Pragmatism vs Perseverance

Where fellow sufferers gather to share the pain, longing and unrequited transfer requests that make being a Wanderer what it is...

Moderator: Zulus Thousand of em

How do you want to see the manager respond to iffy results?

Pragmatism
7
33%
Perseverance
14
67%
 
Total votes: 21

BWFC_Insane
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 26625
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm

Re: Pragmatism vs Perseverance

Post by BWFC_Insane » Sun Sep 27, 2020 6:26 pm

Bertie Wooster wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 6:02 pm
So BWFCI /does the buck & accountability stop with Evatt ?, are you saying that Evatt is comfortable with all of our signings and had an input with them all ?
I mean it’s a question of first getting a team out on the pitch doing the footballing basics right. We can’t play out from the back. It’s just not possible. We need to see a back four drilled into a shape with some discipline in midfield in front of them. Those things just aren’t happening now..and without basics and fight and graft you won’t win any games. So far we haven’t got a player who looks like he can play at this level and we know that not to be the case. The problem is clearly a) they cannot play from the back b) they need some instruction and coaching to get them into a cohesive unit and c) they lack confidence.

All this needs fixing and can be on the training ground and Evatt himself has more or less said so.

I don’t think clubs where a manager picks and signs every player on his own with no other input exist anymore. Evatt himself says that sort of old setup is impossible in the modern day and he wants this setup with a DoF. In terms of your question, in terms of basic coaching and being set up properly the buck very much stops with Evatt. But I think he knows this and it’s time to find a way to get points.

Harry Genshaw
Legend
Legend
Posts: 7459
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2005 10:47 pm
Location: Half dead in Panama

Re: Pragmatism vs Perseverance

Post by Harry Genshaw » Sun Sep 27, 2020 10:58 pm

We can play out from the back and it's perfectly possible. There are greater priorities right now though.

Get the back 3 or 4 to forget any notion for now of getting forward. Remember that they are defenders first and foremost and that they'd rather die than concede a goal. Spend all this week practicing on positioning, defending set pieces and being bloody minded.
"Get your feet off the furniture you Oxbridge tw*t. You're not on a feckin punt now you know"

User avatar
Dave Sutton's barnet
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 18398
Joined: Sun May 14, 2006 4:00 pm
Location: Hanging on in quiet desperation
Contact:

Re: Pragmatism vs Perseverance

Post by Dave Sutton's barnet » Mon Sep 28, 2020 10:25 am

I've airlifted this post here from the transfers thread, because I think it goes to the heart of the titular choice here and chimes with Harry's post above...
BWFC_Insane wrote:
Mon Sep 28, 2020 9:13 am
...The only player I've seen in our team who WANTS the ball is White. He might sometimes make an error but he does seem comfortable in possession and wants to try and get the team going forwards.

This is where for me we're trying to overcomplicate it. Most football at this level is a solid base, some outlets either with a target up front or pace down the channels and then play from there. It gets you 40 or 50 yards up the pitch and then players like Crawford and White and your wide men can have a go at teams or work something in and around their box. The way we play means that White and/or Crawford are having to come into our half, pick it up and then start attacks. If you think what that involves its probably 7 or 8 more passes than if you can get it wide first time or hit a target up front. 7 or 8 more passes that a) if they aren't quick enough let the opposition get into position very comfortably and b) 7 or 8 times where a mistake costs possession,

Playing out from the back is fine if you can do it, or if its a variation in your game - but we're trying to do it every time and pretty much failing 80% of the time to build a meaningful attack. The worry is we've not recruited the wide players capable of playing this system nor have we got a striker who can do the holding up job up front. But at a simple level we need our best attacking threats picking up the ball within 30 yards of the opposition goal consistently, ideally before the opposition have their shape.

The whole way Evatt wants to play relies on extreme pressure on the ball, fast transitions and a player able to go up the gears very very quickly when the opponents are dug in. I think we lack all those things on the evidence thus far. Its more than just understanding - the confidence isn't there. So we need to play a simpler game.

If you look at it our strength comparatively is our strikers, Doyle and Delfouneso should be a handful and should score goals. To make that effective we need to stop conceding and find a more basic and easy way of getting them chances. Because currently we're not creating chances on anything like a regular basis.
A very good post, BWFCi, I find myself nodding along in agreement with just about all of it. Interestingly, the hybrid football you suggest - get it forward, *then* play in their third - isn't far from what we did at our best under the prelapsarian Owen Coyle: everyone remembers the equaliser against Blackpool but we frequently "found Kev" or Elmander in order to pitch our tents at the business end of the field.

By the way, didn't Crellin go longer a lot more often this weekend?

As you say, every pass is a risk - and while I'd love us to pass teams to death, I don't want us to pass ourselves to death. It's not just five defeats, it's five fairly awful defeats in which we've barely laid a glove on the oppo. Just because we haven't been hammered doesn't mean we've been that close. Again, you know I'm not a man for hyperbole but with better finishing at set-pieces Newport could have reversed the 6-0 scoreline last time we met: they had 24 efforts on goal, nine on target. Because, by the way all this, including your excellent post above and my continual tw*tting on about formations, doesn't even begin to consider the defending, which is woeful bordering on criminal. That is about organisation and coaching, and that is the worry.

But back to what you say above. Like you I'd be content for now with solidity, whether it's a back three or a 4-3-3 with a sitter. I voted Perseverance but that's when I expected us to be able to do the basics. So for now IMO we have to crank the dial back a bit. Get our more experienced players in - Tutte and Delaney, for instance. Find a balance because at the moment we're basing a moonshot on a rotten launchpad.

BWFC_Insane
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 26625
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm

Re: Pragmatism vs Perseverance

Post by BWFC_Insane » Mon Sep 28, 2020 11:14 am

Dave Sutton's barnet wrote:
Mon Sep 28, 2020 10:25 am

A very good post, BWFCi, I find myself nodding along in agreement with just about all of it. Interestingly, the hybrid football you suggest - get it forward, *then* play in their third - isn't far from what we did at our best under the prelapsarian Owen Coyle: everyone remembers the equaliser against Blackpool but we frequently "found Kev" or Elmander in order to pitch our tents at the business end of the field.

By the way, didn't Crellin go longer a lot more often this weekend?

As you say, every pass is a risk - and while I'd love us to pass teams to death, I don't want us to pass ourselves to death. It's not just five defeats, it's five fairly awful defeats in which we've barely laid a glove on the oppo. Just because we haven't been hammered doesn't mean we've been that close. Again, you know I'm not a man for hyperbole but with better finishing at set-pieces Newport could have reversed the 6-0 scoreline last time we met: they had 24 efforts on goal, nine on target. Because, by the way all this, including your excellent post above and my continual tw*tting on about formations, doesn't even begin to consider the defending, which is woeful bordering on criminal. That is about organisation and coaching, and that is the worry.

But back to what you say above. Like you I'd be content for now with solidity, whether it's a back three or a 4-3-3 with a sitter. I voted Perseverance but that's when I expected us to be able to do the basics. So for now IMO we have to crank the dial back a bit. Get our more experienced players in - Tutte and Delaney, for instance. Find a balance because at the moment we're basing a moonshot on a rotten launchpad.
And whilst I may be prone to hyperbole you could see the signs well before this weekend. Colchester for example - Evatt thought we played well, but we didn't really lay a glove on them. And their keeper was comfortable as was their side watching us pass it nowhere waiting on a mistake.

We've had 5 competitive games and I'd say we've not come close to winning a single one - not in reality. The scorelines mask the performances MOSTLY. Colchester I suspect 2-0 was a little harsh but we did deserve to lose.

I'd try a very basic 4-4-2 to be honest. Something they should be comfortable with.

Crellin
Gordon/Mascoll Delaney Baptiste Jones
White Tutte Comley Hickman
Doyle Delf

Something like that. You can tweak the individuals - idea being Gordon pushes on ahead of White who tucks in and supports midfield. Hickman offers width.

officer_dibble
Legend
Legend
Posts: 9222
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 9:33 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: Pragmatism vs Perseverance

Post by officer_dibble » Mon Sep 28, 2020 11:46 am

Crellin did go long a lot more - Evatt has taken that as our defenders not being brave enough and showing for the ball. If it gets Santos dropped, great, but it doesn’t address the problem.

User avatar
Dave Sutton's barnet
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 18398
Joined: Sun May 14, 2006 4:00 pm
Location: Hanging on in quiet desperation
Contact:

Re: Pragmatism vs Perseverance

Post by Dave Sutton's barnet » Sat Oct 10, 2020 6:34 pm

Thought I'd give this a bump, as a few people twitch toward the panic button... :mrgreen:

GhostoftheBok
Dedicated
Dedicated
Posts: 1162
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2018 12:51 pm

Re: Pragmatism vs Perseverance

Post by GhostoftheBok » Sat Oct 10, 2020 7:21 pm

Dave Sutton's barnet wrote:
Sat Oct 10, 2020 6:34 pm
Thought I'd give this a bump, as a few people twitch toward the panic button... :mrgreen:
Attachments
kim.jpg
kim.jpg (6.73 KiB) Viewed 355 times

officer_dibble
Legend
Legend
Posts: 9222
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 9:33 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: Pragmatism vs Perseverance

Post by officer_dibble » Sun Oct 11, 2020 12:42 pm

Looks like Evatt did as well judging by his subs yesterday 😉

User avatar
Dave Sutton's barnet
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 18398
Joined: Sun May 14, 2006 4:00 pm
Location: Hanging on in quiet desperation
Contact:

Re: Pragmatism vs Perseverance

Post by Dave Sutton's barnet » Sun Oct 11, 2020 1:56 pm

officer_dibble wrote:
Sun Oct 11, 2020 12:42 pm
Looks like Evatt did as well judging by his subs yesterday 😉
I don't mind the replacement of wingbacks - it's good to inject fresh legs and ask new questions – but I'm surprised he thought the delivery from wide areas was a major problem, and specifically that Brockbank would be a better crosser than Hickman.

Comley for Tutte, meh, it's the sort of sub that's alright if Tutte's tiring and those in front are firing, and as TW15 so insightfully put it: they weren't.

Worthy4England
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 23974
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 6:45 pm

Re: Pragmatism vs Perseverance

Post by Worthy4England » Sun Oct 18, 2020 11:25 am

Dave Sutton's barnet wrote:
Sat Oct 10, 2020 6:34 pm
Thought I'd give this a bump, as a few people twitch toward the panic button... :mrgreen:
I'm presenting a plan to our Board on Monday to change our operating model to better meet then needs of the market. We need to do it, but we're going to deliver fcuk all for three years. I fancy my chances.

User avatar
Dave Sutton's barnet
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 18398
Joined: Sun May 14, 2006 4:00 pm
Location: Hanging on in quiet desperation
Contact:

Re: Pragmatism vs Perseverance

Post by Dave Sutton's barnet » Sun Oct 18, 2020 12:31 pm

Still in camp Perseverance, but I must admit I'm beginning to wonder.

But 28 years ago today, under a struggling new manager brought in to stop the rot and take us up, we were 18th in the Endsleigh League Division Two, way behind leaders Leyton Orient and a pack including Hartlepool (who'd just beaten us at home).

Three years after that, we were two divisions higher.

I have no idea whether Evatt is a Rioch or a reject. But I don't think we'll know yet. The "better" players are undeniably underperforming. The system isn't working yet (but it's working better than it was). We need to get a truckload better. I don't think that will be achieved by kicking it long (towards whom?). I think it will take some of the old-school management Evatt says he likes. He says a lot; it's time to do.

Worthy4England
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 23974
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 6:45 pm

Re: Pragmatism vs Perseverance

Post by Worthy4England » Sun Oct 18, 2020 1:04 pm

Don't think (well I'm not at least) suggesting start with kick it long. We need the end point in mind, but acknowledge that we might not be able to play to those aspirations at this point.

IMO we now have our baseline squad with transfer window closure and we need to find the formation/style that best suits them, fairly quickly. Surely you then make incremental change from there, over time and probably over multiple transfer windows. There is little point trying to mould this squad into the end state aspiration. There has to be give and take.

I'm not convinced the current approach of constantly changing 3/5 players a game is working. What opinion/evidence is suggesting that to you Barnetto? I ask, because 2nd half v Crewe, was the last time I thought "this might be progress"

User avatar
Dave Sutton's barnet
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 18398
Joined: Sun May 14, 2006 4:00 pm
Location: Hanging on in quiet desperation
Contact:

Re: Pragmatism vs Perseverance

Post by Dave Sutton's barnet » Sun Oct 18, 2020 1:53 pm

Worthy4England wrote:
Sun Oct 18, 2020 1:04 pm
Don't think (well I'm not at least) suggesting start with kick it long. We need the end point in mind, but acknowledge that we might not be able to play to those aspirations at this point.

IMO we now have our baseline squad with transfer window closure and we need to find the formation/style that best suits them, fairly quickly. Surely you then make incremental change from there, over time and probably over multiple transfer windows. There is little point trying to mould this squad into the end state aspiration. There has to be give and take.

I'm not convinced the current approach of constantly changing 3/5 players a game is working. What opinion/evidence is suggesting that to you Barnetto? I ask, because 2nd half v Crewe, was the last time I thought "this might be progress"
'ello mate, wasn't addressing you particularly with the long-ball suggestions which have been, if you'll pardon the phrase, in the air.

I would agree that Brand Evatt might need to be tweaked and rationalised: we're far too ponderous, especially at the sharp end. I would however be surprised if this bunch of players could play better by KNOCKING IT INTO THE CORNERS.

What we can take from such philosophies is speed of transition: almost without exception, any successful team doesn't take long at all to get it into the danger areas. Worth remembering that Guardiola himself hated the tiki-taka concept of pointless pitty-patty possession-heavy football - it should all be about finding space to punish your opponents, so if they a high press you pass round it into the gaps behind, and if they have a low block you draw them out of position with your possession. None of it is about passing for the sake of it. I'm not sure that is sinking in with our lot just yet.

As for changing players. Managers who do it well are forgiven, managers who do it badly are derided. Ferguson didn't play the same XI in successive games for something astonishing like eight years but nobody ever called him the tinkerman. If Evatt had chosen the same XI that failed to lay a glove on Grimsby he'd have been pilloried, probably with the Not Actually Albert Einstein quote. But if he makes changes it's the Tombola Team Selector. The only answer is to win, but we're not asking the right questions.

On a granular level, as I said before kickoff in a three-game week there's no way that Tutte would play 90/90/90 or possibly even 60/60/60, and that Comley needed to prove himself against Oldham. I thought he did alright for the first half but tailed off badly, and that's sadly something that keeps happening. This week Evatt said that 60 minutes is the magic number at which possession teams start to tire out their opponents, but from what I've seen with us it's the other way round. Certainly in the last minute, as Oldham tore up the pitch, Tutte (who'd taken the free kick) and Mascoll (his fellow sub who was left on halfway for the setpiece) didn't look massively fresh – but I doubt Comley and Gordon would have done any better. I can't shake the feeling that we run out of steam and ideas in the last third of the pitch and the last third of the game, no matter how many changes we make – but I don't think NOT making changes would help with that.

GhostoftheBok
Dedicated
Dedicated
Posts: 1162
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2018 12:51 pm

Re: Pragmatism vs Perseverance

Post by GhostoftheBok » Sun Oct 18, 2020 2:29 pm

It is concerning that we consistently look the least fit team on the pitch.

Harry Genshaw
Legend
Legend
Posts: 7459
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2005 10:47 pm
Location: Half dead in Panama

Re: Pragmatism vs Perseverance

Post by Harry Genshaw » Sun Oct 18, 2020 2:37 pm

Another one here for camp perseverance. Just.

I've been so badly scarred by the Dougie Freedman experience, I cant quite shake off the feeling that we've taken on another charlatan like him.

I can take defeats if things are improving on the whole. I'm not sure they are. We looked worse yesterday than we did against Bradford in the Carabao cup defeat.

Like Freedman, we paid a chunk of cash to get him, pissing more people off in the process and pressed the reset button, before having to press it again a while later and pay him off. I hope to God we don't have to go through that again.

C'mon Ian
"Get your feet off the furniture you Oxbridge tw*t. You're not on a feckin punt now you know"

Worthy4England
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 23974
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 6:45 pm

Re: Pragmatism vs Perseverance

Post by Worthy4England » Sun Oct 18, 2020 3:08 pm

Harry Genshaw wrote:
Sun Oct 18, 2020 2:37 pm
Another one here for camp perseverance. Just.

I've been so badly scarred by the Dougie Freedman experience, I cant quite shake off the feeling that we've taken on another charlatan like him.

I can take defeats if things are improving on the whole. I'm not sure they are. We looked worse yesterday than we did against Bradford in the Carabao cup defeat.

Like Freedman, we paid a chunk of cash to get him, pissing more people off in the process and pressed the reset button, before having to press it again a while later and pay him off. I hope to God we don't have to go through that again.

C'mon Ian
Mr Freedman, I think has our highest win % and lowest loss % since Allardyce...JSL. :-)

Worthy4England
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 23974
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 6:45 pm

Re: Pragmatism vs Perseverance

Post by Worthy4England » Sun Oct 18, 2020 3:33 pm

Dave Sutton's barnet wrote:
Sun Oct 18, 2020 1:53 pm
Worthy4England wrote:
Sun Oct 18, 2020 1:04 pm
Don't think (well I'm not at least) suggesting start with kick it long. We need the end point in mind, but acknowledge that we might not be able to play to those aspirations at this point.

IMO we now have our baseline squad with transfer window closure and we need to find the formation/style that best suits them, fairly quickly. Surely you then make incremental change from there, over time and probably over multiple transfer windows. There is little point trying to mould this squad into the end state aspiration. There has to be give and take.

I'm not convinced the current approach of constantly changing 3/5 players a game is working. What opinion/evidence is suggesting that to you Barnetto? I ask, because 2nd half v Crewe, was the last time I thought "this might be progress"
'ello mate, wasn't addressing you particularly with the long-ball suggestions which have been, if you'll pardon the phrase, in the air.

I would agree that Brand Evatt might need to be tweaked and rationalised: we're far too ponderous, especially at the sharp end. I would however be surprised if this bunch of players could play better by KNOCKING IT INTO THE CORNERS.

What we can take from such philosophies is speed of transition: almost without exception, any successful team doesn't take long at all to get it into the danger areas. Worth remembering that Guardiola himself hated the tiki-taka concept of pointless pitty-patty possession-heavy football - it should all be about finding space to punish your opponents, so if they a high press you pass round it into the gaps behind, and if they have a low block you draw them out of position with your possession. None of it is about passing for the sake of it. I'm not sure that is sinking in with our lot just yet.

As for changing players. Managers who do it well are forgiven, managers who do it badly are derided. Ferguson didn't play the same XI in successive games for something astonishing like eight years but nobody ever called him the tinkerman. If Evatt had chosen the same XI that failed to lay a glove on Grimsby he'd have been pilloried, probably with the Not Actually Albert Einstein quote. But if he makes changes it's the Tombola Team Selector. The only answer is to win, but we're not asking the right questions.

On a granular level, as I said before kickoff in a three-game week there's no way that Tutte would play 90/90/90 or possibly even 60/60/60, and that Comley needed to prove himself against Oldham. I thought he did alright for the first half but tailed off badly, and that's sadly something that keeps happening. This week Evatt said that 60 minutes is the magic number at which possession teams start to tire out their opponents, but from what I've seen with us it's the other way round. Certainly in the last minute, as Oldham tore up the pitch, Tutte (who'd taken the free kick) and Mascoll (his fellow sub who was left on halfway for the setpiece) didn't look massively fresh – but I doubt Comley and Gordon would have done any better. I can't shake the feeling that we run out of steam and ideas in the last third of the pitch and the last third of the game, no matter how many changes we make – but I don't think NOT making changes would help with that.
Nodding at most of this. I guess my "angle" as such, is that we should be a little further up the launchpad than we are, and I'm struggling to see signs of improvement. The fitness one is a great example. To play Brand Evatt, we have to be fit and run the oppo ragged (intelligently rather than headlessly), yet as others have observed (along with me too), we don't look that fit and seem to tire faster than the oppo.

To counterbalance that, if I was starting to see signs we were opening defences up, but just not bagging chances then we might say that's what he's been working on. But we're not seeing that either.

Whilst we argue the toss around the respective talents we have, Doyle, Sarceivic, Crawford and Fonz feels like it should be the basis for at least upper-mid table rather than scrabbling round the basement.

User avatar
Dave Sutton's barnet
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 18398
Joined: Sun May 14, 2006 4:00 pm
Location: Hanging on in quiet desperation
Contact:

Re: Pragmatism vs Perseverance

Post by Dave Sutton's barnet » Sun Oct 18, 2020 3:51 pm

Worthy4England wrote:
Sun Oct 18, 2020 3:33 pm
Nodding at most of this. I guess my "angle" as such, is that we should be a little further up the launchpad than we are, and I'm struggling to see signs of improvement. The fitness one is a great example. To play Brand Evatt, we have to be fit and run the oppo ragged (intelligently rather than headlessly), yet as others have observed (along with me too), we don't look that fit and seem to tire faster than the oppo.

To counterbalance that, if I was starting to see signs we were opening defences up, but just not bagging chances then we might say that's what he's been working on. But we're not seeing that either.

Whilst we argue the toss around the respective talents we have, Doyle, Sarceivic, Crawford and Fonz feels like it should be the basis for at least upper-mid table rather than scrabbling round the basement.
The fitness thing is particularly annoying given that we started before most others. Iles speculated this morning that there possibly aren't enough coaching staff, but it shouldn't take legions of them to get you fit. I think the fitness gap might be an indication of the step up from non-league, perhaps.

And yes: while some of the "Moneyball" signings could go either way, a squad with the four forward talents named above should not be wallowing in the bottom half. Maybe it won't for long. But it will until we start playing in a manner that maximises them.
Worthy4England wrote:
Sun Oct 18, 2020 3:08 pm
Mr Freedman, I think has our highest win % and lowest loss % since Allardyce...JSL. :-)
He also had our most expensive and most capable squad since the Prem, which should have been good enough to do better. History repeats as tragedy or farce...

Worthy4England
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 23974
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 6:45 pm

Re: Pragmatism vs Perseverance

Post by Worthy4England » Sun Oct 18, 2020 4:05 pm

That last para. Did you have to? Gonna need a beer to respond to that! But surely the most expensive post Prem squad was Coyle's...

User avatar
Dave Sutton's barnet
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 18398
Joined: Sun May 14, 2006 4:00 pm
Location: Hanging on in quiet desperation
Contact:

Re: Pragmatism vs Perseverance

Post by Dave Sutton's barnet » Sun Oct 18, 2020 4:26 pm

Worthy4England wrote:
Sun Oct 18, 2020 4:05 pm
That last para. Did you have to? Gonna need a beer to respond to that! But surely the most expensive post Prem squad was Coyle's...
...which Freedman took over within three months. And in that first January he flicked Petrov but added Medo and Craig Davies plus loanee Craig Dawson, for whom we probably paid a bob or two in fees and wages, and of course Rob Hall arrived on loan-with-view-to-transfer-and-disastrous-tactical-decision...

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 32 guests