out of the team/ management that broadly goes like this: "We played really well/ professionally for most of the game, got a soft pen against and then got caught on the break because it's always difficult when you concede the first goal." That is not the game reflected in those highlights. There is a saying/cliche that defeats are the best learning experiences. Yes, but only if you actually want to learn. If what you really want is to stick you fingers in your eyes, close your eyes and shout "La la la la" then defeats are actually just defeats. To be clear, I wasn't there last night, but I was in our previous defeats against Cheltenham, Blackpool, Scunny and Walsall. Here are the lessons that I think I would be learning from those games: 1. The team is not winning enough second balls and contested headers. This means that we do not have a platform to perform from 2. The full backs, especially left back, are allowing crosses to come in from wide areas without even trying to pressure the ball. I think this is mostly because they think that they'll get beaten if they try to get close to the winger 3. Mike Williamson has lost confidence or, maybe, his "legs" and is a liability against a channels runner with any pace. Beckford and Tyler Roberts are hardly electric... 4. Ryan Ledson is badly out of form and struggling, as 20 year-olds sometimes will. Spell out of the side needed. He'll doubtless come back stronger. 5. There is very little movement ahead of the ball, which is something that 4231 depends on (since you are giving up width and midfield flooding) 1. The answer to the first problem is, I'm afraid to say, a good old-fashioned smashing up of the dressing room and demanding to know who wants to play and who doesn't. Then a public bombing out of those who aren't up to it, even if it means playing "inferior" players in their place. To lose out for lack of desire once is annoying but it happens (Cheltenham). Twice is a problem; thrice a real concern; by the fourth time, this has become a gaping wound that needs healing urgently. There will DEFINITELY be players in that dressing room right now looking at certain colleagues and thinking "Can't rely on him..." 2. Mousinho isn't a full-back. Yes, I know that he CAN play there, but he is stop gap. Play Canice Caroll there. He's quicker, has total desire and is better going forward. He'll make mistakes, I expect, but you're going to get 100%. Mousinho deserves a run at centre back. He is definitely trying his best, and shouldn't be asked to be a square peg in a round hole indefinitely when there are other options, and Williamson is struggling so badly. 3. Formation-wise, we have a major, major problem, which is our lack of fit strikers. This means that we HAVE to play one upfront. But I would take it to a 451 for the meantime, play Mowatt just off the frontman and then flood the midfield and get some proper width. But the main, most critically-important thing is going to be effort. We need 11 fit, hungry, passionate players who are going to fight for each other for the whole 90 minutes. Not just until and unless the opposition score their first goal. Totally agree but when it comes to formation and players I don’t think we have them. Johnson hasn’t been replaced, we didn’t have a striker most of season but got by. How we find ourselves with no fit striker in September is a bad mistake by the club. All those players sold and no real quality in = gambling and where we are now.
|
|
|
Post by eraser on Sept 27, 2017 17:32:51 GMT
Just watched the highlights too. Soft penalty, but we've all "seen them given". It's not an out and out mistake by the ref; there is some pressure, but probably 4 times out of 5 you get away with it. But what is much more interesting/ worrying is the sheer number of chances that we gave Bury. Quite apart from the three they DID score, there were another 4 or 5 very clear chances. And we had, maybe, two? So I'm not overly keen on the narrative that is coming out of the team/ management that broadly goes like this: "We played really well/ professionally for most of the game, got a soft pen against and then got caught on the break because it's always difficult when you concede the first goal." That is not the game reflected in those highlights. There is a saying/cliche that defeats are the best learning experiences. Yes, but only if you actually want to learn. If what you really want is to stick you fingers in your eyes, close your eyes and shout "La la la la" then defeats are actually just defeats. To be clear, I wasn't there last night, but I was in our previous defeats against Cheltenham, Blackpool, Scunny and Walsall. Here are the lessons that I think I would be learning from those games: 1. The team is not winning enough second balls and contested headers. This means that we do not have a platform to perform from 2. The full backs, especially left back, are allowing crosses to come in from wide areas without even trying to pressure the ball. I think this is mostly because they think that they'll get beaten if they try to get close to the winger 3. Mike Williamson has lost confidence or, maybe, his "legs" and is a liability against a channels runner with any pace. Beckford and Tyler Roberts are hardly electric... 4. Ryan Ledson is badly out of form and struggling, as 20 year-olds sometimes will. Spell out of the side needed. He'll doubtless come back stronger. 5. There is very little movement ahead of the ball, which is something that 4231 depends on (since you are giving up width and midfield flooding) 1. The answer to the first problem is, I'm afraid to say, a good old-fashioned smashing up of the dressing room and demanding to know who wants to play and who doesn't. Then a public bombing out of those who aren't up to it, even if it means playing "inferior" players in their place. To lose out for lack of desire once is annoying but it happens (Cheltenham). Twice is a problem; thrice a real concern; by the fourth time, this has become a gaping wound that needs healing urgently. There will DEFINITELY be players in that dressing room right now looking at certain colleagues and thinking "Can't rely on him..." 2. Mousinho isn't a full-back. Yes, I know that he CAN play there, but he is stop gap. Play Canice Caroll there. He's quicker, has total desire and is better going forward. He'll make mistakes, I expect, but you're going to get 100%. Mousinho deserves a run at centre back. He is definitely trying his best, and shouldn't be asked to be a square peg in a round hole indefinitely when there are other options, and Williamson is struggling so badly. 3. Formation-wise, we have a major, major problem, which is our lack of fit strikers. This means that we HAVE to play one upfront. But I would take it to a 451 for the meantime, play Mowatt just off the frontman and then flood the midfield and get some proper width. But the main, most critically-important thing is going to be effort. We need 11 fit, hungry, passionate players who are going to fight for each other for the whole 90 minutes. Not just until and unless the opposition score their first goal. Agree with every word Charlie. Charming man is our Pep but I think his continuing use of the words "good moment" & "phase" will get me & others screaming at his interviews. I just don't think he has the 'hairdryer' qualities that we need to rectify our malaise. Along with Project and Fokkus.....
|
|
|
Post by osleroad on Sept 27, 2017 17:57:05 GMT
As I have mentioned before the use of stock phrases for a 2ng lang. Speaker is usual just as much as the cliche ridden native speaker. Pep has a good range of vocab and is grammatically fairly sound..also the speed of delivery is good for a Spanish/Catalan speaker..he deliberately tries to enunciate well too as this can also be a problem with putting stress on right words in sentence. All together these issues might sound a bit robotic and some words like focus with a short u vowel need attention.
|
|
|
Post by ryaniobirdio on Sept 27, 2017 18:09:13 GMT
As I have mentioned before the use of stock phrases for a 2ng lang. Speaker is usual just as much as the cliche ridden native speaker. Pep has a good range of vocab and is grammatically fairly sound..also the speed of delivery is good for a Spanish/Catalan speaker..he deliberately tries to enunciate well too as this can also be a problem with putting stress on right words in sentence. All together these issues might sound a bit robotic and some words like focus with a short u vowel need attention. BLOODY FOREIGNERS, CAN'T EVEN SPEAK PROPERLY. PEP OUT!
|
|
|
Post by bazzer9461 on Sept 27, 2017 18:32:23 GMT
When there are 19 pages on a match day thread it’s normally because of promotion but it’s not! Worrying times ahead?
|
|
|
Post by scotchegg on Sept 27, 2017 19:39:19 GMT
When there are 19 pages on a match day thread it’s normally because of promotion but it’s not! Worrying times ahead? When there are 19 pages it is because of a defeat. We could win 10 nil and it would only generate a couple of pages. But everyone loves a moan!!
|
|
|
Post by uptheus on Sept 27, 2017 19:55:40 GMT
When there are 19 pages on a match day thread it’s normally because of promotion but it’s not! Worrying times ahead? When there are 19 pages it is because of a defeat. We could win 10 nil and it would only generate a couple of pages. But everyone loves a moan!! No we don't.
|
|
|
Post by Gary Baldi on Sept 27, 2017 20:40:36 GMT
That was a penalty? Wow. It's not soft, it's a down right bottle of Lenor.
|
|
|
Post by charliesghost on Sept 27, 2017 21:09:13 GMT
When there are 19 pages on a match day thread it’s normally because of promotion but it’s not! Worrying times ahead? When there are 19 pages it is because of a defeat. We could win 10 nil and it would only generate a couple of pages. But everyone loves a moan!! Only problem with that, scotchers, is that it's just not true. Bradford at home (apparently the best display of winning football since Wembley 66) generated the same amount of pages as the home disaster against Walsall. Both got 13 pages. Still, why let facts get in the way of...erm.... a good old moan.
|
|
|
Post by scotchegg on Sept 27, 2017 21:34:12 GMT
When there are 19 pages it is because of a defeat. We could win 10 nil and it would only generate a couple of pages. But everyone loves a moan!! Still, why let facts get in the way of...erm.... a good old moan. Pot and kettle numpty boy!
|
|
|
Post by charliesghost on Sept 27, 2017 21:50:45 GMT
Still, why let facts get in the way of...erm.... a good old moan. Pot and kettle numpty boy! Bless.
|
|
|
Post by londonroader on Sept 28, 2017 6:55:06 GMT
Just watched the highlights too. Soft penalty, but we've all "seen them given". It's not an out and out mistake by the ref; there is some pressure, but probably 4 times out of 5 you get away with it. But what is much more interesting/ worrying is the sheer number of chances that we gave Bury. Quite apart from the three they DID score, there were another 4 or 5 very clear chances. And we had, maybe, two? So I'm not overly keen on the narrative that is coming out of the team/ management that broadly goes like this: "We played really well/ professionally for most of the game, got a soft pen against and then got caught on the break because it's always difficult when you concede the first goal." That is not the game reflected in those highlights. There is a saying/cliche that defeats are the best learning experiences. Yes, but only if you actually want to learn. If what you really want is to stick you fingers in your eyes, close your eyes and shout "La la la la" then defeats are actually just defeats. To be clear, I wasn't there last night, but I was in our previous defeats against Cheltenham, Blackpool, Scunny and Walsall. Here are the lessons that I think I would be learning from those games: 1. The team is not winning enough second balls and contested headers. This means that we do not have a platform to perform from 2. The full backs, especially left back, are allowing crosses to come in from wide areas without even trying to pressure the ball. I think this is mostly because they think that they'll get beaten if they try to get close to the winger 3. Mike Williamson has lost confidence or, maybe, his "legs" and is a liability against a channels runner with any pace. Beckford and Tyler Roberts are hardly electric... 4. Ryan Ledson is badly out of form and struggling, as 20 year-olds sometimes will. Spell out of the side needed. He'll doubtless come back stronger. 5. There is very little movement ahead of the ball, which is something that 4231 depends on (since you are giving up width and midfield flooding) 1. The answer to the first problem is, I'm afraid to say, a good old-fashioned smashing up of the dressing room and demanding to know who wants to play and who doesn't. Then a public bombing out of those who aren't up to it, even if it means playing "inferior" players in their place. To lose out for lack of desire once is annoying but it happens (Cheltenham). Twice is a problem; thrice a real concern; by the fourth time, this has become a gaping wound that needs healing urgently. There will DEFINITELY be players in that dressing room right now looking at certain colleagues and thinking "Can't rely on him..." 2. Mousinho isn't a full-back. Yes, I know that he CAN play there, but he is stop gap. Play Canice Caroll there. He's quicker, has total desire and is better going forward. He'll make mistakes, I expect, but you're going to get 100%. Mousinho deserves a run at centre back. He is definitely trying his best, and shouldn't be asked to be a square peg in a round hole indefinitely when there are other options, and Williamson is struggling so badly. 3. Formation-wise, we have a major, major problem, which is our lack of fit strikers. This means that we HAVE to play one upfront. But I would take it to a 451 for the meantime, play Mowatt just off the frontman and then flood the midfield and get some proper width. But the main, most critically-important thing is going to be effort. We need 11 fit, hungry, passionate players who are going to fight for each other for the whole 90 minutes. Not just until and unless the opposition score their first goal. Agree with every word Charlie. Charming man is our Pep but I think his continuing use of the words "good moment" & "phase" will get me & others screaming at his interviews. I just don't think he has the 'hairdryer' qualities that we need to rectify our malaise. Don't be fooled by Pep's public demeanor, he can be a "b*stard" and a very hard task master behind the scenes.
|
|
|
Post by charliesghost on Sept 28, 2017 7:03:27 GMT
Agree with every word Charlie. Charming man is our Pep but I think his continuing use of the words "good moment" & "phase" will get me & others screaming at his interviews. I just don't think he has the 'hairdryer' qualities that we need to rectify our malaise. Don't be fooled by Pep's public demeanor, he can be a "b*stard" and a very hard task master behind the scenes. That's interesting (to me at least) as that's precisely my concern. Where have you got that from?
|
|
|
Post by Toeby on Sept 28, 2017 12:32:05 GMT
|
|
|
Post by HeyMcAleny on Sept 28, 2017 20:58:55 GMT
That is indeed very interesting. From various things I've heard and read, if Pep ultimately fails at Oxford it won't be for lack of effort, or planning or analysis.
I did wonder if he lacked the necessary toughness to make players worry about giving less than 100%, so this insight is welcome.
I really hope Pep is successful here, for obvious reasons, but he seems to be someone who is always seeking to learn and improve and do the right things in the right way.
I would hate to see us turn on him although that is the natural course of things if this poor form continues.
Bloody hell I hope we turn in a performance this Saturday.
|
|
|
Post by charliesghost on Sept 29, 2017 9:24:08 GMT
Interesting article. Obviously it's basically a hagiography, in that every strength gets analysed and maximised, and every weak point dismissed or swiftly explained away. But that doesn't mean that there are not interesting things in there. 1) obsession with detail. In a boss in any business this is a strength and a weakness. Strength for obvious reasons; weakness because it can obscure the blatantly obvious that is staring you in the face. 2) that he has a temper/charisma etc. I think this is a strength and he would be well-advised to show a few flashes of it in his media appearances. 3) his players like him and always want to big him up. This seems like a strength. And it is. No need to be un-likeable as Chippy was and is. But you wont find many such paeans of personal adoration for Clough, Ferguson, Mourinho, Pulis, Warnock or - dare I say it - Appleton. You need respect, above all else. You are, in English football, 'the gaffer'. The guy who turns a bunch of narcissistic 20 somethings into a coherent fighting unit. It's the same job that a sergeant major has to do and comes with similar requirements. Respect and a little bit of fear. That's why I was interested in what a previous poster said about Pep having the capacity to be a bit nasty. I think that he needs that right now.
|
|
|
Post by sihath on Sept 29, 2017 9:45:52 GMT
Interesting article. Obviously it's basically a hagiography, in that every strength gets analysed and maximised, and every weak point dismissed or swiftly explained away. But that doesn't mean that there are not interesting things in there. 1) obsession with detail. In a boss in any business this is a strength and a weakness. Strength for obvious reasons; weakness because it can obscure the blatantly obvious that is staring you in the face. 2) that he has a temper/charisma etc. I think this is a strength and he would be well-advised to show a few flashes of it in his media appearances. 3) his players like him and always want to big him up. This seems like a strength. And it is. No need to be un-likeable as Chippy was and is. But you wont find many such paeans of personal adoration for Clough, Ferguson, Mourinho, Pulis, Warnock or - dare I say it - Appleton. You need respect, above all else. You are, in English football, 'the gaffer'. The guy who turns a bunch of narcissistic 20 somethings into a coherent fighting unit. It's the same job that a sergeant major has to do and comes with similar requirements. Respect and a little bit of fear. That's why I was interested in what a previous poster said about Pep having the capacity to be a bit nasty. I think that he needs that right now. Although the vast majority of successful managers seem to be of a certain kind of personality (hard to warm to on a personal level), there are some (admittedly fewer) that have managed to be successful and yet still likeable, Bob Paisley and Jurgen Klopp both spring to mind when thinking of managers who don't appear to use a players fear of them to elicit performances from them. That said, I think it's probably a more difficult style of management to be successful with. Let's hope that whatever style Pep employs it works.
|
|
|
Post by mcf86 on Sept 29, 2017 11:53:40 GMT
'Good cop bad cop' In management you need a bit of both, simply because some players need different motivation. A quiet word in the ear might work for some, while others need a kick up the backside, or a mug of tea thrown at them. Mapp seemed to adopt both 'qualities' and knew when to flex his tattooed muscles or pat someone on the back. I'd have expected to see hear the 'Other side' of Pep by now, no reports of broken crockery have arisen as far as I know.
|
|
|
Post by charliesghost on Sept 29, 2017 15:15:27 GMT
Interesting article. Obviously it's basically a hagiography, in that every strength gets analysed and maximised, and every weak point dismissed or swiftly explained away. But that doesn't mean that there are not interesting things in there. 1) obsession with detail. In a boss in any business this is a strength and a weakness. Strength for obvious reasons; weakness because it can obscure the blatantly obvious that is staring you in the face. 2) that he has a temper/charisma etc. I think this is a strength and he would be well-advised to show a few flashes of it in his media appearances. 3) his players like him and always want to big him up. This seems like a strength. And it is. No need to be un-likeable as Chippy was and is. But you wont find many such paeans of personal adoration for Clough, Ferguson, Mourinho, Pulis, Warnock or - dare I say it - Appleton. You need respect, above all else. You are, in English football, 'the gaffer'. The guy who turns a bunch of narcissistic 20 somethings into a coherent fighting unit. It's the same job that a sergeant major has to do and comes with similar requirements. Respect and a little bit of fear. That's why I was interested in what a previous poster said about Pep having the capacity to be a bit nasty. I think that he needs that right now. Although the vast majority of successful managers seem to be of a certain kind of personality (hard to warm to on a personal level), there are some (admittedly fewer) that have managed to be successful and yet still likeable, Bob Paisley and Jurgen Klopp both spring to mind when thinking of managers who don't appear to use a players fear of them to elicit performances from them. That said, I think it's probably a more difficult style of management to be successful with. Let's hope that whatever style Pep employs it works. Simon, I think that that's true. Somebody else mentioned Maurice Evans! Klopp is an obvious big name one. Wenger would be another. It CAN be done, no doubt about it. I remember on Fleet Street, most newspaper editors were shouters and screamers. And then I landed at the Telegraph, where the editor never raised his voice. But he somehow managed to have the same effect by raising an eyebrow and sighing exasperatedly. We were terrified of that raised eyebrow and sigh! In retrospect, I think that that is because he ACTED on our poor performance (or good performance). There were consequences. You would be pulled in the following day and have it explained, very calmly, what the professional and personal consequences of your crapness were going to be. I suspect that this was MApp's style. By the by, having not bumped into you at the stadium or in Thame recently, what is your view on the season thus far?
|
|
|
Post by sihath on Sept 29, 2017 15:55:42 GMT
Although the vast majority of successful managers seem to be of a certain kind of personality (hard to warm to on a personal level), there are some (admittedly fewer) that have managed to be successful and yet still likeable, Bob Paisley and Jurgen Klopp both spring to mind when thinking of managers who don't appear to use a players fear of them to elicit performances from them. That said, I think it's probably a more difficult style of management to be successful with. Let's hope that whatever style Pep employs it works. Simon, I think that that's true. Somebody else mentioned Maurice Evans! Klopp is an obvious big name one. Wenger would be another. It CAN be done, no doubt about it. I remember on Fleet Street, most newspaper editors were shouters and screamers. And then I landed at the Telegraph, where the editor never raised his voice. But he somehow managed to have the same effect by raising an eyebrow and sighing exasperatedly. We were terrified of that raised eyebrow and sigh! In retrospect, I think that that is because he ACTED on our poor performance (or good performance). There were consequences. You would be pulled in the following day and have it explained, very calmly, what the professional and personal consequences of your crapness were going to be. I suspect that this was MApp's style. By the by, having not bumped into you at the stadium or in Thame recently, what is your view on the season thus far? Maurice Evans came to mind after I had posted and I couldn't be bothered to edit! There comes a time when constant shouting/criticism/tea cup throwing loses its impact and you've then got nowhere to go, whereas if you start from a position of calmness you can at least get a reaction when you do show some anger. The season so far? Frustrating on so many levels. There are some flashes of ability, both individually and as a team that show we have the potential to be a good side at this level, then we go and play appallingly for 3 games on the trot (although I've missed the last 2). Will the real OUFC please step forward? I think it's often easier to get a consistent level of performance from limited players as they have usually got into the pro game through hard work and determination. If you've got there through a natural ability and are at 3rd division level, it's likely you're there because of a lack of consistency (more consistency from Robbie Hall for example would see him playing much higher). A team who have 'footballers' in Div 3 are more likely to be inconsistent, 'cloggers' less so. As we have more of the former we may have to accept that it's going to be a season of mixed performances.
|
|
|
Post by charliesghost on Sept 29, 2017 16:21:23 GMT
Simon, I think that that's true. Somebody else mentioned Maurice Evans! Klopp is an obvious big name one. Wenger would be another. It CAN be done, no doubt about it. I remember on Fleet Street, most newspaper editors were shouters and screamers. And then I landed at the Telegraph, where the editor never raised his voice. But he somehow managed to have the same effect by raising an eyebrow and sighing exasperatedly. We were terrified of that raised eyebrow and sigh! In retrospect, I think that that is because he ACTED on our poor performance (or good performance). There were consequences. You would be pulled in the following day and have it explained, very calmly, what the professional and personal consequences of your crapness were going to be. I suspect that this was MApp's style. By the by, having not bumped into you at the stadium or in Thame recently, what is your view on the season thus far? Maurice Evans came to mind after I had posted and I couldn't be bothered to edit! There comes a time when constant shouting/criticism/tea cup throwing loses its impact and you've then got nowhere to go, whereas if you start from a position of calmness you can at least get a reaction when you do show some anger. The season so far? Frustrating on so many levels. There are some flashes of ability, both individually and as a team that show we have the potential to be a good side at this level, then we go and play appallingly for 3 games on the trot (although I've missed the last 2). Will the real OUFC please step forward? I think it's often easier to get a consistent level of performance from limited players as they have usually got into the pro game through hard work and determination. If you've got there through a natural ability and are at 3rd division level, it's likely you're there because of a lack of consistency (more consistency from Robbie Hall for example would see him playing much higher). A team who have 'footballers' in Div 3 are more likely to be inconsistent, 'cloggers' less so. As we have more of the former we may have to accept that it's going to be a season of mixed performances. That's a really interesting theory. So, do we need to balance out the squad with some more cloggers?
|
|
|
Post by palmersgreenyellow on Sept 29, 2017 17:15:38 GMT
Don't you think that MApp leaving when he did and a group of talented players deserting ship was always going to be extremely hard to manage? Only a few short months ago and all was rosy with the world (at least at OUFC!) but we have quickly fallen behind where we could have been. I'm hopeful that this is, indeed, just a blip caused by too many new (and untested for this league) players finding their feet; a new manager; a new system but the signs over the last three games have been ominous.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Sept 29, 2017 17:25:15 GMT
Maurice Evans came to mind after I had posted and I couldn't be bothered to edit! There comes a time when constant shouting/criticism/tea cup throwing loses its impact and you've then got nowhere to go, whereas if you start from a position of calmness you can at least get a reaction when you do show some anger. The season so far? Frustrating on so many levels. There are some flashes of ability, both individually and as a team that show we have the potential to be a good side at this level, then we go and play appallingly for 3 games on the trot (although I've missed the last 2). Will the real OUFC please step forward? I think it's often easier to get a consistent level of performance from limited players as they have usually got into the pro game through hard work and determination. If you've got there through a natural ability and are at 3rd division level, it's likely you're there because of a lack of consistency (more consistency from Robbie Hall for example would see him playing much higher). A team who have 'footballers' in Div 3 are more likely to be inconsistent, 'cloggers' less so. As we have more of the former we may have to accept that it's going to be a season of mixed performances. That's a really interesting theory. So, do we need to balance out the squad with some more cloggers? Nope, but maybe the formation. Ruffels is a less fancy player than say rothwell. Which is maybe why we did better in the middle in the first few games. Players that will do their job but keep it simple, recycling the ball, closing down doing the dirty work. Not so much a clogger in the sense of what we’ve had in the past.
|
|
|
Post by charliesghost on Sept 29, 2017 17:35:16 GMT
That's a really interesting theory. So, do we need to balance out the squad with some more cloggers? Nope, but maybe the formation. Ruffels is a less fancy player than say rothwell. Which is maybe why we did better in the middle in the first few games. Players that will do their job but keep it simple, recycling the ball, closing down doing the dirty work. Not so much a clogger in the sense of what we’ve had in the past. Yes, I guess that clogger is too pejorative a term. Who wants cloggers? But I think that what Simon meant was that the squad could do with more utilitarian players. People like Edwards, Dunkley, Skarz.... whose prime job may not be to look fancy, but who are adept at heading and kicking balls and players if that is what is needed. Personally, I think that that isn't a complete explanation. Williamson is hardly a fancy dan; nor is Mousinho; nor is Henry.... their careers were all built off being solid pros. Even Ricardinho, though he has his moments, generally likes to get stuck in (when he's not standing off a winger for fear of being exposed for pace!). It does, though, look to be about right that we need to get back to being solid and functional before we can look forward to fokkusing on some of Pep's grander theories. There's been a bit of trying to canter around before we can manage a steady trot in recent games. It sounded (from he radio) like the first hour at Bury represented an initial attempt at this. Let's forget what happened thereafter, especially as Pep seems to believe that conceding the first goal is a near insurmountable hurdle to overcome in football. At some point, hopefully tomorrow, we are surely going to score first. Then, perhaps, the team will start to believe in it all a bit more.
|
|
|
Post by sihath on Oct 2, 2017 7:17:06 GMT
Nope, but maybe the formation. Ruffels is a less fancy player than say rothwell. Which is maybe why we did better in the middle in the first few games. Players that will do their job but keep it simple, recycling the ball, closing down doing the dirty work. Not so much a clogger in the sense of what we’ve had in the past. Yes, I guess that clogger is too pejorative a term. Who wants cloggers? But I think that what Simon meant was that the squad could do with more utilitarian players. People like Edwards, Dunkley, Skarz.... whose prime job may not be to look fancy, but who are adept at heading and kicking balls and players if that is what is needed. Personally, I think that that isn't a complete explanation. Williamson is hardly a fancy dan; nor is Mousinho; nor is Henry.... their careers were all built off being solid pros. Even Ricardinho, though he has his moments, generally likes to get stuck in (when he's not standing off a winger for fear of being exposed for pace!). It does, though, look to be about right that we need to get back to being solid and functional before we can look forward to fokkusing on some of Pep's grander theories. There's been a bit of trying to canter around before we can manage a steady trot in recent games. It sounded (from he radio) like the first hour at Bury represented an initial attempt at this. Let's forget what happened thereafter, especially as Pep seems to believe that conceding the first goal is a near insurmountable hurdle to overcome in football. At some point, hopefully tomorrow, we are surely going to score first. Then, perhaps, the team will start to believe in it all a bit more. I think yesterday showed that you can get a better performance from a player when they play in their best position. Mousinho (who, while I don't think is a fancy dan, is definitely a ball playing centre back) looks twice the player at CB than he did at right back. Ruffels is back (no idea why he was dropped in the first place) and he epitomises the phrase 'solid pro'. He does the dirty stuff in midfield that needs doing. He's unlikely to win man of the match because he's not flash, he's unlikely to hit a screamer from 30 yards but he'll have an understated and often undervalued impact on a game. Ove the next few games I'd be happy to see a more solid midfield 3 of Ruf/Ledson/Rothwell, with Henry and Payne ahead of them and Obika/Thomas as the lone striker.
|
|