Cowshed

14 minutes ago, Merrick's Marvels said:

I suspect he thought he could be successful here, despite the compromises and drawbacks involved - the CEO being the major one.

"I could write a book about some of the things that have gone on" is, pretty much, the verbatim quote he gave to supporters at one point. 

I think we can make an educated guess as to what he was referring to. 

Maybe he can explain in his book how HE signed Lee Tomlin wanting to buld a side around him, then months later how he wanted the team to press high up the pitch .. 

11 minutes ago, Harry said:

Or work with what you’ve got. Why would someone resign? 

Integrity. 

9 minutes ago, Harry said:

He did have one. It’s just that the recruitment didn’t match it. 

Then its NOT a model of play .. He should have resigned. 

8 hours ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Do you have the same opinion of Klopp, Mourinho, successive Man U and Chelsea managers, all of whom kowtow to a transfer "committee" that decide which players are brought in? Of course the manager/head coach is consulted on which players are being scouted and who prospective signings are, however the modern model does not give the manager the overall and ultimate responsibility of signing who they want to. It has been like this at the top clubs for quite a few years, so it's surprising some fans are still confused about how things work. When Mark Ashton rocked up at Ipswich, are you expecting us to believe that Paul Cook had a list of 23 players that he wanted to sign, and that Ashton purely did the administrative work behind the deals? 

With respect, you couldn't possibly know that. I don't either btw, however I'd put to you that it is very unlikely that in 4 years LJ did not privately express concerns regards Ashton. Very unlikely. 

Klopps players are brought into to fit a model of play. This vision, that identity was created by Jurgen Klopp. 

Lee Johnsons identity ... He didn't have one.

17 hours ago, BLRed said:

Biggest one for me, especially in the football league is make the referees accountable for their in-game decisions. They get away with terrible refereeing time and time again and all that happens are apology letters from the FA without anything truly being done about it. Yet manager bemoaning said mistakes get heavily fined. 
I reckon if they aren’t going to improve the standard of refereeing, then each manager should get 2-3 decision challenges per game, whereby a video referee is called upon. If the challenger is correct, decision over ruled and they keep the challenge like in cricket.

Referees are promoted and demoted, or not retained on the basis of their decisions. This starts at level eight and goes through thirteen levels (there are 2a/2b etc).

No referee gets away with terrible refereeing time after time at any level. If you are poor you do not get retained, above level three you get demoted.  

22 minutes ago, Tinmans Love Child said:

If Societal factors are the cause, then these sort of incidents should be more frequent and occur across all aspects of life, but they don’t, they happen only at football.  

You don’t get somebody under societal pressures going to the theatre to watch Lion King and after a few beers in the interval, running on stage and punching Simba do you!  

 

Do large groupings of males from obvious socio-economic groupings go to the theatre? Human behaviour develops differently across society. Behaviour is affected by setting, its environment and peer group and emotions, and these incidents wouldn't be witnessed at the theatre, as the dynamics are different.

In regards to your first line behaviours we see at football can also be parallel to gigs, demos, festivals. There is a phrase demo fever, it is a heightened state of mental arousal, people at demos display behaviours they do not demonstrate elsewhere because of the intensity of the event and the actions of the participants .. A similarity to some peoples more extreme behaviour at football.

Just now, spudski said:

We can agree to disagree...it is a 'general' occurance where a minority act feral and anti social. When confined as a group together, it magnifies the situation.

Unfortunately the legal punishments you speak of aren't deterring enough people. 

If you can't stop fans getting over boarding, you have no chance of funneling. They will find a way...after all there is four sides to a football pitch.

I saw more self policing back in the ' dark days'. Our ' own' would deal with the dick heads. 

It's not just the young ens...it grown men in their 40s and 50s acting like complete knob ends that gets me. 

I get the social unrest of a anarchic youth back in the 70s and 80s. It was a reaction to the day.

Now it's more often than not, just a bunch of fat old men trying to recreate something they did when they were young. It's pretty sad to observe.

At football and in towns when out.

Whatever happened to self awareness and control...now it seems people have to be told what to do

Then that feral tiny minority would not be a binary and or. Football fans are divergent. 

Legal punishments have helped to cut massively offending at football. We can look at football as then and now. Its silly to state that legal punishments that are greatly elevated (discriminatory?) for football are inadequate as a means of deterrent. 

No chance? Placing Police in areas that are more at risk would be more productive than what occurred last night. In a time of high emotion when the Police and safety officers will know using historical norms, fans will come onto the pitch, a fan ran into the dugout area which was unguarded by Police or Stewards. The risk Management there is a disgrace, leading to a induvial behaving disgracefully. 

Its not just the ... Same as it was in the past but the numbers have decreased, an ever present to be Managed.   

What happened to self-awareness .. Football crowds in the 70's, 80's, 90's and were so much more aware!! Football crowds in stadiums have become far less emotional, less responsive, less unpredictable, and far less violent.  

There were nearly 30,000 at Forest. One individual doesn't define the crowd. 

19 minutes ago, TonyTonyTony said:

I read an article, can't remember where from, that it's coke usage fuelling fans now rather than booze. When i was young, coke use was no way prevalent - it seems it is now. Is that right?

Cocaine has replaced amphetamines as the drug of choice to use with alcohol. Cocaine use has increased v decreasing amphetamines consumption over decades. Alcohol use has decreased across the populace.

Football fans in C2 groups upwards x age groups display obvious themes in drinking and drug usage v the populace. 

Is cocaine responsible for violence? Todays football crowds were far more violent in the past. 

There are socio economic factors there. 

1 hour ago, spudski said:

Well it's obvious 'celebrations' on pitches can't be managed...some want to celebrate, others are just looking to make trouble. 

In a perfect world...yes it would be great...but it's not.

Plus...why should players have to deal with it? Why should they have to be surrounded by fans charging on? You either get fans celebrating or acting feral and trying to get kit and boots from players...or the opposition players insulted or worse. 

The public can't be left to their own devices, as there are just too many morons. 

Arrests and being dealt with, mean absolutely nothing to the person who's been assaulted. It's reactive punishment. The action should be pro active...don't let it happen in the first place. 

You can't expect stewards on minimum wage to stop some drunk/ drugged up lunatic doing whatever they like.

System is broken.

Because its not a perfect world we manage risks. Players in general do not have to deal with it. There are legal punishements that prevent offending = Most people do not act in a similar manner.

You don't get fans celebrating, or feral. Feral fans in hundreds .. It no longer happens in stadiums. Thats the past. There are now very small numbers of problematic supporters.  

There are risks to manage. That is the proactive. Assaults on players/Managers are a rare occurence. This assault, the assailant ran up the touch line to the dug outs. There is a control measure there. Safety officers and the Police know fans will come on the pitch, its inevitable, so a control measure could be funnelling fans away from the dug outs, tunnels, or further allow pitch celebrations after the players have left the pitch, and are in a area where risk can be better managed. 

The system is broken ... Uneven at best. Football came from  a dark place where pitched battles happened at stadiums were weekly events. Systems very much work.  

10 minutes ago, IAmNick said:

It's such a shame as seeing all the fans surrounding the pitch, then run on after a huge win is such a great feeling / spectacle. Really disappointing that some idiots continue to ruin things for everyone else.

Personally I'd be disappointed if it was just cut out completely - I think the club even use a vid of everyone on the pitch after our last promotion in the pre match reel.

If it can't be done sensibly and safely though I don't know what the answer is. It's not acceptable for anyone to get attacked or assaulted whoever they are.

The person responsible will be dealt with legally. Assaults on players are very rare. Fans celebrating on the pitch, or indulging in what are end of season traditions is not a rare occurence. We know fans will go on pitches, celebrations on pitches can be managed. 

57 minutes ago, redysteadygo said:

Could always go back to fences around the pitch! 

This is the sort of behaviour they were introduced for.

When assessing risks perspective should be used. Football has a history to assess. 

How many people are injured due to pitch invasions?

How many people have been injured, or died due to fencing?  

4 hours ago, Scare_Man said:

The amount of time wasting and ‘gamesmanship’ that goes on in every single game is a real frustration for the team on the other end, having a stop clock system should prevent that - obviously the purists would be dead against any sort of change like this but those stats speak for themselves 

Yes the stats paint pictures. Ball rolling time has increased over dedades. Compare ball rolling time now v the eighties/nineties. What the stats tell you is that possession based teams have higher ball rolling times, and those that place greater emphasis on direct football and set plays have lower ball rolling times. Stokes stats were a reflection of their game approach not gamesmanship.

Having a stop the clock system would mean some games would be two hours long. Think about the variables for games, levels (grass roots to pro) and fans. There would also still be gamesmanship. Stopping the clock, still stops a  game and breaks momentum. 

2 minutes ago, Clevedon Red said:

Refs to be made accountable for decisions and explain it to the media.

Refs are accountable. They are promoted and demoted. From level seven upwards. 

19 hours ago, slartibartfast said:

Surely any rule change to the laws of the game would have to be ratified by FIFA ?

That is IFAB. 

International Football Association Board | Laws of the Game | IFAB (theifab.com)

The links explain how laws are changed. Its a process that has to benefit football as a whole not individual leagues and TV. Football rules should be universal. 

1 hour ago, 22A said:

Usually late May / early June, the League holds it's AGM attended by all 92 club's Chairmen and amongst other things, they discuss amendments to the rules.

Any suggestions you think we could ask  City's Chairman to raise? (Other than only one team per city / town allowed in the League  )

A change I'd like to see is that if a team is awarded a free kick, they can take it as soon as they want without having to wit for the Ref's whistle.

A possibility would be to have off side only in the penalty area.

A free kick can be taken without the refs whistle. but there are criteria where you cannot take a free kick quickly like has the ref identified what the offence is, whether there will be a sanction, can the opponents get ten metres away etc.   

22 minutes ago, chinapig said:

Interesting, thanks, and agreed. I guess when some people talk of a back 4 they are thinking of a traditional flat back 4 where full backs are very much defenders. More Burnley than Brighton so to speak.

Full back is the most interesting position for me in the modern game to the extent that the term full back doesn't seem adequate any more!

If we take Walker, James and Alexander Arnold as the 3 main options for the England team, they're all called right backs but each performs a different role for his club. So you might need to set the team up in different ways to get the best out of the one selected.

Exactly. These players are not solely defenders. People do vieW full backs as defdenders v players who start at the back(?) but play the full length of the pitch.   

This player makes ninety passes a game that is more than Henderson or Thiago . Its a play making full back. The word full can be interpreted as its plays that FULL length of the park. 

Walkers demented pace allows Man City to create extreme width depth and dispersal. Its defending but not in a traditional sense as the players starting positions are not that of traditional right backs as he covers multiple zones. 

James ditto, no flat back four and none of the traditional you do not advance. 

Walker v Arnold for England .. Very differing players. Southgate has used Walkersas the third CB and at full back but withdrawn v Man City. Arnold? Cant see it. 

4 minutes ago, chinapig said:

A moot point I think.

Liverpool's centre backs play a high line and split wide with Fabinho ahead of and in between them. Their full backs start high up the pitch. Is that a back 4?

Man City tend to push their full backs into midfield, with Cancelo more forward than Walker. Is that a back 4?

There are so many variations these days it's harder to say what a back 4 even means!

What variation Nigel prefers, if any, I have no idea. My guess is he is a more sophisticated thinker than people believe though.

The full backs frequently play the full length of the pitch starting from that tucked in (its inversion) position. The formations are still 4-3-3 and 4-2-3-1 but they are a means to the control of possession.

Liverpools full backs go high because the likes of Henderson drop in to full back positions and centre back positions to create security. Out of possession the team goes into a traditional shape.

If your interested in this. Henderson uses a movement know as Laviplana build up. Common in Germany. Common in Spain now becoming more common in England.

15 minutes ago, Harry said:

We read a lot on here about Nigel’s desire to play 4-3-3 or some variation of which involves playing only 4 at the back (ie 2 centre backs). Whereas we’ve been playing a 3 for most of this season. 
 

I had a quick look at the formations of the other teams in the Championship over the last few weeks. This is not an exact science, just a quick look. 
 

The top 2 (Fulham & Bournemouth) tend to play 2 CB’s. 
The bottom 4 (Barnsley, Derby, Peterborough, Reading) tend to play 2 CB’s. 
5th bottom Birmingham tend to play 2 CB’s with an occasional 3. 
Everyone else tends to play with a 3 either all the time or the majority of the time. 
 

It would seem that, unless you are very good, playing a 2 will leave you near the bottom of the table. 

Do we think it’s right that Nige wants us to move to a back 4 next season? 
Thoughts……. 

Peterboro play 3-4-1-2. Barnlsey have played over half the season with 3-4-1-2 and 3-4-3. Derby played 4-2-3-1 and systems of 4-3-3 etc. 

But you may, or not want to advance the thinking here. Fulham play 4-2-3-1 and Bournemouth 4-2-3-1 and 4-3-3 as part of possession based football. Their teams intent and its outcomes are clear. 

City play 3-4-1-2, 3-5-2 and make several hundred passes less a game than the above. What is the intent behind Citys formation? Its not clear.  

1 minute ago, Rich said:

I'm fully aware of that, thanks for pointing out the bleeding obvious. But, that's not what I was implying. I referred to the ability of "some" players, not "all" players. There's also a difference regarding age of players and the expectations on whether they could do this or that type of role. Could Deidhiou have performed a a centre back? Much like has happened on numerous occasions with players of age as well.

I wasn't for one moment suggesting that a skillful slightly built winger would turn out to be a great central defender, or a bruising six foot five defender be a tricky winger. Merely suggesting that to the coaching staff, he'd done enough to give him more game time there.

And my reply mentioned some. I provided an example of a forward. Striker was in your post.   

Its a rare beast in the championship that can play adeptly multiple roles. What we do see is norms where players move from roles where their skill sets = Qualities required - RB - RWB. The positions are not wholly different. 

Could Diedhiou performed at centre back? No. He did not man mark and was poor at following tactical approaches like screening. Defending is tactical and psychologically demanding. Heading a few corners while guarding a zonal space is easy in comparison, and in comparison, current players do similar as well. As for his recovery post explosive movement, his physical corner was poor. Defenders need recovery qualities to sustain levels under pressure. 

22 hours ago, Rich said:

Why do some people on here think that some players, maybe being described as a striker, think that for some reason, they can't adapt and play in a different position, as and when necessity dictates? 

 

Because individuals have differing aptitudes and skill sets. Some players really will not, and c annot meet the challenges of differing roles within teams. Famara Diedhiou as a mobile ball retaining and ball winning centre midfielder? That is fanciful. 

7 minutes ago, frenchred said:

But there was an enforced reshuffle that all teams really didn't know what they were signing up for. The only going they could rely on was zero support from the fa suits!

I think Ashton amd Blackwell were scheduled to tra el down there on boxing day! Where is the logic in that

There were Cornish teams in the Western league in the eighties. The number has increased as the Western League has evolved with teams being promoted, or entering the Hellenic league.

The Western league has moved on its not the same clubs around Bristol, Somerset and North/West Wilts. The Western league is better for it. Clubs progress up and through.  

Logic? Clubs don't know what they are part of. Yes they do and the Cornish teams go the other way. 

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

Wasn’t there some enforced restructuring that happened in the close season?

I thought that was steps four to six.  

The Western league league is constantly altering as teams enter the Southern League and leave for steps down, and across. Frome. Larkhall, Manor Farm, Melksham, Paulton amongst other long term members have been lost and in are coming teams from elsewhere.

South West teams leaving the South peninsula league etc are stepping up a level to Western league football. Teams like Saltash have left and returned to the Western League from a lower level. 

Versus the eighties, nineties the Western league has become dynamic versus being filled with the same teams season upon season. Keynsham are in that evolving league by choice. Point here is there are alternatives for Keynsham, others choose alternative leagues that fit means and ambition. 

3 hours ago, Silvio Dante said:

KTFC have called their Toolstation game tonight off, citing cost and reasonableness of journey. Clearly there have to have been discussions prior to today - but at this level of football, who’s right?
 

 

Its a Western League. Keynsham enter this league each season understanding where teams play. They can choose to leave and join another league (the Hellenic) as other former Western league teams have.

On 31/03/2022 at 13:12, Rob k said:

For England or Liverpool?

For Liverpool. For England Hendersons stats lower as he is used primarily to hold - He plays to conservative instruction. 

12 hours ago, KegCity said:

In what way? Phillips breaks up play better and has better distribution.

Phillips makes a fifth of the assists Henderson makes, makes less key passes, makes less passes and has a lower passing accuracy.