Why do people call it moaning???
It's called been a realist.
We're 24th in the league. We're 7 points From safety. What's there to be cheerful about?
How many managers do we need to sack before you wake up and realise that they're not the problem?
Yes that's right because job security doesn't exist in the world of football. :facepalm:
And this of course is the point that never get's answered. According to one observer on here Thorn is the best manager we have had in the last 10 years. Well all of those managers have been re-employed in a managerial capacity again. One even managers a national team. So if Thorn is the best manager in a decade he surely would resign now safe in the knowledge a man of his many talents will immediately be snapped up by another club.
Perhaps he does not share his supporter' view of his own talents.
So you think Boothroyd should still be manager then? Or Coleman? After all they were not the problem.
Doesn't it? Name one manager who has manager lets say, Coventry, who never got another crack at management.
How many managers do we need to sack before you wake up and realise that they're not the problem?
I wouldn't say sacking the manager every season for the last decade is a realistic way to move forward.
Just because you support your manager doesn't mean that you find the situation cheerful, how childish.
Haha – that is ridiculous. So because managers have been sacked wrongly in the past, it means we can’t sack Thorn.
Were bottom of the league.
In the past week we’ve dropped 6 points from winning positions. We have won only 1 game out of the last 6.
All the above proves Thorn is not good enough. What is so childish about it?
Thorn and SISU are both to blame. SISU more but Thorn has deffo played his part in the demise of this club. Anyone who can’t see that need to go Specsavers.
If you can be winning till the 87th minute then professional footballers should hold onto it.
21 points weve dropped after taking the lead. The players are good enough. It's the manager who's not.
What's childish is trying to make out that by supporting Thorn as our manager that we are being cheerful.
No one is saying don't sack Thorn because we have sacked managers wrongly before.
I'm saying, and so is the majority that he is right for our club.
Only winning 1 in the last 6 doesn't point to thorn Not being a good manager, it points to the fact that we havn't got the players to compete in this league.
And anyone that doesn't agree with your view needs to go spec savers ? Again.. How childish.
You obviously don't think about what you're before you say it do you, try reading it again. You must be very young CUS WYKEN?
actually gaz i dont think the majority are saying AT is right for the club same as most are not saying he is wrong- most people havent expressed an opinion - I think they just accept AT is who we have got for now
I'm saying, and so is the majority that he is right for our club.
Only winning 1 in the last 6 doesn't point to thorn Not being a good manager, it points to
Wrong unless you have polled everyone the Ground. Majority are indifferent to managers and have been for years. Are you seriously telling me there would be thousands of irate supporters chanting outside the Ricoh today if Thorn got sacked. Of course there wouldn't. 90% would just shrug their shoulders and say another one bites the dust.
Until I see bad performance after bad performance, I will continue to support AT and the team as what I see is a team falling short due to lack of quality rather than because of a poor manager.
Performances don't mean points though, look at our league position....
If we are good enough to get into winning positions and compete with the majority of the league for 88 minutes then the players are good enough.
All the players need to seek mental help as they obviously have issues with conceding in injury time, I bet every single player on the pitch on Saturday felt they were going to concede that winner.
Carsley was a huge influence in the first half of last season in seeing out games.
Performances don't mean points though, look at our league position....
Well then that's where the debate is then isn't it.
I say we don't have enough points because of a lack of players good enough for this league.
Where others would suggest it's down to the manager.
If Thorn was a bad manager then we would be putting in bad performances, but we are not, so for me it's the simply that the team isn't good enough.
If Thorn was a bad manager then we would be putting in bad performances, but we are not, so for me it's the simply that the team isn't good enough.
depends what your definition of good performance is.
We play keep ball in our own half pretty well, looks nice and controlled but is clearly ineffective because it doesnt achieve the object of the game which is to score more goals than the opposition. Good performance includes defending well, clearly we dont for all the games
We are good enough to get into winning positions so surely the players are good enough to be lower Championship standard. AT says the players he has are good enough so do you back his judgement or not ?
Wouldnt want to go back to hoofball but surely there is a good arguement for saying the team should be set to keep the ball away from our goal and to put pressure on theirs - we achieve that on far too few occassions. Most fans would be happy with a team playing with a bit of blood n thunder, that didnt pass the ball around their own half so much and could at least hang on to the points - that would be good performances. We have lost the mentality of winning and what ever any one says AT contributes to that - we are just debating by how much
Is this thread a joke? Just read the title. Is the author suggesting that Thorn is not trying his best? He may be many things, but please don't accuse him of not trying 'his best'.
Surely if the team wasn't good enough we wouldn't be able to put in good performances as all of our players would be so rubbish we couldn't put in a good performance?
I think that it was just aimed at people who are saying that he shouldn't go because he is trying his best, he is a nice bloke etc.
Is a footballing side really one who plays across the back 4? I am pretty sure we looked more dangerous yesterday and against boro when we went direct!
Yes, we can pass it across our defence or in our half, that doesnt make us a footballing side it is other teams letting us play!
This is just wrong. The best move Saturday, leading to a goal, started with lots of short passing in our own half. Lots of fans stupidly started booing, shouting things like "get it forwards!". They couldn't see that we were doing the correct thing, moving opposition players out of position.
If you didn't see the analysis on how Swansea play (MOTD2 I think?), it is strongly advised. Sure we don't have anything like the same quality, but the same principles apply. Pass after pass after pass in their own half, all of which would have been jeered at The Ricoh, whereas they were cheered by Swansea fans who understand the style of play.
In a similar position near the end, Deegan tried to play a direct, forwards "Hollywood" pass: it was intercepted, and Ipswich scored.
Long ball does not equal results. It's a recurring theme on here that if only we hoofed it, we'd soon be climbing the table. Boothroyd showed that is not the case-it's totally one-dimensional and easily "worked out".
Thorn has adjusted his tactics from the Swansea model to slightly more direct-we started "mixing it up" a bit as we were too short-passing at times. It has led to slightly better results, but ultimately, it isn't the tactics that win: it's footballers. Ours just aren't good enough, and there aren't enough of them, compared to our peers. Tactics can give you an edge when sides are even, but when you are miles behind in terms of quality and depth, it won't see you win enough. I'm with Brian Clough on this one!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?