Jump to content

Recommended Posts

24 minutes ago, ReadingOwl said:

I’m no fan of Monk.

 

But it’s not surprising he’s failing. He’s been set up to fail.

 

What support does he receive?

 

His own backroom staff? Senior Pro’s?
 

What remit was he given by the Chairman? Survival? Play attacking football?
 

Anything?
 

Under current conditions it’s hard to see anyone succeeding at the Club.


DC said in the presser when Monk arrives he only thinks about the top two.

 

Monk is desperately underachieving then...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ReadingOwl said:

 

Why were Boner and Forestieri substituted?

 

Why arent Westwood and Hutchinson available?

 

What goal has the Chairman set for Monk?

 

I don’t know, do you?

I presumed Borner was injured....Theres no way Tom Lees should be within Corona virus distance of the defence on current form, he kept drifting out to left back for some reason...He needs a rest...

The Chairman and the manager...Both made basic errors against City...The chairman for thinking "Thousands" would flock...cos its Man City....and Monk for thinking Da Cruz is better than Forestieri...both f.ookin' abject schoolboy errors we see far too much of at Hillsborough...

 

 

 

Well those that can f.ookin' afford to go see far too much of.............

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be honest, I don't know why he didn't throw Nuhiu on with Fletcher. I normally hate the long, aimless punts up front but I couldn't really see any other way we were going to create anything tonight. The only times City looked under pressures was chucking it into the box but even then, we didn't have the players to create owt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Spondon Owl said:

Set us up well. We needed fessi to chase and harass. Da Cruz added a bit of height and pace without offering as much as Fletcher nor being as static as Nuhiu. We were solid and actually looked quite comfortable albeit looking weak at set pieces. 

 

Substitutions:

 

Borner off for Lees. 

 

Got to assume this was an injury. Whilst borner wasn't playing top of his game, his performance wasn't sufficient to warrant hooking at half time.

 

If it wasn't, then I have no idea what Monk was doing wasting a sub and changing the back four dynamic. I dont think it was a surprise that at the start of the second half we looked rattled and conceded. 

 

Forestieri off for Fletcher.

 

Madness. Fessi was playing a lot, lot better than Da Cruz. We lost energy and we ended up carrying Da Cruz for pretty much all of the second half. 

 

Lee for hunt. 

 

Forced but actually improved our balance and energy.

 

Game management:

 

Solid first half. 

 

0-1 at 75 minutes and we are sitting as deep as anytime in the game with no high press. 2 substitutions used (unless for injury) in bizarre ways reducing our overall energy with zero attempt to take the game to city.

 

Very underwhelming. 

 

Overall:

 

Overall tactically we were ok but utterly uninspiring. The substitutions and the lack of impetus toward the end of the second half were baffling. We went down without so much as a sniff of taking the fight to city.

 

5/10 - maybe we'll scrape a few draws while avoiding (hopefully) relegation. 

The players understood what they were being asked to do as it was obvious. Makes a change from his normal tactical shambles I.e. the Derby high press  3 3 4 debacle which got unlocked all first half

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, DJMortimer said:

 

Considering the options we had, I could see the logic of going with Forestieri and Da Cruz. It gave us the slightest glimpse of mobility and creativity that we could muster if Fletcher is still not fully fit. Nuhiu, Winnall or Rhodes would not have made mych of a difference really would they?

 

Who knows but I'll say this ... Nuhiu is 10 times the player that da Cruz is.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Spondon Owl said:

We have a squad that is capable of doing better than it currently is.

 

That's the bottom line. Monks tactics are uninspiring, his substitutions are appalling and his overall game management beggars belief.

 

I dont enjoy watching paint dry. But I'm watching paint dry while we whimper and slide down the league.

You say we have a squad that is capable of doing better but while I’d like to agree with you the bulk of these players are simply not good enough at th3 moment and clearly letting the fantastic supporters down

The quicker we get some imaginative midfielders, a ‘real captain’ who leads by example and quick, strong forwards who puts a bit of fear in th3 opposition we will be ‘massive’ only to those that have a bloody long memory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest mkowl
11 minutes ago, ReadingOwl said:

 

Im no fan of his. Never have been. His appointment didn’t fill me with hope, as his past C.V wasn’t anything special.

 

But my knowledge is limited.

 

However, my point was that Monk, singularly, can’t tackle this job. He needs a good Chairman, good staff and good Senior players.

 

Otherwise he will fail. And, is failing.

 

With regard to Forestieri, I have no idea. Unless he was saving him for league time - but on that basis, I wouldn’t have brought Fletcher on either, if I was concentrating on the League.

 

Not a big fan of Monk - he’s looking to be a very poor choice. But,  under the current context, I’m not sure what the alternative is.

 

Spot on because we can get rid of Monk easily and replace him with the next one, then the next one. 

 

It needs a strategic plan from the Chairman but a bit like Monks tactics if Plan A (lob money at it failed) then where is the convincing Plan B.

 

Without that input we won't go anywhere beyond OT slagging off the players or the manager

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, SallyCinnamon said:


DC said in the presser when Monk arrives he only thinks about the top two.

 

Monk is desperately underachieving then...

That simply proves the point Chansiri is bloody delusional or deliberayely trying to pressure a manager into doing something which was virtually impossible...Which still makes Chansiri f.ookin' delusional

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just before the board goes up Forestieri was looking across at the half way line, it looked like he knew before his name went up that he'd be subbed,

was it pre-planned, told to run his arris off first half, get into them make it difficult for them and then get subbed.

 

Borner was having a mare.

 

Lee was poo pooed.

 

This is all I can think why the substitutions, not that I agree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, erowl said:

 

Who knows but I'll say this ... Nuhiu is 10 times the player that da Cruz is.

 

I agree he's a better footballer, but this gameplan wouldn't have suited Nuhiu apart from a few times from set pieces, which didn't happen much. We needed a bit of movement and the potential at least to get in behind them, although that was rare as well. Obviously we created little, but I don't think the strategy should be considered a drastic failure. They are obviously way better than us and at least we kept them having to play until the end instead of getting humiliated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, TheEnchanter said:

Food that's past it's best doesn't suddenly come good again. 

 

This is the medium term impact of our complete mismanagement of the squad from the top down. If people can't see that then they will always sit their expecting this group of players to acheive the same results as 2015-17. 

 

We never built on success. We stagnated and regressed. Monk is the latest to try and pick up the pieces. If it wasn't him it'd be someone else feeling the heat. 

Monk can't make a silk purse out of a does ear. What do people think Pep would do with our team. Same as Monk. 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, daleblue said:

Just before the board goes up Forestieri was looking across at the half way line, it looked like he knew before his name went up that he'd be subbed,

was it pre-planned, told to run his arris off first half, get into them make it difficult for them and then get subbed.

 

Borner was having a mare.

 

Lee was poo pooed.

 

This is all I can think why the substitutions, not that I agree.

Borner wsn't exactly "Having a mare was he?...He was part of a defence that was holding one of the best teams in Europe to 0-0 at half time...

Did Lees improve that?

Did he f.ook....he looked nervy all the time he was on

Link to comment
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...