Erol Bulut accuses his players of not fighting or concentrating

The Bluebirds' manager accused his players of not fighting or concentrating as the Canaries came from behind to snatch a late win at the Cardiff City Stadium

https://nation.cymru/sport/erol-bulu...ss-to-norwich/

Can’t argue with any of it tbh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2b2bdoo

Can’t argue with any of it tbh.

---

agreed

I accuse him of subbing players who were doing fine, not knackered, and disrupting the eleven on the field.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by splott parker

I accuse him of subbing players who were doing fine, not knackered, and disrupting the eleven on the field.

---

You make a good point, but then we were struggling before the subs, Bowler had become less effective. Personally I’d have not brought Colwill on but then many wanted him to start. I think I’d have moved Robinson upfront rather than took him off. The goals though were mistakes by Wintle and Tanner so you have a point. Doubt he knew Wintle would do that or Tanner would become half assed and not bother tracking back.

Erol Bulut in blaming the players and not taking any responsibility himself shocker

Erol Bullshit more like!

Can't win every game

A few tweaks and we should be top ten easily enough

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2b2bdoo

Can’t argue with any of it tbh.

---

He's a good manager , players screwed up today

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Henry Hill

Erol Bulut in blaming the players and not taking any responsibility himself shocker

---

How many managers take responsibility? Let’s be honest did he say to Wintle knock it in the net or Tanner just leave the fullback do what he wants and leave Romeo done (I did).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY

He's a good manager , players screwed up today

---

They did. People talking about him not taking responsibility, for what, poor personal performances? Here's one to be on, if we do badly then he'll get sacked, the players wont though, and that's the way it should be. That's responsibility.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Henry Hill

Erol Bulut in blaming the players and not taking any responsibility himself shocker

---

Erol Bulut wasn't out on the pitch. The players were. And if what he said about working on corners is true then McGuinness really dropped a bollock. The players worked hard to get a lead, but then they lost concentration and gave away 2 more soft goals. Why should Bulut take responsibility for that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NYCBlue

Erol Bulut wasn't out on the pitch. The players were. And if what he said about working on corners is true then McGuinness really dropped a bollock. The players worked hard to get a lead, but then they lost concentration and gave away 2 more soft goals. Why should Bulut take responsibility for that?

---

From what I heard, he talked about the front player getting the header and not being picked up, not sure who that was. McGuiness had a decent game but that was poor from him anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2b2bdoo

How many managers take responsibility? Let’s be honest did he say to Wintle knock it in the net or Tanner just leave the fullback do what he wants and leave Romeo done (I did).

---

We hear it the whole time. Managers saying that their teams didn't do the basics correctly, switched off, didn't want it enough etc etc. Bugger all wrong with that. What is wrong is when the players keep doing it, then the manager and his coaching staff need questioning and criticism, or the players in question aren't replaced with better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2b2bdoo

How many managers take responsibility? Let’s be honest did he say to Wintle knock it in the net or Tanner just leave the fullback do what he wants and leave Romeo done (I did).

---

Tanner is learning the game. Defensively he's nowhere near up to speed as Bowler, hence why Bowler has started every game since returning from injury. If Romeo had a rather tough game this afternoon, bringing on Tanner to help him out was a rather foolish mistake.

While Tanner is a really exciting prospect, to say he's a bit raw is an understatement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric the Half a Bee

Tanner is learning the game. Defensively he's nowhere near up to speed as Bowler, hence why Bowler has started every game since returning from injury. If Romeo had a rather tough game this afternoon, bringing on Tanner to help him out was a rather foolish mistake.

While Tanner is a really exciting prospect, to say he's a bit raw is an understatement.

---

Don’t disagree, but as well as Bowler was doing he certainly wasn’t helping Romeo either?

We came back from 0-1 down to be leading 2-1. with neat goals. We started the second half on the front foot also, but player-for-player they were stronger in a couple of areas, and when we sat back and didn't 'get in their faces' they grew in confidence. Simply we'd done the [hard] job and took the foot off the gas against a side who are better than recent form would suggest. And we couldn't get back into it. Tanner and coldwill might have changed it but for them it was a bit like turning up at a party when all your mates are fast asleep and aren't really aware you're there...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric the Half a Bee

Tanner is learning the game. Defensively he's nowhere near up to speed as Bowler, hence why Bowler has started every game since returning from injury. If Romeo had a rather tough game this afternoon, bringing on Tanner to help him out was a rather foolish mistake.

While Tanner is a really exciting prospect, to say he's a bit raw is an understatement.

---

In some respects though, Tanner's defensive play has been more effective than his offensive play, it was strange to see him look so poor at that aspect of the game yeserday.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NYCBlue

Erol Bulut wasn't out on the pitch. The players were. And if what he said about working on corners is true then McGuinness really dropped a bollock. The players worked hard to get a lead, but then they lost concentration and gave away 2 more soft goals. Why should Bulut take responsibility for that?

---

Bulut has been praised for a lot of his substitutions this season and rightly so. However, he himself is saying they didn't work yesterday, so, surely, he has to take some responsibility for that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

Bulut has been praised for a lot of his substitutions this season and rightly so. However, he himself is saying they didn't work yesterday, so, surely, he has to take some responsibility for that?

---

Absolutely.

Ultimately, it was a disappointing result. Let's learn and move on.

P.s McGuinness might have two shiners now. 😆

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by B. Oddie

Absolutely.

Ultimately, it was a disappointing result. Let's learn and move on.

P.s McGuinness might have two shiners now. 😆

---

Players made mistakes and didn’t do their job,
With the squad we had yesterday we are a mid table side.

Ramsey, Ng ODowda would have made a difference, but even then we would be around the top six
We need the 3-4 targets already identified in January to kick on.

Bulut knows that Meite isn’t a threat as a 9 and Etete is only a back up.
Romeo isn’t a Championship standard player and Tanner is still work in progress

We need to move a few on, just disappointing that Wintle has gone backwards over the last month or so, total lack of concentration yesterday

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

Bulut has been praised for a lot of his substitutions this season and rightly so. However, he himself is saying they didn't work yesterday, so, surely, he has to take some responsibility for that?

---

They didn't work necessarily but I thought before them Norwich were on top anyway.

I was surprised Tanner and Colwill both came on at 2-1 when we were on the back foot but it's all hindsight, if one of them gets a goal then Bulut's a genius.

Thought Norwich were overall just the better team, caused problems first half and second half continued to do so whilst also limiting us.

We just didn't look up for it second half. Closing down was poor along with other basics.

I think Wagner’s substitutions made a difference. In the first half their fullbacks, particularly the left back, were being overrun and their replacements shored up a wobbling defence. Bringing on Idah in the second half added a bit of purpose to the attacking threat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by splott parker

I accuse him of subbing players who were doing fine, not knackered, and disrupting the eleven on the field.

---

In my opinion we were struggling before the subs and it looked like Norwich were going to score any second. Bulut had to change it up, what worked for the past few weeks just didn't work for whatever reason today.

I'm a big fan of Tanner but the third goal was his fault, he didn't follow his man which left Romeo 2 vs 1.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Doucas

In my opinion we were struggling before the subs and it looked like Norwich were going to score any second. Bulut had to change it up, what worked for the past few weeks just didn't work for whatever reason today.

I'm a big fan of Tanner but the third goal was his fault, he didn't follow his man which left Romeo 2 vs 1.

---

You’re right they were on top prior to the subs. Maybe it’s a measure how far we’ve come in such a short time under Bulut that we’ve gone all analytical and a touch critical. Of course it’s good that we’re throwing in our two penn’orth, that’s what messageboards are for but, in my case, I think I’ll step back and look at the bigger picture, certainly in relation to the last couple of seasons……………..until the next time we bugger up of course:hehe:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trigger

They didn't work necessarily but I thought before them Norwich were on top anyway.

I was surprised Tanner and Colwill both came on at 2-1 when we were on the back foot but it's all hindsight, if one of them gets a goal then Bulut's a genius.

Thought Norwich were overall just the better team, caused problems first half and second half continued to do so whilst also limiting us.

We just didn't look up for it second half. Closing down was poor along with other basics.

---

Yeah we were basically waiting for Norwich to put something decent together for the entire second half, the subs made no difference either way to the fact that we were being thoroughly over run.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SweetFA

I think Wagner’s substitutions made a difference. In the first half their fullbacks, particularly the left back, were being overrun and their replacements shored up a wobbling defence. Bringing on Idah in the second half added a bit of purpose to the attacking threat.

---

Imagine how different our attack looks with Moore starting and Meite coming on to run at tired defenders..

Fingers crossed January gives us what we are looking for.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric Cartman

Imagine how different our attack looks with Moore starting and Meite coming on to run at tired defenders..

Fingers crossed January gives us what we are looking for.

---

The one player missing yesterday was NG and maybe that was the difference. Eitherway we should not have lost yesterday.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NYCBlue

Erol Bulut wasn't out on the pitch. The players were. And if what he said about working on corners is true then McGuinness really dropped a bollock. The players worked hard to get a lead, but then they lost concentration and gave away 2 more soft goals. Why should Bulut take responsibility for that?

---

He’s not on the pitch when we win either but happy to take the credit then.

Must have gone to the same school of management as Steve Morison. Take the glory and none of the blame.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2b2bdoo

How many managers take responsibility? Let’s be honest did he say to Wintle knock it in the net or Tanner just leave the fullback do what he wants and leave Romeo done (I did).

---

He’s the one who brought Tanner on when we were leading and getting overrun. He’s not a player to bring on in that situation. It’s was a bad substitution and he should take some responsibility for it but no-one is allowed to knock the messiah.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2b2bdoo

From what I heard, he talked about the front player getting the header and not being picked up, not sure who that was. McGuiness had a decent game but that was poor from him anyway.

---

Well there were about six of them there so take your pick.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Henry Hill

He’s the one who brought Tanner on when we were leading and getting overrun. He’s not a player to bring on in that situation. It’s was a bad substitution and he should take some responsibility for it but no-one is allowed to knock the messiah.

---

when you put it that way you have to really question why did the grand messiah make that decision? did he think we were in the position to go for a third? because obviously we were not in that position

the fact is most of buluts decisions dont seem to have any real common sense or reasoning behind them

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blooburd

when you put it that way you have to really question why did the grand messiah make that decision? did he think we were in the position to go for a third? because obviously we were not in that position

the fact is most of buluts decisions dont seem to have any real common sense or reasoning behind them

---

I think that given we a few points off a play off play and lie 9th ........the vast majority of his decisions are common sense

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Henry Hill

He’s not on the pitch when we win either but happy to take the credit then.

Must have gone to the same school of management as Steve Morison. Take the glory and none of the blame.

---

Steve Morison was absolutely hopeless

Bulut has us in 9th , just outside the play off places

You need to get a grip ff sake

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pipster

The one player missing yesterday was NG and maybe that was the difference. Eitherway we should not have lost yesterday.

---

It’s a fair point about Ng who has been picked as the best right back in the Championship this season on some of the videos and podcasts I watch and listen to. Was Romeo really so bad or have we become soused to Ng’s excellence this season that we found it hard to return to “normality”? I’d say there’s some truth to it, Romeo struggled, but he’s had very little football (first team squad members are not playing the occasional under21 match when not starting for the senior team like they have done in previous seasons) lately and it didn’t help that both of the right wingers used yesterday were not helping him out much.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY

I think that given we a few points off a play off play and lie 9th ........the vast majority of his decisions are common sense

---

where is the blindfold emote on this forum?

G

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Henry Hill

He’s the one who brought Tanner on when we were leading and getting overrun. He’s not a player to bring on in that situation. It’s was a bad substitution and he should take some responsibility for it but no-one is allowed to knock the messiah.

---

Guess you'd prefer Steve Morrison.

I’m sorry Erol, but you’ve got to take full responsibility for changing the dynamics of the game.

To take off 3 of our most important players, at the same time, gave Norwich the incentive to play further up the pitch.

We basically threw away 3 solid/easy points, in a game where we were in charge

Please don’t become a tinker man and change players for changing sake

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BLUETIT

I’m sorry Erol, but you’ve got to take full responsibility for changing the dynamics of the game.

To take off 3 of our most important players, at the same time, gave Norwich the incentive to play further up the pitch.

We basically threw away 3 solid/easy points, in a game where we were in charge

Please don’t become a tinker man and change players for changing sake

---

You said the same thing on Call Rob the other night.
I don't entirely agree with you. Norwich's subs changed the game, ours didn't. You could argue we would have been better off making no subs at all, its almost as if the manager makes changes at a pre-planned time, irrespective of how the game is going.
FWIW I would have brought on Sawyers to shore up midfield instead of Colwill and left Bowler on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BLUETIT

I’m sorry Erol, but you’ve got to take full responsibility for changing the dynamics of the game.

To take off 3 of our most important players, at the same time, gave Norwich the incentive to play further up the pitch.

We basically threw away 3 solid/easy points, in a game where we were in charge

Please don’t become a tinker man and change players for changing sake

---

I'm not disagreeing with you on this subject, or agreeing really, i'm somewhere in the middle. The subs didn't perform, but we see endless stuff on here about Colwill and Tanner, more so Colwill, how are these players supposed to develop if they're not given a chance to perform? Tanner isn't fully developed yet, he's come on loads, but he isn't the finished article. As for Colwill, what do the club do with him? New contract, yet it's obvious Bulut doesn't completely fancy him to perform in the way he wants for 90 minutes, same with previous managers. And i don't think a loan spell would favour either player. Bulut has made it clear what is required from them both.