[Ska'dForLife-WBA]

Unfortunately, I'm rapidly coming to the conclusion that the manager (or head coach in this case) isn't the real problem when it comes to cups. The Premier League has a major flaw in terms of huge squads full of players who won't all be used regularly in the league, and as there's no proper reserve league anymore and only three seniors can take part in youth games, the cup competitions are the only chance to give these guys games. Many fans cry out for the strongest side to be played, but if you're fielding that side in both league and cup, you've now got a dozen players sitting around wondering why they ever bothered to sign. Back to smaller squads, then? Fair enough, but we'll also be back to the days when one bad injury in a crucial position could relegate a team. A harsh proposition when relegation now often doubles up with near-bankruptcy.

To me, Irvine made a big mistake in selecting the midfield he did - that lack of creativity was tactical suicide - but I think he was also caught in the perpetual quandary of needing "the stiffs" to get competitive game time. People who say the club set out to lose in cup competitions are off the mark; I think the desire to win behind the scenes is probably there, but is it matched on the pitch? How do you motivate a player who thinks he's already achieved everything he needs to (or is likely to) in his career? The Bournemouth reserves were chomping at the bit to beat a team full of internationals, to maybe stake a place in a first team that's going places, ultimately earn themselves promotion bonuses or a move to the Premier League in future. Irvine apparently told our boys to go out and prove they should be in the first team; evidently, for most that just isn't a tempting enough carrot.

For the FA Cup, if we're not going to go old school and field the first team, I'd try and build a cup side out of those reserves AND older youth players who "get" the concept of a cup run and genuinely want to step out at Wembley in April and May. Just trying to keep some fitness, curry your way into the first team or angling for a move? Nope, not good enough. I don't want you anywhere near that pitch at kick-off.

[Dingle-Dingle]

Has the £10Mil man actually played 90 minutes?? DD

[Luke_East_Baggie]

Can't see it working in reality.

I really can't see assistant "X" saying to Jose Mourinho, "Jose Mate, were playing Shrewsbury tonight, they are gonna try and kick us up in the air all game, so I'll be needing Costa even if he ain't 100%, and also Willian and Hazard too"

It would just end up being the same sort of situation.

All will probably be forgotten is we get a result at Leicester.

=====================================

My Ratings from The Game (we were behind the goal so couldn't see every finer detail)


Myhill - 6 - Average, not as confident as vs United.
Davidson - 5.5 - didn't provide much going forward, and most their good stuff seemed to come down that side. (better than Ridgewell tho!!)
Mcauley - 5.5 - Used to Mcauley dominating things, he was very average though.
Dawson - 6.4 - Thought he still looked confident at the back, not too bad from him
Gamboa - 6.3 - Thought Gamboa was okay. Maybe should of had a penalty - and got up and down the line really well. Final ball was poor - If he had a decent run in the team he would be fine.
Oneil - 5 - quite night - subbed
Mulumbu - 5.1 - some decent passes, but a shadow of his usual "animal" self. Gave the ball away sloppily for their first goal.
Baird - 5 - Didn't know he was playing till he missed the header at the end - Probably meant he didn't do too much wrong - but not enough right.
Blanco - 5.5 Average performer on the night
Anichebe - 5 - did very little - recieved little service
Ideye - 5.4 - at least tried to create a bit - no service at all

Samaras - 6 -Not a Samaras fan, but thought he was okay when he came on, some neat hold up, and tried to make a bit of space.
Sess - 6 - Didn't create anything dangerous, but opened up players and made space - were twice as dangerous with him on.
Berahino - 5.5 - not much time to make an impac - was marked tight when he was on.

---

[Bournemouth Baggie]

I've read Mr Irvine's comments around giving opportunities and most not taking them. I also note his comments around tiredness of the regulars who have been asked to play four games in 12 days. Simple person that I am that makes 6 hours "work". In 12 days. How can they be tired? Our postman runs on his round taking 3 hours a day. Every day. Am I missing something?

[Tom_Wba]

I've read Mr Irvine's comments around giving opportunities and most not taking them. I also note his comments around tiredness of the regulars who have been asked to play four games in 12 days. Simple person that I am that makes 6 hours "work".  In 12 days. How can they be tired? Our postman runs on his round taking 3 hours a day. Every day. Am I missing something?

I didn't go to Bournemouth but i went to the Hull game both Gamboa and Blanco really impressed me that night yet haven't been given a chance, So Irvine talks out his arse! We could of beat Bournemouth 4-0 on Tuesday but you could be certain it would be the same team that failed to beat Palace....Mediocre Manager!

[wba_1996]

I also note his comments around tiredness of the regulars who have been asked to play four games in 12 days. Simple person that I am that makes 6 hours "work".  In 12 days. How can they be tired? Our postman runs on his round taking 3 hours a day. Every day. Am I missing something?

You get people saying this a lot, and I agree with it. But being professional athletes does anyone think maybe 3 high-intensity games in a week stretches them enough that there is a noticeable dip in their performance by the third game? With the pace and physicality of the PL I can imagine how tiring a full 90 mins can be. Would what is generally seen as an "unimportant" cup match in the grand scheme of the greed league appeal to a player who knows he then has to be fired up again for a tough match against a Leicester side full of pressing and pace just a few days later? There were 9 (NINE) internationals starting against Bournemouth, without being disrespectful, if I was one of the lads who started against Palace I would expect them to get the job done against lower league opposition. I'm not defending anyone but I'm just trying to look at it from another perspective.

[Ska'dForLife-WBA]

Yes, I'd agree with that. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think Irvine actually used the word "tired", did he? He just said that some players were "feeling the effects", which I'd interpret to mean that they didn't feel they could give 100% for ninety minutes on both Tuesday and Saturday without losing a bit of pace and sharpness. People bring up the Sixties and Seventies all the time in these kind of arguments, talking about the days when players had to play 500 games a season with two broken legs, etc, but the fact is that all teams then had the same handicap, and the wider spread of quality in a division meant that a team might not suffer so much from one player having an off-day. In the modern Premier League, these fine margins are punished ruthlessly.

To phrase that in Steve's analogy, the postman may run for three hours a day, but if his job was reliant on him being faster than vicious dogs which chase him for breakfast, and one day he felt that he couldn't match his usual dog-beating pace, raising the risk that he could be injured and off-work for a long time, and thus jeopardising the status of his post office branch which might get closed down as a result, is he then justified in having a day to recuperate?

[Slick_Footwork]

IMO, we didn't lose this game because of the wholesale changes.

We lost because Irvine picked a team with no balance, no pattern of
play and personnel that do not compliment each other.

Anichebe is a player who thrives on short balls into his feet, so he can
return the ball to the midfielder or roll the defender, when there's a 40
yard gap between him and the midfield, he's always going to look useless.

We have a £10m striker who thrived in a team with pacy wingers and
then play him in a side with 3 sitting midfielders and no width, with an
international winger sitting on the bench.

Then, when we decide to bring the winger on, we play him up top and
take the striker off.

Irvine did exactly the same against Oxford, played a disjointed team of
players with no width. We were very lucky yo beat them.

But he doesn't learn, it's like banging your head against a brick wall.

[aries22]

Unfortunately, I'm rapidly coming to the conclusion that the manager (or head coach in this case) isn't the real problem when it comes to cups.  The Premier League has a major flaw in terms of huge squads full of players who won't all be used regularly in the league, and as there's no proper reserve league anymore and only three seniors can take part in youth games, the cup competitions are the only chance to give these guys games.  Many fans cry out for the strongest side to be played, but if you're fielding that side in both league and cup, you've now got a dozen players sitting around wondering why they ever bothered to sign.  Back to smaller squads, then?  Fair enough, but we'll also be back to the days when one bad injury in a crucial position could relegate a team.  A harsh proposition when relegation now often doubles up with near-bankruptcy.

To me, Irvine made a big mistake in selecting the midfield he did - that lack of creativity was tactical suicide - but I think he was also caught in the perpetual quandary of needing "the stiffs" to get competitive game time.  People who say the club set out to lose in cup competitions are off the mark; I think the desire to win behind the scenes is probably there, but is it matched on the pitch?  How do you motivate a player who thinks he's already achieved everything he needs to (or is likely to) in his career?  The Bournemouth reserves were chomping at the bit to beat a team full of internationals, to maybe stake a place in a first team that's going places, ultimately earn themselves promotion bonuses or a move to the Premier League in future.  Irvine apparently told our boys to go out and prove they should be in the first team; evidently, for most that just isn't a tempting enough carrot.

For the FA Cup, if we're not going to go old school and field the first team, I'd try and build a cup side out of those reserves AND older youth players who "get" the concept of a cup run and genuinely want to step out at Wembley in April and May.  Just trying to keep some fitness, curry your way into the first team or angling for a move?  Nope, not good enough.  I don't want you anywhere near that pitch at kick-off.

Maybe revive the old Central League and cut matchday subs from seven to three (one goalie, two outfield players). Which team was it very recently that had to put an outfield player in goal when the regular goalie went off injured? Those were the days.

[talkSAFT]

[quote='Ska' pid='10138' dateline='1414678546']

Maybe revive the old Central League and cut matchday subs from seven to three (one goalie, two outfield players). Which team was it very recently that had to put an outfield player in goal when the regular goalie went off injured? Those were the days.

Ha. 5'7" Graham Williams went in goal for 1/2 an hour on the Road to Wembley '68 (v Southampton away), when Ossie got injured.
I've a feeling Bomber's done it as well sometime, but can't be sure. Any stats, Ska'd?