Russell Martin

[Tommy Mulgrew]

16 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

What does make me chuckle is the amount of shit he gets for breaking a settled back 4. 

That settled back 4 conceded 3 against Huddersfield at St Mary's, 3 at Bristol City, 0 at WBA, and 2 at home to Hull, averaging 2 per game. Maybe that's why he changed it, because we were doing pretty shit with that amazingly settled, highly talented back 4.

Which is why I and several others have consistently called him out for insisting that our FBs, especially Manning, play close to the middle of the pitch instead of marking their wingers and closing the latter down thus preventing unhurried crosses onto our penalty area.

[Chez]

1 hour ago, saintstowin said:

The players appear not coached to be aggressive and to have the correct/normal degree of urgency in defence, it's like the coolness on the ball permeates into coolness off it. 

This isn't down to poor coaching by RM in my opinion, it's due to the players we have at the club. The likes of Charles, Smallbone, Sulemana, Edozie, Brooks, Amstrong, Manning...the list goes on...are all fine with the ball (and need to be to play a possession based game), but without it, they are just not very good. They don't work hard enough, run hard enough, tackle hard enough, fight hard enough. 

[Weston Super Saint]

4 minutes ago, Chez said:

This isn't down to poor coaching by RM in my opinion, it's due to the players we have at the club. The likes of Charles, Smallbone, Sulemana, Edozie, Brooks, Amstrong, Manning...the list goes on...are all fine with the ball (and need to be to play a possession based game), but without it, they are just not very good. They don't work hard enough, run hard enough, tackle hard enough, fight hard enough. 

And you don't think the "coaching" staff have any possible way of influencing this?

[Chez]

1 hour ago, sandwichsaint said:

We must have won 'best squad', I read it on here a dozen times a day. Interesting to see how many players will get into the team of the year? Probably KWP and maybe Arma or Downes? THB seems to have gone a little bit under the radar in the wider scheme of things.

Not sure about keeper and centre backs, but suspect team of the year won't be far off this:

O'Leary
KWP Rodon Faes Leif
Dewsbury-Hall Winks O'Hare
Summerville Armstrong Mavadidi

 

 

[Chez]

7 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

And you don't think the "coaching" staff have any possible way of influencing this?

no I don't. Players either have that in them or they don't.

Smallbone is 24. He ain't suddenly going to become Barry Horne in the tackle because we have a change in manager. 

[Galway saint]

1 hour ago, Chez said:

This isn't down to poor coaching by RM in my opinion, it's due to the players we have at the club. The likes of Charles, Smallbone, Sulemana, Edozie, Brooks, Amstrong, Manning...the list goes on...are all fine with the ball (and need to be to play a possession based game), but without it, they are just not very good. They don't work hard enough, run hard enough, tackle hard enough, fight hard enough. 

we aren’t good enough without the ball.

whether that’s the players or the coaching I don’t know but all season the midfield balance hasn’t felt right and I think that’s as much the formation as anything.

I know he’s not great on the ball but we have tended to look more compact when charles has played.

as for the stephen’s libero role wtf is that about 

[Jonnyboy]

3 hours ago, Farmer Saint said:

I'm not dissolving him of all blame, but conversely he is also not completely to blame for us being behind 2 teams with better players and Ipswich who clearly have a very, very good manager. 

As said, if we had a better keeper and striker we'd probably be top. We'd have beaten Millwall, Rotherham, Boro, Ipswich the other day just off the top of my head, so what is that, an extra 10 points? 

What does make me chuckle is the amount of shit he gets for breaking a settled back 4. 

That settled back 4 conceded 3 against Huddersfield at St Mary's, 3 at Bristol City, 0 at WBA, and 2 at home to Hull, averaging 2 per game. Maybe that's why he changed it, because we were doing pretty shit with that amazingly settled, highly talented back 4.

Wasn't that when Downes was out?

[Saint_clark]

2 hours ago, Chez said:

Not sure about keeper and centre backs, but suspect team of the year won't be far off this:

O'Leary
KWP Rodon Faes Leif
Dewsbury-Hall Winks O'Hare
Summerville Armstrong Mavadidi

 

 

Not a chance in hell Szmodics isn't in there. 

[Roger]

3 hours ago, Jonnyboy said:

Wasn't that when Downes was out?

Yep it was and other than Bristol away when Charles was taken off at 0/0 and he played vs West Brom clean sheet then was dropped so no number 6 infront of them.

[Weston Super Saint]

8 hours ago, Chez said:

no I don't. Players either have that in them or they don't.

Smallbone is 24. He ain't suddenly going to become Barry Horne in the tackle because we have a change in manager. 

Jesus wept.

Might as well sack the coaching team and save a few quid then, apparently there is no point having them.

[Wade Garrett]

9 hours ago, Galway saint said:

we aren’t good enough without the ball.

whether that’s the players or the coaching I don’t know but all season the midfield balance hasn’t felt right and I think that’s as much the formation as anything.

I know he’s not great on the ball but we have tended to look more compact when charles has played.

as for the stephen’s libero role wtf is that about 

The set-up is a real head-scratcher.  To me, it looks like 4-3-3 so why do we rely on our wingers to close their wingers down?  Our full-backs, when defending, always seem to be tucked inside.

The formation and tactics are a fucking absolute abortion.  A Russ and Rasmus vanity project.  They need to both be relieved of their duties.

Unfortunately, Dragan seems to be asleep at the rudder.

[Saint86]

14 hours ago, Chez said:

This isn't down to poor coaching by RM in my opinion, it's due to the players we have at the club. The likes of Charles, Smallbone, Sulemana, Edozie, Brooks, Amstrong, Manning...the list goes on...are all fine with the ball (and need to be to play a possession based game), but without it, they are just not very good. They don't work hard enough, run hard enough, tackle hard enough, fight hard enough. 

Partially agree with this, but also think its a bit harsh / too simplistic. We've signed a lot of youngsters or technically skilful players in recent seasons - and as yet they don't have the fight to get stuck in to the nitty gritty of this league - i can't recall who it was we played a month or so ago, but one of their players absolutely booted Edozie early on and he was in his shell for the rest of the game.

As for stopping teams playing through us, we need two defensively good CMs to play the way we want to play - Its about balance and i really don't think its rocket science to be a bit less open tbh. We seem to go from passing it around our backline for fun, to then having no one sitting in the middle 3rd / covering outside the box when an attack fizzles out, allowing a break. Hoping it gets sorted by the playoffs for obvious reasons.

Flynn Downes is class for this level, a real rolls royce of a Championship player imho. From a balance perspective, Smallbone is okay alongside him (provided he is tasked with remaining defensively aware - which isn't always the case, and causes issues when he isn't), and Charles would be okay as well but barely gets to play in this scenario.... What i'd love is a Wanyama style player to be the anchor, and Downes to sit alongside as  CM. Sadly what tends to happen, is that time and time again we play only one player operating in a CM or CDM role (i.e. we overcommit on attacks a lot) and then wonder why a mix of 5 strikers, wingers, CAMs don't defend / win the ball back well. Maybe it doesn't need to be a dedicated CM/CDM player (i.e. Aribo adds a lot of strength and ball retention in the middle third), but we simply have to retain that cover in CM when we're attacking... Otherwise its a knife through butter on the counter every time - The oppo spray one ball into their own unmarked central players, who then picks a pass over the top or out to the wingers, and they're away, whilst we've got the majority of our outfield players over committed.

Edited April 4 by Saint86

[VectisSaint]

11 hours ago, Farmer Saint said:

I'm not dissolving him of all blame, but conversely he is also not completely to blame for us being behind 2 teams with better players and Ipswich who clearly have a very, very good manager. 

As said, if we had a better keeper and striker we'd probably be top. We'd have beaten Millwall, Rotherham, Boro, Ipswich the other day just off the top of my head, so what is that, an extra 10 points? 

What does make me chuckle is the amount of shit he gets for breaking a settled back 4. 

That settled back 4 conceded 3 against Huddersfield at St Mary's, 3 at Bristol City, 0 at WBA, and 2 at home to Hull, averaging 2 per game. Maybe that's why he changed it, because we were doing pretty shit with that amazingly settled, highly talented back 4.

The defensive problems started not with unsettling the back 4, but losing Flynn Downes to injury. So many people think 'defence' means the back 4, it doesn't, at the very least you have to consider the DM. When Downes went off injured against Huddersfield it was 0-0 (and we were playing with our so called settled back 4). Within minutes we conceded and then a second. We went 3-1 down in the 2nd half before we made an excellent recovery tom win 5-3. The damage was done though. Teams saw that we were very fragile at the back without the shield of Downes.and that was exploited over the next few games. In the end Downes came back of course, but our confidence had been destroyed and oppositions could see our weaknesses. Coupled with that we have had other injuries (KWP) and Manning has been exposed as a poor defender and Martin/Calderwood have found it hard to get that consistency back. It is nothing to do with shoehorning Stephens in (we beat WBA 2-0 when he was in, probably one of our best defensive displays). To be honest the loss to Ipswich was not a problem defensively, we coped very well against the best attacking side in the Division, it was down to a stinking performance by our keeper and getting  Bree harshly sent off. 

[Turkish]

41 minutes ago, VectisSaint said:

The defensive problems started not with unsettling the back 4, but losing Flynn Downes to injury. So many people think 'defence' means the back 4, it doesn't, at the very least you have to consider the DM. When Downes went off injured against Huddersfield it was 0-0 (and we were playing with our so called settled back 4). Within minutes we conceded and then a second. We went 3-1 down in the 2nd half before we made an excellent recovery tom win 5-3. The damage was done though. Teams saw that we were very fragile at the back without the shield of Downes.and that was exploited over the next few games. In the end Downes came back of course, but our confidence had been destroyed and oppositions could see our weaknesses. Coupled with that we have had other injuries (KWP) and Manning has been exposed as a poor defender and Martin/Calderwood have found it hard to get that consistency back. It is nothing to do with shoehorning Stephens in (we beat WBA 2-0 when he was in, probably one of our best defensive displays). To be honest the loss to Ipswich was not a problem defensively, we coped very well against the best attacking side in the Division, it was down to a stinking performance by our keeper and getting  Bree harshly sent off. 

you keep blaming this. Bree was sent off with 5 minutes left plus 7 minutes of injury time. We conceded in the last seconds of that due to our inept defending where a player could miss the ball, fall over in the penalty area and still recover to get a tame shot in whilst 4 players stood there watching. That's was zip all to do with Bree being sent off it was shocking defending. Like the first goal where Bree sliced his clearance then lost his man, shit goalkeeping too. Then there was the second one where an Ipswich player is completely unmarked in the penalty area to score. 3 pieces of U10s defending and 3 goals. You can blame Baz as well as his part in it was shite too but for all three goals the Ipswich players shouldn't even be able to get shots away like they did. Losing had zip all to do with Bree being sent off it had  everything to do with poor defending and goalkeeping

Edited April 4 by Turkish

[Whitey Grandad]

1 hour ago, Turkish said:

you keep blaming this. Bree was sent off with 5 minutes left plus 7 minutes of injury time. We conceded in the last seconds of that due to our inept defending where a player could miss the ball, fall over in the penalty area and still recover to get a tame shot in whilst 4 players stood there watching. That's was zip all to do with Bree being sent off it was shocking defending. Like the first goal where Bree sliced his clearance then lost his man, shit goalkeeping too. Then there was the second one where an Ipswich player is completely unmarked in the penalty area to score. 3 pieces of U10s defending and 3 goals. You can blame Baz as well as his part in it was shite too but for all three goals the Ipswich players shouldn't even be able to get shots away like they did. Losing had zip all to do with Bree being sent off it had  everything to do with poor defending and goalkeeping

Agreed.

They don’t close down players quickly enough. They don’t run at them. They just stand off, turn on sideways and hope that the ball doesn’t hurt them too much if it hits them. A common factor in most of the goals that we concede is the amount of space and time that we concede. If a player is ruched then he is more likely to make a poor shot.

Ipswich’s second goal took a slight touch of the inside of Harwood-Bellis’s right leg on its way to beating Baz’s outstretched fingers. If HB had been closer to the attacker then he might have got in a proper block.

Get in their faces FFS

[VectisSaint]

1 hour ago, Turkish said:

you keep blaming this. Bree was sent off with 5 minutes left plus 7 minutes of injury time. We conceded in the last seconds of that due to our inept defending where a player could miss the ball, fall over in the penalty area and still recover to get a tame shot in whilst 4 players stood there watching. That's was zip all to do with Bree being sent off it was shocking defending. Like the first goal where Bree sliced his clearance then lost his man, shit goalkeeping too. Then there was the second one where an Ipswich player is completely unmarked in the penalty area to score. 3 pieces of U10s defending and 3 goals. You can blame Baz as well as his part in it was shite too but for all three goals the Ipswich players shouldn't even be able to get shots away like they did. Losing had zip all to do with Bree being sent off it had  everything to do with poor defending and goalkeeping

The 3rd goal, which was the one that caused us to lose the game (as opposed to drawing) was due to defensive disorganisation following Bree's sending off, including being a man (defender) short. The root cause of that goal was actually piss poor play by our attackers who only needed to hold the ball up, you know play  a little Russball but gave it away needlessly and cheaply and allowed Ipswich to break.

The first goal was clearly Bree's (and Bazunu) fault, no argument from me there but it didn't contribute to us losing the game, indeed it can be argued it galvanised or shocked us into equalising and later taking the lead.

[Turkish]

4 minutes ago, VectisSaint said:

The 3rd goal, which was the one that caused us to lose the game (as opposed to drawing) was due to defensive disorganisation following Bree's sending off, including being a man (defender) short. The root cause of that goal was actually piss poor play by our attackers who only needed to hold the ball up, you know play  a little Russball but gave it away needlessly and cheaply and allowed Ipswich to break.

The first goal was clearly Bree's (and Bazunu) fault, no argument from me there but it didn't contribute to us losing the game, indeed it can be argued it galvanised or shocked us into equalising and later taking the lead.

how does conceding a goal in a game you lose by one goal not contribute to losing a game? You're going to have to explain that one

The third goal, Player almost on the penalty spot is allowed all day to fall over whilst 4 players stood watching not reacting, nothing to do with dis-organisation. You need to watch the game again as i did notice the other day you said we conceded the 2nd and 3rd goals after Bree got sent off. 

 

[saintant]

1 hour ago, Whitey Grandad said:

Agreed.

They don’t close down players quickly enough. They don’t run at them. They just stand off, turn on sideways and hope that the ball doesn’t hurt them too much if it hits them. A common factor in most of the goals that we concede is the amount of space and time that we concede. If a player is ruched then he is more likely to make a poor shot.

Ipswich’s second goal took a slight touch of the inside of Harwood-Bellis’s right leg on its way to beating Baz’s outstretched fingers. If HB had been closer to the attacker then he might have got in a proper block.

Get in their faces FFS

AA was totally at fault for the second goal - this is very clear from the highlights.

[Badger]

1 hour ago, VectisSaint said:

The 3rd goal …. was due to defensive disorganisation … The root cause of that goal was actually piss poor play by our attackers who only needed to hold the ball up, you know play  a little Russball but gave it away needlessly and cheaply and allowed Ipswich to break

So which was it, “defensive disorganisation” , or “piss poor play by our attackers”, possibly both ? 
 

Actually I don’t think our forwards were involved in it at all. My recollection is that Bazunu launched it like an Exocet missile, over AA’s head and straight to their GK.

As I said on an earlier thread it was reminiscent of Crouch v Everton in 2005, the ball should have been put anywhere but to their GK who was always going to return it upfield into our half. We spend large parts of the game needlessly passing it between the CB’s and Bazunu, but not it seems when that was required. ( I can understand that we needed a win, so perhaps an excuse, but in terms of that match it was ridiculous).

No wonder Martin was annoyed with Bazunu at the end of the match.

[Badger]

1 hour ago, Turkish said:

 

The third goal, Player almost on the penalty spot is allowed all day to fall over whilst 4 players stood watching not reacting, nothing to do with dis-organisation. You need to watch the game again as i did notice the other day you said we conceded the 2nd and 3rd goals after Bree got sent off. 

 

Surprised none of our players helped him to his feet, brushed him down, enquired if he was okay, before allowing him to take the shot. 
We really seem that obliging at times. 

[Sunglasses Ron]

On 03/04/2024 at 07:08, Toussaint said:

Well don’t let old misery guts here taint it for you, I’m just raw and angry that we seem to have blown it. I feel the same way as I did when Southgate blew two consecutive finals. Enjoy the game.

Haha Thanks! All seems a bit pointless going now, but I'll make the best I can of it!

[Farmer Saint]

10 hours ago, Roger said:

Yep it was and other than Bristol away when Charles was taken off at 0/0 and he played vs West Brom clean sheet then was dropped so no number 6 infront of them.

 

13 hours ago, Jonnyboy said:

Wasn't that when Downes was out?

 

10 hours ago, Roger said:

Yep it was and other than Bristol away when Charles was taken off at 0/0 and he played vs West Brom clean sheet then was dropped so no number 6 infront of them.

He played against Huddersfield. 

[Chez]

7 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Jesus wept.

Might as well sack the coaching team and save a few quid then, apparently there is no point having them.

So you think a good coach could turn Smallbone into a ferocious tackler like Barry Horne then? It's not coaching that's needed there, it's hypnosis. 

Players are all different. Just as some have it in them to beat five men, tackle or bust a gut towards their own goal, some just don't. You need all sorts, but you need the correct blend. Perhaps we just don't have the right blend. 

Coaches obviously have value, but they are not magicians. They are not looking to turn a dribbler into a tackler or vise versa. They are helping players hone their established skillset, understand the nuisances of their position and motivate them. But even with motivation, I don't believe any coach is going to change Brooks into a guy that tracks his runner back hard every time. It's just not in him.

[Chez]

13 hours ago, Saint_clark said:

Not a chance in hell Szmodics isn't in there. 

who you leaving out, Winks?

Is the EFL team of the year voted for by the players

[S-Clarke]

7 minutes ago, Chez said:

who you leaving out, Winks?

Is the EFL team of the year voted for by the players

I reckon Mvadidi will miss out. He had a good first half of the season but he's tailed off in my eyes, and also Leicester fans opinion.

I think you could say Armstrong, Szmodics and Summerville have all been fairly consistent in their returns over the season as a whole.

[Chez]

5 hours ago, Saint86 said:

Partially agree with this, but also think its a bit harsh / too simplistic. We've signed a lot of youngsters or technically skilful players in recent seasons - and as yet they don't have the fight to get stuck in to the nitty gritty of this league - i can't recall who it was we played a month or so ago, but one of their players absolutely booted Edozie early on and he was in his shell for the rest of the game.

As for stopping teams playing through us, we need two defensively good CMs to play the way we want to play - Its about balance and i really don't think its rocket science to be a bit less open tbh. We seem to go from passing it around our backline for fun, to then having no one sitting in the middle 3rd / covering outside the box when an attack fizzles out, allowing a break. Hoping it gets sorted by the playoffs for obvious reasons.

Flynn Downes is class for this level, a real rolls royce of a Championship player imho. From a balance perspective, Smallbone is okay alongside him (provided he is tasked with remaining defensively aware - which isn't always the case, and causes issues when he isn't), and Charles would be okay as well but barely gets to play in this scenario.... What i'd love is a Wanyama style player to be the anchor, and Downes to sit alongside as  CM. Sadly what tends to happen, is that time and time again we play only one player operating in a CM or CDM role (i.e. we overcommit on attacks a lot) and then wonder why a mix of 5 strikers, wingers, CAMs don't defend / win the ball back well. Maybe it doesn't need to be a dedicated CM/CDM player (i.e. Aribo adds a lot of strength and ball retention in the middle third), but we simply have to retain that cover in CM when we're attacking... Otherwise its a knife through butter on the counter every time - The oppo spray one ball into their own unmarked central players, who then picks a pass over the top or out to the wingers, and they're away, whilst we've got the majority of our outfield players over committed.

I chose to say it in 30 words, you chose a few more, but we basically agree.

Not enough players in the squad that do the ugly things well. Smallbone doesn't and nor does Charles (holds a DCM position pretty well, but far too casual). The wide players are wingers/attackers, not midfielders. There simply is not enough hussle without the ball. The balance is not right. Lots of good passers, not enough workrate and bite when we don't have the ball.

Charles is the answer by the way (he has the physical traits and the ball skills), but only if his game progresses quickly. There needs to be much more sharpness both when on the ball and when defending.    

[Chez]

2 minutes ago, S-Clarke said:

I reckon Mvadidi will miss out. He had a good first half of the season but he's tailed off in my eyes, and also Leicester fans opinion.

I think you could say Armstrong, Szmodics and Summerville have all been fairly consistent in their returns over the season as a whole.

Not in mine. Mvadidi continues to run rings round opponents.  The next Zaha (championship talent that does it in the Prem too). 

[Chez]

2 hours ago, Turkish said:

how does conceding a goal in a game you lose by one goal not contribute to losing a game? You're going to have to explain that one

The third goal, Player almost on the penalty spot is allowed all day to fall over whilst 4 players stood watching not reacting, nothing to do with dis-organisation. You need to watch the game again as i did notice the other day you said we conceded the 2nd and 3rd goals after Bree got sent off. 

 

not having Bree on the pitch did impact the third goal a little. We were stretched, the ball went wide, there was no one near enough to stop the cross and then the rest you know - basically Brooks flinching rather than reacting to the guy falling over his own feet, which meant he got two bites at the cherry. Funnily enough though, after Bree got sent off, we were possibly marginally the better side and created a couple of chances. We weren't massively under the cosh, the game was still end to end.  

[captainchris]

17 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said:

And you don't think the "coaching" staff have any possible way of influencing this?

Precisely 

[Wade Garrett]

1 hour ago, saintant said:

AA was totally at fault for the second goal - this is very clear from the highlights.

He was definitely culpable.  I will say though, that a set-up that relies on our forward defending in our penalty area is a fucking shit one.

[captainchris]

8 minutes ago, Chez said:

not having Bree on the pitch did impact the third goal a little. We were stretched, the ball went wide, there was no one near enough to stop the cross and then the rest you know - basically Brooks flinching rather than reacting to the guy falling over his own feet, which meant he got two bites at the cherry. Funnily enough though, after Bree got sent off, we were possibly marginally the better side and created a couple of chances. We weren't massively under the cosh, the game was still end to end.  

But Bree was nowhere near the guy who scored the first goal when Bree was on the pitch….. He was desperately poor actually…

Our coaching is obviously not right for defending though as we see this stuff week and week out. We don’t mark up, close down, prevent crosses or get aggressively close to attackers at all. This IS coaching…..

[Weston Super Saint]

36 minutes ago, Chez said:

So you think a good coach could turn Smallbone into a ferocious tackler like Barry Horne then? It's not coaching that's needed there, it's hypnosis. 

Players are all different. Just as some have it in them to beat five men, tackle or bust a gut towards their own goal, some just don't. You need all sorts, but you need the correct blend. Perhaps we just don't have the right blend. 

Coaches obviously have value, but they are not magicians. They are not looking to turn a dribbler into a tackler or vise versa. They are helping players hone their established skillset, understand the nuisances of their position and motivate them. But even with motivation, I don't believe any coach is going to change Brooks into a guy that tracks his runner back hard every time. It's just not in him.

I heard a quote from the commentators for the Ipswich game that we don't bother to analyse our opponents.

Basically, we are too arrogant (or lazy) to let that bother us. Apparently we'll look at a few of their set pieces and then practice passing in triangles. 

You can bet your last 50p that our opposition are analysing the fucking great big gaps we leave down the left hand side and how they can shoot at our goalkeeper for a nailed on goal, especially to his left.

If we're going to ignore the opposition, the very least we can do is get our coaches to coach the players to be more assertive, close down the opposition and just generally be the "brave" bollocks we hear so much about.

[malcolm waldron]

1 hour ago, Chez said:

Not in mine. Mvadidi continues to run rings round opponents.  The next Zaha (championship talent that does it in the Prem too). 

Since the Leicester home game back in September I've quietly been comparing Mvadidi (tricky, pacy wide player) with our own tricky, pacey Kamaldeen.  12 goals vs 0 (and I know KS has been out injured for a while) highlights what we're not getting so far from our investment.  

[Doctoroncall]

1 hour ago, Weston Super Saint said:

I heard a quote from the commentators for the Ipswich game that we don't bother to analyse our opponents.

Basically, we are too arrogant (or lazy) to let that bother us. Apparently we'll look at a few of their set pieces and then practice passing in triangles. 

That’s shocking if true. 

[Midfield_General]

1 hour ago, captainchris said:

Our coaching is obviously not right for defending though as we see this stuff week and week out. We don’t mark up, close down, prevent crosses or get aggressively close to attackers at all. This IS coaching…..

Martin's never been able to coach a defence. Every side he's managed has let in a lot of goals. MK Dons fans said it, Swansea fans said it, and it was there in black and white for anyone to see. We hired a manager who's incapable of building a solid defensive unit and - surprise - we've shipped too many goals all season, with no sign of him either being interested in addressing it, or knowing how to. 

He wears his complete tactical inflexibility as a badge of honour and tells anyone who will listen that he won't change how he sets up his teams, so what on earth did anyone expect? 

[gammon cheeks]

16 minutes ago, Midfield_General said:

Martin's never been able to coach a defence. Every side he's managed has let in a lot of goals. MK Dons fans said it, Swansea fans said it, and it was there in black and white for anyone to see. We hired a manager who's incapable of building a solid defensive unit and - surprise - we've shipped too many goals all season, with no sign of him either being interested in addressing it, or knowing how to. 

He wears his complete tactical inflexibility as a badge of honour and tells anyone who will listen that he won't change how he sets up his teams, so what on earth did anyone expect? 

100%

[Toadhall Saint]

58 minutes ago, Doctoroncall said:

That’s shocking if true. 

It is I heard the same and was a little perplexed to say the least.

[S-Clarke]

9 minutes ago, Toadhall Saint said:

It is I heard the same and was a little perplexed to say the least.

It seems hard to believe, but it is the sort of thing you'd imagine we'd do.

''We can just play our game, it doesn't matter what the opposition do'' kind of attitude. We are really not good enough to do that, but I'm sure we'll continue the arrogance until the end of time.

Edited April 4 by S-Clarke

[Galway saint]

Just listened to adam and joe going home and heard the RM interview from Monday 

wasn’t enamoured with his comments about KWP and there are no ‘superstars’ in the team - well at this level he is a superstar and has given us a year of his career and 100 % effort when a lot of others would have sulked and forced a move. 

[Gloucester Saint]

1 hour ago, Galway saint said:

Just listened to adam and joe going home and heard the RM interview from Monday 

wasn’t enamoured with his comments about KWP and there are no ‘superstars’ in the team - well at this level he is a superstar and has given us a year of his career and 100 % effort when a lot of others would have sulked and forced a move. 

KWP is very popular with our fans and within the club, I think Martin knows he’s on the brink of getting the chop and no Wilcox to save him now. Plus pushing Bazanu under the bus (Bazanu is barely professional standard but just loan him out down the leagues, don’t kick him in public’, he seems a man under huge pressure. Win at Wembley or he’s gone, and if the form carries on, I’m not sure he will even make the WBA semi first leg without a clear improvement. 

[Osvaldorama]

6 hours ago, S-Clarke said:

It seems hard to believe, but it is the sort of thing you'd imagine we'd do.

''We can just play our game, it doesn't matter what the opposition do'' kind of attitude. We are really not good enough to do that, but I'm sure we'll continue the arrogance until the end of time.

Do we do the same with our scouting?

”nah no need to look at the tapes mate. We signed that livramento kid before, this next one will be a gem too”

[LVSaint]

7 minutes ago, Gloucester Saint said:

KWP is very popular with our fans and within the club, I think Martin knows he’s on the brink of getting the chop and no Wilcox to save him now. Plus pushing Bazanu under the bus (Bazanu is barely professional standard but just loan him out down the leagues, don’t kick him in public’, he seems a man under huge pressure. Win at Wembley or he’s gone, and if the form carries on, I’m not sure he will even make the WBA semi first leg without a clear improvement. 

Does he? He's obviously safe if we go up. Perfectly safe IMO if we fail in the playoffs. This is Ankerson's man and he's got plenty of time left before he reaches the realm of Nathan Jones failure status.

[Dark Munster]

1 hour ago, LVSaint said:

Does he? He's obviously safe if we go up. Perfectly safe IMO if we fail in the playoffs. This is Ankerson's man and he's got plenty of time left before he reaches the realm of Nathan Jones failure status.

This is what I have believed from the beginning. Wilcox was gushing praise on RM when he (RM) was hired, but if reports are true we were following RM for 6 months before Wilcox was hired. It's got that deluded moron Ankersen's fingerprints all over it, much like he did with Nathan F*cking Jones.

When will Dragan wake up and realise he has put his club in the hands of a charlatan?

Edited April 5 by Dark Munster

[Verbal Kint]

1 hour ago, Dark Munster said:

This is what I have believed from the beginning. Wilcox was gushing praise on RM when he (RM) was hired, but if reports are true we were following RM for 6 months before Wilcox was hired. It's got that deluded moron Ankersen's fingerprints all over it, much like he did with Nathan F*cking Jones.

When will Dragan wake up and realise he has put his club in the hands of a charlatan?

I find it hard to believe that Ankerson could choose both Jones and then Martin. They are completely different managers with totally different ideas on how to play. Jones is a long ball "play on the front foot" merchant who does nothing but rant and rave. Martin has his possession football bollocks which is clearly a Man City & Pep way of playing.

It seems quite likely to me that Martin was a Wilcox appointment considering his background

Edited April 5 by Verbal Kint

[Miltonaggro]

4 hours ago, Verbal Kint said:

I find it hard to believe that Ankerson could choose both Jones and then Martin. They are completely different managers with totally different ideas on how to play. Jones is a long ball "play on the front foot" merchant who does nothing but rant and rave. Martin has his possession football bollocks which is clearly a Man City & Pep way of playing.

It seems quite likely to me that Martin was a Wilcox appointment considering his background

You have to factor in the Ankersen factor, that in all probability he hasn’t the faintest idea what he’s doing. Could be Wilcox wanted Maresca and when that fell through Rasmus had already identified a lower league Pep lite to sate his Man City on sea fetish. Wilcox was ‘sod it’ let’s try it. 

[egg]

7 hours ago, LVSaint said:

Does he? He's obviously safe if we go up. Perfectly safe IMO if we fail in the playoffs. This is Ankerson's man and he's got plenty of time left before he reaches the realm of Nathan Jones failure status.

That's contrary to something I heard (from someone to be trusted) a wee while ago which essentially was that there were concerns about him if we made it up. 

[Toussaint]

8 hours ago, LVSaint said:

Does he? He's obviously safe if we go up. Perfectly safe IMO if we fail in the playoffs. This is Ankerson's man and he's got plenty of time left before he reaches the realm of Nathan Jones failure status.

He wouldn’t be safe for long if we went up, if he persists with the Russball dogma we would get shredded every game.

[Mr X]

Should we fail to go up through the playoffs (which we will imo) we are stuck with a manager that's completely inflexible in his style even when it's not working and we will have even less decent players to adopt that single vision style... Where do we go from there other than down the league table? 

Martins style has been found out time and time again in the championship..... We would be murdered in the premier league without a plan B 

Edited April 5 by Mr X

[LGTL]

15 minutes ago, Mr X said:

Should we fail to go up through the playoffs (which we will imo) we are stuck with a manager that's completely inflexible in his style even when it's not working and we will have even less decent players to adopt that single vision style... Where do we go from there other than down the league table? 

Martins style has been found out time and time again in the championship..... We would be murdered in the premier league without a plan B 

We will just become Swansea from his time there. Floating around mid-table playing his failed brand of football with a load of shite on the pitch. Can’t wait. 

A defence that has consisted of KWP, Bednarek and THB on a consistent basis with Downes in front shouldn’t have conceded 51 fucking goals, the same as QPR. It’s been a horror show by Martin defensively. 

Edited April 5 by LGTL

[Turkish]

1 hour ago, egg said:

That's contrary to something I heard (from someone to be trusted) a wee while ago which essentially was that there were concerns about him if we made it up. 

Yep we will get absolutely murdered if we go up. Conceding 51 goals with players like THB and KWP in the back 4 is unbelievable. We’d concede over 100 if we went up