Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
CANARYKING

Farke putting the boot into Connor Southwell

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

I've never read so much twaddle on a thread about football.  All Farke has pinpointed is the fact that a journalist has written an article full of it's own importance in the way that it pontificates (innacurately) about the match.  Journalists - unless they are qualified coaches themselves - should not be talking in so much detail about tactics, substitions etc etc, their job is to report what has happened on the pitch, not talk as if they are experts on football.  He may have made some good points in his article as well as the wrong analysis, but Connor Southwell is no more an expert on football than thousands of others of us and it is fine if he wants to talk about tactics etc on social media, but his job is as a reporter, not a football pundit.

Spot on, Lakey 👍

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

I've never read so much twaddle on a thread about football.  All Farke has pinpointed is the fact that a journalist has written an article full of it's own importance in the way that it pontificates (innacurately) about the match.  Journalists - unless they are qualified coaches themselves - should not be talking in so much detail about tactics, substitions etc etc, their job is to report what has happened on the pitch, not talk as if they are experts on football.  He may have made some good points in his article as well as the wrong analysis, but Connor Southwell is no more an expert on football than thousands of others of us and it is fine if he wants to talk about tactics etc on social media, but his job is as a reporter, not a football pundit.

Very true words. Connor Southwell has been given enough rope..and the inevitable has happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

I've never read so much twaddle on a thread about football.  All Farke has pinpointed is the fact that a journalist has written an article full of it's own importance in the way that it pontificates (innacurately) about the match.  Journalists - unless they are qualified coaches themselves - should not be talking in so much detail about tactics, substitions etc etc, their job is to report what has happened on the pitch, not talk as if they are experts on football.  He may have made some good points in his article as well as the wrong analysis, but Connor Southwell is no more an expert on football than thousands of others of us and it is fine if he wants to talk about tactics etc on social media, but his job is as a reporter, not a football pundit.

With you completely on that Lakey. If an opportunity ever arose to join the media team and you were headhunted would you be interested? 

I think you’d be your own man but still a team player and would definitely improve the reading and viewing figures. If they insisted you moved back to Norwich and had to wear the hat for post match blogs would you be tempted ? 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing is, it couldn’t be any easier to be an ‘expert’ in your analysis after the event with hindsight, that’s nothing on Connor alone, that stands for everyone. Personally I thought it was a decent lineup and I could see what Daniel was trying to do. He went offensively and I still feel that was the right way to approach the game - that’s the gamble of football. 
 

Hindsight really is a wonderful thing and allows all and sundry to be the best manager in the world. If it had worked out, and it could have on another day as there are no tactics in the world that mean you play the game a hundred times and get the same result a hundred times, I guarantee you the likes of Connor and Jim Smith etc wouldn’t be writing ‘well, that all looked very wrong to me before the game, the line up, tactics etc was off, but fair play, it was spot on’. There is zero evidence that whatever methods etc you would have chosen both during and before the game would have got us the points. From what I saw of Jim’s prematch lineup, the only 2 differences were Tettey for the Mayor, and Duda for Drmic. The team under less pressure always had the upper hand at this stage of the season, as Everton also will tonight.  I don’t even think Everton will try and kill the game in the first 10 minutes this evening, they know the longer the game goes on, the more risks we will have to take. Not sure how you counteract that - it is in their favour full stop and they know it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Midlands Yellow said:

With you completely on that Lakey. If an opportunity ever arose to join the media team and you were headhunted would you be interested? 

I think you’d be your own man but still a team player and would definitely improve the reading and viewing figures. If they insisted you moved back to Norwich and had to wear the hat for post match blogs would you be tempted ? 
 

🤣 🤣 We've talked about moving back to Norfolk, so that wouldn't be an obstacle, but I don't think my brand of reporting would go down well with most punters! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

I've never read so much twaddle on a thread about football.  All Farke has pinpointed is the fact that a journalist has written an article full of it's own importance in the way that it pontificates (innacurately) about the match.  Journalists - unless they are qualified coaches themselves - should not be talking in so much detail about tactics, substitions etc etc, their job is to report what has happened on the pitch, not talk as if they are experts on football.  He may have made some good points in his article as well as the wrong analysis, but Connor Southwell is no more an expert on football than thousands of others of us and it is fine if he wants to talk about tactics etc on social media, but his job is as a reporter, not a football pundit.

Absolutely. And that goes for 99% of news 'reporting' these days.

The BBC used to give you information about events. There was always an inevitable selection about the facts presented as there are always too many to fit into a bulletin, but there was the belief that they were presented in as unbiased a way as possible. Nowadays we're presented with a biased selection of those facts & we're told how to think about them. Sky & Ch4 are even worse.

Also there is a blatant tendency to whip up discord & controversy where none exists. Forever trying to drive a wedge between people. The reason is to try & generate more news; as I often say, the news industry is an industry like any other & its raw material is bad news - that's what we're attuned to, we need to know where the threats are coming from. Good news has no survival value.

Mainstream media is dying. This is bad, because institutions like the BBC are what hold us together. The people running those institutions have a lot to answer for.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

🤣 🤣 We've talked about moving back to Norfolk, so that wouldn't be an obstacle, but I don't think my brand of reporting would go down well with most punters! 

It certainly would. Quite quickly you’d have a cult following with fans from all clubs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

🤣 🤣 We've talked about moving back to Norfolk, so that wouldn't be an obstacle, but I don't think my brand of reporting would go down well with most punters! 

I completely disagree. A loud voice positively helping to rouse and unify the supporters and all those at the club, rather than irritate the backroom staff which almost certainly makes our task harder, would be most welcome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just watched the whole video interview and in context he's not harsh at all to Connor - just points out that stuff he's said isn't true, and he's not read the game tactically correctly. That's not a problem, few of us will because we're not qualified coaches with specialisms in tactical setups etc.

The problem is Connor is writing in the media and therefore presenting his opinion almost as fact in the form of a match review. I'm pleased Farke has pointed out it's wrong, otherwise the gullible simply believe what they read, don't they?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, hogesar said:

Just watched the whole video interview and in context he's not harsh at all to Connor - just points out that stuff he's said isn't true, and he's not read the game tactically correctly. That's not a problem, few of us will because we're not qualified coaches with specialisms in tactical setups etc.

The problem is Connor is writing in the media and therefore presenting his opinion almost as fact in the form of a match review. I'm pleased Farke has pointed out it's wrong, otherwise the gullible simply believe what they read, don't they?

Full agreement, there’s a first 😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Midlands Yellow said:

Full agreement, there’s a first 😉

Let's put it down to lockdown!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, First Wazzock said:

Farke also said that he thinks Big Vince is a helmet

Post of the week 🤣

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Duncan Edwards said:

I needn't have worried.

"Intrinsically, the concept was designed to match up Ralph Hassenhuttl’s side, with Tom Trybull deployed as a deeper midfielder to screen the central defenders and offer a ball-playing pivot to help break the Saints’ adept and intense press."

 

"Trybull’s role was designed to get City playing through the thirds with progressive passes to Emi Buendia and Todd Cantwell from deep. Instead, Southampton used him collecting the ball as a trigger point for their press, and they flooded the transition to construct overloads."

Sometimes I read football journalists and you can see how what they write has been influenced by playing too much Football Manager

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, The Great Mass Debater said:

Sometimes I read football journalists and you can see how what they write has been influenced by playing too much Football Manager

 

So true 🙂

It's a good job that nobody takes it upon themselves to 'analyse' young Connor's work in the way he does a cod analysis of Daniel Farke's work!!!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hogesar said:

Just watched the whole video interview and in context he's not harsh at all to Connor - just points out that stuff he's said isn't true, and he's not read the game tactically correctly. That's not a problem, few of us will because we're not qualified coaches with specialisms in tactical setups etc.

The problem is Connor is writing in the media and therefore presenting his opinion almost as fact in the form of a match review. I'm pleased Farke has pointed out it's wrong, otherwise the gullible simply believe what they read, don't they?

I’ve just watched it too, and TBH he’s just gone down in my estimation. “I never have a pint” - WHAAAAT?!!? 😉

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Alex Moss said:

The thing is, it couldn’t be any easier to be an ‘expert’ in your analysis after the event with hindsight, that’s nothing on Connor alone, that stands for everyone. Personally I thought it was a decent lineup and I could see what Daniel was trying to do. He went offensively and I still feel that was the right way to approach the game - that’s the gamble of football. 
 

Hindsight really is a wonderful thing and allows all and sundry to be the best manager in the world. If it had worked out, and it could have on another day as there are no tactics in the world that mean you play the game a hundred times and get the same result a hundred times, I guarantee you the likes of Connor and Jim Smith etc wouldn’t be writing ‘well, that all looked very wrong to me before the game, the line up, tactics etc was off, but fair play, it was spot on’. There is zero evidence that whatever methods etc you would have chosen both during and before the game would have got us the points. From what I saw of Jim’s prematch lineup, the only 2 differences were Tettey for the Mayor, and Duda for Drmic. The team under less pressure always had the upper hand at this stage of the season, as Everton also will tonight.  I don’t even think Everton will try and kill the game in the first 10 minutes this evening, they know the longer the game goes on, the more risks we will have to take. Not sure how you counteract that - it is in their favour full stop and they know it.

Personally as soon as I saw that line up I was very surprised and said to my mates I was in contact with that I felt it left us wide open in midfield on the counter and I feared the worst. I would have no issue holding my hands up if we'd won and played well.

The point about the line up is that the Trybull/Mclean  combo in midfield DOES NOT WORK at this level and indeed no midfield line up we have tried not including Tettey does. So that is a fairly significant difference you have highlighted there in the team I said I would like to see and the team Farke put out. As also is Duda for Drmic. I'm no massive fan of Duda (and would have been fine with Kenny, Vrancic or Onel instead of him) but Drmic was awful. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Jim Smith said:

Personally as soon as I saw that line up I was very surprised and said to my mates I was in contact with that I felt it left us wide open in midfield on the counter and I feared the worst. I would have no issue holding my hands up if we'd won and played well.

The point about the line up is that the Trybull/Mclean  combo in midfield DOES NOT WORK at this level and indeed no midfield line up we have tried not including Tettey does. So that is a fairly significant difference you have highlighted there in the team I said I would like to see and the team Farke put out. As also is Duda for Drmic. I'm no massive fan of Duda (and would have been fine with Kenny, Vrancic or Onel instead of him) but Drmic was awful. 

This 'Drmic' was awful fills a narrative. Statistically he was better than over half our players, Pukki included.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ron obvious said:

Absolutely. And that goes for 99% of news 'reporting' these days.

The BBC used to give you information about events. There was always an inevitable selection about the facts presented as there are always too many to fit into a bulletin, but there was the belief that they were presented in as unbiased a way as possible. Nowadays we're presented with a biased selection of those facts & we're told how to think about them. Sky & Ch4 are even worse.

Also there is a blatant tendency to whip up discord & controversy where none exists. Forever trying to drive a wedge between people. The reason is to try & generate more news; as I often say, the news industry is an industry like any other & its raw material is bad news - that's what we're attuned to, we need to know where the threats are coming from. Good news has no survival value.

Mainstream media is dying. This is bad, because institutions like the BBC are what hold us together. The people running those institutions have a lot to answer for.

Not sure about that, Ron. Worldwide printed circulation of newspapers has grown, with 2.5bn buying a paper a day. Plus 600m looking online, so that is getting towards half the population of the planet. And as for reading online, the Express, the Mirror, the Sun, the FT, the Indy, the Daily Telegraph, the Mail and The Guardian are all in the top 26 of worldwide online readership.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Dr Greenthumb said:

How many has he sold/loaned too?

Exactly, including some who got brought in and couldn't get a game. 

Loans have been done in and out also remember. 

Normal club activity, doesn't fit with the headline that he hasn't been able to sign any players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Jim Smith said:

Personally as soon as I saw that line up I was very surprised and said to my mates I was in contact with that I felt it left us wide open in midfield on the counter and I feared the worst. I would have no issue holding my hands up if we'd won and played well.

The point about the line up is that the Trybull/Mclean  combo in midfield DOES NOT WORK at this level and indeed no midfield line up we have tried not including Tettey does. So that is a fairly significant difference you have highlighted there in the team I said I would like to see and the team Farke put out. As also is Duda for Drmic. I'm no massive fan of Duda (and would have been fine with Kenny, Vrancic or Onel instead of him) but Drmic was awful. 

But you keep on posting on the assumption that Tettey was fit and was left out deliberately.  Suppose you are plain wrong about that, and Tettey was not fit to start, then what would your team have been? Based on what you have posted there then Farke's midfield was as good as he could have selected, since according to you no midfield that doesn't include Tettey works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

i really like Daniel and I'm also a very good friend of Connors so wont get involved in the war of words

Connor is a very young lad,  it's his first job so if you've read his whole article and you'd don't agree with the contant , how about giving him some constructive feedback which I know he'll take onboard

https://www.pinkun.com/norwich-city/connor-southwell-on-daniel-farke-s-tactical-approach-against-southampton-1-6710533  

 

Edited by Diane
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

But you keep on posting on the assumption that Tettey was fit and was left out deliberately.  Suppose you are plain wrong about that, and Tettey was not fit to start, then what would your team have been? Based on what you have posted there then Farke's midfield was as good as he could have selected, since according to you no midfield that doesn't include Tettey works.

Well Purple if Tettey was not fit enough to play (and I don't think that was the case) and I was Farke and knew I had to rely on Trybull and Kenny I guess I would have tried to consolidate the midfield by playing Vrancic or someone more combative like Rupp in front of them to give us a bit more solidity and control in that area. I certainly wouldn't have exacerbated the weakness in the midfield by playing one less midfielder than usual.

Playing an extra striker being more "attacking" is a bit like the old not playing Wes debate to make us more defensively solid debate that used to take place. my own view was always that we were just as if not more defensively sound when Wes played because he enabled us to keep the ball better which in turn took some pressure off the defence. On Friday we saw the opposite happen whereby the fact we had an extra striker and one less in midfield led (in combination with a few of our players having bad games) to an inability to retain possession in midfield and a lack of defensive cover which as well as placing us in difficulties at the back also meant we were actually a lot less effective as an attacking force, despite notionally playing a more attacking line up. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Jim Smith said:

Well Purple if Tettey was not fit enough to play (and I don't think that was the case) and I was Farke and knew I had to rely on Trybull and Kenny I guess I would have tried to consolidate the midfield by playing Vrancic or someone more combative like Rupp in front of them to give us a bit more solidity and control in that area. I certainly wouldn't have exacerbated the weakness in the midfield by playing one less midfielder than usual.

Playing an extra striker being more "attacking" is a bit like the old not playing Wes debate to make us more defensively solid debate that used to take place. my own view was always that we were just as if not more defensively sound when Wes played because he enabled us to keep the ball better which in turn took some pressure off the defence. On Friday we saw the opposite happen whereby the fact we had an extra striker and one less in midfield led (in combination with a few of our players having bad games) to an inability to retain possession in midfield and a lack of defensive cover which as well as placing us in difficulties at the back also meant we were actually a lot less effective as an attacking force, despite notionally playing a more attacking line up. 

Well, I imagine we are never going to know whether you're right that Tettey was fit to start and Farke left him out. Him starting tonight, if that happens, will prove nothing. It could actually indicate Tettey wasn't fit last Friday, and/or that nowadays he can only play one game in a week. The indications of that being the case have been there for a while.

As it happens I agree that without Tettey I wouldn't have played two strikers, and would have added Vrancic or Rupp, but Farke may have thought boldness was the best policy, to try to get off to a flying start. Either way, the reality is that Tettey's acknowledged ageing problems and the loss of those three players for the duration all drastically limit Farke's options.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PurpleCanary said:

Not sure about that, Ron. Worldwide printed circulation of newspapers has grown, with 2.5bn buying a paper a day. Plus 600m looking online, so that is getting towards half the population of the planet. And as for reading online, the Express, the Mirror, the Sun, the FT, the Indy, the Daily Telegraph, the Mail and The Guardian are all in the top 26 of worldwide online readership.

Therein lies part of the problem.  These are not newspapers, they are mouthpieces for the politics they support. Suck in punters with pictures of pretty girls, put plenty of sport in - and/or headlines that mislead or are plain untruths, political spin that is so blatant it makes your hair curl........all in all a disgrace to journalism, but it has ever been thus.  It gives people the opportunity to read what they want to see.....nothing wrong with that you might think, but it is all part of a manipulation of the population.  Again, it has ever been thus, but truth is getting ever harder to get at, which is a dangerous state to be in.  Lies, misinformation, manipulation, conning people, - all in the name of "news". 

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Number9 said:

Exactly, including some who got brought in and couldn't get a game. 

Loans have been done in and out also remember. 

Normal club activity, doesn't fit with the headline that he hasn't been able to sign any players.

No one is disgusting that, but when you are given nothing to spend, you have to keep testing players! For every Pukki, there has been a Marley Watkins! You don’t get much for free, so I feel he has done a cracking job, with what he has been given.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Dr Greenthumb said:

No one is disgusting that, but when you are given nothing to spend, you have to keep testing players! For every Pukki, there has been a Marley Watkins! You don’t get much for free, so I feel he has done a cracking job, with what he has been given.

Mr Thumb, we have a huge surplus of attacking midfielders and we appear woefully under stocked with defenders. 

Farke has bought and loaned in attacking midfielders, he could have bought and loaned in defenders. 

That's not a cracking job, that's mismanagement when you consider that our defence was woeful last season and has remained so this season. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Number9 said:

Mr Thumb, we have a huge surplus of attacking midfielders and we appear woefully under stocked with defenders. 

Farke has bought and loaned in attacking midfielders, he could have bought and loaned in defenders. 

That's not a cracking job, that's mismanagement when you consider that our defence was woeful last season and has remained so this season. 

Do you understand that Farke doesn't sign the players? Webber does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Connor is a youngster in his first season. If he's gone too far it is the fault of whoever gave his article the green light.

On a more general point we don't seem to have reporters anymore. Rickyyy does the best match report. He describes what happened without giving much opinion. Except maybe about his bladder🙃

Match analysis is a tough one. I'm not qualified to analyse a match. I'm clueless and watch each game as an avid fan and supporter. Even our more analytic posters struggle at this. Kingo sees things I miss but he was clueless of the in game changes Farke had made. I have watched a game sat next to Parma and he's the best I personally know as an analyst. Parma pointed to things I didn't pick up. I could then see what he saw but would not pick it up myself at another game. In fact I don't think I'd even want to because my support is too emotional to be able to analyse what is happening.

However I think Connor's article was flagged as opinion. Opinions are two a penny all over the internet after a game. If you are a talented writer you are good at expressing your opinion but that talent doesn't add anymore weight to the opinion just gives it a bigger platform and wider audience. This can be a problem when opinion is treated as news because it's on a news site.

Opinion seems to have become an ever increasing part of news sites. Good reporting seems to be becoming a thing of the past.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, king canary said:

Do you understand that Farke doesn't sign the players? Webber does.

I understand that Farke doesn't sign players on his own. 

Most clubs have a group of decision makers who sign players, the manager being a senior member of that group. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...