Chansiri - The players are to blame. "On the pitch the manager can't do anything"

[mogbad]

Without a doubt our players are inconsistent & make mistakes but that can be said of most players at our level.
 

Those mistakes & inconsitencies become more frequent when players are asked to perform in roles & positions they're either not familiar with or comfortable with. Mistakes & inconsistencies will also occur when players don't fully understand or agree with the tactics & game plan they've been asked to use.

 

Therefore if we have players who are being played out of position to tactics they're not confidant with they're going to make even more mistakes which in turn affects confidence & causes even more mistakes.

 

So in short for DC to say that the manager can't affect what happens on the pitch is completes & utter ********.

[Elderly Owl]

57 minutes ago, LondonOwl313 said:

Totally the managers fault.. he picks the team and the tactics and is free to make changes to both in between games and during them as well.

 

If the players aren’t performing they shouldn’t be selected. You can make the argument we don’t have any good enough but I find that hard to believe. Particularly when the same things happen with different groups of players last season and this.

No. The Manager picks the team and the tactics, but if the players don’t play well it is not within his power to change what is happening in the pitch. Yes he can sub, but if the team as a whole are not up to it. or the opposition prevents the tactics from being effective, then there is little he can do. He is limited then by the quality within the squad to vary the tactics and create a winning situation based on their own skills and experience.

Sacking the manager doesn’t help. Change is no substitute for effective teamwork. Bruce admitted it would take more than a couple of transfer windows- and he brought Premier League players with him on loan. Monk has no such options, but has had a shocking run of injuries - well beyond his power to change, especially on the day.

we should support Garry Monk. He has the one of the most difficult jobs in football.

 

[Gob_Bluth]

Good managers know how to get players to run through walls for them which is 100% the manager making a difference on the pitch.

 

It might not result in wins all the time but having everyone onside and buying into what the manager is saying makes all the difference

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[@owlstalk]

 

It's a strange one this

Honestly?

 

I yo-yo between IT'S THE MANAGER - OF COURSE IT'S THE MANAGER!! then I swing to "Hang on the players aren't good enough even if we had an amazing manager who got them to run through brick walls for him - which is the Chairman/recruitment teams fault" right through to "The players MIGHT be good enough but just not trying hard enough" right back to the first point again and round and round

I just can't decide!

Maybe it's ALL of those...

[OwlerIT]

Manager has big influence. He draws the players out of the hat and decides to drop Windass to the bench against Wycombe and carry on with the currently out of form a Marriot. 
Could go on about square pegs in round holes e.g switching the wing backs around etc.

 

[sherlyegg]

1 hour ago, Spondon Owl said:

I think you don't like Chansiri. 

Not sure why, DC is basically saying the same as @owlstalk it's the players fault not monk's..

No doubt he will do switch anytime soon, he usually does..

[@owlstalk]

1 minute ago, sherlyegg said:

Not sure why, DC is basically saying the same as @owlstalk it's the players fault not monk's..

Exactly!

 

 

[S36 OWL]

1 hour ago, @owlstalk said:

 

 

Debate the topic - Chansiri says the manager can't do anything and that the players aren't good/consistent enough

Do you agree?

I've not expressed a view on Chansiri either way

 

Which begs the question, if they arnt good enough, who actually signed them? 

[A E Neuman NYowl]

I think this is where DC gets it totally wrong.

 

He seems prepared to pay out for players in the belief that the more you pay the better player you get.

 

Other than for Bruce and his staff he has not put together a strong management and backroom team, thinking that the players on their own will get you the results.

 

Unless he changes his thoughts in th future I think we will struggle.

Edited November 5, 2020 by A E Neuman NYowl
Sp

[@owlstalk]

Just now, A E Neuman NYowl said:

I think this is DC gets it totally wrong.

 

He seems prepared to pay out for players in the belief that the more you pay the better player you get.

 

And we all know who’s been telling him THAT one

[McRightSide]

One of the most common things I've read on here is how we need to look at the players and stop blaming the manager, up until last week that was pretty much the party line. 

[Spondon Owl]

6 minutes ago, McRightSide said:

One of the most common things I've read on here is how we need to look at the players and stop blaming the manager, up until last week that was pretty much the party line. 

Whos party? Democrats or Republicans.. ? It's that blooming polarized on here might as well be those clowns over the pond.

[@owlstalk]

1 minute ago, Spondon Owl said:

Whos party? Democrats or Republicans.. ? It's that blooming polarized on here might as well be those clowns over the pond.

 

 

There's people of all persuasions posting - all kinds of opinions

 

You're seeing what you want to see

There are some who think Chansiri  is to blame for everything that happens, some that are convinced it's Garry Monk and some like myself sat in the middle posting in a neutral way

 

All opinions 

[Spondon Owl]

2 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:

 

 

There's people of all persuasions posting - all kinds of opinions

 

You're seeing what you want to see

There are some who think Chansiri  is to blame for everything that happens, some that are convinced it's Garry Monk and some like myself sat in the middle posting in a neutral way

 

All opinions 

There are but I think people in general appear more polarized on topics than ever before. I blame social media. It sends people into a tizz over really minor things.

[Guest LondonOwl313]

2 hours ago, bdmfournil said:

Carlos, Bullen, Bruce, Jos and Monk have been unable to get the players performing on a consistent basis.

Does that mean they are all crap or we have probably got mentally weak players who lose concentration at

certain points in nearly every game

I’d say Carlos was pretty consistent.. you don’t finish 4th and 6th without consistency. Similarly for Bruce we lost 4 from 23 second half of the season I think.. that’s quite consistent too

[Guest LondonOwl313]

1 hour ago, Elderly Owl said:

No. The Manager picks the team and the tactics, but if the players don’t play well it is not within his power to change what is happening in the pitch. Yes he can sub, but if the team as a whole are not up to it. or the opposition prevents the tactics from being effective, then there is little he can do. He is limited then by the quality within the squad to vary the tactics and create a winning situation based on their own skills and experience.

Sacking the manager doesn’t help. Change is no substitute for effective teamwork. Bruce admitted it would take more than a couple of transfer windows- and he brought Premier League players with him on loan. Monk has no such options, but has had a shocking run of injuries - well beyond his power to change, especially on the day.

we should support Garry Monk. He has the one of the most difficult jobs in football.

 

That maybe be true for one off games, once he’s picked his team and done the work in training his options during the game revolve around making subs and shouting instructions from the sidelines. But over a period of time it’s totally within his control.. he picks who starts most weeks. For example, he’s the one who decided Westwood and Hutchinson weren’t good enough but that Dawson and Pelupessy are good enough to be involved most games (and start in the case of the former). When it’s obvious they don’t perform he should drop them and replace them but he doesn’t. He’s not doing his job properly.

 

Since Bruce made those comments we’ve had 3 transfer windows and the squad has gone downhill since. Some of that is Chansiri’s fault but it’s not like backing has been zero, it’s been at a level which should enable a mid table finish, not bottom 3 as the last 33 games have been. It’s also a bit of a stretch to call Aarons and Lazaar premier league players as Bruce himself hasn’t even included them in their 25 man squad over the last two seasons

[Guest]

3 hours ago, @owlstalk said:

Today Chansiri said this about not sacking Monk

 

"It’s easy to sack the manager but sometimes it is not 100 per cent the manager’s fault.

For me on the pitch, it is more the fault of the players.

On the pitch, the manager can’t do anything"

Something that a few people agree with and post on a regular basis 

I've never really agreed 100% with that and feel that managers can definitely influence what goes on during games, but I'm not 100% confident in that view EITHER

What do you think? 

Can a manager do something about it if its going wrong on the pitch?

What about the time between games?

What about the initial tactics, team selection too?

Or is it the case that the players (as Chansiri has said today) just aren't good enough?

 

Not sure he said they were not good enough, otherwise I doubt he would have the play-offs in his mind, More that they are not performing on the pitch.

 

If he watches every game we play he will surely see players being played out of position, long-ball tactics without a target man and sticking to a formation that hasn't really worked.

 

In terms of time between games, it is the same for every team and every manager, few have a record as bad a we have under Monk under the same time period. In terms of changing things during games, his substitutions often raise more eyebrows than solve problems and often fail to have a positive impact. 

 

Yes the players are also responsible for not performing to the best of their ability but the manager has a job to play an effective tactical approach that makes the team better than the sum of its parts. Monk has failed to do that. 

Edited November 5, 2020 by Guest

[flash]

Would Bruce or someone like Cook get more out of these players = Yes = Monks fault 

[ameylamps]

3 hours ago, @owlstalk said:

 

 

Debate the topic - Chansiri says the manager can't do anything and that the players aren't good/consistent enough

Do you agree?

I've not expressed a view on Chansiri either way

Anyone that's listened to undr the cosh knows that players absolutely nail managers when they don't get on with them. I think a manager can do so much but if the players aren't having the manager he cannot do anything. It's easier to get a new man in that replace the entire squad.

[@owlstalk]

Just now, ameylamps said:

Anyone that's listened to undr the cosh knows that players absolutely nail managers when they don't get on with them. 

That podcast is fantastic!

 

Some properly interesting player stories on that!