Totally agree. Bloomfield seems obsessed with stats and uses them to defend how we are playing. Problem is , we may have lots of favourable stats but we are not winning games.
I know he’s a club legend but soon action will need to taken otherwise we’re in a relegation fight.
If any good has come from this current situation it’s the hope that some of those who were so critical of Gareth Ainsworth’s brand of football have finally realised that results are what dictates a manager’s tenure in his job, not style of play.
Whilst firmly in camp of giving Bloomfield more time (we were going well before the injuries and he deserves an opportunity to recapture than now that players are returning), yesterday's post match interview was disappointing. The stats may be a useful tool to manager's, but they don't mean much to most fans who have again seen us struggle to break down organised, but very average opposition.
I wasn't in the jumping for joy camp when MB was appointed, I was one of the disappointed GA went as we were on a decent run & could well have made the playoffs if he had stayed with us. Did I like the brand of football we played under GA, not particularly, but like all of us I enjoyed most of the results.
Certainly this season, I could see what MB was trying to achieve & had been given the opportunity to get in players he believed could deliver his "style". As I said earlier, prior to the October International break we were doing ok, playing well & putting a decent string of results together, since then we have been poor. Other than the huge swathe of injuries we have I am struggling to put my finger on what has caused the change.
It’s the ponderous nature of this new system that just sucks the life and enjoyment out of the game. It seems that they have instructions not to go long from Max and insist on allowing the opposition to organise themselves before we consider an attack.
Time and again we pass it around the back and then punt long hopeful balls diagonally or down the wing, often resulting in a throw in to the opponent. As someone highlighted above, we need to be able to adapt to break quickly if the opportunity presents itself.
To be fair to the defender there is often just no other outlet for them. They’d look up and not see another player in front of them within 25 yards giving them no option but to welly it.
MB’s interview, I’m sorry to say, was verging on the delusional. I don’t judge a game on whether we have more passes in their half or ours, or whether we had some theoretical higher chance probability. It’s just soul destroying to watch talented players hamstrung by such a rigid and negative system.
Oh for an Anis Mehmeti type player, but who knows whether he’d be allowed to play the role he did so successfully for us.
People are saying this is a good squad. I'm not sure I agree. It is very imbalanced. There is no pace and limited threat in the air, two very important aspects at this level.
The signings are very loan heavy. Four of our key players are loanees. That suggests a win or bust approach to promotion this season. I fear for next season as there is not too much of a nucleus of our own players.
Whilst we have some good players, I don't think we have all the attributes needed for a good team. And tactically I don't think we have got the right balance between defence and attack at any stage of the season. Add in injuries, there are now so many problems.
The buck for all this ultimately falls on the manager. But I think there are so many things to resolve it may be impossible.
The only thing yesterday's relatively high xG really shows is that we were chasing the game - there were only two 'good' chances. I'm not convinced Blooms understands how to interpret it - it's certainly tone-deaf to whip it out in a post-match interview when we're in such dire straits.
Significantly improved performance yesterday. First half really pushing forward until their goal against the run of play.
Last 15 minutes really tried to find a way through. Pierre was outstanding and headed/blocked everything.
Those calling for Ainsworth, we’ve had just as bad runs under him and the football just as bad if not worse at times in those poor runs. Loved GA but I wouldn’t want him back. I’d have Dobbo back behind the scenes in an instant.
Leahy linked the play really well and we got lost for a bit when he was moved to left back.
When will our strikers gamble on a Vokes flick. McCleary and Taylor didn’t anticipate a single flick and he made two or three excellent ones. For two experienced pros they deserve a right rollicking from Bloomfield.
If we’re going to play this way the players need to be instinctive. Too many times they had to really think what they were trying to do and by that point they fluffed it or took too long.
I’m happy for Matt to continue, regardless of current form, until the Burton game. I think we should take stock then and decide whether he can keep us up or not.
if relegation is looking likely then I’d bring some experience in (Dobbo) to help out OR worse case we may need a change.
I am a big believer in having patience in these situations unless it becomes so dire that action needs to be taken and I don’t think we have reached that point. We aren’t yet halfway through the season and I have faith that Matt will learn from whatever mistakes he has made because he’s an intelligent guy.
This sort of thing generally just postpones the inevitable for a few weeks and does nothing for the managers stature or the players confidence in him. If MON, Dobbo, Gaz or anyone else could help him run it better they are surely available for quiet advice, and if it needs someone else's time and input then they will probably need to be in charge.
One of the biggest loads of guff talked about in football (in a strong field) is armchair discussions about the impact of specific coaches by people who have never been near the training ground. Do any of us know if the coaches are doing a bad job of passing on the managers instructions? Nope. A manager and his staff come as a package you can't start messing with that. Similarly people who want Dobbo back without Gaz are disrespectful of that partnership and what Gaz brought to it.
On the subject of XG /Ref decisions mentions in post match interviews I made a fairly clumsy point last week about it, some of these things are factors and may gain him sympathy for the players or from them but to many it will just sound like justification and excuses but more worryingly not understanding the key problems.
We aren't winning games because we aren't creating enough decent chances, our forwards might be unfit, goalshy or feeble but this means we need more and better chances creating and ultimately a shift in formation. We were better yesterday in possession but not at using it.
Wonder if he hung around Tesco's shouting at random players for old times sake after the emotional reunion yesterday. Seems to have stopped using his ketchup profile pic.
A good manager will know the strengths and weaknesses of the squad he has, recruit to remove weaknesses and coach a system that works for the players he then has.
At the moment it’s like me playing Football Manager for the first time. I know a formation I like. I know players I like. Adding the two together does not equal a coherent team and results will reflect.
Flashes of individual quality will allow you to scrape an occasional result but in the end you are going to come a cropper.
It’s not that much harder than that. We have (a fair quota of) good players. We have a system. We don’t have good players for that system. We are making good players bad.
If Matt does get sacked it’s only one person’s fault. I love that he has principals of how he wants to play but when that means you hopelessly lose week after week it might be time to reassess.
Through sheer laziness last night, I watched a bit of Match of the Day for the first time in years. Apparently, Man United aren't good enough to play out from the back because they don't have control of the midfield. Although they might not be in a good place at the moment, I'm not sure that we can manage a system that they can't!
I think that our previous manager used a bit of Game Theory in his approach - knowingly or not. If everyone does the same sort of thing, e.g. playing out from the back, it might be worthwhile doing the opposite.
Wasn’t George Stokes Pierre’s dance partner in that fateful meeting in Tesco car park? If so, wonder what he made of that MotM performance from the latter.
My take on his post-match was that he was struggling to find something positive and looked completely shell-shocked by what is going on. Hence the retreat into stats because he had nothing else to offer. He’s too nice a guy to criticise players to the cameras, he’s too intelligent and balanced to spout Bartonesque bollocks and I don’t think he has the dressing room support to be able to say “Yes, I have been trying something, it isn’t working so I’m going to change it. Recent bad form rests with me.” Ainsworth had created a culture and had a personality that meant, at Wycombe, he could say he needed to do better and the players, owners and a fair chunk of the supporters would back him.
I’m still willing to give him time. Show me a back 4 next weekend and pick up the pace please! Keogh can carry a ball forward, so can Joe L, so can Chris and we look better when we do so. Show us intensity. Lift the crowd.
The best managers create teams who are greater than the sum of their parts. Over Ainsworth’s time with us I’d say that was usually true. Over Matt’s time so far it hasn’t been, in fact the team is lesser than the sum. That’s Tony Adams stuff and if I didn’t know Matt from Adam(s) I’d be calling for his head for sure but I (we) do and I think he can learn and turn this around.
Whether a Georgian financier will see it that way though…
I actually turned off the interview after about 25 seconds, the stats were utterly irrelevant.
Perhaps Shrewsbury’s game plan was just sit off and defend, sooner or later they will have a chance and Wycombe are toothless in attack and couldn’t finish a biscuit.
If this was the gameplan then it’s not like we forced them into passes in their half of the field, it’s that they allowed us to do this.
Going back to the post-match interview from Bloomfield, I too couldn't believe various stats were being churned out as a defence of what was, viewed from the stands, subjectively a lethargic, uninspired performance against a team that was set up to take advantage of our blunt attacking threat.
We used to (rightly) mock the likes of Robinson, Barton and Manning and co. for referring to superior passing and possession stats when claiming a moral victory after losing the tactical battle with Ainsworth, it won't end well for us either if we go down that route.
To look on the bright side for a bit (keep looking it’s there somewhere!!), I actually thought there was the glimmer of something a bit more encouraging for the 13 minutes where we played as a 4-2-3-1 formation yesterday.
We finally took the extra centre-half we didn’t need off and put a player further forward. With a 3 of McCleary, Sadlier and Phillips supporting the central striker, it started to feel a bit better and it seemed, briefly, that we looked a lot more dangerous on both flanks.
However, we then brought Sam Vokes on and moved to 4-4-2 and it all kind of dissipated with Luke Leahy having to go to left back and Phillips having to go back into the engine room to replace him. In the end, we were just banging long balls towards Vokes and Taylor who were no match for Dunkley and Pierre.
Not having a pop at Vokes, or even playing 4-4-2, by the way, it was more just a shame that Matt didn’t just let things run as there was just a few signs of us coming to life.
Comments
Totally agree. Bloomfield seems obsessed with stats and uses them to defend how we are playing. Problem is , we may have lots of favourable stats but we are not winning games.
I know he’s a club legend but soon action will need to taken otherwise we’re in a relegation fight.
If any good has come from this current situation it’s the hope that some of those who were so critical of Gareth Ainsworth’s brand of football have finally realised that results are what dictates a manager’s tenure in his job, not style of play.
Paul Lambert said that he asked Martin O'Neill for advice when he became Wycombe manager and got a two word answer. Win games.
Whilst firmly in camp of giving Bloomfield more time (we were going well before the injuries and he deserves an opportunity to recapture than now that players are returning), yesterday's post match interview was disappointing. The stats may be a useful tool to manager's, but they don't mean much to most fans who have again seen us struggle to break down organised, but very average opposition.
So what’s your take on the situation, Alan?
Should he be given more time and if so, how long?
I wasn't in the jumping for joy camp when MB was appointed, I was one of the disappointed GA went as we were on a decent run & could well have made the playoffs if he had stayed with us. Did I like the brand of football we played under GA, not particularly, but like all of us I enjoyed most of the results.
Certainly this season, I could see what MB was trying to achieve & had been given the opportunity to get in players he believed could deliver his "style". As I said earlier, prior to the October International break we were doing ok, playing well & putting a decent string of results together, since then we have been poor. Other than the huge swathe of injuries we have I am struggling to put my finger on what has caused the change.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=iSSpPkMlb98
It’s the ponderous nature of this new system that just sucks the life and enjoyment out of the game. It seems that they have instructions not to go long from Max and insist on allowing the opposition to organise themselves before we consider an attack.
Time and again we pass it around the back and then punt long hopeful balls diagonally or down the wing, often resulting in a throw in to the opponent. As someone highlighted above, we need to be able to adapt to break quickly if the opportunity presents itself.
To be fair to the defender there is often just no other outlet for them. They’d look up and not see another player in front of them within 25 yards giving them no option but to welly it.
MB’s interview, I’m sorry to say, was verging on the delusional. I don’t judge a game on whether we have more passes in their half or ours, or whether we had some theoretical higher chance probability. It’s just soul destroying to watch talented players hamstrung by such a rigid and negative system.
Oh for an Anis Mehmeti type player, but who knows whether he’d be allowed to play the role he did so successfully for us.
People are saying this is a good squad. I'm not sure I agree. It is very imbalanced. There is no pace and limited threat in the air, two very important aspects at this level.
The signings are very loan heavy. Four of our key players are loanees. That suggests a win or bust approach to promotion this season. I fear for next season as there is not too much of a nucleus of our own players.
Whilst we have some good players, I don't think we have all the attributes needed for a good team. And tactically I don't think we have got the right balance between defence and attack at any stage of the season. Add in injuries, there are now so many problems.
The buck for all this ultimately falls on the manager. But I think there are so many things to resolve it may be impossible.
I feel I'm determined never to understand xG but if you're scoring fewer real goals than xG it just means you're not very good up front doesn't it?
Don't know about anyone else, but the last couple of weeks we could have played until midnight; I still wouldn't have x'ed any G
I thought it was a pretty cringey post-match interview I'm afraid
The only thing yesterday's relatively high xG really shows is that we were chasing the game - there were only two 'good' chances. I'm not convinced Blooms understands how to interpret it - it's certainly tone-deaf to whip it out in a post-match interview when we're in such dire straits.
*chasing the game and playing against a team content to park the bus
Significantly improved performance yesterday. First half really pushing forward until their goal against the run of play.
Last 15 minutes really tried to find a way through. Pierre was outstanding and headed/blocked everything.
Those calling for Ainsworth, we’ve had just as bad runs under him and the football just as bad if not worse at times in those poor runs. Loved GA but I wouldn’t want him back. I’d have Dobbo back behind the scenes in an instant.
Leahy linked the play really well and we got lost for a bit when he was moved to left back.
When will our strikers gamble on a Vokes flick. McCleary and Taylor didn’t anticipate a single flick and he made two or three excellent ones. For two experienced pros they deserve a right rollicking from Bloomfield.
If we’re going to play this way the players need to be instinctive. Too many times they had to really think what they were trying to do and by that point they fluffed it or took too long.
I’m happy for Matt to continue, regardless of current form, until the Burton game. I think we should take stock then and decide whether he can keep us up or not.
if relegation is looking likely then I’d bring some experience in (Dobbo) to help out OR worse case we may need a change.
If a manager needs someone to come in and 'help out' then he needs replacing.
I am a big believer in having patience in these situations unless it becomes so dire that action needs to be taken and I don’t think we have reached that point. We aren’t yet halfway through the season and I have faith that Matt will learn from whatever mistakes he has made because he’s an intelligent guy.
You can be intelligent and also be stubborn and it's obvious to most that the current system needs changing but he seems determined to stick with it.
And if the helper is somebody who has spent his entire career with Ainsworth then you might as well get Ainsworth.
This sort of thing generally just postpones the inevitable for a few weeks and does nothing for the managers stature or the players confidence in him. If MON, Dobbo, Gaz or anyone else could help him run it better they are surely available for quiet advice, and if it needs someone else's time and input then they will probably need to be in charge.
One of the biggest loads of guff talked about in football (in a strong field) is armchair discussions about the impact of specific coaches by people who have never been near the training ground. Do any of us know if the coaches are doing a bad job of passing on the managers instructions? Nope. A manager and his staff come as a package you can't start messing with that. Similarly people who want Dobbo back without Gaz are disrespectful of that partnership and what Gaz brought to it.
On the subject of XG /Ref decisions mentions in post match interviews I made a fairly clumsy point last week about it, some of these things are factors and may gain him sympathy for the players or from them but to many it will just sound like justification and excuses but more worryingly not understanding the key problems.
We aren't winning games because we aren't creating enough decent chances, our forwards might be unfit, goalshy or feeble but this means we need more and better chances creating and ultimately a shift in formation. We were better yesterday in possession but not at using it.
Wonder if he hung around Tesco's shouting at random players for old times sake after the emotional reunion yesterday. Seems to have stopped using his ketchup profile pic.
The last month has been up there as one of the most miserable periods I can remember as a WWFC fan, thoroughly miserable.
Only bettered by the Torquay season.
Its just absolutely horrendous at the moment, you know we are never going to score but always likely to concede and it’s not a good combination.
A good manager will know the strengths and weaknesses of the squad he has, recruit to remove weaknesses and coach a system that works for the players he then has.
At the moment it’s like me playing Football Manager for the first time. I know a formation I like. I know players I like. Adding the two together does not equal a coherent team and results will reflect.
Flashes of individual quality will allow you to scrape an occasional result but in the end you are going to come a cropper.
It’s not that much harder than that. We have (a fair quota of) good players. We have a system. We don’t have good players for that system. We are making good players bad.
If Matt does get sacked it’s only one person’s fault. I love that he has principals of how he wants to play but when that means you hopelessly lose week after week it might be time to reassess.
Through sheer laziness last night, I watched a bit of Match of the Day for the first time in years. Apparently, Man United aren't good enough to play out from the back because they don't have control of the midfield. Although they might not be in a good place at the moment, I'm not sure that we can manage a system that they can't!
I think that our previous manager used a bit of Game Theory in his approach - knowingly or not. If everyone does the same sort of thing, e.g. playing out from the back, it might be worthwhile doing the opposite.
Brighton manage to play out from the back ok.
Wasn’t George Stokes Pierre’s dance partner in that fateful meeting in Tesco car park? If so, wonder what he made of that MotM performance from the latter.
My take on his post-match was that he was struggling to find something positive and looked completely shell-shocked by what is going on. Hence the retreat into stats because he had nothing else to offer. He’s too nice a guy to criticise players to the cameras, he’s too intelligent and balanced to spout Bartonesque bollocks and I don’t think he has the dressing room support to be able to say “Yes, I have been trying something, it isn’t working so I’m going to change it. Recent bad form rests with me.” Ainsworth had created a culture and had a personality that meant, at Wycombe, he could say he needed to do better and the players, owners and a fair chunk of the supporters would back him.
I’m still willing to give him time. Show me a back 4 next weekend and pick up the pace please! Keogh can carry a ball forward, so can Joe L, so can Chris and we look better when we do so. Show us intensity. Lift the crowd.
The best managers create teams who are greater than the sum of their parts. Over Ainsworth’s time with us I’d say that was usually true. Over Matt’s time so far it hasn’t been, in fact the team is lesser than the sum. That’s Tony Adams stuff and if I didn’t know Matt from Adam(s) I’d be calling for his head for sure but I (we) do and I think he can learn and turn this around.
Whether a Georgian financier will see it that way though…
I actually turned off the interview after about 25 seconds, the stats were utterly irrelevant.
Perhaps Shrewsbury’s game plan was just sit off and defend, sooner or later they will have a chance and Wycombe are toothless in attack and couldn’t finish a biscuit.
If this was the gameplan then it’s not like we forced them into passes in their half of the field, it’s that they allowed us to do this.
Going back to the post-match interview from Bloomfield, I too couldn't believe various stats were being churned out as a defence of what was, viewed from the stands, subjectively a lethargic, uninspired performance against a team that was set up to take advantage of our blunt attacking threat.
We used to (rightly) mock the likes of Robinson, Barton and Manning and co. for referring to superior passing and possession stats when claiming a moral victory after losing the tactical battle with Ainsworth, it won't end well for us either if we go down that route.
Fair enough. Thus, would it be fair to say that at least some of this country's best teams cannot play out from the back?
To look on the bright side for a bit (keep looking it’s there somewhere!!), I actually thought there was the glimmer of something a bit more encouraging for the 13 minutes where we played as a 4-2-3-1 formation yesterday.
We finally took the extra centre-half we didn’t need off and put a player further forward. With a 3 of McCleary, Sadlier and Phillips supporting the central striker, it started to feel a bit better and it seemed, briefly, that we looked a lot more dangerous on both flanks.
However, we then brought Sam Vokes on and moved to 4-4-2 and it all kind of dissipated with Luke Leahy having to go to left back and Phillips having to go back into the engine room to replace him. In the end, we were just banging long balls towards Vokes and Taylor who were no match for Dunkley and Pierre.
Not having a pop at Vokes, or even playing 4-4-2, by the way, it was more just a shame that Matt didn’t just let things run as there was just a few signs of us coming to life.