Pimlico_Villa

Really does not look like players want to play for Smith. Probably why he brought on his good pal Whelan. 

As refreshing as it was to see tactical preparation for a game when he first came in, he is showing that the job is just too big for him. He can’t even inspire the players either.

Much more suited to a team without expectation. No doubt his post match will be full of insight and analysis, yet once again showing he can’t do it on the pitch. He is the football equivalent of Management Speak. 

Would make a great Sky commentator or as part of Chelsea’s technical team. 

I think the EFL, who have the discretion here, need to tread very carefully. Any punishment they apply to teams breaching FFP will act as a precedent, and if it was applied to the letter of the law then I think almost every team in the League would be vulnerable. 

They should take a common sense approach. The philosophy (apart from protecting the top Clubs) is essentially to ensure that Clubs don’t run themselves into the ground.

We are a very well capitalised Club that can sustain these losses (which, BTW, are predominantly only technical losses in Accounting terms, not actual cash losses) because of our Owners and face no existential risk because of that. 

If it came to scrutiny, we’d be able to demonstrate this clearly. I also think FFP will increasingly face more and more criticism to the point where they will have to revise the restrictions on Owners investing capital into Clubs. There is just no way that the current restrictions are fair and are clearly designed to stop Clubs breaking into the upper echelons by virtue of having wealthy owners. 

Legally, as well, I think FFP is built on very fragile ground. Our owners, Wes in particular, are incredibly astute, commercially (I’ve worked with Fortress before and they are KILLERS!) so I’m really not worried about FFP. 

Maybe, this level of physical intensity PLUS the levels of mental concentration needed for this system is a bit much for those players that have played under Bruce. 

With Bruce, it was just a case of working hard physically, but now we have to do that AND concentrate/adhere to strict, likely highly detailed tactics. 

Given we’ve had 5 games in 14 days, it is maybe that combination that is causing the fatigue. It does look like an effort issue, but I just don’t think these players are lazy and would like to give them the benefit of the doubt. 

Good news, is that there is a week to recover and that the players should continue to adapt. It can only be doing them good and when they sort it we’ll be strong. Might just take time. 

4 minutes ago, hippo said:

Where did you hear this PV ?

Some lads that were at the game. 

11 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

I know nothing of any arguments with the manager  - I was there today but on the other side of the pitch. Was there a row?

Smith has laid into the players a bit in his post match interview and there's an element of truth in it - but it's him that got it wrong today - playing a midfield two that included one tired player and one old player meant we gave them the middle of the park - playing a striker that couldn't hold the ball up compounded that error - we were beaten tactically today in my opinion, not on effort, on tactics.

Smith got today all wrong. There's a lot of work to do on the training ground this week. 

 

Apparently, after the second goal they looked to be having words. Not sure there is anything in it, but didn’t like the sound of it. 

37 minutes ago, villalad21 said:

 

Great to see him picking up on certain players not putting the effort in. I really do wonder why that is, as I don’t see any masssive Pogba-like egos. 

1 hour ago, KHV said:

People often say Jedinak isn't a Dean Smith type player and wouldn't fit in. Dean Smith teams concede 60+ goals a season. 

Maybe Smith needs to think about a Jedinak type player. 

I think he is exactly what we need in front of the back 4.

Just saying......

Particularly now teams have worked out they can just knock it over the top. 

I didn’t go today, so wouldn’t know, but how heated was the argument between Terry and Smith? Hearing various reports. 

34 minutes ago, TRO said:

sorry Mark, I disagree.

maybe we are talking in different interpretations of work rate.

shadow boxing ( if I may use that term), or standing off is not my idea of work rate....any team can run all day ineffectively and claim work rate....shadowing the opposition and not getting any physical contact on them is not work rate to me...idle running or hiding is not work rate either.

I seen it with Bruce and I still see it.....not blaming either, because I don't know where the problem lies....just know it exists.

I agree with you, about Quality, you must have that too, but it has to be supported by application....during the period you mention 80/81/82 arguably Ipswich had the better individual quality, but we had the 110% workrate Ron professed and was often derided for in the press....You see teams like Blues above us with lesser quality, Cardiff last season had lesser quality, depending on what that means.....They get stuck in to the physical challenge and grind results out.

The City v Liverpool game was a spectacle of the finer arts of the game, but how many seen the sheer intensity and durability of the physical battle....Fernandino, may be one of the best defensive Midfield talents in the world, but his commitment is phenomenal and his close physical endeavour is mind blowing.....Those multi- millionare footballer are the ones with an excuse to not get hurt, but crikey, they were all full one, even Neil Warnock and Dave Bassett/Joe Kinnear would have been proud.

Off the ball our commitment is questionable imo.....I believe it will hamper us from achieving what we all want....unless we change it.

I am loving some of the offensive play and its a credit to Tammy that he has 16 goals to date, that is unprecedented in recent times and we also know teams concede, we all know that, my problem right now , we concede so easily by yielding space and standing off the opponents, we concede so readily and it seems the word has got round....no one is afraid of taking us on....Its the manner of how we concede is the main issue.

I understand that we are in a building process, I just hope we recognise the issue and buy The right type of players to address it.....we have changed players for 10 years and not really changed much...sure stats move around a bit, but some of the same issues are still there for me.

I am not having a go at Dean Smith, he has been here much too short a time....his initial 6 or so games were great....the recent ones are iffy, we all know Jack and Axel have been massive misses and the Goal keeper is not of sufficient quality.

If I am being brutally honest with you....I don't see a really top quality ( for this league) team in this division, like Wolves, Newcastle or Brighton.....what I do see in the teams at the top is Hard work and a physicality that says we want to win...a resilience to grind out a result.

PS not going today, not in the right frame of mind....still ****ing fuming over Freeman and Eze's goals.

Not to labour the point about style, but when we do play so expansively all it takes is one player in the midfield not too work hard and it costs us. We saw it in our last game, Hourihane ambling around with no intention whatsoever to get a tackle in, or even get close to, their midfield. Before their goals, Hourihane had several let offs with Eze as well. 

Play that expansively, and we need grit, tenacity and desire elsewhere on the pitch. This is why we could do with some nasty thugs in the middle. We’re too nice at times. 

13 minutes ago, TRO said:

Have you been watching the games....we stood off while they ploughed a furrough....the first 2 was shocking.

and it could easily have been the same against the blues.

we are conceding silly goals in such a shockingly passive fashion, its totally unacceptable.

sure we have injuries....but players can get there foot in or make an effort to put a player off their stride, if they can't then they should be miles away from our team.

The seemingly acceptance of our conceding is frightening.

It all comes down to attitude and a desire to win. The top clubs have it and install it in their youngsters: Terry has it and you can see it in Tammy’s desire, but it is missing from every other player we have. 

As a Club, we are still rebuilding and next step has to be for us to have that winning attitude. We can have all the technical ability in the world, but we absolutely need that competitive spirit and desire to win. 

If the player accepts himself that he is not Top 6 quality, then I can see why the Dingles would turn his head given they could likely be playing Europa Leaugue. That, and the fact that they’ve got CL quality midfielders that can service him, I can see why he might see them as a proposition. 

If the decision was just down to Chelsea, then no way he goes to the Dingles. 

16 hours ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said:

Please enlighten me as to how those "defensive problems" could be addressed with the limited defensive personell we have had to contend with?

Should he have mended Jack, Tuanzebe, Taylor, signed a couple CBs and Midfield enforcers illegaly?

Could he have stopped the poor individual errors by limited players we are actively trying to replace?

You are acting as if this is an OGS replacing Mourinho situation.

99 percent of us are frustrated but have kept our grasp on reality ffs.

Have you not for one moment considered that it might not just be a personnel issue, per se, and that maybe it could just be the obvious downside of a (naively) over-expansive style? I would argue that a back four comprised of Chester and Tuenzebe, albeit with full backs playing out of position, is still competent enough not to concede 5 goals at Home against a team unlikely to be challenging for automatics. Add to that the fact that we have one of the world’s greatest ever defenders with us day to day on the training pitch and that players can, beleive it or not, actually be coached, then we should have conceded less. 

Moreover, even if it was overwhelmingly a personnel issue as you claim, the system could have been tweaked to compensate: for example, playing a flatter, more padded out midfield that makes us tighter and less exposed. The players benaeath the ones you mention are still competent enough to play at this level and not concede so much as they played last season - its the system and tactics that have hurt us. Just ask fans of teams that we’ve played. 

I know certain people on here won’t be able to even contemplate this, but it is there for all to see, objectively, and perfectly manifested in results and our league position. Peoples have their coping mechanisms that blind them, and and the fact that we are all enjoying scoring lots of goals for once, probably blinds people even more. 

That shouldn’t stop people being allowed to question obvious mis-steps, unless the rules have been updated on VT to appease some of the wannabe dictators on here. Fine for people to disagree with me, that’s the whole point of a forum like this, but some of the replies on here have been embarrassing to those that make them - i.e. New Hope

For what its worth, I stil prefer this attacking style to what Bruce served up.  

11 hours ago, S-Platt said:

Also he is trying to get meat and 2 veg players brought by the previous manager to play the beautiful game.  Give him the chance to sign footballers and things will improve.  

In general, I actually think the players we have aren’t that basic, at least for this League.

Hourihane aside, they are more than competent, perhaps even good and likely quite coachable. I don’t think we have a single player that could not be coached to play Smith’s style. 

8 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

To be fair you do have a point. He does talk a good game. But I think he’s allowed too until he can get some of his own players in. 

In terms of performances and results you’re being harsh. I only think we have deserved to lose one game since he took over and that was against Leeds. We should have beaten WBA and got 4 points against QPR instead of 1. We should have got a point against Norwich. 

The results will come because the performances haven’t been bad.  We are creating a lot of chances every game. 

It’s not like he has rubbish players to work with though is it? He does need his own players, but given his style is very attack- focused (which I like), he should have enough in our current squad to implement his style, particularly if he can coach players. It’s the coaching part, defensively, that he needs to do to truly earn his corn as no Manager save for Pep will ever have their ideal players in every position. 

Maybe I’m taking a more cynical view on our performances and being guided too much by the actual result and league position. I acknowledge that in parts we have been wonderful, but on balance I haven’t been too impressed. At least not as much as everyone else seems to be, anyway. 

8 minutes ago, A'Villan said:

Now that was written with a lot more clarity and insight than what you had posted earlier (apart from the clown calling). I don't expect everyone to agree with you but would be surprised if anyone were overly critical of what you've just written.

I've posted more than a handful of times on why we can be optimistic about the brand of football being implemented by Smith getting us the results we need in order to be in the promotion contest at seasons end.

You speak of hot air, well, don't take this the wrong way, you venting frustration due to results not being adequate, without investigating the process that led to it, doesn't make for a true account of what has transpired or what we can expect, and could just as easily be construed as hot air as what Smith is saying.

Thanks.

Although, the frustration I have vented here is not simply down to results; what I find so antagonising is how Smith can evidently identify the problems but then not actually address them! 

Respectively, investigating the process that led to these results - which you advise me to do - likely warrants an entirely different post and would be pure speculation. The point being made is purposely more of a simplistic observation: he can see what is causing us not to win games and he should address it. And it is that which I find antagonising. 

I actually think Chelsea could ultimately get more than the £18M being touted for Tammy and aren’t in a desperate enough position to have to sell him in Jan. 

Much more sensible to preserve their optionality, see if he can do the biz in the PL and for England and then get a higher fee for him in a season or two. 

As much as £18M sounds - we’d absolutely love that amount now - they’ll not be worrying about missing out on it.

Hes scoring goals, enjoying his football and clearly developing as a player. As such, better to leave him with us. 

2 hours ago, New_Hope said:

Why give the attention seeker time if day guys?  I've only read two of his posts in the last 2 days and both were uneducated and poorly thought out drivel.....just ignore him.

Wondered how long it would be before a clown like you came out and tried to hush any opinion to the contrary. Really not surprised at all. Tolerance on here for questioning a Manager is horrific. It’s perfectly legitimate to question a Manager and what he is doing, particularly when our results and League position are what they are; it’s a DISCUSSION forum. 

The points I made are entirely fair: he continues to talk a good game - granted, with much more tactical insight and intelligence than Bruce - but then does not address what he says himself are the problems. 

Performances against Stoke, Leeds, Preston and on Tuesday, in my opinion, were not good enough because of tactical missteps and team selection.

It’s nice to see that we have a Manager that is watching the same game as me, for once. Maybe it’s because we have had to endure so much dross for managers over the years that people are enjoying Smith. I am too, I just think that he needs to start addressing the issues, tactically, otherwise it is just hot air. 

For me, Smith is showing a worrying trend that was prevalent under Bruce: identify exactly what went wrong in the post-match interview, but then do absolutely nothing about it. So antagonising to see.

Worried we are being duped by him as for all his talk results, style and performance have been terrible, not to mention League positioning. 

Really beginning to question whether he is all gloss and no substance. 

16 minutes ago, mjmooney said:

How do you know we haven't lined up a left back? It's January 3rd! 

 

Given the upmost importance of one, I thought we would have one line up to bring in straight away. At the moment, there aren’t even any rumours. 

The fact that we haven’t lined up a LB shows that the Club has written off this season. It’s a shame as we are only 11 points off the autos, but probably more sensible for the long term. 

13 hours ago, srsmithusa said:

largely true, I'm not a Hutton hater, but our LB position has needed to improve for much longer that just the time Hutton has been playing there.   Our RB position has been weak too, but Bree MIGHT be the answer there.  Too soon to tell IMO.

Hutton has some great strengths, attitude and effort being near the top, but his overall positioning and decision making tends to gift opponents 2 or more gilded chances a match.

Not sure Bree offers enough going forward to be honest. Probably sound defensively, but we need full backs that can attack, particularly given our MF likes to sit so incredibly deep and our wingers so wide and high. 

The fact that he got overtaken by the player who scored their second yesterday is truly appalling and something he should be fined for. 

He is sometimes effective from set pieces but offers absolutely nothing in open play. Unfit, slow, and can't play a forward ball. 

As refreshing as it is after Bruce to have a Manager clearly recognise and acknowledge mistakes being made in his post-match, we are seeing Smith talk a good game but not generate the results. 

If Bruce had played the same style and approach that Smith elected to play yesterday then we would have been bemoaning him relentlessly. 

On the point about him possibly adjusting the system to suit the players, I think that is a fair criticism. I really didn't like his rationale for playing Whelan. He said he'd been working hard in training - whilst that is nice to hear, and I suppose all the player can do, it shows that tactics come second, which I thought Smith was above. 

The next 3 League games are entirely winnable and a chance to make up ground on the pack above us. Anything less than 9 points and I'd be questioning Smith. He needs to show more that he can do his homework on the opposition and devise a game plan to beat them. 

We also need more variety in attack. Yesterday's opposition were doubling and even trebling up on our wingers and Smith should have reacted to that and played down the middle more. Its this sort of shortsightedness, coupled with consistently conceding pathetic goals, that worries me with Smith. 

Think he would be much more effective as an impact sub, not a starter.