Can you imagine how cardiff fans would react if we passed the ball around at the back like Luton did yesterday?

They even took advantage of the new law that the ball doesn’t have to leave the box from a goal kick to pass it back and forth between a defender and a keeper for what seemed like forever- maybe to up their possession stats?

Cardiff fans go mental if the ball is ever passed back to the keeper under any circumstances! I dread to think what the reaction would be if we did what Luton were doing yesterday- even when they were losing!!


Ps the only trouble Luton did cause us was ironically from a bloody corner.

It wouldn’t be a pretty showing, no. Cardiff complete just above half of their passes, so that wouldn’t look good either. But that is what Warwick has put together. He only signed ONE player that can be regarded as talent for the future. The rest is horses for corpses. It’s all about himself, and he is not setting the club up for any progress. Wonder when fans will realize this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Father Dougal

They even took advantage of the new law that the ball doesn’t have to leave the box from a goal kick to pass it back and forth between a defender and a keeper for what seemed like forever- maybe to up their possession stats?

Cardiff fans go mental if the ball is ever passed back to the keeper under any circumstances! I dread to think what the reaction would be if we did what Luton were doing yesterday- even when they were losing!!


Ps the only trouble Luton did cause us was ironically from a bloody corner.

---

Which it seems they shouldn’t have had

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lawnmower

Which it seems they shouldn’t have had

---

It was clearly a goal kick. Doesn’t excuse the space their player had for the equaliser, especially for a team that prides itself on attacking/defending set pieces.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lawnmower

Which it seems they shouldn’t have had

---

Yes a big mistake. However very disappointing for us to spend so much energy complaining after it was given. I’m sure that contributed to us not defending it properly. The players were right back at the ref after they scored.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolfmother

It wouldn’t be a pretty showing, no. Cardiff complete just above half of their passes, so that wouldn’t look good either. But that is what Warwick has put together. He only signed ONE player that can be regarded as talent for the future. The rest is horses for corpses. It’s all about himself, and he is not setting the club up for any progress. Wonder when fans will realize this.

---

I’d give a new manager one, maybe if he was already well known and already popular, two goal kicks like that before total discontent set in. :hehe:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lawnmower

Which it seems they shouldn’t have had

---

And we didn't defend properly.

When they tried to move forward with it, they looked alright, but lacked a cutting edge. The passing to the keeper, to the cb back to the keeper is awful to watch.

I suppose they weren't under much pressure and were happy with a point but still, if that's largely how they play I'm not sure I'd prefer to watch it than anything we do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stavross1927

It was clearly a goal kick. Doesn’t excuse the space their player had for the equaliser, especially for a team that prides itself on attacking/defending set pieces.

---

Zonal marking crap

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trigger

When they tried to move forward with it, they looked alright, but lacked a cutting edge. The passing to the keeper, to the cb back to the keeper is awful to watch.

I suppose they weren't under much pressure and were happy with a point but still, if that's largely how they play I'm not sure I'd prefer to watch it than anything we do.

---

Do we know if they play like that all of the time? Luton didn't want to get into a long ball game with us for obvious reasons, there keeper when forced to kick was knocking the ball out to the wide areas. I can sort of understand why they were trying to play out, especially as we only play with one striker and are very strong in the air.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolfmother

It wouldn’t be a pretty showing, no. Cardiff complete just above half of their passes, so that wouldn’t look good either. But that is what Warwick has put together. He only signed ONE player that can be regarded as talent for the future. The rest is horses for corpses. It’s all about himself, and he is not setting the club up for any progress. Wonder when fans will realize this.

---

What do you want to do then ?
- start trying to play a continental style passing game and taking on Liverpool and Manchester City at their own game ?

Cardiff City have has a good measure of success by doing something different to most other teams. When it works, which is quite a lot of the time, it exploits the weaknesses in current footballing strategies and gets us much further than we've got any right to expect with our resources.
That's worth doing and gets results, and it's called Warnockball.

From my point of view it's far more creditable than just buying success as the big clubs do, and in the real world 90% of clubs including ourselves can't do that anyway.

There are many many clubs trying to play "quality" football and yielding nothing but frustrated mediocrity from their efforts.

Case in point: Bristol City.

Warnockball got us promoted with one of the lowest budgets in the Championship and very nearly kept us in the premiership.
There's a very good chance that Warnockball will get us there again this year.

Those who constantly moan about it, ( and I don't single you out because there are plenty here), are not being logical or wise.

I sometimes get a bit irritated in the other threads here with youngsters who don't acknowledge that experience of the real world counts much and think they're the first people to come up with theories which don't actually work.

Perhaps that makes me a bit rude and dismissive of them, which is probably wrong of me, but the fact is that I've been around the block a few times and in the process I hope I've learned the difference between a seductive argument and a workable policy. On this basis , I suggest that the manager we've got knows exactly what he's doing - what sounds like a nice idea and what will actually work to get the best possible outcome in an imperfect world.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RonnieBird

What do you want to do then ?
- start trying to play a continental style passing game and taking on Liverpool and Manchester City at their own game ?

Cardiff City have has a good measure of success by doing something different to most other teams. When it works, which is quite a lot of the time, it exploits the weaknesses in current footballing strategies and gets us much further than we've got any right to expect with our resources.
That's worth doing and gets results, and it's called Warnockball.

From my point of view it's far more creditable than just buying success as the big clubs do, and in the real world 90% of clubs including ourselves can't do that anyway.

There are many many clubs trying to play "quality" football and yielding nothing but frustrated mediocrity from their efforts.

Case in point: Bristol City.

Warnockball got us promoted with one of the lowest budgets in the Championship and very nearly kept us in the premiership.
There's a very good chance that Warnockball will get us there again this year.

Those who constantly moan about it, ( and I don't single you out because there are plenty here), are not being logical or wise.

I sometimes get a bit irritated in the other threads here with youngsters who don't acknowledge that experience of the real world counts much and think they're the first people to come up with theories which don't actually work.

Perhaps that makes me a bit rude and dismissive of them, which is probably wrong of me, but the fact is that I've been around the block a few times and in the process I hope I've learned the difference between a seductive argument and a workable policy. On this basis , I suggest that the manager we've got knows exactly what he's doing - what sounds like a nice idea and what will actually work to get the best possible outcome in an imperfect world.

---

Perfectly illustrated. The point I was making in the OP was if we did completely change strategy fans would go mad about that aswell.

Hilarious to read people say what we should really do is a combination of tough play, no nonsense when needed, but also possession based, but purposeful and attacking possession. Oh and our strikers should score lots of goals but also have really good overall play.

Yeah good idea lads, wonder why nobody else has ever thought of that?! :shrug:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Father Dougal

Perfectly illustrated. The point I was making in the OP was if we did completely change strategy fans would go mad about that aswell.

Hilarious to read people say what we should really do is a combination of tough play, no nonsense when needed, but also possession based, but purposeful and attacking possession. Oh and our strikers should score lots of goals but also have really good overall play.

Yeah good idea lads, wonder why nobody else has ever thought of that?! :shrug:

---

Nobody is saying any of that, you're being silly :thumbup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tuerto

Nobody is saying any of that, you're being silly :thumbup:

---

Over exaggerating yes.

However I stand by my OP in that if a new manager came in and played anything like Luton did yesterday our fans would be absolutely fuming.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Father Dougal

Perfectly illustrated. The point I was making in the OP was if we did completely change strategy fans would go mad about that aswell.

Hilarious to read people say what we should really do is a combination of tough play, no nonsense when needed, but also possession based, but purposeful and attacking possession. Oh and our strikers should score lots of goals but also have really good overall play.

Yeah good idea lads, wonder why nobody else has ever thought of that?! :shrug:

---

There are plenty of teams down the years who have done all of the things you list to some extent or another and achieved success.

Maybe for the first time ever, I agree with some of what Ronnie Bird says because I think there is some merit in playing like we do because, these days, opponents don't get as much experience of facing it as they once did, but I think there is a lot of keeping the, blind, faith going on since yesterday's match - City won, so everything is fine.

I can't speak for others, but because I'm critical of the way we play, it doesn't mean I want us to play in a possession for possession's sake way. That's a very extreme version of playing the game where possession is respected, while we play an increasingly extreme version of an attritional game where, it seems that having the ball for only a third of a game is regarded as no bad thing.

Neither of those approaches will bring you long term success, especially in the Premier League. You need to mix things up a bit and get sides guessing what you are likely to do going into a match - I think the fans would accept an attacking approach which saw us showing a bit more patience than we do now to try an work an opening.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

There are plenty of teams down the years who have done all of the things you list to some extent or another and achieved success.

Maybe for the first time ever, I agree with some of what Ronnie Bird says because I think there is some merit in playing like we do because, these days, opponents don't get as much experience of facing it as they once did, but I think there is a lot of keeping the, blind, faith going on since yesterday's match - City won, so everything is fine.

I can't speak for others, but because I'm critical of the way we play, it doesn't mean I want us to play in a possession for possession's sake way. That's a very extreme version of playing the game where possession is respected, while we play an increasingly extreme version of an attritional game where, it seems that having the ball for only a third of a game is regarded as no bad thing.

Neither of those approaches will bring you long term success, especially in the Premier League. You need to mix things up a bit and get sides guessing what you are likely to do going into a match - I think the fans would accept an attacking approach which saw us showing a bit more patience than we do now to try an work an opening.

---

What I will say is in the championship you can be very successful with any style. But you absolutely must be good at what you are good at- the very best in your area. You can’t get anywhere being a bits and pieces team.

This is what Warnock understands most.

It’s also why for me the championship is ten times more interesting than the premier league as you get a whole range of styles and approaches- none of them perfect but all can work if executed well. :thumbup:

I think there is merit to play how we do just at times it feels like we give the ball away too easily and can’t hold onto the ball to save our lives. It always feels like an equaliser is coming.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolfmother

It wouldn’t be a pretty showing, no. Cardiff complete just above half of their passes, so that wouldn’t look good either. But that is what Warwick has put together. He only signed ONE player that can be regarded as talent for the future. The rest is horses for corpses. It’s all about himself, and he is not setting the club up for any progress. Wonder when fans will realize this.

---

Blimey, they're slow, but no that slow..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

There are plenty of teams down the years who have done all of the things you list to some extent or another and achieved success.

Maybe for the first time ever, I agree with some of what Ronnie Bird says because I think there is some merit in playing like we do because, these days, opponents don't get as much experience of facing it as they once did, but I think there is a lot of keeping the, blind, faith going on since yesterday's match - City won, so everything is fine.

I can't speak for others, but because I'm critical of the way we play, it doesn't mean I want us to play in a possession for possession's sake way. That's a very extreme version of playing the game where possession is respected, while we play an increasingly extreme version of an attritional game where, it seems that having the ball for only a third of a game is regarded as no bad thing.

Neither of those approaches will bring you long term success, especially in the Premier League. You need to mix things up a bit and get sides guessing what you are likely to do going into a match - I think the fans would accept an attacking approach which saw us showing a bit more patience than we do now to try an work an opening.

---

Most people would be happy with watching us play like we did against Wolves, Leeds or Villa last time we were here wouldn’t they?

The challenge is attaining that level consistently. I’m not sure whether we abandoned the approach last time around or just started to run out of steam once we started picking up injuries and knocks along the way.

Why does it have to be one thing or the other? You can still retain possession without playing tippy-tappy at the back. We had the lead yesterday and the opportunity to control the game. But we failed to do, by continuing with hopeful long balls, lobs, flicks, headers etc. We need to be able to adapt our game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Father Dougal

What I will say is in the championship you can be very successful with any style. But you absolutely must be good at what you are good at- the very best in your area. You can’t get anywhere being a bits and pieces team.

This is what Warnock understands most.

It’s also why for me the championship is ten times more interesting than the premier league as you get a whole range of styles and approaches- none of them perfect but all can work if executed well. :thumbup:

---

Personally for that reason I genuinely thought the premier league was quite boring. Every team we played seemed to be strong, tall, quick, skilful, well organised- and didn’t have any weak links.

In the championship all teams and players have some strengths but they also have weaknesses so its always game on. A real contrast of tactics available. Much more interesting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baloo

Most people would be happy with watching us play like we did against Wolves, Leeds or Villa last time we were here wouldn’t they?

The challenge is attaining that level consistently. I’m not sure whether we abandoned the approach last time around or just started to run out of steam once we started picking up injuries and knocks along the way.

---

They would.

Unfortunately teams watch each other in this league and all those wins happened in the first 10 games or so. Teams worked out how to stop us then. We didn’t have a choice but to adapt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RonnieBird

What do you want to do then ?
- start trying to play a continental style passing game and taking on Liverpool and Manchester City at their own game ?

Cardiff City have has a good measure of success by doing something different to most other teams. When it works, which is quite a lot of the time, it exploits the weaknesses in current footballing strategies and gets us much further than we've got any right to expect with our resources.
That's worth doing and gets results, and it's called Warnockball.

From my point of view it's far more creditable than just buying success as the big clubs do, and in the real world 90% of clubs including ourselves can't do that anyway.

There are many many clubs trying to play "quality" football and yielding nothing but frustrated mediocrity from their efforts.

Case in point: Bristol City.

Warnockball got us promoted with one of the lowest budgets in the Championship and very nearly kept us in the premiership.
There's a very good chance that Warnockball will get us there again this year.

Those who constantly moan about it, ( and I don't single you out because there are plenty here), are not being logical or wise.

I sometimes get a bit irritated in the other threads here with youngsters who don't acknowledge that experience of the real world counts much and think they're the first people to come up with theories which don't actually work.

Perhaps that makes me a bit rude and dismissive of them, which is probably wrong of me, but the fact is that I've been around the block a few times and in the process I hope I've learned the difference between a seductive argument and a workable policy. On this basis , I suggest that the manager we've got knows exactly what he's doing - what sounds like a nice idea and what will actually work to get the best possible outcome in an imperfect world.

---

As I mentioned in another post, I actually agree with a fair bit of what you say, but, the facts say that the Warnock method is not as successful as you make it appear in your final paragraph. As of now, Neil Warnock sides have been promoted in one of five of the seasons he has been in management. That's a fine record that many others must envy, but I'm not sure that it's good enough to merit the all of our eggs in one basket approach being seen this season whereby we follow one method and one method only.

If we had not scored that very late goal yesterday, I'm sure there would have been some on here urging patience, but I guarantee that "Warnockball" would have been getting a far tougher time of it on here than its did last night and is doing today because when it is executed badly and the wins don't come, it has nothing whatsoever to it to please football fans - I'm sure the fans will stay with our manager and his team if our current league position soon turns into one in the top six, but if it stays as it is, there won't be much "in Warnock we trust" being seen on here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rudy gestede

I think there is merit to play how we do just at times it feels like we give the ball away too easily and can’t hold onto the ball to save our lives. It always feels like an equaliser is coming.

---

He plays to our strengths, but sometimes it only takes a second to look up, if you’re gonna hoof it hoof it near someone so we can at least make a challenge and attempt to keep the ball.

One thing that’s always grated on me
Is aimless punts upfield. Other teams do, liverpool and Man City for example resort to it, but it’s always calculated. I honestly believe we just don’t look and welly the ball at times.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Father Dougal

They would.

Unfortunately teams watch each other in this league and all those wins happened in the first 10 games or so. Teams worked out how to stop us then. We didn’t have a choice but to adapt.

---

What do you think they did out of interest?