Where are the goals coming from?

[gurujuan]

8 minutes ago, dorian gray said:

tbh, i don't know that much about garry monk, but i'll hazard a guess that he knows more about football tactics, and strategy than you, i, and many more on here.

i also imagine he'll know more about our squad than we do, and on that footing i'll assume you're wrong, and he's not. 

Or maybe our results give a clearer indication

[Marc_Degryse]

2 hours ago, whatdial said:

Our midfield doesn’t get in the box and break the lines enough. We’ve had the problem for years. No true box to box player. We need someone that gets 10 goals from centre mid and haven’t had one of them for years

Does one of these exist in the Championship?

 

Closest we have is Reach, got nine goals last season. Not really from out wide though, playing him behind a front man with licence to roam and spaff shots on goal at will 

[dorian gray]

1 hour ago, GerOwl said:

 

This is the new excuse and it isn't factually or statistically correct. 

hahahahahahaha!

it is in no way, a new excuse whatsoever, it is fact!

the 2016 side was bought together to win promotion THEN! in a s**t or bust roll of the dice, it had 2 good years in it, and was then going over the hill.

with players not being sold (for whatever reasons) it limited future incomings, it was a ticking bomb.

IF you think the squad inherited by monk wasn't shockingly bad, and grossly unbalanced with only one competent attacker, a leaky defence in comparison to the previous five years, and a struggling m/f then tell me what it is?

[gurujuan]

4 minutes ago, dorian gray said:

hahahahahahaha!

it is in no way, a new excuse whatsoever, it is fact!

the 2016 side was bought together to win promotion THEN! in a s**t or bust roll of the dice, it had 2 good years in it, and was then going over the hill.

with players not being sold (for whatever reasons) it limited future incomings, it was a ticking bomb.

IF you think the squad inherited by monk wasn't shockingly bad, and grossly unbalanced with only one competent attacker, a leaky defence in comparison to the previous five years, and a struggling m/f then tell me what it is?

Clearly the emphasis was on a short term assault at promotion, with recruitment geared towards that. 
Nobody could reasonably argue that the squad wasn’t in decline, it was. However, Bruce had that same squad performing at levels needed to sustain a challenge. To offset that decline, we’ve brought in players the calibre of, Iorfa, Borner, Luongo, Murphy and Wickham. Bullen, and indeed Monk himself, managed to get the club into the top three of the championship. Surely what has happened since Christmas casts doubt about Monk’s ability to take us forward? 

[dorian gray]

10 minutes ago, gurujuan said:

Or maybe our results give a clearer indication

i have pointed out in a post on here that there are a number of supporters who are willing to deny the truth in order to give themselves the ammunition to stab monk in the back, it's quite possible none more so than you.

because you want the ball tiptapping about about in our half, and on half way all day like it's some magic cure all for bad results, in the pretence of ball retention, when in fact it merely takes our defenders and threatens to shut them down by opposition forwards whilst struggling to control the ball in the most dangerous area of the field for us.

he is a professional football manager, you are a fan.

i am utterly certain he knows far more than you about football.

he took this shambolically unbalanced squad of ours and forced it into 3rd. place before his only forward went off with a long term injury, which has resulted in us falling away in scoring, (do you deny this?) and thus form, both you and i know that's not rocket science to see that, but admit it, it doesn't suit your agenda does it?

 

[Skyline]

We don't seem to have a game plan, ever.

 

Players just seem to do their own thing. no creativity, no flair.

 

Carlos first season was some of the best football i saw us play, then his second season to now we seem to have gone back into typical Wednesday mode.

[dorian gray]

2 minutes ago, gurujuan said:

Clearly the emphasis was on a short term assault at promotion, with recruitment geared towards that. 
Nobody could reasonably argue that the squad wasn’t in decline, it was. However, Bruce had that same squad performing at levels needed to sustain a challenge. To offset that decline, we’ve brought in players the calibre of, Iorfa, Borner, Luongo, Murphy and Wickham. Bullen, and indeed Monk himself, managed to get the club into the top three of the championship. Surely what has happened since Christmas casts doubt about Monk’s ability to take us forward? 

what has happened since Christmas is our only forward of any merit has had a long term injury, and you know it.

[dorian gray]

Just now, Skyline said:

We don't seem to have a game plan, ever.

 

Players just seem to do their own thing. no creativity, no flair.

 

Carlos first season was some of the best football i saw us play, then his second season to now we seem to have gone back into typical Wednesday mode.

remind me again, what we actually put in the trophy cabinet in that and the following two years?

i'll give you a clue, it's the same as now.

[Skyline]

39 minutes ago, dorian gray said:

remind me again, what we actually put in the trophy cabinet in that and the following two years?

i'll give you a clue, it's the same as now.

I have no idea what you are getting at here? Are you one of those really anti Carlos people?

 

I'm no Carlos number 1 fan boy, but the football we played in that first season was very entertaining and also saw us get to the Play off final.

 

What I'm trying to get at, is if we actually improved that team in the areas we needed and continued to play the same football, we would have been promoted.

Instead we decided to start making stupid signings, positions we did not need to strengthen (or the players were not the required type for that position). 

Carlos decided to go backwards and change our style of play. From that point on we've continued to go backwards.

 

I still don't see why a trophy in the cabinet has any resemblance.

What I do see, is we got to the play off final and now we're scrapping about at the bottom. 

[gurujuan]

59 minutes ago, dorian gray said:

i have pointed out in a post on here that there are a number of supporters who are willing to deny the truth in order to give themselves the ammunition to stab monk in the back, it's quite possible none more so than you.

because you want the ball tiptapping about about in our half, and on half way all day like it's some magic cure all for bad results, in the pretence of ball retention, when in fact it merely takes our defenders and threatens to shut them down by opposition forwards whilst struggling to control the ball in the most dangerous area of the field for us.

he is a professional football manager, you are a fan.

i am utterly certain he knows far more than you about football.

he took this shambolically unbalanced squad of ours and forced it into 3rd. place before his only forward went off with a long term injury, which has resulted in us falling away in scoring, (do you deny this?) and thus form, both you and i know that's not rocket science to see that, but admit it, it doesn't suit your agenda does it?

 

Bruce and Bullen also had this shambolic unbalanced squad showing that sort of form, but only Monk has overseen, what has been a total collapse in form. If you are seriously suggesting the loss of Fletcher was solely responsible for that collapse, then respectfully, you must be in some sort of denial. 
For a start, Fletcher was only absent for part of that period, and Monk was allowed to bring in an experienced replacement in Conor Wickham. Sure, if you lose your leading scorer, it’s going to have a negative impact, but by suggesting that his absence was the main reason for the disastrous form, is just fanciful. 

[DJMortimer]

5 minutes ago, gurujuan said:

Bruce and Bullen also had this shambolic unbalanced squad showing that sort of form, but only Monk has overseen, what has been a total collapse in form. If you are seriously suggesting the loss of Fletcher was solely responsible for that collapse, then respectfully, you must be in some sort of denial. 
For a start, Fletcher was only absent for part of that period, and Monk was allowed to bring in an experienced replacement in Conor Wickham. Sure, if you lose your leading scorer, it’s going to have a negative impact, but by suggesting that his absence was the main reason for the disastrous form, is just fanciful. 

 

It is silly to suggest that our recent slump was down to nothing more than Fletcher's absence, but the question remains; what has caused it? Such a dramatic and sustained change is unlikely to be no more than a consequence of Monk's body language, press conference comments, occasionally picking Odubajo, letting Bannan take set pieces or a disagreement with a player or two. 

 

And I'm not claiming I have any idea either. It's possible that the truth is a tangled web of many smaller issues that have come together at once rather than a single big cause.

[sonofbert2]

1 hour ago, gurujuan said:

Clearly the emphasis was on a short term assault at promotion, with recruitment geared towards that. 
Nobody could reasonably argue that the squad wasn’t in decline, it was. However, Bruce had that same squad performing at levels needed to sustain a challenge. To offset that decline, we’ve brought in players the calibre of, Iorfa, Borner, Luongo, Murphy and Wickham. Bullen, and indeed Monk himself, managed to get the club into the top three of the championship. Surely what has happened since Christmas casts doubt about Monk’s ability to take us forward? 

 

Something happened at Christmas behind the scenes that kicked off our decline.

 

Very similar to the row with Westwood the previous Christmas under Jos I think.

 

Hutchinson fuckedoff in January, Westwood not seen since either and there’s also FF who has played a bit part.

 

Fletcher seemed to be the man, been a lot fitter and stronger this year but obviously got a move lined up and doesn’t want to risk it.

 

Fox the same but carried on until the end without extending.

 

Only 2 players BB and KL left in the side last match from the team of 2016.

 

Kieran Lee was finished but his first half display against Swansea, and his general comeback deserves huge credit.

 

Bannan’s role is like his hair transplant, bit of a nearly man who’s convinced he’s not really bald.

 

Looks like Tom Lees is another one that still thinks Carlos is the boss.

 

It is very difficult for any new manager to take away working conditions that staff are used to.  I think DC has been soft in this respect and possibly undermined Jos.

 

Should be fit in or fuckoff

Edited July 7, 2020 by sonofbert2

[gurujuan]

Whoever the manager might be, and whatever division we may be in, we need a broader range of attacking options Our obsession with continuously looking for the big man, is far too limiting

[deano]

11 minutes ago, gurujuan said:

Whoever the manager might be, and whatever division we may be in, we need a broader range of attacking options Our obsession with continuously looking for the big man, is far too limiting

I'm afraid that maybe the limits of Monks tactical ability. Hope I'm wrong. 

Edited July 7, 2020 by deano

[deano]

6 minutes ago, Dagmeister's Shadow said:

If your best striker is a big man (by a distance) it's logical to play to this strength. I'd expect Monk would revise his tactics with different kinds of forwards at his disposal. 

Could be wrong but I think Monk has always played with a target man. I hope you're right though, Infact I wouldn't grumble if Monk wanted to play direct if it was successful. My concern is that his teams don't seem to have any clear identity, good managers always seem to have a clear way of playing, and get the best out of players they inherit. 

[gurujuan]

33 minutes ago, Dagmeister's Shadow said:

Bullen only had a few games. It's been stated by another poster that Bruce's tenure measures similar to monks over the same number of games when he first took over.

Come on Guru you know full well that Wickham was nowhere near fit before the break. Fletcher was a huge miss. This has been re-emphasised these past four games where missed chances have impacted on points accrued. Performances deserved better. The Hutch and Westwood issues will no doubt have had an impact in the squad but IMO the purge the squad which is now well underway simply had to be undertaken. He needs to be judged after a pre season and rebuilt squad and backup staff of his choosing.

Wickham wasn’t fit, which begs the question, why sign him? Also, let’s not forget that Fletcher was involved in 7 of those games, and contributed just one goal. No way does any of that explain why we have imploded

Edited July 7, 2020 by gurujuan

[gurujuan]

5 minutes ago, Dagmeister's Shadow said:

We were third before Christmas after which Fletcher picked up an injury. Been involved in just 6 league games subsequently. First one as a half time sub, second time got 28 minutes off the bench, third game 33 minutes off the bench as he continued to build up fitness. Started in next two games. came on as a sub for 5 minutes v Forest before going off injured. Not the sole reason but there is a correlation between his limited appearances and our dropping from 3rd place..

Re. Wickham I suspect that budget was a key factor so we took a punt on a subsidised loan. Given that he'd been on the bench for Palace a few times I was shocked to see his lack of fitness before the break. 

Me too, really shocked

[mcmigo]

30 minutes ago, Dagmeister's Shadow said:

We were third before Christmas after which Fletcher picked up an injury. Been involved in just 6 league games subsequently. First one as a half time sub, second time got 28 minutes off the bench, third game 33 minutes off the bench as he continued to build up fitness. Started in next two games. came on as a sub for 5 minutes v Forest before going off injured. Not the sole reason but there is a correlation between his limited appearances and our dropping from 3rd place..

Re. Wickham I suspect that budget was a key factor so we took a punt on a subsidised loan. Given that he'd been on the bench for Palace a few times I was shocked to see his lack of fitness before the break. 

Re fletcher this is absolutely spot on. If we get relegated this season, it will be much to do with fletcher walking out on June 30 when he knew we were in trouble with our striking options.

he is a disgrace/ 

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Dagmeister's Shadow said:

I'm sure we'll find out what Monk's preferred style is next season when he's overseen his own recruitment/rebuild and got his full and preferred back up team with him.

I'm reserving judgement until then.

 

I am no Monk fan and I certainly don't trust him to overhaul our squad. You would expect a decent manager to play his style or at least try to imprint his way of playing from the start and if you are suggesting that he's going change after being in the job for 3/4 of a season then more fool you. Most know how Pep, Klopp, Jose, Wilder, Warnock, Bruce, Bielsa etc are going to play when they take over a team, that is their style and the way they do things. Monk likes a target man and he likes "direct"(sic Hoofball) football. 

[Inspector Lestrade]

Were any of us convinced when we were third that we would stay there?  We never looked the part even though, I never expected us to drop as far as we have.

 

A very big rebuilding phase coming up which will dictate the direction of the next three years at least.

 

Prepared to see what Monk can do in the market but not holding out much hope.  

 

Last time I was this pessimistic about a Manager, was when Wilkinson signed, so what do I know?