Leam Richardson v Paul Cook | Page 9 | Vital Football

Leam Richardson v Paul Cook

jeffs right

Vital 1st Team Regular
Well Sam made his debut tonight in his side's home defeat to West Ham's kids.
Apparently a brilliant classic demonstration of Cookism.
Despite using the 'gell' excuse for his side's pathetic start to the season an ideal opportunity was scorned tonight with many changes which is sending the Ipswich fans into a rage on social media.
 
Well Sam made his debut tonight in his side's home defeat to West Ham's kids.
Apparently a brilliant classic demonstration of Cookism.
Despite using the 'gell' excuse for his side's pathetic start to the season an ideal opportunity was scorned tonight with many changes which is sending the Ipswich fans into a rage on social media.
Their next 2 are Lincoln City (A) and Sheffield Wednesday (H).
If he doesn't get at least 3pts from them... he's history.
 

jeffs right

Vital 1st Team Regular
Cooky didnt get sacked at Wigan he apparently resigned in a bid to save us money and thus survive. I sense some are willing Ipswich to lose for the wrong reasons.. Yes as rivals I want Ipswich to lose but it would give me no pleasure to see Cooky sacked
Wouldn't wish him sacked but I would see Ipswich possibly as a promotion rival. While he is there it is keeping them out of the pack.
 
Well Sam made his debut tonight in his side's home defeat to West Ham's kids.
Apparently a brilliant classic demonstration of Cookism.
Despite using the 'gell' excuse for his side's pathetic start to the season an ideal opportunity was scorned tonight with many changes which is sending the Ipswich fans into a rage on social media.
I often think 'gelling' is a bit of an excuse used to try and cover up coaching struggles.

Understandably a new team of players will improve as they get more familiar with each other I'd say that is gelling and fair enough.

But sometimes managers haven't got their players fit or organised, have picked wrong tactics etc and I think they throw that in as 'gelling' when it's not really about the players as they did as they were instructed.

For example when Moore, Lowe, Williams etc arrived a few years ago we adjusted our tactics and while the new players settling in was a factor, if we had established players those tactics would've seen them struggle also. When we started to play better some of the players had adapted better but the biggest difference was the change in tactics. So I think a teams struggles can passed off as the players gelling when the reality was the coaching staff at the time were making bad choices as they try and work out what they want to do with their new players. It's understandable a coach may need time to adjust and tinker with his side and the players adapt but I think that gelling is often putting more emphasis on the players when it's often more the coaches adapting.
 
Last edited:
I often think 'gelling' is a bit of an excuse used to try and cover up coaching struggles.

Understandably a new team of players will improve as they get more familiar with each other I'd say that is gelling and fair enough.

But sometimes managers haven't got their players fit or organised, have picked wrong tactics etc and I think they throw that in as 'gelling' when it's not really about the players as they did as they were instructed.

For example when Moore, Lowe, Williams etc arrived a few years ago we adjusted our tactics and while the new players settling in was a factor, if we had established players those tactics would've seen them struggle also. When we started to play better some of the players had adapted better but the biggest difference was the change in tactics. So I think a teams struggles can passed off as the players gelling when the reality was the coaching staff at the time were making bad choices as they try and work out what they want to do with their new players. It's understandable a coach may need time to adjust and tinker with his side and the players adapt but I think that gelling is often putting more emphasis on the players when it's often more the coaches adapting.
Make no mistake about it, that Ipswich team will take A LOT of gelling (maybe even longer than their Hierarchy are willing to give Cook).
They really are unbalanced at the moment, excessively top heavy in Midfield & Attack, and bare bones at the back.
Will Morsy make a difference? ...I'm not so sure it will.

IF Cook is still Ipswich Manager in January (which I very much doubt), I can see him going back into the transfer market to get Dunkley and Kiprè to shore up his defence.
 
Last edited:

ZAKKY

Vital 1st Team Regular
I often think 'gelling' is a bit of an excuse used to try and cover up coaching struggles.

Understandably a new team of players will improve as they get more familiar with each other I'd say that is gelling and fair enough.

But sometimes managers haven't got their players fit or organised, have picked wrong tactics etc and I think they throw that in as 'gelling' when it's not really about the players as they did as they were instructed.

For example when Moore, Lowe, Williams etc arrived a few years ago we adjusted our tactics and while the new players settling in was a factor, if we had established players those tactics would've seen them struggle also. When we started to play better, some of the players had adapted better but the biggest difference was the change in tactics. So I think a team's struggles can be passed off as the players gelling, when the reality was the coaching staff at the time were making bad choices as they try and work out what they want to do with their new players. It's understandable a coach may need time to adjust and tinker with his side and the players adapt, but I think that gelling is often putting more emphasis on the players when it's often more the coaches adapting.

Talking of tinkering, do you think when Kerr is fully fit we will go with three at the back and play with wing backs ?
 
Talking of tinkering, do you think when Kerr is fully fit we will go with three at the back and play with wing backs ?
I think it's a possibility and we will want to have a back 3 as an option we can switch to but I dont think we'll change much until we get injuries or a loss of form / poor results justify a shake up.

We've basically got far too many good players to fit into any system so we can't possibly include the all. But it's a nice problem to have.

I think if you can play wing backs effectively in an attacking way with the left and right centre halfs getting involved in attacks it's very good, but often teams play it in a negative way which is more like a 5 man defence which is dreadful. So I'm neither for nor against the idea of a switch in theory it just depends how well we'd play it. But right now I think we probably need to focus refining our 4-2-3-1 and get that firing on all cylinders.
 
Let's hope not. Left back and right back should be as they are defenders. Wing backs can possibly work if you have top notch players. At our level it's crap.
Let's concentrate in getting crosses in with a winger and not defenders.
In the modern game movement is everything and overloads are a huge part of a successful style of play. The full backs always have the most time and space when joining attacks so they are real difference makers if they can do it well.

I think good attacking full backs used to be a nice bonus but these days are essential.
 
Cook at Ipswich P24 W4 L10 D10
Leam at Latics P44 W15 D12 L17

Leam took over a crumbling squad in freefall
We had a terrible run of losses. Garner and kal wanting out. Had a lot of tough losses in there and losing leads. Then Sunderland and Burton away gava a bit of hope. He had a transfer window and made a team that put together a great escape. Mostly in admin. Couple of losses like Swindon maybe didn't matter but still add to the losses and Hull and Bolton count as draws in that record and they produced morale boosting penalty nights. This is Leams squad now and he's been well backed and the league table and general feel at the club are all on the increase.

Cook took over a team in a good postiton and took them backwards. Was also well back in summer but the results and general feel there is sour as well.

I'm happy we've got Leam based on all that. I'm wondering how long cook will get now.
 
Make no mistake about it, that Ipswich team will take A LOT of gelling (maybe even longer than their Hierarchy are willing to give Cook).
They really are unbalanced at the moment, excessively top heavy in Midfield & Attack, and bare bones at the back.
Will Morsy make a difference? ...I'm not so sure it will.

IF Cook is still Ipswich Manager in January (which I very much doubt), I can see him going back into the transfer market to get Dunkley and Kiprè to shore up his defence.
I wouldn't say they are bare bones defensively.

They've got Walton, Hlandky, Holy for keeper.

They've got Morsy, Evans, Harper and Carroll to sit in front of the back 4.

Then Burgess, Edmundson, Woolfeden and Nisala for centre half.

Then they've got Penny, Coulson, Vincent-Young and Donacien for full backs.

I think they have their full contingent of 2 good players in every defensive spot with 10 of the 15 defensive players being signed in the summer.

I think they've got possibly the most balanced and deep squad in the division. If the window was open any longer I think they probably wouldn't have sign anyone else.
 
I wouldn't say they are bare bones defensively.

They've got Walton, Hlandky, Holy for keeper.

They've got Morsy, Evans, Harper and Carroll to sit in front of the back 4.

Then Burgess, Edmundson, Woolfeden and Nisala for centre half.

Then they've got Penny, Coulson, Vincent-Young and Donacien for full backs.

I think they have their full contingent of 2 good players in every defensive spot with 10 of the 15 defensive players being signed in the summer.

I think they've got possibly the most balanced and deep squad in the division. If the window was open any longer I think they probably wouldn't have sign anyone else.
I meant "bare bones" as in, their entire back 4 are absolute bobbins, and given the fact they've already conceded 15 goals (most conceded in League 1), I guess I'm not far wrong...
 

jeffs right

Vital 1st Team Regular
In the modern game movement is everything and overloads are a huge part of a successful style of play. The full backs always have the most time and space when joining attacks so they are real difference makers if they can do it well.

I think good attacking full backs used to be a nice bonus but these days are essential.
They always did king. We have had an history of defenders coming forward and overlapping with a winger ie Billy Sutherland, Leighton Baines, Alan Tankard, Kevin Kilbane but there wasnt a reliance on them getting the crosses in. That was the job of the winger but we were not stuck in the rut of one striker and two lines of midfielders then either.
 

The_Pon

Vital Reserves Team
https://www.eadt.co.uk/sport/ipswich-town/itfc-boss-paul-cook-on-leam-richardson-debate-8332700

Saw this earlier. Cook is still saying all the same guff he came out with here to try to defend woeful performances and results.

I doubt the new Ipswich owners, with all the money they've put in, will have the seemingly unlimited patience our owners at the time gave him: with the benefit of hindsight, our Chinese shysters couldn't have cared less... I doubt the new Ipswich owners feel the same.

He's my odds on favourite to get the chop first in L1.