OldNick Posted 12 February, 2009 Share Posted 12 February, 2009 Sorry ..... missed it ( should have gone to specsavers as well ) Well done NickG ........you'll get the wrath of Alpine when he sees your original post StR lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 12 February, 2009 Share Posted 12 February, 2009 There is no surprise in this. During last Friday's webchat, Adam Leitch got tremendous flak about the Echo's coverage of Saints and this will not have gone unnoticed by his bosses. All newspapers pander to their readers' opinions and as they're now on pretty safe ground saying that the 'revolutionary' brand of football is an utter, utter failure they can hop on the bandwagon. I'd be interested to know how much influence this website has on the Echo's stance on Saints as the forum is a fairly representative cross-section of old and young fans and the decent debate is articulate and strongly reasoned on both sides, although it's clear what the broad consensus on most things is. Discuss: This forum is more of an agenda-setter than the Echo, which tends to reflect it - Simon Carter's piece today proves it.Are you saying that you think this forum has more readers than the echo!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chap in the Chapel Posted 12 February, 2009 Share Posted 12 February, 2009 Are you saying that you think this forum has more readers than the echo!! No - I don't know the stats for either. I'm throwing the debate open out of my own intrigue: which do people think influences the other more - the Echo or this forum? I suppose the fact that we're discussing an Echo piece on here now indicates one thing, but it's their change of stance to match what is largely said on here that has provoked it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derry Posted 12 February, 2009 Share Posted 12 February, 2009 True - though I think that was a reaction to CCC tactics against us and general frustration, coupled with a clueless manager who looked defeated (because he knew he was) every time he stepped up to the touchline. I give Wotte 2 more defeats before we see the startled rabbit in the headlights look from him too. The problem really started when we lost Holmes at QPR. Up to then we had wide options, which meant the passing game worked. Once we stopped playing with width, the players would look for a wide option, not find one, and either have to run with the ball, or pass short inside to an already crowded midfield. Once the Dutch prat ignored his fundamental requirement of two wide players, that effectively finished the experiment. It also made us easy to predict and counterattack. Sadly we are still doing it, and unless they cop on quickly, it won't matter who we play or how we play, we will be relegated. It is fundamental to play the full width not two thirds of the pitch. Lallana is one of our big problems and needs to be left out, he has no idea how a football team works, and it seems neither do the coaches and most of the players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRobbie Posted 12 February, 2009 Share Posted 12 February, 2009 Discuss: This forum is more of an agenda-setter than the Echo, which tends to reflect it - Simon Carter's piece today proves it. Bit of both. They definately gain alot from this messageboard - it certainly does have an effect. But the media is generally steered by public opinion rather than shaping it... particularly local media who need to sell papers. They'll sell alot more if they reflect the vast majority of Saints fans views and attack Lowe and Wilde. So its an editorial no-brainer. Adam Leich was right to have been hounded on the web discussion the other day. But, the Echo must reflect what readers want and take up the reigns now to remove Lowe, Wilde, Wotte and the stooges. About time the paper did something constructive towards the pride of Southampton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRobbie Posted 12 February, 2009 Share Posted 12 February, 2009 The problem really started when we lost Holmes at QPR. Up to then we had wide options, which meant the passing game worked. Once we stopped playing with width, the players would look for a wide option, not find one, and either have to run with the ball, or pass short inside to an already crowded midfield. Once the Dutch prat ignored his fundamental requirement of two wide players, that effectively finished the experiment. It also made us easy to predict and counterattack. Sadly we are still doing it, and unless they cop on quickly, it won't matter who we play or how we play, we will be relegated. It is fundamental to play the full width not two thirds of the pitch. Lallana is one of our big problems and needs to be left out, he has no idea how a football team works, and it seems neither do the coaches and most of the players. I didnt notice that at QPR - had my head in my hands for most of that drubbing. I brought a Fulham friend with me - who hates the 'r - and he couldnt believe how poor Saints had become, not just tactics, but generally in quality throughout the team. An objective opinion from a neutral who agreed wholeheartedly with me then that this team was going no where other than League 1....or possibly 2. Kids + Dutch conmen + no confidence in Lowe = Failure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 12 February, 2009 Share Posted 12 February, 2009 No - I don't know the stats for either. I'm throwing the debate open out of my own intrigue: which do people think influences the other more - the Echo or this forum? I suppose the fact that we're discussing an Echo piece on here now indicates one thing, but it's their change of stance to match what is largely said on here that has provoked it.I expect they look on here as do Radio hants because its useful to see what gets a section of fans debating.That in turn is used to coax listeners and readers if they hit on news that fans are talking about.So you are right in a way as the agenda may be set at times by what is sparking forums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ponty Posted 12 February, 2009 Share Posted 12 February, 2009 We should heavily debate something completely arbitrary, just to test out that theory. Who would like to start a discussion about the colour of the corner flags? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 12 February, 2009 Share Posted 12 February, 2009 We should heavily debate something completely arbitrary, just to test out that theory. Who would like to start a discussion about the colour of the corner flags? Why are there corner flags in the first place? What purpose do they serve? Eh? Answer me that. Yet another example of how the FA are toothless when it comes to licking the shoes of FIFA and UEFA. FFS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chap in the Chapel Posted 12 February, 2009 Share Posted 12 February, 2009 We should heavily debate something completely arbitrary, just to test out that theory. Without arbitrary debate this forum would be less busy than it is... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fitzhugh Fella Posted 12 February, 2009 Share Posted 12 February, 2009 Don't worry I think this current crisis "is just a blip". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mole Posted 12 February, 2009 Share Posted 12 February, 2009 Don't worry I think this current crisis "is just a blip". You were asking for Lowe quotes the other day. Perhaps these gems could go in your next book: We are fortunate that, as a result of the long term Academy plan, we have been able to mould a team of young, dedicated and technically able players, many of whom had been previously overlooked for first team selection. "Together with some limited, but astute, signings, Jan Poortvliet and his staff have worked to play an attacking brand of Dutch football that makes the most of the technical abilities which the players were taught by Georges Prost and Stewart Henderson as they progressed through the Academy. "The prevailing view amongst the English football establishment was that we would struggle to win any games playing with such a young team. "We have disproved this theory by playing some very entertaining football and whilst at the time of writing we have obtained 16 points from 17 games, we are confident that we will become stronger as the season progresses. "We are proud that our team usually includes a very high percentage of Academy players who are British, some of whom are already being recognised by their national teams. "This gives us a very good foundation upon which to build and benefit from the talents of our entire squad. "We are under no illusion that our progress can be taken for granted and there will, undoubtedly, be some “ups and downs.” "Building the foundation was always going to be the hardest part but we have achieved this. "People are now beginning to sit up and take notice of our achievements under Jan Poortvliet, which has brought praise from many quarters. "Our recent match against Championship leaders Wolverhampton Wanderers is a prime example with their experienced striker Chris Iwelumo stating after the match that Saints were one of the best footballing sides he had come across in the division this season, and consequently one of the most attractive to watch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
70's Mike Posted 12 February, 2009 Share Posted 12 February, 2009 The problem really started when we lost Holmes at QPR. Up to then we had wide options, which meant the passing game worked. Once we stopped playing with width, the players would look for a wide option, not find one, and either have to run with the ball, or pass short inside to an already crowded midfield. Once the Dutch prat ignored his fundamental requirement of two wide players, that effectively finished the experiment. It also made us easy to predict and counterattack. Sadly we are still doing it, and unless they cop on quickly, it won't matter who we play or how we play, we will be relegated. It is fundamental to play the full width not two thirds of the pitch. Lallana is one of our big problems and needs to be left out, he has no idea how a football team works, and it seems neither do the coaches and most of the players. slightly disagree we did play with width after QPR BUT THE PROBLEM WAS THAT THEY were on the wrong sides of the pitch, left on right , right on left which had a effect of narrowing the pitch. If Rupert is reading this then, I run a Tyro under 14 side and worked out the SAINTS PROBLEM shame Jan did not, or for that matter Wotte Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derry Posted 12 February, 2009 Share Posted 12 February, 2009 slightly disagree we did play with width after QPR BUT THE PROBLEM WAS THAT THEY were on the wrong sides of the pitch, left on right , right on left which had a effect of narrowing the pitch. If Rupert is reading this then, I run a Tyro under 14 side and worked out the SAINTS PROBLEM shame Jan did not, or for that matter Wotte And mostly 20yds inside the touchline which was the critical thing, has to be naturally footed players to get to the byeline effectively. Lallana was given a free role on the right, therefore never played there, all the players except Holmes came inside. At the moment Skacel/Surman LM wide the other at full back and BWP/McLaggon at Wide RM are the only options. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
70's Mike Posted 12 February, 2009 Share Posted 12 February, 2009 And mostly 20yds inside the touchline which was the critical thing, has to be naturally footed players to get to the byeline effectively. Lallana was given a free role on the right, therefore never played there, all the players except Holmes came inside. At the moment Skacel/Surman LM wide the other at full back and BWP/McLaggon at Wide RM are the only options. thing is i thought the idea of the sitting midfield player was to enable your full backs to overlap and supply width. we have had up to two players sitting in midfield but the full backs still do not get in behind their defence, did anyone ever check to see if Jan ACTUALLY HAD ANY COACHING experience Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derry Posted 12 February, 2009 Share Posted 12 February, 2009 thing is i thought the idea of the sitting midfield player was to enable your full backs to overlap and supply width. we have had up to two players sitting in midfield but the full backs still do not get in behind their defence, did anyone ever check to see if Jan ACTUALLY HAD ANY COACHING experience Two wide players on each side was fundamental for his system to work. It was impossible to get to the byeline and made the fullback as the only player on the right isolated and vulnerable, hence we scored few and leaked lots of goals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stthrobber Posted 12 February, 2009 Share Posted 12 February, 2009 Rupert Lowe's Vision Has Failed , he should go to Specsavers then He did mate, they were buy one get one free, he lost one pair, now he's using the free ones for the rest of the season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
70's Mike Posted 12 February, 2009 Share Posted 12 February, 2009 He did mate, they were buy one get one free, he lost one pair, now he's using the free ones for the rest of the season. bitterne park humour Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stthrobber Posted 12 February, 2009 Share Posted 12 February, 2009 Any chance of a thread that discusses something different than nearly 99 percent of all the other threads? Well in all fairness, Um's post is based upon the Echo article and as such is surely worthy of debate? FWIW I haven't usually got much time for Simon Carter, but in this article there is little that I can disagree with. Bringing in a foreign coach with little experience of English football and no experience of coaching at a decent level was a big risk dressed up as "revolutionary" I could never understand why Wotte who has a fairly unimpressive CV but at a higher level was not chosen as Head Coach above JP who also has a fairly unimpressive CV at a lower level. According to MLT there were British managers who would have done the job for less money than Pearson was on prior to his contract not being renewed and this was the way forward then and imo still is now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dalek2003 Posted 12 February, 2009 Share Posted 12 February, 2009 Here we go again. Some fans re-writng history,others airbrushing issues out. Some edging away from one viewpoint to the next. Others, burying their previous statements. Only a few are left to tell it as it truly was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fitzhugh Fella Posted 12 February, 2009 Share Posted 12 February, 2009 Here we go again. Some fans re-writng history,others airbrushing issues out. Some edging away from one viewpoint to the next. Others, burying their previous statements. Only a few are left to tell it as it truly was. Love that last sentence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SW11_Saint Posted 12 February, 2009 Share Posted 12 February, 2009 Any chance of a thread that discusses something different than nearly 99 percent of all the other threads? With the club in crisis, what else do you expect us to be discussing on a fans formum FFS?? Do you have something massively more important you'd like to suggest, perhaps how wide the stripes on our home kit next year should be? Jeez... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ponty Posted 12 February, 2009 Share Posted 12 February, 2009 With the club in crisis, what else do you expect us to be discussing on a fans formum FFS?? Do you have something massively more important you'd like to suggest, perhaps how wide the stripes on our home kit next year should be? Jeez... What are you thinking? About 3 inches? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRobbie Posted 12 February, 2009 Share Posted 12 February, 2009 What are you thinking? About 3 inches? I think smaller like the old Euro strip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rod Le Shearer Posted 13 February, 2009 Share Posted 13 February, 2009 I am just remembering all the abuse I got on here for saying all of this 6 months ago............ aaaw bless. I`m sure we all feel very sorry for you,Alpine ! after all..its not as if your good old mild-tempered self have ever handed out some abuse on here,is it..?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAY-Z Posted 13 February, 2009 Share Posted 13 February, 2009 my thoughts are this: there was nothing wrong with lowes plan to play the youngsters together and try to get the whole club playing the same way but he has gone about it in completely the wrong manner. this approach needed to be a bottom up approach whereby the acadamies were all playing in the same manner and then as the went further up the ranks they would all be bringing that style up together. to try and start this process from the top (first team) was always complete madness and doomed to fail Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tamesaint Posted 13 February, 2009 Share Posted 13 February, 2009 What are you thinking? About 3 inches? Is that a male 3 inches or a female 3 inches?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 13 February, 2009 Share Posted 13 February, 2009 aaaw bless. I`m sure we all feel very sorry for you,Alpine ! after all..its not as if your good old mild-tempered self have ever handed out some abuse on here,is it..?? As usual, you have got completely the wrong end of the stick.. I am not feeling sorry for myself for the abuse I got back then, I am laughing at the likes of you who were utterly abusive having to choke on their words. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
offix Posted 13 February, 2009 Share Posted 13 February, 2009 Good article. Surprising to see the Echo out of lock-step with Ru/*rt, but a good surprise. One line in the article says it all: "Saints are facing a second relegation in five seasons, and their second in three seasons under Lowe’s chairmanship" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 14 February, 2009 Share Posted 14 February, 2009 Good article. Surprising to see the Echo out of lock-step with Ru/*rt, but a good surprise. One line in the article says it all: "Saints are facing a second relegation in five seasons, and their second in three seasons under Lowe’s chairmanship"That is a bit like saying we have lost were only in the PL one season.It is turning the facts to support an arguement.Surely it is 2 twice in 5/10/13 I dont know how many years he was there.It could be said that LC faced relegation once in 1 season.That would be unfair, although a fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lets B Avenue Posted 14 February, 2009 Share Posted 14 February, 2009 That is a bit like saying we have lost were only in the PL one season.It is turning the facts to support an arguement.Surely it is 2 twice in 5/10/13 I dont know how many years he was there.It could be said that LC faced relegation once in 1 season.That would be unfair, although a fact. Yes, but we didnt go down under Crouch. Like most on here, I cant see that being repeated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calvin Posted 14 February, 2009 Share Posted 14 February, 2009 Yes, but we didnt go down under Crouch. Like most on here, I cant see that being repeated. We had experienced players then, and of course a better squad but a very low morale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRobbie Posted 14 February, 2009 Share Posted 14 February, 2009 my thoughts are this: there was nothing wrong with lowes plan to play the youngsters together and try to get the whole club playing the same way but he has gone about it in completely the wrong manner. this approach needed to be a bottom up approach whereby the acadamies were all playing in the same manner and then as the went further up the ranks they would all be bringing that style up together. to try and start this process from the top (first team) was always complete madness and doomed to fail I think that's what most Clubs do. I would agree with that. Lowe's gamble has also had another spin off that most people have ignored. It has destroyed our youth set up rather than enhancing it. The reason your idea works is that it means that youth are integrated gradually into a mans game in a mans league. This = success. Success = youngsters saying 'I want to go to Southampton as they're a Premier League outfit'. Lowe's failure, turning Southampton FC into a League 1/2 side, has actually turned the jewel in his eye into a failure too. I didnt see the youth team in the youth FA Cup this year or doing as well as previous years. The reason... even our youth set up is starting to die. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 14 February, 2009 Share Posted 14 February, 2009 Yes, but we didnt go down under Crouch. Like most on here, I cant see that being repeated.Thats true but again to be fair we haven't this season.That is what i was pointing out LC faced relegation in 1 season and if the Echo was being used as a tool to beat the club that should be pointed out as they used the term 'face relegation' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 14 February, 2009 Author Share Posted 14 February, 2009 (edited) I think that's what most Clubs do. I would agree with that. Lowe's gamble has also had another spin off that most people have ignored. It has destroyed our youth set up rather than enhancing it. The reason your idea works is that it means that youth are integrated gradually into a mans game in a mans league. This = success. Success = youngsters saying 'I want to go to Southampton as they're a Premier League outfit'. Lowe's failure, turning Southampton FC into a League 1/2 side, has actually turned the jewel in his eye into a failure too. I didnt see the youth team in the youth FA Cup this year or doing as well as previous years. The reason... even our youth set up is starting to die. I would add that I think it's done something worse than that, as I am concerned that we have blooded too many, too early and actually set them back. Rather than allow them to develop at theior own pace and come into a team when they are ready, I fear that too many have been forced into a failing team way too early in their careers. I just hope this hasn't impacted on their development and confidence. If you were a parent you would want your son nurtured and somewhat protected until they were ready. Edited 14 February, 2009 by um pahars Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingsbridge Saint Posted 14 February, 2009 Share Posted 14 February, 2009 'Rupert Lowes Vision has failed'. No **** Sherlock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 14 February, 2009 Share Posted 14 February, 2009 I would add that I think it's done something worse than that, as I am concerned that we have blooded too many, too early and actually set them back. Rather than allow them to develop at theior own pace and come into a team when they are ready, I fear that too many have been forced into a failing team way too early in their careers. I just hope this hasn If you were a parent you would want your son nurtured and somewhat protected until they were ready.To be fair you rightly pointed out to me that DMG was 21 when i thought he was 19. most of the young players are in their 20's now and so should be ready to step up.i know I would be Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
70's Mike Posted 14 February, 2009 Share Posted 14 February, 2009 To be fair you rightly pointed out to me that DMG was 21 when i thought he was 19. most of the young players are in their 20's now and so should be ready to step up.i know I would be that assumes they are good enough, problem is many of them were the ones left here from their age group , the better ones had already moved on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRobbie Posted 14 February, 2009 Share Posted 14 February, 2009 that assumes they are good enough' date=' problem is many of them were the ones left here from their age group , the better ones had already moved on.[/quote'] Correct. But also, how can even someone with potential like DMG expect to improve when he's playing with fellow kids. How does he learn and improve his confidence? The only thing that may save Wotte's bacon now will be the men he's clawed back - but as the Euell thread and Skacel thread demonstrate they're not now fully commited due to Lowe's Club Policy. Lowe's failed in so, so many ways this time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 14 February, 2009 Author Share Posted 14 February, 2009 (edited) To be fair you rightly pointed out to me that DMG was 21 when i thought he was 19. most of the young players are in their 20's now and so should be ready to step up.i know I would be I was talking more about the Gobern's, Lancashire, McClaggon, Mills, Paterson, White, Thompson etc and maybe even others such as Lallana, who is a more fragile type of player. Many of these players have been dropped in the deep end, then bombed out. IMHO, on too many occasions we have played players before they were ready, or we have overplayed others. I am an advocate of "if they're good enough, then they're old enough", but I also understand that for some being dropped in at 18/19 or even 20 is not necessarily good for their development, particularly in a struggling side in a a brute of a division. Edited 14 February, 2009 by um pahars Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 14 February, 2009 Share Posted 14 February, 2009 I was talking more about the Gobern's, Lancashire, McClaggon, Mills, Paterson, White, Thompson etc and maybe even others such as Lallana, who is a more fragile type of player. Many of these players have been dropped in the deep end, then bombed out. IMHO, on too many occasions we have played players before they were ready, or we have overplayed others. I certainly I am an advocate of "if they're good enough, then they're old enough", but I also understand that for some being dropped in at 18/19 or even 20 is not necessarily good for their development, particularly in a struggling side in a a brute of a division. true..and agree but..but about a year ago, so many championed for the young lads to be given a game over the "wasters" like wright and co Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadoldgit Posted 14 February, 2009 Share Posted 14 February, 2009 (edited) Visions usually take more than a few months to come to fruition don't they? And does any one truly know what Lowe's vision is? From what I gather his current plan is to stave off administration (which despite the people on here telling us it is imminent it has yet to happen) by bringing down the cost base, which is happening is it not? It is to bring on the youth to help save money on transfer fees and wages, that is happening. It is to get back to the Premiership in three seasons - looks very unlikely right now but we can't say that failed until three seasons have passed. I don't recall anyone at the club saying that we were going to set the world alight this season. If we stay out of administration and stay up I don't see that as a failure. If the plan is Premiership football in three seasons and we don't make that I would see that as failure. Edited 14 February, 2009 by sadoldgit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eelpie Posted 14 February, 2009 Share Posted 14 February, 2009 Why are there corner flags in the first place? What purpose do they serve? Eh? Answer me that. Yet another example of how the FA are toothless when it comes to licking the shoes of FIFA and UEFA. FFS What purpose are corners? Why not have a round pitch? Football needs to be totally rethought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 14 February, 2009 Author Share Posted 14 February, 2009 true..and agree but..but about a year ago, so many championed for the young lads to be given a game over the "wasters" like wright and co I don't think anyone would have had a problem with youngsters being used judiciously, when they are ready and perhaps even only for certain games. A good mixture of young and old would have bee fine (and personally, although i'm not sure what his wage demands were, I would have had no problem with Wright staying on). I think there are some youngsters that are ready to play when they are fairly young, but IMHO we didn't judge each case on it's merits and really look at what was best for the Club and for the player, we just seemed to throw in as many as we could and hoped that they would at least tread water!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRobbie Posted 14 February, 2009 Share Posted 14 February, 2009 What purpose are corners? Why not have a round pitch? Football needs to be totally rethought. Its a Premier League leaders conspiracy to prevent Stoke from winning the league with Delap's throw-ins into the box from all over the pitch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Saint Posted 14 February, 2009 Share Posted 14 February, 2009 I agree with um pahars on this. It is not a matter of age but experience. There is a world of difference playing in the Academy or reserve team. The step up to CCC is immense. The correct way is to blood inexperienced players so that they can gain experience without damaging their confidence. Because of the "Lowe Experiment" and his idea of the best way to balance the books he went for full blooded baptism of too many inexperienced players at the same time. Wright was offered a new contract I understand but the fact he moved on suggests it was too short or more likely at a very much reduced salary. Some of the younger players coming into or trying to establish themselves in the team felt he was a great help to their career. I watched Euell for the last couple of games he has played and he was forever talking to the younger players, pointing to where they should be and covering them when they were out of position. The balance between "youth", I like to call it inexperience, and seasoned players was all wrong from the start. Damage is being done, has been done and likely will continue to be done due to our financial position and Lowe's inability to accept he was wrong. There is nothing wrong with his vision to play home grown from the academy. It was just too many too soon. Innovation is to be applauded but it has to be within a structured framework so that innovation does not damage the overall system but gradually develops and changes it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai_phil Posted 14 February, 2009 Share Posted 14 February, 2009 I agree with um pahars on this. It is not a matter of age but experience. There is a world of difference playing in the Academy or reserve team. The step up to CCC is immense. The correct way is to blood inexperienced players so that they can gain experience without damaging their confidence. Because of the "Lowe Experiment" and his idea of the best way to balance the books he went for full blooded baptism of too many inexperienced players at the same time. Wright was offered a new contract I understand but the fact he moved on suggests it was too short or more likely at a very much reduced salary. Some of the younger players coming into or trying to establish themselves in the team felt he was a great help to their career. I watched Euell for the last couple of games he has played and he was forever talking to the younger players, pointing to where they should be and covering them when they were out of position. The balance between "youth", I like to call it inexperience, and seasoned players was all wrong from the start. Damage is being done, has been done and likely will continue to be done due to our financial position and Lowe's inability to accept he was wrong. There is nothing wrong with his vision to play home grown from the academy. It was just too many too soon. Innovation is to be applauded but it has to be within a structured framework so that innovation does not damage the overall system but gradually develops and changes it. Avoiding the "Alpine" I told you so approach, I think that almost all of the regular posters on here worried about this at the start of the season in different ways. Inexperience and Balance, but not just on the pitch, off it as well. IMHO we didn't need to keep all of last year's under achievers if any of them, but what we should have done was to bring in the type of players who could have helped - there are plenty in the lower leagues with good heads on their shoulders and would have been less cost than the Euells etc. And don't let's get started on the managerial lack of balance and experience as well. We didn't, it shows and the kids have possibly been harmed. In fact, Lowe's legacy may actually to have been to DAMAGE the prospects of our next generation of youngsters making the grade, rather than his original intention of pushing them on to make the grade. Time will tell on that score, if we have enough of it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 14 February, 2009 Share Posted 14 February, 2009 Lowe's idea is the spectacular failure we virtually all knew it would be. I don't even think it's the percentage of young/inexperienced players that is the problem, or the players signed/let go/loaned out. The only problem is not letting a football manager be in control of all the above descisions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 14 February, 2009 Share Posted 14 February, 2009 I was talking more about the Gobern's, Lancashire, McClaggon, Mills, Paterson, White, Thompson etc and maybe even others such as Lallana, who is a more fragile type of player. Many of these players have been dropped in the deep end, then bombed out. IMHO, on too many occasions we have played players before they were ready, or we have overplayed others. I am an advocate of "if they're good enough, then they're old enough", but I also understand that for some being dropped in at 18/19 or even 20 is not necessarily good for their development, particularly in a struggling side in a a brute of a division.That is fair. Not all were ready but they have been brought out of the fire and will come back stronger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SFC Forever Posted 14 February, 2009 Share Posted 14 February, 2009 That is fair. Not all were ready but they have been brought out of the fire and will come back stronger. I hope that you are right because we will need them next year if we are going to try to rebuild. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now