Playing to peoples strengths....

[Robbie]

I read thread after thread and no matter the player mentioned - we're not playing to his strengths (except Monty, Morgan and Henderson).

Evans.... we're not playing the football that suits him, we're not playing to his strengths and he would be a world beater if we did.

Cotts - we're not playing to his strengths and would be a world beater if we did.

Sharp - We're not playing to his strengths. He would get 700 goals a season if we were you know?

Harper - We're not playing to his strengths, the ball bypasses him and he is not being given the freedom he craves.

The list is endless for people like Howard, SQuinn, Walker etc.

So are we signing people blindly?
Should we play 11 different ways of football per game to suit everyone?
Is it really a case of not playing to their strengths?
Or we just making excuses for players we like who are not performing?

 

[Revolution]

I don't know the answer to your question Robbie, but I will make one supplemental point - post Brown, none of the central midfielders we've used have ever played consistently well. Even those with a good reputation somewhere else - Howard, Harper, Hendrie - have not kept up those standards.

Not that I'm expecting Brown mark II - that was a once in a generation season he had - but it is surprising that nobody has settled in that role 6 years (actually, I might make 1 exception - Jags when he was there in 05/06).

Could it be that it's not the players but it's a function of how we play?

(in fact, I have always thought having to partner with the most offensively limited midfielder on the planet was part of the problem, but I know that is a taboo subject for many so forget I said that bit. There's no need to tell me he's the second coming of Michael Essien)

 

[Grecian2000]

Or are we just not playing a style of football that suits footballers?

The players you mention whose strengths we do play to are not the sort that would have you running to the ticket office to splash out your hard earned are they?

 

[Houso]

I read thread after thread and no matter the player mentioned - we're not playing to his strengths (except Monty, Morgan and Henderson).

Evans.... we're not playing the football that suits him, we're not playing to his strengths and he would be a world beater if we did.

Cotts - we're not playing to his strengths and would be a world beater if we did.

Sharp - We're not playing to his strengths. He would get 700 goals a season if we were you know?

Harper - We're not playing to his strengths, the ball bypasses him and he is not being given the freedom he craves.

The list is endless for people like Howard, SQuinn, Walker etc.

So are we signing people blindly?
Should we play 11 different ways of football per game to suit everyone?
Is it really a case of not playing to their strengths?
Or we just making excuses for players we like who are not performing?

All those players would benefit from a more controlled and intelligent approach. Not '11 different ways of football per game'.

Of course one or two are underperforming, but that's also a chicken and egg question when considering our style of play.

You say except Henderson by the way, well I think he'd play even better if his main role wasn't to compete for every hoof to his head.

 

[Jim Chimmerney]

I read thread after thread and no matter the player mentioned - we're not playing to his strengths (except Monty, Morgan and Henderson).

Evans.... we're not playing the football that suits him, we're not playing to his strengths and he would be a world beater if we did.

Cotts - we're not playing to his strengths and would be a world beater if we did.

Sharp - We're not playing to his strengths. He would get 700 goals a season if we were you know?

Harper - We're not playing to his strengths, the ball bypasses him and he is not being given the freedom he craves.

The list is endless for people like Howard, SQuinn, Walker etc.

So are we signing people blindly?
Should we play 11 different ways of football per game to suit everyone?
Is it really a case of not playing to their strengths?
Or we just making excuses for players we like who are not performing?

We have been blessed with Blackwell and Warnock over the last 10 years who in the main like to play to a system first and add the players in second. To me, players should be adaptable enough to make changes when they're on the pitch but at the end of the day, if they're not playing to instructions they'll be dropped. Blackwell talked the talk about wanting pace and wingers but, well, we know the rest.

 

[Grecian2000]

"We have been blessed with Blackwell and Warnock over the last 10 years"

Would that be what's known as a "blessing in disguise"?

 

[SotonBlade]

I think all the players mentioned are 'footballers'. Ball played to feet.

We try this for about 20-30% of a game, which mean's the rest of the time these type of players become anonymous.

I think that Blackwell is limited tactically and just can't get them to play football consistently and resorts to the aim for Hendo tactic.

I'm still giving him 6 games with a reasonably fit squad, but i'm not that hopeful of things changing that much.

 

[Jim Chimmerney]

I think all the players mentioned are 'footballers'. Ball played to feet.

We try this for about 20-30% of a game, which mean's the rest of the time these type of players become anonymous.

I think that Blackwell is limited tactically and just can't get them to play football consistently and resorts to the aim for Hendo tactic.

I'm still giving him 6 games with a reasonably fit squad, but i'm not that hopeful of things changing that much.

Said it many times before but you watch them pre-game knocking it around, quick one-touch stuff, movement, the lot, then the game starts.......

 

[HoodedClaw]

Can someone enlighten me as to what strenghts SQuinn has please??

IMO the first strength a footballer should have is the ability to play football, not the ability to kick it forward 40 yards and shout "Get on the end of that fucker"

The players seem to be happier trying when to give each other more than a 50/50 chance of winning the ball, and to me if you're happy with what you're trying to do there is a greater chance of you succeeding.

Blackwell unfortunately plays a pre-historic brand of football, and pretty poorly at that.

It does astound me though, that as part of his coaching badges, Blackwell went round some of the biggest clubs in the world (Real Madrid, Inter Milan etc) and then decided on fucking hoofball as the way forward. Unbelievable :loopy:

 

[Cheshire Cat]

Can someone enlighten me as to what strenghts SQuinn has please??

IMO the first strength a footballer should have is the ability to play football, not the ability to kick it forward 40 yards and shout "Get on the end of that fucker"

I'm not a fan of Quinny - but he was a different player against Preston in the home leg of the play-off, and his movement (running about wildly) was, alongside the movement of Craig Beattie, the reason that we bossed that game for such long periods in the first hour.

His normal mode when we play out and out direct is maddening - run about and hook it over his shoulder. However - him, Monty and Howard looked fantastic when playing balls between them, running off the ball and picking out players in space. He was also useful when space opened up and he could run into the channels.

He's never going to be a 'foot on the ball' type, but he's always been better when he's taken the time to think before acting. It's his passing without looking that has me hurling abuse.

 

[Torrix1889]

As has been said the problem is our managers, (with the exception of Robson) over the last 10+ years play their football in a certain way and no matter what that aint gonna change.

They then sign players hoping that they will fit-in to their system and when they don't they sell them on. (almost all the time at a huge £ loss!)

That's why we have such a high turnover of players at the club.

 

[SotonBlade]

As has been said the problem is our managers, (with the exception of Robson) over the last 10+ years play their football in a certain way and no matter what that aint gonna change.

They then sign players hoping that they will fit-in to their system and when they don't they sell them on. (almost all the time at a huge £ loss!)

That's why we have such a high turnover of players at the club.

The more you think about that, the more it rings true

 

[HoodedClaw]

I'm not a fan of Quinny - but he was a different player against Preston in the home leg of the play-off, and his movement (running about wildly) was, alongside the movement of Craig Beattie, the reason that we bossed that game for such long periods in the first hour.

His normal mode when we play out and out direct is maddening - run about and hook it over his shoulder. However - him, Monty and Howard looked fantastic when playing balls between them, running off the ball and picking out players in space. He was also useful when space opened up and he could run into the channels.

He's never going to be a 'foot on the ball' type, but he's always been better when he's taken the time to think before acting. It's his passing without looking that has me hurling abuse.

Thats fair Cheshire, Id forgot about that game seems so long ago when we saw some decent football.

 

[Grecian2000]

The last time we got promoted SQuinny spent a large part of the season at Millmoor. A friend of mine who is unfortunate enough to hold a ST for The Millers spent most of any conversation I had with him waxing lyrical about the "ginger Pele" we had loaned them.

When he played for us in the Prem. he looked a real prospect (a smaller, stronger version of his brother) who could put his foot on the ball and attack down the left. He even had the gall the make David James look a bit foolish at a free kick. I thought we had a real prospect on our hands.

I find what has happened over the last season and a half a complete mystery. He now looks a shadow of what came into the team. He constantly gets rid of the ball without as much as a glance of where it might be going and looks, frankly, out of his depth. How has it got to this?

 

[raul]

Memory is a little hazy, but I seem to recall Monty going down a similar path, looked the business when he brokethrough, then.......

 

[Grecian2000]

How dare you suggest the Saviour is anything less than magnificent, call yourself a Blade. Pah!

 

[SotonBlade]

How dare you suggest the Saviour is anything less than magnificent, call yourself a Blade. Pah!

Wish more posters on here had your tongue in cheek attitude

 

[oldblade]

Said it many times before but you watch them pre-game knocking it around, quick one-touch stuff, movement, the lot, then the game starts.......

Pre match all I see is us still being unable to hit the target, and Blackwell throwing the ball up for Morgan and Co to head.

 

[super_pig]

high turnover of staff is a classic sign of a poorly managed outfit.. i'd love to quiz brian howard about this.. the most successful teams in the world do not play hoof ball..there is a reason for this.. it is unsuccessful.