| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
This is because we have a very limited set of midfield players some of who have done well in parts and got us some decent points especially at the start of the season but have been found out.Originally Posted by Eric the Half a Bee
The bi-product is to play deeper.
Look at Plymouth, they came here with a young, pretty cheaply put together side that played in an attractive manner, I’d much rather watch a team playing like that every week than what we’ve had to put up with in the last ten years and, I’ll tell you what, I reckon they could well finish above us in the table this season.
As for the result being everything, the Millwall game was as close to unwatchable as I’ve seen in a while.
Why is it that a succession of managers have given up on trying to play more of a passing game? Because our sides have been put together in a manner which doesn’t put as high an emphasis on skill and technique as most other clubs and we end up with teams that can only play a passing game hesitantly and poorly.
Someone has mentioned Colwill, I try to avoid mentioning him these days because there’s not much more to be said on him, but his treatment by Bulut is revealing and relevant to the subject of this thread. Colwill is not some potential world beater and there are pretty clear faults to his game, but, from 21/22 onwards he became one of the biggest potential game changers we have. If he wasn’t at a club that has as few game changers as we do, Colwill would not get all of the attention that he does and I reckon that we’re now in a position where, in Ramsey’s absence, he’s the best game changer we’ve got.
Was anyone surprised that Colwill was missing from the starting line up on Tuesday though and that he was moved from pillar to post because of the inadequacies of others when he finally was brought on? Under this manager, the likes of Colwill, Tanner and Etete are dismissed as young players and unreliable while he fills his side full of older players who he trusts who have not got the natural ability of the three players named - maybe “unwatchable” is a bit harsh, but I think Cardiff has nearly always been a club that has favoured pragmatic, hard working, power based football over the more technical stuff.
DJ was an old-school romantic 442 that played like a 424, we did spend (wages) on decent players but ultimately didn't achieve the goal of the premier league. Football was still under the spell of Mourinho's anti-football and Malky was a disciple, the rot starts there.
Pep then starts exporting Tikki Taka and Klopp's 433 all-out attack heavy metal football pushing out Mourinho's anti-football.
IMO, Warnock is closer to Klopp 433 getting the ball forward quickly with a higher dependence on physicality over pure football skill but we hired Mad Mick, Harris, Morison, then Hudson when we should have got a German manager well-versed in 433 as we had that DNA already there and a fanbase used to speed on the flanks and the ball going forward.
We chose the wrong model to copy, Peps slow, deliberate, highly technical passing as we just didn't have the players, or the fanbase, but importantly hired managers and coaches who were known as scrappers, not technical tacticians.
I know there is a constituent on here who say they'd prefer to lose playing good football, but Championship football is just about winning. Losing beautifully got us 14K at Ninian Park, winning ugly sold out the CCS
It's all a bit fake to me. There are big decisions for the hierarchy, all in on Bulut and get more technical players because this lot can't execute what he wants to do but they will be expensive and may see us in pretty much the same position if it doesn't work out, with a lot of foreign players wanting to go home but under contract
And that's the damning consequence. A squad like ours needs practically a new midfield and attack just to be competitive, whereas Plymouth and I'd say many others, just new a teak here or there to improve significantly. They have the basis of a championship quality squad. I struggle to adequately describe ours..
Moore aside, I doubt Bulut has much knowledge of decent potential signings from the PL/EFL. I certainly know no-one else connected to the club has..
Liverpool can pass the ball around well when they need to. Warnock's City couldn't pass water.
There's also the use of the long ball, which needs considering. How often would Klopp's side thump a ball 70 yards upfield with no real aim other than it might go in the direction of a target man? When they play a long ball it is usually to feet and the pass is meant for a specific player. We did that initially in our promotion season, when we battered Villa and won our opening 5 games. It was great to watch. The second half of the season we were much more a side that ground out results.
Why has it got to be one or the other? A change in footballing direction doesn't happen overnight. There'll be problems and bad results along the way, but that's true of life at times as well. As TOBW says, we've had a succession of managers who have given up on us playing a more passing game because of results. Where's the forward planning? I suspect there is little from our owner, who thinks we have a good chance of winning the playoffs this season. He wants results now. That's not the way to run a football club. It's a part of the reason we've been in the shit for the last few seasons.
And how damning a statement is that? Tan has been our owner for 13 years. I wonder how much networking he's done with other sides in those years, how many contacts has he, and our board made? How much has he learned from other clubs?
I know Liverpool are not a big "9" aimless long ball team, they pass it to pull teams around to allow their wide forwards enough separation for the long PASS into space or feet. My argument isn't that Liverpool are good or bad, it's they don't have the budget of Pep so play a game based upon something they excel at and then recruit for that system.
We have staggered around since Malky's sacking trying to work out who we are. Warnock for not much money turned us into a promotion team by not trying to copy Pep. There were much better squads than ours left in the championship almost throwing games by incompetently passing out from the back. If your opposition is making mistakes allow them. The championship is generally evenly matched so the team with the fewest errors normally wins.
The goal for any championship club is to get promoted. The easiest way is to play percentage minimal-risk championship football (Warnock) but when you get to the premier league giving the ball to much better teams generally kills you. Its a conundrum
What we are trying to do is play the "right way" with good League One players. Its madness. We have won tight games through a decent set play game and a defensive setup. Its almost Malky without the class.
I agree its about the owner, we just have to hope for the best
He's 5000 miles away. Unfortunately he left Choo and Dalman to run the shop and their football knowledge was zero.
Unless we are bought by the next messiah then we are stuck with tan and we clearly are not going to be buying our way out of the championship
It's pointless even analysing the situation
It may be that bulut is the answer and the best we can hope for is a few low cost signings who turn us into a regular top ten side with a sniff of a chance with a fair wind
I get the impression that Bulut is here to expose himself to a larger and wealthier circle and I just can't see him being happy with us being a mid-table team as that is essentially obscurity.
Well plenty of our fans seem to think that just 6 months or so into his job he's not up to it
I think they are wrong but even if they are not it really is a case of given our position what is the alternative ?
I think he's good enough to mould us into a good side with some new blood and a chance to offload those that are surplus to requirements
I think if he does that then bigger clubs may well be interested in his signature but nothing we can do to stop that
Because the recruitment stinks. Take Steve Morison, he signed Rinomhota, Adams and Sawyers to supplement Ralls and Wintle. How on God's green Earth are we supposed to pass the ball around with that 5? The centre halves can't play, yet incredibly our centre halves under Morison were more likely to pick a pass than our centre mids.
We have to sign people that don't treat the football as an object that must be dispatched as soon as possible. There's only two players that have anywhere near the required abilities to play for Leicester, and that's Colwill and Ng.
Re Bulut, the players are not capable of implementing what he's trying to do. Alnwick, Goutas and McGuinness can't play out from the back, so you've got a problem. The midfielders can't turn and do anything with it, that's why you see Wintle careering back 5 yards when he receives the ball, and the ball doesn't stick up top, unless Etete plays who couldn't hit a barn door with a banjo. I admire him, he works hard, has promising signs but he's not going to make it at this level as he can't finish.
Baby steps and all that but Bulut is not above criticism. After a strong start, the players have gone backwards and the promising signs from Tanner (and others) have faded. I don't think they're learning or getting better. We do need serious reinforcements though, so many of the players are poor but I do think we should be doing better with the first team we had, and Bulut's inability to get a tune out of players like Bowler is poor.
This.
To call Liverpool a long-ball team just because they have excellent ball players and one of the best players in the world making runs on the right hand side is ridiculous. If we could do that I'd take "long ball" all day, every day. When we have played long ball in the past it was all about lumping it upfield and hoping for a decent outcome. I don't understand why people complain about playing out from the back. Why would you not do that? You pass to one of your own players and then have them do the same. OK, sometimes it breaks down but surely it's better than a 50/50 big boot which if it gets on the head of a defender ends up back at the halfway line anyway.
Interesting reading the thoughts of many on the subject. What I find difficult to accept is the apparent lack of concern to turn things around and make changes. I had a lot of success in my career by taking on things others wouldn't and getting results. There's also a personal pride issue in not wanting to be associated with failing or coming 2nd. OK it's obvious we could benefit from some new talent but it's not here yet if it comes at all. I feel really sorry for fans who have paid good money for season tickets only to see this. I have seen 2 games at the CCS this year namely QPR and Norwich. It's a lot of effort and cost for me to come down and the appeal is not there. I remember in the past at NP when we were in the lower leagues I saw all but 3-4 home games all season and felt the effort worth the return.
I am probably in the minority but I've always been suspicious of Bulut's ability and experience. Opposition defences probably relish playing us because they know there'll be very little to do. Yes the lack of a tower up front to take down the ball, shoot or distribute is an issue.
When the going gets tough the tough should get going but we seem to give up or start trying in the 80th minute when the game is already lost.
I don't think Bulut is 100% to blame and as has been pointed out his coaching team ought also to be under the cosh.
Not optimistic for QPR and still remember being there last season when we got beaten.
Guess it's going to be a long winter.
I'd love it if we could do it with any conviction. But we can't along with half the championship. Its all a bit fake to me, we are pretending to be a "progressive" team. The question is I can see what Citeh and Liverpool are doing, what are we trying to do?
The championship is a heavily analyzed league, they all are, but it is system over individuality as it is so close.
After 10 games teams sussed us and thats it, no response. No need to press, just a low block and wait for us to pass it around the back 3 (no one trusts Coliins) and one of the sitters drops, just wait for them to get impatient and lose it.
We couldn't go route one properly if we wanted, maybe we'll have that option from tomorrow (fingers crossed) then the opposition have to defend deeper as the good old fashioned flick on is a weapon but so is the 9 holding onto it, and giving it to the 10 with a bit of space. Anyway, it will give the defenders a bit more space to do something with the ball as teams have to plan for the long kick or the short ball, at the moment we are so boringly predictable.
Alnwick kicked long a couple of times against Leicester, one led to a corner for us that Ralls took and failed to clear the first defender. It showed though that mixing it up a bit from the ‘keeper can work. It’s a pity Alnwick didn’t take the corner though
If that's the case, then Great!
I think he's doing a pretty decent job results wise. At times we've been great to watch and overall better than we've been for a few years.
My main gripe though is a lack of plan B. Okay we've got a paper thin squad but there's been no real change in tactics or formation when we're not winning. Maybe try playing with wingbacks, or two up front occasionally.
The trouble with all of that is that virtually every side we play in this league are more comfortable on the ball than us. Clearly the table shows we aren’t the worst team in the league, but you only have to watch us play on a regular basis to realise that we are among the worst in the league when it comes to basic things like ball retention and the ability to give and receive passes.
People seem to think that there are two extreme ways of playing the game that you have to follow - something like Tiki taka and a form of Warnockball, but there’s a huge area in between that most other sides fall into. City should be doing that, but we don’t have enough players who are comfortable on the ball. Such players are available within the budget we’ve had to operate within, but the emphasis appears to be on other things - our budget should not dictate that we can only go for a certain type of player, other sides without great spending power (eg Plymouth) don’t.
It just seems to me we handicap our last few managers with the mantra that it must be a "modern game" when the recruiters are signing players incapable of doing so, but we persevere with it anyway to the point where we would have been relegated last season until we got a manager in who went pretty direct.
NG and Wintle grew in the Crewe system of pass and move, but they are not great at it in the wider scheme of things or they would have been sold to teams genuinely committed to that system. The point I am making it's not that simple to sign players there needs to be more tactically
I know I am preaching to the choir but the need of a DoF has been paramount since Malky, but Vinny doesn't go for it, it's madness.
So I find myself in the all-in on Bulut camp because he is the first football man since Warnock and our preferred method is to hand the keys to the house over to the manager with little oversight
I certainly don’t want Bulut sacked or anything like that as I agree he’s a step up from recent managers and I believe he’s won games for us at times with some clever substitutions. However, I look at how Siopis is playing lately and wonder about his signing. Originally, I thought he was a good signing because he was a step up from our other central midfielders - I still think he is, but, essentially, he offers more of the same and, even with a fit Ramsey, we needed something different from that.
I’ve mentioned Colwill and, although he’s not set the world on fire, it seems to me that, with Robinson a shadow of the player he was, he should be in the starting line up for most games now - he has improved in the things Bulut criticised him about, but you get the feeling he’s still not trusted.
We do need to take risks if we are going to play a more passing style. The biggest problem is movement, for it to be affective, players need to create space by movement and leaving space, otherwise it's pretty futile. There's no way Bulut is going to allow midfield players and fullbacks the luxury of getting into advanced areas in order to capitalise on possession in attacking areas with an overload.
At the same time I don't advocate long ball. A more progressive style needs to start somewhere, it takes time, patience and plenty of mistakes along the way. Look at Swansea, I don't think that many of their fans would say that getting rid of Martin was a good idea now. They were three or four players off promotion when he was there.
Siopis is a major upgrade on Wintle we just need to find Ralls replacement, because if Ralls and Wintle are squad players we are going in the right direction. Joe's best days were left side of an aggressive 3, not the top of the double pivot, we need to find someone who understands that position and has the skill and physicality to cope with the championship
Get that and a genuine 9 and Colwill will be a different player and i do believe Bulut sees him as the future
note: Joe Ralls is and has been an amazing player for this club, but father time is catching up with him. All those 40/60 tackles he's won take their toll
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote