Steve Bruce

[terrytini]

Just now, Ingram85 said:

There are arguments to support his post. Bruce relies on individual players skill and luck to see us through a match. Not really sure tactical strength can be argued as a plus for brucie. 

You think he doesn’t see what we all see ? It goes over his head ?

[Ingram85]

Just now, terrytini said:

You think he doesn’t see what we all see ? It goes over his head ?

He may see it indeed but very rarely does he act on things successfully. His bizarre subs/lack of subs/no change in formations during a match kind of show this.

[terrytini]

4 minutes ago, Ingram85 said:

He may see it indeed but very rarely does he act on things successfully. His bizarre subs/lack of subs/no change in formations during a match kind of show this.

That really amounts to no more than him not doing the things some people think he should do when they think he should do them. I dont see how him making different choices to those some would prefer means he has “ no tactical brain whatsoever”.

[sne]

3 minutes ago, Ingram85 said:

He may see it indeed but very rarely does he act on things successfully. His bizarre subs/lack of subs/no change in formations during a match kind of show this.

Would be interesting to witness one of the training sessions for when we work on our "Play all the strikers but no midfield" tactic.

Wonder if he found one of RDM's playbooks lying around and just went with it?

[ozvilla28]

Should be long gone once playoff ended.Biggest budget in the league and big name players and backed by the owner and failed.We shouldn't be needing a playoff to go up sorry.Teams with half our budget went up and quality of players. End of story.

[Ingram85]

6 minutes ago, terrytini said:

That really amounts to no more than him not doing the things some people think he should do when they think he should do them. I dont see how him making different choices to those some would prefer means he has “ no tactical brain whatsoever”.

Well it is all subjective I guess. If you like the way Bruce manages you’d have an opposite reaction to me. Imo I’d definitely call rubbish subs/lack of adapting to opponents a tactical unawareness. To be honest I’m worn out now, we’ve all debated to the nth degree pretty much everything we can about Bruce. I’m prepared to just wait and see what happens, if we keep him whatever, if he goes whatever. I’m genuinely worried about our future with all the uncertainty going on around manager/owner/squad/£££ and Villa have worn me out . 

Edited June 4, 2018 by Ingram85

[terrytini]

26 minutes ago, Ingram85 said:

Well it is all subjective I guess. If you like the way Bruce manages you’d have an opposite reaction to me. Imo I’d definitely call rubbish subs/lack of adapting to opponents a tactical unawareness. To be honest I’m worn out now, we’ve all debated to the nth degree pretty much everything we can about Bruce. I’m prepared to just wait and see what happens, if we keep him whatever, if he goes whatever. I’m genuinely worried about our future with all the uncertainty going on around manager/owner/squad/£££ and Villa have worn me out . 

Oh I can’t stand some of his decisions, some of his selections, and for the life of me I don’t know why he delays subs so long.

Its just I don’t think that means he doesn’t know what he’s doing tactically, just that I don’t like it.

As for the rest, I agree, except I don’t share your worry, it’s all part of the game.

[Pimlico_Villa]

I’m not one to sympathise entirely with Bruce, but a lot of people aren’t recognising his contributions to fixing a culture of chronic unprofessionalism and ill discipline on the playing side. That was a poison that would have ultimately killed us that he remedied in less than a year. Without him doing this, I don’t think we would have stood half a chance on the pitch. 

It’s also the type of thing that you absolutely have to get right before you can even begin to think about getting results on the pitch. Considering where we were when Bruce took over to where we nearly got to this season is an acheivement in itself.

In saying this, I would agree that with the playing staff we had last season we should have achieved more. If Cardiff can get promoted then we absolutely should have been, so agree he has underperformed relative to the quality of the squad we had.  

I’m sure we can all agree that last season, despite the disappointment, was an improvement on the one before, so I’d like to think that Bruce can continue that trajectory. Next season the top teams will all be characterised as having to go through some sort of restructuring - either Managerially or on the playing side - so I would like to think that the consistency we would get form keeping Bruce, plus his familiarity of this League, would give us a competitive advantage. Whilst others are finding their feet in this League, if we can stick together then it’ll do us good. Bruce just needs to be more authoritive tactically rather than rely on individual quality of players to do him a job. 

[Ingram85]

16 minutes ago, Pimlico_Villa said:

I’m not one to sympathise entirely with Bruce, but a lot of people aren’t recognising his contributions to fixing a culture of chronic unprofessionalism and ill discipline on the playing side. That was a poison that would have ultimately killed us that he remedied in less than a year. Without him doing this, I don’t think we would have stood half a chance on the pitch. 

It’s also the type of thing that you absolutely have to get right before you can even begin to think about getting results on the pitch. Considering where we were when Bruce took over to where we nearly got to this season is an acheivement in itself.

Tbf, the discussion has circled round so many times that sometimes things get missed. Stopping the rot and toxic atmosphere plus things like getting Grealish back on the straight and narrow have all been credited to Bruce by pretty much everyone. It’s all a few pages back mind.

[Eastie]

30 minutes ago, terrytini said:

Oh I can’t stand some of his decisions, some of his selections, and for the life of me I don’t know why he delays subs so long.

Its just I don’t think that means he doesn’t know what he’s doing tactically, just that I don’t like it.

As for the rest, I agree, except I don’t share your worry, it’s all part of the game.

Interesting piece this -

Shortly after taking charge at Sunderland Steve Bruce was asked if he had considered experimenting with a Christmas Tree formation. "I'm not really into tactics," he replied. At the time that response was easy to interpret as a deliberately flippant or, perhaps, a self-deprecating means of avoiding answering the question. As the seasons passed, though, the suspicion grew that the former Manchester United captain had simply been honest.

 

The former Sunderland No1 paid little attention to modern coaching methods, technology or tactics – and now he looks like man whose era has passed

Wed 30 Nov 2011 21.08 GMT

https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2011/nov/30/steve-bruce-sunderland-sacked

 

Edited June 4, 2018 by Eastie

[Dave J]

15 hours ago, holteend1982 said:

Completely agree with him to be fair. 

He never once mentioned  that he failed in his objectives two seasons on the trot - convenient you could say 

[wilko154]

56 minutes ago, ozvilla28 said:

Should be long gone once playoff ended.Biggest budget in the league and big name players and backed by the owner and failed.We shouldn't be needing a playoff to go up sorry.Teams with half our budget went up and quality of players. End of story.

Not really true, when you look at the net spend over the last two seasons I believe we were actually in profit over both season's (between the summer and winter transfer windows).

Yes we have spent a lot of money over the two season's however not all were by Bruce, (McCormack, Elphick, Gollini, De Laet, Tshibola were all RDM's failings).

Yes Cardiff went up, but they have put together a team that has a great team ethic and have been together for a fair amount of time. We were a club in dire straights when we went down, Bruce has turned this around and brought the dressing room back together. If we can get through this summer with as much of the squad still together as possible we can be in a strong position to continue next season.

[sheepyvillian]

1 hour ago, terrytini said:

You think he doesn’t see what we all see ? It goes over his head ?

If the answer is no, then there are no excuses for his failure. 

[TRO]

13 hours ago, DaveAV1 said:

Well if you think Steve Bruce is in the same league as Ron Saunders then there’s nothing I can say. Saunders had already got us promoted and won the League Cup twice. To try to say we would have thought badly about Saunders if we hadn’t won the league just to defend your current position on Steve Bruce is ridiculous. Yes things can be determined by small margins, but we were Champions, not playing in a last chance saloon game because we hadn’t been good enough to achieve our aim during the rest of the season. Tosh you say, dearly me. 

 

Dave....

you are comparing 2 different things and subsequently coming up with the wrong answer.

Ron Saunders did a job, of which there is little or no comparison......Graham Taylor, did very well too......both shadow what Steve Bruce has done, so far.....obviously.

I wasn't comparing the 2 managers, in their content.....that's your interpretation

I was talking about how managers can just miss out or succeed and the landscape is entirely different...that's what I was trying to highlight.....I wasn't even talking about at what level, it was not the essence of my point.

you have just gone off at a tangent and started declaring that we wasn't, good enough, we all know that, else, we would have gone up automatically.

You seem to admit small margins, then build a case against it.

He has failed, yes, you heard it here......but he has done much good work.....is that so hard to reconcile?

Edited June 4, 2018 by TRO

[blandy]

2 hours ago, Ingram85 said:

Well it is all subjective I guess. If you like the way Bruce manages you’d have an opposite reaction to me. Imo I’d definitely call rubbish subs/lack of adapting to opponents a tactical unawareness.

I sort of share your view, but thought I'd comment because something's changed, IMO. When he first came in, in terms of making substitutions I think about 90% of the time I was thinking "he needs to change X for Y" and it would happen. That doesn't mean Bruce is as dumb as me, or I'm smart, but maybe that things were so clear because we (at that time) had a squad where the "swaps" were obvious, the needs on the filed were also obvious "we need to shore up shop / chase a goal" or whatever.

But TBH this season, I've almost never kind of worked out what he would do befoire he did it, and nearly all of his subs have baffled me. You get the ones anyone could predict - like "Kodjia will be on with 15 mins to go and Albert will go off", but in terms of having a coherent way of working that a simpleton like me could work out...it's gone. The only thing I've spotted is that far too often we/he has set us up not to lose and then only if losing has the approach changed to a more positive adventurous set of tactics. And then chucking on forwards as we get more deperate.

I don't know what any of that means, really, other than the subs he makes these days leave me mostly baffled.

[omariqy]

Another thing to note that 2 of the players credited for changing the dressing room environment - Snodgrass and Terry - are no longer with us because Bruce ultimately failed in achieving his goal. So although Bruce has changed the environment for the better will this still be the case next season?

[ozvillafan]

14 minutes ago, blandy said:

I sort of share your view, but thought I'd comment because something's changed, IMO. When he first came in, in terms of making substitutions I think about 90% of the time I was thinking "he needs to change X for Y" and it would happen. That doesn't mean Bruce is as dumb as me, or I'm smart, but maybe that things were so clear because we (at that time) had a squad where the "swaps" were obvious, the needs on the filed were also obvious "we need to shore up shop / chase a goal" or whatever.

But TBH this season, I've almost never kind of worked out what he would do befoire he did it, and nearly all of his subs have baffled me. You get the ones anyone could predict - like "Kodjia will be on with 15 mins to go and Albert will go off", but in terms of having a coherent way of working that a simpleton like me could work out...it's gone. The only thing I've spotted is that far too often we/he has set us up not to lose and then only if losing has the approach changed to a more positive adventurous set of tactics. And then chucking on forwards as we get more deperate.

I don't know what any of that means, really, other than the subs he makes these days leave me mostly baffled.

I remember Guus Hiddink when he managed Australia. In our most important qualifier, he left our best player (Harry Kewell) on the bench, then subbed him on after only 25 minutes.

I thought it was absolute bonkers, but he explained after the match that this was the plan all along, the players knew the plan and he wanted the opposition to get comfortable thinking we were playing defensive, then throw on Kewell (replacing a defender) after the early nerves had gone so the opposition got unsettled again.

As time went on, it was obvious he had a plan for every situation, even if we didn't exactly know what it was. He knew what he was going to do in any given situation, and so did his players. And it showed in the way they played.

I don't get the same feeling from Bruce. It seems he just throws bodies at a problem and hopes it will work out. Take the last 15 minutes of the playoff final when Fulham went a man down. What a fizzer, due largely in part to what appears an incoherent plan (take off Elmo and bring on Kodja.... with Adomah dropping to fullback? Then another forward for a midfielder?)

I know it's all subjective, but I don't perceive the level of tactical competence you would expect from the manager of a club like Villa.

[hippo]

2 hours ago, Eastie said:

Interesting piece this -

Shortly after taking charge at Sunderland Steve Bruce was asked if he had considered experimenting with a Christmas Tree formation. "I'm not really into tactics," he replied. At the time that response was easy to interpret as a deliberately flippant or, perhaps, a self-deprecating means of avoiding answering the question. As the seasons passed, though, the suspicion grew that the former Manchester United captain had simply been honest.

 

The former Sunderland No1 paid little attention to modern coaching methods, technology or tactics – and now he looks like man whose era has passed

Wed 30 Nov 2011 21.08 GMT

https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2011/nov/30/steve-bruce-sunderland-sacked

 

"Tactics don't win football matches "   Sir Graham Taylor RIP

[stewiek2]

I just want a manager who'll send us out to win a game rather than contain the opposition. Is that too much to ask?

[DaveAV1]

1 hour ago, TRO said:

 

Dave....

you are comparing 2 different things and subsequently coming up with the wrong answer.

Ron Saunders did a job, of which there is little or no comparison......Graham Taylor, did very well too......both shadow what Steve Bruce has done, so far.....obviously.

I wasn't comparing the 2 managers, in their content.....that's your interpretation

I was talking about how managers can just miss out or succeed and the landscape is entirely different...that's what I was trying to highlight.....I wasn't even talking about at what level, it was not the essence of my point.

you have just gone off at a tangent and started declaring that we wasn't, good enough, we all know that, else, we would have gone up automatically.

You seem to admit small margins, then build a case against it.

He has failed, yes, you heard it here......but he has done much good work.....is that so hard to reconcile?

TRO you asked the question, if Bosko Jankovic hadn’t scored for Middlesbrough would we view Ron in the same light?  Your point being a comparison between that moment and last week at Wembley. Well for a start off Ipswich still had a game to play which they had to win and didn’t, but we’ll never know if they would have done if they’d won the Boro game.

 But I digress, your point that on fine margins often huge things hang, is perfectly true. History shows that this has often been the case in many aspects of life. However you seem to suggest that the fans reaction, had we not won the League, would have been the same for Saunders as it is now for Bruce. I don’t think that would have been even remotely the case. Ron Saunders had already achieved a great deal. Won promotion and two League Cups and built a wonderful side that was good enough and did win the League. We approached the end of that season on a high with a manager that had already written a fantastic chapter in our wonderful history. I doubt many, if any of our fans at that point had anything but admiration for Ron Saunders. Steve Bruce on the other hand, whilst working hard and playing his part in steadying the ship, hasn’t actually achieved anything of note. His position has come under serious scrutiny on numerous occasions in his short reign. So to try to compare the two situations I don’t believe is valid. 

Edited June 4, 2018 by DaveAV1