Jump to content

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, TaxiMark said:

Not saying its BS just wanted to know who the players were you are referring too.


If I remember right pretty much every ex-player from Megson’s stint that’s been on UndrTheCosh has referenced some players having a dislike towards him or his methods at that time. The podcasts were Tommy Miller, Sedgwick, Weaver and Otsemobor that I can remember. 
 

Otsemobor is a more recent one, he definitely said Megson was a ramped up version of himself because of his links to Wednesday and that ruffled a few at times.
 

 

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

He's a broken man who knows that he cannot continue the job. Statements like "We can talk about the game but its the overall picture isnt it.."  and "You'll have to ask the players"

 

Highly influential troublemakers causing problems. Certain players have more influence on this team than the manager does and he knows that so did Jos. Its too far gone and its happened too many times in the past. They are a disgrace to the club and fans should stop cheering for them and call them out. 

 

Who this time? Are we still blaming Hutchinson and Westwood for the last 3 or 4 performances where they were no closer to being included than I was or is it someone else that Monk keeps selecting causing all the problems and rubbing off on the new players who also look confused by the complete change in formation after playing 1 game under him?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, oh_weds_we_love_you said:


My point exactly, Monk has bought in better attacking options with the lose change he was given in January, set up a different system to dominate the midfield and be more attacking, they the PLAYERS resort to the type of football all footballers low on confidence/lack of mentality do and just hit and hope. No way has Monk told them to go out and do that, and his reaction afterwards suggests that’s the case.


excellent point ... low on confidence and mentally weak 

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


If I remember right pretty much every ex-player from Megson’s stint that’s been on UndrTheCosh has referenced some players having a dislike towards him or his methods at that time. The podcasts were Tommy Miller, Sedgwick, Weaver and Otsemobor that I can remember. 
 

Otsemobor is a more recent one, he definitely said Megson was a ramped up version of himself because of his links to Wednesday and that ruffled a few at times.
 

 

 

Interesting, how many of those players were heavily involved in the promotion season?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, 2roland2 said:

 

So im  abit lost here sorry mate, your telling me that Monk who has a entire management history of playing direct football at every club, has not told them to play the direct football we have played including tonight? and the last 9 /10 games? well hes still picking these players so i would say yep he is telling them to play this way


There is a big difference between direct style of play, which Monk is renowned for and played earlier in the season, and hoof and hope, which is what the players have resorted to in recent weeks, as I mentioned earlier pal.

 

As I say, the common denominator here is the same core of mentality weak, serial failures on the pitch. Different managers, same core of players, same sh*te. At some point you have to accept the problem isn’t always the manager.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, hirstyboywonder said:

 

The core of the squad worked hard for Megson because they had a belief in what he was doing for a good while. That fell down when results went downhill and the style looked dated and one-dimensional, Dave Jones got the same squad, albeit with the important addition of Antonio, playing far better football.

 

Tell me about how playing Forestieri at left-wing-back is meant to inspire and instill belief into the players.


Forestieri was more or less playing the same position he played Saturday. The idea seemed to me was to give him more license going forward and Wednesday more protection and balance going backwards. 
 

He was more left wing tonight than left back.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, NeonLeon said:


Blackburn was a shambles and tonight we set up completely different to how we have before, as I stated earlier. 
 

Before that both Leeds and QPR we set up to counter. Even the games at Hillsborough we’ve won we were set up to counter and had less of the ball.

 

We only countered Leeds after they got desperate near the end. Anyone who saw that game knew we were lucky not to go in behind at half-time. QPR was just a bit of a scrap and we scored a counter goal again late on when they were chasing a goal - it hasn't been a tactic that we have been effective with throughout games.

 

We have been direct which was effective with Fletcher but not specifically counter attacking.

 

Our tactics since Christmas have been undefined from what I have seen - no clear effective plan,

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

 

I can’t particularly blame Monk.

 

Sacking him without leadership and direction from above,  is just knee jerk and pointless.

 

Its just shuffling the deck chairs.

 


Shuffling the deck chairs on the titanic is a good way to put it.

 

But Monk has to take some culpability for what’s happened in the last two months.

 

It needs a change. And I can’t see DC going anywhere so it has to be Monk

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, NeonLeon said:

 

He’s the biggest culprit for stifling our ability to move up the pitch quickly. 
 

If anything he’s a reason why Monk’s system isn’t having any success.

 

Even when we were doing quite well, I was concerned at Bannan's propensity for slowing attacks down and actually reducing the number of opportunities we might get. That's not to say he is a poor player or even one of the biggest reasons why we are in such a slump. I just think he can be a little self-indulgent and deliberate.

 

12 minutes ago, g-owls said:

 

Our lot on the other hand seemingly have a 'woe is me' attitude.

 

The bigger picture though, is that the example is being set by the man at the very top..

 

The difference in attitude from Chansiri when comparing his first two years with the last couple seems quite stark. I have no idea if he has actually lost interest but there is no obvious reason to believe otherwise and if that is really the case, who knows what effect it is having in other areas of the club?

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, NeonLeon said:


Forestieri was more or less playing the same position he played Saturday. The idea seemed to me was to give him more license going forward and Wednesday more protection and balance going backwards. 
 

He was more left wing tonight than left back.

 

Worked a treat!

We played 3 centre-backs today and he was wing-back, the fact he isn't cut out to play the defensive part of that role contributed to the first half in which we could have been 3-0 down to the worst team in the division.

Iorfa clearly played a different position today to what he did on Saturday. 

we sign 3 attacking players, chuck them all into the team straight away, change formation completely after 1 game and score 1 goal in two games against the worst two sides in the league.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, 2roland2 said:

 

Direct, and hoof and hope, we havent got the players for it to stick, it isnt working mate. its pure madness if somethign continually doesnt work you change it, or else it continues not to work.  Without fletcher long, direct, hoof ball whatever it aint going to work.


The style we played earlier in the season wasn’t hoof and hope though bud. It was direct, but it had purpose, there was a clear plan (use the wingers with pace, work off Fletcher in and around the box, and be defensively solid).

 

In recent weeks the players have just put their foot through it and banged the ball aimlessly forward. It’s not what we did earlier in the season and it’s not what Monk wants them to do, but it’s what they’re doing now!

 

If you believe the problem is with yet another manager, then we’ll have to agree to disagree mate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not one for forensically examining these interviews as they are usually little but exercises in rotating the same old soundbites and giving little away. Plus, people will usually be able to find what they want to if they have a particular angle they want to promote. But the body language in that clip is interesting as Monk is reluctant to make eye contact with the interviewer and sidesteps two opportunities to vigorously defend his squad, when normally the manager would be at pains to take the responsibility away from them much more directly. As evidence of deep-seated unrest, it's more circumstantial and non-specific than some of the more strident narrators would have us believe, but it's not easy to glibly explain away.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

This reminds me about what SB said at the end of last season, saying it will take a number of windows to fix and compete. I just think Monk made the error of a public condemnation of unnamed players which seems to have destroyed the unity SB brought in and any real authority he may have had before. Jos did the same but the key difference now is that they will be gone soon.

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 in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...