Moderators: Charnwood, Bluemike
number 9 wrote:I just had a thought...don't p*ss Charny off cuz he does the Prediction Lg! We don't want him buggering off before Bluecheese takes the title!!
You need to visit us a bit more!
bluemike wrote:I f**king love this.......It makes such a change not to be involved in the arguments PMSL.
Andy great post and I agree with most of it, just a couple of things I would disagree with. I actually think Skuse is a vital part of our team, there was a time he got endless stick but by and large that has stopped, I think the problem is that Douglas is not the right type of partner for him, while JD hasn't done much wrong he really does little of any quality, the way they play is just too much alike. Like you I am a big fan of Kevin Bru and hopefully he will return to the starting line up soon, he was quality at Brentford and ran the show, had he not gone off we would have won that game without question, I also think he is a very good passer of the ball, his vision is very good.I post much more rarely these days, and unfortunately this thread highlights the main reason why. I can understand how discussions can get heated face to face, but when you're sat at a keyboard with time to think before exchanging insults... I despair.
For what it's worth, here's my take on our situation.
We always seem to look for scapegoats when things go wrong. McCarthy's tactics, or team selection for this or the previous game, or individual players. I think it's time to be more realistic and less blinkered.
1. I don't think the team selected for Man U had the slightest impact on Saturday's performance. A more likely factor is that we were playing a lowly team and expected them to be easy.
2. Gerken takes a lot of criticism on this board, because - like McCarthy - we have favourites and many think Bart is better. For my part, I think both are decent, neither is great, and there is little to choose. I do think though, as Blue Mike said, that Gerken had a good game on Saturday and could do nothing about the first goal as the deflection moved the path of the ball from his right to his left and he was already committed to the right.
3. Smith also takes a lot of stick. But he was as good if not better than any other of our defenders on Saturday. Chambers is struggling this season, as is Berra. I don't believe Knudsen will ever make it at this level. He is out of his depth, and unfortunately when Parr came on he looked weak, allowing too much space.
4. The next scapegoat is Douglas. I'm not keen on him either, and I'm still not a fan of Skuse. I am a fan of Bru's but we need to be aware of the potential problems. A 4-4-2 formation is pretty interchangeable with 4-2-4. Our wide players (particularly if we play Fraser and Niles) tend to be attacking players. If we replaced (for example) Douglas with Bru, I think Skuse would be hopelessly exposed when Bru pushed forward.
5. I know he's only 12 or whatever, but I don't think Niles will ever make it. He did have a good couple of 45 minutes earlier in the season, but he offers no protection at all. He will not challenge for a 50-50 ball on the ground or in the air. It doesn't matter how young or old you are - if you don't have the guts to do it now you never will.
6. Presumably it was MM's decision, not for the first time, to move Niles into a more central position on Saturday. This offered even less protection to Chambers and also Niles was completely ineffective.
7. The strikers. Murphy is out of form. Pitman isn't good enough. I believe McGoldrick has an issue with the rest of the team (see below). Sears had a poor game on Saturday - I overheard one lady say as she left after the game "Why wasn't Sears playing today?" I thought yes, that's how much of an impression he made.
8. McGoldrick. I think when the rest of the team aren't playing well, he is like the star of an under 12 side - her wants to do it all himself because he's knows the rest of the team aren't good enough. He comes back to get the ball. Her wants to take everyone on. He wants to score. He was very poor on Saturday but I still rate him and think he just lacks any support.
9. Tactics. Bristol had a giant at the back and we still resorted to lumping long balls forward. That and moving Niles centrally. I don't think I need say any more.
10. I came away from the Birmingham draw feeling happy. Not with the result but I had enjoyed the game. When I thought about individuals, the only players who had actually impressed were Toure and (in the first half) Sears. But we deserved better from the chances we created. But the Bristol game? The only minor positive was Fraser. Who of course isn't a Town player.
11. I've said it before but the main problem is that individually we are very poor. McGoldrick is probably the only player we have who I expect to actually control the ball with his first touch. Most of the team are incapable of playing an accurate pass. The 2 fundamentals of the game and almost the entire team are inept at both. We can play whatever formation we like and whatever team we like but that won't change. We get results - when we get them - through effort. But underneath that, there is nothing. So let's not expect us to achieve success because we won't. Without investment, without a manager who values ability as well as effort, we are going nowhere.
marko69 wrote:Charnwood, trust me, hissy fits and cream puffs are not abusive or derogatory..... They are merely observations. I thought you had a Scottish son in law FFS!
marko69 wrote:But we've got all the best Golf courses.
I don't for one minute think I am one of those you refer to, but you really must be appreciative of other peoples comments/criticisms even if you don't like them. Irrespective of your exchanges with Marko, it is after all a forum and open to all to express what they think.Charnwood wrote:marko69 wrote:
For the record though, I have never been in the camp that agreed with the eleven changes at Old Trafford. I have always wanted ITFC to have the League Cup as part of the honours list. The line up was indeed very disappointing.
Regarding motivation. Let's agree that it's arguably one of the most important aspects at any football club. There is no dispute there.
But regarding team selection for the Manchester United game , that will have been discussed in great depth with the players and management staff as to what the plan for the game was going to be long before the Wednesday. Those players will have known that they were not going to be featuring and will have had professional explanations as to why. If then they couldn't get themselves motivated for a more important HOME league game, then Mick has a problem with the attitude of those players, not their motivation.
Are you saying Charnwood, that if you were on that squad, you'd have been less motivated and more than likely in the f**king cream puff because you didn't play?
It's laughable. I also find it unbelievable.
You may well find it laughable and unbelievable Marko, but I don't have a bloody clue what language you're using. I've no idea what a "hissy fit" is and have never heard of the term, and the same applies to being "in the f**king cream puff".. I guess these are all Scottish terms probably abusive or derogatory, but given all the interest and pokes from third party stirrers it's probably best that we simply choose to agree to disagree and move on.
barmy billy wrote:We've all been on the motivational training courses Charnwood but you obviously didn't take it all in. Your opening 'Marko me old mate' is the typical passive aggressive comment you give someone when you are trying to prove your superior knowlege. As has been said already, you cannot take anyone disagreeing with you and resort to the sort of comment above.Charnwood wrote:Marko me old mate, my comment wasn't aimed solely at you, if you look thro the thread you're not the only one either missing my point or not quite understanding it.
Motivation is a driver that enables people to either over or underperform against their norm and
has nothing to do with players "getting off arses" or "getting into gear" or anything about McCarthy "losing the dressing room" ...
Intrinsic motivation which is so important in sport is all about players behaviours and enjoyment and is an essential ingredient to get the best out of them. Players who are excited and feel valued and important to the team are more likely to excel, than one who feels devalued or less important. An interested, excited and confident player is far more likely to produce enhanced performance on the pitch than one who isn't, which is probably why our second string team did so well to contain a strong Man Utd team for as long as they did on Wednesday night.
Just think how much more excited, important and confident our first team players would have felt running out on the pitch yesterday had they given a good account of themselves at Old Trafford, in fact the dressing room would have been buzzing pre match.
Participation motivation is another key driver for footballers and is all about being part of a team, getting selected, their status within the team and recognition, some may think trivial but all very important when trying to get players to excel and over perform.
I just think the fella got it completely wrong dropping everyone who played the previous weekend, and looking at the subs bench I guess most of them stayed back at Portman Road training without either the manager or coach being around. Hardly a motivating experience whilst their mostly inferior mates enjoyed themselves playing against Manchester United in front of a crowd of 56000.
Maybe had he just rested a couple of players who might have been carrying niggling injuries, or for performance reasons wanted to try something different, or simply wanting to motivate a couple of junior players then I could have understood his decision, but changing the whole team was f**king stupid and he got his pay back yesterday, not because the players "couldn't be arsed" but simply because some of them probably weren't as motivated as they could have been and in my opinion that was the managers fault.
It is a known fact that when one looks back over past times (eg ex pros) ones opinions change and things are not thought of as they were say, 15-20 years ago. There will be obvious exceptions, but in the main the average footballer is not blessed with the highest intelligence (sad but true) and would not understand many of the motivational techniques taught. They are motivated by the vast amounts of money they earn and the size of the ridiculous cars they drive more than anything else. This is why so many of them are prepared to stay at clubs picking up the cash in the full knowlege that will hardly ever see first team football.
I don't recall making that statement or the context in which it was made, as it not the type of thing I would normally say. I believe you however as I don't have the inclination to look it up.Charnwood wrote:barmy billy wrote:We've all been on the motivational training courses Charnwood but you obviously didn't take it all in. Your opening 'Marko me old mate' is the typical passive aggressive comment you give someone when you are trying to prove your superior knowlege. As has been said already, you cannot take anyone disagreeing with you and resort to the sort of comment above.Charnwood wrote:Marko me old mate, my comment wasn't aimed solely at you, if you look thro the thread you're not the only one either missing my point or not quite understanding it.
Motivation is a driver that enables people to either over or underperform against their norm and
has nothing to do with players "getting off arses" or "getting into gear" or anything about McCarthy "losing the dressing room" ...
Intrinsic motivation which is so important in sport is all about players behaviours and enjoyment and is an essential ingredient to get the best out of them. Players who are excited and feel valued and important to the team are more likely to excel, than one who feels devalued or less important. An interested, excited and confident player is far more likely to produce enhanced performance on the pitch than one who isn't, which is probably why our second string team did so well to contain a strong Man Utd team for as long as they did on Wednesday night.
Just think how much more excited, important and confident our first team players would have felt running out on the pitch yesterday had they given a good account of themselves at Old Trafford, in fact the dressing room would have been buzzing pre match.
Participation motivation is another key driver for footballers and is all about being part of a team, getting selected, their status within the team and recognition, some may think trivial but all very important when trying to get players to excel and over perform.
I just think the fella got it completely wrong dropping everyone who played the previous weekend, and looking at the subs bench I guess most of them stayed back at Portman Road training without either the manager or coach being around. Hardly a motivating experience whilst their mostly inferior mates enjoyed themselves playing against Manchester United in front of a crowd of 56000.
Maybe had he just rested a couple of players who might have been carrying niggling injuries, or for performance reasons wanted to try something different, or simply wanting to motivate a couple of junior players then I could have understood his decision, but changing the whole team was f**king stupid and he got his pay back yesterday, not because the players "couldn't be arsed" but simply because some of them probably weren't as motivated as they could have been and in my opinion that was the managers fault.
It is a known fact that when one looks back over past times (eg ex pros) ones opinions change and things are not thought of as they were say, 15-20 years ago. There will be obvious exceptions, but in the main the average footballer is not blessed with the highest intelligence (sad but true) and would not understand many of the motivational techniques taught. They are motivated by the vast amounts of money they earn and the size of the ridiculous cars they drive more than anything else. This is why so many of them are prepared to stay at clubs picking up the cash in the full knowlege that will hardly ever see first team football.
I'm not sure why you assume everyone in life has been on a motivational training course BB, I'd imagine that's a pretty poor assumption as is your suggestion that I might not have "taken in all the training".
A couple of weeks ago on another thread I was quite impressed to read your statement ".....I do actually know what I'm talking about". Two weeks later I'm thinking that statement was hugely exaggerated.
barmy billy wrote:I don't for one minute think I am one of those you refer to, but you really must be appreciative of other peoples comments/criticisms even if you don't like them. Irrespective of your exchanges with Marko, it is after all a forum and open to all to express what they think.Charnwood wrote:marko69 wrote:
For the record though, I have never been in the camp that agreed with the eleven changes at Old Trafford. I have always wanted ITFC to have the League Cup as part of the honours list. The line up was indeed very disappointing.
Regarding motivation. Let's agree that it's arguably one of the most important aspects at any football club. There is no dispute there.
But regarding team selection for the Manchester United game , that will have been discussed in great depth with the players and management staff as to what the plan for the game was going to be long before the Wednesday. Those players will have known that they were not going to be featuring and will have had professional explanations as to why. If then they couldn't get themselves motivated for a more important HOME league game, then Mick has a problem with the attitude of those players, not their motivation.
Are you saying Charnwood, that if you were on that squad, you'd have been less motivated and more than likely in the f**king cream puff because you didn't play?
It's laughable. I also find it unbelievable.
You may well find it laughable and unbelievable Marko, but I don't have a bloody clue what language you're using. I've no idea what a "hissy fit" is and have never heard of the term, and the same applies to being "in the f**king cream puff".. I guess these are all Scottish terms probably abusive or derogatory, but given all the interest and pokes from third party stirrers it's probably best that we simply choose to agree to disagree and move on.
Yep, Marko's been on the meths and cider again!Frosty wrote:As long as no one takes it too seriously this thread's been quite a bit of fun.
It's good to see a bit of spirit on here again.
herforder wrote:Yep, Marko's been on the meths and cider again!Frosty wrote:As long as no one takes it too seriously this thread's been quite a bit of fun.
It's good to see a bit of spirit on here again.
is that all? That'd be an average night! It's like being back in high school again! marko69 wrote:herforder wrote:Yep, Marko's been on the meths and cider again!Frosty wrote:As long as no one takes it too seriously this thread's been quite a bit of fun.
It's good to see a bit of spirit on here again.
Seriously though...... I have just read back over the thread since "motivation-gate"...... And it's an absolute pi$$er of a laugh. One guy thinking the Man Utd game motivationally mattered, the other thinks "no" ....., and it all erupts!
YES Charny...... There are High Schools in Scotland ya bawbag!
I better head back there and find out if "motivationally" is a word.
We should have never sold RhodesBring on the Blackburn Rovers game thread.... I'm bored of this now
Mods........, political pish in the football section........., RED card please!!Charnwood wrote:At least our little spat generated a bit of interest and brought a few additional posts onto an otherwise quiet forum. Frosty appears to be happy with the extra traffic which is a bit of a bonus and saved either of us a yellow card.
.... and by the way I guess approx 15% of all the kids leaving yer high schools will head down south to secure their futures. It makes me wonder how Scotland would have survived had you guys opted for independence.
Ps: I think "motivationally" is a word both sides of the border.
Bring on the Blackburn Rovers game thread.... I'm bored of this now.
I didn't think that sounded like me. I think the post you refer to was on 13 September under the 'FAO Bluemike' thread and the comment was actually made by Rossi, to which I replied 'Modest as well.'Charnwood wrote:barmy billy wrote:We've all been on the motivational training courses Charnwood but you obviously didn't take it all in. Your opening 'Marko me old mate' is the typical passive aggressive comment you give someone when you are trying to prove your superior knowlege. As has been said already, you cannot take anyone disagreeing with you and resort to the sort of comment above.Charnwood wrote:Marko me old mate, my comment wasn't aimed solely at you, if you look thro the thread you're not the only one either missing my point or not quite understanding it.
Motivation is a driver that enables people to either over or underperform against their norm and
has nothing to do with players "getting off arses" or "getting into gear" or anything about McCarthy "losing the dressing room" ...
Intrinsic motivation which is so important in sport is all about players behaviours and enjoyment and is an essential ingredient to get the best out of them. Players who are excited and feel valued and important to the team are more likely to excel, than one who feels devalued or less important. An interested, excited and confident player is far more likely to produce enhanced performance on the pitch than one who isn't, which is probably why our second string team did so well to contain a strong Man Utd team for as long as they did on Wednesday night.
Just think how much more excited, important and confident our first team players would have felt running out on the pitch yesterday had they given a good account of themselves at Old Trafford, in fact the dressing room would have been buzzing pre match.
Participation motivation is another key driver for footballers and is all about being part of a team, getting selected, their status within the team and recognition, some may think trivial but all very important when trying to get players to excel and over perform.
I just think the fella got it completely wrong dropping everyone who played the previous weekend, and looking at the subs bench I guess most of them stayed back at Portman Road training without either the manager or coach being around. Hardly a motivating experience whilst their mostly inferior mates enjoyed themselves playing against Manchester United in front of a crowd of 56000.
Maybe had he just rested a couple of players who might have been carrying niggling injuries, or for performance reasons wanted to try something different, or simply wanting to motivate a couple of junior players then I could have understood his decision, but changing the whole team was f**king stupid and he got his pay back yesterday, not because the players "couldn't be arsed" but simply because some of them probably weren't as motivated as they could have been and in my opinion that was the managers fault.
It is a known fact that when one looks back over past times (eg ex pros) ones opinions change and things are not thought of as they were say, 15-20 years ago. There will be obvious exceptions, but in the main the average footballer is not blessed with the highest intelligence (sad but true) and would not understand many of the motivational techniques taught. They are motivated by the vast amounts of money they earn and the size of the ridiculous cars they drive more than anything else. This is why so many of them are prepared to stay at clubs picking up the cash in the full knowlege that will hardly ever see first team football.
I'm not sure why you assume everyone in life has been on a motivational training course BB, I'd imagine that's a pretty poor assumption as is your suggestion that I might not have "taken in all the training".
A couple of weeks ago on another thread I was quite impressed to read your statement ".....I do actually know what I'm talking about". Two weeks later I'm thinking that statement was hugely exaggerated.
Hmm.number 9 wrote:Well BB, you certainly know what you're talking about when it comes to 'thread revision' haha!
marko69 wrote:All things bright and beautiful,
All creatures great and small,
All things wise and wonderful:
The Lord God made them all.
Oh, Hmm?
Thought you said Hymn.
I wish I could be as laid back as you Marko, but I always tell the truth and It irked me that I was accused of saying something I was pretty sure I had not. I decided to look at my posts for the last month and stumbled on Rossi's post pretty quickly.marko69 wrote:You look a bit confused as well buddy!
Going to Arse-ume that with no smilies added....., you really are confused. As much as it's a pain in the ringpiece to constantly use smilies, I find it is probably better to use them as it reduces the chances of being called a c*nt.
9 thought that you found the post excellently. He, (nor I) would've been bothered our arses to do it.
And the "hmm"? ......, lets all sing some hmms!
Its ok mate, fk it......., this c*nt here is even more confused than you now.
(American, evangelical, deep south accent)barmy billy wrote:but I always tell the truth
barmy billy wrote:Twenty four hours on and still no comment. That says a lot to me about honesty and integrity.