By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Danny Murphy & Tony Cascarino both suggesting that us and Southampton have disrespected the Premier League by refusing to change our styles of play, thinking we could out-football teams.
Murphy accused both managers of running vanity projects of their own ideals rather than adapting, or cutting their cloth to get the best out of what they have at their disposal.
We shouldn’t have come up and attempted Burnley-ball with Championship standard players, it was incredibly naive and doomed to fail but absolutely nothing to do with vanity.
Someone posted a video of a lad from Barnsley exposing that this stuff about Ipswich not changing is absolute ballony. He showed the stats which demonstrate how from Lg 1 to today our play has evolved. Basically that we play a lot more long balls and make a lot more clearances now than we did before.
I simply ask him what he wants us to do? Become long ball merchants? Yeah, that'll work! Not.
Someone posted a video of a lad from Barnsley exposing that this stuff about Ipswich not changing is absolute ballony. He showed the stats which demonstrate how from Lg 1 to today our play has evolved. Basically that we play a lot more long balls and make a lot more clearances now than we did before.
I simply ask him what he wants us to do? Become long ball merchants? Yeah, that'll work! Not.
Click bait nonsense for a pundit.
It seems so obvious but we are playing a completely different style to league 1 and the championship, even though the formation is the same we are much more direct, and play out from the back much less.
It will be nice to be rid of these clueless pundits next year.
They'd all laugh at me if they knew what I was trying to do. To create a new strain of super-wine in half-an-hour with a fraction of nature's resources and a FOOL for an assistant. 'Bernard Black, he's mad,' they'd say, 'he's insane, he's dangerous.' Well I'll show them! I'll show them all!
I don't really understand the point they're making. Who or what is feeling 'disrespected'?
It's the punditry promotional rite of passage: you pass quickly through the "breath of fresh air" period into the "I'm starting to worry for them" era. Then, onward to the "defensively naive" stage, and finally, to the "for me, they're gone" verdict.
It's the latest bandwagon they are all jumping on since Burnley's time, it's a lazy stereotype, but the buzzword for the moment.
None of these pundits can use their brains to reason why teams struggle, they all cite the 'Managers won't change' argument which is lazy at best.
But it's Talksport, so you can't expect much.
When you see they employ absolute whoppers like O'Hara and Cundy, and then give them their own show, you can see why they attract the cesspit of pundits.
The No.9 problem I think simply comes down to finding someone available, of sufficient assured quality (we already had a punt in Delap), within our price range, with the right mentality, likely to remain fit (not Broja) and willing to come to Ipswich (Ioannidis wasn't). That narrows the field considerably. Going abroad doesn't guarantee they'll be any good in the English Prem (differences in standard/style).
We just ran out of options and time, not wishing to load up the transfer/wage bill with someone who wasn't even predicted to be able to do the job.
It feels like we left all our eggs in one basket
The big surprise for me was we didn't have someone identified for January and it's not like we could have found someone
We were linked with Michy Batshuayi as an example who ended up going on loan to Frankfurt, he'd have done a job imho
Instead we now have Delap and Hirst who talented as he is, has a terrible injury record. It is a very risky strategy.
We loaned out Al-Hamadi thinking about deal was pretty much done presumably.
[Post edited 24 Mar 12:52]
Alcohol is the answer but I can't remember the question!
On MOTD last week, on the commentary of the Forest game we were accused of being naive during the commentary when we got caught out for the 4th goal as we were pushing to try and score a goal.
We were 3-1 down with 4 minutes left, other than chasing the game and taking risks the alternative was to see it out at 1-3.....it's hardly naive to not want to do that
Tbh, our experience this season has made me re-evaluate my criticism of Burnley last year and Southampton this. Basically, there's lots of different ways to get relegated from this division and increasingly fewer ways of staying up. If anything is naive it's the idea that there's one tactical approach that will make a huge difference to your chances if the player quality isn't there (which it usually isn't).
I think we've tried to be adaptable. We've sat in a low block sometimes, we've been aggressive at others time, there's games where we've gone long, games where we've tried to dominate possession. Some of it worked some of the time, most of it didn't, most of the time.
I do think we should have played 4-3-3 this season. I do think we could have concentrated more on the midfield in the summer. I remember Murphy saying at the beginning of the season that he thought we had enough to stay up, so hindsight is a wonderful thing.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
