'Wagstaff, clearly trying to bolster the midfield. Yet we still conceded' Oh my sides. Einstein will get there in the end.
If you were disappointed yesterday that we didn't hold on to a 1-3 lead, well neither did Man U today, but at least we got a point!
Nothing to do with Wagstaff, try Pack who tries to attempt an impossible pass when he should of whacked it up field..
he's not good enough to be in a promotion challenging squad, but for a squad player he's perfect as he can play pretty much anywhere
Not really. It was where he got nicknamed Cotterball because of the long ball rubbish that has at times been associated with his teams.
'Nothing to do with Wagstaff' - Nothing is a pretty decent description of Wagstaff. Cotterill was at fault not for just bringing the clown Wagstaff on but his total negativity with his substitutions. Cotterill's substitution decisions just invited Fleetwood on. He got what he deserved.
you don't know what you are talking about mate, I have a friend who is a Burnley season ticket holder and he rates him
Victor your an attention seaker...ooop's what have I done, been and given you some attention, you must like me a lot sunny jim!
There are Burnley fans who reckon he took thousands of the gate. The Cotterball tag was part of his days there and his football. A quick google and out it leaps left right and centre. It is from the fans of the clubs he was at and not made up. I expect City to walk this league that is hardly not rating Steve Cotterill.
Rp, why do you keep knocking SC for his subs (especialy Wagstaff), we have played 9 games, we are unbeaten, we have scored 18 goals, conceded 7, his substitutions so far have been spot on, and if Marlon Pack would have dealt with the situation better, we would have got three points instead of one against Fleetwood. I don't understand your dislike of Wagstaff, last season he played 45 games, played a big part in keeping us in Div1, but you still knock the bloke, i rate him as a good squad player, not going to get in the starting 11, but can still do a useful job for us at this level, give the bloke a bit of credit, may not have Jets ability but at least gives 100%.
Steve Cotterill has an exceptional squad of players at this level. His substitutions have been at times questionable, and on occasions the logical outcome has been to invite the opposition onto the City defense rather than defend high via attacking, and the obvious ability of the players at his disposal. City have dropped points in games where the Manager has opted to be passive v offensive. Saturday looks like a case of substitutions having a negative effect due to passivity.
Cliftonville, i think you will find most football managers holding a lead will be more passive than offensive, they tend to pack mid-field, or bring on another defender for an attacking player, sometimes it pays off, sometimes it goes wrong, i was involved in football management for many years, did i make mistakes with substitutions, of course i did, did i get it right, yes many times, that's the nature of the game, don't know if your involved in football management, if you are, you should know, if your not, have a go, maybe you can come up with a formula that know one else has, now that would be intersting.
I am involved, and soon hope to be employed in football coaching, but it matters not. Being conservative this season has cost City points. I would use that well known formula that attack, and holding a high line [very fashionable] v a deep one is a excellent means of defense, particularly when you have a team that man for man is better than the opposition.
This thread is highlighting how fascinating football is. We have differing opinions about tactics and substitutions. Whatever a football manager does, it will be right for some and wrong for others. Correct tactics on some occasions and completely wrong on another day. I always remember in the early days of substitutes, the great AD took Alan Skirton off at 0-0 with twenty minutes to go. HE was given howls of derision by many of the City faithful. Two minutes later, his substitute scored and we won the game. The moral is that it is right on some occasions to close the game up and hang on to what you have but on others it's better to keep the opposition employed in defending our attacks. On decisions like this, and the run of the ball do football managers stand proud or be made to look daft. What will SC do next time?
Well an example, i know its only one, Man Utd v Leicester, man for man, Man Utd better than the opposition, very attacking team, 3-1 up, lost 5-3, whats your assessment of that.
I only saw the highlights, but at 3-1, Man U were totally in control. I don't think I have seen a game swing so dramatically, not just in goals scored, but the flow of the game, in years. Speaking of managers and subs, and I wait to be shot down on this, but I always reckoned Johnson made subs for the sake of it at times and lost count of the number of games, especially at the end when we threw points away
