First Impressions Of Life Under Cotterill

[SecretSam]

So, I've not seen the lads play since the new man came in.  Has anything changed noticeably in terms of the style of play?  He's known for a 'direct' approach, but then SOD was known for silky smooth play and we saw precious little of that.

 

Frankly, it's been a while since a City team really purred

[Redrobbin]

"Underwhelming" in a word. Only seen them play on T.V. At tamworth. And the home game against Rotherham In which the first half, the players didn't seem to know what they were supposed to be doing. The second half was much better though and we had a lot of possession, huffed and puffed, and saw a few flashes of some good football, but unable to convert our chances. In fact the second half they played very much in the O'Driscoll vein. So we do know Cottrell does have a plan B. " Play like you did under SOD."

The jury is still very much out with me. We may have a better understanding of the team set up and ethos after this Christmas period.

[Robbored]

Way too early to tell. Like many new managers he's stuck with an inherited squad which has obviously been too weak all season. His hand are tied until January when he plans to strengthen by bringing in 5 or 6 new players. Only then will we be able to judge accurately what to expect from Cotterill.

That said if playing a direct ( hoof ball ) style in order the win games to survive then so be it. We might have to wait till next season before we some decent stuff.

[Olé]

We have two winnable home games now - but I don't see it happening.

Apart from Reid, it still doesn't feel like we've hit on a winning formula in midfield that might begin to get the team looking fluid, let alone 'purring'. We have bits and pieces players, a bit like when GJ was cycling through loan players in his first season. We also still don't feel commanding at the back and we don't have a proper captain on the pitch.

I'm expecting to be underwhelmed by the next two home games, I'm fed up of turning up expecting the real City to show up or any kind of breakout performance - if there's a club that's seen worse home football in 2013 I'd love to know, I think we struggle again in both games, players are expecting to be replaced, this is the end, not the start.

Anything less than six points and for me it's League Two. No more of this too good to go down nonsense, I can't think of another brief Cotterill has come in on, if not to win home games against the likes of Walsall and Stevenage. If he doesn't, which seems quite likely the way we're playing, where do people think we're going to pick up the points?

[Redrobbin]

Has to be said as Robbored has pointed out. If we play hoof ball then so be it. Equally though in order to play hoof ball the ball does need to stick, or we are just gifting possession back to the opposition.

If we continue to play baldock isolated up front, hoof ball is never going to work and will cause more problems for us. And as yet cottell is still positioning baldock in this mannor.

But as Robbored has also pointed out, we will have to wait and see what players he brings in in the window. A striker who can receive long balls hold the play up,and contribute a few goals is a must!

[BCFC_Dan]

On the note of "direct" football, I read yesterday (http://www.whoscored.com/Articles/xbxjz5wckk285ygznyz6ja/Show/Team-Focus-Hit-Hope-Aston-Villa-in-Panic-Mode#.UrhlQ0qbxQY.twitter) that Southampton, who are a great team to watch, play on average the most long balls per game out of any team in the top flight. The key, I imagine, is in making sure that the long balls go to a team mate. Direct football is not in itself a bad thing, except when it's done badly.

 

City mainly seem to do it badly.

[Super]

Uninspiring and negative. happy Xmas.

[glynriley]

On the note of "direct" football, I read yesterday (http://www.whoscored.com/Articles/xbxjz5wckk285ygznyz6ja/Show/Team-Focus-Hit-Hope-Aston-Villa-in-Panic-Mode#.UrhlQ0qbxQY.twitter) that Southampton, who are a great team to watch, play on average the most long balls per game out of any team in the top flight. The key, I imagine, is in making sure that the long balls go to a team mate. Direct football is not in itself a bad thing, except when it's done badly.

 

City mainly seem to do it badly.

 

When you've got someone like Ricky Lambert in your side, the 'long' ball is always an option. As good as anyone in the country at holding it up. Would love us to sign someone in his mould.

[Always Believesham]

On the note of "direct" football, I read yesterday (http://www.whoscored.com/Articles/xbxjz5wckk285ygznyz6ja/Show/Team-Focus-Hit-Hope-Aston-Villa-in-Panic-Mode#.UrhlQ0qbxQY.twitter) that Southampton, who are a great team to watch, play on average the most long balls per game out of any team in the top flight. The key, I imagine, is in making sure that the long balls go to a team mate. Direct football is not in itself a bad thing, except when it's done badly.

 

City mainly seem to do it badly.

 

Haven't read the article but do you reckon that's including crossfield passes - the 'Tinnion - Murray' long ball perse?

 

Looks like it might work a bit better than SoD's style - he seems to change quicker in games, bringing Strikers on or changing the shape when he feels it necessary

[Eco]

[BCFC_Dan]

Haven't read the article but do you reckon that's including crossfield passes - the 'Tinnion - Murray' long ball perse?

 

Looks like it might work a bit better than SoD's style - he seems to change quicker in games, bringing Strikers on or changing the shape when he feels it necessary

 

From what I've seen of Southampton, which is mainly highlights so possibly not representative, they do seem to play quite a few diagonal balls, and they're long passes rather than aimless hoofs forward.

 

The point is that a team can be both direct and play attractive football. And as SO'D showed at City, a team can play a passing game terribly. At the end of the day it's not so much about the style as playing well.

 

Whilst we're on the note of "statistics I found on the internet", I've long been a fan of these attacking/defensive effectiveness graphs: http://matchstory.co.uk/england-league1-attack/

 

The interesting thing for me here is that in both areas City are located quite close to the boundary lines. This suggests that whilst results have been poor the team hasn't actually been performing that terribly and it would take a relatively small improvement to push both attack and defense into the positive quadrants. (For reference, last season's graphs can be found here: http://experimental361.com/2013/05/25/championship-attack-and-defence-201213/ - we had a clinical attack but a terrible defense.)

 

 

 

[And Its Smith]

When all the players have changed for both teams, the term 'bogey team' isn't relevant. If we want to stay up then these two games need to return four points.

[Mad Cyril]

I havent seen them play yet.

The football is woeful. He has to go.

[sodburyred]

"Underwhelming" in a word. Only seen them play on T.V. At tamworth. And the home game against Rotherham In which the first half, the players didn't seem to know what they were supposed to be doing. The second half was much better though and we had a lot of possession, huffed and puffed, and saw a few flashes of some good football, but unable to convert our chances. In fact the second half they played very much in the O'Driscoll vein. So we do know Cottrell does have a plan B. " Play like you did under SOD."

The jury is still very much out with me. We may have a better understanding of the team set up and ethos after this Christmas period.

 

Is this being said in jest? First half was awfull and everybit like most games under SOD this season. 2nd half was alot better and nothing like under SOD? We've only played that attacking under SOD in the last 10 minutes of games when loosing by 2 or 3? Under Cotterill it was pretty much the entire 2nd half.

[Redrobbin]

Is this being said in jest? First half was awfull and everybit like most games under SOD this season. 2nd half was alot better and nothing like under SOD? We've only played that attacking under SOD in the last 10 minutes of games when loosing by 2 or 3? Under Cotterill it was pretty much the entire 2nd half.

Ageed tempo was higher a bit more urgency about our play. Mainly because Reid was on the pitch and provided a attacking penotration in the midfield. But the out come was very much the same. Not good enough in the final third!

[BUTOR]

In two words, Bobby Reid.

[Major Isewater]

Meet the new boss same as the old one !

[Major Isewater]

Meet the new boss same as the old one !

Results wise,for the moment.

[RedM]

The OP asks what are our first impressions, well I'm not going to turn this into a SoD bashing contest but my first impressions are very different from the first couple of weeks SoD was here.

Right now it feels like Cotterill has been instructed to avoid relegation al all costs whereas almost as soon as Sod joined it was being muted about as inevitable, but would be alright as we were going to rebuild and take league one by storm. Long term plans, pillars etc were good ideas but we totally forgot about the here and now.

As far as I'm concerned we gave up our Championship status far, far, to easy, without a whimper. Even if the unthinkable happens and we go and get relegated again I honestly don't think we will surrender without a fight. That's my initial impression of Cotterill. It maybe all bluff and bluster but that's just about all we have right now. If he can get results out of nothing but hard work and positivity he has to be at least given a chance as so far all else in too many recent seasons has failed.

[BCFC_Dan]

The OP asks what are our first impressions, well I'm not going to turn this into a SoD bashing contest but my first impressions are very different from the first couple of weeks SoD was here.

Right now it feels like Cotterill has been instructed to avoid relegation al all costs whereas almost as soon as Sod joined it was being muted about as inevitable, but would be alright as we were going to rebuild and take league one by storm. Long term plans, pillars etc were good ideas but we totally forgot about the here and now.

As far as I'm concerned we gave up our Championship status far, far, to easy, without a whimper. Even if the unthinkable happens and we go and get relegated again I honestly don't think we will surrender without a fight. That's my initial impression of Cotterill. It maybe all bluff and bluster but that's just about all we have right now. If he can get results out of nothing but hard work and positivity he has to be at least given a chance as so far all else in too many recent seasons has failed.

 

Not disputing how you felt when SO'D was in charge (how could I?) but my memory of the situation is that he initially took quite a pragmatic approach and set the team up in an organised but simple manner. They went from shipping goals to keeping clean sheets and won a few games. The only thing that stopped them climbing the table was the form of other teams at the bottom.

 

Then Jon Stead got injured and the entire thing fell apart. The team threw away the lead in the vital game at Wolves and then gave up completely. Had that not happened, I believe we would have stayed up.

 

Like I said, I can't dispute how you felt about the situation, but we must be careful not to let later events cloud our judgement of the entire O'Driscoll reign.

[Cider red]

Not disputing how you felt when SO'D was in charge (how could I?) but my memory of the situation is that he initially took quite a pragmatic approach and set the team up in an organised but simple manner. They went from shipping goals to keeping clean sheets and won a few games. The only thing that stopped them climbing the table was the form of other teams at the bottom.

 

Then Jon Stead got injured and the entire thing fell apart. The team threw away the lead in the vital game at Wolves and then gave up completely. Had that not happened, I believe we would have stayed up.

 

Like I said, I can't dispute how you felt about the situation, but we must be careful not to let later events cloud our judgement of the entire O'Driscoll reign.

 

Well made point this dan. We actually played well in all of our remaining home games last season, and were unlucky to lose to Bolton and Birmingham, as well as not beating Brighton. It was our WOEFUL away form that did us, we lost all but one under odriscoll away at hull. And the capitulation and wolves was pretty much the final nail in our coffin.

 

But I do already see signs of more fight under cotteril, people throwing there bodies in the way of shots, last minute tackles, and more importantly, more urgency. People have alluded to Southampton playing long passes and not long ball, whilst we are no way near their level I've noticed when we do play a ball up to baldock it tends now to be in the channels where he can run in behind. Unfortunately under the sod we were passing it around at the back far too slowly, so the opposition defence had a chance to regroup and when we inevitably played it long it was straight down the throat of the centre backs. This happened much less on Saturday, and hopefully we will see a change in results sharpish as a result.

[Redrobbin]

Not disputing how you felt when SO'D was in charge (how could I?) but my memory of the situation is that he initially took quite a pragmatic approach and set the team up in an organised but simple manner. They went from shipping goals to keeping clean sheets and won a few games. The only thing that stopped them climbing the table was the form of other teams at the bottom.

Then Jon Stead got injured and the entire thing fell apart. The team threw away the lead in the vital game at Wolves and then gave up completely. Had that not happened, I believe we would have stayed up.

Like I said, I can't dispute how you felt about the situation, but we must be careful not to let later events cloud our judgement of the entire O'Driscoll reign.

From memory we had about 39 - 40 pts

Peterborough went down with 51 pts

That tells you we did go down with a wimper.

Eleven points from any form of safety.

[Red-Robbo]

Whatever we think of Cotterill's tactics, it does appear he's more of a motivator.

 

I've no doubt - from their Tweets - that the players liked Sean. He had an unusual way of training that made them think about the game differently (I'm paraphrasing from what they all have said) and I doubt he was a very fierce disciplinarian. Away from the glare of publicity - which he seemed to hate - he may well have been a very personable man, to his players. (I know others at AG found him awkward and arrogant, but not seemingly, the players)

 

Trouble was, he patently didn't get the best out of his chosen men. If Cotterill gets them playing at even 75% of their capacity, then we'll move up the table.

 

Morale, self-belief, and encouragement may make that difference.

[BCFC_Dan]

From memory we had about 39 - 40 pts

Peterborough went down with 51 pts

That tells you we did go down with a wimper.

Eleven points from any form of safety.

 

http://www.statto.com/football/stats/england/league-championship/2012-2013/table/2013-03-09

 

League table on March 9th 2013. City had just beaten Middlesbrough 2-0 at Ashton Gate and were 3rd bottom, level on points with Wolves and behind only on goal difference, with a game at Wolves to come the next weekend.

 

We had 39 points that day, with 9 games remaining. However, Jon Stead suffered the injury that ended his season, City lost at Wolves and they picked up only 2 more points all season.

 

From Wolves away onwards we went down without a whimper. Prior to that there was plenty of fight and no terrible shortage of points.

[Nogbad the Bad]

http://www.statto.com/football/stats/england/league-championship/2012-2013/table/2013-03-09

 

League table on March 9th 2013. City had just beaten Middlesbrough 2-0 at Ashton Gate and were 3rd bottom, level on points with Wolves and behind only on goal difference, with a game at Wolves to come the next weekend.

 

We had 39 points that day, with 9 games remaining. However, Jon Stead suffered the injury that ended his season, City lost at Wolves and they picked up only 2 more points all season.

 

From Wolves away onwards we went down without a whimper. Prior to that there was plenty of fight and no terrible shortage of points.

 

Those 9 games account for about one fifth of the season, just at the time when the manager has to instil as much fight and passion into the players as he can possibly muster.

 

City's long and extremely embarrassing end of season demise, with just 2 points from a possible 27. and 'giving up completely' as you put it when so much was at stake was nothing short of disgraceful.

 

We relinquished our hard fought Championship status without putting up a fight, something unforgiveable that reflects terribly on the manager.

[Aizoon]

My gut feeling is that we are doomed, not because I don't rate Cotterill, but because changing styles at this point in the season was an idiotic decision. We won't see New Manager Syndrome because the players were already well motivated, as anyone who actually watched them would know.

In desperation, I've wagered a tenner on us going down as the one sure way of keeping us up.

[Red-Robbo]

My gut feeling is that we are doomed, not because I don't rate Cotterill, but because changing styles at this point in the season was an idiotic decision. We won't see New Manager Syndrome because the players were already well motivated, as anyone who actually watched them would know.

In desperation, I've wagered a tenner on us going down as the one sure way of keeping us up.

 

Was it an idiotic decision last season?

[Aizoon]

Was it an idiotic decision last season?

No, because O'Driscoll was capable of taking over where McInnes left off and because motivation was a real problem under McInnes. Neither is true of this season's change.

[foghornred]

The defence does not play around with the ball for passing sake just to keep the possession statistic up,and we seem a bit more offensive,

plus the fact that Carey and Reid get a look in things are better.

When we get a few of his players in I am sure that it will improve.

Always believe !

[Aizoon]

So it's because you dont rate Cotterill then, which you said it wasnt the case of that, above

I said nothing of the sort. I have no problem with Cotterill's competence.

I said that Cotterill isn't capable of taking over where O'Driscoll left off, and he isn't. I also believe that O'Driscoll wouldn't be capable of taking over where Cotterill left off.

No criticism of either, they're just very different kinds of manager. Why not read what I say, rather than making it up as you go along?