Neil Warnock.

I was watching Neil Warnock and son playing Jimmy Bullard in a Utube Golf match. The interviewer asked him what annoyed him most  in modern day football and his reply was: Football clubs who think they can suddenly change to playing out at  the back without changing the players. All they do is concede soft goals.he said. What is the point of copying other clubs when you just don't have the players to do it. You should always play to your own strengths and not the oppositions. I thought that just about sums up our team. We should be trying to play to our own strengths and not copying others. We don't have the players and we are struggling because of it.

The problem is, what are our strengths?

Quoted from Maringer

The problem is, what are our strengths?

Beat me to it. We’re not strong. We’re not quick. We’re not big. We’re not energetic. We’re not good on the ball. We don’t have many players capable of taking a man on. Pretty much all our defenders are NL standard. And collectively have no balls.

I reckon Pep would struggle to work out a way to win with these losers.

Quoted from aussiej

I was watching Neil Warnock and son playing Jimmy Bullard in a Utube Golf match. The interviewer asked him what annoyed him most  in modern day football and his reply was: Football clubs who think they can suddenly change from playing out at  the back without changing the players. All they do is concede soft goals.he said. What is the point of copying other clubs when you just don't have the players to do it. You should always play to your own strengths and not the oppositions. I thought that just about sums up our team. We should be trying to play to our own strengths and not copying others. We don't have the players and we are struggling because of it.

So what then?  We just hoof it up field and hope to pickup the 2nd ball?

How’s his diary looking between now and the end of April?

Quoted from 123614

So what then?  We just hoof it up field and hope to pickup the 2nd ball?

Sometimes yeah.

But these players can do it. Apart from Saturday our attacking intent has been a 100% improvement over the Hurst tactics. They seemed to enjoy it as well.

A couple of weeks ago all we needed to do was tighten up at the back. I don't understand what happened on Saturday- the selection, the lack of a plan was reminiscent of Hurst’s team.

To go back to being "pragmatic" and hoping for the best would be a retrograde step.

It would be a brave person to criticise Neil Warnock.  Certainly face to face…..

Quoted from 123614

So what then?  We just hoof it up field and hope to pickup the 2nd ball?

It’s been our method for quite a long time.

We are not good enough to play out end of but we have a manager that thinks we can hence why we concede awful goals most games , unless we change & he wont we best hope sutton & fgr dont suddenly pick two or three wins up because i dont see us getting over 40 points

Quoted from fishcake63

We are not good enough to play out end of but we have a manager that thinks we can hence why we concede awful goals most games , unless we change & he wont we best hope sutton & fgr dont suddenly pick two or three wins up because i dont see us getting over 40 points

Mate, Saturday we lost because one player cocked up!...nothing to do with playing out from the back, we actually controlled it pretty well, Cartwright had next to nothing to do, and their second goal was an own goal anyway!! .
Did you not see the Crewe, Salford, County, Morecambe  Mk games?..
Warnock is like Hodgson, talking about yester years tactics and doesn't understand its 2024 and the worlds moved on from midfielders breaking forwards legs, and 4-4-2..

Quoted from fishcake63

We are not good enough to play out end of but we have a manager that thinks we can hence why we concede awful goals most games , unless we change & he wont we best hope sutton & fgr dont suddenly pick two or three wins up because i dont see us getting over 40 points

Do you actually watch the games or just spout shite? We don't concede because we are playing out from the back, I literally can not pick a single goal out we've conceded where we've been caught on the ball and it's lead to them scoring. Every single goal is a carbon copy of itself, our full back is beaten far too easily and it's walked into the net, it was a problem last season aswell. It's not just a this season issue, we have full backs that can't defend.  

Warnock made me laugh when he was interviewed a little while ago and asked why his team didn't play out from the back, he replied 'I've got 2 centre backs who can't pass water'.

To be fair I don’t think it’s the playing out from the back that’s the problem. I can’t remember us conceding a goal as a direct result of it anyway. It’s the basics we can’t do, track runners, stop crosses and win first balls. Until Saturday, when we had an inept midfielder supposed to be playing in front of the back four, I think the actual playing out from the back has been pretty good.

Quoted from LocalLadGTFC

Do you actually watch the games or just spout shite? We don't concede because we are playing out from the back, I literally can not pick a single goal out we've conceded where we've been caught on the ball and it's lead to them scoring. Every single goal is a carbon copy of itself, our full back is beaten far too easily and it's walked into the net, it was a problem last season aswell. It's not just a this season issue, we have full backs that can't defend.  

Maybe the County first (I think, could have been second) when Vernam miscontrolled, Mullarkey miles ahead of play and they take advantage.  That's the only example I can think of where our 'style' has cost us.

Rodgers not knowing how to head a ball and Glennon having the physical prowess of a dying hamster when getting caught wrong side is not about our style.  If anything I think I'd be more worried that if we weren't trying to play it out a bit because the way our defence aren't defending, our best hope is trying to outscore teams.

Ironically on Saturday we completely abandoned any attempts to play football out from the back and just reverted to hoofing it.  Massive gap between the isolated Danny Rose and surprise, surprise we invited pressure on a countless basis.

Quoted from jimgtfc

To be fair I don’t think it’s the playing out from the back that’s the problem. I can’t remember us conceding a goal as a direct result of it anyway. It’s the basics we can’t do, track runners, stop crosses and win first balls. Until Saturday, when we had an inept midfielder supposed to be playing in front of the back four, I think the actual playing out from the back has been pretty good.

Absolutely right. We actually looked much better at it on Saturday bc of Tharne's calm and assured presence. Even the leaky right of defence/Mullarkey hole looked more secure with him there, add in the goal and quite an impressive debut for the lad.

Quoted from SpiritOf98

Absolutely right. We actually looked much better at it on Saturday bc of Tharne's calm and assured presence. Even the leaky right of defence/Mullarkey hole looked more secure with him there, add in the goal and quite an impressive debut for the lad.

I thought he was absolutely shocking. He was calm in the sense he kept endlessly passing back to the keeper but I thought he didn't have anything about him at all.

Time will tell.

Quoted from lew chaterleys lover

I thought he was absolutely shocking. He was calm in the sense he kept endlessly passing back to the keeper but I thought he didn't have anything about him at all.

Time will tell.

Shocking? That's a label I'd use for Mullarkey at RB, thought Tharne looked very good and throught we suffered second half without him. Still, opinions eh.

Quoted from LocalLadGTFC

Do you actually watch the games or just spout shite? We don't concede because we are playing out from the back, I literally can not pick a single goal out we've conceded where we've been caught on the ball and it's lead to them scoring. Every single goal is a carbon copy of itself, our full back is beaten far too easily and it's walked into the net, it was a problem last season aswell. It's not just a this season issue, we have full backs that can't defend.  

Do you watch the games?

I'm not saying just hoof it but how many goals have we scored from playing it out from the back?

Some are suggesting we played it out well on Saturday but until very late on in the game we created frig all.

Quoted from SpiritOf98

Shocking? That's a label I'd use for Mullarkey at RB, thought Tharne looked very good and throught we suffered second half without him. Still, opinions eh.

Yes it's all about opinions and I thought Maher improved us when he came on! Football eh?!

Quoted from arryarryarry

Do you watch the games?

I'm not saying just hoof it but how many goals have we scored from playing it out from the back?

Some are suggesting we played it out well on Saturday but until very late on in the game we created frig all.

I agree that we aren't very good at it, but we've created many chances and goals from us building up the play from the back. Sometimes it's too slow and lethargic, on Saturday when it went into the midfield it went backwards 99% of the time. The absence of Conteh leaves a huge hole as we lack someone that can really break the lines. I think Tharme looked good, he was quite commanding in the air and looked good on it. I think him and Maher could compliment each other well but I don't really have much hope at full back anymore.

Thought Tharme got muscled off the ball a few times and got caught being too keen to nip in as well, but he wasn’t ‘shocking’. I was more surprised that he wasn’t the ball playing, central defender that I thought David Brent would bring in. He looked unsure what to do with the ball whenever he had it and just ended up playing it back to Rodgers or Cartwright, or sending a high looping ball forwards, which I don’t think the manager was happy with. Hopefully that was just because he had no midfield in front of him whatsoever.

Quoted from 123614

So what then?  We just hoof it up field and hope to pickup the 2nd ball?

Yeah we've been doing that since August. 🙄

Rose is so isolated nobody is near enough to pick up a 2nd ball.Keep up ffs were now tika taka like Barca only without the sun.

Artell said we reverted to type. I think our midfield needs to be better at showing for the ball, and braver when they get it, facing our own goal 40 yards out.

That's not Wood or Andrews' game, and Tranmere pressed Green the whole time so in that situation what do you do?

It's a worrying sign that we're getting worse, not better, after beating Salford 3-0.

I appreciate we've had change in personnel too, but hasn't every team in Jan?

Tranmere knew we'd try and pass it out from the back. They set up in a 4-4-2 and let our back line have it. Our 3 in midfield couldn't escape the 4 of Tranmere.

Then we hit it long to a bloke who's got a decent leap but at the end of the day he's not six foot. Wide players Clifton and Eisa are in no man's land.

Tactically, we were out-thought. Physically, we were out-fought.

I want to like Artell but it worries me that neither he nor his players had any clue of what to do when it became clear we'd need to do something different.

With 11 men settled and in position, we weren't going to tip-tap it around and jostle the opposition out of position. They were far too disciplined to fall for that trap.

Artell needs to see the season out playing in a way that suits our players. Trouble is, now that he's moved some on and brought some in, we're a bit of a mess in terms of style.

Quoted from fishcake63

We are not good enough to play out end of but we have a manager that thinks we can hence why we concede awful goals most games , unless we change & he wont we best hope sutton & fgr dont suddenly pick two or three wins up because i dont see us getting over 40 points

I’d take 40 points and risk it right now.

Quoted from jimgtfc

Thought Tharme got muscled off the ball a few times and got caught being too keen to nip in as well, but he wasn’t ‘shocking’. I was more surprised that he wasn’t the ball playing, central defender that I thought David Brent would bring in. He looked unsure what to do with the ball whenever he had it and just ended up playing it back to Rodgers or Cartwright, or sending a high looping ball forwards, which I don’t think the manager was happy with. Hopefully that was just because he had no midfield in front of him whatsoever.

Probably the wrong choice of word on my part, I should have said very underwhelming. We started with Tharme and Rodgers, but would prefer Maher and Waterfall if he was still here over those two. I agree with your description of Tharme though and to me he just didn't have any presence at all and was far too lightweight, not quick, couldn't pick a pass.  

This is what irks me with recruitment - keep your money in your pocket if we just keep swapping players if we are not going to get an upgrade.

Quoted from lew chaterleys lover

Probably the wrong choice of word on my part, I should have said very underwhelming. We started with Tharme and Rodgers, but would prefer Maher and Waterfall if he was still here over those two. I agree with your description of Tharme though and to me he just didn't have any presence at all and was far too lightweight, not quick, couldn't pick a pass.  

This is what irks me with recruitment - keep your money in your pocket if we just keep swapping players if we are not going to get an upgrade.

What you on about?...Waterfall was past it, he turned slower than oil tanker, league football was beyond him, we've bought a 24 year old, who looked assured imo, can't judge him on one performance, playing with Mullarkey and Glennon.

Quoted from Northbank Mariner

What you on about?...Waterfall was past it, he turned slower than oil tanker, league football was beyond him, we've bought a 24 year old, who looked assured imo, can't judge him on one performance, playing with Mullarkey and Glennon.

In your opinion he looked assured, which is fair enough, and he looked anything but in mine, so time will tell which of us is right!

Quoted from lew chaterleys lover

In your opinion he looked assured, which is fair enough, and he looked anything but in mine, so time will tell which of us is right!

I thought, bearing in mind how bad our defence has been, that I didn't notice him being a particular upgrade, just seemed much of a muchness with Rodgers really, which is a bit worrying!

I thought Tharme did fine. Nothing special, but nothing terrible. He's as good a ball player as the rest of our centre-halves so can't really critise him for that side of the game too much.

Waterfall isn't half the player he was during our promotion season, so it was time for him to move on. Our current options aren't as strong as him in the air, but there isn't much difference in other aspects and he's by far the slowest of them. I think the Walsall game sealed his fate, though it may have been that a move was already in the pipeline. It was certainly rumoured.

If we’d have drawn the game and he’d have played the full 90 I’m sure Tharme would have been a decent signing.

For what it’s worth I thought he did ok considering the game time he’s had this season.

DA wants to play out from the back.  This is unrealistic with the current players.  We must survive this season ( of course).  Maybe DA will not change his approach this seaso ( which is yet another worry).

DA wants to play out from the back.  This is unrealistic with the current players.  We must survive this season ( of course).  Maybe DA will not change his approach this seaso ( which is yet another worry).

Quoted from HerveJosse

I’d take 40 points and risk it right now.

40 points would have got us relegated 8 out of the last 10 full league 2 seasons , I don't like those odds .

Quoted from HertsGTFC

If we’d have drawn the game and he’d have played the full 90 I’m sure Tharme would have been a decent signing.

For what it’s worth I thought he did ok considering the game time he’s had this season.

I agree with you about Tharme. Let's face it he only played 62 minutes and scored on his debut. You've got to see him over a few games before he can be judged.