Ashley Barnes says we were crap

[cambridgeshire canary 6,769]

And he's not wrong is he?

 

[Mr Angry 1,570]

I bet he was frustrated at getting fouled so often with the referee not giving him any decisions.

[Indy 3,310]

Well he was on the pitch for the full game and could have made a better impact! Was missing the last 20 minutes!

[Branston Pickle 3,675]

1 hour ago, Mr Angry said:

I bet he was frustrated at getting fouled so often with the referee not giving him any decisions.

Quite so - especially when he gave a f-k for almost every challenge on their guy in the first half, I thought there were 3-4 that he missed on Barnes in the second.

He’s not wrong about the schoolboy errors - Gunn was very poor for their first; conceding the throw followed by crap cover from it for the second. There were some decent bits in between, but defensive errors are still proving very costly.

[canarydan23 4,060]

Bloody 20%er

[Capt. Pants 4,271]

I'm always a bit wary when a player chooses to highlight the errors of others, especially when they haven't done much themselves.

Barnes isn't wrong though and is right to call it out I suppose.

Otherthan our 2 goals, one of which was due to QPR falling asleep from a corner, we created very little.

[Robert N. LiM 4,464]

This sort of stuff is better kept in the dressing room if you ask me

[......and Smith must score. 1,355]

I thought we drew yesterday so only cost two points Ashley.

Every cloud…….

[Corbs1 90]

Well, if you talk the talk, you have to walk the walk. There were 2 instance’s yesterday when he was on the end of a long ball, got sandwiched between 2 defenders. It was not pretty, in fact slightly comical, both times he appeared to be looking for the foul rather than for the ball. Probably sensible. Towards the end of the game he forced their keeper into a good save, I was impressed he controlled ball, and got shot away, so have to give credit there. 

[Addick/Canary 76]

1 hour ago, Capt. Pants said:

 

Otherthan our 2 goals, one of which was due to QPR falling asleep from a corner, we created very little.

If you watch the highlights, you will see Ben Gibson "marshalling" 3 of their players out of the way to create the hole into which McLean places his shot! The 'Barnes Effect' rubbing off on others?

[Haus 259]

1 hour ago, Branston Pickle said:

Quite so - especially when he gave a f-k for almost every challenge on their guy in the first half, I thought there were 3-4 that he missed on Barnes in the second.

He’s not wrong about the schoolboy errors - Gunn was very poor for their first; conceding the throw followed by crap cover from it for the second. There were some decent bits in between, but defensive errors are still proving very costly.

He dived a bit in front of the ref in the first half.  Then the ref didn't give him any decisions after that.

[canarybubbles 1,934]

I know most people will disagree with me, but I really wish he wasn't at our club.   

[Ken Hairy 3,779]

Him being on the pitch for 97 minutes was crap too.

[Feedthewolf 4,865]

4 hours ago, Indy said:

Well he was on the pitch for the full game and could have made a better impact! Was missing the last 20 minutes!

Not his fault that the coach elected to keep him on as a lone frontman (clearly not his strongest suit even when he's fully fit) when we had a hungry new signing on the bench itching to put himself about.

[S_81 829]

The biggest schoolboy error was his boss not putting Sydney on when taking Sarge off. 

[Feedthewolf 4,865]

5 minutes ago, S_81 said:

The biggest schoolboy error was his boss not putting Sydney on when taking Sarge off. 

It's an odd one. Sarge came off on 68 minutes, so it's weird that he wouldn't trust his new signing to play 22 minutes better than a tiring journeyman who's never been effective as a lone striker anyway. And even more bizarre to change our left-backs over with 10 minutes left rather than put SVH on for Barnes, who was clearly out of energy and ideas playing as a lone frontman.

[S_81 829]

7 minutes ago, Feedthewolf said:

It's an odd one. Sarge came off on 68 minutes, so it's weird that he wouldn't trust his new signing to play 22 minutes better than a tiring journeyman who's never been effective as a lone striker anyway. And even more bizarre to change our left-backs over with 10 minutes left rather than put SVH on for Barnes, who was clearly out of energy and ideas playing as a lone frontman.

It’s the kind of decision making that he does far too often with his subs. He’s more often than not incapable of changing a game for the better from the bench. And he has mitigation given he’s had periods of the season where what was on offer from the bench was limited. But yesterday there was a really obvious sub to make to improve us up top and he failed to make it. And I’m not buying some of the nonsense said on here that Sydney couldn’t play 20mins. Or even 10 for that matter.
It’s the kind of management that makes me believe he’s incapable of getting us promoted. 

[Feedthewolf 4,865]

6 minutes ago, S_81 said:

It’s the kind of decision making that he does far too often with his subs. He’s more often than not incapable of changing a game for the better from the bench. And he has mitigation given he’s had periods of the season where what was on offer from the bench was limited. But yesterday there was a really obvious sub to make to improve us up top and he failed to make it. And I’m not buying some of the nonsense said on here that Sydney couldn’t play 20mins. Or even 10 for that matter.
It’s the kind of management that makes me believe he’s incapable of getting us promoted. 

I've pretty much already written this season off, to be honest. This isn't the kind of football I can get behind; it's marginally better than Dean Smith's, but it doesn't have a true identity or belief. I think we were all spoiled with Daniel Farke; he set the bar too high for what can realistically be achieved with a negligible budget and a self-funding model.

I remain optimistic that Knapper's experience at Arsenal will lead to him insisting upon a more expansive, attacking style of football and a change of head coach in the summer. If we did somehow get promoted under Wagner, we would get absolutely annihilated in the PL.

[BigManInTheBarclay 75]

Barnes was ball-watching most of the game, he's bloody useless most of the time. We'd have been better off with SvH on for the 2nd half. 

[canarybubbles 1,934]

9 minutes ago, BigManInTheBarclay said:

Barnes was ball-watching most of the game, he's bloody useless most of the time. We'd have been better off with SvH on for the 2nd half. 

Or too busy picking fights with the opponents. People say he's like Holt. No, he's not. Holt was a smart cookie who deliberately and cleverly wound up the other team whilst almost always remaining totally in control of himself. Barnes is a lout who goes looking for fights and is easily wound up by opposing players, often to our side's disadvantage (e.g. the Millwall game).

Edited February 11 by canarybubbles

[Indy 3,310]

1 hour ago, Feedthewolf said:

Not his fault that the coach elected to keep him on as a lone frontman (clearly not his strongest suit even when he's fully fit) when we had a hungry new signing on the bench itching to put himself about.

Indeed and that’s why I’m starting to think his best for us is off the bench! Last 20.

[Feedthewolf 4,865]

1 minute ago, Indy said:

Indeed and that’s why I’m starting to think his best for us is off the bench! Last 20.

To be fair, he's dovetailed quite nicely with Sarge since the latter came back from injury. I still think he's a decent squad player who can make a good impact for us, but shifting him into the lone striker role with a more withdrawn midfield when he's already played 70 minutes... er, that's not the thing.

[hogesar 9,717]

Barnes wasn't the problem yesterday and Sargent will testify to enjoying his football far more with him on the pitch.

[Indy 3,310]

8 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Barnes wasn't the problem yesterday and Sargent will testify to enjoying his football far more with him on the pitch.

Barnes was a problem as he was falling over, he held the ball up a few times but contributed next to nothing, especially the last 20! I watched the highlights today and I just can’t fathom why he’s starting ahead of a young hungry striker! He’s not prolific and hasn’t played anywhere near the standard required since his first three games!

I’m not blaming him, he’s what he is and his best days are long gone, it’s the position we find ourselves in, a lot of old players well past their best! Little wonder Sainz, Rowe, Sarah the younger players are the ones carrying the threat!

Barnes is what he is and I for one hope to see more of VH as a big unit with youth on his side I hope he will offer more to our game, still to be seen.

[hogesar 9,717]

2 minutes ago, Indy said:

Barnes was a problem as he was falling over, he held the ball up a few times but contributed next to nothing, especially the last 20! I watched the highlights today and I just can’t fathom why he’s starting ahead of a young hungry striker! He’s not prolific and hasn’t played anywhere near the standard required since his first three games!

I’m not blaming him, he’s what he is and his best days are long gone, it’s the position we find ourselves in, a lot of old players well past their best! Little wonder Sainz, Rowe, Sarah the younger players are the ones carrying the threat!

Barnes is what he is and I for one hope to see more of VH as a big unit with youth on his side I hope he will offer more to our game, still to be seen.

Barnes "falling over" was often him competing against 2 cbs or a dm + cb and doing enough to give us a chance of picking up second balls all whilst giving Sargent a bit of space. 

Like I say, ask Sargent and he would want Barnes playing...

[Feedthewolf 4,865]

2 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Barnes "falling over" was often him competing against 2 cbs or a dm + cb and doing enough to give us a chance of picking up second balls all whilst giving Sargent a bit of space. 

Like I say, ask Sargent and he would want Barnes playing...

Yeah, I agree with that. But when Sargent was brought off, a tiring Barnes as a lone striker was a really dumb call. Especially when we had a big, strong, hungry new signing on the bench who was itching to get on and show what he can do.

[S_81 829]

1 hour ago, Feedthewolf said:

I've pretty much already written this season off, to be honest. This isn't the kind of football I can get behind; it's marginally better than Dean Smith's, but it doesn't have a true identity or belief. I think we were all spoiled with Daniel Farke; he set the bar too high for what can realistically be achieved with a negligible budget and a self-funding model.

I remain optimistic that Knapper's experience at Arsenal will lead to him insisting upon a more expansive, attacking style of football and a change of head coach in the summer. If we did somehow get promoted under Wagner, we would get absolutely annihilated in the PL.

I’m with you. I think it’s all a false dawn given how poor a tactician Wagner is. Speaks more about the quality of the league that we are still in touching distance. My fear is he’s still in charge next season. 

[hogesar 9,717]

4 minutes ago, Feedthewolf said:

Yeah, I agree with that. But when Sargent was brought off, a tiring Barnes as a lone striker was a really dumb call. Especially when we had a big, strong, hungry new signing on the bench who was itching to get on and show what he can do.

Yep, but he's a new signing who has been with us for a week. A young lad in a different country and different league away from his family. He may not be ready, he may not understand his role. He gets thrown in by Wagner in a pivotal moment and if he sinks, fans are on his back and he's got a real hard job on his hands.

I remember Farke getting a lot of stick for not putting new signings in immediately and spoke about it quite well towards the end of his tenure.

[Feedthewolf 4,865]

3 minutes ago, S_81 said:

I’m with you. I think it’s all a false dawn given how poor a tactician Wagner is. Speaks more about the quality of the league that we are still in touching distance. My fear is he’s still in charge next season. 

I'm going to go out on a limb and say there's no chance he'll be here next season unless we get promoted (which I think is hugely unlikely).

Delia and Michael aren't daft, they could see how unified the club was with Farke at the helm. They care about the club, and they know that the sporting director/head coach combo can work if executed well. I am confident that with Knapper's experience at Arsenal and acknowledged belief in statistics, that he has a bigger and better plan than trying to hoodwink our way into the playoffs with Wagner at the helm.

[Ken Hairy 3,779]

1 hour ago, canarybubbles said:

Or too busy picking fights with the opponents. People say he's like Holt. No, he's not. Holt was a smart cookie who deliberately and cleverly wound up the other team whilst almost always remaining totally in control of himself. Barnes is a lout who goes looking for fights and is easily wound up by opposing players, often to our side's disadvantage (e.g. the Millwall game).

100% this 👍