Nigel Adkins Out of His Depth

[colehillsaint]

I know the Internet is a crappy horrible place and everything but people feeling the need to demean the acheivements of our last manager is depressing me every time I bother to look on here. Can't we just move on. I'm sure he has.

[colehillsaint]

I can't believe there's even discussion about him being out of his depth. It's fine to move on, back the new guy, whatever. But the fact is saints were doing fine for a first season the top flight. If they'd have been 20th and cut off you could suggest he was out of his depth, but even then it would be very harsh for a first season and rule out the prospect of a manager learning and improving.

 

Awful example for young British coaches isn't it, do that well and people will just call you out of your depth. Really hope he proves idiots wrong by doing well in the top flight elsewhere. Although I imagine they'll still find ways to turn that negative too.

 

FWIW I couldn't agree more, but I am just tired of reading about it. I want to get behind the team and try to begin to re-assemble the feelings of optimism and excitement I had after the Chelsea result. I can always see both sides of most debates, but I really wish those that believe MP offers a brighter future didn't feel the need to denigrate Nigel to make their point. You and many others feel the need to weigh in and defend Nigel, and I can't blame you, because I agree, but it just seems odd that some of those wanting unity behind MP can't resist pot shots at Nigel designed to antagonise those that liked him. That is the internet for you. It's sad because before a week ago last Friday, i thought the Saints fan base seemed more together as one than at any time I can remember.

[FloridaMarlin]

Had an interesting chat with a mate today who had an off-the-record talk to a senior player.

Far from being on the verge of revolt over Adkins' sacking, the players were not that bothered.

They were bemused and a little concerned at some of his decisions and man management.

For example, leaving Rickie out, or on the bench, and not telling the goalkeepers until an hour before kick-off which one of them was playing.

Also, after his appearance against Chelsea, Chaplow was made to train with the youth team.

You can, of course, see this as an example of how fickle players are but they certainly seem to have taken to the new regime with smiles on their faces.

[Thedelldays]

Had an interesting chat with a mate today who had an off-the-record talk to a senior player.

Far from being on the verge of revolt over Adkins' sacking, the players were not that bothered.

They were bemused and a little concerned at some of his decisions and man management.

For example, leaving Rickie out, or on the bench, and not telling the goalkeepers until an hour before kick-off which one of them was playing.

Also, after his appearance against Chelsea, Chaplow was made to train with the youth team.

You can, of course, see this as an example of how fickle players are but they certainly seem to have taken to the new regime with smiles on their faces.

interesting

[St Matty]

PR plants would use paragraphs.

 

Fact is Nigel was out of his depth at the beginning of the season but, like many of the players, he was learning to swim. He made mistakes, like many of the players, but the fundamentals were (in my opinion) sound. If you believe in happy endings, he would have probably got us to where Cortese wants to go but not half as fast as Cortese wants to get there.

 

The one area I think NA was lacking was one that he couldn't learn - and that is international profile. Do you think Pep or Jose would know of 'our Nige' - unlikely, and the same would be true of players we were trying to attract. Having played for Argentina and managed in La Liga, Pochettino at least has that. Spending big is a way of getting there faster. And say what you like about NA, but his signings were typically English and from the lower leagues (understandably).

 

Cortese probably thought, loyalty, schmoyalty - I want results.

 

As an afterthought, I do wonder if when Nigel took the job he was told that it was to get us to the Premiership and then Cortese would reassess. Hence the emotion after promotion last year - that might be reading too much into a highly charged situation, but if he thought his job was done (or uncertain), would explain the comments.

 

It is far to early to say whether MP does the business, but is probably better placed than NA to do it quicker; but that depends on us staying up.

 

p.s. If there were big rumblings from the players I've not heard of them (at least not before the sacking).

 

Given that NC wanted the prem in 5 years didn't NA overachieve? As for player unrest - wrong - they loved him,.

[trousers]

http://www.skysports.com/opinion/story/0,,18932_8431978,00.html

[Wes Tender]

The one area I think NA was lacking was one that he couldn't learn - and that is international profile. Do you think Pep or Jose would know of 'our Nige' - unlikely, and the same would be true of players we were trying to attract. Having played for Argentina and managed in La Liga, Pochettino at least has that.

 

Pochettino doesn't particularly have an international profile. The reaction from most on here was to say who? So he didn't register much in arguably the best league in the World. OK, he managed one of the medium sized in Spain, so Guiardiola and Mourinho knew of him. A bit like saying that saying that Ferguson and Wenger knew Adkins. So he played for Argentina and that registered with most people solely because he gave away a penalty to an Owen dive that put them out of the World Cup.

 

European players would come here mainly because of what we would be paying them, because they want to play in the Premiership, because we already have attracted some good foreign players, because Cortese has some contacts, etc. Pochettino might have an edge with Argentinan players and some Spanish ones, but that's as far as it goes.

[Turkish]

Had an interesting chat with a mate today who had an off-the-record talk to a senior player.

Far from being on the verge of revolt over Adkins' sacking, the players were not that bothered.

They were bemused and a little concerned at some of his decisions and man management.

For example, leaving Rickie out, or on the bench, and not telling the goalkeepers until an hour before kick-off which one of them was playing.

Also, after his appearance against Chelsea, Chaplow was made to train with the youth team.

You can, of course, see this as an example of how fickle players are but they certainly seem to have taken to the new regime with smiles on their faces.

 

Interesting and i have been told by others you are someone we should listen to on here. Thanks.

 

Bizarre about chaplow.

[hutch]

Interesting and i have been told by others you are someone we should listen to on here. Thanks.

 

Bizarre about chaplow.

It's the old Puncheon routine.

[The Kraken]

Had an interesting chat with a mate today who had an off-the-record talk to a senior player.

Far from being on the verge of revolt over Adkins' sacking, the players were not that bothered.

They were bemused and a little concerned at some of his decisions and man management.

For example, leaving Rickie out, or on the bench, and not telling the goalkeepers until an hour before kick-off which one of them was playing.

Also, after his appearance against Chelsea, Chaplow was made to train with the youth team.

You can, of course, see this as an example of how fickle players are but they certainly seem to have taken to the new regime with smiles on their faces.

 

And yet this constantly got trotted out on here as being such a sage move, a tactical masterstroke. As it turns out it was something the players didn't buy in to. And hopefully it'll be something we don't see again this season; Lambert is far and away the best striker we have at this club, leaving him on the bech for more than half a game at a time and utilising a significantly inferior player instead makes very, very little tactical sense.

[Wes Tender]

And yet this constantly got trotted out on here as being such a sage move, a tactical masterstroke. As it turns out it was something the players didn't buy in to. And hopefully it'll be something we don't see again this season; Lambert is far and away the best striker we have at this club, leaving him on the bech for more than half a game at a time and utilising a significantly inferior player instead makes very, very little tactical sense.

 

Does it turn out that the players didn't buy into it? Which ones? All of them? Even the strikers who wouldn't have got a game if Lambert played every game? And should he play every match regardless of him carrying a knock, or tiring from too much exertion in too many matches close together, or whether tactically the team selection calls for a different type of striker up front?

 

Personally I'm rather more inclined to trust the manager to make these decisions than the players, who might have issues of their own that they want to push. That's his job. If he gets it wrong, he takes the blame, but if he gets it right then the players will get the credit.

[The Kraken]

Does it turn out that the players didn't buy into it? Which ones? All of them? Even the strikers who wouldn't have got a game if Lambert played every game? And should he play every match regardless of him carrying a knock, or tiring from too much exertion in too many matches close together, or whether tactically the team selection calls for a different type of striker up front?

 

Personally I'm rather more inclined to trust the manager to make these decisions than the players, who might have issues of their own that they want to push. That's his job. If he gets it wrong, he takes the blame, but if he gets it right then the players will get the credit.

 

It's starting to appear that that may well just have happened, Wes.

[Lallana's Left Peg]

http://www.skysports.com/opinion/story/0,,18932_8431978,00.html

 

The one thing that will harm any credibility that opinion has is it coming from f**kwit pundits who talk alot but say very little - like Jamie Redknapp. How on earth can he start that column by saying Pichettino may be good in the long run - completely undermines the rest of his point the stupid *****.

[bender]

Something had to be done.

Adkins, Crosby, Wilkins, Stannard are not were we want to be.

They are a brilliant league management team, not Premiership.

They done their job, albeit fantastic, however they never had the know how of the Premiership, they were learning as they went along.

I don't think they could put us on to the next level, they looked frightened to be there, out of their depth.

Think Cortese saw this and maybe most of the supporters too. I did.

Also heard rumours today, disagreements with players and Nigel??? Any news?

 

Utter rubbish. I was at the Chelsea match and you saw the way Adkins interacted with the players at full time that the whole team & staff were as one. Without doubt NA was learning as he was going along but he was indeed learning and he was clearly turning the corner. IMO we were on the way to having one of the most sought after managers in the country, and he would have repaid the loyalty (had it been given) and stuck with us, eventually only leaving us to become the England manager.

 

Maybe our new guy will come good but will someone please tell me what the 'next level' is supposed to mean. Are we going to be gunning for the Champions league, because frankly the Europa league is a nothing competition for me.

[hutch]

Utter rubbish. I was at the Chelsea match and you saw the way Adkins interacted with the players at full time that the whole team & staff were as one.

Isn't that the point, though? That degree of self-satisfaction after a game we could, and some say should, have won wasn't acceptable to the Chairman.

[Saint_clark]

Isn't that the point, though? That degree of self-satisfaction after a game we could, and some say should, have won wasn't acceptable to the Chairman.

 

And yet he looked satisfied after drawing at home to Everton.

[The Kraken]

Isn't that the point, though? That degree of self-satisfaction after a game we could, and some say should, have won wasn't acceptable to the Chairman.

 

Yep. Gordon Watson was commentating on the game and was really frustrated that we didn't go at them from the start, saying that it was a good point but we really could have gone for all three.

 

There's something awry when you have by far your most expensive, most creative midfield player and by far your best striker on the bench as a tactical decision.

[shurlock]

Had an interesting chat with a mate today who had an off-the-record talk to a senior player.

Far from being on the verge of revolt over Adkins' sacking, the players were not that bothered.

They were bemused and a little concerned at some of his decisions and man management.

For example, leaving Rickie out, or on the bench, and not telling the goalkeepers until an hour before kick-off which one of them was playing.

Also, after his appearance against Chelsea, Chaplow was made to train with the youth team.

You can, of course, see this as an example of how fickle players are but they certainly seem to have taken to the new regime with smiles on their faces.

 

Interesting thanks. Does support the hunch that it was Adkins, not Cortese who had reservations over Lambert (hence all the transfer rumours). While I can understand why Adkins would rotate Lambert away from home (let's see how Lambert adapts to MP's style of pressing all the over the park), it made less sense when the alternatives (Jrod for whom NA seemed to have a thing) were clearly not the same quality.

Chaplow is an odd one. Was surprised to see him at Stamford Bridge as I assumed that JWP was the clear 4th CM in the midfield hierarchy (another player I don't think was quite ready). But NA stuck with him and was willing to throw him into some big matches. So to see Chaplow again was a surprise but if your source is correct (my understanding is that the team/squad were given a day off after the Chelsea game) to be made to train with the youth is plain bizarre.

I can understand the situation over the keepers - Adkins was a chronic tinkerer (mind you, often with good effect). Still remember how confused and annoyed some players were at Donny last season after NA had changed the formation 3 or 4 times during the game. Adkins decision to add 4-3-3 and another wrinkle into our gameplan would fit with this behavior.

Ultimately, whatever the merits and demerits of NA's firing and Cortese's indifference to the rest of the world, he does seem to be much closer to the player -and presumably would have taken their likely reaction into account before making any decision.

Edited 25 January, 2013 by shurlock

[brmbrm]

FFS. 15th, 22 points, rising, long run of good results, playing like a mid-table team or better. Who would not have taken that last august?

 

First half dozen games marred by player blunders - lots of them! maybe you have forgotten them. You cannot blame the manger for any of those idiocies - tactical errors they were not - they were total ****-ups.

 

I suppose the future will prove whether or not Adkins survives in the prem. We'll have to wait. It won't prove anything about Mo until we are top 6 or so - mid-table is only what you would extrapolate from the season so far.

[Wes Tender]

It's starting to appear that that may well just have happened, Wes.

 

Yes and not a great surprise really. In view of the popularity of Adkins and the furore and surprise not only from the fans, but other sectors of the football media, this is not unexpected. There will now ensue a gradual rewriting of history, rumours of player dissent and unrest, analysis of every match where it can be suggested that there was a tactical decision made by Adkins that seemed bizarre or which backfired. On the other hand, Pochettino will be hailed as the next Mourinho, or Guardiola and much made of how they thought he was a brilliant prospect, unlucky to suffer his sacking because he was forced to sell all of his best players and that had he been able to keep them, Espanol would have been contenders for a champions league place. Mind you, had we been able to keep Walcott, Bale, Oxlade-Chamberlain and other players we had to sell, I expect that Adkins would have been able to get us up the table several places too.

[The Kraken]

Yes and not a great surprise really. In view of the popularity of Adkins and the furore and surprise not only from the fans, but other sectors of the football media, this is not unexpected. There will now ensue a gradual rewriting of history, rumours of player dissent and unrest, analysis of every match where it can be suggested that there was a tactical decision made by Adkins that seemed bizarre or which backfired. On the other hand, Pochettino will be hailed as the next Mourinho, or Guardiola and much made of how they thought he was a brilliant prospect, unlucky to suffer his sacking because he was forced to sell all of his best players and that had he been able to keep them, Espanol would have been contenders for a champions league place. Mind you, had we been able to keep Walcott, Bale, Oxlade-Chamberlain and other players we had to sell, I expect that Adkins would have been able to get us up the table several places too.

 

What a very strange post. You make it sound as if no-one ever questioned some of Adkins' tactics before. Talk about rewriting history.....

[OldNick]

IMO we were on the way to having one of the most sought after managers in the country, and he would have repaid the loyalty (had it been given) and stuck with us, eventually only leaving us to become the England manager.

 

.

its amazing how many clubs have sacked their manager now that NA is available in the rush to get his services.....oh yeah Huddersfield,

[Greenridge]

What a very strange post. You make it sound as if no-one ever questioned some of Adkins' tactics before. Talk about rewriting history.....

 

Now that the dust has settled on his departure how to you see Adkin's tenure at SFC? If I recall correctly last Friday you said you wouldn't be attending any more games at St. Mary's this season in the wake of his dismissal. I might have misunderstood that though.

[Lets B Avenue]

Pochettino doesn't particularly have an international profile. The reaction from most on here was to say who? So he didn't register much in arguably the best league in the World. OK, he managed one of the medium sized in Spain, so Guiardiola and Mourinho knew of him. A bit like saying that saying that Ferguson and Wenger knew Adkins. So he played for Argentina and that registered with most people solely because he gave away a penalty to an Owen dive that put them out of the World Cup.

 

Owen's "dive" was in 98 and Pochettino wasn't playing. He fouled Owen to give away the penalty in 2002, which Beckham scored from.

[Wes Tender]

Owen's "dive" was in 98 and Pochettino wasn't playing. He fouled Owen to give away the penalty in 2002, which Beckham scored from.

 

All I know is that when I read that Pochettino's main claim to fame in the eyes of some journos was his giving away of a penalty to Owen and Argentina being knocked out of the World Cup as a result, there was some video footage linked to it which in my opinion appeared to show that Owen had dived. Owen's reputation in that department obviously preceded him.

[Wes Tender]

What a very strange post. You make it sound as if no-one ever questioned some of Adkins' tactics before. Talk about rewriting history.....

 

Why is it strange? It's human nature for fans to begin to talk down a manager's performance when he's dismissed and to talk up the new replacement to justify the change.

 

I wasn't suggesting that nobody had criticised Adkins' tactics before. The acid test regarding opinions about Adkins' departure is to pay some attention to what neutral rival fans think about it and conversely to consider what we would have said about Pochettino had he gone to another team.

[Turkish]

Why is it strange? It's human nature for fans to begin to talk down a manager's performance when he's dismissed and to talk up the new replacement to justify the change.

 

I wasn't suggesting that nobody had criticised Adkins' tactics before. The acid test regarding opinions about Adkins' departure is to pay some attention to what neutral rival fans think about it and conversely to consider what we would have said about Pochettino had he gone to another team.

 

I thought you didn't care what rival fans thought?

[aintforever]

I thought you didn't care what rival fans thought?

 

I often find other fans views to be quite a good gauge. The do not read the propaganda spewed out by the club and are not influenced by petty internal agendas (like a pro or anti Cortese stance).

 

Like when we hired the two Dutch guys, it was as clear as day to any football fan that we were f*cked. Yet on here you could still find people thinking it's a great idea after believing all Lowe's bullsh!te.

Edited 25 January, 2013 by aintforever

[Dibden Purlieu Saint]

Interesting thanks. Does support the hunch that it was Adkins, not Cortese who had reservations over Lambert (hence all the transfer rumours). While I can understand why Adkins would rotate Lambert away from home (let's see how Lambert adapts to MP's style of pressing all the over the park), it made less sense when the alternatives (Jrod for whom NA seemed to have a thing) were clearly not the same quality.

 

From what I was told in the Summer, Rodriguez was an 'Adkins' signing. There have been quite a few times this season when Lambert has looked dejected, and him being left out has been my main source of frustration this Season. Perhaps this was one of the reasons. Got to say none of the players seemed bothered that Adkins had left.

[The9]

Owen's "dive" was in 98 and Pochettino wasn't playing. He fouled Owen to give away the penalty in 2002, which Beckham scored from.

 

Owen's "dive" was arguably in both 1998 and 2002.

[The9]

From what I was told in the Summer, Rodriguez was an 'Adkins' signing. There have been quite a few times this season when Lambert has looked dejected, and him being left out has been my main source of frustration this Season. Perhaps this was one of the reasons. Got to say none of the players seemed bothered that Adkins had left.

 

As Lambert said in his post-match interview on Sky, "obviously a footballer's place is on the pitch, once you're on there you forget about everything else."

[Frank's cousin]

Not sure this 'out of his depth' argument is appropriate in this case - Adkins was NEW to the prem and learning fast. He is an intelligent guy and had shown he was able to adapt and learn quickly. I do not believe he was sacked for being out of his depth or in general because of our overall performace this season - which give or take a few results has been in the right direction. Every manager makes selecetion errors now and again etc and especially one who is still learning his trade at the top level.

 

I also believe he has enough up stairs to get better and do very well in the prem in time.

 

Although we will probably never know the true reason for the sacking, I suspect its a combination of things - the biggest being that it seems NC's plan includes bringing key people in for each 'phase' who do their job and then move on - he has a timeframe to which he is working and the fact we are a head merely brings the end goal forward, and does not mean we can relax for two seasons.

 

Its possible NC and Adkins disagreed on many things, not in itself an issue, happens all the time, but if around the pace of progress, how its achieved etc, a parting of the ways was also inevitable.

 

Someone suggested his current name/status may hinder transfers in... possible, but maintain that these things are usually overcome if the deal is right for selling club and player - in most cases its down to money.

 

Problem for NC is the way he communicates or lack of it - and the way in which it was done, leaves him rightly open to accusations of callousness. I do not undersatnd why in such a case there is not greater communication to expalin decsions and thanks for service - its not difficlut and would go along way to ensuring the whole media frenzy and bad PR is minimised. And I believe its fair to ask that question.

 

Having said that, I also think that there need to be a little more honesty from fans - we are fickle and we are hypocrits - the way we express moral outrage in this case compared to not giveing a flying feck if it happens to someone we dont rate - both are human beings yet we seem morally outraged only when it suits - for others, mostly players etc, most are happy to help them pack and drive the taxi.

 

Adkins is not on the breadline, is not having his house repocessed, he is a decent manager who was paid decent wage beyond what most of us will ever get to, and high his stock in football very high, already being linked with many clubs - he wil do well.

Edited 25 January, 2013 by Frank's cousin

[Give it to Ron]

Yep. Gordon Watson was commentating on the game and was really frustrated that we didn't go at them from the start, saying that it was a good point but we really could have gone for all three.

 

There's something awry when you have by far your most expensive, most creative midfield player and by far your best striker on the bench as a tactical decision.

 

I will add Fulham away to that...bizarre tactics for 25 minutes. We were well on top and everyone around me was also calling for another attacker yet waited until 79 minutes...we got a fortunate

penalty on 85! We should of gone for the jugular from 60 minutes as Fulham were appalling apart from Berbatov.

[Turkish]

I often find other fans views to be quite a good gauge. The do not read the propaganda spewed out by the club and are not influenced by petty internal agendas (like a pro or anti Cortese stance).

 

Like when we hired the two Dutch guys, it was as clear as day to any football fan that we were f*cked. Yet on here you could still find people thinking it's a great idea after believing all Lowe's bullsh!te.

 

Most normal people would agree with you. However Les is on record as saying he doesn't care what other clubs fans say about us.

[St Matty]

And yet this constantly got trotted out on here as being such a sage move, a tactical masterstroke. As it turns out it was something the players didn't buy in to. And hopefully it'll be something we don't see again this season; Lambert is far and away the best striker we have at this club, leaving him on the bech for more than half a game at a time and utilising a significantly inferior player instead makes very, very little tactical sense.

 

I disagree, SRL is over 30, never the fittest player so playing part of the game was always likely in the EPL. impact when he came on against chelsea surely bears that out.

[Joey-deacons-left-nut]

Who was saying that thisforum would start to see PR plants?

 

 

 

hahahah seriously??? Do you honestly believe the club, and bare in mind this is a club that frankly doesnt give a flying fck what anyone thinks, be it the media or us the paying customers, old players, would employ people to spin positive PR for the club on t'internet?!?!?!??!?!

[The Kraken]

I disagree, SRL is over 30, never the fittest player so playing part of the game was always likely in the EPL. impact when he came on against chelsea surely bears that out.

 

It doesn't bear it out at all in my eyes; it shows me what might have been had he been on the pitch for longer. Lambert IS 30, and he's perhaps the most influential player we have and should be on the pitch as much as possible. If you're suggesting he can only play an efficient 30 minutes every game due to lack of fitness I'm going to have to disagree.

 

The decisions previously to rest Lambert at the starts of games were questioned at the time. That news of the players not necessarily going along with is seemingly drifting out wouldn't be a surprise to me.

 

Lets see if Pochettino gives the same tactic a go; if its worked so well in the past he'll surely be encouraged to try it further. I have a feeling he won't, but we'll see.

[Wes Tender]

I disagree, SRL is over 30, never the fittest player so playing part of the game was always likely in the EPL. impact when he came on against chelsea surely bears that out.

 

Rubbish! Had Lambert been on the pitch from the start, we would have been so far ahead, we would be out of sight.

 

Pochettino will start Lambert every match regardless of his condition, as everybody knows that it is stupid not to play your strongest team. Mind you, deciding which is your strongest team is a matter of opinion too. Ask ten posters on here and you're likely to get 10 variations. And I have heard it suggested that it ought to be the strongest team determined to an extent by what attributes will be required by the players to counteract the strengths of the opposition.

 

Oh, perhaps it's not quite so straightforward after all.

[up and away]

PR plants would use paragraphs.

 

Fact is Nigel was out of his depth at the beginning of the season but, like many of the players, he was learning to swim. He made mistakes, like many of the players, but the fundamentals were (in my opinion) sound. If you believe in happy endings, he would have probably got us to where Cortese wants to go but not half as fast as Cortese wants to get there.

 

The one area I think NA was lacking was one that he couldn't learn - and that is international profile. Do you think Pep or Jose would know of 'our Nige' - unlikely, and the same would be true of players we were trying to attract. Having played for Argentina and managed in La Liga, Pochettino at least has that. Spending big is a way of getting there faster. And say what you like about NA, but his signings were typically English and from the lower leagues (understandably).

 

Cortese probably thought, loyalty, schmoyalty - I want results.

 

As an afterthought, I do wonder if when Nigel took the job he was told that it was to get us to the Premiership and then Cortese would reassess. Hence the emotion after promotion last year - that might be reading too much into a highly charged situation, but if he thought his job was done (or uncertain), would explain the comments.

 

It is far to early to say whether MP does the business, but is probably better placed than NA to do it quicker; but that depends on us staying up.

 

p.s. If there were big rumblings from the players I've not heard of them (at least not before the sacking).

 

 

Good analysis from Corteses POV . but I am sure there is not a lot more Cortese can do to get the signature above the line. Tony Fernandez has equally deep pockets but in Redknapp an equally deep resource in getting a player to sign. Just so glad we never went down the Redknapp, route may have been close

[Turkish]

Rubbish! Had Lambert been on the pitch from the start, we would have been so far ahead, we would be out of sight.

 

Pochettino will start Lambert every match regardless of his condition, as everybody knows that it is stupid not to play your strongest team. Mind you, deciding which is your strongest team is a matter of opinion too. Ask ten posters on here and you're likely to get 10 variations. And I have heard it suggested that it ought to be the strongest team determined to an extent by what attributes will be required by the players to counteract the strengths of the opposition.

 

Oh, perhaps it's not quite so straightforward after all.

 

:lol: So on this very thread you've defended Adkins for being such a great manager, now you've saying he cost us the game by not playing our strongest team and MP will do exactly what Adkins didnt do. Make your mind up Les!!! :lol:

[The9]

Rubbish! Had Lambert been on the pitch from the start, we would have been so far ahead, we would be out of sight.

 

Pochettino will start Lambert every match regardless of his condition, as everybody knows that it is stupid not to play your strongest team. Mind you, deciding which is your strongest team is a matter of opinion too. Ask ten posters on here and you're likely to get 10 variations. And I have heard it suggested that it ought to be the strongest team determined to an extent by what attributes will be required by the players to counteract the strengths of the opposition.

 

Oh, perhaps it's not quite so straightforward after all.

 

Playing Lambert for 90 minutes in every match is the best way I know to get him injured - especially if he plays all of them with the effort to impress the new manager that he put in in the first half on Monday, I've never seen him run for a through ball before and he did it at least 3 times.

[Wes Tender]

Playing Lambert for 90 minutes in every match is the best way I know to get him injured - especially if he plays all of them with the effort to impress the new manager that he put in in the first half on Monday, I've never seen him run for a through ball before and he did it at least 3 times.

 

My tongue was firmly in my cheek. I'm of the opinion that when a manager chooses a team or makes a tactical switch during a match, then he has his reasons for doing so. Whether the selection or tactical change pays dividends or not is a matter of opinion. Even when Lambert and Davis scored coming on late against Manchester City, there were those who opined that had they come on earlier then we could have scored even more. As I said earlier, if the tactics go awry, the manager gets the blame, whereas if they go according to plan, the players get the credit.

[The9]

My tongue was firmly in my cheek. I'm of the opinion that when a manager chooses a team or makes a tactical switch during a match, then he has his reasons for doing so. Whether the selection or tactical change pays dividends or not is a matter of opinion. Even when Lambert and Davis scored coming on late against Manchester City, there were those who opined that had they come on earlier then we could have scored even more. As I said earlier, if the tactics go awry, the manager gets the blame, whereas if they go according to plan, the players get the credit.

 

And he did the same thing against Chelsea with similar results. We didn't win either, but we got a point which wasn't bad going, and we didn't do the same thing at Arsenal and got murdered.

[FloridaMarlin]

Interesting and i have been told by others you are someone we should listen to on here. Thanks..

 

Thanks for the complement but I'm no different to most of the other posters on here.

 

Like everybody else, I have my contacts and they tell me things. Sometimes they are spot on, other times they are a country mile wide of the mark.

 

But again, like most people, I am not a WUM and post the information on here in good faith based on whether or not I feel it should be in the public domain and available for debate.

 

You probably wouldn't be that surprised to find out how many people on here either work in the media or have close friends who do and have information they feel should be shared.

 

The problem is that there is so much management and manipulation of the news agenda - and I don't just mean Saints here - that the traditional role of the media in being a watchdog to provide check and balances on those who are accountable or in positions of influence and power, is being eroded.

 

Journalists are becoming increasingly frustrated that, for whatever reason, they are unable to use a lot of the stuff they know, in their own outlets.

 

So they turn to forums like this to get information out there that would otherwise remain under wraps.

 

A sign of the times.

[Leicestersaint]

Had an interesting chat with a mate today who had an off-the-record talk to a senior player.

Far from being on the verge of revolt over Adkins' sacking, the players were not that bothered.

They were bemused and a little concerned at some of his decisions and man management.

For example, leaving Rickie out, or on the bench, and not telling the goalkeepers until an hour before kick-off which one of them was playing.

Also, after his appearance against Chelsea, Chaplow was made to train with the youth team.

You can, of course, see this as an example of how fickle players are but they certainly seem to have taken to the new regime with smiles on their faces.

 

Fascinating.

[Leicestersaint]

Something had to be done.

Adkins, Crosby, Wilkins, Stannard are not were we want to be.

They are a brilliant league management team, not Premiership.

They done their job, albeit fantastic, however they never had the know how of the Premiership, they were learning as they went along.

I don't think they could put us on to the next level, they looked frightened to be there, out of their depth.

Think Cortese saw this and maybe most of the supporters too. I did.

Also heard rumours today, disagreements with players and Nigel??? Any news?

 

Quite extraordinary.

[Horley CTFC Saint]

Something had to be done.

Adkins, Crosby, Wilkins, Stannard are not were we want to be.

They are a brilliant league management team, not Premiership.

They done their job, albeit fantastic, however they never had the know how of the Premiership, they were learning as they went along.

I don't think they could put us on to the next level, they looked frightened to be there, out of their depth.

Think Cortese saw this and maybe most of the supporters too. I did.

Also heard rumours today, disagreements with players and Nigel??? Any news?

 

Que? Mauricio?!?

[Webby]

Chaplow is an odd one. Was surprised to see him at Stamford Bridge as I assumed that JWP was the clear 4th CM in the midfield hierarchy (another player I don't think was quite ready). But NA stuck with him and was willing to throw him into some big matches. So to see Chaplow again was a surprise but if your source is correct (my understanding is that the team/squad were given a day off after the Chelsea game) to be made to train with the youth is plain bizarre.

Is it bizarre? Maybe Chaplow had a reaction to the game and was asked to come in next day to assess it again in the morning, and as the first team had the day off, he trained with the youth.

 

Just a thought.

[Turkish]

Fascinating.

 

you would do well to listen to Marlin mush.

[Turkish]

Thanks for the complement but I'm no different to most of the other posters on here.

 

Like everybody else, I have my contacts and they tell me things. Sometimes they are spot on, other times they are a country mile wide of the mark.

 

But again, like most people, I am not a WUM and post the information on here in good faith based on whether or not I feel it should be in the public domain and available for debate.

 

You probably wouldn't be that surprised to find out how many people on here either work in the media or have close friends who do and have information they feel should be shared.

 

The problem is that there is so much management and manipulation of the news agenda - and I don't just mean Saints here - that the traditional role of the media in being a watchdog to provide check and balances on those who are accountable or in positions of influence and power, is being eroded.

 

Journalists are becoming increasingly frustrated that, for whatever reason, they are unable to use a lot of the stuff they know, in their own outlets.

 

So they turn to forums like this to get information out there that would otherwise remain under wraps.

 

A sign of the times.

 

I respect your modesty but i was told relatvely recently that you know what you are on about and have good sources. This by someone i trust.