| A dispassionate view post the B'muff game 10:09 - Oct 2 with 1874 views | saint901 |
I was away for a few days and have only just seen the "highlights" so appreciate that I may have a biased view of the match and its outcome.
The team that was picked looked to be unbalanced and unlikely to cause the opposition much trouble.
Whilst I was pleased to see a more defensive mindset and having only one up front, to make that "one" a teenager with a gifted left foot who has demonstrated his ability to skin full backs, is inept, incompetent or tactically naive. Take your pick. If Tyler was in the team, then you need two up front to get the best from him.
B'muff put us to the sword in a 25 minute spell in which the whole team was pushed into panic mode. Lack of direction from the bench or a central midfield player or a CB meant that the opposition could have scored twice as many goals in that period. Better opposition will.
Keeping you best or most experienced players out of the team and failing to use them when panic struck, is also baffling and bizarre.
The B'muff striker who scored their third also said "we watched some videos and were told and shown how slow Saints were to organise after giving away a free kick". And he's right. That is schoolboy stuff and the whole coaching staff should hang their heads in shame.
Calls fro RM's resignation are pointless as are calls for his sacking. We're stuck with him and look on course to set a new PL record.
I just wish their was an eject button because I'd rather we did not have to suffer what promises to be more dreadful results. |  | | |  |
| A dispassionate view post the B'muff game on 10:19 - Oct 2 with 1829 views | cocklebreath |
What makes you think we’re stuck with him? |  |
| |
| A dispassionate view post the B'muff game on 11:39 - Oct 2 with 1717 views | saint901 |
| A dispassionate view post the B'muff game on 10:19 - Oct 2 by cocklebreath |
What makes you think we’re stuck with him? |
Why are we stuck with him?
One: the owners will be happy for us to bounce between PL/Champ for a few seasons because of the parachute payments.
Two:his contract will be expensive to exit
Three: his style of play has a place in the PL but you need better players. It's a contradiction but they want his style but are not prepared to invest in the team.
Four: they may see RM as a medium term project which will come good but if not as long as the TV money keeps arriving they don't really care enough about the football.
Five: a new manager is likely to want guarantees or expensive buy outs in any contract offered. Also a new manager means new players which is expensive.
In my view, they will stay with RM even if we end the season with the lowest ever recorded points and only think about a replacement if we don't get promoted out of the Champ in the 25/26 season.
I hope I'm wrong but even if we had a Moyes or a Potter, they need 5 to 8 games to make us harder to beat which puts us 11 to 14 games into a 38 game season. We then need 36 to 40 points from 25 games which is mid table form.
We presently have defenders being asked to have passing skills and visions of a central midfield player; midfield players who are told to keep the ball as their absolute priority; forwards who I suspect are low on confidence and to be blunt, with one exception, not good enough. A Moyes/Potter will therefore perhaps need more than 5/8 games and as such our chances of staying in this league are low - so why bother with the expense and disruption of a new manager anyway? | | | |
| A dispassionate view post the B'muff game on 12:49 - Oct 2 with 1641 views | arfurdent |
| A dispassionate view post the B'muff game on 11:39 - Oct 2 by saint901 |
Why are we stuck with him?
One: the owners will be happy for us to bounce between PL/Champ for a few seasons because of the parachute payments.
Two:his contract will be expensive to exit
Three: his style of play has a place in the PL but you need better players. It's a contradiction but they want his style but are not prepared to invest in the team.
Four: they may see RM as a medium term project which will come good but if not as long as the TV money keeps arriving they don't really care enough about the football.
Five: a new manager is likely to want guarantees or expensive buy outs in any contract offered. Also a new manager means new players which is expensive.
In my view, they will stay with RM even if we end the season with the lowest ever recorded points and only think about a replacement if we don't get promoted out of the Champ in the 25/26 season.
I hope I'm wrong but even if we had a Moyes or a Potter, they need 5 to 8 games to make us harder to beat which puts us 11 to 14 games into a 38 game season. We then need 36 to 40 points from 25 games which is mid table form.
We presently have defenders being asked to have passing skills and visions of a central midfield player; midfield players who are told to keep the ball as their absolute priority; forwards who I suspect are low on confidence and to be blunt, with one exception, not good enough. A Moyes/Potter will therefore perhaps need more than 5/8 games and as such our chances of staying in this league are low - so why bother with the expense and disruption of a new manager anyway? |
a realistic but depressing viewpoint |  |
| And the White Knight is talking backwards
And the Red Queen's off with her head |
| |
| A dispassionate view post the B'muff game on 13:08 - Oct 2 with 1609 views | kingolaf |
| A dispassionate view post the B'muff game on 11:39 - Oct 2 by saint901 |
Why are we stuck with him?
One: the owners will be happy for us to bounce between PL/Champ for a few seasons because of the parachute payments.
Two:his contract will be expensive to exit
Three: his style of play has a place in the PL but you need better players. It's a contradiction but they want his style but are not prepared to invest in the team.
Four: they may see RM as a medium term project which will come good but if not as long as the TV money keeps arriving they don't really care enough about the football.
Five: a new manager is likely to want guarantees or expensive buy outs in any contract offered. Also a new manager means new players which is expensive.
In my view, they will stay with RM even if we end the season with the lowest ever recorded points and only think about a replacement if we don't get promoted out of the Champ in the 25/26 season.
I hope I'm wrong but even if we had a Moyes or a Potter, they need 5 to 8 games to make us harder to beat which puts us 11 to 14 games into a 38 game season. We then need 36 to 40 points from 25 games which is mid table form.
We presently have defenders being asked to have passing skills and visions of a central midfield player; midfield players who are told to keep the ball as their absolute priority; forwards who I suspect are low on confidence and to be blunt, with one exception, not good enough. A Moyes/Potter will therefore perhaps need more than 5/8 games and as such our chances of staying in this league are low - so why bother with the expense and disruption of a new manager anyway? |
Potter or Moyes would make us harder to beat straight away.
We’ll be lucky to win a single league game under Russell Martin. | | | |
| A dispassionate view post the B'muff game on 14:57 - Oct 2 with 1498 views | sledger |
asking players to do things there not capable of is tactical suicide and the management style of an arrogant retard. | | | |
| A dispassionate view post the B'muff game on 16:27 - Oct 2 with 1414 views | cocklebreath |
| A dispassionate view post the B'muff game on 11:39 - Oct 2 by saint901 |
Why are we stuck with him?
One: the owners will be happy for us to bounce between PL/Champ for a few seasons because of the parachute payments.
Two:his contract will be expensive to exit
Three: his style of play has a place in the PL but you need better players. It's a contradiction but they want his style but are not prepared to invest in the team.
Four: they may see RM as a medium term project which will come good but if not as long as the TV money keeps arriving they don't really care enough about the football.
Five: a new manager is likely to want guarantees or expensive buy outs in any contract offered. Also a new manager means new players which is expensive.
In my view, they will stay with RM even if we end the season with the lowest ever recorded points and only think about a replacement if we don't get promoted out of the Champ in the 25/26 season.
I hope I'm wrong but even if we had a Moyes or a Potter, they need 5 to 8 games to make us harder to beat which puts us 11 to 14 games into a 38 game season. We then need 36 to 40 points from 25 games which is mid table form.
We presently have defenders being asked to have passing skills and visions of a central midfield player; midfield players who are told to keep the ball as their absolute priority; forwards who I suspect are low on confidence and to be blunt, with one exception, not good enough. A Moyes/Potter will therefore perhaps need more than 5/8 games and as such our chances of staying in this league are low - so why bother with the expense and disruption of a new manager anyway? |
Okay well I think you’re wrong, we’ll see. | |
| |
| A dispassionate view post the B'muff game on 16:38 - Oct 2 with 1390 views | saint901 |
| A dispassionate view post the B'muff game on 16:27 - Oct 2 by cocklebreath |
Okay well I think you’re wrong, we’ll see. |
I hope I am wrong and that we get somebody who is better or at least capable of not repeating the same mistakes game after game. | | | |
| A dispassionate view post the B'muff game on 16:44 - Oct 2 with 1368 views | Centurion |
The race for 19th is on. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| A dispassionate view post the B'muff game on 17:00 - Oct 2 with 1356 views | StAnt |
| A dispassionate view post the B'muff game on 11:39 - Oct 2 by saint901 |
Why are we stuck with him?
One: the owners will be happy for us to bounce between PL/Champ for a few seasons because of the parachute payments.
Two:his contract will be expensive to exit
Three: his style of play has a place in the PL but you need better players. It's a contradiction but they want his style but are not prepared to invest in the team.
Four: they may see RM as a medium term project which will come good but if not as long as the TV money keeps arriving they don't really care enough about the football.
Five: a new manager is likely to want guarantees or expensive buy outs in any contract offered. Also a new manager means new players which is expensive.
In my view, they will stay with RM even if we end the season with the lowest ever recorded points and only think about a replacement if we don't get promoted out of the Champ in the 25/26 season.
I hope I'm wrong but even if we had a Moyes or a Potter, they need 5 to 8 games to make us harder to beat which puts us 11 to 14 games into a 38 game season. We then need 36 to 40 points from 25 games which is mid table form.
We presently have defenders being asked to have passing skills and visions of a central midfield player; midfield players who are told to keep the ball as their absolute priority; forwards who I suspect are low on confidence and to be blunt, with one exception, not good enough. A Moyes/Potter will therefore perhaps need more than 5/8 games and as such our chances of staying in this league are low - so why bother with the expense and disruption of a new manager anyway? |
'They' may stay with RM but one thing is certain - if we go down with a lower points total than Derby there is no way on earth that the fans and more importantly season ticket holders will accept him staying. | | | |
| A dispassionate view post the B'muff game on 12:10 - Oct 3 with 1084 views | saint901 |
| A dispassionate view post the B'muff game on 17:00 - Oct 2 by StAnt |
'They' may stay with RM but one thing is certain - if we go down with a lower points total than Derby there is no way on earth that the fans and more importantly season ticket holders will accept him staying. |
I have to disagree.
If we are relegated and he stays the fans will be embarrassed and angry but to be blunt, the club ownership doesn't care.
The "loss" from losing 10% of the season ticket income would be more than matched by parachute payments.
I really cannot see a mass protest from season ticket holders in the event of relegation and keeping the same set up next year. Fans don't work like that. It takes a lot for fans not to turn up - or at least pay up - to matches. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
