Is Wagner tactically inept?

[cambridgeshire canary 6,742]

I just don't understand hardly any of his substituions and changes and other than the McCallum one a match ago I can't really think of any match he's made decent changes in that have switched the game to being in our favour.

 

I mean just look at today he goes and takes one of only goal threats off the pitch to change the system up and bring on a defender and then tada like magic we get scored against in what feels like a few seconds later and as a result the game is dead and buried.

 

And yes; Only one loss in our last six matches is a good record but it really does not change what seems to be an issue in that Wagner just does not know how to change matches up nor how to make any decent changes to our team.

[daz 70]

1000000000%

[Capt. Pants 4,250]

LOL

I don't have a huge problem with the subs otherthan I would have given Idah a bit more time, but even then bearing in mind we play again Friday it was sensible not to run Idah into the ground. Rowe is useless as a loan striker; too weak.

We almost pegged them back in the last 5 mins. I'm not a Wagner fan but didn't see too much wrong with today. If anything, the tactical changes he made in our 6 game run got us where we are today.

[hogesar 9,690]

I mean the subs nearly worked didn't they? Somehow we restricted them to 1 and Hwang nearly scored the equaliser.

Certainly today's game doesn't deserve any comments of inept.

He doesn't exactly have quality to bring off the bench although it is getting better with players returning.

[TheGunnShow 5,940]

If you don't have the necessary ability to bring off the bench, how can the manager really be "inept"?

[Dean Coneys boots 1,400]

Yes. Nice guy, good people person but totally tactically out of his depth. Lunatic subs and zero game management 

[Robert Ketts Yellow Army 15]

Thought we played ok and kept on fighting until the end. Good call to rest Idah for Friday and give Hwang some game time imo

[Mason 47 1,384]

Not inept but limited, for sure.

My biggest problem today is that WBA's 5 in midfield was dominating the Sara / Nunez pair from minute 1. The sending off you can't account for, and is silly, but our response being to further reduce our midfield + forward presence was a move that just encouraged the prevailing game state.

The fact Kipre was often wandering about 25yds from our goal should be a clue.

 

[Peregrine Shorts 315]

Yes…….next question 

[Capt. Pants 4,250]

5 minutes ago, Mason 47 said:

Not inept but limited, for sure.

My biggest problem today is that WBA's 5 in midfield was dominating the Sara / Nunez pair from minute 1. The sending off you can't account for, and is silly, but our response being to further reduce our midfield + forward presence was a move that just encouraged the prevailing game state.

The fact Kipre was often wandering about 25yds from our goal should be a clue.

 

The problem will be that when we play a decent team and cannot dominate possession Barnes is in no mans land and we are a man down in midfield. It's ok at home to the likes of Huddersfield but today we did absolutely nothing, even with 11 men, to try and nullify Wallace who had the freedom of The Hawthorns all afternoon. 

It's a bit one size fits all with DW but as mentioned he hasn't much quality to work with when you scratch below the surface.

[Keith Scott 245]

He's the most tactically inept manager I've ever seen. And I've witnessed Brian Hamilton and Peter Grant in the managerial hot seat.

All the best.

Big Keith Scott.

 

[Thirsty Lizard 3,166]

1 hour ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

I just don't understand hardly any of his substituions and changes and other than the McCallum one a match ago I can't really think of any match he's made decent changes in that have switched the game to being in our favour.

 

I mean just look at today he goes and takes one of only goal threats off the pitch to change the system up and bring on a defender and then tada like magic we get scored against in what feels like a few seconds later and as a result the game is dead and buried.

 

And yes; Only one loss in our last six matches is a good record but it really does not change what seems to be an issue in that Wagner just does not know how to change matches up nor how to make any decent changes to our team.

Oh lets think for half a second now............ Idah against Hull - Idah against Cardiff - Idah against Bristol City - you know games that we were either drawing or losing when he made the substitution and we ended up winning because of a goal scored by the substitute that he brought on. 

[Ken Hairy 3,773]

I think basically he has one real way of setting a team up, when it works it works well but when things go against us then he doesn't have the skill set to change it.

Saying that stupidity from Borja Sainz cost us more than anything else.

[Ian 1,131]

9 minutes ago, Thirsty Lizard said:

Oh lets think for half a second now............ Idah against Hull - Idah against Cardiff - Idah against Bristol City - you know games that we were either drawing or losing when he made the substitution and we ended up winning because of a goal scored by the substitute that he brought on. 

Well yeah, but apart from all the times substitutions have won us points, or kept us from conceding, they've done nothing.

[Well b back 3,221]

I am no Wagner fan, but being at the game today I can honestly say the subs each time seemed about right, and to be fair to him ( for once, I am not normally ) the substitutions got us close to grabbing a point.

[Jim Smith 2,322]

Yes. He is tactically one of the worst coaches I’ve ever seen in our dugout. 
 

The biggest issue is his obsession with a starting formation that surrenders the midfield. We get away with it against sh*t teams, particularly at home but away and/or against the better sides it’s utter madness and I cannot tell you how frustrating I find it to watch. He just does not seem to see the issue. It’s soul destroying. 25% possession today when it was 11 v 11. You will lose 90% of games having to withstand that sort of pressure. 

[S_81 803]

Yes, he is very tactically inept. 
He has mitigation in the fact he doesn’t have a lot to work with from our bench. But none the less he very rarely changes a game for the better. 
He remains lucky to be in the job. Many of the results on our recent upturn in form have actually been poor performances. 
 

I hope he isn’t here next season 

[Monty13 2,235]

2 hours ago, Capt. Pants said:

LOL

I don't have a huge problem with the subs otherthan I would have given Idah a bit more time, but even then bearing in mind we play again Friday it was sensible not to run Idah into the ground. Rowe is useless as a loan striker; too weak.

We almost pegged them back in the last 5 mins. I'm not a Wagner fan but didn't see too much wrong with today. If anything, the tactical changes he made in our 6 game run got us where we are today.

Agree, my only real disappointment was the Idah sub, felt like it was early to yank him and then Hwang barely had a touch for the rest of the game.

Edited December 26, 2023 by Monty13

[Yobocop 1,099]

2 hours ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

I just don't understand hardly any of his substituions and changes and other than the McCallum one a match ago I can't really think of any match he's made decent changes in that have switched the game to being in our favour.

 

I mean just look at today he goes and takes one of only goal threats off the pitch to change the system up and bring on a defender and then tada like magic we get scored against in what feels like a few seconds later and as a result the game is dead and buried.

 

And yes; Only one loss in our last six matches is a good record but it really does not change what seems to be an issue in that Wagner just does not know how to change matches up nor how to make any decent changes to our team.

No. Next 

[Bradwell canary 109]

2 hours ago, Capt. Pants said:

LOL

I don't have a huge problem with the subs otherthan I would have given Idah a bit more time, but even then bearing in mind we play again Friday it was sensible not to run Idah into the ground. Rowe is useless as a loan striker; too weak.

We almost pegged them back in the last 5 mins. I'm not a Wagner fan but didn't see too much wrong with today. If anything, the tactical changes he made in our 6 game run got us where we are today.

Agree, Rowe is not effective in a more central role.

He needs to be on the wing, some of the most successful goal scorers have been in that position. Our own Hucks, but many others, Salah, Henry, . Defenders find them hard to deal with.

 

[TheBaldOne66 690]

2 hours ago, hogesar said:

I mean the subs nearly worked didn't they? Somehow we restricted them to 1 and Hwang nearly scored the equaliser.

Certainly today's game doesn't deserve any comments of inept.

He doesn't exactly have quality to bring off the bench although it is getting better with players returning.

What a phrase “subs nearly worked” how silly is that?

They either work or they don’t, and they didn’t. 
 

[By Hook or Ian crook 917]

I wouldn’t say he’s inept. What I would say is his side plays nothing like how he describes how he wants them to play. His substitutions also are at odds with how he says he wants them to play. So either he’s lying when he speaks about how he wants to play or the team are just not capable of playing how he asks them too. I would say it’s more than Wagner says what he thinks people want to hear but sets the side up in a way he feels will get some kind of result. I feel we are far too passive in games and far too deep when starting off with the ball. 

[ged in the onion bag 855]

The player that such a situation would not benefit is Nunez… it’s understandable to take off one offensive player for a defensive option but two I felt was foolish not only for the negative message but the alien team dynamic.   Nunez relies on options to be at his best, to create…. By taking off Barnes and Rowe (and with Sainz already off), what’s the point of Nunez.    It seemed a very strange decision and probably just needed Gibbs in for Nunez to screen the defence.    It was 0-0, where was the thought to at least give us a competitive chance if we did concede?    Far too negative.

Would we really do much worse by developing Gibbs and Warner in this team?

[Gordon Bennett 786]

11 hours ago, TheBaldOne66 said:

What a phrase “subs nearly worked” how silly is that?

They either work or they don’t, and they didn’t. 
 

Not silly at all. We were a very, very good save away from an unlikely point. 

[A Load of Squit 5,172]

Every manager is tactically inept when their team loses and tactically astute when their team wins.

 

[Jim Smith 2,322]

1 hour ago, A Load of Squit said:

Every manager is tactically inept when their team loses and tactically astute when their team wins.

 

Nope. Wagner is inept when we win as well. We win despite him, not because of him. 

[Nuff Said 5,146]

13 hours ago, TheBaldOne66 said:

What a phrase “subs nearly worked” how silly is that?

They either work or they don’t, and they didn’t. 
 

Why? Is nuance beyond you? (Rhetorical question!).

We lose 1-0 and come close to drawing, that’s “nearly working”. If we got thrashed and lost 6-0 then that’s not working.

[hogesar 9,690]

32 minutes ago, Jim Smith said:

Nope. Wagner is inept when we win as well. We win despite him, not because of him. 

This is where the argument falls down because it's pointless having sensible debate at this point.

In my opinion we have definitely lost games because of him but we've also won games because of him.

We are talking professional football in the second highest tier of English football. Teams certainly don't go on the recent run we've just gone on "in spite" of a manager.

[Dean Coneys boots 1,400]

4 minutes ago, hogesar said:

This is where the argument falls down because it's pointless having sensible debate at this point.

In my opinion we have definitely lost games because of him but we've also won games because of him.

We are talking professional football in the second highest tier of English football. Teams certainly don't go on the recent run we've just gone on "in spite" of a manager.

If a poor manager gets underperforming teams and a good one over performing- I guess that is the question. Which are we doing? Big names and old legs but where should we be 

[Capt. Pants 4,250]

10 hours ago, ged in the onion bag said:

The player that such a situation would not benefit is Nunez… it’s understandable to take off one offensive player for a defensive option but two I felt was foolish not only for the negative message but the alien team dynamic.   Nunez relies on options to be at his best, to create…. By taking off Barnes and Rowe (and with Sainz already off), what’s the point of Nunez.    It seemed a very strange decision and probably just needed Gibbs in for Nunez to screen the defence.    It was 0-0, where was the thought to at least give us a competitive chance if we did concede?    Far too negative.

Would we really do much worse by developing Gibbs and Warner in this team?

Fair comment re Gibbs, however I guess bringing Hanley and Batth on enabled McLean, Sara and Nunez to hold midfield. Gibbs would have come on had we still been level deep into the game.

The changes quickly fell apart because we failed to stop the crosses coming in.

WBA width was a massive issue even with XI on the pitch which we didn't get to grips with.