Steve Bruce

[Godders]

5 minutes ago, Dr_Pangloss said:

Taking a £15m striker off with like 12 minutes to go when you're trying to win a football match is utterly horrific thinking. 

At that point, I think they'd settled for the draw. 

[Stevo985]

12 minutes ago, DCJonah said:

I have to disagree. 

I said it in the Lansbury thread, IMO Lansbury was clearly playing in the advanced role. I think we did play 4-4-1-1 or 4-2-3-1 both very similar formations. 

 

Yeah it was 4-2-3-1

I guess you can call it 4-3-3 if you include Lansbury in that central 3, but as you say he was clearly playing much more advanced, which is a good thing,

The formation completely worked in the first half. I was more than happy with it.

The problem was we couldn't respond to Hull playing well in the second half. That's when changes should have been made

[Stevo985]

34 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

Wow stop over thinking things 

I wasn't, i was just asking a question which you haven't been able to answer.

That's fine, but don't mock me for your own confusion.

[Stevo985]

6 minutes ago, Godders said:

At that point, I think they'd settled for the draw. 

Villa? Nonsense. No way did we settle for a draw in that game, whether you agree with the subs or not.

Edited August 7, 2017 by Stevo985

[Dr_Pangloss]

7 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

Yeah it was 4-2-3-1

I guess you can call it 4-3-3 if you include Lansbury in that central 3, but as you say he was clearly playing much more advanced, which is a good thing,

The formation completely worked in the first half. I was more than happy with it.

The problem was we couldn't respond to Hull playing well in the second half. That's when changes should have been made

This is Bruce's biggest problem, he's just not 'adaptive-reactive'. He has one and only one plan, when that doesn't work or, over the course of a game, becomes far less effective, he just stands there scratching his arse, totally unable to make small changes to how the side is set up in order to counter act what the opposition is doing. This doesn't even require subs, rather it just needs some form of tactical nuance in game. However we he does make subs, generally they are too late or simply wrong headed, as though it is out of total desperation rather than the result of clear thinking. I think we're on a hiding to no where with him in charge. In a lot of matches there tends to be this 55-60 min window, where we play fairly well and have the better of the action, however if we don't kill the game by then, the result seems to be a draw or a defeat. 

Edited August 7, 2017 by Dr_Pangloss

[Stevo985]

Just now, Dr_Pangloss said:

This is Bruce's biggest problem, he's just not 'adaptive-reactive'. He has one and only one plan, when that doesn't work or, over the course of a game, becomes far less effective, he just stands there scratching his arse, totally unable to make small changes to how the side is set up in order to counter act what the opposition is doing. This doesn't even require subs, rather it just needs some form of tactical nuance in game. However we he does make subs, generally they are too late or simply wrong headed. I think we're on a hiding to no where with him in charge. In a lot of matches there tends to be this 55-60 min window, where we play fairly well and have the better of the action, however if we don't kill the game by then, the result seems to be a draw or a defeat. 

I agree it's his biggest problem. But I think generally the changes he makes are actually good. His subs often make sense and make a difference. The problem is he takes too long to make them.

On Saturday it was obvious to everyone after 5 minutes of the second half that something had to change. it wasn't working. yet I said to my mate "Bruce doesn't do subs until about 70 minutes". And 70 minutes exactly was when he made his first sub.

After that Hull's pressure stopped, Green stretched the game, Onomah added something new and we still had 2 chances to win it.

So why not do that earlier? 

[Demitri_C]

14 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

I wasn't, i was just asking a question which you haven't been able to answer.

That's fine, but don't mock me for your own confusion.

Who is mocking who?

Think someone woke up on the wrong side of bed 

Anyway back on subject 

[turvontour]

39 minutes ago, Godders said:

Those same bookmakers thought a draw on Saturday was a pretty likely outcome. And they still have us favourites for auto promotion along with Boro (who lost a game they were expected by most to win by the way). 

We're not going to win every game. A draw at home against Hull was not unexpected. 

But we have to win 3 out of 4 of our home games. Even if we are twice as good away from home this season, that only gives us about 35 points. And that's a big if by the way, a big shift in culture.

Not beating Hull means that we now need to win our next three home games, irrespective of opposition.

There needs to be a real reason why we don't win home games this season e.g. our teams decimated by injuries/suspension, playing other automatic promotion favourite, playing team who has won six in a row etc. I don't see a reason as to why we didn't beat Hull.

[Zatman]

37 minutes ago, Dr_Pangloss said:

Taking a £15m striker off with like 12 minutes to go when you're trying to win a football match is utterly horrific thinking. 

Taking off any striker in that instance if not like for like

[jim]

Just a hunch, but I think he will be gone if we don't get results against Cardiff and Norwich.

I don't think the good Dr was too impressed with the result on Saturday.

Edited August 7, 2017 by jim

[vreitti]

7 minutes ago, jim said:

Just a hunch, but I think he will be gone if we don't get results against Cardiff and Norwich.

I don't think the good Dr was too impressed with the result on Saturday.

We need results. It really is that simple, and the good Dr knows this. We needed to hit the ground running this season. Annihilating Cardiff next week might still give Bruce some breathing room. I somehow still think he'll be able to hang on until the international break. 

[mattjpa]

I dont think there is any chance of the manager getting sacked - non whatsoever. Keith Wyness clearly stated a couple of days ago that stability is the key to getting us back, they are big enough to not listen to the FIFA generation of fans who think sacking a manager will cure everything. Our squad and team are too good to go on a long losing spree bad enough to get him the bullet.

Im not a massive Bruce fan but we have to be brave enough to keep faith now - too much has bee n invested in him already which we couldnt afford to do in the next guy that would come along. I just wish he would make a **** substitution or change of formation between 45-70 mins when things are turning against us....

[AntrimBlack]

13 minutes ago, jim said:

Just a hunch, but I think he will be gone if we don't get results against Cardiff and Norwich.

I don't think the good Dr was too impressed with the result on Saturday.

Yes. Xia will know that he cannot wait for too long if he wants to get promoted. He now has the experience of last season to guide him.

[ViewFromT2]

1 hour ago, Dr_Pangloss said:

This is Bruce's biggest problem, he's just not 'adaptive-reactive'. He has one and only one plan, when that doesn't work or, over the course of a game, becomes far less effective, he just stands there scratching his arse, totally unable to make small changes to how the side is set up in order to counter act what the opposition is doing. This doesn't even require subs, rather it just needs some form of tactical nuance in game. However we he does make subs, generally they are too late or simply wrong headed, as though it is out of total desperation rather than the result of clear thinking. I think we're on a hiding to no where with him in charge. In a lot of matches there tends to be this 55-60 min window, where we play fairly well and have the better of the action, however if we don't kill the game by then, the result seems to be a draw or a defeat. 

Totally agree. He gets out-boxed by every manager he comes up against. All managers snuff out our initial threat before half time, then adjust their own tactics for the second half and we struggle. There are simply no excuses for not winning that game on Saturday. Hull offered no opposition for 35 minutes. 

Said it all summer. We will not go up with Steve Bruce in charge. 

[hippo]

4 minutes ago, AntrimBlack said:

Yes. Xia will know that he cannot wait for too long if he wants to get promoted. He now has the experience of last season to guide him.

He might also know that after the RDM fiasco - getting the right manager isn't that easy.

Personally I think we should be a bit nasty and wait until someone decent becomes available then make our  move.

[StefanAVFC]

My biggest concern with Bruce is that he's a reactive manager. Not necessarily the end of the world, there have been managers who have been successful without being hugely proactive, but the issue with this is that he needs to be spot on each time.

Often he's not. Against Hull everyone could see it needed a change, yet Bruce didn't make one until it was too late. 

 

[ViewFromT2]

9 minutes ago, vreitti said:

We need results. It really is that simple, and the good Dr knows this. We needed to hit the ground running this season. Annihilating Cardiff next week might still give Bruce some breathing room. I somehow still think he'll be able to hang on until the international break. 

We'll get beat at Cardiff....its almost guaranteed. Warnock will definitely get the better of Bruce. The Reading game could be a struggle too....meaning Norwich at home is huge. I really don't think Steve Bruce will be in charge beyond October. 

[AntrimBlack]

3 minutes ago, mattjpa said:

I dont think there is any chance of the manager getting sacked - non whatsoever. Keith Wyness clearly stated a couple of days ago that stability is the key to getting us back, they are big enough to not listen to the FIFA generation of fans who think sacking a manager will cure everything. Our squad and team are too good to go on a long losing spree bad enough to get him the bullet.

Im not a massive Bruce fan but we have to be brave enough to keep faith now - too much has bee n invested in him already which we couldnt afford to do in the next guy that would come along. I just wish he would make a **** substitution or change of formation between 45-70 mins when things are turning against us....

I have been supporting Aston Villa since 1956 and I will want him gone if he cannot turn things around very soon

I do not necessarily think that sacking a manager will cure everything - it has not this far - but I certainly know when it becomes non viable to retain a failing manager.

[TheMightyVillans]

Wish he would make some subs earlier on... Always feels 10 mins too late.

[AntrimBlack]

5 minutes ago, hippo said:

He might also know that after the RDM fiasco - getting the right manager isn't that easy.

Personally I think we should be a bit nasty and wait until someone decent becomes available then make our  move.

Of course. That would be ideal. But waiting may not be a possibility.