We have a massive inability to retain possession for any amount of time. Onohua is a big culprit of this with his constant chips in to no man's land. Playing one up top hinders possession with know immediate support on the ball. I really don't think Holloway is a tactics man in any way. He's the passion and desire type manager which will bring you a result every now and then as he's proven
We have no leaders our so called captain shd lead by example unfortunately he did last season an the others followed suit!!
I completely get your point SH; however you missed mine... he had a policy of continually changing players and playing with formations while losing match after match - he didn't change that policy and kept losing matches ('doing the same thing and expecting a different result'); he looked headless, maybe even arrogant/stubborn... it was all at a great cost even now. You would normally build on success, perhaps making small changes to look for improvement - not throw the baby out with the bath water. I had the same views at the time this was all happening, as did many on here. Let alone the point that fans were paying hard-earned money to watch experimentation and failure when we should have been aiming for the highest position possible. After the time he has had with the team he should know the areas that need strengthening ... there are plenty here that could have told him. Practice pitches are for drilling new formations and experimenting, 'Saturdays' are for winning games and points (in style if at all possible). Anyway, a new season ahead, lets see how our new signings will fit in and what Holloway is going to do to improve the disaster of last season.
But you have seen an on paper weaker team in terms of skill beat an on paper stronger team through tactics and equally as importantly, discipline and commitment. I think Italy under Conte was far stronger as a unit than its individual players would indicate. Similarly Leicester City in their title winning season, consistently beating 'better' teams, not carried by the passion of a giant killing opportunity in the cup. Not that I think QPR under Holloway will be emulating either of these teams. I get the feeling Ollies new found obsession with versatility and being able to face various different types of opposition is more about an unvoiced understanding that our own squad is weak and will remain so, hence our shape will be led by who we are playing, not by us imposing a game plan on them.
FWIW, there wasn't a stable (i.e. completely unchanged) side when we were winning. Sometimes you have to change the side (injuries, fatigue, disciplinary bans). Sometimes you play a bunch of sides that you'd struggle to beat anyway - we all know that. There was nothing wrong with Olly's tactics. The results just didn't come. It's not always possible to turn every conversation into 'I hate Olly, let's get rid' simply because you don't like him, Durbar.
So if a side loses 5-0, he should have kept the same side for the following match? Expecting a different result? Seriously?
That was a serious statement. Really?!? So with your best winning streak of the season you would throw everything out and adopt a policy of playing experimental teams that hadn't played regularly together, playing experimental variations of tactics. Seriously? Many successful teams play the least number of players across a season, keeping a cohesive unit and greater understanding and spatial awareness while applying their skills. I thought the aim was to score more than the opposing team, entertain the fans and get to your highest position in the league - or maybe you have a new '101' on the league system too!
Or we could just call Uncle Neil and ask him what he thinks of our squad and what he would do with it
Does anyone know the type of football Blackpool played (Hoofball, Passing game) when Ollie got promoted them promoted?
No, hang on. YOU said that changing the team was a bad idea. And changing the team after losing - in your view - led to us losing again. So you're saying that when the team was losing, Olly should NOT have changed it. Now you're trying to say something else? Now you're saying that 'doing something different and expecting the same result' wasn't happening during our winning streak (it was, as we were not playing the same eleven players during that time). Talk about selective fact-picking. If you're gonna post that kind of illogical wittering, at least be consistent. Or are you now trying something else, yet still expecting the same result? We get it. You and Durbar don't like him. Fine. Just don't make stuff up to try and defend that view.
No... I said he shouldn't have undergone RADICAL changes while winning - which is what he did and continually did, while nobody could work out his team changes, his tactics or inability to get us back to winning ways. His strategy was not clear to his players (as they couldn't cope), his stakeholders (the fans, who were losing faith) or the professionals (pundits and commentators who could not understand his methods and said so weekly). Changes made during our winning spell were minor; the latter spell were radical - breaking up localised teams in defence, midfield and attack from game to game with no clear objective to anyone outside of the manager. There was no attempt for cohesion, or introducing players into a team to develop them - no it was radical changes when all was going well and a chance to build. I'm sure the players loved losing their bonuses while the Manager was trying to do something illogical. Many of the best team successes have come from teams who have used less first team players in a season than others. Your 101 is to throw everything into radical change, allow yourself to get into trouble and keep doing the same radical changes and hope they get you out of trouble. Buddy, look back a little, the successful strategy was there before you threw the baby out with the bath water. I was always saying Holloway had it wrong after the radical changes, that if he wanted to make changes to the team it should be in ones or twos, build people into a successful unit and see the success continue and build confidence in the team and manager. That's not what he did. The results back it up; the fans responses back it up. In business if you have a winning recipe, stick to it; make small improvements by all means; but you don't throw everything out. If it isn't working you at least have the common sense to go back to your winning recipe - not continue making wholesale changes that keep bringing losing results every week, week after week until your in deep trouble. If I told my boss that after six successful results reporting, after a very under-performing previous periods of reporting that put the business in a critical position, I wanted to radically change how we do things and switch teams around, affect key employees futures (and his) affect stakeholders confidence, I'm sure he would be sure to tell me where to go. Holloway wasn't a choice I would have made, but he's in position and I accept that. Doesn't mean I have to agree with everything he does just because he played for us before. You clearly have great confidence in the man and his techniques - we'll see who is right by the end of the season. The truth is in the results. Key in business and definitely applied in football where it's all about the results. Oh... and who's the Royal 'we' ?
My '101' is most definitely NOT radical change - it's put out a side and formation to exploit the weaknesses of your opponent and/or to nullify their threats. You seem to be saying that we just put out the same side, irrespective of what we are facing, what happened last week, and ignoring the facts that that's not always (or even often) possible. I think you're just disagreeing for the sake of it now, mate...
Not at all. The difference is I'm talking about facts and you're talking about scenarios (from the Management Distraction chapter no doubt). I explained my position fully over the two patterns of 8 games at the end of last season. I took your very first post (if plan A isn't working try plan B, C ad infinitum) but you didn't get that if Plan A is working, don't keep making radical changes and keep that process going when you could return to Plan A and get the support of your team and the results. I never said at any time put out the same side irrespective.. show me where I advocated that. You just can't see two sides of the coin, mate! Good luck with the business manual, but I wouldn't go for your negotiation skills manual
Hey, I never said I didn't like him, he's probably a vey nice guy, I just think he's not a good manager for us at the moment.
What you want to read/interpret and what I actually said appears a dichotomy to you WLW. Like I said facts!! Not your various scenarios to justify Holloways poor performance last season. Let's call it an impass, and let's see how Holloway does with this coming season and his transfers - which reminds me, any news on new signings??
