Coaching Angst (it's one result away)

Allen Curbishley is free HK_Keeper2008-09-25 16:03:53

i have no problem with Terry talking to the players with the backroom absent,

@ tigers

"i have no problem with Terry talking to the players with the backroom absent"

the problem it creates is the visible lack of trust in the coach who is meant to be the top footballing man there.

"it is possible to argue that few English clubs owe their very existence to their 'owner'"

Really? I'd like to hear your argue this case.

What do EPL clubs owe their existence too? Fans?(Asian ones help the coffers if youre in the top four)

Maybe it was fans in the days before SKY TV (and being able to develop talent or buy it cheap) but not anymore. Now they owe it to money. Lots of Money. Money needed for managers, coaches, players, wages,admin, etc. if you don't have big money (and a reasonable manger than you're Spurs). And who has the big money? yanks, arabs and russians and fat gits like mike ashley.

Clubs like Liverpool, Manchester United,Chelsea, Newcastle, Portsmouth, Manchester City are examples of clubs that have their existence and future success tied to the fortunes of an owner. 

yes I hate how Terry had a talk with the team

yep all of those clubs were founded by their current owners and would go under and cease to exist if their owners left, as there is not that much money floating around the EPL to pick up the tab. IE someone else would buy them.

MartinB - your last line proves my point.

To be fair, all clubs, with the exception of Ebsfleet and other fan-owned clubs, are subject to this rule.

As I understand, RH is the Head Coach and the board is the management. There is no team manager. Since TS is part of the board and main owner of the club , he is basically the voice of the management and so it is not as the owner he talks to the players but rather he comes as the management board of the club. He needs to check whether the backroom (RH and WO) or the players are at fault. In essence he acts as the boss of both staff and players and the mediator between staff and players. This works well enough, because the board is the main ruler over them. TS is not imposing football rules but mediate clarity so that the backroom staff and the players can start to focus on the problem. TS does not have to focus on the problem but supervise. So only the staff and players keep doing what they should be doing but with more idea of what is needed.

Well there was two things that need to be sorted out for the players as a collective.

Question:

One: Does the problem lies with Coach and backroom or does it lies with the players?

Two: What can be done about it?

Answer;

One; no problems with coach and backroom staff, the problem lies with the players.

Two: The players have to do the hard work.

Now that that is clear along all the players, then they could work on the problem. Beforehand, everyone was not sure where the problem is and therefore was unable to work on it fully.

If they claim that it was the coaches problem, then it would be acknowledged that the coach was not working well with the players in the training and that the training was not enough for the players as well as the game plan was not working.

Then a couple of issues can be aired and then with an visit to the backroom, the issues can be relayed to RH and WO so they could try some things out to address these issues at the next team meeting.

If the training was done well and the game plan was sound, then it would be the players that was at fault.

Now it is widely acknowledge that the players are not playing up to the coaches expectation save a few.

Decent management strategy to me.AllWhitebelievr2008-09-26 04:40:08

Setting aside the debate on the confusion and conflicts caused by the expectations, in some quarters, that the Phoenix has a responsibility to develop NZ football the other major problem at the heart of the Nix's troubles would seem to be a lack of leadership.

 

I thought that was complete drivel personally

There is a blog on Stuff that covers this off really well - whoever writes it is a genius 

I think he needs  to do some work for YF and stop MW'ing

Don't knock MWing.

btw, you're no stranger to it yourself...

Spotted Brian Turner at Nix's training today

Warning - long coaching exposition (. . . for Bopman)

What needs to be done. Back to basics

As established, the problem is the players. So the problem is their on-field game. The solution, in a nutshell, is in their on-field game. Therefore the players' on-field game needs to be addressed. Success in the on-field is success in the off-field.

The leadership is tied up with how they play their game as players on the field

The General Spew:

The players have to step up and take responsibility for their actions. They need to "own" their corner of the problem and tackle their area harder. The ownership of their problem must be realised and they need to take control of it rather than it taking control of them. This is what it means to take the "bull by it's horn"

First things first.

Off field affairs should not be your thinking as you get on the field. When you are on the field you cannot deal with those affairs. The affairs of others cannot be deal with on the field. When you are on the field, there is nothing else but the game to deal with. So stay focus for the 90 minutes

On field:

When all the players take the field, relative to where the ball is, there are always three things that a player are thinking and nothing else. The mind switches between the three very quickly. They are in this order of priority.



Rationale and how you go about it each of the three points:

(1) You always can apply your own committment, passion and discipline to your play so that is something you as a player can control in regards to your position. The most committed, passionate and disciplined players are the most successful players. Without this you can't do (2) or (3) very well. You must be willing to listen to good instructions and change tactics quickly this is where discipline comes in.

(2) You can positively encourage/guidance your teammate (on the ball or off the ball) on the next thing they need to do because you can see things they may not be able to see while being challenged on the ball or from a view they don't see from their angle. This means to talk only in the present tense or the immediate future tense and not in the recent past as the past is gone and cannot be changed. This communication type is what gels teams together on the pitch. Heaps of talking and useful talking guides each other into passing lanes and positional spaces this increases passing selection and passing options. It can gets double, triple checked in a short time. (the guy with the ball is the first check, the another voice is the double check and the next other voice is the triple check) More voices communicating the same thing, the quicker and easier the decision making should be.

(3) Is mixed up with (1) and (2) in decision making with and without ball possession. Besides that, focus is on playing the ball not the player, there is nothing else more important. Playing the ball wins games, playing the player loses games. Simple thinking and keep it simple.

Every player is a leader and a follower in the game, it depends on the context of the situation. However, it is expected that the more senior players are better at this than younger players. But all can do it.

That's how you build up leadership on the field. You play your (2) above the (1) with good communication.

This then translates to success on-field, regardless of the off-field affairs. To be successful as a club, players should be always working at this thinking at every training. (that's why you work on your second and first touch training. . . your first touch is vital. . . third touch is considered dribbling)

(c) copyright AllWhiteBeliever

Seriously HK Keeper that smiley was confusing until I read Royal's post you quoted. Having Allen Curblishley is like NZ Knights round two, don't go there, don't even joke about, just let it die a silent death.

 cheers AWB, like Bopman, I'm always interested in your views and learn from reading them

yeah i was being sarcastic, in reply to someone

See, I told all you guys that RH could do no wrong, shame on you all  

Another couple of wins and this thread will dissapear, c'mon ricki, c'mon phoenix!!

Get rid of Rickim,  bought the wrong players, worst thing ever to have that muppet turner along side him, Turner is crap english mentality.

we only won 2-1,lets sack him.

i thought that both Gao and Coveny had drifted out of the game but suprised that Daniel didnt come on. Plodder did suprisingly well though.

UberGunner2008-09-29 08:20:37

think its time for this to be dragged back up? Scottishbhoy2008-10-27 12:52:36

FFS  would you run outside and play on the motorway.

7 points from 12 and we're bringing this thread up again? You're stirring surely?

You can't just go a fire him because we loose a game coming off 2 wins and 1 draw.

Can't be with him one minute, against the next.Michael2008-10-27 17:14:13

thats true. and we could have easily won out there yesterday or atleast got a draw. weve made HUGE improvements out there on the field and definitely have what it takes to beat any team in the league. that 1 loss against queenslad just came down to a few unlucky shots from us

Thats true. but there were at least 5 or 6 'unlucky' shots that needed to be goals!

Not suggesting he should be sacked, thou was very dissapointed in the way we played on Friday.. not sure why we have to conceed before we start playing football.. We did the same against sydney last time too.

Eh? You a Newcastle fan?