O'Driscoll Answers Critics (Well Some)

[Brockleb]

As an aside, wether we agree with each other or not, it is disappointing that some contributors resort to personal insult in trying to make their point.

[Davros]

Davros, I am not quite sure what you are getting at but, I have nothing but admiration for Steve Lansdowne.

What I'm saying is that your throwing blind critasm at SOD without actually reading what he's saying it makes so much sense its unreal. The SL reference is to put it into context.

[Kibs]

I think the problem you get sometimes is a large gulf in expectations. If you hoped that he would come in and completely turn our season around then you are bound to be "Skeptical" and dissapointed.

Looking at the squad, the league position, the timing etc, I was always of the opinion that it would take something pretty special to keep us up. Having now had chance to see how things have panned out, including the outstanding form of the other bottom clubs like Peterboro, Barnsley etc, it would have taken even more than I originally thought. It's looking like a record points total to survive.

There has been decent improvement since S O'D took over. We couldn't win at home for toffee, we have achieved 17 points out of a possible 21 if I'm not mistaken. I saw a stat the other day which read something like (And I stand to be corrected because it's from memory): City averaged 0.85 Pts per game before he took over and were 6 points adrift. We have averaged 1.3 Pts since he arrived and are now 7 points adrift.

Time will only tell if he is given the time to sort out this mess and fully imbed his philosophy into the club. If people get itchy feet and demand instant success, I fear we could be in for a torrid few years.

[LondonBristolian]

I think I have made my point of view fairly clear.

Please don't take this the wrong way but I don't think you've made your point of view clear in the slightest. You've said that you find it defensive and self-serving, haven't really been able to explain what you mean by that and have just repeated those sentences and got a bit tetchy when you've been asked for clarification.

I'd genuinely be interested to know why and how you found it defensive and self-serving. I mean the latter I can accept - of course any manager explaining his approach is doing it to benefit himself by making sure fans know what his approach is but I don't see how it's defensive. He hasn't changed his opinion in the light of poor results and is saying the same things as he did when he was succeeding at Doncaster and Bournemouth. So I can't really see the justification for your perspective on that and would appreciate you explaining it.

I'd also disagree with others who say SOD is making things complicated. It's a long article but it's explaining a very simple approach - make sure you play well and the players know what they're doing and, in time, you'll win more than you lose.

[stroudy]

Cracking read.

[biggythecity]

I have to say a facinating read.Although i was far from happy with the selection and performance in lots of ways lots of what SOD says rings true.Im more than happy to give him time as i always have been and just hope what his plans are ring true.COYR

[bemmyredjeff]

I just read the article without the rose coloured glasses. What I wrote is what I think to be the case.

You will be hitting a brick wall with some on here.

I dont mind managers who can talk a good game but I am more interested in how that talk is transfered on to the pitch.

Unfortunately, despite a slight improvement in performances O'driscoll has been unable to wave his magic wand with this generally shambles of a squad.

0ne must not forget that he has had virtually half a season to turn things round and found us in a position that was, all be it slight, better than what we are now.

If the cull of players is achieved by him that we all hope for then I am confident though that he can start leading us in the right direction, but the jury for me is still out.

[Roger Red Hat]

You will be hitting a brick wall with some on here.

I dont mind managers who can talk a good game but I am more interested in how that talk is transfered on to the pitch.

Unfortunately, despite a slight improvement in performances O'Driscoll has been unable to wave his magic wand with this generally shambles of a squad.

0ne must not forget that he has had virtually half a season to turn things round and found us in a position that was, all be it slight, better than what we are now.

If the cull of players is achieved by him that we all hope for then I am confident though that he can start leading us in the right direction, but the jury for me is still out.

EH? You don't go to games do you.

[LondonBristolian]

You will be hitting a brick wall with some on here.

I dont mind managers who can talk a good game but I am more interested in how that talk is transfered on to the pitch.

Unfortunately, despite a slight improvement in performances O'Driscoll has been unable to wave his magic wand with this generally shambles of a squad.

0ne must not forget that he has had virtually half a season to turn things round and found us in a position that was, all be it slight, better than what we are now.

If the cull of players is achieved by him that we all hope for then I am confident though that he can start leading us in the right direction, but the jury for me is still out.

Season - Mid-August to Mid-May = 9 months (even if you exclude pre-season prep. time when lots of crucial unseen work happens)

S'OD - mid-jan to beginning of April = 2 1/2 months

I think your maths are a bit wonky here.

[bemmyredjeff]

EH? You don't go to games do you.

What would you like me to tell about yesterday.

The half time penalty shootout with the first contestant scoring both to win a years supply of blackthorn ?

Or, did you notice that the clock in the williams was still an hour behind ?

Or......

[bemmyredjeff]

Season - Mid-August to Mid-May = 9 months (even if you exclude pre-season prep. time when lots of crucial unseen work happens)

S'OD - mid-jan to beginning of April = 2 1/2 months

I think your maths are a bit wonky here.

By the end of the season, 20 games, virtually half a season.

Survival unsuccessful PAL.

[LondonBristolian]

By the end of the season, 20 games, virtually half a season.

Survival unsuccessful PAL.

I don't think he can be entirely blamed for that. If we'd had his average points per game since the start of the season we'd be level on points with 12th and 13th.

[beijing red]

I realise that he has been with us only a relatively short time but I would have felt better about him had he not written in the way he has.

As I stated earlier, I find the article defensive and self serving.

No one would be more pleased than me, if I am proved to be wrong.

Time will tell.

I have to disagree, I think there will be many who are more pleased than you if you are proved wrong!

[bemmyredjeff]

I don't think he can be entirely blamed for that. If we'd had his average points per game since the start of the season we'd be level on points with 12th and 13th.

Yes LB that is quite true, but while the other strugglers have been able to raise their game an extra notch we haven't and I know O'driscoll cannot be solely blamed for that.

[Roger Red Hat]

What would you like me to tell about yesterday.

The half time penalty shootout with the first contestant scoring both to win a years supply of blackthorn ?

Or, did you notice that the clock in the williams was still an hour behind ?

Or......

Thanks for clarifying that. You were obviously looking at everything, bar the game.

[Robin101]

Talk's the talk but as yet hasn't walked the walk, i remain sceptical.

To an extent. But we're unbeaten at home since he took over, and we're clearly more organised. Was always going to be a miracle if he kept us up.

[Harry]

As there are 2 threads on this subject I've decided to post on this one, as the other one has turned into the RalphMilnesLeftFoot show.

Ok - I've read everything O'Driscoll has had to say and although he has remained consistent in his views from day 1, I still feel there are flaws in his approach at this particular juncture.

Don't get me wrong, I am 100% behind him and I absolutely understand everything he's saying and what he's trying to achieve - I get it, I do.

But there are a couple of things that are still baffling me :

1) He says he decided to go for a more positive approach at Derby. I quote "At Derby we took a different approach to the game. Wanting to be positive, and to see how far the team has moved on, we brought an additional element of possession and passing to our game. As a collective, overall we were a poorer team for it."

Not sure if the 800 or so who were there can back this up, but I was of the opinion that we hardly got a kick and didn't string 3 passes together, so I'm not sure where this "additional element of possession" remark comes from. In fact, if you look at the possession stats for all of our away games under O'Driscoll, Derby comes out second bottom (behind Cardiff). In all of our other away matches we have had more possession than we had at Derby.

I also don't understand why he would decide to opt for a more positive approach in the fixture away to Derby, and then a more defensive approach in the home fixture v Sheff Weds. Again, I quote "For Sheffield Wednesday we revisited what had helped us achieve positive home results and sacrificed flair for functional"

Now, far be it for me to question the Head Coach, but surely this should be the other way round shouldn't it? Surely we should have opted for functional and defensive away at Derby in the hope of snatching a point, and then played a more open, expansive game at home v Sheff Weds, who would always come to sit back and counter-attack?

For everything that I do GET about Sean, this I'm afraid I don't get!

2) The second question I have is the way he has previously explained that no loan signings were necessary (or wanted) because he needed to take time to instil his beliefs into the current players, and he's trying to build the "Bristol City Way".

Whilst this is admirable, we all know that a number of these players are not good enough and (hopefully) a lot of them won't be here next season. Therefore, I would question why O'Driscoll didn't try to focus on the here and now and get the players to play a style which will give us the best chance of survival. He talks a lot of the long-term goals and getting the right attitudes and behaviours - which again is all very good - but we were in need of a quick fix, not a long-term vision.

I'd happily have taken the fight to our opponents in the short term in the best way we could, and then we could focus on resolving the long term issues at the end of the season as a Championship club.

These very same players he has been spending endless hours trying to educate into a certain way of football will hopefully not be here next season, so it's ultimately time wasted for Sean as he's gonna have to restart the whole process again in the summer with a whole new crop of players.

I simply don't see the point in him trying to re-educate some of our hopeless players as a short-term fix, when he should instead have known that the urgency of our predicament would take more than a little re-education here and there.

As I said, don't get me wrong, I am 100% behind Sean and I am fully engulfed in his long-term vision. I just feel as though he maybe should have taken a slightly different approach to our short-term situation. Rome wasn't built in a day, and perhaps he should have called off the diggers for a short spell to focus more on the immediate problem at hand.

Please don't take this as me laying any blame onto Sean either - I'm not. He had a tough task trying to keep us up and one which ultimately I always thought we'd fail, but there are some baffling circumstances and comments coming through.

[Forza Revolution]

My view is that sod will be great for us. Give him time and see if he can turn us into club with a style and identity

[Aizoon]

Yes LB that is quite true, but while the other strugglers have been able to raise their game an extra notch we haven't and I know O'Driscoll cannot be solely blamed for that.

Actually we did raise our game another notch, but Del left us on the bottom notch when he left.

[bristolcitysweden]

You get on with what you got.

It's ugly and close to pointless,

But what can you do.

[SecretSam]

Honest, which is good. I think he's privately admitted we're going down. He's looking to next season.

[Jordan Tansley]

As there are 2 threads on this subject I've decided to post on this one, as the other one has turned into the RalphMilnesLeftFoot show.

Ok - I've read everything O'Driscoll has had to say and although he has remained consistent in his views from day 1, I still feel there are flaws in his approach at this particular juncture.

Don't get me wrong, I am 100% behind him and I absolutely understand everything he's saying and what he's trying to achieve - I get it, I do.

But there are a couple of things that are still baffling me :

1) He says he decided to go for a more positive approach at Derby. I quote "At Derby we took a different approach to the game. Wanting to be positive, and to see how far the team has moved on, we brought an additional element of possession and passing to our game. As a collective, overall we were a poorer team for it."

Not sure if the 800 or so who were there can back this up, but I was of the opinion that we hardly got a kick and didn't string 3 passes together, so I'm not sure where this "additional element of possession" remark comes from. In fact, if you look at the possession stats for all of our away games under O'Driscoll, Derby comes out second bottom (behind Cardiff). In all of our other away matches we have had more possession than we had at Derby.

I also don't understand why he would decide to opt for a more positive approach in the fixture away to Derby, and then a more defensive approach in the home fixture v Sheff Weds. Again, I quote "For Sheffield Wednesday we revisited what had helped us achieve positive home results and sacrificed flair for functional"

Now, far be it for me to question the Head Coach, but surely this should be the other way round shouldn't it? Surely we should have opted for functional and defensive away at Derby in the hope of snatching a point, and then played a more open, expansive game at home v Sheff Weds, who would always come to sit back and counter-attack?

For everything that I do GET about Sean, this I'm afraid I don't get!

2) The second question I have is the way he has previously explained that no loan signings were necessary (or wanted) because he needed to take time to instil his beliefs into the current players, and he's trying to build the "Bristol City Way".

Whilst this is admirable, we all know that a number of these players are not good enough and (hopefully) a lot of them won't be here next season. Therefore, I would question why O'Driscoll didn't try to focus on the here and now and get the players to play a style which will give us the best chance of survival. He talks a lot of the long-term goals and getting the right attitudes and behaviours - which again is all very good - but we were in need of a quick fix, not a long-term vision.

I'd happily have taken the fight to our opponents in the short term in the best way we could, and then we could focus on resolving the long term issues at the end of the season as a Championship club.

These very same players he has been spending endless hours trying to educate into a certain way of football will hopefully not be here next season, so it's ultimately time wasted for Sean as he's gonna have to restart the whole process again in the summer with a whole new crop of players.

I simply don't see the point in him trying to re-educate some of our hopeless players as a short-term fix, when he should instead have known that the urgency of our predicament would take more than a little re-education here and there.

As I said, don't get me wrong, I am 100% behind Sean and I am fully engulfed in his long-term vision. I just feel as though he maybe should have taken a slightly different approach to our short-term situation. Rome wasn't built in a day, and perhaps he should have called off the diggers for a short spell to focus more on the immediate problem at hand.

Please don't take this as me laying any blame onto Sean either - I'm not. He had a tough task trying to keep us up and one which ultimately I always thought we'd fail, but there are some baffling circumstances and comments coming through.

Back to your best Harry!

On your two points I would tend to disagree with you, though I can see where you're coming from on the first point. I think Sean answers your query in the section you have quoted in your post, He wanted to see how far the team had come against Derby, by that I would imagine that had we done well and kept possession like he had wanted (That's what he means about the additional element of possession, not that we controlled the game, merely that we tried to play players who would, had things gone our way, kept the ball better than we usually do) then he would have retained similar tactics against Wednesday. Unfortunately we were terrible and quite rightly Sean returned to the tactics which have done us so proud at home since he has come to the club.

On your second point I completely disagree. I don't disagree with loans per se but I do agree with Sean backing his coaching ability to get the best out of our current expensively assembled squad. Perhaps a target man type striker for a month before Ryan Taylor or Stead is back might have helped us but it's all hypothetical. I think the club needs to accept that we are relegated and probably have been since long before Sean came in, Let's be honest, he's gained points at a very good rate since he came in, much better than really could have been expected, chucking money at the problem was never likely to bare fruition, I'd rather any cash that would have been spent desperately trying to force a miracle was actually saved for the kitty going into next season when Sean can really build his own team.

[Spike]

To be brutely honest, I found his article defensive and self serving.

As will many but let's face it, if he answers his criticism people will say he's being defensive and self serving, if he doesn't answer his critics then people will say he's not communicating with the fans and that he's "lost the plot"...

No manager can win with some of our fans, we're far too critical at times, myself included but for the first time in a long time we have a good manager who can build a good team but he cannot do miracles, he can't turn this team into a solid Championship team when most of them belong in League One. SOD needs time, actual time, not 6 months and he certainly doesn't need criticism already when we knew the mess he inherited.

We'll be relegated this season, it is not SOD's fault, we need to back him and allow him to shape this club instead of doing the usual "You aren't giving us what we want so you need to be sacked" crap.

This season has been a lot harder to avoid relegation than ever, I think you can see that when teams like Wolves, Blackburn and Ipswich are struggling so much. It's hardly a surprise we're where we are, a lot of poor decisions, a lot of bad management and now we finally have a good manager it seems like many people are essentially starting to write him off before we've given him a chance.

I'm giving him all of next season regardless and I'll judge him at the end of that, until then we should just allow him to work and mould the team he brings together.

[RedM]

Basically I think he knows what is good about the team and what is bad. He is already looking to the future as he knows relegation is certainly likely, as much brought on by the results of others as ourselves. He must know that a large number of players will move on, some he will be happy with losing and some not. Let him bring in his own players and work with them, then judge. Hasn't he just appointed a new scout from Forest, surely that's positive?

Although it looks like we change managers every 5 minutes on the whole we do not. I can't see us changing again for quite a while, so like it or lump it SOD is here to stay. And long term he probably has the experience more than most to turn us around once and for all.

[Kid in the Riot]

As there are 2 threads on this subject I've decided to post on this one, as the other one has turned into the RalphMilnesLeftFoot show.

Ok - I've read everything O'Driscoll has had to say and although he has remained consistent in his views from day 1, I still feel there are flaws in his approach at this particular juncture.

Don't get me wrong, I am 100% behind him and I absolutely understand everything he's saying and what he's trying to achieve - I get it, I do.

But there are a couple of things that are still baffling me :

1) He says he decided to go for a more positive approach at Derby. I quote "At Derby we took a different approach to the game. Wanting to be positive, and to see how far the team has moved on, we brought an additional element of possession and passing to our game. As a collective, overall we were a poorer team for it."

Not sure if the 800 or so who were there can back this up, but I was of the opinion that we hardly got a kick and didn't string 3 passes together, so I'm not sure where this "additional element of possession" remark comes from. In fact, if you look at the possession stats for all of our away games under O'Driscoll, Derby comes out second bottom (behind Cardiff). In all of our other away matches we have had more possession than we had at Derby.

I also don't understand why he would decide to opt for a more positive approach in the fixture away to Derby, and then a more defensive approach in the home fixture v Sheff Weds. Again, I quote "For Sheffield Wednesday we revisited what had helped us achieve positive home results and sacrificed flair for functional"

Now, far be it for me to question the Head Coach, but surely this should be the other way round shouldn't it? Surely we should have opted for functional and defensive away at Derby in the hope of snatching a point, and then played a more open, expansive game at home v Sheff Weds, who would always come to sit back and counter-attack?

For everything that I do GET about Sean, this I'm afraid I don't get!

Said exactly the same in my article this week Harry, he got the line-ups for Derby and Wednesday the wrong way round!

I suspect:

a) After Wolves result he felt we had to go for it at Derby, then;

b) Went back into his shell with a defensive line up after the hiding at Pride Park.

We could talk about why he didn't go for it when we were 1-0 up at Wolves and when their confidence was shattered too...

O'Driz has said he is only comfortable giving the current crop of players basic things to do, an indication of how much he actually rates some of them I'd suggest. Long term hopefully his 'ethos' will be embedded in the team and we will see more of the confident, passing, flowing football that Bournemouth and Donny were capable of playing under his command.

[Red_Jim]

Said exactly the same in my article this week Harry, he got the line-ups for Derby and Wednesday the wrong way round!

I suspect:

a) After Wolves result he felt we had to go for it at Derby, then;

b) Went back into his shell with a defensive line up after the hiding at Pride Park.

We could talk about why he didn't go for it when we were 1-0 up at Wolves and when their confidence was shattered too...

O'Driz has said he is only comfortable giving the current crop of players basic things to do, an indication of how much he actually rates some of them I'd suggest. Long term hopefully his 'ethos' will be embedded in the team and we will see more of the confident, passing, flowing football that Bournemouth and Donny were capable of playing under his command.

To be brutally honest there's only so much he can do with the shite at his disposal. How many of our starting 11 are Championship quality? 3, maybe 4?

Judge him at the end of next season.