Page 1 of 2

Who's to blame

Posted: Wed Oct 05, 2016 12:38 pm
by K L Blue
I normally don't do long posts, but having seen a lot of stuff written about Town, and its got me thinking(sorry if it sounds like blue tinted glasses, or it sounds like i'm waffling on)


why are we doing badly at the start of this season?

I don't think its all MM fault, lets face it the most creative player, and reliable goal scorer(albeit a 33 year old) was sold without having the replacement signed or ready to sign when Murphy went.
This has lead to us playing a passing game(if that's what you call it) to which the players are having to adapt to, which will take time.
The recruits that have been brought in, need time to settle in, but lets face it their professional players and shouldn't take months to do this, after all its what their paid for.
So who's fault is the less than impressive start to the season?
Evans shouldn't have sold Murphy unless the replacement was sorted(yes I am pleased with the fee)
MM Should have been making sure that the tactics employed should suit the players, not the other way round.
The players need to take responsibility for their play as well, lets face it they get a lot of money to do what they do, so if their not performing then they need to take a good look at themselves.

My point is I don't think any one particular person is at fault, I think a few things need to be sorted, from the top to the bottom.
Loads of people seem to dump all the clubs problems at MM feet, yet he doesn't have the resources to drop every under performer, and the players know this.
FFP is also something that should be included, it means unless your in the premiership you can't just throw money around, it seems that its ok for a premiership club to run in the red, but not anyone in the lower leagues.
I guess my point is there's plenty of stuff affecting our club, but it seems to all be dropped at MM feet, some of which he has no control over.

Well I hope I didn't run on to much, and I hope a few points were properly put down

Re: Who's to blame

Posted: Wed Oct 05, 2016 3:31 pm
by number 9
Unfortunately, MM is accountable for how the team performs. We can talk all day about the constraints MM has had to deal with under ME's ownership. MM did well the first couple of years, but now there's a trend of regress which is quite disturbing. Also, MM doesn't make things any better by his perceived apathy to what the fans want. You're right, it's not all MM's fault...but I personally have had enough of the negative football. I'm ready for a change.

Re: Who's to blame

Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2016 1:11 am
by arana peligrosa
Many will realize McCarthy isn't solely responsible for the crap we have endured going back far enough, but as someone who picks the team and utilizes formation, he has to take his share of blame. His methods aren't working as just about everyone can attest to, but he continues to deploy the same tactics week in week out, even though it has been evident for some time that we're making little to no progress.

Evans himself could be found more culpable. Insufficient investment, allowing the manager to blunder from one game to another, and not seeming to care or do a damn thing about it. In an ideal world, we'd have both removed from position by about now, but understand there are the minority who still remain resolute we are in good hands and see no reason for change.

As before, given enough time, something has to give.

Re: Who's to blame

Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2016 7:58 am
by hallamblue
I personally have two thought processes about ITFC

1. Mick is a good manager : But adopts outdated tactics, that have long ago been dropped by most other coaches, and at best are simply boring.

2. Marcus Evans , clearly has no interest in putting anymore real cash into the Club to allow any manager to compete on a realistic footing with the modern day game. He continues to use ITFC as a tax avoidance cash cow.

I wish he'd sell up and move on.

Re: Who's to blame

Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2016 8:35 am
by Dubai Blue
Personally I would still like to see a full strength side on the field for 5 or 6 matches before I even consider expressing an opinion. IMO any other approach is a tad premature. But of course I do respect the opinions of others, and enjoy reading them.

Re: Who's to blame

Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2016 9:52 am
by hallamblue
Well yes that is a very vaild omment . But we always seem to have our key playesr inured , ie Meesr McGoldrick and Williams . Do we just have players in the squad that we rely on that will never ever be fit ? And do we get in other Clubs injury prone playesr because they are the cheap option? what other Club would bring in Williams ( a habitual injured player ) only not to be able to use him for nigh on 3 months ?) Didzy is exactly the same . Difference is we have given him contracts, no doubt lucrative, and he's yet to complete a full season for us .

Re: Who's to blame

Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2016 10:53 am
by Dubai Blue
No question that we are all frustrated about that. I'm guessing that our wage structure means that we could never afford to pay players like Williams if they were already on a long and successful run of games, so we have to gamble a bit.

All we can do is keep our fingers crossed. Especially now that Williams appears to be approaching full fitness again.

Re: Who's to blame

Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2016 11:47 am
by bluepeter
Lets not forget TC!!!
MM/TC work with the players and are in the best position to play the best 11 and change tactics when necessary.
However,the majority of us Town fans disagree.
There have been astonishing selections and substitutions which have resulted in an embarrassing run and lack of goals.
If that is not laid at MM/TC's feet I don't get it.
Something isn't right at the moment.We're not even getting shots or corners whilst making stupid blunders at the back.
I will reserve my final judgement over the next few games.If it doesn't improve dramatically something MUST be done.

Re: Who's to blame

Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2016 12:54 pm
by The Odious Mr Rossi
Dubai Blue wrote:No question that we are all frustrated about that. I'm guessing that our wage structure means that we could never afford to pay players like Williams if they were already on a long and successful run of games, so we have to gamble a bit.

All we can do is keep our fingers crossed. Especially now that Williams appears to be approaching full fitness again.
I think that's entirely missing the point.

It's not so much about players, but the tactics employed.
Why do you think that we have scored in the first half in only 6 of our last 35 games? MM himself has stated that he does not want to attack early because if we do and go 2 down then we're out of the game.
So his first thought is to play tight and make sure we don't concede.

It doesn't matter what players a team has, if the orders are to go out and hold, then goals will be in short supply.

And what annoys me is that if we are level with just a few minutes to go, then we go hell for leather to try to win.
So we have the players to attack and create chances - even with the current injuries - what we lack is a manager who is willing to take a chance.

Re: Who's to blame

Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2016 1:31 pm
by hallamblue
His fear of losing is almost repressing our ability to take the game to opponents.

I recall vividly last season at QPR when we had sat back for 86mins of the game. ...Fraser got injured and limped off and we brought a sub on. For the last 4 minx plus injury time we started to attack them. Rangers when hanging on for dear life and how the hell we didn't beat them I don't know. But what infuriated me was the simple fact that had we actually attacked them ....and many other teams, especially at home, we would have won, I'm sure of that.

This season , we have more young talent in the squad, but Mick STILL persists with this archaic tactic. Frankly we could have Messi and Bale in our team and he still play for a bloody draw. I'm sick to death of it and I perfectly understand why fans are voting in their droves with their feet.

Re: Who's to blame

Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2016 2:06 pm
by marko69
Bluepeter, I think you are correct; what about TC?

While the club MAY be embarking on difficult times, can't help but think the Mick talk is becoming repetitive and highly monotonous.

Just for a change,......., Hey Terry, it's your f**king fault.

Re: Who's to blame

Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2016 4:24 pm
by derick_ipsw
Unfortunately it is MM & TC, I say unfortunately, because they are the ones that work with the players everyday. TC has "SPECIAL" striker session which MM raved about when Murphy scored 27, well they are not to be raved about now. MM picks the team and style of play which most of the time, both are crap. You could blame the owner and the MD, but lets be honest does any body know what that Milne bloke actually contributes to the club. Regarding the owner, we have to be careful here, he pretty much has saved us from going bankrupt, and after wasting a few millions on crap Keane signings and sackings after probably being promised the earth from the big headed git, he is going to be a bit wary. So MM & TC it is!!

Re: Who's to blame

Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2016 4:59 pm
by Andym
hallamblue wrote:His fear of losing is almost repressing our ability to take the game to opponents.

I recall vividly last season at QPR when we had sat back for 86mins of the game. ...Fraser got injured and limped off and we brought a sub on. For the last 4 minx plus injury time we started to attack them. Rangers when hanging on for dear life and how the hell we didn't beat them I don't know. But what infuriated me was the simple fact that had we actually attacked them ....and many other teams, especially at home, we would have won, I'm sure of that.

This season , we have more young talent in the squad, but Mick STILL persists with this archaic tactic. Frankly we could have Messi and Bale in our team and he still play for a bloody draw. I'm sick to death of it and I perfectly understand why fans are voting in their droves with their feet.
An very good point. I am very wary of the Newcastle game. I watched them against Villa and they were all over them. After half time, Villa attacked and got an equaliser. Against Norwich, the opposite. Norwich attacked and scored 3. When our dear neighbours tried to defend the lead, they got stuffed. An oversimplification, but maybe the answer is to attack Newcastle. But will MM have the guts. The answr, I fear, I a two-letter word.

Re: Who's to blame

Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2016 5:43 pm
by bluepeter
I would like to see a Director of football brought in because our illustrious MD & Owner are clueless. George Burley anyone?



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSEOzimKnEY

Re: Who's to blame

Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2016 6:17 pm
by Bluemike
I think KL Blue actually makes a very good point, no one person is to blame with the current situation. Yes it is MM that has to take the blame for his insistence on playing a formation that even Stevie Wonder can see is not working right now, he also selects the starting Eleven every week so again that falls at his feet. There is however an element in turth in that players have only just arrived and do need a little bit of time to settle in adjust etc, unfortunately hot on the heels of their arrivals we lost virtually a whole team through injury.

I do disagree about Murphy though, as much as I liked the guy we just could not afford to turn down that money for him whether we had a replacement lined up or not, in would have been bad business, I am however pleased that thousands of fans realise at last just how vital he was to our team and not just goals, his all round game and strong presence was vital is is being badly missed, he was colossal for us.

Hallam makes a point that ME has no interest in stomping up any money of note and that no manager would be able to compete so that being the case getting a new manager in would change nothing, except maybe more attacking football which does not guarantee winning games.

Dubai also makes a good point in that he would like to see a run of 5 games with our full strength side out before condemning everyone and I agree, even when things were going OK we still had players out and as yet have not fielded what can be regarded as our strongest Eleven, of course we will all have different ideas on what that is. As I have said several times up until the Derby game we had done ok and were in a half decent position, from the Villa game onwards it has gone down hill big time on an entertainment level and I could not abide the crap I witnessed at Leeds, that was poor beyond belief and brings me back to KL Blues comment that the players have to be accountable too and that is spot on, at Leeds they let them selves down, the Manager down and the fans down, there is no Two ways about that, poor showings by the likes of Bru, Sears and Ward over the last few weeks should also be laid at the players feet, Chambers & Bart gifting a goal cost us Saturday, maybe it is also MM's fault as he has stayed loyal to some when bang out of form, althought right now our options are limited.

I am not sure Terry Connor can do much else right now to be fair, Murphy gone, Didsy crocked, Pitman crocked, Varney crocked, Best just arrived so that leaves him Sears to work with and he is not playing as a natural striker right now so Connor must be sitting on the practice pitch doing sod all atm.

So yes we do have issues for sure but as KL Blue started out by saying they are certainly not all down to one man and sorting them out is far from straightforward, however what MM can do is try going for it from the off as the current tactics are not working.

Re: Who's to blame

Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2016 8:24 pm
by number 9

Re: Who's to blame

Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2016 8:50 pm
by Bluemike
74% of 20 LOL.

Re: Who's to blame

Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2016 9:19 pm
by number 9
bluemike wrote:74% of 20 LOL.
Not sure where you're getting that; the article clearly states that 74% derived from 2500 responses. Of course, I'm not wearing my blue-tinted glasses so I could be wrong . Haha!

Re: Who's to blame

Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2016 9:20 pm
by hallamblue
that could be our next attendance ! lol :wink:

Re: Who's to blame

Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2016 9:45 pm
by herforder
Must have taken HB yonks to respond 2,500 times! :wink:

Re: Who's to blame

Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2016 10:18 pm
by Bluemike
I must admit I am a sceptic to these ridiculous polls.

Re: Who's to blame

Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2016 10:32 pm
by hallamblue
herforder wrote:Must have taken HB yonks to respond 2,500 times! :wink:

right yer card is marked lol :wink:


ps even though I've had enough of MM style/ tactics. I can't bring myself to ever "vote" him out.

Re: Who's to blame

Posted: Fri Oct 07, 2016 8:56 am
by K L Blue

I was gonna have a look, but then I saw the "VitalFootball" in the link!
surprised Mike didn't pick it up

Re: Who's to blame

Posted: Fri Oct 07, 2016 6:16 pm
by Bluemike
K L Blue wrote:

I was gonna have a look, but then I saw the "VitalFootball" in the link!
surprised Mike didn't pick it up
I did see it was that site but refuse to acknowledge it LOL.

Re: Who's to blame

Posted: Sat Oct 08, 2016 9:24 am
by Tangfastic
Is blame kind of neccesary?

Mick's who he is. Great to turn around the club and instill some steel and grit, but can't see him take this club any further.

The team is built around Chambo, Skuse, Douglas, Berra, not creative, younger players and that's how he wants it. Can't see him changing as it's not just because he won't... but he can't. Younger, flashier ,more unpredictable players aren't his thing. Give him a Skuse or Douglas who will put in 6/10 steady performances game in, game out and he's bursting with adulation.

He's not a failure by not getting top six, rather he's done enough to stabilise the club and time to hand over the reigns to someone else. 4 years now is a long time in management. He's done his job.

Why wait until we slide downwards further into more disatisfaction and perhaps flirting with the relegation zone?
Isn't it better to act now when things are not that bad. Not worried about the last 3 games, but just the last 12- 18 months. Just too much same old, same old.

I can only see Mick get sacked by ME if things get really bad.... and it could be another 2-3 years as Mick will scrape a few wins.... and then you need another 'turnaround' manager.

Don't care about the blame, but if ME really is ambitious then he should see we need something/someone new and act now. Better to build on something solid now rather let the situation slowly deteriorate.

Re: Who's to blame

Posted: Sat Oct 08, 2016 10:35 am
by marko69
Catch 22, Tang. Younger, more creative, flashier players, (like Ryan Fraser) are too expensive. And if it's loanees, then the Ryan Frasers are very difficult to find. Even tougher to find if your arse is flapping slightly. End up doing "Knudsen" deals.

But understand what you are saying. Someone new will reset the clock and time will not be of the essence.

Keeping saying it, but MPB has been correct for a long time.

Re: Who's to blame

Posted: Sat Oct 08, 2016 12:14 pm
by Tangfastic
marko69 wrote:Catch 22, Tang. Younger, more creative, flashier players, (like Ryan Fraser) are too expensive. And if it's loanees, then the Ryan Frasers are very difficult to find. Even tougher to find if your arse is flapping slightly. End up doing "Knudsen" deals.

But understand what you are saying. Someone new will reset the clock and time will not be of the essence.

Keeping saying it, but MPB has been correct for a long time.
What abut the coaching and the academy kids then? Do players actually improve as players when they come here? Or does just Mick want ready-made players around 30 who follow his instructions to the tee. Not convinced MM could bring through a Ryan Fraser who was ready-made. Wards gone backwards lately and I still think Bishop when completely fit will be an understudy to Douglas. Dozzell only got a run late last year to sell season tickets.


It's not all money ( although it bloody well helps) , but can Mick trust and bring on more creative, younger players? He likes his journeymen who are low maintenance, don't need any coaching, do what he tells them and are different class.

Re: Who's to blame

Posted: Sat Oct 08, 2016 2:54 pm
by len
Hi, i have been a town supporter for over 30 years, and what gets my goat is that MM
fails to play the old fashion wing play game. As a past outside right player when i was
young the main objective was to aim for the by-line and cross...job done!!!!!
If you are going to play with two wingers, then they should be prepared to attack defenders
and not shy away. Playing the ball back sends a message to defenders that you have no balls!!!
MM should only use players in their strongest positions and not out of position.
He should go and sooner the better! !!!

My motto for MM is play with passion, dictate the game from start, be aggressive in attack,
then he may win back the fans(wishful thinking).

Re: Who's to blame

Posted: Sat Oct 08, 2016 3:29 pm
by arana peligrosa
As someone touched on, one concern is that McCarthy will be allowed to continue in the time ahead (potentially years) so long as he provides some performances of merit or recognition, but at the same time the majority of play being what we are already used to and a continuation of largely uninspiring play and ineffective approaches.

Christ we've already wasted some 15 years since George Burley departed and fallen further behind year after year, and the thought of the same style of play and lack of ambition for years to come - just enough so Evans decides the manager is doing an adequate job and sees no reason for termination of employment - doesn't provide much motivation or interest.

Last I looked Steve Bruce was still available : any owner who could evidently see their club was in need of rebuild or aspiring to challenge would have made approaches by now or at least showed a level of interest, but once again Evans sees fit to sit idly by and stick with the garbage we still possess.

Once again, both are immediately culpable for the decline of this club at this moment in time.

Re: Who's to blame

Posted: Sat Oct 08, 2016 4:32 pm
by Tangfastic
Len, any post with 'what's get my goat 'in it is a winner for me. Love that phrase... good old Suffolk phrase. :) good direct post... and the first one as well ....