Bulut: 'At least we now know which players can step up'

[Tuerto]

Hardly gave many a platform to succeed. One centre half in the side, a formation the firsts don't play and an entirely second string team with kids coming on in the second half

Surely a better gauge on who can step up is how they perform alongside the actual firsts or at least in the shape we'd actually play? Surely it would make more sense to put Panzo in a back 4, stick a kid in at left back if needed and Evans in his actual position as a winger rather than a wing back on the wrong side? You can say chances are limited, but you can't just chuck a rag tag side together with little semblance to where these players play or would play if they were in the firsts and then say "x can't step up"

Sorry, didn't see your whole post Shall we provide them with their favourite biscuits at half time as well, ask them if they're happy with the colour scheme in the changing room? In my opinion, good players show through whatever the circumstances, even if they're asked to play a different role. And i would say that was what Bulut was looking for. The result was secondary. We can't promote players on the hope that they'd be better with better players around them, when they've not shown anything in games like last night. That would be ridiculous

[AdrianAlston]

Hardly gave many a platform to succeed. One centre half in the side, a formation the firsts don't play and an entirely second string team with kids coming on in the second half

Surely a better gauge on who can step up is how they perform alongside the actual firsts or at least in the shape we'd actually play? Surely it would make more sense to put Panzo in a back 4, stick a kid in at left back if needed and Evans in his actual position as a winger rather than a wing back on the wrong side? You can say chances are limited, but you can't just chuck a rag tag side together with little semblance to where these players play or would play if they were in the firsts and then say "x can't step up"

This is a really good post. What you have highlighted is why I hate 11 changes for a cup game. West Ham did this last night although their 'reserve' team was full of multi-million pound players and they struggled to beat Lincoln with the aid of a jammy goal.

It looks like Evans won't be with us much longer but hopefully it will not be because a young right-footed winger who's weakest part of his game is his defence that his big chance came as a left wing back with a makeshift defence behind him. He really has talent and there is no other player in the squad quite like him (probably a right-footed O'Dowda would be the best example).

What the game did highlight was that last season when we were poor with Romeo, Sawyers, Rinhomota etc as 1st choice; it may not have been the coaching that was to blame!

Don't want to be seen to criticise Bulut, who is clearly doing a good job.

[City123]

Sorry, didn't see your whole post Shall we provide them with their favourite biscuits at half time as well, ask them if they're happy with the colour scheme in the changing room? In my opinion, good players show through whatever the circumstances, even if they're asked to play a different role. And i would say that was what Bulut was looking for. The result was secondary. We can't promote players on the hope that they'd be better with better players around them, when they've not shown anything in games like last night. That would be ridiculous

I just don't really see the point playing players out of position in a formation we never play and then saying "he can't step up", you don't learn anything useful. If he genuinely wanted to learn something about those players it would have made far more sense playing the same system the first team play as that's where they'd actually play if they ever are called upon to play in the firsts rather than that ridiculous 3 at the back that we don't actually play. When is Romeo going to play as a right sided centre back? He's not. When are Evans or Tanner likely to play as wing backs? They're not.

Evans is a good example of why last night was a little ridiculous for me. He's a winger who did ok in pre-season, why stick him in as a left wing back if you want to see if he can step up to the first team (where he would play as a left winger)? Surely it makes far more sense to stick him in as a left winger. If you want to see him take ownership of that role and test him defensively, stick a kid in at left back and have Evans help him through the game

Panzo as well, we've brought him in as one of our 3 main centre halves, why give him one of his few opportunities in a back 3 when we don't use one?

This would have made more sense to me and made Bulut's complains about who can step up more reasonable at least then they're in positions that actually correspond to how they'd play if they had to step up

Runnarson

Romeo Adams (if we must rest Gouts/McGuinness) Panzo Giles/Beecher

J.Colwill Rinomhota

Robinson R.Colwill Evans

Etete

There you have the system we actually play and players in positions they actually play with some of the younger players given responsibility. Go out and play well, no excuses. Instead we went with a bizarre formation we don't use, with square pegs in round holes.

[the other bob wilson]

Sounds like Bulut decided to put a series of fringe players into situations they were unfamiliar with and see if they sank or swam as it was a match where the result wasn’t hugely important - I just hope that the fact that many swam when put in the same situation in the Second Round at Birmingham isn’t forgotten.

[jon1959]

I like the way Bulut is talking about Colwill.

He is pulling no punches on the weaknesses that need to be tackled, but clearly sees him as a player with a very high potential ceiling - and puts achieving that down to the coaching and to Rubin himself.

He made similar comments about Tanner but didn’t get the balance right. Too much stick and not enough carrot (in a second or third or fourth language)!

Bulut impresses me more as time goes by.

[pipster]

The boss not pulling any punches here...

https://nation.cymru/sport/cardiff-b...fter-cup-loss/

Whenever I have seen Colwill and Tanner play together they link up really well.
On his own though - he does come across as not looking as sharp as others - maybe that's his style - I dont know - but I can see why Bulut may become a bit frustrated. It's not as if he hasnt had the chances

[Tuerto]

I like the way Bulut is talking about Colwill.

He is pulling no punches on the weaknesses that need to be tackled, but clearly sees him as a player with a very high potential ceiling - and puts achieving that down to the coaching and to Rubin himself.

He made similar comments about Tanner but didn’t get the balance right. Too much stick and not enough carrot (in a second or third or fourth language)!

Bulut impresses me more as time goes by.

Exactly, yet we had plenty on here blaming the coaching staff or saying that Colwill just can't play a certain way. There may be some truth to that in terms of him finding it difficult, but he has to learn the defensive side of the game and the out of possession bit in order to fulfil his potential. There's not a club on earth who would allow a player to ignore those aspects of the game. Look at the impact Colwill made at Sunderland. He was assertive, controlled, showed glimpses of quality, but we also saw another side to his game that hasn't been prevalent, he was a pain in the arse for the opposition when we weren't on the ball.

[Wash DC Blue]

I like the way Bulut is talking about Colwill.

He is pulling no punches on the weaknesses that need to be tackled, but clearly sees him as a player with a very high potential ceiling - and puts achieving that down to the coaching and to Rubin himself.

He made similar comments about Tanner but didn’t get the balance right. Too much stick and not enough carrot (in a second or third or fourth language)!

Bulut impresses me more as time goes by.

Just watched the highlights.
Colwill seemed a bit lackadaisical in defense for a couple of their goals in my opinion.

Looked like Panzo had a bit of a mare and Runnerson was a bit jittery.

Let’s not forget though how bad Collins looked against Colchester and how fantastic he has been since.

[Tuerto]

I just don't really see the point playing players out of position in a formation we never play and then saying "he can't step up", you don't learn anything useful. If he genuinely wanted to learn something about those players it would have made far more sense playing the same system the first team play as that's where they'd actually play if they ever are called upon to play in the firsts rather than that ridiculous 3 at the back that we don't actually play. When is Romeo going to play as a right sided centre back? He's not. When are Evans or Tanner likely to play as wing backs? They're not.

Evans is a good example of why last night was a little ridiculous for me. He's a winger who did ok in pre-season, why stick him in as a left wing back if you want to see if he can step up to the first team (where he would play as a left winger)? Surely it makes far more sense to stick him in as a left winger. If you want to see him take ownership of that role and test him defensively, stick a kid in at left back and have Evans help him through the game

Panzo as well, we've brought him in as one of our 3 main centre halves, why give him one of his few opportunities in a back 3 when we don't use one?

This would have made more sense to me and made Bulut's complains about who can step up more reasonable at least then they're in positions that actually correspond to how they'd play if they had to step up

Runnarson

Romeo Adams (if we must rest Gouts/McGuinness) Panzo Giles/Beecher

J.Colwill Rinomhota

Robinson R.Colwill Evans

Etete

There you have the system we actually play and players in positions they actually play with some of the younger players given responsibility. Go out and play well, no excuses. Instead we went with a bizarre formation we don't use, with square pegs in round holes.

I don't agree. Players can still show quality in a position that they're not used to. Evans wouldn't have all of a sudden lost his natural attributes because he was a bit more withdrawn in a position, from a starting point. He would still have the ability to pass a ball, carry a ball, use the vision he has, step inside onto his stronger foot, the game was in front of him. He may have struggled with getting into good positions when defending though. That's fair. Tanner, the same.

Panzo was playing in his natural position. I have no idea on him, i have no idea how he played, although i'm sure that he's played in a back three before, if that causes him problems then we have problems.

Bulut may be seeing evans as a wing back, who knows, he may think that's his best position, he might have spoken to him about it, we don't know. He's almost 22 years old, so whatever he has been doing previously hasn't worked at Cardiff. That may sound harsh, it probably is, but for me, last night was a chance for him and others. Not ideal, not a perfect formation, but who can be afforded everything they want in order to succeed? Sometimes people have to show a bit more, prove people wrong, forget the obstacles.

[City123]

I don't agree. Players can still show quality in a position that they're not used to. Evans wouldn't have all of a sudden lost his natural attributes because he was a bit more withdrawn in a position, from a starting point. He would still have the ability to pass a ball, carry a ball, use the vision he has, step inside onto his stronger foot, the game was in front of him. He may have struggled with getting into good positions when defending though. That's fair. Tanner, the same.

Panzo was playing in his natural position. I have no idea on him, i have no idea how he played, although i'm sure that he's played in a back three before, if that causes him problems then we have problems.

Bulut may be seeing evans as a wing back, who knows, he may think that's his best position, he might have spoken to him about it, we don't know. He's almost 22 years old, so whatever he has been doing previously hasn't worked at Cardiff. That may sound harsh, it probably is, but for me, last night was a chance for him and others. Not ideal, not a perfect formation, but who can be afforded everything they want in order to succeed? Sometimes people have to show a bit more, prove people wrong, forget the obstacles.

I'm not saying they can't show quality and that they shouldn't take responsibility, I'm just saying that it seems a little pointless to completely change the shape and play players in unfamiliar positions if you're genuinely looking to see if they can play in a league match where they would be in a completely different shape. Its not a question of giving people everything they want, it's about playing them in the position they would play in a league game and seeing how they get on. That's hardly a huge ask?

Realistically, what was the point completely changing the shape last night? He caught lightning in a bottle at Birmingham and it worked out, but wouldn't it make more sense to play the same way and see how they do in Grant's role, or Siopis' role etc? You have an obvious comparison there on how they would do if they had to step into that role in a league match for whatever reason.

[splott parker]

Could it be that Bulut has seen in training that he’s confident that the fringe players can do a job in a like for like swap in their preferred position? He used last night, unsuccessfully it seems, to see how they performed out of their comfort zone, to see how versatile they could be should the situation arise. Perhaps he saw this game as the competition to experiment in rather than having to make an enforced change in a league match with not much clue how the replacement would fit in, slotting into a necessary unfamiliar role at that particular moment. Last night may have taught him a lot about our squad.

[Tuerto]

Could it be that Bulut has seen in training that he’s confident that the fringe players can do a job in a like for like swap in their preferred position? He used last night, unsuccessfully it seems, to see how they performed out of their comfort zone, to see how versatile they could be should the situation arise. Perhaps he saw this game as the competition to experiment in rather than having to make an enforced change in a league match with not much clue how the replacement would fit in, slotting into a necessary unfamiliar role at that particular moment. Last night may have taught him a lot about our squad.

Yeah, could well be. Couid also be that he sees certain players in a different light to what they or the fans think. Not saying he's right, but he sees them every day. Nathan Blake made his debut as a central defender against Bristol Rovers (unless it was a few games after he made his debut) he showed plenty of quality in that role, even though he wasn't a defender. That's because he was a good player who could adapt and think for himself. Football isn't that complicated a game.

[Tuerto]

I'm not saying they can't show quality and that they shouldn't take responsibility, I'm just saying that it seems a little pointless to completely change the shape and play players in unfamiliar positions if you're genuinely looking to see if they can play in a league match where they would be in a completely different shape. Its not a question of giving people everything they want, it's about playing them in the position they would play in a league game and seeing how they get on. That's hardly a huge ask?

Realistically, what was the point completely changing the shape last night? He caught lightning in a bottle at Birmingham and it worked out, but wouldn't it make more sense to play the same way and see how they do in Grant's role, or Siopis' role etc? You have an obvious comparison there on how they would do if they had to step into that role in a league match for whatever reason.

I don't think that Bulut gave an arse about the formation, probably experimenting a bit to see what options he has. I do reckon though that he was more interested in individual performances, concentration etc.

[olderblue]

I don't think that Bulut gave an arse about the formation, probably experimenting a bit to see what options he has. I do reckon though that he was more interested in individual performances, concentration etc.

I would say desire, was one of the main things he wanted to see, who actually wants this?

Football is a brutal world and you can have all the skills in the world, but as a team sport you have to demonstrate that you have the will to succeed in a team environment

We’ve all heard the phrase bodies on the line, but sometimes it’s down to just that basic hunger for success or as I’ve heard it called the need and greed to succeed

[Tuerto]

I would say desire, was one of the main things he wanted to see, who actually wants this?

Football is a brutal world and you can have all the skills in the world, but as a team sport you have to demonstrate that you have the will to succeed in a team environment

We’ve all heard the phrase bodies on the line, but sometimes it’s down to just that basic hunger for success or as I’ve heard it called the need and greed to succeed

Agreed. There has to be a certain mindset for players to succeed, you would have thought. I don't get this talk of formations and players playing slightly out of position, then nothing coming back which passes responsibility onto them as individuals with the ability to perform. Maybe i'm being a bit harsh, my mantra is to get on with things and make the best of a situation, and if it isn't working, get the hell out and do something else instead. look at yourself before you look at other people and situations. So, i suppose i may be being a little unreasonable, as i can only transcend those thoughts into every day life, not those of a high performing Athlete

[xsnaggle]

Bulut knew about Ramsey's injury before this game. I wonder if it affected his selection?

[Loramski]

Yeah, could well be. Couid also be that he sees certain players in a different light to what they or the fans think. Not saying he's right, but he sees them every day. Nathan Blake made his debut as a central defender against Bristol Rovers (unless it was a few games after he made his debut) he showed plenty of quality in that role, even though he wasn't a defender. That's because he was a good player who could adapt and think for himself. Football isn't that complicated a game.

Really good thread this, well argued from all sides.

Good point you make about Nathan Blake. I was at Bristol Rovers that day. Ray Daniel was one of our better players back then, I feared the worst when we had to give a debut to an 18-year-old to replace him but Blake had a great game and we only lost 2-1 to a late winner, as I remember. He played left back that day but he did fill in at centre back for us, as well as sweeper and centre-midfield.

Philogene played at wing-back for us last season and he did well there I thought. It can be done, although I see where City123 is coming from here.

[Pedro de la Rosa]

I like the way Bulut is talking about Colwill.

He is pulling no punches on the weaknesses that need to be tackled, but clearly sees him as a player with a very high potential ceiling - and puts achieving that down to the coaching and to Rubin himself.

He made similar comments about Tanner but didn’t get the balance right. Too much stick and not enough carrot (in a second or third or fourth language)!

Bulut impresses me more as time goes by.

When Colwill does his man, which is more often than not, he needs to release it as he’s too slow to get away from people for more than a few yards. He’s getting better though, Bulut is making an impact everywhere

[Tuerto]

Really good thread this, well argued from all sides.

Good point you make about Nathan Blake. I was at Bristol Rovers that day. Ray Daniel was one of our better players back then, I feared the worst when we had to give a debut to an 18-year-old to replace him but Blake had a great game and we only lost 2-1 to a late winner, as I remember. He played left back that day but he did fill in at centre back for us, as well as sweeper and centre-midfield.

Philogene played at wing-back for us last season and he did well there I thought. It can be done, although I see where City123 is coming from here.

Where did i get centre back from? I was at the game as well, a rainy day at Twerton Park if i recall, it was certainly grey. He did play well, i remember him going on a mazey dribble from deep in our half. I may come across as a bit simplistic with my reasoning in this thread, but i really do believe that good players can show what they're about wherever they are on the pitch, they can adapt, show intelligence. I'm not naive enough to think that they're not going to make mistakes or get themselves in poor positions because of a lack of experience, and i'm sure tat bulut and his coaching staff would allow for that.

[Loramski]

Where did i get centre back from? I was at the game as well, a rainy day at Twerton Park if i recall, it was certainly grey. He did play well, i remember him going on a mazey dribble from deep in our half. I may come across as a bit simplistic with my reasoning in this thread, but i really do believe that good players can show what they're about wherever they are on the pitch, they can adapt, show intelligence. I'm not naive enough to think that they're not going to make mistakes or get themselves in poor positions because of a lack of experience, and i'm sure tat bulut and his coaching staff would allow for that.

Exactly. And in a sense you'd think that might take a little of the pressure off them in that no one's expecting them to be perfect.

I thought it was interesting what SP said earlier about Bulut taking players out of their comfort zone. I don't think he's going to bother trying to teach lobsters to play chess while he's here but I reckon he'll be looking to make little tweaks from game to game (and within games) and will be looking for players who can be flexible enough to adapt to any changes he wants to make. Some people are talking about last night as though it was a total waste of time but I'm sure Bulut took plenty out of it.

You haven't been simplistic at all by the way, no one has. It's been an excellent thread, Mike should have it framed.

[Dorcus]

When Colwill does his man, which is more often than not, he needs to release it as he’s too slow to get away from people for more than a few yards. He’s getting better though, Bulut is making an impact everywhere

Very good point. Colwill has a lot of plus points and he might figure prominently in Ramsey's absence. I'm open to disagreement but I think he's a tad slow and ponderous when collecting the ball and that gives too much advantage to the opposition defence.

[Dorcus]

Exactly. And in a sense you'd think that might take a little of the pressure off them in that no one's expecting them to be perfect.

I thought it was interesting what SP said earlier about Bulut taking players out of their comfort zone. I don't think he's going to bother trying to teach lobsters to play chess while he's here but I reckon he'll be looking to make little tweaks from game to game (and within games) and will be looking for players who can be flexible enough to adapt to any changes he wants to make. Some people are talking about last night as though it was a total waste of time but I'm sure Bulut took plenty out of it.

You haven't been simplistic at all by the way, no one has. It's been an excellent thread, Mike should have it framed.

Hey Loramski I love your analyses and I always look out for them 👍

[the other bob wilson]

Very good point. Colwill has a lot of plus points and he might figure prominently in Ramsey's absence. I'm open to disagreement but I think he's a tad slow and ponderous when collecting the ball and that gives too much advantage to the opposition defence.

Surely the way to approach things is acknowledge that Colwill can do things that very few in the squad can (especially if Ramsey is out for some time) and the task facing any City manager is finding a way to integrate that ability into the team format? I think if you’re good on the ball (I’d say even his critics accept Colwill is) and you know it, you’re going to want to take more touches of it - it’s been a running theme of Aaron Ramsey’s career, but it’s a “criticism” which I’d say still applies.

Bulut said that he sees Colwill as a number ten supporting the striker about a month ago, yet has used him almost exclusively in a wider position since then - now, with Ramsey’s injury there is a chance in the short, and possibly long, term to use him in the position he said Colwill is best suited to. In the last two matches, it’s been Ryan Wintle who has been given what I’d call the most advanced central midfielder role, as opposed to number ten. This was a very surprising choice to me, but, with an assist against Coventry, it could be said to have worked that evening and, given how we played at Sunderland, I can understand Wintle before Colwill or Robinson there.

Tomorrow though we face opponents that everyone is expecting us to beat, opponents who have yet to take a point away from home yet and so I think we need to be more aggressive in our selection by either leaving Wintle out or dropping him back to play alongside Siopis and bringing in Colwill or Robinson.

If it is to be Colwill, then there’s a case for Tanner starting because Wednesday offered more evidence of the understanding between those two players - Colwill seems more prepared to release the ball quickly if Tanner is one of the options he has to pass to.

Personally, the success story of the Blackburn game was how Colwill, Tanner (although not as a wing back) and Etete pushed their cases for inclusion in the starting line up for Championship matches.

Although three of them have come in the League Cup, Etete already has scored more goals this season than last and has also scored more than Ugbo in what I’m pretty sure is less game time - a big difference so far from last season is that the competition for attacking places in the first team is much more intense, players like Tanner, Colwill and Etete are making much stronger cases for inclusion every week than they were last year.

Finally, regarding Nathan Blake and playing centre back, that was how Len Ashurst saw his career developing, Blakey was never having it though!

[Dorcus]

Surely the way to approach things is acknowledge that Colwill can do things that very few in the squad can (especially if Ramsey is out for some time) and the task facing any City manager is finding a way to integrate that ability into the team format? I think if you’re good on the ball (I’d say even his critics accept Colwill is) and you know it, you’re going to want to take more touches of it - it’s been a running theme of Aaron Ramsey’s career, but it’s a “criticism” which I’d say still applies.

Bulut said that he sees Colwill as a number ten supporting the striker about a month ago, yet has used him almost exclusively in a wider position since then - now, with Ramsey’s injury there is a chance in the short, and possibly long, term to use him in the position he said Colwill is best suited to. In the last two matches, it’s been Ryan Wintle who has been given what I’d call the most advanced central midfielder role, as opposed to number ten. This was a very surprising choice to me, but, with an assist against Coventry, it could be said to have worked that evening and, given how we played at Sunderland, I can understand Wintle before Colwill or Robinson there.

Tomorrow though we face opponents that everyone is expecting us to beat, opponents who have yet to take a point away from home yet and so I think we need to be more aggressive in our selection by either leaving Wintle out or dropping him back to play alongside Siopis and bringing in Colwill or Robinson.

If it is to be Colwill, then there’s a case for Tanner starting because Wednesday offered more evidence of the understanding between those two players - Colwill seems more prepared to release the ball quickly if Tanner is one of the options he has to pass to.

Personally, the success story of the Blackburn game was how Colwill, Tanner (although not as a wing back) and Etete pushed their cases for inclusion in the starting line up for Championship matches.

Although three of them have come in the League Cup, Etete already has scored more goals this season than last and has also scored more than Ugbo in what I’m pretty sure is less game time - a big difference so far from last season is that the competition for attacking places in the first team is much more intense, players like Tanner, Colwill and Etete are making much stronger cases for inclusion every week than they were last year.

Finally, regarding Nathan Blake and playing centre back, that was how Len Ashurst saw his career developing, Blakey was never having it though!

Agree, I think you put it rather better than I did Bob 👍

[North Cardiff Blue]

Surely the way to approach things is acknowledge that Colwill can do things that very few in the squad can (especially if Ramsey is out for some time) and the task facing any City manager is finding a way to integrate that ability into the team format? I think if you’re good on the ball (I’d say even his critics accept Colwill is) and you know it, you’re going to want to take more touches of it - it’s been a running theme of Aaron Ramsey’s career, but it’s a “criticism” which I’d say still applies.

Bulut said that he sees Colwill as a number ten supporting the striker about a month ago, yet has used him almost exclusively in a wider position since then - now, with Ramsey’s injury there is a chance in the short, and possibly long, term to use him in the position he said Colwill is best suited to. In the last two matches, it’s been Ryan Wintle who has been given what I’d call the most advanced central midfielder role, as opposed to number ten. This was a very surprising choice to me, but, with an assist against Coventry, it could be said to have worked that evening and, given how we played at Sunderland, I can understand Wintle before Colwill or Robinson there.

Tomorrow though we face opponents that everyone is expecting us to beat, opponents who have yet to take a point away from home yet and so I think we need to be more aggressive in our selection by either leaving Wintle out or dropping him back to play alongside Siopis and bringing in Colwill or Robinson.

If it is to be Colwill, then there’s a case for Tanner starting because Wednesday offered more evidence of the understanding between those two players - Colwill seems more prepared to release the ball quickly if Tanner is one of the options he has to pass to.

Personally, the success story of the Blackburn game was how Colwill, Tanner (although not as a wing back) and Etete pushed their cases for inclusion in the starting line up for Championship matches.

Although three of them have come in the League Cup, Etete already has scored more goals this season than last and has also scored more than Ugbo in what I’m pretty sure is less game time - a big difference so far from last season is that the competition for attacking places in the first team is much more intense, players like Tanner, Colwill and Etete are making much stronger cases for inclusion every week than they were last year.

Finally, regarding Nathan Blake and playing centre back, that was how Len Ashurst saw his career developing, Blakey was never having it though!

Yes, it does seem like the perfect opportunity to play Colwill there, but does Bulut trust him yet?