too good not to have it own thread.......clockstand pie dodger take a bow son.. "For me, the primary factor that determines whether a manager should be sacked or not is the quality of the team that is assembled. The second factor is the selection of formations along with tactics and strategy. The third factor is the strength of the team spirit. Once again, we have entered into a premier league campaign with three strikers. One of which is a loan and two of which had to be "protected for their own good" according to Bruce. So, because Bruce chose to sign two players that needed protection for their own good, the fans that had bought into Sir Niall's dream have been served up a 4-5-1 formation for a full 25% of the entire season. A formation that has left us teetering upon the verge of a relegation position with a grand total of 10 points from 11 games. Is it any suprise a few of those working class supporters are sitting in the pub, perhaps drowning their sorrows? Now we find ourselves faced with the prospect of having one of our three stikers sidelined for a substantial length of time (unconfirmed, so let us hope that Wickham is ok) however if Wickham has picked up a serious injury we are left with two strikers. What if one of either Ji or Bendtner is injured? Well, its back to the good old 4-5-1 or 4-6-0 formation. Therefore the first question we ought to be asking is... Who made the decision to start the season with three strikers and two of which that had to be "protected for their own good"? Due to whomever made the decision to start the season with three strikers two of which were effectively unplayable according to Bruce, we have been restricted to the range of formations we are capable of placing upon the pitch. 25% of the season has now expired and we sit one point above a relegation position. A decision maker at the club also chose to sell Ferdinand and hence leave the squad with three 'quality' centrebacks, well, atleast until Bramble was suspended. Although I could call into question the ability to identify the type of characters that are potentially trouble as opposed to good solid pro's as being a very important part of man management. Ferdinand the club man who commits time to charitable work, a player that is also available to cover both left and right back in addition to centreback, or Bramble.... What is this love affair of the number three? Why only three centrebacks, why only three strikers? Who is making these decisions? Throughout the course of a season there will always be injuries and suspensions and therefore, all clubs with any level of aspiration to retain their status within the premier league should ALWAYS ensure that there are four players available for, centre half, midfield and the strikers. The only area that is adequately covered is the centre of midfield. Although the only central midfielder capable of scoring goals is sitting upon the bench due to being little more that a six million championship plodder whose general deficiences outweight his solitary season of goal scoring exploits. Just to put this into perspective, if Bendtner is injured we could see a 4-5-1 with an inexperienced Ji or a 4-4-2 with Tounkara/Ji, quite mouthwatering. What if Brown is injured? We could be watching a Turner/Nosworthy partnership, quite mouthwatering. What if Bendtner and Brown are injured at the same time? Well, the depth of the squad is revealed to all and sundry, including the manager. So we can see that the quality of the squad that Bruce assembled has some major flaws and flaws that have a genuine potential to provide relegation. The only factor that is yet to reveal itself as being a negative is the spirit of the team. The spirit is still strong and that in itself is a 'good sign'. However is a strong team spirit enough to maintain premier league status? To answer that question it may be prudent to ask another question... If you assembled a team of kickers from the championship, players that would play their heart out yet were unable to compete at the level of standard required, what would be the probable outcome? Champions league? Europa league? Or a longstanding battle against relegation? Thus far, the first two factors suggest that Bruce is still making the wrong decisions (a whole thirteen years after becoming a manager) and if we find ourselves in the bottom six or lower come christmas we may well see the spirit of the team becoming oppressed as the realisation dawns upon the squad that they are being managed by Steve Bruce. A manager with a proven track record of relegation, a manager with a consistently proven record of serious injuries (over-training leading to weakness). A manager that has won nothing, walked out of two clubs and dismissed from another. The moment of realisation may well be just around the corner... "
To be fair mate, we only have 3 centre halves, Colo Saylor Williamson, and 3 strikers, Shola Besty Demba. If anyone else has to slot into those positions we're ****ed, ie Perch, Loverman etc
A good read. I take issue with 2 points: I don't think the above was down to Bruce, I am fairly sure in his mind he had 4: Bendtner, Wickham, Ji and of course Gyan. I also think he thought he had 4 CB's: Bramble, Turner, Brown and OShea. With Elmo and Colback being cover for Bardo and Ricco at full back. Now I am not defending Bruce and our board entirely, I would have liked them to do a Spurs with Modric and insist Gyan stay and see out his contract. I was also a fan of Ferdinand and can only think the reason he was sold was to get some money for him as he was towards the end of his contract. The Jury is still out for me as far as Bruce is concerned. On the negative side he has tinkered with formations and players playing out of position. He also seems to have problems motivating players at times (Norwich away). On the positive side he has attracted decent names and quality to the club, players like Sess, Bendtner, Larsson and Brown are a cut above some of what we have had to put up with in the past. Bruce has bought without actually spending a lot of money. He has also bought youngsters like Hendo, Colback, Meyler though and turn around players like Bardsley. I am going to reserve judgement on him until the end of the season. If we struggling then I think he should be sacked, but if we again finish 10th of higher he should keep him job.
I don't agree with the love affair of number 3 for the reason no 3 is the position we have failed to fill no 3 is Gyans number and what a twat he turned out to be no 3 is the number of points you get for a win which we are struggling to get no 3 from bottom still gets you relegated So for me no 3 is no lucky number of mine
This is easier said than done though. With our wage cap being what it is (necessarily, given our turnover) the only reason big players will come here is game time. Players like Bent, Sessegnon and Bendtner had careers that were going nowhere, and we offered them a chance to get on the field and prove their point - that's why they came. Before we can realistically talk about a bigger squad, we need to improve our merchandising and pay better wages, simple as that. £40k to sit on your backside for two-thirds of the season (and probably lose your international place because of it) just isn't going to cut it at the highest level. So whilst I'd like a bigger squad, I just don't think we're in a position to get it. I also think it's a bit unfair to say Bruce has walked out on two clubs. If you're going to move up to a better job, you have to 'walk out' on somebody. Mind you, it works in the other direction too - you can hardly blame Bent for saying he went to a bigger club with better players when Bruce was talking about shopping at Harrods and rubbing 'little Wigan's' nose in it when he came here. If it's unfair on Bruce, its' also unfair on Bent. They all do that. The bottom line? - Howay, Quinn and Milliband. We need you to succeed.
Just popped back to see if the banter had improved on here and going by the quality of this article I assume not!! Seriously some of the people on here really need to have a look at themselves. Don't get me wrong I adore SAFC and have my thoughts and opinions on our manager and players, but to write such a long article on the matter (I won't go into the quality of the content) seems only slightly more preferable than scraping my own eyeball with a compass needle! Now you are more than entitled to think whatever you wish about Bruce and the club but seriously my friend, you may want to look at getting some other interests. Yours and some others obsessions is a little unhealthy.
This is how I see it... Who made the decision to agree to the terms of the loan for Gyan? Somebody at the club chose to accept those terms and leave the squad and supporters with three strikers. As far as I'm concerned Gyan cannot be blamed for that, someone at the club chose to accept the terms of the loan. I also find it interesting that a man with 50 years of life experience didn't consider the possibility that letting Gyan's international teammates leave could potentially be a catlyst to create an unsettled Gyan. If Bruce didn't consider that option then perhaps the size of Gyans belly upon his return from the summer break may have been a visible indication that his mindset wasnt altogether fully focused, although to be fair to Gyan, Bruce doesn't exactly provide a glowing example in this department. If the club had decided to loan Gyan before the window had closed, why didn't they ensure the fans had four strikers to cheer on through the season? Two of the strikers we have were unplayable according to Bruce due to "needing protection". There is no reasonable excuse (although we do hear a lot of them coming from the club) for selling Gyan post September because there WAS adequate time to see that his heart wasn't at SAFC prior to the window closing. If there wasn't adequate time to see that Gyan's heart wasn't in the club before the transfer window closed, then how come the decision makers could miraculously determine that by the 10th September the best and only option was to loan Gyan out to another club? As far as the defence is concerned, O'Shea was brought in as first choice right back as Bardsley started as first choice left back. Elmo? The mind boggles on that one... a poor mans Carlos Edwards if you ask me... If the intention is to build a squad with players who are capable of performing accross the back, such as O'Shea and Bardsley then why would anybody choose to sell Ferdinand ahead of Bramble? The problem we have is that using players to cover multiple positions is flawed unless you have 8 players who are capable of playing right accross the back. Brown, O'Shea and Bardsley are capable of playing accross the back. Richardson, Turner, Elmo, Colback, Bramble arn't capable of playing accross the back. If O'Shea, Bardsley and Larsson are injured/suspended then the team is playing individuals out of position. Brown or Elmo would have to drop in at right back (and he isn't good enough to cover in the first place, the former leaving a hole in the middle which at present we couldn't cover) and then we have to play a central midfielder out of position to cover for Larsson. The whole dynamics of the team are being inhibited due to not having an adequate squad. I agree that Bruce has brought in some good quality but he also leaves certain positions under staffed and this affects the ability to consistently turn out a well balanced team. If Elmo is cover for Larsson then he shouldn't be considered as cover for right back unless an extreme situation arises. The 'ability' to cover right back should be considered as a bonus and nothing more. If Larsson, Richardson and O'Shea are injured we have to turn out with an unbalanced team because we don't have the natural replacements... Either we would have to play Gardener etc out wide right and Elmo at RB or Elmo at RW and Colback at RB. We need 4 out and out centre halfs, two out and out left backs and two out and out right backs. If those out and out centre backs can also play at LB/RB then that should be considered as a bonus, a candidate for 3rd choice LB/RB. We shouldn't have to reply upon players like Bardsley who is one of two choices for left back covering for right back assuming O'Shea is injured because that leaves left back uncovered if Richardson is injured. This only serves to amplify the madness of selling Ferdinand ahead of Bramble. Bramble, assuming he wasn't suspended isn't as flexible as Ferdinand. These are just some of the reasons why I see don't see much more than a relegation battle with Bruce year in year out. We flirted with relegation last season and managed to avoid that by an excellent start. This season we have continued how we left off and it is clear we are in a relegation battle once again, except this time, we are bottom half to mid as opposed to last season where we were top half to bottom half to mid.
Why oh why do people keep saying we could have refused Gyan's loan agreement? Do we really think having an unhappy, unmotiviated greedy ****er at the club this season would have helped us in any way shape or form? Oshea is a CB, who can play at RB if needed.
If you don't enjoy reading a few paragrahs once in a while then there are always places such as Facebook and Twitter to fulfill your quench for something to read.
