Brendan v Sousa

Bob the slob

Bob the slob

Well-Known Member
Feb 12, 2013
3,956
1,594
113
NULL
I rarely bother watching games that don't involve the Swans but I'm looking forward to this.
(Thought it was tonight! Weds)
 
Interesting match-up and a good chance to see the master of blarney against the master of defense organization and tactics in general.

Maybe they'll swap Monk jokes before the start of the match (sorry couldn't resist).
 
Just noticed that if you take the "N" off Brendan and add it to to Sousa, we can call them both women's names for double the comedic effect.

Brenda and Susan.
 
Just read that Guardian article above on the link and it's clear that Sousa recognises he made a mistake in going to Leicester. Like many Swans fans I liked him but the way we faded that season was memorable for all the wrong reasons. At the time I accused Sousa of poor tactics and I remember a match away to Bristol City towards the end of the season where he got it horribly wrong but as time has passed I really think it was down to a lack of quality up front which wasn't his fault.

Pintado will always be remembered for that tackle but let's be honest he wasn't great and couldn't play the role demanded of him by Sousa.
 
Dragonborn said:
I remember a match away to Bristol City towards the end of the season where he got it horribly wrong but as time has passed I really think it was down to a lack of quality up front which wasn't his fault.
Click to expand...


I was at that game, we got torn by the Bristol winger and generally played like zombies.

Just had a look at the Guardian link and there are some polar opposite comments being made about Sousa.
That's football I suppose.

I liked him and think he did a great job. Play may have become boring (with our forwards that season it's easy to see why) but we still played skilfully. I tend to forget the position Martinez left us in and how late Sousa came in.
 
Take a look at his record. Take a look at what he had to work with here. Take a look at what he achieved without a forward line to speak of. You're wrong imo.
 
I think Monk's comments on Sousa's reign are interesting though. Without trying to spark public furore on here, the issues are similar to that reported regarding Laudrup's reign too. Monk mentions that players were leaving training sessions having "not broken sweat" and that, for a squad that knew they liked to be pushed and worked hard, their fitness levels were fading dramatically from the Martinez era. Then, he states that they, collectively, were happy to have a new manager (Rodgers) that was going to work them hard again. Furthermore, Monk said that the most frustrating thing with Sousa's reign was that not only were they training much less intensely and with much less focus on fitness, but the players weren't even allowed to do extra training in their spare time to maintain their fitness levels themselves. A weird approach, it must be said. Monk did go on to say that it can't be denied that Sousa did help stabilise the club defensively and remove any naivety from the squad too. But, it seems, that many players and fans were glad to see the back of him.
 
Monk is a typical English player / manager who believes more is better. It's in the DNA and applies to all walks of life. Many continentals believe in working smarter rather than harder. What is undeniable is the positive effect Sousa had on Monk's defensive play.
As Biggie says Monk had a lot to say about Sousa & Laudrup! A coincidence?
 
Just watched the first half. Liverpool look a shadow of the team they were last season. As for Rodgers & Sousa: based on the first half of this game, I'd have Monk any day of the week over those two turkeys lol.
 
aswan_dam said:
Just watched the first half. Liverpool look a shadow of the team they were last season. As for Rodgers & Sousa: based on the first half of this game, I'd have Monk any day of the week over those two turkeys lol.
Click to expand...

Agree. There's been hardly any attacking football whatsoever.
 
I thought we treated Sousa badly, and he had no other option to play defensive negative football, as Huw refused to sign his preferred loan striker in January of that season, the cost was £500,000.
 
Hobit said:
I thought we treated Sousa badly, and he had no other option to play defensive negative football, as Huw refused to sign his preferred loan striker in January of that season, the cost was £500,000.
Click to expand...

We think he did well under Sousa, but did we really?

We finished 7th, but a point of the play-offs after winning only 3 games in our last 13.

We had one of the best defences in the Championship, conceding 37 goals with 24 clean sheets.

Conversely we had the worst attack, scoring the fewest goals in the league - 40

We failed to score in 18 games.

Its easy to report with hindsight but at the time, our strikers included Dobbie, Pintado, Kuqi, Bauza, Trundle (on loan) and Beattie; a record signing and Sousa's biggest flop, we ALL thought we had enough up front didn't we? and we ALL thought we had a shot at the play offs.

So what happened? We missed out on a play off birth by 1 solitary point.

To cover his arse, late in the season, Sousa turned to the press to blame everyone around him for his failures. To state the bloody obvious he cited that a seven-match win less run 'could' have been avoided had the squad been strengthened. This from the manager who turned our backs to goal, restricting our attacking play, brought our centre forward into the defence, poor Pintado defended our area so much he might as well have wore a number 5 on his back.

Don't forget too that Sousa brought us Jordi Lopez <doh> and Craig 'its gone again' Beattie, loaned out who we considered at the time to be our best striker, Dobbie, to a club who eventually took by 1 point our play off place. Also he caused the departure of the heart of our club, Leon.

Imho, Sousa's legacy, finishing 7th, our highest ever position, was achieved despite him not because of him. Imo his restrictive style held us back and cost us more than it gained. Our then squad oozed flare and attacking talent but was forced to play an alien negative game severely cropping their ability to attack, score goals and win points. Sousa lucked out.

I think the board saw his style was stifling and decided not to invest in it. They also saw, because we ALL did, that Sousa was using us as a stepping stone. Imo, they put the best interests of the club first and didn't waste money on a manager who had no feeling for our club or our footballing philosophy. All Sousa wanted was to use us to bolster his CV to maximising his career options. I feel his tenor held us back and it could be said it cost us an early opportunity at a shot at the premiership.
Just how I see it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back