[Confirmed] Adams & Cork gone

[Deleted member 875]

Teams in that division get success by keeping it tight at the back and then hitting back on the break.

Call it long ball, call it counter attacking football but it works.

 

[Pinchy]

post: 335494"]Teams in that division get success by keeping it tight at the back and then hitting back on the break.

Call it long ball, call it counter attacking football but it works.

But the reality this season is quite to the contrary!

Do you like football?

 

[Deleted member 875]

But the reality this season is quite to the contrary!

Do you like football?

Yes, but i like football that wins games.

Pretty football looks shit when your losing. You just need to look at the football under Robson and then Gary Speed to understand that.

 

[Pinchy]

Whereas Hoofball always looks shit - Win, lose or draw!

Proper football is simple - Pass and Move not Hoof and Hope.

I am always amused by the ludicrous notion that Hoofball is somehow more effective at gathering points. It isn't. Ask Quickfix Micky.

If the last couple of years haven't persuaded you to give football a chance then nothing will.

I am sick and tired of this bizarre inverted snobbery amongst wholly misguided Blades fans that promotes a wretched, discredited, outdated and most of all failed brand of anti-football above the game as it should be played. No other set of fans would regard the matter as even remotely arguable.

The inevitable and welcome sacking of Quickfix gives us a real opportunity to alter our disgraceful but well deserved reputation amongst neutrals for anti-football. Let's not waste it this time.

It's time to :heart: football.

 

[JJ Sefton]

post: 335498"]Yes, but i like football that wins games.

Pretty football looks shit when your losing. You just need to look at the football under Robson and then Gary Speed to understand that.

I must haven missed all that silky football we played to the samba beat of the beaches of Rio when Robson was in charge.

We've had hoofball, that didnt win us games.

 

[Deleted member 875]

The last two manager who tried to play "football" was Bryan Robson and Gary Speed.

Two outstanding failutes.

I'm a big believer in teams having strong spine. A big hard centre half, a scrapper in midfield and a big meatball up front and you fit the football in around them.

You only win a lot of games when you become hard to beat.

I :heart: hoofing

 

[JJ Sefton]

post: 335508"]the last two manager who tried to play "football" was bryan robson...

myth alert myth alert

 

[Kenilworth]

post: 335508"]The last two manager who tried to play "football" was Bryan Robson and Gary Speed.

Two outstanding failutes.

Agree they were failutes Brownie but not sure they tried to play football any more than anyone else.
Robson gets in high profile palyers, chucks em together and hopes they gel.
Speed was just the most negative manager I have ever seen at the Lane. 1 or 2 chances per game max.
Anyone can piss about with it at the back and create nothing, It's not football.

Goal mouth action, wing play, chances, excitement - that's what football is all about. It's not a game of chess.

 

[Deleted member 875]

myth alert myth alert

Why was it a myth?

---------- Post added at 01:00 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:00 AM ----------

Agree they were failutes Brownie but not sure they tried to play football any more than anyone else.
Robson gets in high profile palyers, chucks em together and hopes they gel.
Speed was just the most negative manager I have ever seen at the Lane. 1 or 2 chances per game max.
Anyone can piss about with it at the back and create nothing, It's not football.

Goal mouth action, wing play, chances, excitement - that's what football is all about. It's not a game of chess.

And direct football achieves that

 

[JJ Sefton]

post: 335511"]Why was it a myth?

Robsons teams didnt play any more football than Warnocks had. That was just something he put about to excuse his miserable failure, along the lines of "What was I supposed to do with this bunch of cloggers" and "I had to change the whole culture of the club". Robsons mates in the media who already had us down as a long ball team anyway bought it.

---------- Post added at 01:07 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:05 AM ----------

post: 335511"]And direct football achieves that

Depends what you mean by direct. As has been pointed out, if youre advocating just pumping it up to a centre forward from deep then that style of play has been spurned by all the teams who have been successful in League One this last season.

There seems to be this idea that there is a trade off between style and success. There isnt.

 

[Deleted member 875]

So how would you classify Robsons football. I saw the vast majority of game and there was play plenty of tippy-tappy football where they passed in neat triangles, but lack a cutting edge, and also lacked defensive stability. He was brought in to play football, tried to play football but it didn't work.

As for the trade of between style and success, have you ever noticed that to be successful at football, you need first of all to be hard to beat. When you become hard to beat, then you will be more likely to win more game. Its no good about preaching about attractive football when you've got a soft underbelly.

If you disagree with this then look at the record of Tony Pulis at Stoke City

 

[JJ Sefton]

post: 335516"]So how would you classify Robsons football. I saw the vast majority of game and there was play plenty of tippy-tappy football where they passed in neat triangles, but lack a cutting edge, and also lacked defensive stability. He was brought in to play football, tried to play football but it didn't work.

There was some "tippy tappy" indeed but there is more to 'football' than that. Any dickhead can tell his back four to pass it sideways for 10 minutes, doesnt make them Brazil.

Id classify Robsons football as uneven stodge. It was much the same blend as we had under Warnock minus the pace.

 

[Pinchy]

You find the eleven best, fittest, strongest, most committed hoofers in the world and pitch them against Barcelona or Brazil '70. Your lot would be begging for mercy after 20 minutes of futile shadow-chasing.

I repeat. Only our fans would even tolerate this ragamuffin, sterile, mind-numbing, upanatem non-football. To argue that it is actually desirable beggars belief. It's a shameful admission that we can't outplay even modest opposition so every game must be turned into a lowest common denominator playground standard shambles. That's your philosophy and it's one of abject despair and pitiful failure.

I really wish I could support a different team but I can't so I'll continue throwing pearls before swine.

 

[JJ Sefton]

post: 335516"]As for the trade of between style and success, have you ever noticed that to be successful at football, you need first of all to be hard to beat. When you become hard to beat, then you will be more likely to win more game. Its no good about preaching about attractive football when you've got a soft underbelly.

Have you ever noticed that some teams that play very good, attractive, attacking football, can also be quite good defensively? Again, youre seeing a trade off that isnt there, between a constructive attacking style and defending.

If you disagree with this then look at the record of Gus Poyet at Brighton & Hove Albion. Thats the division we're heading into.

 

[Deleted member 875]

There was plenty of "tippy tappy" indeed but there is more to 'football' than that. Any dickhead can tell his back four to pass it sideways for 1o minutes, doesnt make them Brazil.

Id classify Robsons football as uneven stodge. It was much the same blend as we had under Warnock minus the pace.

Your half right on this occasion.

Under Robson he tried to get us to play a passing game but it was never going to work. He had the players at his disposal to win that league at a canter, but by trying to play attractive football it looked shit when we was losing games.

 

[JJ Sefton]

post: 335520"]Your half right on this occasion.

Under Robson he tried to get us to play a passing game but it was never going to work. He had the players at his disposal to win that league at a canter, but by trying to play attractive football it looked shit when we was losing games.

He didnt try to get us to play a passing game, we already did. He just slowed it down and made it more expensive.

 

[Deleted member 875]

Have you ever noticed that some teams that play very good, attractive, attacking football, can also be quite good defensively? Again, youre seeing a trade off that isnt there, between a constructive attacking style and defending.

If you disagree with this then look at the record of Gus Poyet at Brighton & Hove Albion. Thats the division we're heading into.

The point i've made by being hard to beat is that by being strong defensively then the rest will follow.

You build a strong spine to your team and thats your foundations, then the rest adds to it and make your side attractive to watch then thats what you need to do, whats what i've tried to explain but you obviously don't understand.

If hoofball win Sheffield United games then i :heart: hoofball. I would rather see us winning games by longball rather than losing games playing shit 'football'

 

[JJ Sefton]

post: 335523"]The point i've made by being hard to beat is that by being strong defensively then the rest will follow.

You build a strong spine to your team and thats your foundations, then the rest adds to it and make your side attractive to watch then thats what you need to do, whats what i've tried to explain but you obviously don't understand.

And what you fail to understand is that you can have a decent defence and play constructive football.

post: 335523"]If hoofball win Sheffield United games then i :heart: hoofball. I would rather see us winning games by longball rather than losing games playing shit 'football'

And Id rather see us win games playing constructive football than carry on losing them playing the hoofball we have been.

 

[Deleted member 875]

He didnt try to get us to play a passing game, we already did. He just slowed it down and made it more expensive.

Before Robson took charge, we played direct football and some good football at times under Warnock, but he had the spine of the team sorted out. He made us hard to beat and the football followed.

---------- Post added at 01:34 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:33 AM ----------

And Id rather see us win games playing constructive football than carry on losing them playing the hoofball we have been.

But how exactly do you win games without being hard to bear?

 

[JJ Sefton]

post: 335525"]But how exactly do you win games without being hard to bear?

I assume you mean 'beat' though I admit, I have found us hard to bear this season.

You dont. But what you dont grasp is that its possible for a team to have a decent defence and play decent constructive football.

---------- Post added at 01:39 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:38 AM ----------

post: 335525"]Before Robson took charge, we played direct football and some good football at times under Warnock, but he had the spine of the team sorted out. He made us hard to beat and the football followed.

This about the 'spine of the team', even a constructive side needs that.

 

[Deleted member 875]

Is it possible for you to add to the debate without acting like a patronising arsehole?

 

[grafikhaus]

If it wasn't for the fact that the club is now looking for its 5th manager in just over 8 months, would anyone expect Adams to retain his job ?

No me neither.

Haven't got time to read every post, but I agree with this.

For once, I listened to Radio Pig last night at 6 and was surprised that there was a Sheffield Fans forum from Hallam 'Uni'. Near the end, somebody on the panel (think it was a journo) said a manager had to have two things - the ability to spot a player and man-management abilities. (Don't think many of us would disagree with that). Adams has neither, as has been shown with Bent, Doyle & Collins and calling some (still present) players 'cheats'.

And what's with some peoples 'word of the month' - STABILITY?

Does that mean burying our head in the sand and ignoring that we'd got another managerial appointment wrong?

 

[Pinchy]

The glorious stability of consistent failure!

 

[DronnieBlade]

Brownie.

Have a look at the top of ALL 4 divisions of English football and ask yourself "are these teams known hoofers or do they play football".

One last request - drag yourself, kicking and screaming if necessary, into the 21st century mate.

Its not a fluke that Spain are current Euro and World champions.

 

[LSF]

Absolute stereotypical rubbish! Have you not noticed Brighton, Southampton, Huddersfield, Bournemouth and Peterborough all play proper football?

Astonishingly We still :heart: Hoofing.

Will we never learn?

I despair.

Reminds me very much of the 'stuff' you post on most occasions Pinchy

 

[Pinchy]

Brownie.

Have a look at the top of ALL 4 divisions of English football and ask yourself "are these teams known hoofers or do they play football".

One last request - drag yourself, kicking and screaming if necessary, into the 21st century.

If that's too much too soon, at least pop into the 20th. You might bump into Beckenbauer, Platini and Bergkamp. Not a bad spine, that.

---------- Post added at 08:03 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:02 AM ----------

Reminds me very much of the 'stuff' you post on most occasions Pinchy

But it's quality rubbish LSF. Composed with loving care especially for you :hug:

 

[Balham]

I know I'm in danger of repeating what a lot have already said but here's my tuppence worth.

We are now at a crossroads. We can continue down the road of managers who'll inject "passion" and "commitment", which is great because if we don't catch up with where football has moved to in the last 10 years, we'll need passionate, committed players to chase shadows as the likes of Rochdale and Exeter pass right through us.

Alternatively, we could take our time and appoint someone who understands that the modern game is about tactics and technique more than passion and percentages. I'm not suggesting that players shouldn't be committed but they should be able to control the ball under pressure and find another Blade with a short pass. People dismiss short passing as "tippy tappy" which it can be, if it doesn't go anywhere. However, it is much better to keep the ball through passing and moving than aimlessly sending a diagonal ball in the vague direction of a lumbering centre forward.

How many goals did we concede this season through incisive passes and how many came from long balls lumped up? The game has changed - players are smaller, quicker and more skilful than ever before - we need to catch up.

 

[SteelCity Blade]

Re: football v hoofball argument - you're all missing the point!

We have a poor team at present that lacks key attributes and proper balance right across the board. Whether they try to pass it or "hoof" it, it will make not a blind bit of difference. The team needs a complete overhaul and needs a bright new manager who knows what he's doing to have a look at whats available and piece a workable group together bit by bit. The style of football is (at the moment) completely secondary and should be developed alongside recruitment with some careful planning.

Touching on this debate, I honestly dont care as long as it is effective and we win. I'm less bothered about being entertained at the moment than I am about us winning and getting back into the Championship. Pretty football is nice and in an ideal world I would always champion keeping it on the deck as much as possible but we dont have those sorts of players and dont have the money for those sorts of players.....

The reality is that 90% of teams outside the PL (and a couple within it) play percentage football and will generally knock it into the channels. Very few try to play a nice fluid pass and move game and they are the ones with the type of player gifted enough to do it. The more successful sides are the ones that can mix it up.....Man Utd being the best example (I haven't seen a trophy in Arsenal's cabinet for a long time) and further down QPR who have done very well this season by playing with a good blend.

Football is not an exact science though some would like to believe it is at times and you have to play to the strengths of the players you have available as much as possible. The beauty of football is the variety, the way different players and different teams go about it. It's what makes it the beautiful game. There is no right or wrong way and I will always stand by that.

 

[JJ Sefton]

post: 335535"]Is it possible for you to add to the debate without acting like a patronising arsehole?

I thought we were having quite a civil chat, dry your eyes babe.

 

[Balham]

We have a poor team at present that lacks key attributes and proper balance right across the board. Whether they try to pass it or "hoof" it, it will make not a blind bit of difference. The team needs a complete overhaul and needs a bright new manager who knows what he's doing to have a look at whats available and piece a workable group together bit by bit. The style of football is (at the moment) completely secondary and should be developed alongside recruitment with some careful planning.

I fully agree with this. However, there are plenty of clubs in Leagues One and Two who have put together decent sides on a shoestring budget; nothing stopping us doing the same.