Freedman out!

[jaffka]

There are a few gobshites on here who offer their opinion a unquestionable fact and bullshit their self importance. Dick heads.

[Prufrock]

When you were battering on about 442, we didn't possess two forwards that could work together. The fact that some months later we got a target man and linked him up with a second loanee, doesn't make you right at the point in time you started mentioning it.

I first started mentioning it last season, not this one, and it's got nothing to do with the strikers we have either. They could be two lazy poachers or two workhorse target men, it doesn't change the fact that two strikers suits us more. I was right with that yet my comments were met with constant derisory comments about me playing too much Football Manager I'm right about the other things I've got into in the past too.

Seeing as he chirped in this thread, as he always does when I post, I remember Prufock taking issue with me slagging Knight off for his awful defending against Forest earlier this year. BWFI agreed with him, as did someone else who I can't remember. When people take that sort of stance, it tells me that they know nothing about football and/or they're picking an argument because they don't like me. Their understanding of football is so far off point, it's almost childlike, yet they constantly pick up on my points. It's oddly masochistic of them.

As for the backtracking on how poor the team was that Coyle assembled then pointing out that a replacement for Holden or Chungy might have helped when we spunked our cash on Sordell. Beggars belief.

I've not backtracked on anything and I agree that the money that went on Sordell was too much and proved to be a poor deal. It was a gamble and some pay off, some don't, but we should have gone with a safe bet and signed someone with a proven record.

What can I say, I find it difficult to let bollocks slide (which is an arresting thought).

Dude, if you keep having to preface everything you say with how you know more than everybody else, well that should tell you something. DSB doesn't preface verything he says with his CV in footballing journalism. Boris doesn't preface everything he says with his list of playing and other experience. People who know what they are talking about don't need to stress to their audience that they know what they are talking about.

When you first came on here, you gave it the 'big I am' implying that you worked at a serious level within the game. When questioned it turned out you had (or were working towards I can't remember) your FA level 1, a qualification granted to all those who can simultaneously a) put out cones and b) not be a paedophile.

You dropped that but continue to post in patronising tones to people with this attitude that you know more about football than them. Yet the stuff you come out with jars. You keep going on about Freedman's inability to build an 'attacking unit'. Now perhaps that's just a semantically odd use of the word 'unit', but in context of the other stuff you write I think it's an attempt to sound knowledgeable by using words you think sort of fit the context. Similar to when people misuse big words in an attempt to sound intelligent. The main defensive principles are that you defend narrow, and compact. Hence why people talk about a defensive 'unit' because unit implies solidity and 'oneness'. People rarely use the word when talking about attacking because in attack you want to make the pitch big, you want width, and depth. That's not very unit-y.

To be fair, that might just be an odd choice of word, and I'm plenty guilty of that at times.

Where I know you're talking shite though is when you talk about defending. Specifically in fact that Knight incident. I shadowed a guy doing his A licence whilst he taught a session specifically on 'playing offside'. I personally don't like the idea of playing offside because its complicated, and it sticks an emphasis on training defensively which I find dull. It's also hard to coach, beyond me. This is almost certainly shortcoming on my part. This guy was fecking brilliant at it. How did he teach this offside trap? By triggers on when there was pressure on the ball. You cannot play offside without pressure on the ball. Alan Hansen ripped into I think Fulham the other week for trying to play offside without pressure on the ball. Some top Italian coach of the 90s, I'm fairly sure it was Arrigo Sacchi, talked about how his entire system was based on constant pressure on the ball allowing a high line to be played. Many people talked about how the difference between Rijkard's and Guardiola's Barcelona being that Guardiola's team pressed the ball well allowing them to play a high line and so limit the space the other team could play in. This is something that is universally accepted, that you cannot hope to 'play a line' without pressure on the ball. Without pressure on the ball the guy on it can just time his pass so he plays it as the attacker 'crosses' the defensive line. Teams will constantly get in behind you playing that way.

That Knight incident you refer to came from you saying he should have pushed up two yards to play a line against a midfielder running at the back four without pressure on the ball. I called you on it. BWFCi called you on it. Bolton Boris called you on it pointing out that even if he had held a line he wouldn't even have been offside! Yet you talk as if you're a footballing visionary for saying 'Zat Knight should have pushed up'.

You also keep trying to claim some sort of credit for arguing we should be playing 4-4-2. You were certainly right that the 4-2-3-1 we were playing was not successful, but that hardly puts you in a minority. Loads of people were saying that. I wasn't one of them, i thought we'd be better with that formation and was wrong. But we haven't played a 4-4-2. The wonky diamond best described probably as a 4-2-2-2 isn't what you were arguing for. You were right about where we going wrong, but you weren't right about the solution, not unless you genuinely think it's as simple as having '2 up top not 1' in which case, see above.

I think loads of people are wrong at times, and no doubt loads of people think I'm wrong at times (/all the time!). Sometimes that's great fodder for debate, but to point out everything would be fecking tedious. The reason I seem to jump on everything you say is not because I think you're wrong (or because I dislike you, I don't bloody know you!), but because you try to hold yourself out as some sort of footballing visionary rather than what you are, which is just another bloke typing away on the internet like the rest of us.

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

Sorry, SF, but I can't help feeling you may have been better suited to being a Liverpool fan.

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

Ouch!

[Hoboh]

Sorry, SF, but I can't help feeling you may have been better suited to being a Liverpool fan.

Low blow that!

[bobo the clown]

Sorry, SF, but I can't help feeling you may have been better suited to being a Liverpool fan.

Low blow that!

"Cruel and unusual !"

[jaffka]

That is just out of order.

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

Isn't that defamation? Put you in prison here that.

[thebish]

Liverpool fans ARE "the most knowledgeable fans in the game", though...

[BWFC_Insane]

The only thing I'd take back is my opinion that Coyle isn't a bad manager but whilst I don't rate him, I don't have the anger that many people on here do and I'd still defend him against a lot of the excessive criticism. He was a much better manager for us than Freedman has been who, bizarrely, some people haven't completely seen through. But my comments on the team were right. We did lack quality in the season we went down and we should have signed more played to cover the injury crisis we had. Had we brought in a replacement for Chungy or Holden, I don't think we'd have gone down which puts into perspective the job Coyle did. The players who replaced them weren't good enough and they undoubtedly did lack confidence, so I wasn't wrong.

Lets just tackle this with some numbers.....

On the back of a fag packed calculation taking upper bound limit of reported fees in all cases:

Transfer Spend
Coyle ~17M
Freedman ~4M

Wage bill during last full published accounts
Coyle ~55M
Freedman ~37M

Wage bill + Expenditure
Coyle - 72M
Freedman - 41M

Position Team inherited
Coyle - 18th in Premiership
Freedman - 16th in Championship

Position of Team when leaving (or after last game)
Coyle - 18th in Championship
Freedman - 14th in Championship

Net League Table Change
Coyle - -20
Freedman - +2

[Andy Waller]

Sorry, SF, but I can't help feeling you may have been better suited to being a Liverpool fan.

Low blow that!

"Cruel and unusual !"

Justice For The SF.

[jaffka]

The only thing I'd take back is my opinion that Coyle isn't a bad manager but whilst I don't rate him, I don't have the anger that many people on here do and I'd still defend him against a lot of the excessive criticism. He was a much better manager for us than Freedman has been who, bizarrely, some people haven't completely seen through. But my comments on the team were right. We did lack quality in the season we went down and we should have signed more played to cover the injury crisis we had. Had we brought in a replacement for Chungy or Holden, I don't think we'd have gone down which puts into perspective the job Coyle did. The players who replaced them weren't good enough and they undoubtedly did lack confidence, so I wasn't wrong.

Lets just tackle this with some numbers.....

On the back of a fag packed calculation taking upper bound limit of reported fees in all cases:

Transfer Spend
Coyle ~17M
Freedman ~4M

Wage bill during last full published accounts
Coyle ~55M
Freedman ~37M

Wage bill + Expenditure
Coyle - 72M
Freedman - 41M

Position Team inherited
Coyle - 18th in Premiership
Freedman - 16th in Championship

Position of Team when leaving (or after last game)
Coyle - 18th in Championship
Freedman - 14th in Championship

Net League Table Change
Coyle - -20
Freedman - +2

How typical that you don't join in with the fun and persist on your pointless crusade.

You really are very boring

[malcd1]

Sorry, SF, but I can't help feeling you may have been better suited to being a Liverpool fan.

I'm in agreement. I don't mind people giving SF dogs of abuse (he's big enough to take it hopefully) but that comment, Mummy, is WAY out of order. I'm proposing a months ban for Mummy.

[Lord Kangana]

14th in the Championship off a £37m wage bill is as embarrassing as being relegated with a £55m one. We really are in tallest dwarf territory here.

[jaffka]

Groundhog day

[Prufrock]

But this could be the time someone wins!

And Crayons? Ouch!

[jaffka]

Seconds out, round 5672...

[Prufrock]

Even I've given up banging on about that one! And I bloody love banging on.

[jaffka]

Even I've given up banging on about that one! And I bloody love banging on.

I love banging...

[BWFC_Insane]

14th in the Championship off a £37m wage bill is as embarrassing as being relegated with a £55m one. We really are in tallest dwarf territory here.

The wage bill will be considerably lower than that. That was the last reported set of accounts.