|
Post by Wimbo on May 6, 2020 9:52:06 GMT
Interesting comment on the Luton News site from Moncur:
Here was Moncur on playing under MH: "It just takes every bit of pressure off the players. He just lets you go out and play, you just really enjoy your football. It’s great just getting out on the pitch, just having no fear and no pressure at all.”
|
|
|
Post by flathatter on May 6, 2020 10:03:57 GMT
I think that is a hint relating to GJ's departure.
|
|
|
Post by rutlandhatter on May 6, 2020 10:21:39 GMT
I think that is a hint relating to GJ's departure. certainly is, flat, and an explanation as to why we won league 1 when other teams arguably had better players --barnsley in particular. people on here often say you can't blame the manager as he's not on the pitch playing the game but i have never held to that view. the manager is steering the ship --excuse the metaphore-- and if it doesn't go where it is meant to then he is to blame.
|
|
|
Post by bernardshakey on May 6, 2020 10:42:29 GMT
Does everyone on here think the GJ departure was 100% financial or was there some other contributing factors?
|
|
|
Post by Wimbo on May 6, 2020 10:47:40 GMT
Does everyone on here think the GJ departure was 100% financial or was there some other contributing factors? Don't know Bernard but I am really curious.
|
|
|
Post by proudhattersince74 on May 6, 2020 11:12:37 GMT
I would think the financial figures were utterly daunting to the board without having a penny of income for the last home matches and the management were the most expensive element (except, possibly a couple of loanees). The doubt about getting income for renewed STs only added to that.
All that noted, I doubt many tears would have been shed by the board/investors as I don't believe GJ and his gang actually got anywhere near the best out of what they had at their disposal. In the few games where we looked like we were taking the game to the opposition, we actually played well and got a decent return in points for that approach - Blackburn(A), Barnsley(A), Leeds(H), Fulham(H), Boro(both games). But there were far too many matches where we started slowly and, fundamentally, invited the opposition to throw their best at us and we'd try to hit them on the break ... this became our main tactic and was the main contributory reason why we lost so many frickin' away matches on the trot. Our 'hitting them on the break plan A' soon became a non-tactic when the other team breached our defence and then held firm to deny us many chance at getting a point.
I think the most typical away game that fits that model was at Bristol City: considering how well we played vs Fulham just days before, our tactics at Bristol City were as bewildering as they were disappointing.
But I feel that the most important match we didn't start offensively was home to Birmingham. Our energy levels were shocking from minute 1 and got exactly what our tactics deserved in a match that would have dragged them into the relegation mire with us and others. Instead, we gave them a helping leg-up and a boost to their confidence.
Moncur's comment about MH letting the players play without pressure is all very well when the players are, individually, as good as the opposition. They clearly were in L1. But I'm not so sure that approach will gain the same general results/style in a division where the opposition are usually more gifted and better organised. Steve Rutter managed to keep the organisational aspect in L1 but I'm not sure whether MH could tactically steer us through Championship matches without such an assistant. Not a dig at Mick as such ... just that a tactically astute assistant would be a massive boost to Mick's man management skills.
|
|
|
Post by 8two on May 6, 2020 13:12:25 GMT
Does everyone on here think the GJ departure was 100% financial or was there some other contributing factors? no bernard, I don't believe it was. Not exactly a successful manager whose early decisions in away games were a disaster. Had a few more odd points been gained we wouldn't be worried by thoughts of relegation. Arguably 50 percent of the fans had had enough of the current coaching team and it therefore is not beyond speculation that 50 percent of the board had as well. COVID chaos had given a good reason to redefine the relationship and if the rumours about salary cuts are correct then perhaps a decision to better go rather than be pushed was a face saving result for both parties.
|
|
|
Post by hattersussex on May 6, 2020 13:32:53 GMT
I make no bones about it...I didn't like GJ from about 4 weeks into the season...I didn't rate his Man management skills, his tactics (Or lack of)...his after match comments, when he would slate certain players, the way he literally threw in the towel when Izzy was injured...etc. etc...his vast array of scientists, was it 3 goalkeeping coaches ?...Oh boy...Am i happy !!
|
|
|
Post by lutonloyal on May 6, 2020 16:28:51 GMT
Does everyone on here think the GJ departure was 100% financial or was there some other contributing factors? 100 % Financial but he didn't help himself with the Board when having a tantrum on being asked to possibly go on furlough leave ?
|
|
|
Post by maggiechow on May 6, 2020 16:59:50 GMT
Source?
|
|
|
Post by bms on May 6, 2020 17:32:37 GMT
I would think the financial figures were utterly daunting to the board without having a penny of income for the last home matches and the management were the most expensive element (except, possibly a couple of loanees). The doubt about getting income for renewed STs only added to that. All that noted, I doubt many tears would have been shed by the board/investors as I don't believe GJ and his gang actually got anywhere near the best out of what they had at their disposal. In the few games where we looked like we were taking the game to the opposition, we actually played well and got a decent return in points for that approach - Blackburn(A), Barnsley(A), Leeds(H), Fulham(H), Boro(both games). But there were far too many matches where we started slowly and, fundamentally, invited the opposition to throw their best at us and we'd try to hit them on the break ... this became our main tactic and was the main contributory reason why we lost so many frickin' away matches on the trot. Our 'hitting them on the break plan A' soon became a non-tactic when the other team breached our defence and then held firm to deny us many chance at getting a point. I think the most typical away game that fits that model was at Bristol City: considering how well we played vs Fulham just days before, our tactics at Bristol City were as bewildering as they were disappointing. But I feel that the most important match we didn't start offensively was home to Birmingham. Our energy levels were shocking from minute 1 and got exactly what our tactics deserved in a match that would have dragged them into the relegation mire with us and others. Instead, we gave them a helping leg-up and a boost to their confidence. Moncur's comment about MH letting the players play without pressure is all very well when the players are, individually, as good as the opposition. They clearly were in L1. But I'm not so sure that approach will gain the same general results/style in a division where the opposition are usually more gifted and better organised. Steve Rutter managed to keep the organisational aspect in L1 but I'm not sure whether MH could tactically steer us through Championship matches without such an assistant. Not a dig at Mick as such ... just that a tactically astute assistant would be a massive boost to Mick's man management skills. I think that’s an excellent summary Proud - I was at all the matches you cited. think it’s dangerous to speculate on the exact circumstances of GJ’s departure and anyway, who really cares - I for one have no problem with his departure whatsoever, and assuming it has saved us some money, all the better. I suspect GS and co will base the next appointment firstly on what we can afford and secondly on which League we find ourselves in when a resolution of 2019/20 is confirmed - maybe by Xmas at this rate.
|
|
|
Post by melbournehatter on May 7, 2020 10:35:52 GMT
Does everyone on here think the GJ departure was 100% financial or was there some other contributing factors? 100 % Financial but he didn't help himself with the Board when having a tantrum on being asked to possibly go on furlough leave ? Someone else asked, but I could see no response, so I will ask again ---- Source??
|
|
|
Post by tassie on May 7, 2020 11:39:46 GMT
Melbourne that “ someone “ is Senior Member Maggiechow and yes I too would like to know the source of the alleged “ tantrum “. Can anyone help, please? COYH
|
|
|
Post by braminghamrover on May 8, 2020 8:04:20 GMT
Last week we had the first in depth comments from Rick Parry in behalf of the EFL. The statistic that surprised me was the number of players out of contract on June 30. If I'd been asked to guess I would have said six or seven per club but, no, the number is 1400. Coming from a man in his position I am taking that as a fact. Spread over 71 clubs there is an average of 20. So my guess would have been accurate if I was forecasting the number of players not out of contract!
It's fair to assume that prevalence of OOCs will be lower the bigger the club and with only a couple of big clubs outside the Championship the impact will be concentrated in Leagues 1and 2. Some time ago on this board I said "What next season?" and many contributors since then have included the possibility of divisional restructuring in their remarks. This in turn has triggered another thought in my mind. Football teams need very little money to take the field, the lowest of the local leagues prove that. But football clubs require considerable funding to put a team on the field at Football League level and these have evolved into companies that must comply with both legal and football-related regulations with respect to their balance sheets. When they fail to do this they first cop punishment from the football authorities in the form of points deductions and fines (I've never understood the logic of fining people who are broke) and when they are unable to overcome the hurdles they fall into administration.
However, even the myopic football authorities must realise that the standard treatment of ostrasication won't work in epidemic conditions. If they are faced with the expulsion of 20 or 30 teams from the EFL will they permit the mothballing of clubs until the bereaved communities are able to recover to the point where they can once again field a team compatible with professional league levels. I'm talking about actual Football League membership being allowed to go into hibernation for somewhere between 5 and 10 years. The EFL could restructure into the appropriate number of divisions and allow the mothballed clubs to come back on stream as and when they are fit to do so, restarting at the bottom of course.
If the authorities follow current practice Leagues 1 and 2 could be populated with clubs like Braintree and Harrogate or The Bird In Hand while the Nattional League pyramid and below could be populated by clubs like Doncaster Rovers, Luton Town or Newcastle United.
A bit of an apocalyptic view, I know, and we all hope it won't happen but which of the two recovery processes should they choose, or are their others?
|
|
|
Post by melbournehatter on May 8, 2020 11:52:53 GMT
(I've never understood the logic of fining people who are broke) BMS, that comment is true of society in general and the social structures of it. Prisons (gaols) are full of people who have not paid fines. they are the underprivelidged, the socio-economically poor, the people of the tenemants. The generationally unemployed. they commit minor offences, they are fined, they are poor so can't pay the fine .... so they end up in prison. It is a societal problem all the way round, whichever way you look at it. IRT Football Clubs, it should be different. They start with XXX money, they know this. But they overspend on the dreams of success and promotion (see the Championship struggles to get to the Premiership). That is not a societal problem, it is a 'man made' problem. They overspend, they take shortcuts, they fiddle the books. The powers know they cannot pay the fine --- but the structure of punishments means a fine is the only punishment then can hand out for first offence. Then the spiral starts --- can't pay the fine. Keep spending money ---- get into more problems ---- more punishment --- points deductions!! Then administration. The 'owners' skip town, the supporters are screwed!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Such is life.
|
|