Leam Richardson v Paul Cook | Page 8 | Vital Football

Leam Richardson v Paul Cook

I agree with most of that EV ... but your opening two sentences effectively underwrite what I said to WalgarthJohn .... that the away record was basically irrelevant given our finishing position.

Anyway, no point looking backwards ... I think we're all enjoying the achievements of the team, not to mention the commitment of the owner/Chairman.
Not really.
In our administration season, we didn't win a single game away from home until we beat Birmingham City on New Year's Day 2020.
That's an awful lot of dropped points which could've quite easily changed the complexion of the situation.

Agree with you on the last part though... 👍
 
Ahh right... the 18/19 season, the one which we started like a rocket, then probably due to his own managerial naiveties, started to play safe away from home with zero success.
We only started to go for it again away from home at Leeds on the Good Friday.

As for the administration season, I'm not blaming Cooky entirely, but whether you like it or not, he was a contributing factor.

Like I said, would the Dongers have pulled the trigger if we were on the verge of the play offs? ...Nobody can say for certain one way or the other, but the Big Bucks of the Premier League on the horizon would've probably been too tempting to pass up.

Anyways... all that's ancient history now, and like you said, going through all of that to get rid of the Dongers, and get Talal and his team in was probably (just about) worth the pain and suffering we went through.
Would we have raised our game to the extent we did after those crooks dropped us in it? Who knows?
 
Well question must be asked, 'why would Middlesbrough let him go?'

2m quid apparently!

I would've loved Morsy back but he's 30 with no resale value and on 12k a week supposedly. In L1 that is pretty crazy and i don't think we could justify that fee if it's true.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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
Who said he got sacked? 🤔
 
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:
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 ?
 
Judging by his comments he seems increasingly exasperated. I suspect coaching maybe the issue - and given the fantastic job Richardson has done with us, particularly last season, it’s not difficult to see what he’s missing.
 
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 strongly suspect that that is the plan otherwise we wouldn't have brought in Tilt. We now have too many CB's for a flat back four IMO, we have Whatmough, Watts, Kerr, Tilt, Long and Naylor who can play CB.
 
Talking of tinkering, do you think when Kerr is fully fit we will go with three at the back and play with wing backs ?
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.