Garry Monk post match reaction - "We controlled the game"

[Emerson Thome]

4 hours ago, RUMBELOWS91 said:

Overall, it was awful. One positive is the problem with the first 75 minutes was glaringly obvious- we had two players up front who hadn't a clue how to play the role. Utterly bemused by this, but it's an easy fix, as we saw in the last 15 mins. Rhodes isnt the striker he was, and Windass isn't match fit, hut just the fact they know where to be and what to do improved us no end- as did Brown playing inbetween the lines behind them.

 

So, I'd link to think (if he didn't know before) Monk now knows how urgent it is to get another out and out striker in, other than Rhodes. 

 

Other positives.. 

Brown (as previously mentioned) will be a threat played in the correct position, but will we be brave enough to play him.behind two forwards? I'm hoping Kachunga's much talked about work rate will allow us to do this, or Windass's ability to also drop deep and support the midfield.

 

Penney's willingness to deliver an early ball is surely what Rhodes needs if they're both to be given a chance.

 

Dawson looked assured- hopefully the new keeper coach is having an impact. In front of him the back three looked solid defensively but we'll never make a real success off this system with someone as weak as Tom Lees is on the ball playing in there regularly 

 

Thought the midfield three of Luongo, Bannan and Fiz were poor today. More to come from all three of them.

 

Reach was poor and In struggling to find a place for him in the side. 

 

Odubajo did ok, but his decision making in both halves of the pitch is so poor.

 

In summary, we must find a striker this week, or Monk needs to back Rhodes and play to his strengths- early balls into the box from wide 

 

Just give it up. Rhodes is a busted flush. There's no room for any further excuses. No matter the number of early balls that Penney puts in, or anyone else. In modern football you can't afford to carry a passenger who does nothing apart from when he's in the opposition box. Because if you're only playing with 10 men its very hard to get the ball in the opposition box. Hard to think of another player at his level or higher who offers so little in build-up play.

[Owl999]

11 hours ago, Emilianenko said:

Expected better from a North Country Boy

Love the banter your having “ one to another “ .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Dizzys Dad]

9 hours ago, 4evaowl said:

Couldn't agree more.

I'm astounded that he thinks that game had any positives in it other than Penny's 30 mins.

 

The other day he said the players were ready. That didn't show up at all.

 

If he'd come out and said it was an awful game (both sides) we were well below what he expected or wanted, there's lots to improve on but a win us a win and it's the first game, then I'd have had more respect for him. Those post match comments insult our intelligence.

 

They don’t insult the intelligence of many posters on here, unfortunately.

That would be nigh on impossible.

 

[debram]

9 hours ago, prowl said:

I seems to remember the fans kicking up a stink because we'd not got a manager appointed.

 

I do take your point though. Does it also apply to out search for a centre forward, is it better to sign the best we can get now or wait until possibly next summer before we get the right one.

Tough one to call, we're desperate for a quality striker but i say battle on with what we have and wait to get the right fit for us, obviously money is key, when does Rhodes contract end and would that free up some much needed cash. 

[sheffielddart]

So, like most Championship clubs we don’t put full first choice starting XI on pitch in 1st round of league cup.

 

Game is awful (It is the 1st round of the league cup, which usually throws up 9 goal thrillers) but we get through on penalties.

 

Manager happy that we won and pleased that players at least looked like they knew each other after a just couple of weeks together following a full squad overhaul.

Personally neither pleased nor disappointed with the performance, with where we are in terms of squad building it was what it was. At least we won and a few more weeks of less than scintillating performances would seem likely, let’s hope we can scrape some wins as they gel.  

 

[gurujuan]

10 minutes ago, debram said:

Tough one to call, we're desperate for a quality striker but i say battle on with what we have and wait to get the right fit for us, obviously money is key, when does Rhodes contract end and would that free up some much needed cash. 

Monk says he’s not considering selling Reach or Rhodes at the moment. Maybe he thinks he can ill afford to let anyone go from his squad at the moment, but why keep them around if you are unlikely to use them. Then there is the money issue, even if we can get them out on subsidised loans, that will free up some space wages wise. Anyway, it appears we do have money to spend, and Monk is supposedly looking to bring in another three strikers, one of which will almost certainly be a loan. What I don’t understand is, if we are being patient about the target man we want, fair enough, but why not bring in his understudy? A target man is so integral to the way we play, we will obviously need back up to our first choice centre forward. So if we bring in the understudy now, he will not only gain valuable experience, but will help us to set up in the right shape so we can play in the way we want to play. If we don’t want Hirst, for whatever reason, then look for another young striker from a Premier League clubs development system. Personally I think Hirst would be an excellent fit to understudy a more experienced centre forward, but I’m not getting hung up on him, there will be others out there. By bringing in a youngster now, it buys us time to continue our search, while not dropping points because our shape is all wrong. A young target man, with the more experienced Windass or Kachunga alongside, would at least give us a focal point, and we wouldn’t need to resort to daft experiments like we saw yesterday We just need to get on with it

[jonesy87shef]

I’m just a bit disappointed that he’s talking the same old boll*cks.

 

How he or anyone can be pleased with that performance is beyond me.

 

Said the mighty Walsall 2 leagues below are ahead of us for minutes. They haven’t played a competitive game in 6 months!  

 

I agree we controlled the passing round defence then often hitting it long. Playing arguably our best and most creative player with his back go goal. 

 

We defended well because Walsall offered nothing. It’s not like we had to defend. I don’t think it’s down to our shape, positing and pressing. I think it’s that somehow they were worst than us and haven’t played s proper game in half a year. 

 

We didn't finish off the good positions we got into. It was dire. I’d love to see our expected goals from that shower of sh*t. Our fans and now manager seem to think shots (of which we had few are all golden opportunities). Unless he means situations like having the call out wide, not beating a man or putting in an under par cross. 

 

It’s just waffle and the same what he said last season.

 

Yes it’s a cup game and doesn’t particularly matter, but I wanted to see signs of improvement, of a system and of a plan. That wasn’t there. What have we been working on pre season except Iorfa going into their half to challenge for flick ons from our goal kick.

 

It was dire. I don’t expect world beaters or a miricle, but I do expect some sort of idea how to play and to try and create a couple of chances against a team who hasn’t played in forever 2 divisions below. 

 

I always want us to win, but today the performance was more important than a win for me to have any enthusiasm and change my opinion of Monk for the forthcoming season.

[@owlstalk]

23 minutes ago, jonesy87shef said:

I’m just a bit disappointed that he’s talking the same old boll*cks.

 

How he or anyone can be pleased with that performance is beyond me.

 

Said the mighty Walsall 2 leagues below are ahead of us for minutes. They haven’t played a competitive game in 6 months!  

 

I agree we controlled the passing round defence then often hitting it long. Playing arguably our best and most creative player with his back go goal. 

 

We defended well because Walsall offered nothing. It’s not like we had to defend. I don’t think it’s down to our shape, positing and pressing. I think it’s that somehow they were worst than us and haven’t played s proper game in half a year. 

 

We didn't finish off the good positions we got into. It was dire. I’d love to see our expected goals from that shower of sh*t. Our fans and now manager seem to think shots (of which we had few are all golden opportunities). Unless he means situations like having the call out wide, not beating a man or putting in an under par cross. 

 

It’s just waffle and the same what he said last season.

 

Yes it’s a cup game and doesn’t particularly matter, but I wanted to see signs of improvement, of a system and of a plan. That wasn’t there. What have we been working on pre season except Iorfa going into their half to challenge for flick ons from our goal kick.

 

It was dire. I don’t expect world beaters or a miricle, but I do expect some sort of idea how to play and to try and create a couple of chances against a team who hasn’t played in forever 2 divisions below. 

 

I always want us to win, but today the performance was more important than a win for me to have any enthusiasm and change my opinion of Monk for the forthcoming season.

 

 

 

 

This post is just further proof that Monk critics/haters just see what they want to see 

[bradowl]

14 hours ago, agentwalker said:

If controlling the game involves passing it across the back 3 for several minutes at a time then yes well played monk, executed to perfection.

That's what controlling game is, this is what Man City do most games, big difference is they've got Sterling and co up top. 

 

Defensively we were comfortable, Walsall produced very little going forward, we controlled midfield for long periods but gave ball away cheaply on a number of occasions with poor passing. 

Up top we had very little which needs sorting ASAP. 

[jonesy87shef]

2 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:

 

 

 

 

This post is just further proof that Monk critics/haters just see what they want to see 

 

Well it’s not is it. I posted in a thread the other day I wanted to give him a clean slate and see improvement.

 

I posted yesterday positives. Especially Brown, Penny, Fizz etc.

 

It was clear however he made mistakes pre kick off with lineups and positions. Then clear that the players don’t seem to know how to build an attack.

 

Like another poster said, if he came out and mentioned a couple of positives but also said we weren’t good enough and need to improve. Personally I can respect that, instead he came out with the same waffle and sound bites he always does that aren’t true.

 

You defend him all you want. Sons of your defensive is very justified, but honestly I think you can look a tad silly when you go overboard and refuse to criticise some indefensible decisions. You’ve managed to criticise Reach in one thread. Just be a little more honest about Monk too.

[gurujuan]

1 minute ago, bradowl said:

That's what controlling game is, this is what Man City do most games, big difference is they've got Sterling and co up top. 

 

Defensively we were comfortable, Walsall produced very little going forward, we controlled midfield for long periods but gave ball away cheaply on a number of occasions with poor passing. 

Up top we had very little which needs sorting ASAP. 

Actually I was thinking, what would Man City do in our situation, without a recognised striker? Then I remembered, it happened on a couple of occasions. They just did what they normally did, kept the ball, worked the triangles until they got a non striker in for a tap in. Now we’re no Man City, but compared to Walsall, the talent we had, particularly in midfield, we should have been Man Cityesque. Basically, we had five midfield players who are all comfortable on the ball, and the tactics should have been, to keep the ball and play our way around them. That would have been us controlling the game. Bizarrely though, Monk’s tactics were to regularly bypass the midfield and hit it up to Reach and Brown, as if we were still looking for Fletcher and Nuhiu. That’s poor, very poor in my book, and perhaps one of the reasons that many supporters can’t take this manager seriously

[Beighton Owl 87]

Walsall have had a longer pre season then us with plenty of games. We have played one game in six weeks with a much shorter pre season. Everyone knows this but would rather ignore the facts and use Monk's comments to have another dig. Let's get behind the team shall we. Gonna be hard enough season as it is without all the negativity. 

[@owlstalk]

16 minutes ago, jonesy87shef said:

 

Well it’s not is it. I posted in a thread the other day I wanted to give him a clean slate and see improvement.

Then immediately after just the first game you're showing that's simply not the case

 

 

[daveyboy66]

6 minutes ago, A12owl said:

And Monk fans like yourself cannot accept that he does anything wrong. 

It's all about opinions. 

One side will be proved right one day. 

It's not that he hasn't done anything wrong though is it ? He's not going anywhere and he's trying to transition the team using younger players with pace...you know things that posters on here having been shouting the club to do over the last two years. Personally I'm quite happy to wait and see if he succeeds if the players are giving their all...but there again I'm not concerned about being right on social media 

[gurujuan]

Basically we all want Monk to be a success, but until he is, you are always going to get these polarised opinions. Taking his post match comments at face value, was he right to say we controlled the game? 
Well again, that’s debatable, meaning it’s fine to debate it. Stats suggest we had sufficiently more possession for someone to conclude that, but if you watched the game, you could come to a different conclusion. We never really suppressed them, and for all of our possession, we never really created much. The truth is, with our midfield options, the least that was expected was for us to have more possession, but as for controlling the game no. We were never in a position where we could dictate the game, save for a 15 minute spell after Penney had come on. When you control a game, you control the tempo, and we didn’t do that

[SwellOwl]

You can’t make conclusions on the fresh start on a game that, let’s be honest, many clubs saw as another pre season game.

 

No one should be under the illusion that this will take time. Yes the match was crap but we had good spells and squad is not complete yet. Every SWFC fan should by now have the patience of a saint. Just need to wait some more.

[@owlstalk]

17 minutes ago, A12owl said:

And Monk fans like yourself cannot accept that he does anything wrong. 

Again - people seeing what they want to see

I've never suggested Monk has done nothing wrong

What I HAVE done however is taken a mature, balanced sensible view of the situation and not just collapsed into a crying emotional wreck after just ONE cup game

[4evaowl]

I hope as genuine supporters of the club that people would call the game as they see it, rather than from a position of being pro Monk or anti-Monk.

 

As a one off game I thought it was dreadful from Wednesday and have been inundated with texts from my work colleagues up and down the country who know I’m a Wednesdayite saying how poor we were.

 

However, some on here saw it differently. That’s what a fans forum is likely to throw up.

 

What becomes the more interesting debate is what’s the future likely to be like with Monk in charge. I don’t think a manager who has been here a year gets a free hit just because it’s a new season-he does carry forward his record (early days decent, latterly poor) with him. However, I’m prepared to give him games this year to see how he goes with his backroom team.DC has made that choice anyway, regardless of what I think.

 

In the meantime, if we play we’ll I’ll say so; if we don’t, I wont.

 

[@owlstalk]

4 minutes ago, A12owl said:

 you seem to object to anyone criticising Monk but don't accept anyone pointing out your total faith in him.  

 

That's because they don't say 'you seem to have faith in him' but instead try to lie and say things like  'you cannot accept he's done anything wrong'

 

Stick to facts and I'm fine

Start lying and I'm not

Simple really 

[@owlstalk]

Just now, 4evaowl said:

I hope as genuine supporters of the club that people would call the game as they see it, rather than from a position of being pro Monk or anti-Monk.

 

As a one off game I thought it was dreadful from Wednesday and have been inundated with texts from my work colleagues up and down the country who know I’m a Wednesdayite saying how poor we were.

 

However, some on here saw it differently. That’s what a fans forum is likely to throw up.

 

What becomes the more interesting debate is what’s the future likely to be like with Monk in charge. I don’t think a manager who has been here a year gets a free hit just because it’s a new season-he does carry forward his record (early days decent, latterly poor) with him. However, I’m prepared to give him games this year to see how he goes with his backroom team.DC has made that choice anyway, regardless of what I think.

 

In the meantime, if we play we’ll I’ll say so; if we don’t, I wont.

 

 

That's fair enough and fair!