Steve Bruce

[Demitri_C]

1 hour ago, TheStagMan said:

Dear Lord, get over yourself and chill. 

It was a comment about the string of shit managers we have had since O'Neil rather than an attack on Bruce so cool your jets.

I am very chilled thanks no need for the silly comment 

[Adam2003]

https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2018/may/17/liam-rosenior-released-brighton-bitter-pill

Quote

You’ve been great for us but we’re not prepared to renew your contract for next season.” The words I think every player fears and dreads, so when I heard them from my (now former) manager Chris Hughton, I felt a whole range of emotions. I’m at the stage in my career that I knew what might be coming but at the same time you can never prepare for it. I’ve been released and just like every player who has experienced the scenario there is no way to ready yourself.

This is about Brighton but when he talks about club culture, I think that’s something Bruce (and the club) have started building here that had been missing for years. That would be my concern in changing to another manager, even if they were one who played prettier football. Now, hopefully whoever we get in next is someone who carries this culture forward and evolves it, but personally as things stand I would stick with Bruce to let him keep building it. 

[terrytini]

I must be missing something, I think we play good football.  By good I mean both good to watch and good in terms of results.

We defend brilliantly as a team (good football). We work incredibly hard (good football). We play 4 forward thinking midfielders in addition to a striker  - and they all have and use licence to roam where they need to go, and interchange well wit the ball (good football).  We create chances (good football). We employ the services of the most skilful player I've seen in my years of watching us (good football). We score lots of goals (good football). We 'go long' and also play through the midfield (good football).

In fact I can personally only think of one thing I don't like, which is that sometimes when going long, its aimless - but then I see many other Clubs fall into that trap. As a matter of tactics, I think we sometimes fail to support the striker adequately. That's it.

Now, I know I'm not a freak, because when I chat things through with others they tend to agree for the most part.  About the only time I ever part ways with someone is when they are a fan of this 'tippy tappy' 'possession' stuff - I'm afraid I find it dull, but that's just my view.  It certainly isn't 'better football' though, its just different.

SO I'm afraid I find the comments over the last page or two are over my head - and that includes YOU @TRO - I'm not sure what it is about the way we play you don't like ?  When I read your Posts you seem a fan of all the above, and often refer back to the days of Sir Ron, who certainly ensured those ingredients were a key part of his sides.

So, for me, Bruce has bought well, performed well, has us playing decent stuff, has created a fantastic team spirit, and, with luck, got us up as well. Top Man !

[lexicon]

But but Barcelona on fifa 18! Etc. 

[TRO]

2 hours ago, srsmithusa said:

Just from an accounting standpoint, saying that he is under-resourced because he only has $5.00 in one account while he had &5,000 in another account is misleading at least.  (Numbers to illustrate the point only not to reflect any othe idea or ratios) (dollar signs used because they are the only ones available on my American phone.  

You assert he will play a different style when he has more resources.  Can you give an example in which a Steve Bruce side played in a  non “workmanlike style” (your words).   He has had more cash available in the Premier League.  When was a side he managed creative, free flowing, exciting.  

But now you’ve got me arguing again when I had decided not to, at least until the season outcome is known.  

If ya’ll don’t want critics offering views, it would be best if you stop arguing

Go Bruce!   Outsmart Fulham and equip the players to outplay them.  UTV

We/ I argue, because i dont agree with your point.

He and a few other managers who play a similar style......have never had the resources to play with confidence like you allude to.

playing outright attacking football has more scalps than you maybe prepared to admit to.....its idealistic and you need the players to do it with success.....try it without the players....or over value what you really have and you can get dumped on your arse....we seen it with RDM.

 

[London Villa]

19 hours ago, briny_ear said:

Depressing that in the run up to one of our biggest match in years some people seem determined to focus on briefing against the manager. I suppose no-one should be surprised as this has been a constant theme all season. But you might think it could be dropped just for a few days to concentrate on the 26th May.

100% agree mate. I honestly read some of the crap on here and find some of it embarrassing. I think this whole thread has really let this site down this season.

[TRO]

3 hours ago, sheepyvillian said:

I'm not disputing they've grafted. But he was brought in to get us promotion. Let's get that first , because trust me it won't be easy. And God forbid, we set up in a cautious manner, because for me, to let them take the initiative, will be a big mistake.

Let's see some exciting, attacking , confident, football. It's not like the team's not capable of producing it.

It wasn't that long ago we beat Wolves by playing with a bit of panache.

Go down to Bodymoor heath and ask them very politely why they are not doing what you are asking.

can you then come on here and tell us what the players/ manager have collectively said?

I am sure it will be a very interesting post.

[TRO]

2 hours ago, DCJonah said:

Not sure i agree with that. Not that it really matters though, it was a fantastic atmosphere.

It was an opinion.

[srsmithusa]

25 minutes ago, TRO said:

We/ I argue, because i dont agree with your point.

He and a few other managers who play a similar style......have never had the resources to play with confidence like you allude to.

playing outright attacking football has more scalps than you maybe prepared to admit to.....its idealistic and you need the players to do it with success.....try it without the players....or over value what you really have and you can get dumped on your arse....we seen it with RDM.

 

So you’re sure he’ll play that way when he has more resources even though he never has played that way when he had better resources.   Got it   

(Your argument was made before I countered )    But again,,  I’m going to let it go until our season outcome is know

Come on Bruce !!!!!!

 

 

 

[TRO]

53 minutes ago, terrytini said:

I must be missing something, I think we play good football.  By good I mean both good to watch and good in terms of results.

We defend brilliantly as a team (good football). We work incredibly hard (good football). We play 4 forward thinking midfielders in addition to a striker  - and they all have and use licence to roam where they need to go, and interchange well wit the ball (good football).  We create chances (good football). We employ the services of the most skilful player I've seen in my years of watching us (good football). We score lots of goals (good football). We 'go long' and also play through the midfield (good football).

In fact I can personally only think of one thing I don't like, which is that sometimes when going long, its aimless - but then I see many other Clubs fall into that trap. As a matter of tactics, I think we sometimes fail to support the striker adequately. That's it.

Now, I know I'm not a freak, because when I chat things through with others they tend to agree for the most part.  About the only time I ever part ways with someone is when they are a fan of this 'tippy tappy' 'possession' stuff - I'm afraid I find it dull, but that's just my view.  It certainly isn't 'better football' though, its just different.

SO I'm afraid I find the comments over the last page or two are over my head - and that includes YOU @TRO - I'm not sure what it is about the way we play you don't like ?  When I read your Posts you seem a fan of all the above, and often refer back to the days of Sir Ron, who certainly ensured those ingredients were a key part of his sides.

So, for me, Bruce has bought well, performed well, has us playing decent stuff, has created a fantastic team spirit, and, with luck, got us up as well. Top Man !

Terry agree with all of that.

let me explain my position.

I am trying to be reasonable and understand their perspective....albeit i think it is a bit idealistic.....I support steve Bruce and everything he has attempted to do.

However, i don't like how easily we surrender possession at times or give the ball away so cheaply and that does not include every player that is just some......but that ís just me nit picking....don't construe from that i can be dragged in to an anti steve Bruce argument, because nothing is further from the truth.

They have a point Terry....just one I don't entirely agree with.

I think i have written enough to prove my point.

[TRO]

22 minutes ago, srsmithusa said:

So you’re sure he’ll play that way when he has more resources even though he never has played that way when he had better resources.   Got it   

(Your argument was made before I countered )    But again,,  I’m going to let it go until our season outcome is know

Come on Bruce !!!!!!

 

 

 

1. Its my opinion....how can i be sure.

2. When had he had better resources?

i think its a good idea to drop it.....its disrespectful to be having this debate at this time.

[rubberman]

If / when we get promoted the football with Bruce won't get any more 'attractive '.  We'll be playing for survival to start with so it'll be defence first. 

Means to an end innit. 

[TRO]

1 hour ago, terrytini said:

I must be missing something, I think we play good football.  By good I mean both good to watch and good in terms of results.

We defend brilliantly as a team (good football). We work incredibly hard (good football). We play 4 forward thinking midfielders in addition to a striker  - and they all have and use licence to roam where they need to go, and interchange well wit the ball (good football).  We create chances (good football). We employ the services of the most skilful player I've seen in my years of watching us (good football). We score lots of goals (good football). We 'go long' and also play through the midfield (good football).

In fact I can personally only think of one thing I don't like, which is that sometimes when going long, its aimless - but then I see many other Clubs fall into that trap. As a matter of tactics, I think we sometimes fail to support the striker adequately. That's it.

Now, I know I'm not a freak, because when I chat things through with others they tend to agree for the most part.  About the only time I ever part ways with someone is when they are a fan of this 'tippy tappy' 'possession' stuff - I'm afraid I find it dull, but that's just my view.  It certainly isn't 'better football' though, its just different.

SO I'm afraid I find the comments over the last page or two are over my head - and that includes YOU @TRO - I'm not sure what it is about the way we play you don't like ?  When I read your Posts you seem a fan of all the above, and often refer back to the days of Sir Ron, who certainly ensured those ingredients were a key part of his sides.

So, for me, Bruce has bought well, performed well, has us playing decent stuff, has created a fantastic team spirit, and, with luck, got us up as well. Top Man !

Not sure what bit of my posts have rubbed you up the wrong way, but would be interested to know.

In the main to my knowledge we generally agree.....albeit we all have slight differences of opinion.

[sheepyvillian]

1 hour ago, TRO said:

Go down to Bodymoor heath and ask them very politely why they are not doing what you are asking.

can you then come on here and tell us what the players/ manager have collectively said?

I am sure it will be a very interesting post.

There's no need to do that, as you have said in the past, you have no qualms about nobody being up the the pitch when the opposition have a corner. Because it's his job on the line. My fear is, that caution could be our downfall on May 26th.

Both big Sam and Moyes, lost their jobs this week. Even though they succeeded in keeping their respective clubs in the Premier. Why ? Because the football their teams produced didn't excite. Should we be promoted , you really think Bruce is going to lose that cautious streak ?

We had one one of the best teams in the Championship, who, Imo. Could of played with much more attacking Intent, and maybe my fingers wouldn't be crossed right now .

Accept it, caution is a part of his DNA and it's going nowhere fast.

[sheepyvillian]

5 hours ago, TRO said:

I don't think it will be more of the same.....I would guess I will be very much in the minority on this.

My opinion is this........He plays a style of football that suits the book, he has never been blessed with a team full of talented players, that he feels he has the choice to play anything close to expansive football.

Players have to be able to do what you are asking of them, otherwise you play a more cautious game to accommodate to get results.

I am not saying he will naturally produce a team like Man City or that he has the skill set to emulate Pepe......but I do think you will see less caution as we get better players in.

Like Mourinho as shown less caution at Man u ?

[TRO]

5 minutes ago, sheepyvillian said:

There's no need to do that, as you have said in the past, you have no qualms about nobody being up the the pitch when the opposition have a corner. Because it's his job on the line. My fear is, that caution could be our downfall on May 26th.

Both big Sam and Moyes, lost their jobs this week. Even though they succeeded in keeping their respective clubs in the Premier. Why ? Because the football their teams produced didn't excite. Should we be promoted , you really think Bruce is going to lose that cautious streak ?

We had one one of the best teams in the Championship, who, Imo. Could of played with much more attacking Intent, and maybe my fingers wouldn't be crossed right now .

Accept it, caution is a part of his DNA and it's going nowhere fast.

I do have qualms about no player being up the pitch when the opposition have a corner, not sure where you got that from......but I am not about to tell SB how to do his job...its his call.

His caution is an integral part of all what he does and Sam and David Moyes, should not have lost their jobs imo.

when he gets promotion, the better quality, could well dilute his cautious approach, but some of it is a virtue to be honest....the degree is subjective.

you seem to be of the belief, we should be blowing teams away, every week, sheepy....to get rid of those fiercely crossed fingers......I think that is ambitious at best.

have some respect for opposing teams and their ambitions.

 

 

[TRO]

9 minutes ago, sheepyvillian said:

Like Mourinho as shown less caution at Man u ?

Tell me that, when he gets the players he wants.

[Dave J]

2 hours ago, terrytini said:

I must be missing something, I think we play good football.  By good I mean both good to watch and good in terms of results.

We defend brilliantly as a team (good football). We work incredibly hard (good football). We play 4 forward thinking midfielders in addition to a striker  - and they all have and use licence to roam where they need to go, and interchange well wit the ball (good football).  We create chances (good football). We employ the services of the most skilful player I've seen in my years of watching us (good football). We score lots of goals (good football). We 'go long' and also play through the midfield (good football).

In fact I can personally only think of one thing I don't like, which is that sometimes when going long, its aimless - but then I see many other Clubs fall into that trap. As a matter of tactics, I think we sometimes fail to support the striker adequately. That's it.

Now, I know I'm not a freak, because when I chat things through with others they tend to agree for the most part.  About the only time I ever part ways with someone is when they are a fan of this 'tippy tappy' 'possession' stuff - I'm afraid I find it dull, but that's just my view.  It certainly isn't 'better football' though, its just different.

SO I'm afraid I find the comments over the last page or two are over my head - and that includes YOU @TRO - I'm not sure what it is about the way we play you don't like ?  When I read your Posts you seem a fan of all the above, and often refer back to the days of Sir Ron, who certainly ensured those ingredients were a key part of his sides.

So, for me, Bruce has bought well, performed well, has us playing decent stuff, has created a fantastic team spirit, and, with luck, got us up as well. Top Man !

Yes but Terry - we haven't always been this way - I think under SB we have been poorer longer than we have been good imo - it's only since this xmas do I think we have shown much in the way of consistency and an upturn in the fayre on offfer.

i'm not sure to many fans would have been that upset if he had the bullet in December ?

I honestly would not call him a top man - I think  better than average man is more applicable again imo 

[DCJonah]

2 hours ago, TRO said:

It was an opinion.

I know. As was mine. 

I thought that was the point of this place 

[TRO]

6 minutes ago, DCJonah said:

I know. As was mine. 

I thought that was the point of this place 

Yes......but they were my ears, reporting to me.

I was telling you what I thought.....you said you wasn't sure?

by definition its subjective, but i just thought it might be worth telling folk what i thought of the noise.

Edited May 17, 2018 by TRO