GENTLEMAN Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 Make no mistake the national media are enjoying our fall, it is a good laugh for them because we are giving them great material on-the-pitch and off it. I'm pretty sure the national media don't care that much that we've been a laughing stock for the past few years. Why should they? The fact is we are team that is constantly fighting relegation, playing poor football, have fans who are fed up, an owner who wants to sell and has no interest in the club, a manager who most people either don't want here or just think we can't get any better given our situation. Most people couldn't give a shit if we were to be relegated and the national media are no different. Our biggest success in the last 15 years is getting to two cup finals and losing both of them! Of course history is important but as of today it has no bearing on our future. If we are relegated (could very well happen) we'll probably just become another Bolton, Leeds, Nottingham Forest, Blackburn for the next 5 years at least. We can't keep fighting relegation every season, we will lose one of the battles. I'm not disputing whether the media "care" about us or not, I don't think they do. I'm totally fine with that fact as it won't alter my support for the club. But they're definitely having some fun with our fall (or what they believe to be our fall). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 If we lose the next 3 that will be 12 points from 20 games. An average of 0.6 points a game, which over a season would get you 22 points. Does playing quite well and putting up a fight mean anything when you see the return of a period of games longer than half a season? If we lose the next 3 games we'd also then probably need to average a point a game for the rest of the season to survive. I'm not sure we've got it in us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted January 15, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted January 15, 2015 If we lose the next 3 that will be 12 points from 20 games. An average of 0.6 points a game, which over a season would get you 22 points. Does playing quite well and putting up a fight mean anything when you see the return of a period of games longer than half a season? Not when we judge the season as a whole. But in isolation, i.e. how I will be reacting to those games when they happen, then yes playing well and putting up a fight means something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
useless Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 (edited) If they don't put up a fight it'll be the players' fault and not Lamert's. Edited January 15, 2015 by useless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ermie123 Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 We were not quite Southampton then as they now have a new stadium and have been relegated and then promoted and now they have a decent side after all they sold the best part of a team in the summer and they are doing better with what they have now than last season and with a different manager! His point was that like Southampton we were once challenging for the top 4 and flying high but unlike Southampton most of the money was spent poorly, we didn't have a manager anywhere near as good as Koeman and we didn't have a youth setup as good as Southampton's (which is probably the best in the country). That's what i was trying to say. MON was actually a false dawn as it were for us and you really cannot blame Learner for being stingy with the cash as he has had his hands well and truly burnt by MON!! Can everybody remember Habib Bye on £50.0000 a week, Curtis Davies for £12 million, he even signed Chris bloody Sutton! Then got rid of Gary Cahill who now plays for Chelski and England!! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 If they don't put up a fight it'll be the players' fault and not Lamert's. If they do put up a fight is that down to the players and not the manager? If we lose the next 3 that will be 12 points from 20 games. An average of 0.6 points a game, which over a season would get you 22 points. Does playing quite well and putting up a fight mean anything when you see the return of a period of games longer than half a season? Not when we judge the season as a whole. But in isolation, i.e. how I will be reacting to those games when they happen, then yes playing well and putting up a fight means something. Fair enough. Putting up a fight should be the minimum IMO. But for me I'm going to need more than fight to make me believe we will pick up enough points to survive. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont_do_it_doug. Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 (edited) If they don't put up a fight it'll be the players' fault and not Lamert's. How does that work then? Is it not the managers squad and thus his job to motivate them? If they're not motivated then it means he has lost the dressing room, which should mean losing his job. They'll fight. They'll be shit too mind. Edited January 15, 2015 by dont_do_it_doug. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GENTLEMAN Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 . Make no mistake the national media are enjoying our fall, it is a good laugh for them because we are giving them great material on-the-pitch and off it. And yet you constantly defend the manager who serves up the shit that is causing us to be a laughing stock. Nice cherry picking Risso, you need to take a look in the mirror. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
useless Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 If they don't put up a fight it'll be the players' fault and not Lamert's. How does that work then? Is it not the managers squad and thus his job to motivate them? If they're not motivated then it means he has lost the dressing room, which should mean losing his job. They'll fight. They'll be shit too mind. So if you were playing football and didn't put up a fight (not saying you wouldn't just an hypothetical situation) would you blame the manager or accept that it's your own fault, seeing as your in control of your own actions. Of course it's the players fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 If they don't put up a fight it'll be the players' fault and not Lamert's. How does that work then? Is it not the managers squad and thus his job to motivate them? If they're not motivated then it means he has lost the dressing room, which should mean losing his job. They'll fight. They'll be shit too mind. So if you were playing football and didn't put up a fight (not saying you wouldn't just an hypothetical situation) would you blame the manager or accept that it's your own fault, seeing as your in control of your own actions. Of course it's the players fault. So using this logic if they put up a fight we should ignore it in relation to anything positive for the manager? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post markavfc40 Posted January 15, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted January 15, 2015 (edited) If we lose the next 3 that will be 12 points from 20 games. An average of 0.6 points a game, which over a season would get you 22 points. Does playing quite well and putting up a fight mean anything when you see the return of a period of games longer than half a season? Not when we judge the season as a whole. But in isolation, i.e. how I will be reacting to those games when they happen, then yes playing well and putting up a fight means something. Unfortunately I have gone way past being able to look at games in isolation now. I think had we have say taken 7 points from the last four games then I could have looked at the next three in isolation and have almost seen them as freebies and anything we get is a bonus and I'll be happy as long as we put up a decent showing and good fight. However since the first four games our pretty much non stop run of poor results, with the very odd success, and poor performances resulting in 12 points taken from a possible 51 means a line has been drawn for me. I can't just see these next three games without seeing them in the context of what has been a very poor season. It matters not one iota if we perform gallantly if we lose. I can no longer take solace from admirable displays and the reasons are two fold. Firstly if we fail to take any points we are going to find ourselves in the bottom three very soon and secondly us performing admirably against the better sides, as has been shown, is no indication of any improvement and that we will then take points against the poorer sides. Despite me thinking we have the best squad of players we have had in the last 3 - 4 years I am now seriously concerned that we may well drop this season and the only thing that can change that opinion is points on the board as gallant displays aren't going to do it. Edited January 15, 2015 by markavfc40 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sexbelowsound Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 If they don't put up a fight it'll be the players' fault and not Lamert's. How does that work then? Is it not the managers squad and thus his job to motivate them? If they're not motivated then it means he has lost the dressing room, which should mean losing his job. They'll fight. They'll be shit too mind. So if you were playing football and didn't put up a fight (not saying you wouldn't just an hypothetical situation) would you blame the manager or accept that it's your own fault, seeing as your in control of your own actions. Of course it's the players fault. So using this logic if they put up a fight we should ignore it in relation to anything positive for the manager? You can see what he is saying though. You can't physically make someone do something. I get your point that if the manager isn't responsible for the negatives then he can't be responsible for the positives though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
useless Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 If they don't put up a fight it'll be the players' fault and not Lamert's. How does that work then? Is it not the managers squad and thus his job to motivate them? If they're not motivated then it means he has lost the dressing room, which should mean losing his job. They'll fight. They'll be shit too mind. So if you were playing football and didn't put up a fight (not saying you wouldn't just an hypothetical situation) would you blame the manager or accept that it's your own fault, seeing as your in control of your own actions. Of course it's the players fault. So using this logic if they put up a fight we should ignore it in relation to anything positive for the manager? Players are responsible for their own effort not sure how anyone could disagree with that. A Coach can get them even more fired up but ultimately it's up to the players once on the pitch. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 (edited) To some extent but then managers can have an effect on players in terms of confidence and morale. How many times do you hear comments about players running through a brick wall for a manager. As a professional athlete you'd expect them to go out and give everything but we all know from real life there are plenty of issues that can effect performance. I believe a good manager can have an effect on that and to be fair to Lambert players are prepared to fight for him. Edited January 15, 2015 by DCJonah 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 If they don't put up a fight it'll be the players' fault and not Lamert's.How does that work then? Is it not the managers squad and thus his job to motivate them? If they're not motivated then it means he has lost the dressing room, which should mean losing his job. They'll fight. They'll be shit too mind. So if you were playing football and didn't put up a fight (not saying you wouldn't just an hypothetical situation) would you blame the manager or accept that it's your own fault, seeing as your in control of your own actions. Of course it's the players fault. So using this logic if they put up a fight we should ignore it in relation to anything positive for the manager? You can see what he is saying though. You can't physically make someone do something. I get your point that if the manager isn't responsible for the negatives then he can't be responsible for the positives though. I agree to some extent but then if you have a player who isn't going to do that then you replace him. If you've got too many players choosing not to fight then you have to ask why and what message they're sending? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sexbelowsound Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 I agree to some extent but then if you have a player who isn't going to do that then you replace him. If you've got too many players choosing not to fight then you have to ask why and what message they're sending? I agree, I just think he meant in isolation you cannot physically make someone do something, irregardless of external factors such as the manager. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliffy Biro Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 If you have that many players not willing to fight then there is a reason for that? How many teams over the years look not arsed and rubbish and then when a new guy takes over it a completely new dynamic? We even had it with o'neill initially. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PieFacE Posted January 15, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted January 15, 2015 Another excellent post Mark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 We were not quite Southampton then as they now have a new stadium and have been relegated and then promoted and now they have a decent side after all they sold the best part of a team in the summer and they are doing better with what they have now than last season and with a different manager! His point was that like Southampton we were once challenging for the top 4 and flying high but unlike Southampton most of the money was spent poorly, we didn't have a manager anywhere near as good as Koeman and we didn't have a youth setup as good as Southampton's (which is probably the best in the country). That's what i was trying to say. MON was actually a false dawn as it were for us and you really cannot blame Learner for being stingy with the cash as he has had his hands well and truly burnt by MON!! Can everybody remember Habib Bye on £50.0000 a week, Curtis Davies for £12 million, he even signed Chris bloody Sutton! Then got rid of Gary Cahill who now plays for Chelski and England!! Habib Beye = Bad signing Curtis Davies = 9M with Moore going the other way it made it 6M and in actual fact I think Curtis Davies was underrated for us and could have been decent Chris Sutton = Free transfer after his first window closed and he hadnt got much time to sign anyone. Scored a winner for us at Everton I think and those extra points helped us Plenty of sticks to beat up MON with , the three you chose are slightly surprising Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted January 15, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted January 15, 2015 (edited) If we lose the next 3 that will be 12 points from 20 games. An average of 0.6 points a game, which over a season would get you 22 points. Does playing quite well and putting up a fight mean anything when you see the return of a period of games longer than half a season? Not when we judge the season as a whole. But in isolation, i.e. how I will be reacting to those games when they happen, then yes playing well and putting up a fight means something. Unfortunately I have gone way past being able to look at games in isolation now. I think had we have say taken 7 points from the last four games then I could have looked at the next three in isolation and have almost seen them as freebies and anything we get is a bonus and I'll be happy as long as we put up a decent showing and good fight. However since the first four games our pretty much non stop run of poor results, with the very odd success, and poor performances resulting in 12 points taken from a possible 51 means a line has been drawn for me. I can't just see these next three games without seeing them in the context of what has been a very poor season. It matters not one iota if we perform gallantly if we lose. I can no longer take solace from admirable displays and the reasons are two fold. Firstly if we fail to take any points we are going to find ourselves in the bottom three very soon and secondly us performing admirably against the better sides, as has been shown, is no indication of any improvement and that we will then take points against the poorer sides. Despite me thinking we have the best squad of players we have had in the last 3 - 4 years I am now seriously concerned that we may well drop this season and the only thing that can change that opinion is points on the board as gallant displays aren't going to do it. That's fine. I can look at games in isolation and I'll judge them as such. When I'm considering the season as a whole, then obviously 3 good performances here in a season where we (hypothetically as I don't think it will happen) are relegated won't mean anything. When I'm sat in the stands I'm not going to be sulking during a (again hypothetical) win/great performance vs Chelsea because it doesn't mean anything in the course of a season Edited January 15, 2015 by Stevo985 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts