Reply With QuoteThat wasn't what people were writing on here after the Coventry game.Originally Posted by blue lewj
| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
We never had the players for it. Trollope would be a like a pig in shit if he was Swansea manager.
That wasn't what people were writing on here after the Coventry game.
We enjoyed the winning. It's when it stops becoming winning football that questions get raised.
Did you come up with the analogy of City being a drunk swaying from one direction to the next uncontrollably a few years ago? Or did I come up with that but doing so to agree with your complaints about short-termism?
I agree that short-termism over the past 10 plus years means we're far further behind where we should be, but I can see some medium to longer-term planning in what club has done since Harris has arrived and think there should be some patience while it plays out. I don't think Harris-ball should be the final picture though.
I'm not sure the club believe it's what I want to see, but they've seen Warnock get a side with limitations promoted very successfully and probably not at great cost. We're still forced into it if we want success because we have players whose natural game isn't about passing and movement.
They comprehensively beat us because we played poorly. They didn't play that well. If we had played well we would have won. We still have 12 points out of the last 15, they have 10 out of 15. How is Cooper a better manager ? What has he achieved ? Nothing. We finished above them last season and will again this.
Their journey started in League 1 but would have been a decision and they would have employed a manager that started changing that style.
I'd say we have spent as much as Brighton over their period prior to being promoted to have more than bedded in a new style.
I would also say that the incremental change of manager would cost more and take longer than getting a manager in with an attractive style and letting him change it as and when the finances allow. If the fans could see this is what he was trying to do I'm sure there would be more patience too.
You mention the academy and I agree ours isn't fit for purpose given what it has produced. I would not expect our board to know what was going wrong with it or put people in place to remedy it. They certainly wouldn't look at examples of a good, successful academy and replicate it that's for sure.
Because he has them higher in the table and playing a much better, attractive style of football and just played us off the park.
He also has less to spend but many say that you need money to achieve it.
So we're a better side because we've taken more points from the last 5 than they have, despite them taking more points over the course of the season, or even the last game......
Trouble is, it is always the same 7 or 8 people raising the question on here, usually immediately after a loss. They also don't raise the question when we are winning games, as in the last four matches.
Fees paid, wages id say theyd have the higher out of both those 11s.
After 18 games they have more points than us. The season isn't decided after 18 games.
Brighton's academy was one of the best in the UK and had players to bring through which is probably why, maybe the transfer budget too, Potter agreed to go there. They didn't play better football than us when under Hughton.
Can you/anyone name a side which has successfully jumped to a more expansive style without resources (money or money invested in their academy) to back it up with? The only one I can think of is Swansea but they started in league One.
So are the owners bleeding them dry or spending more on their team than us?
We can't have it both ways.
Do you think the board even considered the brand of football we would play when employing Harris?
If put on the spot do you think Tan, Choo and Dalman could dissect the performance today and tell us why we lost?
These are the people picking who takes charge of the team here.
Absolutely, so you must reckon we'll finish above them after 46 games then?
So are you happy with the entire direction of the club, or are you not concerned in the slightest?
I think that's the thing with the style of football, if your winning its accepted. Footballs about winning.
If we aren't winning then what we are left with is awful football.
This is not new to Harris but same under Warnock, Malky etc
I think I can look over the years probably since DJ left and say we have lacked an identity. We have had some good times in those years but eventually end back up where we were and I really believe that's because of the lack of identity.
As above you can't really blame the managers as those managers were known for playing a certain way.
So Hughton was a drab manager who played similar to Warnock but they went for Potter. So there are examples.
Our finances are our finances. I would prefer to give the money to a manager with a vision and with the intention of playing an attractive, attacking style. Giving money to Harris, if the club sees him as a stepping stone, for me is wasted money.
Again, you mention Swansea were in League 1. Does it matter where it starts as long as you're not relegated?
No one is asking for a "jump" Surge, but signs of a transition would be good. All we've seen for the last 7 or 8 years is turgid football, there is nothing exciting about watching City play, just the same old grind every week, taking players like Wilson & Ojo and making them look very average. Only Camarasa has bucked the trend in that time & occasionally a cameo from Tomlin.
We lost today because the players don't have enough quality and Harris just isn't good enough at tactics to be able to counteract that.
Under Warnock in the Championship we rarely ever got outplayed by our opponents. Even when the other side was better we were still able to turn it into a scrap. Under Harris, we seem to get constantly outplayed when playing a team better than us - the two 2-0 defeats to Fulham last year were cases in point.
Today, we started with a 4-4-2, already a bit of a worry when playing their 3 in midfield but I don't blame him for not wanting to change a winning team. However, the way he set us up gave us absolutely no chance in the game.
Their wing backs were being marked by our wingers, meaning that our full backs were dropped deep never coming up the pitch. If our full backs played tight to their wing backs, we could have played our wingers far narrower off the ball and effectively had 4 in the middle to combat their 3. Instead, we were just left chasing shadows as their more technically gifted 3 passed it around our 2 like they weren't there.
The fact that we were being completely overrun in midfield was obvious early on, and Harris just did nothing to stop it. He only thing he ever seems to do to change things up in games is to bring Glatzel on and go 4-4-2. He just doesn't have the brains to see something is going wrong and change it.
Our most technically gifted player was also then shunted out onto the wing left to track back their wing back all game, and so he could never get into dangerous positions on the pitch. What's the point of having Wilson if we're not going to use him effectively?
Exactly this.
We don't have a great deal of money. It is what it is.
Surely though, what we do spend should be spent by a manager with a vision and a change of style.
For me giving money to people like Harris who have no style or real idea of how to change it is wasting money.
Out of interest does anyone know the cost of Swanseas team and if Cooper brought them in. I know some are from the youth team but it doesn't seem an expensive team with the exception of Ayew
Agree with so much of that. So much of the criticism after a game like today's can be seen as being knee jerk (especially when the team had won their last four), but I'm sure I wasn't the only City fan who was concerned about, first, playing the same team for a fifth game and, second, playing 4-4-2 against Swansea with a pair of scufflers as the central midfield two.
They had what 7 years in the PL.?
Theyve got players there theyve spent big on and on massive wages.
The board want to go up.
We are going to be in deep financial shit in the summer unless we go up and were never going to do that with a complete change of style.
They had money and a fantastic youth team. We had neither.
If we jumped to an expansive style we would have got relegated - see Trollope, see us passing out from the back earlier this year before 4-4-2. Either it's something you want done incrementally or you're happy to have a relegation first.
Posting Permissions
