Up The City! Posted July 2, 2015 Report Share Posted July 2, 2015 Great coach. Not so sure he is cut out to be a manager tho. Firmly believe he laid the foundations for our success. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted July 2, 2015 Report Share Posted July 2, 2015 That wasn't a tactic it was where City had ended up due to how badly a lot of money had been spent for years. The hierarchy wrote the cheques for rubbish players costing the club millions anmd millions. It neglect. Point spudski and others have tried to make is it should not happen again. city should have good players already in the building via the academy and spending on smaller squads instead of bulking squads up to thirty plus with journeyemen. Absoulte bullshit Yes the club wrote the cheques but they didn't chose the players to sign that's the managers and no burts job The board supported the manager it's the manager who couldn't motivate or sign the correct players not the board If the board are guilty of anything it's putting to much faith into the manager and blindly backing him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spudski Posted July 2, 2015 Report Share Posted July 2, 2015 Absoulte bullshit Yes the club wrote the cheques but they didn't chose the players to sign that's the managers and no burts job The board supported the manager it's the manager who couldn't motivate or sign the correct players not the board If the board are guilty of anything it's putting to much faith into the manager and blindly backing him It's not Bullshit at all Monkeh....it's been done a thousand times...but fans seem to easily forget. After our Wembley defeat to Hull, SL threw money around like it was confetti. He wanted the likes of David James...and agreed to the extortionate wages being paid to many journeyman pros that came and have left since. He and the board wanted to buy their way to the Prem. They put no particular plan in place that was sustainable. They thought no further than their next buy. It resulted in players like Fonts on long overpaid contracts. DM and SoD had very little money to play with, because of the unwanted dross on high wages and long contracts. SL and the Board are the ones who brought in managers and basically told them to 'just get on with it'. No plan...no sustainable long term plan to be precise....just throwing money at a lost cause. Approx 120 million allegedly...spent... and we still found ourselves towards the foot of League 1. You can't blame the managers that came in after GJ....it was a losing battle. You only have to read and listen to SL since leaving the helm that he acknowledges all these mistakes and that's why things have changed since the appointment of SoD. A sustainable plan has been put in place....a blueprint the Club now follows. The manager liaises with Burt who SoD brought in....who liaises with the board. They decide on players and budget and a plan of action. We didn't do that before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Three Lions Posted July 2, 2015 Report Share Posted July 2, 2015 Absoulte bullshit Yes the club wrote the cheques but they didn't chose the players to sign that's the managers and no burts job The board supported the manager it's the manager who couldn't motivate or sign the correct players not the board If the board are guilty of anything it's putting to much faith into the manager and blindly backing him BCFC were in usurious debt before Keith But was employed. SL and the board sanctioned huge debts. So the Dirctors directed [??] the club to be in serious debt!! So it is not bullshit!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowshed Posted July 2, 2015 Report Share Posted July 2, 2015 SoD was an unmitigated disaster. Football is a simple game. He made it sound like a game of advanced chess. It's all very similar to the England set up. ***** thinking that possession is the name of the game. It's utterly meaningless unless you do something with the ball and put it in the opposition's net. Players became paralysed by analysis. They were thinking so hard what to do they forgot the friggin basics. I'm fed up listening to all these who go on about coaching this and that. Was talking to a Portugese lad last night, no formal training or coaching just played 5 a-side's since he was 8 years old. He had far more skills than any on display from our England under 21's combined. Pride, passion, belief and a team 'will to win' - everything that was missing from SoD's team and the under 21's. I bet those who scoffed at Cott's 'I'm a winner' quote are the same now who are defending SoD as it doesn't fit in with their elitist view of how the game should be played. If you don't believe me, just look at the England cricket team performances freed form the shackles of high tech analysis of their every move. And a Portugese academy in Lisbon using performance and physical analysis had a player called Ronaldo. The Germans are highly scientific in their approach and? Their teams are hardly suffering from a fear of playing. Player analysis even cuts down on soft tissue injuries i.e. Southampton. Yes football is a simple game and England cannot do simple, quick and fast or one touch if you like, two touches if you can etc as well as its competitors. England don't do the basics as well. Improvement will not come from scoffing at coaches but from more enlightened coaching. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted July 2, 2015 Report Share Posted July 2, 2015 And a Portugese academy in Lisbon using performance and physical analysis had a player called Ronaldo. The Germans are highly scientific in their approach and? Their teams are hardly suffering from a fear of playing. Player analysis even cuts down on soft tissue injuries i.e. Southampton. Yes football is a simple game and England cannot do simple, quick and fast or one touch if you like, two touches if you can etc as well as its competitors. England don't do the basics as well.Improvement will not come from scoffing at coaches but from more enlightened coaching. Improvement will only come when young players adopt a similar attitude that of their european counterparts and focus more on being consistent and less on bank balances and taking part non athlete type of activity (non athlete like to athletes) that will make them more susceptible to injury and heal far less quickly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowshed Posted July 2, 2015 Report Share Posted July 2, 2015 Improvement will only come when young players adopt a similar attitude that of their european counterparts and focus more on being consistent and less on bank balances and taking part non athlete type of activity (non athlete like to athletes) that will make them more susceptible to injury and heal far less quickly. It will help to a degree if you believe that is all there is to it, and that nationally methods from the grass roots up to adult XI's are of sufficient standard to create excellence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 2, 2015 Report Share Posted July 2, 2015 Improvement will only come when young players adopt a similar attitude that of their european counterparts and focus more on being consistent and less on bank balances and taking part non athlete type of activity (non athlete like to athletes) that will make them more susceptible to injury and heal far less quickly. Indeed. Whilst Ronaldo's coaching no doubt contributed a lot to his development, I think too little emphasis in Cowshed's post is paid to the fact he's first on the training pitch, last off and has a determination and work ethic which all of us should envy. He made sure he was going to be the worlds best, I'm not absolutely convinced coaching determined that he would be or even necessarily that less sophisticated coaching would have restricted him by that much. I agree with EMB, determination is the key ingredient and it explains why out of Africa and Lat Am you get players like Toure, Drogba, Suarez etc where facilities and sophisticated coaching is not the norm. Methods adopted at a few clubs influenced by Cruyff or Spain and Germany are largely the exception rather than the norm. Far to soon to establish cause and causation... but equally as Cowshed suggests we'd be silly to dismiss these methods. Spudski gave the example earlier in this thread and I agree it will be really interesting to see what position Brentford are in after another 10 years provided they stick dogmatically with their plans. Soton lead the way over here and I agree we should see if it is replicable, but I don't particularly have high expectations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowshed Posted July 2, 2015 Report Share Posted July 2, 2015 Indeed. Whilst Ronaldo's coaching no doubt contributed lot to his development, I think too little emphasis in Cowshed's post is paid to the fact he's first on the training pitch, last off and has a determination and work ethic which all of us should envy. He made sure he was going to be the worlds best, I'm not absolutely convinced coaching determined that he would be or even necessarily that less sophisticated coaching would have restricted him by that much. The point being made was academies and analysis also nurture attitude and desire to be skillful. Coaching can curtail, or be used to improve depending on principles. Because principles differ certain Countries produce continually top class players. The Dutch create highly technical players because their principles are highly technical. In England skill is often looked upon as being "lazy", and the Bassetts, Becks and Wilkinsons looked upon complex skill as "fanny football". Attitudes that are still connected to English football. Don't have time to answer all of your post, but some of the players you mentioned [Toure] also came through the Mimosifcom academy and its former employees included Arsene Wenger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted July 2, 2015 Report Share Posted July 2, 2015 The point being made was academies and analysis also nurture attitude and desire to be skillful. Coaching can curtail, or be used to improve depending on prionciples. In England skill is often looked upon as being "lazy", and the Bassetts, Becks and Wilkinsons looked upon complex skill as "fanny football". Attitudes that are still connected to English football. All this is very true but take a look at England's last squad and there are far too many players who play about 20 odd full games per season for their mainly because of inconsistent performances and or injuries and too many players from lower half/relegated teams and players coming back into the squad who weren't good enough the first time around. England international caps are far more easily to gain these days and to be honest some players see them merely as a tool to trigger a clause in their contracts for a pay rise and not the great honour they should be, it would be interesting to see the numbers of squad players England have used in recent years compared to their counterparts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myol'man Posted July 2, 2015 Report Share Posted July 2, 2015 Great coach. Not so sure he is cut out to be a manager tho. Firmly believe he laid the foundations for our success. Deluded. The only thing SOD laid the foundations for were another relegation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted July 2, 2015 Report Share Posted July 2, 2015 BCFC were in usurious debt before Keith But was employed. SL and the board sanctioned huge debts. So the Dirctors directed [??] the club to be in serious debt!! So it is not bullshit!!!Is the debt owed to the bank? No Is the debt owed to our owner? Yes The debt is a non-issue the board only sanction what the manager wanted therefore the managers fault People blame redknapp for getting Portsmouth Bournemouth and West Ham into trouble so why is it the managers fault their but the boards fault here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cidered abroad Posted July 2, 2015 Report Share Posted July 2, 2015 Sods reign was simply the worst period I have witnessed watching City in over 50 years. Nuff said on this chap. The worst since I started in 1950! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Isewater Posted July 2, 2015 Report Share Posted July 2, 2015 One thing we can all agree on is that O 'Driscoll has given us hours and hours of OTIB forum fun ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soul_Trader Posted July 2, 2015 Report Share Posted July 2, 2015 Just wondering if when SOD gets to Liverpool, he could fix something for me ? It's A field .... not An field that is all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Three Lions Posted July 2, 2015 Report Share Posted July 2, 2015 Is the debt owed to the bank? No Is the debt owed to our owner? Yes The debt is a non-issue the board only sanction what the manager wanted therefore the managers fault People blame redknapp for getting Portsmouth Bournemouth and West Ham into trouble so why is it the managers fault their but the boards fault here? Managers are short term and look at the short term very often. managers will do what is best for their short term often v the long term good of clubs. it is up to directors to "direct" and advise, keep clubs steady, it is why they get salaries it is why they are there etc . City being very badly ran and having massive debts was a non issue lost me there as its why things like the pillars were put in place, it was a big issue!!! quote spudskis post he will give you the argument you want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted July 3, 2015 Report Share Posted July 3, 2015 Rodgers should have employed SOD at Swansea. He could've lived at The Mumbles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.