The problem for me is that we, as fans, focus on when a tactic "didn't work". If we say that sitting on a lead caused the loss of 2 or 3 points on any given occasion, do we consider the flipside, when we do get the 3 points, and say that was because of playing defensively? I don't get to many away games, so maybe I'm not qualified to comment, but looking at the results, we have won a fair few games 1-0 over the last 2 1/2 seasons. Post match views will often comment that the team "defended resolutely".
I agree that having an outlet can be helpful, but it needs to be a person that is mobile enough to reach an out ball and strong enough to hold the ball up when they receive it. Fuller was good at that- I suggest we haven't had such a person this season.
Fuller played against Palace away last season - the greatest example I have seen in all my years watching Charlton of throwing a game away! Sheff Wed at home was another occasion last season. This season we have taken the lead, only to lose two points or three a fair few times. I think there are occasions when you get away with it - I think the numbers suggest you get away with it too few times to make it an effective approach. That is a discussion/argument I can have with a professional manager on a relatively equal footing. I can't say what the detail of the tactics should be - but I can say I have seen a lot of games and know you get more points with a positive approach after going in front than a negative one. If the manager disagrees, his view is equally valid, but equally, not more. I am taking my view from observations over many years and many games.
RedPanda, you've made some really good points. Not everyone is going to agree with everything (for instance, I don't think that a certain playing style makes a good manager, even if we'd all prefer to see attacking play). But I have to agree with the rest of your key criteria: transfers, tactics, adaptability, the "dressing room", ruthlessness and experience. It's a great list to select from...
There will always be conjecture, and some fans are more intelligent in their thoughts than others. Many can provide a detailed breakdown of the game, Tutt Tutt on here always impresses me with his opposition scouting and then a review afterwards. The more matches you watch and the more you learn, there can of course be experts outside the game otherwise we wouldn't have journalists (I'm thinking of The Guardian's entourage here).
Regarding transfers, that is one of the most secretive areas. The number of people who know the details of each purchase or sale is probably in single figures. As such, we can only base opinion on on-pitch performances. There are many things that could go wrong but we never hear about, for example depression, being alone in the dressing room, a poor player-manager relationship, not liking the training. This is something we'll probably never be privy to and so we're forced to either guess or hold it against the manager.
Player sales, if for the greater good, I think most would agree are fine as long as there's not a huge gap left. The exception would be if someone has been woefully undervalued. We will always be a selling club, pretty much everyone in the country is besides Man United, Chelsea and Man City. So when it is inevitable that a player leaves, it should be up to the selling club to maximise profit. Again though, how much more we could have made on Scott Parker or whatever we will never know. If we could have sneaked another million out of it then you can't exactly blame Curbishley.
In mentioning playing style I was more so trying to point out that unattractive football doesn't make a bad manager. I perhaps could have worded it better. Then attacking football yes, some of us do prefer more chess-like tactics. My favourite league is Serie A. However, it is always the teams that create chances, play three up front, get caught in high scoring games that catch the eye. That's easy to say as a neutral, were I a Roma or Napoli fan then there would have been many times I'd have demanded a more defensive approach when ahead.
I did consider doing something along the lines of 'introduction and use of youth' as well but that's something 95% of us will agree upon with Powell. He'd also pass the dress sense test admirably.
The bottom line is that ultimately a manager is really only as good as the players at his disposal.
At the moment Powell is effectively trying to get a League One squad to succeed in the Championship and I don't see anybody could really do much better than him even if they had written a PHd on tactical formations.
Who do we have that would get into the team at a top-six team in this League? Wiggins and Sollly - that's about it.
Kermorgant and Stephens (when here) were good players but would not make the team of anyone in the top-six whilst Hamer and Morrison are good players but they would also be struggling to make those top sides.
Of the rest Wood, Dervite, Green, Hughes, Harriott, Cousins, Church and Sordell are honest players but not in that top-six category.
As things stand we are basically getting what we paid for - we can only hope that will change.
The quality of the players is as you say a v important part of the equation. But if that was the long and the short of it then the art of management would become redundant which is clearly an absurd notion.
The gaffer of the day and his coaching staff can either improve a playing squad, allow them to stand still or be responsible for their deterioration. In fact on re-consideration you either move forward or go in reverse.
So to my mind every single fan has to make up his mind as to whether each and every CAFC manager has used the array of managerial skills at his disposal to improve his squad pound for pound or otherwise regardless as to whether they loathe him or love him for whatever reason they have.
We will all come to our own conclusions and none of us will be right and none of us will be wrong as it is dear Roly who will make the decision and it is him who has reserved the right when coughing up multiple millions to make the judgement. The rest of us are entitled to bitch and moan but we will have little influence as to the decision makers final decision.
Congatulations to all of you who have made this thread an intelligent well thought out exchange of differing views, rather than an exchange of abuse. More like this please.
Sod off back to your old folks home grandad ;-))))
I wonder if Peterborough fans discussed why they didn't try and defend a lead more often and tighten up at the back etc rather than keeping themselves open and shipping so many goals leading to relegation
Chris Powell strikes me as an excellent manager, because he always gives off the impression that he knows the strengths and weaknesses of his players and the opposition in detail. I imagine that is why, with the exception of away matches at Burnley and Doncaster (although man was sent off in that game), it is always a narrow loss or victory in matches.
I would have to disagree, purely on the basis that CP does often struggle when opposition teams change their formation mid-game, or bring on a super sub type player. So while he is better than some credit him for when it comes to matching up with the likely starting formation, far too often plan B is once again 'defend up, attack long' repeated for long periods.
The narrow defeats and victories are simply due to Powell favouring low scoring games, as is his right to do and like Curbishley before him, not a sign of tactical ingenuity to my eyes. Which is not to say he has no tactical nous whatsoever, but getting one goal and then sitting on it is his master plan, and he sets up to achieve it, normally very well. It's what happens when this fails that is his major weakness in my opinion.
Do you think this is - at least in part - due to limitations on his squad? I remember Lennie once talking about how he had to use "guerrilla tactics" because he knew he didn't have the players to compete with the better footballers in the other first division squads.
No, I can't accept that a squad he can adjust/set up to deal with variety of threats/formations before the game suddenly loses all those permutations once the ref blows his whistle. I can admit that yes he has limited options... but options nonetheless, not simply 'defend with ten men, bring on Dervite' for what feels like the thousandth time.
I guess I was getting more at the ability to change a game with the players available to him on the bench. Look at the options Wigan had, for example, compared to us.
Chris Powell strikes me as an excellent manager, because he always gives off the impression that he knows the strengths and weaknesses of his players and the opposition in detail. I imagine that is why, with the exception of away matches at Burnley and Doncaster (although man was sent off in that game), it is always a narrow loss or victory in matches.
I would have to disagree, purely on the basis that CP does often struggle when opposition teams change their formation mid-game, or bring on a super sub type player. So while he is better than some credit him for when it comes to matching up with the likely starting formation, far too often plan B is once again 'defend up, attack long' repeated for long periods.
The narrow defeats and victories are simply due to Powell favouring low scoring games, as is his right to do and like Curbishley before him, not a sign of tactical ingenuity to my eyes. Which is not to say he has no tactical nous whatsoever, but getting one goal and then sitting on it is his master plan, and he sets up to achieve it, normally very well. It's what happens when this fails that is his major weakness in my opinion.
Do you think this is - at least in part - due to limitations on his squad? I remember Lennie once talking about how he had to use "guerrilla tactics" because he knew he didn't have the players to compete with the better footballers in the other first division squads.
No, I can't accept that a squad he can adjust/set up to deal with variety of threats/formations before the game suddenly loses all those permutations once the ref blows his whistle. I can admit that yes he has limited options... but options nonetheless, not simply 'defend with ten men, bring on Dervite' for what feels like the thousandth time.
I guess I was getting more at the ability to change a game with the players available to him on the bench. Look at the options Wigan had, for example, compared to us.
And I agree that compared to many squads, CP's options are not the greatest. BUT it does seem to me that whether we are one or two goals up or down, on the attack or under the cosh, whatever substitution/tactical change the opposition just made, whatever the case... on comes Dervite to defend for twenty odd minutes. You don't need to be a tactical genius to outwit CP mid-game right now, and that's worrying to me.
I am of the opinion that Powell has to be a good manager based on the previous two seasons. Everyone bangs on about the squad we had in league 1 meant a monkey could have got us promoted but the side last year was definitely not the 9th best team in the league. He's the right man for the job however he should be questioned and there is much that can be asked about this season.
My main issue with powell is our defensive mentality when we go a goal up and his obsession with bringing on Dervite at the end of games. Comparing him to Mourinho may be harsh but agaist one of the best attacking sides in recent years he put two men up field when city had a corner and Chelsea attacked right up until the 80th/85th minute. Powell is simply too defensive when we go a goal up.
The Dervite subsitution is where i really lose my patience as I have seen it time and time again, see it not work and us concede time and time again and i just dont know what powell is seeing that Im not. For the first 5 mins Dervite is on he plays in defensive midfield...a position he is not familiar with and he looks completely out of position. He has no idea who to mark and runs around the last third of the pitch like a headless chicken. Then with % mins of the game to go he invariably decides he is now going to play CB. This means the CB pairing for the game are thrown completely out of sync. The three of them dont know who is marking who, look completely at sea and if we havnt conceded during Dervites time in midfield we concede at this point (or both). The original CB pairing that hasnt conceded for 80 minutes is weakened by Powells very basic subsitution and it needs to stop!
I am of the opinion that Powell has to be a good manager based on the previous two seasons. Everyone bangs on about the squad we had in league 1 meant a monkey could have got us promoted but the side last year was definitely not the 9th best team in the league. He's the right man for the job however he should be questioned and there is much that can be asked about this season.
My main issue with powell is our defensive mentality when we go a goal up and his obsession with bringing on Dervite at the end of games. Comparing him to Mourinho may be harsh but agaist one of the best attacking sides in recent years he put two men up field when city had a corner and Chelsea attacked right up until the 80th/85th minute. Powell is simply too defensive when we go a goal up.
The Dervite subsitution is where i really lose my patience as I have seen it time and time again, see it not work and us concede time and time again and i just dont know what powell is seeing that Im not. For the first 5 mins Dervite is on he plays in defensive midfield...a position he is not familiar with and he looks completely out of position. He has no idea who to mark and runs around the last third of the pitch like a headless chicken. Then with % mins of the game to go he invariably decides he is now going to play CB. This means the CB pairing for the game are thrown completely out of sync. The three of them dont know who is marking who, look completely at sea and if we havnt conceded during Dervites time in midfield we concede at this point (or both). The original CB pairing that hasnt conceded for 80 minutes is weakened by Powells very basic subsitution and it needs to stop!
This is exactly how I see it. I had no issue with the Pritchard sub but squirmed when Dervitte was brought on. Not because he is a rubbish CB, but fot the reasons you stated.
Really enjoying this reasoned thread. This subject is one about which I've given a lot of thought, particularly in relation to Chris Powell.
One topic/heading missing from the original post was 'man-management' (although I appreciate there were elements of this within the 'dressing room' section) - yet in my eyes this is arguably the most important, especially in a modern football era of inflated wages and, just as importantly, inflated egos.
It's in this area that Powell excels.
It's been mentioned before, but the best illustration of Powell's man-management is evidenced by the harmony throughout the squad over the past three years. Even ignoring the way he has constantly managed to field a team that - whatever critics say of the tactics and players' ability - can always be seen putting in the effort for the Charlton cause, he has made some tough decisions regarding players in that time.
Just to offer a few examples, Paul Hayes was harshly, if correctly, jettisoned in favour of Yann Kermorgant within a few months of being one of the club's biggest summer signings, Scott Wagstaff didn't know what to do to get a starting role (and when he did away v Leyton Orient, Powell had no hesitation in subbing him after just five minutes following Ben Hamer's red card), and vice-captain Matt Taylor barely featured for the last 18 months of his contract despite being ever-present in the starting XI for the first six.
In all of the above cases, and many more (when Ben Hamer was dropped, Danny Hollands, Cedric Evina, Andy Hughes), players could be forgiven for expressing discontent or having a gripe against the manager who left them on the sidelines for extended periods of time and/or moved them on, yet in all cases the players don't kick up a fuss and, on the occasions when they have left, have departed bearing no grudges and actually singing Powell's praises.
AFKA has written before in praise of the professionalism of Leon Cort, and the same could be said of many others who haven't been given the chances that they and many others (including their agents) felt they deserved. The boat has hardly been rocked, publicly at least, which reveals a lot about the way Powell has handled each individual and the spirit within the squad that he has created. It's also credit to the recruitment process that identified such characters in the first place (more on this later).
And remember, this isn't a squad of players that has been playing in a period of calm water. We struggled for long stages last season and we're currently amid a relegation dogfight; we've had huge uncertainty concerning players' contracts and the contracts of all the coaching staff (both Dale Stephens and Yann Kermorgant have spoken about how Powell's contract situation influenced their own futures, for example); we've had constant speculation about the sale of the club - and they're just the big ticket items.
Indeed, perhaps the biggest worry for me is how the recent new recruits affect this overwhelmingly positive squad dynamic (although the reports of the team work ethic at Wigan were encouraging on this front).
Back to Powell, though, often called the 'nicest man in football'. I've always had an issue with this description because it ignores his huge competitiveness/will to win and a ruthless streak that he's demonstrated as a player and manager. In my mind, he's a 'decent' man, in all the very best connotations of the word - which according to my dictionary is honest, respectable, confirming to recognised standards of morality, kind and obliging. It also lists "properly or modestly dressed" - ha!
By treating everyone fairly and dealing with them honestly, by taking the time to listen to people and considering their views (whether he agrees with or not), by placing his faith and trust in people, by explaining why he is making a decision even when he knows the person affected may not like it, he commands a huge amount of respect from people.
This is by no means intended to be a hagiography, but building personal relationships is essential in modern football and I honestly believe, given the type of person he is, Powell would command the same sort of respect he enjoys at Charlton from multi-millionaire players at the biggest clubs in the country in a way, for example, Jose Mourinho can and Roberto Mancini is unable to.
That's not to say I'm suggesting he's too good for us or that Powell should be managing a big four club or anything, but if we're talking about what makes a good manager, particularly when there are so many distractions that get in the way of the actual football these days, excelling at man-management is essential - and it's a quality Powell possesses in abundance.
(Apologies for the long post - thought I'd make the most of it given the rarity)
Comments
I agree that having an outlet can be helpful, but it needs to be a person that is mobile enough to reach an out ball and strong enough to hold the ball up when they receive it. Fuller was good at that- I suggest we haven't had such a person this season.
Regarding transfers, that is one of the most secretive areas. The number of people who know the details of each purchase or sale is probably in single figures. As such, we can only base opinion on on-pitch performances. There are many things that could go wrong but we never hear about, for example depression, being alone in the dressing room, a poor player-manager relationship, not liking the training. This is something we'll probably never be privy to and so we're forced to either guess or hold it against the manager.
Player sales, if for the greater good, I think most would agree are fine as long as there's not a huge gap left. The exception would be if someone has been woefully undervalued. We will always be a selling club, pretty much everyone in the country is besides Man United, Chelsea and Man City. So when it is inevitable that a player leaves, it should be up to the selling club to maximise profit. Again though, how much more we could have made on Scott Parker or whatever we will never know. If we could have sneaked another million out of it then you can't exactly blame Curbishley.
In mentioning playing style I was more so trying to point out that unattractive football doesn't make a bad manager. I perhaps could have worded it better. Then attacking football yes, some of us do prefer more chess-like tactics. My favourite league is Serie A. However, it is always the teams that create chances, play three up front, get caught in high scoring games that catch the eye. That's easy to say as a neutral, were I a Roma or Napoli fan then there would have been many times I'd have demanded a more defensive approach when ahead.
I did consider doing something along the lines of 'introduction and use of youth' as well but that's something 95% of us will agree upon with Powell. He'd also pass the dress sense test admirably.
The gaffer of the day and his coaching staff can either improve a playing squad, allow them to stand still or be responsible for their deterioration. In fact on re-consideration you either move forward or go in reverse.
So to my mind every single fan has to make up his mind as to whether each and every CAFC manager has used the array of managerial skills at his disposal to improve his squad pound for pound or otherwise regardless as to whether they loathe him or love him for whatever reason they have.
We will all come to our own conclusions and none of us will be right and none of us will be wrong as it is dear Roly who will make the decision and it is him who has reserved the right when coughing up multiple millions to make the judgement. The rest of us are entitled to bitch and moan but we will have little influence as to the decision makers final decision.
Simples peeps ;-))
Why are we allowing 6 year olds on this forum ?
My main issue with powell is our defensive mentality when we go a goal up and his obsession with bringing on Dervite at the end of games. Comparing him to Mourinho may be harsh but agaist one of the best attacking sides in recent years he put two men up field when city had a corner and Chelsea attacked right up until the 80th/85th minute. Powell is simply too defensive when we go a goal up.
The Dervite subsitution is where i really lose my patience as I have seen it time and time again, see it not work and us concede time and time again and i just dont know what powell is seeing that Im not. For the first 5 mins Dervite is on he plays in defensive midfield...a position he is not familiar with and he looks completely out of position. He has no idea who to mark and runs around the last third of the pitch like a headless chicken. Then with % mins of the game to go he invariably decides he is now going to play CB. This means the CB pairing for the game are thrown completely out of sync. The three of them dont know who is marking who, look completely at sea and if we havnt conceded during Dervites time in midfield we concede at this point (or both). The original CB pairing that hasnt conceded for 80 minutes is weakened by Powells very basic subsitution and it needs to stop!
One topic/heading missing from the original post was 'man-management' (although I appreciate there were elements of this within the 'dressing room' section) - yet in my eyes this is arguably the most important, especially in a modern football era of inflated wages and, just as importantly, inflated egos.
It's in this area that Powell excels.
It's been mentioned before, but the best illustration of Powell's man-management is evidenced by the harmony throughout the squad over the past three years. Even ignoring the way he has constantly managed to field a team that - whatever critics say of the tactics and players' ability - can always be seen putting in the effort for the Charlton cause, he has made some tough decisions regarding players in that time.
Just to offer a few examples, Paul Hayes was harshly, if correctly, jettisoned in favour of Yann Kermorgant within a few months of being one of the club's biggest summer signings, Scott Wagstaff didn't know what to do to get a starting role (and when he did away v Leyton Orient, Powell had no hesitation in subbing him after just five minutes following Ben Hamer's red card), and vice-captain Matt Taylor barely featured for the last 18 months of his contract despite being ever-present in the starting XI for the first six.
In all of the above cases, and many more (when Ben Hamer was dropped, Danny Hollands, Cedric Evina, Andy Hughes), players could be forgiven for expressing discontent or having a gripe against the manager who left them on the sidelines for extended periods of time and/or moved them on, yet in all cases the players don't kick up a fuss and, on the occasions when they have left, have departed bearing no grudges and actually singing Powell's praises.
AFKA has written before in praise of the professionalism of Leon Cort, and the same could be said of many others who haven't been given the chances that they and many others (including their agents) felt they deserved. The boat has hardly been rocked, publicly at least, which reveals a lot about the way Powell has handled each individual and the spirit within the squad that he has created. It's also credit to the recruitment process that identified such characters in the first place (more on this later).
And remember, this isn't a squad of players that has been playing in a period of calm water. We struggled for long stages last season and we're currently amid a relegation dogfight; we've had huge uncertainty concerning players' contracts and the contracts of all the coaching staff (both Dale Stephens and Yann Kermorgant have spoken about how Powell's contract situation influenced their own futures, for example); we've had constant speculation about the sale of the club - and they're just the big ticket items.
Indeed, perhaps the biggest worry for me is how the recent new recruits affect this overwhelmingly positive squad dynamic (although the reports of the team work ethic at Wigan were encouraging on this front).
Back to Powell, though, often called the 'nicest man in football'. I've always had an issue with this description because it ignores his huge competitiveness/will to win and a ruthless streak that he's demonstrated as a player and manager. In my mind, he's a 'decent' man, in all the very best connotations of the word - which according to my dictionary is honest, respectable, confirming to recognised standards of morality, kind and obliging. It also lists "properly or modestly dressed" - ha!
By treating everyone fairly and dealing with them honestly, by taking the time to listen to people and considering their views (whether he agrees with or not), by placing his faith and trust in people, by explaining why he is making a decision even when he knows the person affected may not like it, he commands a huge amount of respect from people.
This is by no means intended to be a hagiography, but building personal relationships is essential in modern football and I honestly believe, given the type of person he is, Powell would command the same sort of respect he enjoys at Charlton from multi-millionaire players at the biggest clubs in the country in a way, for example, Jose Mourinho can and Roberto Mancini is unable to.
That's not to say I'm suggesting he's too good for us or that Powell should be managing a big four club or anything, but if we're talking about what makes a good manager, particularly when there are so many distractions that get in the way of the actual football these days, excelling at man-management is essential - and it's a quality Powell possesses in abundance.
(Apologies for the long post - thought I'd make the most of it given the rarity)
What validates what Matt writes is that for a long time he was an insider working with Powell and the players on a daily basis.