You would have to be in the dressing room to know the answer to that one. Perhaps Nugent was keeping it simple? Players like things to be organised and simple to understand. The pre-match interview before the Bradford City game, where Robbo explained his system, made it sound very complicated.
On today's game, either Robbo got his tactics wrong or the players failed to carry out instructions. I can't believe a team at this level would allow the oppositions most influential players a free role to dictate the pattern of play. The failure to adjust our system to nullify their influence, regain control of midfield and then go on to win the game, is a mystery.
Was it just luck or did he have ways to get this lot to perform? Serious question.
Guess you'd have to be a fly on the wall in the changing room at SL , @Weegie Addick as part of me thinks it's down to the way the players feel about their current gaffer.
I know nothing about Nugent & now there's no Memorial Garden to tend, I'm unable to watch the lads' faces & body language whilst training or as they walk on & off the pitches.
We both know what respect a superb man manager like SCP commands & how his players would have run through fire for him when he was at Charlton. The relationship between players & gaffer was second to none IMHO.
Since then, apart from Jose Riga, I would hazard a guess that no-one else has come close although the managerial merry go round at our club hasn't stopped turning long enough for a decent understanding to be formed.
Maybe Nugent's methods & the manner in which he spoke to players started to engender some much needed team spirit ..and who knows whether that team spirit is in its infancy under the current incumbent. Perhaps it's too early to judge. I have to admit, when I saw KR in action at half & full time at Bradford last Saturday, I wondered how guys like JJ, Tex, Paddy & Pearce enjoy the touchy feely way that he seems to employ. But perhaps I'm being a tad unfair.
Time will tell - that's if time is on KR's side, of course.
I can't help being a bit sceptical about KR's tactics when we can only manage a 0-0 and defeat versus his old team. Surely he knows how to attack them/ go for their weak spots? Yet so little evidence of that.
Nugent did well when he was in charge. Why? Who knows, but I remember the Bristol Rovers game when he played Chicksen at Left Mid in front of Morgan. I didn't even know who Chicksen was then but what a difference he made that day. Maybe Nugent can see things that other people can't. Maybe too fanciful but we hit a purple patch when he was in charge. We'll never know now.
You would have to be in the dressing room to know the answer to that one. Perhaps Nugent was keeping it simple? Players like things to be organised and simple to understand. The pre-match interview before the Bradford City game, where Robbo explained his system, made it sound very complicated.
On today's game, either Robbo got his tactics wrong or the players failed to carry out instructions. I can't believe a team at this level would allow the oppositions most influential players a free role to dictate the pattern of play. The failure to adjust our system to nullify their influence, regain control of midfield and then go on to win the game, is a mystery.
"Simplicity is genius" - Bobby Robson.
I continue to resent the notion that players need things to be simple to do them well. I don't doubt that you're correct, but to me a professional footballer should be able to comprehend detailed tactical instructions, and make in-game changes. I always think back to that dossier of Jose Mourinho's that was leaked a few years ago when he was at Chelsea. It was 50-odd pages I think, and it was in the midst of Chelsea being dominant domestically.
Perhaps I'm a bit stronger on this because in America a lot of sports utilize studying "game film" of yourselves and your opponents, even at a high school level, so I just take this for granted.
Again, not saying your wrong, but would hope we could find an 11, particularly one that is pretty experienced, as ours is, that would be alright adjusting formations in a match.
Also, if the opposition have a danger man in midfield, who do we have that can "do a job" on them? I remember you mentioning that their #8 ran the show from the base of the diamond. Who in our midfield has the legs to put them under pressure without leaving massive gaps?
You are missing the point if you think all of the information in a 50 page dossier is used. The Manager will use some of that to make sure he picks the right team and sets them up properly. Also to make sure we are organised at set plays. The team talk will be very simple, otherwise the players will switch off. Some don't listen anyway. The manager should have seen every team in the Division by now and should have done his homework. The scouting report will update his knowledge.
In the case of Forrester (8), often playing someone in that area is enough. If we have a body in that area, it closes down the space and limits his possession and may force him to wander left and right to find the ball. Leaving him in open space to collect the ball in his own time and start the build-up often with a simple pass, is asking for trouble. So get someone close to him to stop the flow! If you nullify him, then the 10 gets less possession and is less effective, and they are not controlling the game.
You are missing the point if you think all of the information in a 50 page dossier is used. The Manager will use some of that to make sure he picks the right team and sets them up properly. Also to make sure we are organised at set plays. The team talk will be very simple, otherwise the players will switch off. Some don't listen anyway. The manager should have seen every team in the Division by now and should have done his homework. The scouting report will update his knowledge.
In the case of Forrester (8), often playing someone in that area is enough. If we have a body in that area, it closes down the space and limits his possession and may force him to wander left and right to find the ball. Leaving him in open space to collect the ball in his own time and start the build-up often with a simple pass, is asking for trouble. So get someone close to him to stop the flow! If you nullify him, then the 10 gets less possession and is less effective, and they are not controlling the game.
Exactly. It's not rocket science especially When explained simply & clearly as Tutt Tutt manages to do.
Making sure the scouting reports on the opposition are completed so the team is set up properly should be part of a professional football set up. The manager should then take account of his own teams strengths & weaknesses in the set up. Picking a team formation that ignores the opposition set up & your own team weaknesses is not good. If things are going wrong, then it is the mark of a decent manager that they can make in game tactical changes.
Not sure what Robinson was trying to do yesterday. Maybe he is testing out his preferred formation to see which players can fit into it or evidencing the squad weakness to Duchatelet is anybody's guess.
Might have been good fortune. Might have been because there was no interference for his brief tenure. Might have been that the players liked him. Might have been because he played to the team's strengths and did not try to get them to play as he thought they should.
Nugent knew the players much better. He seemed to go for a more positive set up than Slade.
Many of the current squad, may have decided / worked out that their time at Charlton will be ending under Robinson. The ill formed squad at the start of the season is going through another big change & upheaval. The next transfer window will tell us everything we need to know about the direction of the club (again).
I strongly hope that Robinson takes account of the weakness of the central midfield & does not try to pretend that he has the players to play his preferred midfield or a 442 (as of yesterday), which he currently does not have. A very poor defeat at midfield will make things very difficult for him, particularly if his team set up ignores the weaknesses of the current squad. Millwall's midfield is reported to be one of the better parts of their team. It will be difficult to forgive conceding the fight in the middle of the pitch.
Nugent knew the players much better. He seemed to go for a more positive set up than Slade.
Many of the current squad, may have decided / worked out that their time at Charlton will be ending under Robinson. The ill formed squad at the start of the season is going through another big change & upheaval. The next transfer window will tell us everything we need to know about the direction of the club (again).
I strongly hope that Robinson takes account of the weakness of the central midfield & does not try to pretend that he has the players to play his preferred formation, which he currently does not have. A very poor defeat at midfield will make things very difficult for him, particularly if his team set up ignores the weaknesses of the current squad. Millwall's midfield is reported to be one of the better parts of their team. It will be difficult to forgive conceding the fight in the middle of the pitch.
One of the first things KR said was that we didn't have the players to play 4-2-3-1. He knows he needs to get a new attacking midfielder or at least put someone he trusts behind the front man.
Nugent knew the players much better. He seemed to go for a more positive set up than Slade.
Many of the current squad, may have decided / worked out that their time at Charlton will be ending under Robinson. The ill formed squad at the start of the season is going through another big change & upheaval. The next transfer window will tell us everything we need to know about the direction of the club (again).
I strongly hope that Robinson takes account of the weakness of the central midfield & does not try to pretend that he has the players to play his preferred formation, which he currently does not have. A very poor defeat at midfield will make things very difficult for him, particularly if his team set up ignores the weaknesses of the current squad. Millwall's midfield is reported to be one of the better parts of their team. It will be difficult to forgive conceding the fight in the middle of the pitch.
To be honest I think Robinson's approach in the games I've been to (Bradford away and yesterday) has been pretty positive - although compared to Slade that's an impossibly low bar not to overcome.
I think Nugent was in the fortunate position of having worked with the players for six months - an incredibly long time by contemporary Charlton standards and wasn't shackled to the same, defensive football that Slade likes to play.
Nugent knew the players much better. He seemed to go for a more positive set up than Slade.
Many of the current squad, may have decided / worked out that their time at Charlton will be ending under Robinson. The ill formed squad at the start of the season is going through another big change & upheaval. The next transfer window will tell us everything we need to know about the direction of the club (again).
I strongly hope that Robinson takes account of the weakness of the central midfield & does not try to pretend that he has the players to play his preferred formation, which he currently does not have. A very poor defeat at midfield will make things very difficult for him, particularly if his team set up ignores the weaknesses of the current squad. Millwall's midfield is reported to be one of the better parts of their team. It will be difficult to forgive conceding the fight in the middle of the pitch.
One of the first things KR said was that we didn't have the players to play 4-2-3-1. He knows he needs to get a new attacking midfielder or at least put someone he trusts behind the front man.
I know that KR did not play 4231 yesterday & the team has evidently lacked an attacking / creative forward playing central midfielder for the last 5 to 6months (not that this was resolved pre season). This is even more so since Gudmundsson & Cousins were sold for 4 million & replaced with loanee Ulvestadt & the out of contract / cheap Player in Crofts.
He played a weak midfield With a 442 with Crofts in the middle with Ulvestadt & wide midfielders, who's strength's are not helping to win the central midfield battle. If he does that again against Millwall & ignores the limitations of his players to play in a formation that allows the midfield to be overrun, KR will make things difficult for himself.
Nugent knew the players much better. He seemed to go for a more positive set up than Slade.
Many of the current squad, may have decided / worked out that their time at Charlton will be ending under Robinson. The ill formed squad at the start of the season is going through another big change & upheaval. The next transfer window will tell us everything we need to know about the direction of the club (again).
I strongly hope that Robinson takes account of the weakness of the central midfield & does not try to pretend that he has the players to play his preferred formation, which he currently does not have. A very poor defeat at midfield will make things very difficult for him, particularly if his team set up ignores the weaknesses of the current squad. Millwall's midfield is reported to be one of the better parts of their team. It will be difficult to forgive conceding the fight in the middle of the pitch.
One of the first things KR said was that we didn't have the players to play 4-2-3-1. He knows he needs to get a new attacking midfielder or at least put someone he trusts behind the front man.
Another thing is that in KR saying that he knows that he does not have players to play 4231, he has given notice to many members of the squad, that they will be out on their ear (& maybe some of them deserve to be). Always going to be player churn with a new manager but his comments were probably not encouraging. It is likely contributed to a downturn. Markedly new team in January & more change at the end of the season again. The lack of stability is not a recipe for success.
Nugent knew the players much better. He seemed to go for a more positive set up than Slade.
Many of the current squad, may have decided / worked out that their time at Charlton will be ending under Robinson. The ill formed squad at the start of the season is going through another big change & upheaval. The next transfer window will tell us everything we need to know about the direction of the club (again).
I strongly hope that Robinson takes account of the weakness of the central midfield & does not try to pretend that he has the players to play his preferred formation, which he currently does not have. A very poor defeat at midfield will make things very difficult for him, particularly if his team set up ignores the weaknesses of the current squad. Millwall's midfield is reported to be one of the better parts of their team. It will be difficult to forgive conceding the fight in the middle of the pitch.
To be honest I think Robinson's approach in the games I've been to (Bradford away and yesterday) has been pretty positive - although compared to Slade that's an impossibly low bar not to overcome.
I think Nugent was in the fortunate position of having worked with the players for six months - an incredibly long time by contemporary Charlton standards and wasn't shackled to the same, defensive football that Slade likes to play.
The obvious think is therefore for KR to listen to Nugent!!
This is one of the problems with keep changing the manager. The players currently are Slade's players. KR will want to bring his preferred players in. No doubt there will be some new arrivals in January. Then, when KR goes, the whole merrygoround starts again. And that might be before the end of the season!
This is one of the problems with keep changing the manager. The players currently are Slade's players. KR will want to bring his preferred players in. No doubt there will be some new arrivals in January. Then, when KR goes, the whole merrygoround starts again. And that might be before the end of the season!
Robinson's post-match interview yesterday indicated just that, so more players coming in who are likely to take a little time to adjust. The trade-off (and a sensible one most owners would insist on) is that other players are let go, so it's a question of who. Unlikely to be new signings who are at the front end of their contracts, or Roger Johnson who nobody wants. So who will they offload given we also have a few players that are unlikely to get anywhere near the contracts they are on at the moment.
This is one of the problems with keep changing the manager. The players currently are Slade's players. KR will want to bring his preferred players in. No doubt there will be some new arrivals in January. Then, when KR goes, the whole merrygoround starts again. And that might be before the end of the season!
Robinson's post-match interview yesterday indicated just that, so more players coming in who are likely to take a little time to adjust. The trade-off (and a sensible one most owners would insist on) is that other players are let go, so it's a question of who. Unlikely to be new signings who are at the front end of their contracts, or Roger Johnson who nobody wants. So who will they offload given we also have a few players that are unlikely to get anywhere near the contracts they are on at the moment.
It was rumoured that they tried to offload Tex & Ba in the summer but, as in the case of Rojo, there was either no takers or the price wasn't right.
Nothing has really changed since then, has it, apart from Konsa now being more prominent in the shop window along with Lookie , albeit not on recent performances on the whole.
If Rudd goes back to Carrow Rd, we must bring in another experienced 'keeper as a back up to young Dillon, surely ?
I wonder what KR's New Year resolution will be .....
This is one of the problems with keep changing the manager. The players currently are Slade's players. KR will want to bring his preferred players in. No doubt there will be some new arrivals in January. Then, when KR goes, the whole merrygoround starts again. And that might be before the end of the season!
Robinson's post-match interview yesterday indicated just that, so more players coming in who are likely to take a little time to adjust. The trade-off (and a sensible one most owners would insist on) is that other players are let go, so it's a question of who. Unlikely to be new signings who are at the front end of their contracts, or Roger Johnson who nobody wants. So who will they offload given we also have a few players that are unlikely to get anywhere near the contracts they are on at the moment.
It was rumoured that they tried to offload Tex & Ba in the summer but, as in the case of Rojo, there was either no takers or the price wasn't right.
Nothing has really changed since then, has it, apart from Konsa now being more prominent in the shop window along with Lookie , albeit not on recent performances on the whole.
If Rudd goes back to Carrow Rd, we must bring in another experienced 'keeper as a back up to young Dillon, surely ? I wonder what KR's New Year resolution will be .....
'A little less conversation and a little more action' ? Thank you, thank you very much, ah ha.
The difference is remarkably simple it is writ large by many on the post match comments on the Peterborough game. It is called BALANCE.
I suggest Nugent did focus on such basics. Most "Temporary Managers" do - it is called do the least harm.
I had thought/hoped Robinson had stumbled on the same trick.
One example is staring us in the face. Quite simply why does the side look better when Chicksen plays? Because he balances and provides different options than those players around him. Fox plays better, Jackson will play better, Crofts should play better with Chicksen because he complements them with a mobile wide left attacking threat.
Wiggins and Holmes-Dennis would have done the same.
Foley, Crofts and Jackson are largely bits & pieces players who do not balance each other but need others to allow them to play to their best or at least be effective.
As an aside I believe Jackson offers the best value of the three due to his leadership, ability on set players, an ability to score crucial goals and his industry. The challenge now is those latter skills are diminishing as he reaches a seniority where you simply cannot build long term around him. In the League1 winning season alongside Hollands, Stephens & Wiggins he was able to maximise his contribution and was instrumental in the achievements of the team.
The whole principle of balance argues to the fundamentally flawed structure and current ethos of the club. For 3 years the lack of a balanced squad/ team has been endemic to the club under this regime. Duchatelets';
- first principle is he does not want to pay players sitting on the bench, especially those on a decent pay cheque.
- second principle is focusing on the individual players playing statistics and talents.
- third principle is to generate revenue from player trading to meet trading costs.
- fourth principle is to create a cheap match day experience.
There is no principle of team success. There is no focus on team performance. There is no element of team.
When he watches on live stream or via later download his focus "Is any given player actually playing? Is he playing well?
The team is a merely a platform for any given player to perform, to attract trading interest from others and for that player to generate trading revenue.
Such a value sets the actual result as merely a nice to have not an overriding principle. Of course he recognises to present a "match day experience" there has to be a performance threshold but such a threshold is "capped" as being "competitive". In the event a window of opportunity to secure team success and therefore increased revenue (promotion to Championship or PL) he will then make a financial decision on the related investment business case.
The team ultimately is no more than a trading "inconvenience". Any principles behind delivering a team collective performance in Duchatelets' world are only of secondary importance.
When you apply such principles to the recruitment process your focus is on an individual players ability without understanding how he will fit the existing squad. It will always ultimately fail - just ask Powell, Peeters, Luzon and Slade.
It is why the likes of a Mr Driessen should never be anywhere any squad construction process. What possible algorithm or matrix can you apply to determine any given players ability to work with the enormous number of player combinations across a squad of 22 players?
Driessen can focus on any given players individual statistics and general contribution but not to the specifics of any team dynamic. Then add the executive pressure of "why am I paying £XXX a week for a player to sit on the bench/ in the stand" and you end up forcing the coach to play players on the basis of their contracts not their performance or balanced contribution to the team.
At that point the "Manager" is no more than a shop keeper" (no disrespect to shop keepers).
The principle of the "manager" identifying the "type of player" he wants, whereon the CEO and her scouts identify a list of possible candidates for the manager to "sign off on" will ultimately always be flawed. The initial "player candidate selection" has to be within the remit of the manager and then you can apply as many statistical algorithms as you like.
What we have seen this season is arguably the most expensive players (salary wise) forced into a playing format in the hope they will be able to work it out i.e. Ajose cost a lot of money he plays no matter what or you insisted on signing Crofts - he plays no matter what - the Ulvestadt loan agreements contains a minimum playing time clause - he plays.
It has repeatedly failed.
The selection has to be about the best team not about the best individual 11/ most expensive players.
We all know this - Fox is a left back. Wiggins is a left back. Chicksen is predominantly a left back they are however completely different players offering completely different skill sets?
Each can be effective and can contribute when played with the right complementary players.
It is crucial "the conductor of the orchestra" from start to finish is the manager not the critic sitting at the computer desk. Until you empower the manager appropriately within the right "checks & balances" environment the nonsense under this regime will continue - no matter whose name is "on the door".
Football is ABOVE EVERYTHING ELSE A TEAM GAME where the end game is for the players to collectively deliver above and beyond their individual talents. You ignore or disrespect that principle to the cost of everyone including the clubs balance sheet.
M. Duchatelet, seldom can anyone have shown less disrespect for and a completely distorted understanding of the industry they have invested in. If you want to start throwing insults of stupidity around you might want to start with the man in the mirror. Can there truly have been be a greater level of arrogant ignorance in our history?
Not on the bench and Pearce said at Bromley Addicks he's not been around the training ground.
But he's not officially left as not been said on the OS and he's not pitched up at Coventry
VOTV saying he and Robinson had a falling out after Robinson bollocked the players after a game and saying Nugent agreed when Nugent had said before it was a bad idea.
Comments
On today's game, either Robbo got his tactics wrong or the players failed to carry out instructions. I can't believe a team at this level would allow the oppositions most influential players a free role to dictate the pattern of play. The failure to adjust our system to nullify their influence, regain control of midfield and then go on to win the game, is a mystery.
"Simplicity is genius" - Bobby Robson.
He didn't want the job. Even if you put a loaded gun against his head. He didn't want it.
I know nothing about Nugent & now there's no Memorial Garden to tend, I'm unable to watch the lads' faces & body language whilst training or as they walk on & off the pitches.
We both know what respect a superb man manager like SCP commands & how his players would have run through fire for him when he was at Charlton. The relationship between players & gaffer was second to none IMHO.
Since then, apart from Jose Riga, I would hazard a guess that no-one else has come close although the managerial merry go round at our club hasn't stopped turning long enough for a decent understanding to be formed.
Maybe Nugent's methods & the manner in which he spoke to players started to engender some much needed team spirit ..and who knows whether that team spirit is in its infancy under the current incumbent. Perhaps it's too early to judge. I have to admit, when I saw KR in action at half & full time at Bradford last Saturday, I wondered how guys like JJ, Tex, Paddy & Pearce enjoy the touchy feely way that he seems to employ. But perhaps I'm being a tad unfair.
Time will tell - that's if time is on KR's side, of course.
Perhaps I'm a bit stronger on this because in America a lot of sports utilize studying "game film" of yourselves and your opponents, even at a high school level, so I just take this for granted.
Again, not saying your wrong, but would hope we could find an 11, particularly one that is pretty experienced, as ours is, that would be alright adjusting formations in a match.
Also, if the opposition have a danger man in midfield, who do we have that can "do a job" on them? I remember you mentioning that their #8 ran the show from the base of the diamond. Who in our midfield has the legs to put them under pressure without leaving massive gaps?
In the case of Forrester (8), often playing someone in that area is enough. If we have a body in that area, it closes down the space and limits his possession and may force him to wander left and right to find the ball. Leaving him in open space to collect the ball in his own time and start the build-up often with a simple pass, is asking for trouble. So get someone close to him to stop the flow! If you nullify him, then the 10 gets less possession and is less effective, and they are not controlling the game.
Making sure the scouting reports on the opposition are completed so the team is set up properly should be part of a professional football set up. The manager should then take account of his own teams strengths & weaknesses in the set up. Picking a team formation that ignores the opposition set up & your own team weaknesses is not good. If things are going wrong, then it is the mark of a decent manager that they can make in game tactical changes.
Not sure what Robinson was trying to do yesterday. Maybe he is testing out his preferred formation to see which players can fit into it or evidencing the squad weakness to Duchatelet is anybody's guess.
He had ricky holmes
Many of the current squad, may have decided / worked out that their time at Charlton will be ending under Robinson. The ill formed squad at the start of the season is going through another big change & upheaval. The next transfer window will tell us everything we need to know about the direction of the club (again).
I strongly hope that Robinson takes account of the weakness of the central midfield & does not try to pretend that he has the players to play his preferred midfield or a 442 (as of yesterday), which he currently does not have. A very poor defeat at midfield will make things very difficult for him, particularly if his team set up ignores the weaknesses of the current squad. Millwall's midfield is reported to be one of the better parts of their team. It will be difficult to forgive conceding the fight in the middle of the pitch.
I think Nugent was in the fortunate position of having worked with the players for six months - an incredibly long time by contemporary Charlton standards and wasn't shackled to the same, defensive football that Slade likes to play.
He played a weak midfield With a 442 with Crofts in the middle with Ulvestadt & wide midfielders, who's strength's are not helping to win the central midfield battle. If he does that again against Millwall & ignores the limitations of his players to play in a formation that allows the midfield to be overrun, KR will make things difficult for himself.
Nothing has really changed since then, has it, apart from Konsa now being more prominent in the shop window along with Lookie , albeit not on recent performances on the whole.
If Rudd goes back to Carrow Rd, we must bring in another experienced 'keeper as a back up to young Dillon, surely ?
I wonder what KR's New Year resolution will be .....
He's alive you know, works at my local chippy
I suggest Nugent did focus on such basics. Most "Temporary Managers" do - it is called do the least harm.
I had thought/hoped Robinson had stumbled on the same trick.
One example is staring us in the face. Quite simply why does the side look better when Chicksen plays? Because he balances and provides different options than those players around him. Fox plays better, Jackson will play better, Crofts should play better with Chicksen because he complements them with a mobile wide left attacking threat.
Wiggins and Holmes-Dennis would have done the same.
Foley, Crofts and Jackson are largely bits & pieces players who do not balance each other but need others to allow them to play to their best or at least be effective.
As an aside I believe Jackson offers the best value of the three due to his leadership, ability on set players, an ability to score crucial goals and his industry. The challenge now is those latter skills are diminishing as he reaches a seniority where you simply cannot build long term around him. In the League1 winning season alongside Hollands, Stephens & Wiggins he was able to maximise his contribution and was instrumental in the achievements of the team.
The whole principle of balance argues to the fundamentally flawed structure and current ethos of the club. For 3 years the lack of a balanced squad/ team has been endemic to the club under this regime. Duchatelets';
- first principle is he does not want to pay players sitting on the bench, especially those on a decent pay cheque.
- second principle is focusing on the individual players playing statistics and talents.
- third principle is to generate revenue from player trading to meet trading costs.
- fourth principle is to create a cheap match day experience.
There is no principle of team success. There is no focus on team performance. There is no element of team.
When he watches on live stream or via later download his focus "Is any given player actually playing? Is he playing well?
The team is a merely a platform for any given player to perform, to attract trading interest from others and for that player to generate trading revenue.
Such a value sets the actual result as merely a nice to have not an overriding principle. Of course he recognises to present a "match day experience" there has to be a performance threshold but such a threshold is "capped" as being "competitive". In the event a window of opportunity to secure team success and therefore increased revenue (promotion to Championship or PL) he will then make a financial decision on the related investment business case.
The team ultimately is no more than a trading "inconvenience". Any principles behind delivering a team collective performance in Duchatelets' world are only of secondary importance.
When you apply such principles to the recruitment process your focus is on an individual players ability without understanding how he will fit the existing squad. It will always ultimately fail - just ask Powell, Peeters, Luzon and Slade.
It is why the likes of a Mr Driessen should never be anywhere any squad construction process. What possible algorithm or matrix can you apply to determine any given players ability to work with the enormous number of player combinations across a squad of 22 players?
Driessen can focus on any given players individual statistics and general contribution but not to the specifics of any team dynamic. Then add the executive pressure of "why am I paying £XXX a week for a player to sit on the bench/ in the stand" and you end up forcing the coach to play players on the basis of their contracts not their performance or balanced contribution to the team.
At that point the "Manager" is no more than a shop keeper" (no disrespect to shop keepers).
The principle of the "manager" identifying the "type of player" he wants, whereon the CEO and her scouts identify a list of possible candidates for the manager to "sign off on" will ultimately always be flawed. The initial "player candidate selection" has to be within the remit of the manager and then you can apply as many statistical algorithms as you like.
What we have seen this season is arguably the most expensive players (salary wise) forced into a playing format in the hope they will be able to work it out i.e. Ajose cost a lot of money he plays no matter what or you insisted on signing Crofts - he plays no matter what - the Ulvestadt loan agreements contains a minimum playing time clause - he plays.
It has repeatedly failed.
The selection has to be about the best team not about the best individual 11/ most expensive players.
We all know this - Fox is a left back. Wiggins is a left back. Chicksen is predominantly a left back they are however completely different players offering completely different skill sets?
Each can be effective and can contribute when played with the right complementary players.
It is crucial "the conductor of the orchestra" from start to finish is the manager not the critic sitting at the computer desk. Until you empower the manager appropriately within the right "checks & balances" environment the nonsense under this regime will continue - no matter whose name is "on the door".
Football is ABOVE EVERYTHING ELSE A TEAM GAME where the end game is for the players to collectively deliver above and beyond their individual talents. You ignore or disrespect that principle to the cost of everyone including the clubs balance sheet.
M. Duchatelet, seldom can anyone have shown less disrespect for and a completely distorted understanding of the industry they have invested in. If you want to start throwing insults of stupidity around you might want to start with the man in the mirror. Can there truly have been be a greater level of arrogant ignorance in our history?
Not on the bench and Pearce said at Bromley Addicks he's not been around the training ground.
But he's not officially left as not been said on the OS and he's not pitched up at Coventry
VOTV saying he and Robinson had a falling out after Robinson bollocked the players after a game and saying Nugent agreed when Nugent had said before it was a bad idea.
Is he on gardening leave?
Is he in dispute over his pay-off?