Gary Caldwell..... Top bloke. | Page 2 | Vital Football

Gary Caldwell..... Top bloke.

Was Morsy booked? I thought he was as well, however it was two years ago and I'd had a few despite the early kick off so I wouldn't put my house on it. Either way I'm not sure it was great management. In that article I interpreted his words that he'd done it before although I can't recall him doing so.

My overriding memories of his managerial reign was one of stubbornness and a never ending obsession to play it aimlessly around the back at a snails pace allowing the opposition to get back in formation. I recall that game at boundary park whenever I'm struggling to sleep. In addition all too often we left the striker isolated on his own up front, scandalous really given the resources we had. It was only the loan of mcaleny that we sorted that out. Clearly Yanic was major difference and in all honesty given the team we had anything other than the title would have been a failure, whomever was in charge.

His second season was a disaster. Players fitness was well below par, the obsession with pointless passing killed us by players unsuited to such a system, let alone some of the bizzare team selections with players out of position nigh on ever week. Personally I thought he was out of his depth, his tactics were wrong and quite frankly the tedious style was boring the arse of me. I thought he was the right appointment at the time but also thought it right he was sacked. Respect and like him as a man and player. However if he's to succeed at management he needs to ignore Bobs advice and realise there is nore than one way to play the game. You need to adapt and be flexible not rigidly stick to something even when it's not working - especially if you have lower league players who don't necessarily have the skill to play a certain way.
 
That's right MiW, ignore the advice of the manager who has just taken Belgium to their best ever finish at a world cup.
Before you say it, I know he has probably got the best squad in Europe and should have won it but you get what you are given player wise. Caldwell is his own man in many respects but he was new to management and effectively had it thrown at him but he needed the advice of more seasoned pro's and Barrow and Martinez were their for him. I still think we should have stuck with him a little longer, but that's my own opinion and others are entitled to theirs. As others have said its something we will never know.

We still got the best of the bargain, although it took the club a little while to work it out, with Paul Cook.
 
That's the point I was making. Bob had a very talented squad of players that were able to play in the way he wanted. Caldwell didn't so he should have adapted. To listen to such advice at the time was very poor and his insistence on following it led to him getting the sack.
 
That's the point I was making. Bob had a very talented squad of players that were able to play in the way he wanted. Caldwell didn't so he should have adapted. To listen to such advice at the time was very poor and his insistence on following it led to him getting the sack.

I agree he did have a good group of players but he coaches them to play in that system, given time who knows what Caldwell could have done with the players he had at his disposal.

Where I also agree with you is that Caldwell was too rigid in his thinking and should have adapted his system to suit the players and then coached them to play the way he wanted them to over time.

Unfortunately, as I say, in my opinion he didn't get the time. Possibly attributable to inexperience and the flush of being a young manager, and maybe from following advice to the letter instead of adapting it to suit the circumstances. Lets face it we all give and get advice, its what we do with the suggestions that make it good or bad advice, and how we put that advice into practice that sorts the chaff from the wheat, or a good manager from a poor one. I don't believe Caldwell was able make best use of the advice given.
 
Not one player was booked in that game, Morsy was having a stinker, as well as a few others, but Caldwell claiming taking him off changed the game is also B/S we were getting opened up constantly by a Blackpool central midfielder, for some bizarre reason Blackpool chose to substitute him and that is when we got control of the game, Mc Canns opening goal was against the run of play, Wildschuts first broke them, the rest is history.

The back four was actually a back five with McCann stepping into midfield at times, we had used this line up for much of the season with the exception of Pierce who was carrying a knock and only on the subs bench.
Stand corrected, memory banks fading, but Dezeuew excellent summary reignited some elements. Anyway still recall it being a shambles of a first half
 
'We are getting obsessed with this stupid play out from the back, split the centre halves either side of the 18 yard box and go play from there...it's utter rubbish to play like that all the time.

When you're the best at it like City then you can do it.'

Says Sam Allardyce this afternoon. Pity he didn't advise Caldwell two years ago!
 
That's the point I was making. Bob had a very talented squad of players that were able to play in the way he wanted. Caldwell didn't so he should have adapted. To listen to such advice at the time was very poor and his insistence on following it led to him getting the sack.
It suits your (and others who also didn't have the capacity to understand Caldwells football philosophy) agenda to believe it was a sacking based on football. I know there was a spat between the young manager and the young chairman, and the sacking was a result of petulance. Don't ask me how I know, I won't be divulging that.
It was a poor call without doubt.
 
My overriding memories of his managerial reign was one of stubbornness and a never ending obsession to play it aimlessly around the back at a snails pace allowing the opposition to get back in formation.
A week before our cup game against Man City last season, I watched the 2nd half of their game against Southampton (if memory serves), I said to City mate of mine that the problem with City is that they take too long from when they get the ball to then get it up to the final third, thus allowing the opposition every opportunity to get easily back into position. It was also a reason as to how we managed to beat them.
Yet they are the best team in the country!
Edit: AND they play the same way all the time! As did Barcelona.
 
City do this in the final 3rd as well....one way then back the other then back again and again all along the edge of our box. Talk about over passing....I remember saying at the time " why don't they bloody shoot ? ". Thank God they didn't.
 
Hold on a minute MiW ...................... let's not be holding Allardyce up as an oracle on tactics and strategy !

I'm not. However being so stubborn that it prohibits adaptability, flexibility, creativity and innovation in whatever pursuit in life rarely ends well.
 
Then again .........."believe"! Unless you're committed to a plan, it's not going to work. Thinking that "ah, we can always switch to plan B" would surely impede the successful implementation of plan A.

On man's stubborn is another man's committed.
 
It suits your (and others who also didn't have the capacity to understand Caldwells football philosophy) agenda to believe it was a sacking based on football. I know there was a spat between the young manager and the young chairman, and the sacking was a result of petulance. Don't ask me how I know, I won't be divulging that.
It was a poor call without doubt.

Philosophy is the new buzzword that has crept into the game in the past decade. People swallow it hook, line and sinker. Unfortunately following one does not automatically make a manager a good one.
 
Then again .........."believe"! Unless you're committed to a plan, it's not going to work. Thinking that "ah, we can always switch to plan B" would surely impede the successful implementation of plan A.

On man's stubborn is another man's committed.

It doesn't impede, it means one has options when faced with differing scenarios. Or to put it another way, it means you don't put all your eggs into the one basket.
 
A week before our cup game against Man City last season, I watched the 2nd half of their game against Southampton (if memory serves), I said to City mate of mine that the problem with City is that they take too long from when they get the ball to then get it up to the final third, thus allowing the opposition every opportunity to get easily back into position. It was also a reason as to how we managed to beat them.
Yet they are the best team in the country!
Edit: AND they play the same way all the time! As did Barcelona.

Yes, but they have the players with the requisite skill to play that way. Most teams below the elite level don't.
 
Of course it might. The world is full of people who think they tried, but in reality, didn't try hard enough........and instead, took a cushier option.

I get the argument about having the right players ............ but if a player can't pass to a teammate, why's he playing football in the first place?
 
Of course it might. The world is full of people who think they tried, but in reality, didn't try hard enough........and instead, took a cushier option.

I get the argument about having the right players ............ but if a player can't pass to a teammate, why's he playing football in the first place?

Cushier option or the more realistic one? All players can pass, but it's a lot more difficult sport than that!
 
All the more reason to keep on applying the effort to hone the skills that enable/deliver that higher level of performance.

The trick is that those without the ball have to play their part too by being in a position where they can receive a pass. Not having sufficient passing options is when players lose possession.

Hoofing it is cushy. A couple of teammates making the effort to be in a position to relieve the pressure means that we retain possession, and (hopefully) continue with the attack.

Dan Burn is by far the best example of someone going from Bambi to a decent ball player. Persistence.
 
So effectively you now admit it takes more than being able to pass a football to play the way Caldwell persisted with! Sometimes a skill can't be honed despite effort, desire and application. Those that have that skill to the standard required to make that system work are invariably not plying their trade in the Championship.