Adkins Interview After Wigan (H)

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Joined
Jan 23, 2015
Messages
4,981
Reaction score
5,326
Location
The Pantry
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p03hrd8d

A very good interview. Rob Staton asks relevant straightforward questions, and Adkins answers them.

Summary below - recommend listening if you are able.
  • RS: What went wrong? NA: A poor decision from us for the penalty - from a desire to make a sliding tackle, then the second gave the ball away from a restart, good finish and we're chasing the game - says he talks about restarts a lot but istm throw-ins have been an issue all season - and last season
  • first half was cat and mouse neither keeper really troubled - it was, they weren't
  • Che looked bright - he did
  • changed shape a couple of times to get better possession and nullify
  • talks [longingly, I think] of a desire to keep possession and play through the thirds - Fleetwood anyone?
  • game was going to be close - they get the first and that changes it
  • two gifted goals gets a mention again
  • re booing at the end, thank you to the fans, behind the team during the game - true - reaction could've been horrible at 0-2, but it was kept till the end
  • finished with two strikers one behind and a winger - I think this doesn't work, it all looks random and desperate - when we change formation so much there's no pattern to our play and we never look like getting into it - imo chucking on more forwards doesn't help
  • we all want to get to the next level
  • Q: Are you good enough? A: Top two out of reach, we need 11 wins from 17 to get the points total for the play-offs
  • Q: Do you feel like you've got to sign someone? A: We've got a lot of players - point being (he says this explicitly) whoever we sign has to go straight into the first team, therefore has to be better than Done, Che, Jam, Flynn (who he seems to like)
  • consistency of team selection has helped with the run of two defeats in three months - obviously now three
  • I'm frustrated, the owners are, we want to get ourselves out of the division right now
  • not scored in the last two, need to find a way
  • re the board: is communication good - the buck stops with me
  • Sammon came off at half time. Has he been a disappointing signing? [Good from RS as this is a prominent question.] NA: Not going to criticise the players. Che looked bright.
  • Q: How do you pick everybody up? You have to. But you hurt first.
  • results dictate livelihoods
  • training can be good but can you do it in the arena?
  • It was a 0-0 game - it was
  • that first goal was so important - as was Bash's miss a few minutes before
  • first half tactically a good game
  • Q: Is there a spark? I say to everyone: Can you be the one that gives us the spark?
  • RS: Loans? NA: Plenty of options, mentions loans but free transfers of released players also a possibility - for clarity I reckon this was talked about academically rather than: We'll be getting a free transfer in
  • look solid in the middle of the park - we did, till Bash went mad
  • tried to manipulate the ball to get Baxter and Coutts creating ball, but it's not all about when you've got the ball
  • it's all about getting the balance right
 

"VERY evasive on whether he believes the board have given him the backing he needed

Asked whether everyone in the club is pulling in the same direction, he replied "well we have to be"
 
What about the bit where he evaded the question "are the players hurting after that" and eventually could only say "it should hurt" not that it does. Very blinkered and biased summary, sorry!
 
WHF if your going to do this its only fair to the fans that didn't hear it you tell the whole story including the blatant change of tone and refusal to conform but not deny things have gone sour in the boardroom and with communication across the club.

If you can't tell it all leave it to Roygbiv
 
Very blinkered and biased summary, sorry!

upload_2016-2-7_21-35-27.png

Frankly my dear...that's crap.

Livelihoods on the line addresses it, in part

There's plenty of other stuff missing as well. Hence the recommendation to listen yourself.

For one thing there's the (arguably even more important) part about backing from the board (addressed by Alfreton14Blade I think) in Roygbiv's thread on the same subject.

Listening carefully, this doesn't get a dead straight answer...and the conspiracy theories are up and running.

You are of course free to post your own summary.
 
View attachment 15900

Frankly my dear...that's crap.

Livelihoods on the line addresses it, in part

There's plenty of other stuff missing as well. Hence the recommendation to listen yourself.

For one thing there's the (arguably even more important) part about backing from the board (addressed by Alfreton14Blade I think) in Roygbiv's thread on the same subject.

Listening carefully, this doesn't get a dead straight answer...and the conspiracy theories are up and running.

You are of course free to post your own summary.

I did listen myself this time, hence my post, but I have chosen to consume your summaries in the past as an alternative when I didn't fancy listening,and I quite enjoyed them. But I had not realised they were so selective and unrepresentative. Fair play to you though, no one said they had to be.
 
I did listen myself this time, hence my post, but I have chosen to consume your summaries in the past as an alternative when I didn't fancy listening,and I quite enjoyed them. But I had not realised they were so selective and unrepresentative. Fair play to you though, no one said they had to be.

Once again, they are not. And I utterly reject that.

Anything that is missed is missed because of the time it takes. I listen to the whole interview at least twice and some parts three, four, five or more times, working from illegible scribbled notes.

It would be beyond stupid to think that conspiratorially covering up criticism of A by B would go unnoticed and uncommented on as everyone was taking my word for what Adkins (or whoever) said in the interviews.

If an omission is important enough it will of course come up in the thread. See, for instance, as mentioned above, the point about backing from the board which Alfreton14Blade has taken the time and trouble to transcribe verbatim.

The point about hurting also appears in Roygbiv's thread.
 
Despite the fact that within 10 minutes of the second half it was 0-2 and game over? :rolleyes:

Details. :)

The way both sides were nullifying each other tactically it was a 0-0 game...and as the cliche goes it would have taken a moment of inspiration (or a set piece) to win the game, but then Bash went bonkers.

Not a criticism btw, but I nearly missed the second as I had my head in my hands over the complete madness of the first.
 
Once again, they are not. And I utterly reject that.

Anything that is missed is missed because of the time it takes. I listen to the whole interview at least twice and some parts three, four, five or more times, working from illegible scribbled notes.

It would be beyond stupid to think that conspiratorially covering up criticism of A by B would go unnoticed and uncommented on as everyone was taking my word for what Adkins (or whoever) said in the interviews.

If an omission is important enough it will of course come up in the thread. See, for instance, as mentioned above, the point about backing from the board which Alfreton14Blade has taken the time and trouble to transcribe verbatim.

The point about hurting also appears in Roygbiv's thread.

OK, fair enough, but it's just that after I listened to it, the two key things that stuck in my mind the most (cos be honest, half of it is still spin even now) were the board communication thing and that "it should hurt" comment where there should have been a "yes of course it hurts them" comment.
 
Once again, they are not. And I utterly reject that.

Anything that is missed is missed because of the time it takes. I listen to the whole interview at least twice and some parts three, four, five or more times, working from illegible scribbled notes.

It would be beyond stupid to think that conspiratorially covering up criticism of A by B would go unnoticed and uncommented on as everyone was taking my word for what Adkins (or whoever) said in the interviews.

If an omission is important enough it will of course come up in the thread. See, for instance, as mentioned above, the point about backing from the board which Alfreton14Blade has taken the time and trouble to transcribe verbatim.

The point about hurting also appears in Roygbiv's thread.

You need a medal, if you have to listen to the interview he spouts out at least twice.
 

And no doubt we were "alluring" to be "united together" once again. He is very much accountable for the dross served up this season....... But without doubt he only shoulders a portion of the blame
 
OK, fair enough, but it's just that after I listened to it, the two key things that stuck in my mind the most (cos be honest, half of it is still spin even now) were the board communication thing and that "it should hurt" comment where there should have been a "yes of course it hurts them" comment.

OK. I don't want to labour the point but the summary does contain:
  • re the board: is communication good - the buck stops with me
This is plainly a non sequitur - I could have pointed that out, and have done previously in similar circumstances, but it is there if anyone wants to read it and come to their own conclusion.

As for the hurting part - in the previous JNTW interview he said: I've made it clear it's in everyone's best interests to get us promoted.

I take that to mean Even if your contract's up and you think you won't be here next season it's still in your interests to get the club promoted hence the reference to livelihoods. (Reading the Secret Footballer there is some truth in this, if you've got a promotion on your CV it enhances your value.)

I'd made a connection between the JNTW interview and livelihoods in my own mind but not out loud, which is why it is cryptic/non-existent in the summaries.

Anyway...motivation is a big issue now. Some of the players could be dead men walking.

Making a big thing of wanting two or three players, and then not signing anyone has consequences in the dressing room. There was movement on this mid-January, as some posters pointed out, when he began more talking up of the players we already have.
 
OK. I don't want to labour the point but the summary does contain:
  • re the board: is communication good - the buck stops with me
This is plainly a non sequitur - I could have pointed that out, and have done previously in similar circumstances, but it is there if anyone wants to read it and come to their own conclusion.

As for the hurting part - in the previous JNTW interview he said: I've made it clear it's in everyone's best interests to get us promoted.

I take that to mean Even if your contract's up and you think you won't be here next season it's still in your interests to get the club promoted hence the reference to livelihoods. (Reading the Secret Footballer there is some truth in this, if you've got a promotion on your CV it enhances your value.)

I'd made a connection between the JNTW interview and livelihoods in my own mind but not out loud, which is why it is cryptic/non-existent in the summaries.

Anyway...motivation is a big issue now. Some of the players could be dead men walking.

Making a big thing of wanting two or three players, and then not signing anyone has consequences in the dressing room. There was movement on this mid-January, as some posters pointed out, when he began more talking up of the players we already have.
 
You still clapping WHF? Nice to see to see you still purveying the normal unrealistic expectant hope over realistic observation.
 
OK. I don't want to labour the point but the summary does contain:
  • re the board: is communication good - the buck stops with me
This is plainly a non sequitur - I could have pointed that out, and have done previously in similar circumstances, but it is there if anyone wants to read it and come to their own conclusion.

As for the hurting part - in the previous JNTW interview he said: I've made it clear it's in everyone's best interests to get us promoted.

I take that to mean Even if your contract's up and you think you won't be here next season it's still in your interests to get the club promoted hence the reference to livelihoods. (Reading the Secret Footballer there is some truth in this, if you've got a promotion on your CV it enhances your value.)

I'd made a connection between the JNTW interview and livelihoods in my own mind but not out loud, which is why it is cryptic/non-existent in the summaries.

Anyway...motivation is a big issue now. Some of the players could be dead men walking.

Making a big thing of wanting two or three players, and then not signing anyone has consequences in the dressing room. There was movement on this mid-January, as some posters pointed out, when he began more talking up of the players we already have.

Yes well, you are choosing not to read too much into those two specific things I mentioned, and I guess I am. It's hard to feel any positivity at the moment but who knows, if we somehow start to string some results together it can still all change and we may scrape the playoffs. If not, and if this team really has given up and NA cannot get them to "hurt" enough then maybe he should start the rebuilding now and bring in some of the youngsters.
 
You still clapping WHF? Nice to see to see you still purveying the normal unrealistic expectant hope over realistic observation.

Would it be unrealistic to expect a coherent post? ;)

Did you read the admin post about getting personal?

The forum is about United not the brainlessness of WHF.

wnd_addd2693c837b063a473f5135ba3e67d.jpg
 
I'm sorry to say it. But it's time we made life very uncomfortable for Mr McCabe (legally ofcourse). In our sorry recent history he does seem to be the common denominator in our decent into such mediocrity. I think his love of the club has been on the wane for a long time now and is just hanging around to be part of any potential land deals around the ground.
He and his family need to be persuaded to walk away with dignity in tact before it all get nasty.
 
The question I would ask Adkins is if he explicitly instructs the players to move as little as possible and not attempt to attack until two goals down, or if the players ignore all his instructions and (as many suspect) none of his players care at all about SUFC or playing football at all (except poor Billy Sharp).

I'd also ask if suspension is the only thing that would keep Hammond out of the team, or would he still pick him anyway and take the points deduction and fine.
 
Would it be unrealistic to expect a coherent post? ;)

Did you read the admin post about getting personal?

The forum is about United not the brainlessness of WHF.

wnd_addd2693c837b063a473f5135ba3e67d.jpg
Got nowt against thee personally WHF. Don't even know ya. Probably a good guy and a Blade to boot. Just doing my duty of annoying both sides of the spectrum. At least I like you more than Barney. Admin basically says (as they all do) play the post not the poster. Your posts are just too optimistic in my view they bear no relation to realism.Just an opinion, you can have your version of realism I'll have mine. Just don't let it upset you too much.
 
The comment about signings having to be better than we have already - as some sort of justification for not making any - is ludicrous. I am a better player than most of our team and I'm in my late 40's..
It's not really though. We keep making the mistake of getting players in for the sake of it. We should take our time. Of course, it's a money thing, but first and foremost getting players in that are better than we have already is something that hasn't happened for a decade.

UTB
 
OK. I don't want to labour the point but the summary does contain:
  • re the board: is communication good - the buck stops with me
This is plainly a non sequitur - I could have pointed that out, and have done previously in similar circumstances, but it is there if anyone wants to read it and come to their own conclusion.

As for the hurting part - in the previous JNTW interview he said: I've made it clear it's in everyone's best interests to get us promoted.

I take that to mean Even if your contract's up and you think you won't be here next season it's still in your interests to get the club promoted hence the reference to livelihoods. (Reading the Secret Footballer there is some truth in this, if you've got a promotion on your CV it enhances your value.)

I'd made a connection between the JNTW interview and livelihoods in my own mind but not out loud, which is why it is cryptic/non-existent in the summaries.

Anyway...motivation is a big issue now. Some of the players could be dead men walking.

Making a big thing of wanting two or three players, and then not signing anyone has consequences in the dressing room. There was movement on this mid-January, as some posters pointed out, when he began more talking up of the players we already have.
Interesting point about wanting two or three players in, then not signing anyone, may be having consequences in the dressing room.
While we didn't really know who the targets were, did the players know, and if they did would the players that the new players would have replaced, have an effect on their performances from now to the end of the season.
Remember these players, in Adkins own words would have to be better than what we have, and be able to fit straight into the team.
Trying to think how I would feel if my company was trying to replace me, but unfortunately failed to do so at the last minute, ( unfortunate for the company anyway) and were then stuck with me until as and when.
 
Interesting point about wanting two or three players in, then not signing anyone, may be having consequences in the dressing room.
While we didn't really know who the targets were, did the players know, and if they did would the players that the new players would have replaced, have an effect on their performances from now to the end of the season.
Remember these players, in Adkins own words would have to be better than what we have, and be able to fit straight into the team.
Trying to think how I would feel if my company was trying to replace me, but unfortunately failed to do so at the last minute, ( unfortunate for the company anyway) and were then stuck with me until as and when.

Credit to Collins because Dan Burn has been looming over him all season, but he's got on with his job.

The other I reckon is possibly a forward. Pretty sure Adkins has said as much.

Imo Sammon is good, ideal even, but he's demoralised. I think he started well and even challenged for a few headers to get the crowd onside more than anything, but late on he miscontrolled a pass that was his bread and butter earlier in the season.

Done is less affected but only bc he's too scatterbrained to notice :)
 
Credit to Collins because Dan Burn has been looming over him all season, but he's got on with his job.

The other I reckon is possibly a forward. Pretty sure Adkins has said as much.

Imo Sammon is good, ideal even, but he's demoralised. I think he started well and even challenged for a few headers to get the crowd onside more than anything, but late on he miscontrolled a pass that was his bread and butter earlier in the season.

Done is less affected but only bc he's too scatterbrained to notice :)
Do we admit ( not you WHF) but collectively, that the players Adkins as brought in are not good enough, omitting sharp in this, but that if the team as a whole, rather than the parts of it, played as a team, then these players would not seem quite as bad as they do.
I know that I'm probably saying the obvious there, but I can't believe that Adkins, who most of us at the time thought was a good appointment, could get it so drastically wrong with so many players.
 

It's all about opinions on here obviously but 'Sammon is good, ideal even' what planet are you on? Did you go yesterday?

Initially I thought Sammon was ok, but yesterday conclusively confirmed to me that (after months of deliberating) he is shit. Even if you are demoralised, it's not too much to ask to jump for a ball and try to win a header is it?

What exactly is he bringing to the table? If he is there to be the target man and foil for sharpe, why does he win nothing in the air, Win nothing on the floor, create no space for sharpe and why is he at the other side of the pitch from him when we have the ball?

If he is there to score goals, well his record speaks for itself. Tell me what he is good at and what is he ideal for?
 

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom