Advert
Advert
The_godfather
-
Posts
358 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Posts posted by The_godfather
-
-
12 minutes ago, andy jones said:
I think you are way off the mark.
IMHO we have a superb owner and to just say 'sell up and go' is hugely insulting to the person who has ...
Saved our club from extinction ... it was a queue of 1.
Spent over £10M on the infrastructure and purchase.
Made PVFC into one of the most community respected clubs in football.
Comments like that say to me you have no understanding of the 'low life' (putting it mildly) the fans have had to oust from the club this past decade or more. I for one would choose relegation this season but retain a brilliant owner to putting the club up for sale and repeating the circle of arseholes who have owned PVFC previously.
100% this.
Anyone who thinks Carol should sell up: 1) has no idea what they are talking about, 2) doesn't have the best interests of the club, 3) is a wind up merchant.
We literally could not have a better custodian of the club.
-
5
-
3
-
-
Just listened to the Clarke pod. Interesting discussion, and good to get a big round table.
One thing I would differ on from the guys is that for me, despite the abysmal run of form, it's pretty clear that the decision is probably 20% performance, 80% politics. Even if we got relegated, Clarke surely has more than enough credit in the bank not to lose his job, and look to rebuild and bounce back straight away. I have a memory of Carol saying that at some point, although that might be wrong.
So his position is untenable - which points to politics. You either trust him to rebuild, or not. Most of the squad will be gone, so he would have a clean slate. Less than 12 months ago, we believed he would be in charge until 2027! He may have lost some of the passion too no doubt, but the 180 degree turn is genuinely astonishing. In the pre-season tour, Carol, Darrell, and David all sat down and talked at length about their working relationship. They talked about openness and constructive criticism - that's always good, but it's easier when things are going well, not so much when they are not. Although he's likeable, you can also imagine Clarke being very spiky during this run of form, especially if he doesn't feel like he has been supported.
The only alternative to that in my mind, is that the prospect of relegation is financially apocalyptic. 2 related points about this - 1) it points to pretty poor longer term/strategic thinking, and the prospects of it happening/assumption it wouldn't. 2) Pretty sure that Carol said that when they reviewed the budget in Nov/Dec, they made a decision to cut their cloth in January. That's a pretty late flex, perhaps based on being out of the cup? We got fees for Charsley and Hall, and got 5 players off the wage bill (+ McCarron & Small) and replaced them with 2. Outgoings must be significantly less now.
-
2
-
1
-
-
Caveat to the following - I can't get to games live, so only watch games on iFollow.
Also, love the podcast, and not being critical, just adding to the discussion. With regards to giving players absolute pelters for crap performances, I think you're being pretty harsh 90% of the time. I'm not saying it's all not deserved, because there has been some dross, but I do think that there is a key explanation that carries greater weight than is discussed.
To explain why, I need to be critical of Clarke & the managerial team. Which is counterintuitive, because I like Clarke, and I think he is doing a good job! BUT, I don't think he helps the players all of the time. The constant rotation of players might be aimed at keeping the squad fresh, or due to injuries, but it also leads to massive inconsistency. Check out Bezza's spreadsheet that I'm sure he is keeping, and look at most people's ratings, and they will be yo-yoing up and down for the most part. Some will have steady 6's and 7's - Smith, Harrison - but many others will be 4, 7, 5, 8. Look at the scores for management too, up and down week to week. The main reason is rotation. Different positions week to week, different partners week to week at the back, in the middle, up front - how can you develop consistency by developing those close relationships you need? Why are Arsenal suddenly top of the Premier League? A couple of class additions to tip them over the edge, on top of a core group that have played 50+ games together now. We had 28 squad players before Small left, including McDermott and Agyakwa. 28! And yet somehow we are still 3-4 short in the January window. The premature promotion probably caused more turnover than planned but there is still too much flux in the team.
Clarke always said he likes to tinker, be flexible, reactive, etc. But ironically, while he has done it with the players, he's been pretty inflexible in terms of formation apart from when throwing a bunch of subs on; the switch to 3-4-3 last season for example was when Crosby was in charge. The roles that players are asked to play, that we ask of them, are often different. e.g. in our 3 man defence, often it is the central defender (Smith) who marks, with the others more progressive. I feel like the responsibilities of our wingbacks and wide defenders contributes to us conceding goals. Who is picking up who? We always seem vulnerable down the sides, and I think that is partly structural, not just personnel. In general, I think we probably ask too much of the wingbacks, which in our formation are the most important players on the pitch to provide width and creativity, plus provide defensive cover. In terms of formations, it's easy to ready too much into the numbers. I know Clarke, obtuse as he is, would say the same thing, i.e., It looks different on the pitch, it's different with and without the ball. While I know he would also say that each game is different and you should plan accordingly, but it's not like we are changing formations game to game to combat teams - we have our plan A, plus subs. Which, to be fair has worked a lot of the time.
However, for example, saying we shouldn't play Butterworth away because we are too open; there are ways around it. Play a nominal 3-5-1-1, with Butterworth in behind a single striker, and get the wing backs to push forwards more to provide support/thrust, in a 3-3-3-1 type formation; we've got plenty - Worrall, Massey, McCarron - who would want to play that way and you could start 3 in the middle still for more solidity. With the opposition pushing forwards, you would want to get Butterworth on the ball with space to play; he doesn't have to be a luxury home player.To be fair, you could say that, on the one hand, the ask of the players from game to game is not too different - different defensive role, different partner - but let's take a few examples to illustrate the point I am butchering:
Massey - Bezza saying, on the one hand, he's <ovf censored>. But, on the other hand, there is a player there. Good as an impact, little impact from the start. But week to week he's played wing back, or striker, neither of which are his best position. Doesn't offer much going back, isn't a goal scorer. So what are we expecting from him? Goals, creativity, chances? In a wide forward position that would appear to suit him best, (i.e., 4-3-3, 3-4-3), he could isolate his man, and create chances, but he hasn't been given any chance to do that over a period. (I also think that a lack of pre-season, whether that reflects well on him, or not, is a big factor - he's probably only coming up to speed now fitness wise and he's learning about his teammates, style etc.). This also relates firmly to Politic too.
Cass - he's 22, has played 1 season in the National League, and half a season in League 2, and he gets stick nearly every week. He's still learning what the heck he's doing! He might have Massey, or Robinson, or Worrall ahead of him, none of whom are natural wingbacks; and Smith or Forrester beside him. Pretty steep learning curve in my opinion. If he was Gibbons (i.e. a youth teamer) I think he would be given a lot more rope.
McCarron - he's 21, mainly a winger and in terms of senior football played in League 2 three years ago. How exactly have we helped him to be ready to play? Chucked him in and then said he's anonymous.
The midfield roulette - who will be centre mid this week? Place your bets. Am I a holder, an engine, or a 10? Are we combined 9 feet high between 2 of us trying to win headers?
Benning has played most of his career at LB in League 2, and is now being asked to play wing back in League 1 in front of Connor Hall, who has struggled, or Dan Jones, who hasn't played higher than League 2 either and has been in and out of the side. I've got a soft spot for Benning, because I think it is hard to understate what he did last season - joined a new club where he was a legend at the old one, struggled and was out of the side, got his head down and worked super hard to get fit, then showed his quality in the run in. That's the kind of character you want at your club.
Mipo has played 39 career games, of which about 80% would be sub appearances. He's probably an impact sub - is he being used in the best way to optimise his skills?
One last quick point, related to the above - it's also ridiculous for the fans to expect, based on all of this, for a sub to come on, and suddenly stake his claim to a starting place for the next game. Even if you have a blinder for 20 mins, it's completely situational, i.e., you're attacking, chasing the game at home, and next week you will likely be starting in a different position, with different players around you, in an away game where you're asked to be a bit more solid and cautious. And if you don't perform, people say - "well he didn't grab his chance" - after 1 game! You need 3-4 to generate some confidence, and consistency and hardly anyone gets it.
Anyway, just a thought, or two. Keep up the good work lads.
-
2
-
2
-
-
On 01/04/2022 at 20:55, Osh said:
One other thing - at the Vale-Bristol Rivers game, wouldn't be great if we got the singing going along with Rovers of us singing Daryl Clarks Black and White Army and they reply Daryl Clarks Blue and White Army and we keep replying to each other for as long as possible.
They idolised Clark - as do we, and it would be great to reach out to them to ask them to do this and put revelry aside for a short while.
Keep that going for 10 mins and it will be on the news!!I want this just to royally piss off Joey Barton.
-
1
-
-
Love listening to the pod, especially the grades. For the last few games have really been enjoying:
Jonny - describes the player's game, gives a grade.
Second person - "I agree - can't really add anything to that." *Proceeds to talk for the next 2-3 minutes about said player.*
Can't believe that inplayman's tip of the week isn't Jonny to say: "I love Harry Charsley. I just love everything about him." (which I assume also means his facial hair!?)
-
1
-
-
Boys, re. possession data, I remember hearing Duncan Alexander from Opta once talking about how they measure it only from the number of passes, not duration or anything like that. So you can play 10 quick passes between the centre backs, and it would count the same as a 10 pass move that forwards, sideways and backwards.
It's one reason why Barca's possession stats always looked so crazy - yes, they did have more of the ball, but the quick 1-2-3-4 type passing added a padding effect to it.
-
1
-
-
Some (slightly edited an hour later )thoughts for you on the game fellas.
You would have to consider it 2 points dropped, after being a goal up. Until Angol came on, Bradford were pretty dreadful going forward, Vernam apart. Their midfield was non-existent although they were effective in stopping us playing. We used the ball poorly, particularly in forward areas out wide, and especially on over/underlapping runs where opportunities were ignored. We had a couple of decent long range efforts, but not much in terms of clear cut chances. Robinson probably had his best game for Vale.
For us, Gibbons looked one of our liveliest players, looking to drive forward at every opportunity, but wasn't involved much in the 2nd half until late on. Worrall was very quiet but grew in influence as the game wore on and helped. The midfield didn't seem balanced to me today - Conlon clearly had the class, but didn't get it enough in the right areas to consistently hurt Bradford; when he did, he made things happen. Pett was tidy, but that's all you could say, and Garrity had one of those days where his energy was evident but didn't bring any returns.
For them, Threlkeld should have gone for those 2 fouls, in the first half, and then really, the whole game changed once Angol came on. The first thing he did was be aggressive in a challenge with Jones, and that set the tone - Bradford suddenly had a focal point to play off and they made the most of it. Good header for the goal, Covolan could never have saved it. Smith's mistake really - not only did he give it away with some strange outside of the boot punt, he then chased out to try and close down, was still nowhere near, and wasn't in the middle to deal with the incoming cross (which was decent).
Wilson's goal was fantastic - great turn and pass from him out wide, then sprinted 60 yards to get on the end of some comical defending.
The subs clearly struggled, but I didn't really blame them to be honest. Taylor was energetic and trying to get involved in the game, but once Wilson went off, we seemed to sit deeper, and just launch it forwards at Lloyd and Rodney. Neither did much, but they weren't exactly offered great service, one excellent Worrall cross fizzed across the 6 yard box aside. At first glance, I thought Conlon's through ball to Lloyd for his great chance was slightly behind him to be honest, and his first touch took him back in to the defence. At least with the competition, Politic will be straining at the leash next week.
Regarding the ref, when the crowd got on his back late on - the keeper's challenge on Rodney was clumsy rather than malicious. He knew he would probably get Rodney on the follow through, but Rodney slightly slipped into it, and it probably made it look worse than it was. The Canavan elbow on Lloyd after was worse - the kind of sly dig that is deliberate, and that you couldn't get away with in the Premier League with VAR, but you can a lot at this level.
If Bradford are in the playoffs come May, Adams deserves to be Manager of the Year.
-
I wouldn't put too much stock in the McKirdy decision - it make much of a difference to be honest - it's just a body in the squad, and only for the last 8 games. There is Bob hope of him being here next season - he isn't the kind of player that Clarke will tolerate.
Anyone who doesn't think there is going to be an enormous upheaval in the summer is just not paying attention.
* Loads of out of contract players
* Underperforming squad
* It's the first window to start constructing the new world order under Flitcroft and Clarke
* History of Clarke ripping things up
* The way he plays (multiple formations, even within games) demands a flexible squad makeup
* The state of the COVID/post COVID player & contract market
I would expect there to be 7-8 new starters the first day of next season.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, stupers said:
I think that's an interesting point. If you don't have forwards in those wide positions, is it more of a 4-5-1? It certainly felt more like that under Askey. If you look at Liverpool who are the experts at 4-3-3, a front line of Salah, Firmino and Mane includes 3 forward, who press further up the pitch.
A great point, I'll bring this up on the next pod. Thanks for the feedback!
There's obviously different ways you can play it; and it depends on the other players available to you, right? How attacking are your fullbacks, where does your width come from, do you mainly attack centrally or from wide? The Liverpool front 3 are world class players with great chemistry, so it looks seamless. We can't decide who the main striker is, which side Worrall should play, whether Amoo will play more than 3 games in a row, whether Monty is a winger or fullback.
Askey prioritised system over players; to me, I can't understand why he didn't look at a 3-5-2/(or even a 3-4-3) to be honest - you could have had Gibbons/Monty on either side, or even Worrall on the right. The defence could have some extra cover for the lack of pace. Joyce would still be part of a 3, playing to his strengths. In a 3-5-2 you could partner up strikers, or even play Amoo and allow him to drift wide and take up those positions allowing a midfielder to break forward into the box. There were plenty of options to offer flexibility.
-
3 hours ago, robf said:
Blimey the "September Update" is at least shorter but no less garbled.
I presume it's an attack on the phoenix club being set up...
https://www.buryfc.co.uk/news/latest-statement-07-08-2020/september/september-update/
There's a definite Den Perry vibe to it...
Flitcroft gone
in Port Vale present
Posted
You are conflating multiple things.
I would not say that she is either without blame (although using the word blame in itself is revealing), nor immune from criticism. Mistakes have been made. Bad decisions look likely to cost us our League 1 place. That is obviously hugely disappointing. But in context, we are still light years ahead of where we were 4 years ago.
No-one wants to be in League 2. The next DoF appointment is key. We have to try and get back up at the first try, which will be challenging.
But thinking that having a local, successful businessperson who is also a proper fan is NOT the ideal custodian, is genuinely a crazy perspective. So what if she makes bad decisions sometimes? She's not likely to be perfect. If she can explain them, or front up, or apologise, then that's more than most would do anyway. How many owners of clubs are actually 'good' owners?
Our natural ceiling is halfway up League 1. Anything higher is great, but it's overachievement. When she talked about it, she was laughed out of the room. Then she referenced little Port Vale, and got pelters. So she can't win really.
I'm not happy with where we are. But we should be happy with the ownership, despite the shemozzle of the season.