Parma's Tactics Masterclass 10

[Lessingham Canary 99]

Wondered where Bethnal Y&G went............................... joined the chip on the shoulder brigade.

[hogesar 9,658]

[quote user="Wes Hooly Fan"]https://twitter.com/Holtamania/status/665584250167672832[/quote]

The jealousy from people in that link is nothing short of embarrassing.

[Jacko 0]

To be fair Holtamania did some cracking analysis of our games about the time Lambert was here. Shame he stopped doing them.

[hogesar 9,658]

[quote user="Jacko"]To be fair Holtamania did some cracking analysis of our games about the time Lambert was here. Shame he stopped doing them.[/quote]

Yeah, difference is Parma hasn''t referred to anyone as a ''bellend'' or a ''wanker'', particularly on a social media platform where the OP is unlikely to read it.

[Jacko 0]

It''s all opinions at the end of the day Hogesar. Some see Parma ''s words as gospel and others think it''s nonsense and some sit in between. That''s the nature of the beast that is the football forum.

[hogesar 9,658]

[quote user="Jacko"]It''s all opinions at the end of the day Hogesar. Some see Parma ''s words as gospel and others think it''s nonsense and some sit in between. That''s the nature of the beast that is the football forum.[/quote]

Yeah of course. Same applies to Holtamania, after all.

All I''m simply saying is after seeing those Twitter posts I know who''s views I''d respect.

[Jacko 0]

The one thing I would say about Parma''s post on a critical level which I have already alluded to.

Did Neil change or was his hand to a certain extent forced by the fact that was it basically the only team available to him? With only a limited number of attacking weapons at our disposal, did we really have any other choice but to play a passive game?

He did say in his post match interview that Redmond would have started on the right had he been fit. That may have altered the dynamic of the team and how we played significantly.

We will never know of course and that is not to take anything away from Neil''s game management. He got a result with thr limited resources available to him. That''s cracking management.

[Katie Borkins 1]

Neil curbed his squad’s attacking instincts to beat the Swans in what he labelled a ‘back-to-basics’ approach to end a four-game losing league run.

“If you look at the teams who want to get on the ball and dominate that way they are near the bottom of the league, unless you have the best players,” he said. “I had to adapt and make sure we come up with a way that gives us the best opportunity of trying to win. Up to that point I hadn’t needed to change anything because it worked last year and also in my time at Hamilton. It is not as if we weren’t doing well and I had stuck with the same way of playing. When you are winning games there is no need to do more than tweak.

“I just think the game has evolved now into a really counter-attacking approach. It nearly worked at Manchester City, but for a couple of errors. We went with three centre backs and two wing-backs and we felt something similar would work against Swansea. That game was more about the result than the performance, and that is probably the first time since I have been here I would say that, because I always feel if you perform well enough you will win games.”

Neil’s successful strategy worked perfectly against the toiling Swans.

“When expansive teams are not getting any joy they become even more expansive and commit even more men forward to try and break you down,” he said. “That leaves more gaps at the back, and I know that because it’s what we have done in our games. You just hope they don’t get the first goal because it then changes the dynamic. We got it and it played right into our hands. It happened the other way round against West Brom in the home game before that one.”

[westcoastcanary 173]

[quote user="Jacko"]It''s all opinions at the end of the day Hogesar. Some see Parma ''s words as gospel and others think it''s nonsense and some sit in between. That''s the nature of the beast that is the football forum.[/quote]

To quote Machiavelli: "There are three kinds of people, firstly geniuses, secondly those who, while not themselves geniuses, have enough wit to recognise genius when they encounter it, and thirdly the rest." Substitute "knowledgeability" for "genius" and ........ well, I''ll say no more!

[Van wink 2,994]

WTF is "Knowledgeability"?

[westcoastcanary 173]

The noun form of the adjective "knowledgable", or, if you prefer, a synonym of "knowledgeableness".

[westcoastcanary 173]

To explain myself further, I was trying to avoid using the term "cognoscenti", fearing that it might prove too much for some people ............

[GJP 79]

Doesn''t Bethnal get paid to write about football?

Holtamania, I believe, has had a fair amount of paid work and turned down a fair bit as well, off the back of the analysis he used to post.

So I''m not particularly convinced they''re "jealous".

[Jacko 0]

[quote user="westcoastcanary"][quote user="Jacko"]It''s all opinions at the end of the day Hogesar. Some see Parma ''s words as gospel and others think it''s nonsense and some sit in between. That''s the nature of the beast that is the football forum.[/quote]

To quote Machiavelli: "There are three kinds of people, firstly geniuses, secondly those who, while not themselves geniuses, have enough wit to recognise genius when they encounter it, and thirdly the rest." Substitute "knowledgeability" for "genius" and ........ well, I''ll say no more![/quote]

Right.............

[PurpleCanary 5,557]

[quote user="GJP"]Doesn''t Bethnal get paid to write about football?

Holtamania, I believe, has had a fair amount of paid work and turned down a fair bit as well, off the back of the analysis he used to post.

So I''m not particularly convinced they''re "jealous".[/quote]The comment from Bethnal, whose posts here were almost invariably interesting, didn''t particularly smack of jealousy anyway.

[Jacko 0]

Bethnal and Holtamania both write very interestingly and insightfully about all things NCFC.

It''s shame neither post on here anymore. If they think these posts are nonsense then to be they have a fair amount of authority to back it up.

Does it make them right?There is no definitive right or wrong answer in these discussions. Something some posters would do well to remember.

[hogesar 9,658]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="GJP"]Doesn''t Bethnal get paid to write about football?

Holtamania, I believe, has had a fair amount of paid work and turned down a fair bit as well, off the back of the analysis he used to post.

So I''m not particularly convinced they''re "jealous".[/quote]The comment from Bethnal, whose posts here were almost invariably interesting, didn''t particularly smack of jealousy anyway.[/quote]

Agreed. Referring to the personal insults @ Parma

[westcoastcanary 173]

Jacko wrote: “There is no definitive right or wrong answer in these discussions ………”

Well, if that’s not a definitive statement of right or wrong I don’t know what is! And in fact it’s quite definitely wrong although, by simply adding “often” to make it read “There is often no ……”, it would become most definitely right!

Furthermore, returning to your and Yorkshire Pudding’s original comments on Parma’s OP, you are both most definitely wrong. To suggest that the post is simply “a long winded way of saying that Alex Neil has responded to the concern that we''d been ''found out'' tactically” is to completely ignore a whole raft of interesting further insights into e.g. the psychology of the dressing room, the undercurrents of manager/player and manager/board relationships, and so on. So for me, and I imagine plenty of others, Parma DID, as usual, “enlighten me with things I didn''t know or understand.”

[nutty nigel 7,531]

Thanks for the link Wes Hooly but now I wish I''d never clicked it. You just know I will get in trouble for it but here goes.....

 

Beth was a good poster on here. I can''t remember Holtmania''s posts but his links were well interesting. But it''s not fashionable amongst these people to post on the pink un anymore. The stuff toward Parma on that link is much the same stuff you will see from others on Twitter and facebook. Especially Journos and columnists. Now I enjoyed reading Beth and Holtmania just as I enjoy reading what the likes of Ed Couzens Lake and Mick Dennis write about City. But I don''t enjoy the bitching about the Pink Un on social media. In fact I have had the conversation with Mick Dennis on Facebook and he has nothing good to say about this place. I can''t even get him to recognise the generosity of the 60 odd PUPs on Rays Funds. I still went to his book launch and purchased his book so I''m not so petty and childish as some think [:)] 

 

I think maybe the problem is that these people have, in the main, worked hard to get where they are and in the modern world any Tom Dick or Harry can get exposure for the stuff they write on a busy place like the Pink Un. Threads on here get thousands of views and it seems the more outrageous the thread is the more views it gets. Rick Waghorn got a strop on about it on here ten years or so ago as the place got really busy. He called us posters "Citizen Journalists". We had a poster change his name to Citizen Journalist Foghorn in Rick''s honour[:)]

 

Parma is a brilliant poster on here. His stuff is always worth a read and the comments on that Twitter are out of order but nothing worse than I have come to expect. Parma''s the real deal. He''s also a genuine guy who has helped me on Rays Funds. In fact our profitability league only happened because he was patient enough to help this bog cleaning bingo caller with the spreadsheets. I''m sure he''ll treat the nastiness with the contempt it deserves. When you stand those people beside Parma..........  well let''s just say they aint all that!

 

[PurpleCanary 5,557]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

Thanks for the link Wes Hooly but now I wish I''d never clicked it. You just know I will get in trouble for it but here goes.....

 

Beth was a good poster on here. I can''t remember Holtmania''s posts but his links were well interesting. But it''s not fashionable amongst these people to post on the pink un anymore. The stuff toward Parma on that link is much the same stuff you will see from others on Twitter and facebook. Especially Journos and columnists. Now I enjoyed reading Beth and Holtmania just as I enjoy reading what the likes of Ed Couzens Lake and Mick Dennis write about City. But I don''t enjoy the bitching about the Pink Un on social media. In fact I have had the conversation with Mick Dennis on Facebook and he has nothing good to say about this place. I can''t even get him to recognise the generosity of the 60 odd PUPs on Rays Funds. I still went to his book launch and purchased his book so I''m not so petty and childish as some think [:)] 

 

I think maybe the problem is that these people have, in the main, worked hard to get where they are and in the modern world any Tom Dick or Harry can get exposure for the stuff they write on a busy place like the Pink Un. Threads on here get thousands of views and it seems the more outrageous the thread is the more views it gets. Rick Waghorn got a strop on about it on here ten years or so ago as the place got really busy. He called us posters "Citizen Journalists". We had a poster change his name to Citizen Journalist Foghorn in Rick''s honour[:)]

 

 

[/quote]

That may be true. nutty, The problem with such an attitude would be that, with one exception, the coverage of Norwich City affairs (apart from the 90 minutes on a Saturday) from locally-based/connected journalists is dire.Mick Dennis has his critics here, but he is a good reporter who knows a great deal about the inner workings at Carrow Road. His difficulty, I imagine, is that he is often constrained from writing all he knows.Waghorn appeared to have some contacts Inside the old regime (from memory he was first with the news that Roeder was replacing Grant) but has seemed totally out of the loop since McNally arrived. As to the EDP, it is an open secret that relations were very chilly between Carrow Road and Rouen Road, to the latter''s disadvantage. There may have been a bit of a thaw more recently, but not to any noticeable benefit to the paper''s coverage.If posters have  acted as Citizen Journalists it has only been to try to fill the information and informed-opinion void left by the likes of Waghorn.

[Parma Ham's gone mouldy 2,219]

Everybody is entitled to draw their views from wherever they so choose. There is much that is well written on Social Media and much that is poor, both grammatically and qualitatively in the printed press.

It is true that the printed press has an editing, filtering process and that any professional industry much survive via providing a service that generates an economic return, which in itself provides a framework that might be judged to ensure a higher level of quality.

Nevertheless, any Luddite complaint about open access to information and viewpoint is misplaced and ultimately futile.

As far as the Madterclasses, I think that as a collective body of work they stand scrutiny. 10 is different in that it moves away from technical on-the-field analysis and moves it off-the-field into the risks that Managers take in doing what they do. It was more positive than most and this was deliberate, credit and compliments are ephemeral and often in short supply for Managers, so acknowledging real risks, well taken is important in balanced analysis (regardless whether it makes popular copy or otherwise).

Socialist Media criticism is entirely par for the course. Whether considered Fair or otherwise, it is expected and placed in its appropriate context. Managers, players and coaches are well used to this and have crawled through a mile of shit many times worse and many times over to get where they are.

Parma

[Van wink 2,994]

The critisism it appears to me was not about "popular copy" in the message you tried convey but more about a perception of a rather pompous style of writing.

[Ray 111]

As far as I am concerned Parma, I look forward to 20, 30, etc. because imo you think in depth when you post whilst I may not agree with everything you post I thoroughly enjoyed each one.

For what it is worth, I would continue the rest of the season playing SB and RB with MR as sweeper, when he is available again. It gives us defensive strength coupled with attacking options.

What do you think?

[Ray 111]

I meant Russ Martin as sweeper.

[Yelloow Since 72 54]

Took me a minute to work that out, Ray, but like you, "I look forward to 20, 30, etc." where Parma''s masterclasses are concerned. The depth of analysis and anticipation of tactics just isn''t available elsewhere. Those who want a 15 second analysis should look to the tabloid journalists sitting at their desks opinionating about superficial elements of the game.

[Bannana Boy 30]

For the record I always look forward to reading Parma''s posts and long may they continue.

They are well written, informative and most importantly for a forum spark some interesting debate.