Wes to sign a new 2yr deal

[mrs miggins 0]

Just to add to my point, Hughton never lost more than twice in a row last season. Adams lost his first 3 games. But on the point of positive and negative, its not good to have too much of either as it blinds your judgment I think.

[crabbycanary 2]

I agree with your last point Mrs M, but do you think, that against Liverpool, and under Hughton, that being 2-0 down after 10 mins, would have led to an almighty spanking, but Adams nearly (and even Liverpool fans agreed with me) pulled off an amazing draw?

Also, vs Chelsea, that we restricted them to only 4 shots on target (I call it a tactical masterpiece, as opposed to negative defensive football) and could have snatched it, if our now departed winger had a good first touch?

[Mr Jenkins 0]

Dear old Mrs Miggins, I would advise you to make your judgement BEFORE adopting a negative or positive view about an issue, if you do it that way round you will find life is a lot less of a mystery.

[mrs miggins 0]

But what i''m saying J is that you like everything so it affects the way you judge something, e.g. getting relegated.

On crabby''s point about Liverpool, firstly we were 2-0 within 10 minutes because of the way Adams set the team up. Everyone could see that, there were so many mistakes he made, it was almost laughable, when they read the team sheet out and the formation we played...it was just embarrassing for a ''manager'' to set up that way against a team who plays its best football in the first half. We came back to score 2 like Hanson said on match of the day because a) we had to and b) liverpool let us back in. However, if Hughton had been 2-0 down, I doubt we''d have seen any sort of proper come back like we did in that game as we didn''t see any before (except west ham, i can''t really think of any more).

With chelsea (like I said at the time) Adams played it almost perfectly (masterstroke playing elmander, definitely his best game for us), its a shame we didn''t do a little bit more in the last 10 minutes but if we had set up like we did in all the other games under Adams, we''d have got mullered as chelsea were still just about in the title race...and of course its the only game we got anything from.

[chicken 0]

It''s also arguable that any managers first game is the first time he will see how his troops are able to work to a plan.The problem in a game like that is that there is ten times the amount of pressure. Adams was to come in and get points, he had to change the way the team were playing, in some cases possibly how a player preferred to play - and to get a result.One thing that people seem to have glossed over so far this summer is the injection of pace Adams has brought into the squad. Grabban is a good, quick forward player. Lafferty is no slouch either for a big man.Last season, you could look at our forwards and wide players and wonder where the pace was going to come from if Redmond wasn''t on the pitch.Against the top teams, having pace is vital. You need to be able to make their defense more cautious about pushing to high a line - unless you pack the midfield and hope that more numbers there will stifle their play. If that is the case you need a couple of midfielders with pace to be able to counter attack feeding off a target man who doesn''t have to have pace himself.

[Mason 47 1,435]

The message I''m taking from this thread is that Adams is Schrodinger''s Manager. Which is an odd one, considering the title.

[crabbycanary 2]

Ah, come on Mrs M, that''s being hard on Adams, Hughton wouldn''t have had the nous to change tactics, Adams did, it wasn''t because ''Liverpool let us back in''. Before when we''ve been 2-0 down to Liverpool, and ''had to'' come back we haven''t, they have been relentless and stomped all over us.

There is praise for Adams for getting the tactics right against an excellent Chelsea, on a sharp learning curve, on a ''horses for courses'' basis?

[Mr Jenkins 0]

Reply to an Existing Message

The message you are replying to: Re: Wes to sign a new 2yr deal

pink''un » Have Your Say » Main Discussion... » Re: Wes to sign a new 2yr deal

mrs miggins wrote the following post at 05/08/2014 11:33 PM:

But what i''m saying J is that you like everything so it affects the way you judge something, e.g. getting relegated.

You are making it up now Miggins, there are many things that displease me about the club, but harping on about them like a spoiled child really doesnt do much good. Do you really think its good to be yet again displaying your anti Adams bias just a few days before the season kicks off? I just dont see your motivation for doing this!

[# 0]

Hooli signing is thankfully only a rumour.

[ZLF 285]

[quote user="ellis206"]

but statistics didn''t lie, didn''t score enough and hardly made any assists in 3 seasons.

[/quote]

 

Premier league facts are elow - brackets are last season equivalents - seems that Pilks is our most creative,  very marginally ahead of the near identical wes and Snoddy - hardly says neither wes nor pilks were not good enough for the prem!

 

Wes             63(10) starts,        8 (1) goals,         11 (1) assists

Snoddy        64 (29)starts,          12 (6) goals,       8 (2) assists

Pilks            58 (10) starts      14 (1)                    5 (1) assists 

howson        56 (23) starts      5 (2) goals,            2 (0) assists 

Redmond      (23) starts           (1) goal                 (3) assists

Fer                 (28) starts            (3) goals               (1) assist 

Johnson       90 (28) starts        6 (3) goals          8 (1) assists

EBennett      32 (1) starts          2 (0) goals        7 (0) assists   

[PurpleCanary 5,609]

[quote user="mrs miggins"]I was at carrow rd cheering like everyone else, but after each match with the mistakes he made, it''s hard to be positive.

Purple, your point about our poor results against the same teams earlier on in the season is a good one, but its about form, teams (especially lower half) are inconsistent, they win one game then lose the next. It''s rare that they win 5 games in a row, its rare that they lose 5 games in a row, especially under hughton, we never did a west ham and lose a large number of games in a row, though Adams tried his best (although I don''t blame him, he was thrown in the deep end)[/quote]We never lost five in a row under Hughton but  between December 22, 2012, and January 19, 2013, we went L,L,L,L,D,L and from September 14, 2013, to October 19, 2013, we went L,L,W,L,L. Given the extreme difficulty of those last five fixtures it is  reasonable to expect Hughton would have produced a similarly bad set of result to those previous ones - ie roughly as bad as those actually achieved by Adams, with at most a point or two either way.

[mrs miggins 0]

crabbycanary wrote the following post at 06/08/2014 7:51 AM:

Ah, come on Mrs M, that''s being hard on Adams, Hughton wouldn''t have had the nous to change tactics, Adams did, it wasn''t because ''Liverpool let us back in''. Before when we''ve been 2-0 down to Liverpool, and ''had to'' come back we haven''t, they have been relentless and stomped all over us.

--------------------------------------------------

I posted the same thing on the post that you responded to. I don''t think if hughton had been 2-0 to liverpool, he would have changed it, he probably would''ve almost accepted defeat.

[mrs miggins 0]

Jenkins wrote the following post at 06/08/2014 8:23 AM:

You are making it up now Miggins, there are many things that displease me about the club, but harping on about them like a spoiled child really doesnt do much good. Do you really think its good to be yet again displaying your anti Adams bias just a few days before the season kicks off? I just dont see your motivation for doing this!

------------------------------------------------

It''s not anti adams, what I said was that no-one knows how he''s going to do in this league as he has never been a manger in the league. No-one can judge him on those 5 games (thankfully for him) going into this season. I''m positive for the season ahead because we have the players and am hopeful Adams be ok, I don''t know. What my point was, was that you can''t say he''s an excellent manager, your relentless positivity has made you say that, there''s no reason to say ''he''s an excellent manager'', he may be, but we don''t know yet.

[MancCanary 0]

[quote user="norfolkngood"]wes is ok but does he make enough happen ? i feel for a player in his position he should score a lot more goals[/quote]

It is a fair question - but I think with Wes in the team the team will always score more goals, so it cancels that out for me. We *never* score the type of goal such as last year when Wes cut it back to the centre for a tap-in by Hooper (wasn''t it?) when everyone expected Wes to shoot - without Wes in the team.

[mrs miggins 0]

purple, you made a great point. That was the season before when we had a great 10 game run and then everything turned to $hit and couldn''t buy a win, it also shows that he could be as bad as adams*. In that season we also had some great results against the big teams, and a few whoopings.

*Adams in the premiership against big teams when just taken over and given the ''poison chalice'', not relating to this season

[Mr Jenkins 0]

Miggins "Now in all these games, perhaps excluding chelsea, the way he set up the team was atrocious, almost scandalous, it was clear he didn''t have a clue how to set up this team up against the big boys",

"The way he set the team up was atrociuos, almost scandalous"

Your words not mine Mrs Miggins, others can judge why you use such language as the season is about to begin.

Yes i do think Adams is an excellent manager, I base my opinion on his role in leading our lads to triumph in the Youth Cup, no mean achievment in my view. I also have confidence in the people that appointed him, i would not expect them to appoint anything less than an excellent manager for our club, especially after the lessons they learned from the appointment of your Mr Nughton.

[Phillip J Fry 0]

[quote user="mrs miggins"] On crabby''s point about Liverpool, firstly we were 2-0 within 10 minutes because of the way Adams set the team up. Everyone could see that, there were so many mistakes he made, it was almost laughable, when they read the team sheet out and the formation we played...it was just embarrassing for a ''manager'' to set up that way against a team who plays its best football in the first half. [/quote]

Whilst I don''t think Adam''s use of the diamond was the correct call against Liverpool, I feel that you are being exceedingly harsh for a logical decision. Liverpool played a diamond against us and Adams made the decision to match the diamond and hopefully negate the advantages of that formation by adopting a similar shape. The problem wasn''t the fact that he chose the diamond, that in itself was entirely understandable, it was the fact that the squad looked so uncomfortable playing in that diamond that caused us problems. He was actually pretty quick to figure this out and made the (correct) change to a 4-2-3-1 which the team looked far more comfortable playing in. It was actually (somewhat) similar to the situation we sometimes found ourselves in under Lambert, who would set the team up wrong at the start of the game and would then make massive changes in order to get the balance right. 

[mrs miggins 0]

Jenkins wrote the following post at 06/08/2014 4:47 PM:"The way he set the team up was atrociuos, almost scandalous"

Your words not mine Mrs Miggins, others can judge why you use such language as the season is about to begin.

Yes i do think Adams is an excellent manager, I base my opinion on his role in leading our lads to triumph in the Youth Cup, no mean achievment in my view. I also have confidence in the people that appointed him, i would not expect them to appoint anything less than an excellent manager for our club, especially after the lessons they learned from the appointment of your Mr Nughton.

---------------------------------------------

You''ve got to start reading my posts J, as I said before and like you''ve pointed out from my post, Adams'' tactics were naive/terrible in all (mostly at liverpool) the games except chelsea. As I said before, no-one can judge him if he''ll be good or bad based on these decisions as they''re against the top teams in the best league in the world. We''re in the championship now and Adams has got his chance to show what he can do. He''s got the the job and the best of luck to him. Hopefully he''ll do well, but at this point no-one can say he''s an excellent manager, your reasons why you think he''s an excellent manager aren''t good enough. I think he will do well because of the team he has at his disposal, but who knows yet.

[Phillip J Fry 0]

[quote user="mrs miggins"]-

You''ve got to start reading my posts J, as I said before and like you''ve pointed out from my post, Adams'' tactics were naive/terrible in all (mostly at liverpool) the games except chelsea. As I said before, no-one can judge him if he''ll be good or bad based on these decisions as they''re against the top teams in the best league in the world. We''re in the championship now and Adams has got his chance to show what he can do. He''s got the the job and the best of luck to him. Hopefully he''ll do well, but at this point no-one can say he''s an excellent manager, your reasons why you think he''s an excellent manager aren''t good enough. I think he will do well because of the team he has at his disposal, but who knows yet.[/quote]

Bullsh*t.

[mrs miggins 0]

Phillip J Fry wrote the following post at 06/08/2014 5:02 PM:

Whilst I don''t think Adam''s use of the diamond was the correct call against Liverpool, I feel that you are being exceedingly harsh for a logical decision. Liverpool played a diamond against us and Adams made the decision to match the diamond and hopefully negate the advantages of that formation by adopting a similar shape. The problem wasn''t the fact that he chose the diamond, that in itself was entirely understandable, it was the fact that the squad looked so uncomfortable playing in that diamond that caused us problems. He was actually pretty quick to figure this out and made the (correct) change to a 4-2-3-1 which the team looked far more comfortable playing in. It was actually (somewhat) similar to the situation we sometimes found ourselves in under Lambert, who would set the team up wrong at the start of the game and would then make massive changes in order to get the balance right.

------------------------------------------------

I think he should be given the credit that he changed to the system we should have started with when we went down 2-0 (despite immediately everyone could see the system we were playing was suicidal), I don''t think Hughton would have changed so drastically if things were going wrong. In terms of matching liverpool with the diamond and playing that way when they had the ball was embarrassing, there was space all over the pitch and our players couldn''t handle it. Adams rightly got stick for making this completely illogical decision where liverpool had the likes of sturridge, gerrard, sterling, etc at their disposal. I don''t think anyone should try and make excuses for him and say that he tried to match liverpool (because that in itself just obviously was not going to work). What can be said, is that he changed it when we went 2-0 down as well as giving the team the urgency to come out in the second half all guns blazing, but the decision to set up the way we did wasn''t good enough.

[Mr Jenkins 0]

You think he will do well because of the team he has at his disposal, what utter tripe.

If he does well it will be because of the decisions he makes and has made.

[Jim Smith 2,366]

How we set up on Sunday will be interesting. Wolves strength appears to be in wide areas so on the face of it not one for the diamond or a game where we should be leaving our full backs too exposed. Could be a game for 4-4-1-1 or 4-3-3.

[mrs miggins 0]

Phillip J Fry wrote the following post at 06/08/2014 5:23 PM:

Bullsh*t.

----------------------------------------

Fulham were awful and we didn''t get tight enough to them, we needed someone who''s likely to score - he starts redmond upfront.

Liverpool- We''ve discussed, terrible

Man U- Do we need to go into how he set up that day and the amount of time we gave them

Chelsea- Did well in this game, spotted that chelsea needed to win, so we tried to catch them on the counter.

Arsenal- incredible that he set up the way he did, you would have thought he would have said with both team with nothing to play for - ''go see what you can do'' instead of treating them like chelsea almost.

[mrs miggins 0]

Jenkins wrote the following post at 06/08/2014 5:25 PM:

You think he will do well because of the team he has at his disposal, what utter tripe.

If he does well it will be because of the decisions he makes and has made.

-------------------------------------------

There are many factors in winning and losing games. We didn''t lose all those games last season solely because our manager wasn''t good enough. It was because -our manager wasn''t good enough, we didn''t have good enough players, we didn''t have the right mentality.

If we go up this season, it will be because of the manager, the players, the team spirit, transfer activity etc. Everyone will get praise, especially the manager and quite rightly so.

[Phillip J Fry 0]

[quote user="mrs miggins"] Adams rightly got stick for making this completely illogical decision where liverpool had the likes of sturridge, gerrard, sterling, etc at their disposal. I don''t think anyone should try and make excuses for him and say that he tried to match liverpool (because that in itself just obviously was not going to work)..[/quote]

What''s one of the biggest advantages of the diamond? The amount of players (and control) it boasts in central areas. A properly executed diamond features 4 players in very central roles and most other formations feature 2/3 central midfielders who have the job of  controlling them. What formations, other than the diamond, can be used to try and combat this? 4-2-3-1, 4-4-2, 4-3-3 etc. all feature the same problem: a lack of central midfielders. Unless you play a diamond (or a similar system like the 4-3-1-2), you will NEVER be able to match tthe opposition in the centre of the pitch. One of Liverpool''s biggest strengths last season was their central midfield options. Sterling, Coutinho, Gerrard, Henderson etc., as you mentioned, were all better players than almost anyone at our disposal and not playing a diamond would be giving these superior players a man advantage in the centre of the pitch. What damage could they potentially do if given an extra man advantage? In that situation, it seems logical to try and match them in the centre to avoid giving them that man advantage, to try and make it so that the individual Liverpool midfielders had to play well to beat their man, rather than relying on a open midfielder that is able to find space as the opposition midfield is always going to be stretched as they are, essentially, a man down. 

Adams mistake was that he believed his players were more comfortable in the diamond than they actually were. The fault was not so much in the tactical decision making but in regards to coaching. The players weren''t comfortable playing a diamond, had a poor defensive shape and made the mistakes that Liverpool calptilised on. 

The decision to play a diamond was good on paper and was, in theory, the best possible approach to the game it just wasn''t the best in practice.

[mrs miggins 0]

I disagree, with the diamond v the diamond like you say you have to match them, but because liverpool play with gerrard (because he''s now older) sitting very deep, almost in line with the back 4, because of this, it often allows their fullback to push on forward

--------------GK-------------

-----CB-----------CB-------

RB-----Gerard------------

Norwich city forward line

-------------------------LB

RM-------------------LM

-----ST--CAM---ST----

It leaves space because the way liverpool play is very clever under Rodgers, it moves the opposition around into places they don''t want to be.

To combat this we needed to pack the midfield and stick the person that played behind the striker in the CAM position, he needed to stick to gerrard like glue. Obviously there''s the saying ''everyones a manager.'' but its just so blindly obvious. Even if the manager didn''t play the way i would have, there''s ''things not to do v liverpool'' ...he did every single one of them.

[Mr Jenkins 0]

Miggins is clearly a far better tactician than Adams, in her own mind!

[mrs miggins 0]

the $hit diagram is just showing (badly) that because gerrard drops from midfield into the defence to spray th ball often out wide, it pushes us up whilst one of their full backs can bomb on. (i know it pretty simple but i just thought i''d mention it J, sorry)

[Mr Jenkins 0]

Apology accepted, i understand that you have a downer on our manager, hopefully after a few games when he demonstrates how good he is you will feel able to change your opinion of him.

In the mean time, resist the temptation to make these negative comments, its not helpfull, there are plenty of others out there who relish that mantel as I am sure you appreciate.

[Cheap Cheap Cheap Canaries 0]

[quote user="Jenkins"]Miggins is clearly a far better tactician than Adams, in her own mind![/quote]How anybody can call Adams a manager is beyond me , to call him an excellent one is totally insane . I cannot see him lasting untill Xmas and thats with one of the strongest sides in the league , already he is benching the best striker at the club .Miggins is right his 5 games in charge were a disaster and we came away from Chelsea with the media shocked at how a team needing a win to have any chance of staying up could play 90 mins for a draw , as for the no show at Old Trafford ? just where was Adams hiding that day .Ridiculous appointment the day it was made and still is , lose at Portman Road and his popularity will be zero .