If Bulut Stays-Can He Succeed?

[Keyser Soze]

Oh do **** off with your psuedo football intellect act.

He’s nearly 32, at the arse end of his career and has hit 20+ goals in a season once - 8 years ago French Ligue 2.

His next best is 14. He’s more like Arthur Fowler than Robbie Fowler. Hope he’s not collecting the kitty money for the end of season tour.

Oh dear he is 32 for a central striker. Yes get the life support machine out for the decrepid old pensioner. Reach for the wheelchair. Line up his zimmer frame. Osteoporosis must be at an advanced stage 😂

Coming to think of it, you need to some help too. Fancy pissing your colostomy bag with rage because someone has an opinion. Maybe someone needs to switch your life support machine off. You clearly struggle with life.

For a not so insurmountable fee you can grab a flight to Switzerland and end your sorrows now, Happy Henry.

[Eric the Half a Bee]

I have found this preposterous for many years because to me a professional player should be capable of using both feet equally well.

Do you also think that snooker players should be able to cue with both hands? Only a small number can, in the same way, only a small number of footballers are entirely confident using both feet.

[Keyser Soze]

Do you also think that snooker players should be able to cue with both hands? Only a small number can, in the same way, only a small number of footballers are entirely confident using both feet.

Everyone will have a favourite. But ultimately if you are a professional that has come through the academy your coaches should have coached it.

You see a lot of it in Germany. You say a lot of it in Spain. In Netherlands, especially Ajax, it is a heavy focus from the age of 7. I still have a heavy paper garnered from the 1990s by the then Director of Youth at Ajax. Philosophies, programmes, annual targets, drills, biomechanics training, decision making, field vision, physical conditioning, body positions whenfl receiving the ball, systems v systems - and how to coach it all and progress through age grades. Superb read. I would have thought that info would have percolated across FAs and clubs by now but watching players, seemingly not.

There is clear content in there that still doesn’t happen at UK academies below the elite clubs, from what I can make out and hear from conversations with some people.

Certainly not in England beyond elite level. The amount of times Salah wastes ball on his right foot for 350k a week is shocking. England have got it right in recent years with players like Grealish and Foden now comfortable on both feet. So for me, yes, I think it is down to poor technical coaching that the problem persists.

Not commenting on a comparison with snooker. Snooker, golf, cricket - not my bag.

[the other bob wilson]

It’s pretty simple. Wingers traditionally get onto the outside of the full back to hit low crosses or floated ones in for headers. So right footers on right wing, left footers on left wing.

I have found this preposterous for many years because to me a professional player should be capable of using both feet equally well. So for example, Arjien Robben was a top winger because you never knew if he would cut in and create / or go on the outside and cross. He also assisted and scored often. Perfect winger.

The inverted winger is a more continental flavour where the left footed winger plays right wing, and right footed on the left wing. Barcelona, Liverpool and Man City are the best exponents of it. The theory is that by going on the outside there is only one option: cross. It is predictable and you also fail to create numerical overloads. The argument against it is that once the full back is beaten at pace then the back four has turn their bodies and re-adjust to deal with the cross.

By cutting inside you create numerical advantage on the inside where short 1-2’s can have typically slower centre backs in a mess. Equally you can eatablish interplay with the 8, 10 or 9. It is inpredictable. You can pass, go for another dribble or shoot as you have a wide angle to shoot. Salah is probably one of the best examples of this. On his right he is crap. On his left he get lots of goals by cutting in, and in his case he is actually the guy with a higher goal output than the central 9. By cutting inside you also raise your possession stats in theory as you have multiple options to retain the ball.

Ideally at top level, you boys should be able to invert or go on the outside to give full predictability. For me Arjen Robben, Ronaldo, Diaz, Jarrod Bowen are good examples of wingers who can do both. My favourite winger right now is that Georgian guy in Italy. I think he is Lazio or Inter. Ends in …shvili. That kid is the deadliest bastard on the planet at the moment.

Weirdly for our level I think a top coach could make Tanner top class. Technically he is lovely. He can go on the outside and delivery, but his attacking performance with this crossing from left wing was something else - I think it was v Southampton. Tanner is two footed and a good coach should be able to do something big with him.

Thanks for the explanation, I'd be interested in hearing a justification from you for the policy of picking a target man type centre forward for about 99 per cent of our games when we play with inverted wingers and full backs that tend to be better at defending than they are attacking because I'm struggling to think of one.

[Rjk]

It’s pretty simple. Wingers traditionally get onto the outside of the full back to hit low crosses or floated ones in for headers. So right footers on right wing, left footers on left wing.

I have found this preposterous for many years because to me a professional player should be capable of using both feet equally well. So for example, Arjien Robben was a top winger because you never knew if he would cut in and create / or go on the outside and cross. He also assisted and scored often. Perfect winger.

The inverted winger is a more continental flavour where the left footed winger plays right wing, and right footed on the left wing. Barcelona, Liverpool and Man City are the best exponents of it. The theory is that by going on the outside there is only one option: cross. It is predictable and you also fail to create numerical overloads. The argument against it is that once the full back is beaten at pace then the back four has turn their bodies and re-adjust to deal with the cross.

By cutting inside you create numerical advantage on the inside where short 1-2’s can have typically slower centre backs in a mess. Equally you can eatablish interplay with the 8, 10 or 9. It is inpredictable. You can pass, go for another dribble or shoot as you have a wide angle to shoot. Salah is probably one of the best examples of this. On his right he is crap. On his left he get lots of goals by cutting in, and in his case he is actually the guy with a higher goal output than the central 9. By cutting inside you also raise your possession stats in theory as you have multiple options to retain the ball.

Ideally at top level, you boys should be able to invert or go on the outside to give full predictability. For me Arjen Robben, Ronaldo, Diaz, Jarrod Bowen are good examples of wingers who can do both. My favourite winger right now is that Georgian guy in Italy. I think he is Lazio or Inter. Ends in …shvili. That kid is the deadliest bastard on the planet at the moment.

Weirdly for our level I think a top coach could make Tanner top class. Technically he is lovely. He can go on the outside and delivery, but his attacking performance with this crossing from left wing was something else - I think it was v Southampton. Tanner is two footed and a good coach should be able to do something big with him.

are you sure you mean Arjen Robben? he's quite famously very one footed.
you know he's always going to try to get inside and shoot, just he was so good at it he was hard to stop.

[Undercoverinwurzelland]

I agree that wingers should be able to go inside or outside the full back. If you always do one or the other you're making it easy for the defender. Unless you're ambidextrous you'll always have a stronger foot but it's not difficult to coach two-footedness if you start early enough.
I'd also like to see wingers swap sides during matches from time to time to keep defenders on their toes.

[splott parker]

More on Bulut’s issues. This is my take. I think Bulut came in, was given a budget, and is a systems man. He has a system he knows well and is good at.

But we have built a 4-5-1 style without the players to support that style. His system looks to replicate AC Milan around 1990s with Van Basten in it. Well that is what he is trying to accomplish at this much lower level, without it being as effective as he wants. But that style requires one or more of following:

1. Wide men who can beat players and deliver quality, or full backs overlapping to deliver and wide men cutting inside to hunt for goals or creativity

2. Central midfielders who are mobile and can defend as well create chances and support the single attacker with goals

So far we have not the required success on .1 as service is slow or barely existent. And on .2, our central midfielders have not been successful enough in goal contribution nor defensive shit outs. Nor are they mobile enough in my view to support such a system.

If above cannot be done, then a defence as a nun’s proverbial is required, and you base your entire tactics on a compact 5 man midfield that restricts the space, and goals come in the form of set pieces, quick counters or the central striker being all-encompassing all-rounder: in the sense that he will be big and hard enough to play back to goal, clever enough in skill to bring in other players, and fast enough to take a quick ball centrally in between or either side of the full back. 1-0s, 2-0s being the scores you look for. Containment, restrict, nick a goal.

Where it failed for us? I’d say a combination of…

1. Midfield not mobile enough to be equally effective in defence and attack: vital for this system

2. Wide men not fast and creative enough

3. Strikers don’t fit the system. Whereas Milan had Weah, Meite had none of it. Diedhou is a fox in the box man that needs service. Etete is good on crosses and set pieces but no pace or skill, so he loses the ball and can’t get through.

Kieffer Moore could have been the man to make the difference for us. He can hold it up, flick it on, race through and make set pieces effective. He is an all rounder. Had we had decent wingers, I also think Karlan Grant would have been our most effective 9. He can hold it up, he can race in behind for a quick ball, he can get on the end of wingers crosses, and his goal rate at WBA suggest he can score 1 in 2, but at least 1 in 3 at this level. Wasted on the wing.

So can Bulut succeed?

It all rests in budget, player availability and agent contacts. If he can solve above issues then we could build and hit the playoffs next year. But this system is highly technical and tactical - the right players HAVE to fit in.

If not, get the players that are good and available, and change the system to suit their strengths. But for that to happen, he needs to have the knowledge to coach the new system well. If he is hell bent on this system and cannot get the players, we can expect another average season in my view.

Ah, football….the beautiful game that billions fell in love with because of it’s simplicity eh!

[North Cardiff Blue]

I agree that wingers should be able to go inside or outside the full back. If you always do one or the other you're making it easy for the defender. Unless you're ambidextrous you'll always have a stronger foot but it's not difficult to coach two-footedness if you start early enough.
I'd also like to see wingers swap sides during matches from time to time to keep defenders on their toes.

It's one of the most important positions teams need five or six to cover injuries and change things around as it seems to be one the most substituted areas, we often change them, and that is a factor in our late goals.

[Henry Hill]

Oh dear he is 32 for a central striker. Yes get the life support machine out for the decrepid old pensioner. Reach for the wheelchair. Line up his zimmer frame. Osteoporosis must be at an advanced stage ��

Coming to think of it, you need to some help too. Fancy pissing your colostomy bag with rage because someone has an opinion. Maybe someone needs to switch your life support machine off. You clearly struggle with life.

For a not so insurmountable fee you can grab a flight to Switzerland and end your sorrows now, Happy Henry.

Send me the number for your dealer. Must be some quality freebase youre smoking to compare Buluts set up to the all conquering early 90s Milan, and Diedhiou to Robbie Fowler.

Hes scored 21 goals in the last 4 seasons, and only 3 in the last 2, but theres a 20 goal a season fox in the box there.

[Keyser Soze]

.

[Keyser Soze]

Send me the number for your dealer. Must be some quality freebase youre smoking to compare Buluts set up to the all conquering early 90s Milan, and Diedhiou to Robbie Fowler.

Hes scored 21 goals in the last 4 seasons, and only 3 in the last 2, but theres a 20 goal a season fox in the box there.

I can see you’re man who is not very bright, and thinks I was saying he is as good as AC Milan when what I was saying he was trying to play the same shape and style and approach, but clearly at a lower level.

I can see you’re a WUM with a short attention soan who struggles to think at all, so I think I’ll put you in ignore as it’s like trying to converse with a piece of house brick.

[Citizen's Nephew]

It’s pretty simple. Wingers traditionally get onto the outside of the full back to hit low crosses or floated ones in for headers. So right footers on right wing, left footers on left wing.

I have found this preposterous for many years because to me a professional player should be capable of using both feet equally well. So for example, Arjien Robben was a top winger because you never knew if he would cut in and create / or go on the outside and cross. He also assisted and scored often. Perfect winger.

The inverted winger is a more continental flavour where the left footed winger plays right wing, and right footed on the left wing. Barcelona, Liverpool and Man City are the best exponents of it. The theory is that by going on the outside there is only one option: cross. It is predictable and you also fail to create numerical overloads. The argument against it is that once the full back is beaten at pace then the back four has turn their bodies and re-adjust to deal with the cross.

By cutting inside you create numerical advantage on the inside where short 1-2’s can have typically slower centre backs in a mess. Equally you can eatablish interplay with the 8, 10 or 9. It is inpredictable. You can pass, go for another dribble or shoot as you have a wide angle to shoot. Salah is probably one of the best examples of this. On his right he is crap. On his left he get lots of goals by cutting in, and in his case he is actually the guy with a higher goal output than the central 9. By cutting inside you also raise your possession stats in theory as you have multiple options to retain the ball.

Ideally at top level, you boys should be able to invert or go on the outside to give full predictability. For me Arjen Robben, Ronaldo, Diaz, Jarrod Bowen are good examples of wingers who can do both. My favourite winger right now is that Georgian guy in Italy. I think he is Lazio or Inter. Ends in …shvili. That kid is the deadliest bastard on the planet at the moment.

Weirdly for our level I think a top coach could make Tanner top class. Technically he is lovely. He can go on the outside and delivery, but his attacking performance with this crossing from left wing was something else - I think it was v Southampton. Tanner is two footed and a good coach should be able to do something big with him.

Cheers for that. So I’ve been giving this some serious thought. Maybe Etete’s problem is that he’s playing as a false inverted number 9. It would certainly explain the reason that as soon as he receives the ball he falls over. Or am I still not getting this? 🤷😜⚽️

[Tuerto]

Cheers for that. So I’ve been giving this some serious thought. Maybe Etete’s problem is that he’s playing as a false inverted number 9. It would certainly explain the reason that as soon as he receives the ball he falls over. Or am I still not getting this? 🤷😜⚽️

He's footballs equivalent of a Skittle.

[Citizen's Nephew]

He's footballs equivalent of a Skittle.

🤣

[Keyser Soze]

🤣

😂

[Keyser Soze]

I agree that wingers should be able to go inside or outside the full back. If you always do one or the other you're making it easy for the defender. Unless you're ambidextrous you'll always have a stronger foot but it's not difficult to coach two-footedness if you start early enough.
I'd also like to see wingers swap sides during matches from time to time to keep defenders on their toes.

Absolutely. Systems coaching started becoming more of a thing in the Sixties onwards, with Germans and Dutch leading the way. But Brazil showed that systems can be open and fluid and that if you have higher skill levels it provides an alternative way of breaking down systems.

Until the last year or so, systems coaching could win you games, but now at the top end we are seeing the converence of systems, multi skilled players and analytical statistics. The thicker, less clever coaches like Steven Gerrard, Frank Lampard, Alan Cork, Wayne Rooney who cannot think analytically can now be outsmarted by smarter coaches who can adapt shapes and systems, or altering players positions or instructions to counter the opponent’s “patterns of play”.

But now I think we seeing a new wave, with the advent of coaches armed with laptops, advanced statistics, real-time data lakes of information, ProZone heat maps and slow introduction of low grade AI, computers are increasingly used by top clubs to show coaches where the patterns of play are from opponents. At the top end, but it will percolate down, coaches and managers will analyse less and be responsible for decision making, having been provided real-time analysis to them.

What impact will this have on players? Well New Zealand in rugby for the last ten years, and Ajax / Barcelona in academies (and recently Klopp, Guardiola and Arteta) talk of “solving problems”. Rather than telling wingers what do do, they are trying to teach better quality decision making by players themselves, based on what they see in front of them. Less playing to systems and more playing to opportunities / weaknesses.

This new dawn favours ambidextrous players because it nullifes instructions such as “always push him wide” or “attack this guy’s left foot” because if the in-game or half-time analysis picks up repeated patterns of behaviour you can be nullified if you are playing to predictable instructions. If you are an ambidextrous winger that sees the full back is showing you outside you hit him on the inside because you are playing to opportunity / weakness. You will always outsmart the AI / pattern recognition analysis being fed to the coach.

I am surprise the ambidextrous player is a magical concept. Dutch Coerver Coaching has been around for decades and the players with the best ambidextrous footwork have often been coached using Coerver Coaching methods. It isn’t hard. You can go on courses or buy the DVDs. If you’re coaching kids it is golden and you see a massive difference in technical output of players at a young age.

[BLUEAWAY TOO]

And success would be play offs for the majority-I'm guessing?

so then, if Bulut is given another crack at it, then can anyone see us progressing up the league table? I'm not going to touch on the football in this pot, the style of play etc, the entertainment value or things that get our backsides off the seat. I'm more interested in his system, his very rigid system.

It's a non comital Midfield, flat, no penetration from central areas, no movement unless it's across the midfield line, a midfield who get the ball wide as soon as possible. Our attack play is from a wide position, which tells me that bulut likes to stretch the opposition, allow an attacking midfield player a tiny bit of freedom, but only when we have the ball. He doesn't want anything to do with playing through teams. We all know this stuff anyway.

I do believe that Bulut has a system of play, players need to be in certain positions at certain points of play during a game, i think that he likes discipline and hard work (nothing wrong with that) And i believe that he really thinks that his system can work, call him deluded or confident if you like, although sometimes there's not much between both those character traits and it can serve some people well.

I can't even watch his style of football anymore, it bores me rigid. I may not be interested, but i do believe that Bulut has method, and if he can bring in players who can buy into his work ethic, discipline, shape and incredibly rigid tactics, then i think that we could move up the table. I believe that the Championship is open to teams who do things differently or who force a style of play on to their opponents because it lacks quality.

I'm not endorsing his football, i can't stand it, but like i said, he has a system, and it's very rigid, games are very similar. I think that with his type of signings and a group of players drilled to shit and back that it could see us climbing the table.

He will not get past October if we don’t have more than 15 pts and his tactics are unchanged.

[PontBlue]

Harsh on Cork to lump him in with the other three

[Alfresco]

Can he succeed? Not with dross he serves up. I can't see anything changing next season if he's in charge. He got lucky picking up so many points, without the luck we would probably be going down .

[MOZZER2]

Absolutely. Systems coaching started becoming more of a thing in the Sixties onwards, with Germans and Dutch leading the way. But Brazil showed that systems can be open and fluid and that if you have higher skill levels it provides an alternative way of breaking down systems.

Until the last year or so, systems coaching could win you games, but now at the top end we are seeing the converence of systems, multi skilled players and analytical statistics. The thicker, less clever coaches like Steven Gerrard, Frank Lampard, Alan Cork, Wayne Rooney who cannot think analytically can now be outsmarted by smarter coaches who can adapt shapes and systems, or altering players positions or instructions to counter the opponent’s “patterns of play”.

But now I think we seeing a new wave, with the advent of coaches armed with laptops, advanced statistics, real-time data lakes of information, ProZone heat maps and slow introduction of low grade AI, computers are increasingly used by top clubs to show coaches where the patterns of play are from opponents. At the top end, but it will percolate down, coaches and managers will analyse less and be responsible for decision making, having been provided real-time analysis to them.

What impact will this have on players? Well New Zealand in rugby for the last ten years, and Ajax / Barcelona in academies (and recently Klopp, Guardiola and Arteta) talk of “solving problems”. Rather than telling wingers what do do, they are trying to teach better quality decision making by players themselves, based on what they see in front of them. Less playing to systems and more playing to opportunities / weaknesses.

This new dawn favours ambidextrous players because it nullifes instructions such as “always push him wide” or “attack this guy’s left foot” because if the in-game or half-time analysis picks up repeated patterns of behaviour you can be nullified if you are playing to predictable instructions. If you are an ambidextrous winger that sees the full back is showing you outside you hit him on the inside because you are playing to opportunity / weakness. You will always outsmart the AI / pattern recognition analysis being fed to the coach.

I am surprise the ambidextrous player is a magical concept. Dutch Coerver Coaching has been around for decades and the players with the best ambidextrous footwork have often been coached using Coerver Coaching methods. It isn’t hard. You can go on courses or buy the DVDs. If you’re coaching kids it is golden and you see a massive difference in technical output of players at a young age.

don't forget our man Flints AI software package too

[Keyser Soze]

😂

[OurManFlint II]

Who is to say we wouldn't have a relegation battle if Bulut stays? Like others, I feel top half has been a false position for us and, statistically at least, virtually all stats point to a season of struggle, wins apart.

Does this not apply to every team in every league in the world?

[North Cardiff Blue]

Does this not apply to every team in every league in the world?

Yes of course the tables are only wrong when Eric the half - glass empty decides

[A Quiet Monkfish]

Yes of course the tables are only wrong when Eric the half - glass empty decides

Is a half glass empty the same as a glass half empty ? I don't think so.

[Dembe]

I didn’t read it as a dig actually. I think the problem is that Bulut maybe wanted 4-3-3 up his sleeve, and Diedhou could work with inverted wingers playing 1-2’s off him, but I think the combination of personnel didn’t click.

I think Diedhou is a superb fox-in-the-box and a good technician. But you see his body language and work rate drop when he doesn’t see enough ball. I genuinely believe he is one of those players where if the team gets plenty of supply into the box he would hit 20 goals a season. A cheap version of Robbie Fowler. And similarly if no supply is provided he drops out of the game. Probably a little mental weakness in there.

It wasn't a dig at you anyway just some fella having a bad morning wanting to have a pop for some reason