Proving the naysayers wrong...

[Dibden Purlieu Saint]

After our last 2 performances I'm hoping Nigel will continue to play the correct players, in the correct formation, making the correct substitutions for the situation (although it does seem that perhaps someone else was influencing these decisions). I will be more than happy for him to prove me wrong, as I am sure others like TDD, Alpine and The Kraken will agree.

 

There is a long way to go, but lets hope we continue this form against Newcastle.

 

UTS!

[Sour Mash]

Thanks for sharing that with us.

[ibizasaint]

Fair play to you mate.... in the end everyone here is on the same side... despite the obsessions with agendas, bickering etc.

[Raging Bull]

Thanks for bringing this up, i mean this hadn't occured to me before, cheers.

 

I'm also sure NA looks on here desperate to prove DPS wrong

[david in sweden]

After our last 2 performances I'm hoping Nigel will continue to play the correct players, in the correct formation, making the correct substitutions for the situation (although it does seem that perhaps someone else was influencing these decisions) QUOTE]

 

 

Of course we've all done our share of criticising this season Dibden, haven't we ?... but I'm not sure I understand the logic on the OP?.

 

Apart from Jack Cork, who we all knew was injured before the season started..but is now thankfully back, and the fact that Puncheon is playing his best football since joining the club..What else is new ?

 

The squad is the same and still includes those players that many said were such a waste of money...so has Nigel Adkins suddenly hit on the correct phrases of encouragement in his pre-match chats?...or finally started listening to the advice from so many of this site?.......I think not! ..or are you suggesting that Nicola Cortese has stopped picking the side.. and let Adkins have a go instead?

 

If so ....it's not so obvious to me, as the formation looks unchanged as does the squad selection.

 

My own thoughts are only that our previously " zero-experienced Prem.Squad " are rapidly learning the ropes in the Prem. where it's painfully obvious that we can't get the better of the Manchester's and the Arsenal's...(as yet) ..thank goodness we haven't played Chelsea..but that we are a good enough footballing side to consider that survival is the prime target this season, and the hope that - if they continue to play..as we've seen they can....the squad (with one or two additions)....might look even better by this time NEXT season.

[Wes Tender]

Thanks for starting an entirely new thread; it really is needed. After all that you have said about how we are certainties to be relegated I'm relieved to see that the penny has finally dropped, that it is a long season and that there is nearly three quarters of it still remaining. Well done.

[Dibden Purlieu Saint]

After our last 2 performances I'm hoping Nigel will continue to play the correct players, in the correct formation, making the correct substitutions for the situation (although it does seem that perhaps someone else was influencing these decisions) QUOTE]

 

 

Of course we've all done our share of criticising this season Dibden, haven't we ?... but I'm not sure I understand the logic on the OP?.

 

Apart from Jack Cork, who we all knew was injured before the season started..but is now thankfully back, and the fact that Puncheon is playing his best football since joining the club..What else is new ?

 

The squad is the same and still includes those players that many said were such a waste of money...so has Nigel Adkins suddenly hit on the correct phrases of encouragement in his pre-match chats?...or finally started listening to the advice from so many of this site?.......I think not! ..or are you suggesting that Nicola Cortese has stopped picking the side.. and let Adkins have a go instead?

 

If so ....it's not so obvious to me, as the formation looks unchanged as does the squad selection.

 

My own thoughts are only that our previously " zero-experienced Prem.Squad " are rapidly learning the ropes in the Prem. where it's painfully obvious that we can't get the better of the Manchester's and the Arsenal's...(as yet) ..thank goodness we haven't played Chelsea..but that we are a good enough footballing side to consider that survival is the prime target this season, and the hope that - if they continue to play..as we've seen they can....the squad (with one or two additions)....might look even better by this time NEXT season.

 

What, like shoehorning JRod into the side, substituting our most impressive players and not playing our best side (trying to be too clever).

[Dibden Purlieu Saint]

Thanks for starting an entirely new thread; it really is needed. After all that you have said about how we are certainties to be relegated I'm relieved to see that the penny has finally dropped, that it is a long season and that there is nearly three quarters of it still remaining. Well done.

 

I agree, thank God the penny has dropped for Nigel.

[skintsaint]

If we get more consistent then that will prove the 'naysayers' wrong, beating a really poor QPR is one thing, a good result v the Geordies is another.

[david in sweden]

What, like shoehorning JRod into the side, substituting our most impressive players and not playing our best side (trying to be too clever).

 

 

.shoehorning him into the side?.......How long do you expect Rickie Lambert to continue playing...?

 

It's logical that we must have someone to step up when RL is no longer making it. Do you recall the nightmare James Beattie had when he first arrived ...it took two seasons for him to get a regular spot.

[The Kraken]

.shoehorning him into the side?.......How long do you expect Rickie Lambert to continue playing...?

 

It's logical that we must have someone to step up when RL is no longer making it. Do you recall the nightmare James Beattie had when he first arrived ...it took two seasons for him to get a regular spot.

 

In which case Rodriguez should have been introduced gradually; not thrown straight into the side either out of position on the wing or in place of Lambert.

 

But Beattie was only 20 years old when he came here, having barely played for Blackburn's first team. Rodriguez is 23 and should be fast approaching his prime. So I'm not sure its really a decent analogy in any case.

[alpine_saint]

I do agree, but we really shouldnt lose sight of the fact that these two games were Swansea and QPR.

[Wes Tender]

I agree, thank God the penny has dropped for Nigel.

 

Either I didn't explain it very well, or you're not very good at understanding simple English. The penny dropping was you finally grasping that there is a long way to go this season.

 

If indeed a penny has dropped for Nigel after two seasons of back to back promotions, all I can say is what a pity it is that he didn't have the benefit of your vast experience of football strategy, the ability to assess the best possible team, the mental attitude of the players, their individual fitness, the understanding that they have with their team mates etc. All this knowledge you possess has enabled you to assess exactly what he has been doing wrong these past matches and I propose that as you possess demonstrably a better footballing brain than Nigel, that the club wastes no time in sacking him and appointing you in his place.

[Dig Dig]

I do agree, but we really shouldnt lose sight of the fact that these two games were Swansea and QPR.

 

Indeed, Swansea are a good side capable of beating us so we did well not lose that and then follow it up with an away win against a side with so much prem experience, something which was definitely deemed as vital on here.

[the stain]

Either I didn't explain it very well, or you're not very good at understanding simple English. The penny dropping was you finally grasping that there is a long way to go this season.

 

If indeed a penny has dropped for Nigel after two seasons of back to back promotions, all I can say is what a pity it is that he didn't have the benefit of your vast experience of football strategy, the ability to assess the best possible team, the mental attitude of the players, their individual fitness, the understanding that they have with their team mates etc. All this knowledge you possess has enabled you to assess exactly what he has been doing wrong these past matches and I propose that as you possess demonstrably a better footballing brain than Nigel, that the club wastes no time in sacking him and appointing you in his place.

 

[david in sweden]

In which case Rodriguez should have been introduced gradually; not thrown straight into the side either out of position on the wing or in place of Lambert.

 

But Beattie was only 20 years old when he came here, having barely played for Blackburn's first team. Rodriguez is 23 and should be fast approaching his prime.

So I'm not sure its really a decent analogy in any case.

 

 

Think I've lost track of your rational in this one, Kraken.

 

Jay Rod looked OK pre-season apparantly. Did any of us expect NA to leave a £6 million buy on the bench indefinitely? There was a 50/50 chance he would have started well...and he was introduced in place of Lambert (your suggestion) it happened to be the first game. On another day ....(and with better defensive options) we might have won the Man.City game, and everyone would have said how great NA's tactics were. Man.City got the points... because we gave them away. KD saved a penalty and were leading 2-1 at one stage, only our poor defending cost us that game.

 

When James Beattie, arrived we already had Östenstad, Mark Hughes and MLT as first choice strikers. It was half a season before JB got a regular spot and two months before he scored his first goal.

The following season, he managed only 8 games.(!).when Kevin Davies and Marian Pahars were first choices.

 

I don't think the age factor is always relevant. If (a/any) player is fast approaching his prime.. .at 23 (your words)....when did Rickie Lambert reach his prime?

Edited 19 November, 2012 by david in sweden

[The Kraken]

Think I've lost track of your rational in this one, Kraken.

 

Jay Rod looked OK pre-season apparantly. Did any of us expect NA to leave a £6 million buy on the bench indefinitely? There was a 50/50 chance he would have started well.

On another day ....(and with better defensive options) we might have won the Man.City game, and everyone would have said how great NA's tactics were.

Man.City got the points... because we gave them away. KD saved a penalty and were leading 2-1 at one stage, only our poor defending cost us that game.

 

When James Beattie, arrived we already had Östenstad, Mark Hughes and MLT as first choice strikers. It was half a season before JB got a regular spot and two months before he scored his first goal.

The following season, he managed only 8 games.(!).when Kevin Davies and Marian Pahars were first choices.

 

I don't think the age factor is always relevant. If (a/any) player is fast approaching his prime.. .at 23 (your words)....when did Rickie Lambert reach his prime?

 

I think you must have misread what I was saying, Dave. I'm pretty sure I wasn't advocating leaving Rodriguez on the bench indefinitely. It was why I suggested he be introduced gradually, and perhaps also play in the cup games, with the intention that that he may eventually be ready to challenge RL for a starting role (or even play alongside him in a 442). Throwing him in at RM and LM smacked of desperation at trying to shoehorn a really expensive signing into a new 4-3-3 formation. That seems to have been stopped in the past couple of games, and with Puncheon having played really well against QPR (and Mayuka challenging for that RM spot) it looks as if Rodriguez will now be looked at only to play down the middle and may have to wait for his chance.

 

I'm not sure which "other day" we may have won the Man City game, other than an extremely lucky one. I could flip that and say that on another day we could have conceded 8 goals, such was their dominance. And we didn't score until your man Rodriguez was taken off, so I'm not really following you with that one.

 

If you want to stick to your Beattie analogy, then surely you must also take that rationale with Rodriguez. Take out the huge price tag; he's still a younger player who has to earn his way into the team. Isn't he?

[Dibden Purlieu Saint]

Either I didn't explain it very well, or you're not very good at understanding simple English. The penny dropping was you finally grasping that there is a long way to go this season.

 

If indeed a penny has dropped for Nigel after two seasons of back to back promotions, all I can say is what a pity it is that he didn't have the benefit of your vast experience of football strategy, the ability to assess the best possible team, the mental attitude of the players, their individual fitness, the understanding that they have with their team mates etc. All this knowledge you possess has enabled you to assess exactly what he has been doing wrong these past matches and I propose that as you possess demonstrably a better footballing brain than Nigel, that the club wastes no time in sacking him and appointing you in his place.

 

You mock, yet as soon as he starts using the correct players in the correct positions as advocated by a few of us 'naysayers' quite a few weeks ago, we start to produce better performances and a win. I know it would be difficult to praise those of us that identified these problems, and very early on (see my thread about strange tactical decisions - the one that was locked), but come on, you don't believe it is all coincidence do you?

 

There are a number of reasons why I couldn't become Saints Manager, certainly the training side of things, the in depth tactical nous, having the correct contacts and the fact that none of my life has been spent in a footballing environment or academia, but surely you can understand that people who watch football can identify basic tactical mistakes?

Edited 19 November, 2012 by Dibden Purlieu Saint

[Dibden Purlieu Saint]

Think I've lost track of your rational in this one, Kraken.

 

Jay Rod looked OK pre-season apparantly. Did any of us expect NA to leave a £6 million buy on the bench indefinitely? There was a 50/50 chance he would have started well...and he was introduced in place of Lambert (your suggestion) it happened to be the first game. On another day ....(and with better defensive options) we might have won the Man.City game, and everyone would have said how great NA's tactics were. Man.City got the points... because we gave them away. KD saved a penalty and were leading 2-1 at one stage, only our poor defending cost us that game.

 

When James Beattie, arrived we already had Östenstad, Mark Hughes and MLT as first choice strikers. It was half a season before JB got a regular spot and two months before he scored his first goal.

The following season, he managed only 8 games.(!).when Kevin Davies and Marian Pahars were first choices.

 

I don't think the age factor is always relevant. If (a/any) player is fast approaching his prime.. .at 23 (your words)....when did Rickie Lambert reach his prime?

 

Mark Hughes played CM did he not?

[Dibden Purlieu Saint]

Indeed, Swansea are a good side capable of beating us so we did well not lose that and then follow it up with an away win against a side with so much prem experience, something which was definitely deemed as vital on here.

 

So if you don't think we should be winning games like Swansea at home, then who should we be beating?

[The9]

As the other thread got locked, here's the post I was making in there...

 

I didn't criticise against Swansea I don't think, so find this confusing...

 

I am making a broad point about people being critical of doing the same thing based on the outcome not the circumstances at the time or the bigger picture. It has nothing to do with whether one individual poster did or didn't criticise on one particular occasion, but there is an overarching hypocrisy in slating the manager for doing the same things all season and judging them based solely on results not the balance of probability and the circumstances at the time - i.e. some people are basically knee-jerking that everything he does when we lose is wrong, and everything he does when we win is right.

 

Personally I can see he wants to give Rodriguez a game because how else is he going to replace Lambert as a regular starter in a year or two if he doesn't get the chance to develop ? On this occasion he decided that overall Lambert would be the best option, but there were still times where having Mayuka or Rodriguez on the pitch would have meant we had a better chance of scoring (Ramirez's run where he got eased out by Ferdinand was the most obvious, no-one to pass to with their defence nowhere). We won, so that looks like a good decision - but who's to say we wouldn't have scored 5 with Rodriguez running riot ?

 

Equally, had he taken off a different 3 players at home to Man U I'm pretty sure we'd still have capitulated because all 10 starting outfielders were tangibly knackered - but there's no way of knowing that for definite, so it's ridiculous to claim it was an "error" when the alternative might have been conceding more and the decision (bring on our best 3 players left on the bench to provide fresh legs) is perfectly logical.

 

Every judgement has to be made in context, not just of the result but also of the options available and the balance of probability. Too many people here just look at the result as the be-all and end-all of what's right and wrong. I can happily say I think Adkins has been consistent in his decision-making all season and I haven't seen anything inexplicable yet - even Yoshida's run of not-greatness and keeping his place could be is down to Adkins's stated aim of keeping a stable back 4, especially with him having only just put Shaw in.

 

BTW DPS, even though I was replying to you I wasn't specifically referring to you, Dig Dig was right.

[notnowcato]

So if you don't think we should be winning games like Swansea at home, then who should we be beating?

 

I think United should be beating Norwich. What is your point?

[The9]

You mock, yet as soon as he starts using the correct players in the correct positions as advocated by a few of us 'naysayers' quite a few weeks ago, we start to produce better performances and a win. I know it would be difficult to praise those of us that identified these problems, and very early on (see my thread about strange tactical decisions - the one that was locked), but come on, you don't believe it is all coincidence do you?

 

There are a number of reasons why I couldn't become Saints Manager, certainly the training side of things, the in depth tactical nous, having the correct contacts and the fact that none of my life has been spent in a footballing environment or academia, but surely you can understand that people who watch football can identify basic tactical mistakes?

 

No, we mostly won because QPR are a lot worse than Man City, Man Utd, even Fulham and Swansea for that matter. We dominated them like we dominated some Championship games last season.

 

I've been impressed with our upturn of form but Adkins hasn't done anything majorly different, we're just not playing top half teams any more.

[Dibden Purlieu Saint]

As the other thread got locked, here's the post I was making in there...

 

 

 

I am making a broad point about people being critical of doing the same thing based on the outcome not the circumstances at the time or the bigger picture. It has nothing to do with whether one individual poster did or didn't criticise on one particular occasion, but there is an overarching hypocrisy in slating the manager for doing the same things all season and judging them based solely on results not the balance of probability and the circumstances at the time - i.e. some people are basically knee-jerking that everything he does when we lose is wrong, and everything he does when we win is right.

 

Personally I can see he wants to give Rodriguez a game because how else is he going to replace Lambert as a regular starter in a year or two if he doesn't get the chance to develop ? On this occasion he decided that overall Lambert would be the best option, but there were still times where having Mayuka or Rodriguez on the pitch would have meant we had a better chance of scoring (Ramirez's run where he got eased out by Ferdinand was the most obvious, no-one to pass to with their defence nowhere). We won, so that looks like a good decision - but who's to say we wouldn't have scored 5 with Rodriguez running riot ?

 

Equally, had he taken off a different 3 players at home to Man U I'm pretty sure we'd still have capitulated because all 10 starting outfielders were tangibly knackered - but there's no way of knowing that for definite, so it's ridiculous to claim it was an "error" when the alternative might have been conceding more and the decision (bring on our best 3 players left on the bench to provide fresh legs) is perfectly logical.

 

Every judgement has to be made in context, not just of the result but also of the options available and the balance of probability. Too many people here just look at the result as the be-all and end-all of what's right and wrong. I can happily say I think Adkins has been consistent in his decision-making all season and I haven't seen anything inexplicable yet - even Yoshida's run of not-greatness and keeping his place could be is down to Adkins's stated aim of keeping a stable back 4, especially with him having only just put Shaw in.

 

BTW DPS, even though I was replying to you I wasn't specifically referring to you, Dig Dig was right.

 

Well the insinuation was that you were, otherwise why did you reply to me? Surely just replying to the thread or the OP would be the correct thing to do?

 

In general, I think the points you are making are correct, but I also believe that blooding Rodriguez, the strange substitutions (imho of course) have cost us games. I also disagree that I don't think he has been consistent in his decision making, but I take your point on board.

[Dibden Purlieu Saint]

I think United should be beating Norwich. What is your point?

 

I wasn't making a point, I was asking a question...confused.

[Dig Dig]

So if you don't think we should be winning games like Swansea at home, then who should we be beating?

 

It's not about who we should or shouldn't be beating. It's about getting the right number of results come the end of the season.

[Dibden Purlieu Saint]

No, we mostly won because QPR are a lot worse than Man City, Man Utd, even Fulham and Swansea for that matter. We dominated them like we dominated some Championship games last season.

 

I've been impressed with our upturn of form but Adkins hasn't done anything majorly different, we're just not playing top half teams any more.

 

QPR at home are better than Fulham away with the number of injuries Fulham had and the fact that Fulham are notoriously horrific away.

[Saint Charlie]

It's not about who we should or shouldn't be beating. It's about getting the right number of results come the end of the season.

 

Typically evasive from you.

[Dibden Purlieu Saint]

It's not about who we should or shouldn't be beating. It's about getting the right number of results come the end of the season.

 

Of course it is, and at the beginning of the season you go through the fixtures and identify the matches we should be winning. And that is surely one of them.

[Dig Dig]

Typically evasive from you.

 

Maybe you should go and update your failed agenda thread with your Dig Dig agenda

[Saint Charlie]

Maybe you should go and update your failed agenda thread with your Dig Dig agenda

 

Good comeback kid. Keep fighting with a reckless abandon.

[Tony F]

Jay Rod looked OK pre-season apparantly. Did any of us expect NA to leave a £6 million buy on the bench indefinitely? There was a 50/50 chance he would have started well...and he was introduced in place of Lambert (your suggestion) it happened to be the first game.

 

I think this is a good example of a misunderstanding of the team set-up on that opening day - and a few since then - that has contributed to fan disquiet.

 

Jay Rod did NOT start the Man City match in place of Lambert; Guly was playing a central role up-front and Jay Rod was on the left wing, with Adam playing in the middle.

 

This "Jay Rod on the left and Adam in the middle" scenario has been tried by Nigel on a few occasions in our opening 10 games and simply has not worked. Not once. Both seem to dislike their appointed roles and are not suited to them.

 

Now we have Ramierez fit again and back in the middle, Adam can go on the left which means the only place for Jay Rod is either on the bench or playing in place of Ricky (or starting on the bench and coming on for Ricky).

 

For the time being its my view this is our best combination, especially supported by Punch on the Right, and showing the quality we saw against QPR.

[Dibden Purlieu Saint]

Maybe you should go and update your failed agenda thread with your Dig Dig agenda

 

He's got you there Charlie

 

[david in sweden]

Mark Hughes played CM did he not?

 

.Depended on the formation of the day I suppose....but wherever he played, he didn't show one iota of the scoring prowess from his Man Utd. days.

 

I seem to recall he got booked every other game .....

[david in sweden]

no, we mostly won because qpr are a lot worse than man city, man utd, even fulham and swansea for that matter. We dominated them like we dominated some championship games last season.

 

I've been impressed with our upturn of form but adkins hasn't done anything majorly different, we're just not playing top half teams any more.

 

 

this !

[The9]

Well the insinuation was that you were, otherwise why did you reply to me? Surely just replying to the thread or the OP would be the correct thing to do?

 

In general, I think the points you are making are correct, but I also believe that blooding Rodriguez, the strange substitutions (imho of course) have cost us games. I also disagree that I don't think he has been consistent in his decision making, but I take your point on board.

 

I generally reply to people directly then waffle off on tangents. As if no-one has ever noticed that.

[The9]

QPR at home are better than Fulham away with the number of injuries Fulham had and the fact that Fulham are notoriously horrific away.

 

Good job I already know you didn't go, or I'd have to have said "you clearly didn't see them". I went to both matches and if QPR get 20 points the way they're playing they'll be lucky. Meanwhile Fulham are a competent mid-table side and will probably remain so.

 

On balance my expectation for the two matches was about the same, I felt a draw was a likely result and hoped for a win. After about 20 minutes at QPR it was pretty obvious it was only going one way, but then you could have said that at West Ham as well.

[The Kraken]

No, we mostly won because QPR are a lot worse than Man City, Man Utd, even Fulham and Swansea for that matter. We dominated them like we dominated some Championship games last season.

 

I've been impressed with our upturn of form but Adkins hasn't done anything majorly different, we're just not playing top half teams any more.

 

Since the Swansea game he has, actually. Prior to that we predominantly (bar a couple of exceptions) either went with 442 with Rodriguez up front with Lambert, or 433 with Rodriguez on the wing. Not all the time, but predominantly. Rodriguez has since made way for Ramirez returning into a proper 433 with Puncheon playing at RM. Also the frequency and number of substitutes being introduced. Again, prior to Swansea we had typically introduced all 3 subs by around the 75 - 80 minute mark at latest. Against Swansea it was just Shaw replaced, the first time all season we've only used just one sub.

 

Added to that, NA has had the fortune of having Jack Cork back, of introducing a new left back into the mix, and also being able to select a more settled back 5 unit rather than having to chop and change from game to game.

 

It may not be one major change that he's made on its own; but he's done quite a few little things together which have made a pretty big difference (not least in the fact that we've "only" conceded 2 goals in 2 games and generally looked altogether more solid).