Roeder's record so far

[ChezGiven 0]

I reckon he has done a decent job so far when you look at the results. What worries me is that he hasn't been able to give the football we play any shape or character so far. Our football looks tot casual, too clumsy for my liking. And I don't think you can blame it on the injuries. The performances have often been poor, the team is rarely creating things from open play and in too many games we have been riding our luck to get the results. So far I am not too impressed overall by his input tbh.

 

If Bill Shankly himself had come in when Roeder did, I reckon we'd be about 7th.

 

Can I clarify this? Are you seriously drawing a comparison with Roeder and one of the greats of British football management?

 

 

No.

 

I'm saying even one of the greats of British football management couldn't have broken our squad (with all it's troubles) into the top 5 at this point of the season. Given that Roeder is an average manager at best, his performance has been excellent.

 

I don't agree. If you gave a good manager (hypothetical or not) in excess of 15 million quid to spend as he pleased in the summer with the squad Roeder inherited, I would expect them to do a better job than Roeder. That means gaining points against Sheffield United at home, for instance, or not getting humped at home by Birmingham in the cup.

 

And again, please enlighten me on which performances have been excellent, because I can't think of a single game where we were convincing.

 

Portsmouth at home.

 

Spurs at home apart from 20 mins in first half.

 

West Ham away.

Edited February 2, 2007 by ChezGiven

[Renton 17828]

I reckon he has done a decent job so far when you look at the results. What worries me is that he hasn't been able to give the football we play any shape or character so far. Our football looks tot casual, too clumsy for my liking. And I don't think you can blame it on the injuries. The performances have often been poor, the team is rarely creating things from open play and in too many games we have been riding our luck to get the results. So far I am not too impressed overall by his input tbh.

 

If Bill Shankly himself had come in when Roeder did, I reckon we'd be about 7th.

 

Can I clarify this? Are you seriously drawing a comparison with Roeder and one of the greats of British football management?

 

 

No.

 

I'm saying even one of the greats of British football management couldn't have broken our squad (with all it's troubles) into the top 5 at this point of the season. Given that Roeder is an average manager at best, his performance has been excellent.

 

I don't agree. If you gave a good manager (hypothetical or not) in excess of 15 million quid to spend as he pleased in the summer with the squad Roeder inherited, I would expect them to do a better job than Roeder. That means gaining points against Sheffield United at home, for instance, or not getting humped at home by Birmingham in the cup.

 

And again, please enlighten me on which performances have been excellent, because I can't think of a single game where we were convincing.

 

Portsmouth at home.

 

Spurs at home apart from 20 mins in first half.

 

West Ham away.

 

Portsmouth was good, but not spectacular. Honestly can't remember Spurs at home that well (demon drink). West Ham were/are struggling. I could list a lot of seriously bad games to counter these but I haven't got time.

[Happy Face 29]

I reckon he has done a decent job so far when you look at the results. What worries me is that he hasn't been able to give the football we play any shape or character so far. Our football looks tot casual, too clumsy for my liking. And I don't think you can blame it on the injuries. The performances have often been poor, the team is rarely creating things from open play and in too many games we have been riding our luck to get the results. So far I am not too impressed overall by his input tbh.

 

If Bill Shankly himself had come in when Roeder did, I reckon we'd be about 7th.

 

Can I clarify this? Are you seriously drawing a comparison with Roeder and one of the greats of British football management?

 

 

No.

 

I'm saying even one of the greats of British football management couldn't have broken our squad (with all it's troubles) into the top 5 at this point of the season. Given that Roeder is an average manager at best, his performance has been excellent.

 

I don't agree. If you gave a good manager (hypothetical or not) in excess of 15 million quid to spend as he pleased in the summer with the squad Roeder inherited, I would expect them to do a better job than Roeder. That means gaining points against Sheffield United at home, for instance, or not getting humped at home by Birmingham in the cup.

 

And again, please enlighten me on which performances have been excellent, because I can't think of a single game where we were convincing.

 

But that was £15million well spent wasn't it? Martins is in the running for our player of the season and although Duff hasn't done enough for us, we could easily recoup what we paid for him. If he'd went and spent £20million more on defenders that weren't good enough (like Souness) and we were still looking at relegation then I'd maybe understand questioning him on that score.

 

We haven't been playing excellent, and I never said we had. But surely this is understandable given that only one player has played a significant number of games within this team over the last 2 years!

[ChezGiven 0]

I reckon he has done a decent job so far when you look at the results. What worries me is that he hasn't been able to give the football we play any shape or character so far. Our football looks tot casual, too clumsy for my liking. And I don't think you can blame it on the injuries. The performances have often been poor, the team is rarely creating things from open play and in too many games we have been riding our luck to get the results. So far I am not too impressed overall by his input tbh.

 

If Bill Shankly himself had come in when Roeder did, I reckon we'd be about 7th.

 

Can I clarify this? Are you seriously drawing a comparison with Roeder and one of the greats of British football management?

 

 

No.

 

I'm saying even one of the greats of British football management couldn't have broken our squad (with all it's troubles) into the top 5 at this point of the season. Given that Roeder is an average manager at best, his performance has been excellent.

 

I don't agree. If you gave a good manager (hypothetical or not) in excess of 15 million quid to spend as he pleased in the summer with the squad Roeder inherited, I would expect them to do a better job than Roeder. That means gaining points against Sheffield United at home, for instance, or not getting humped at home by Birmingham in the cup.

 

And again, please enlighten me on which performances have been excellent, because I can't think of a single game where we were convincing.

 

Portsmouth at home.

 

Spurs at home apart from 20 mins in first half.

 

West Ham away.

 

Portsmouth was good, but not spectacular. Honestly can't remember Spurs at home that well (demon drink). West Ham were/are struggling. I could list a lot of seriously bad games to counter these but I haven't got time.

 

I was convinced in all 3. You asked for one game.

 

Spurs was excellent in parts.

Edited February 2, 2007 by ChezGiven

[Guest alex]

Pompey at home and West Ham away no bother. And Spurs too, after a shakey start are all fair enough like. Overall, we haven't been convincing though. Whether you rate Roeder or not, it's a work in progress isn't it? You can't judge him too harshly 12 months into the job without a full season behind him.

[Isegrim 8876]

Pompey at home and West Ham away no bother. And Spurs too, after a shakey start are all fair enough like. Overall, we haven't been convincing though. Whether you rate Roeder or not, it's a work in progress isn't it? You can't judge him too harshly 12 months into the job without a full season behind him.

I do agree, but I don't see even hints in Roeder really addressing the style of play, and that's what is worrying me. We've seen some work done at the back under Pearson, but even that isn't really convincing me so far as positioning is still a major cause of trouble for the likes of Taylor et al. Even glimpses of progress would do for me...

Edited February 2, 2007 by Isegrim

[ChezGiven 0]

Spurs shakey start? I thought we went 2-0 up within 15?

 

We havent been that convincing consistently either within games or between games.

 

Our football has been noted in the press as attractive and attacking on more than one occassion, especially in the run up to christmas.

[Renton 17828]

I reckon he has done a decent job so far when you look at the results. What worries me is that he hasn't been able to give the football we play any shape or character so far. Our football looks tot casual, too clumsy for my liking. And I don't think you can blame it on the injuries. The performances have often been poor, the team is rarely creating things from open play and in too many games we have been riding our luck to get the results. So far I am not too impressed overall by his input tbh.

 

If Bill Shankly himself had come in when Roeder did, I reckon we'd be about 7th.

 

Can I clarify this? Are you seriously drawing a comparison with Roeder and one of the greats of British football management?

 

 

No.

 

I'm saying even one of the greats of British football management couldn't have broken our squad (with all it's troubles) into the top 5 at this point of the season. Given that Roeder is an average manager at best, his performance has been excellent.

 

I don't agree. If you gave a good manager (hypothetical or not) in excess of 15 million quid to spend as he pleased in the summer with the squad Roeder inherited, I would expect them to do a better job than Roeder. That means gaining points against Sheffield United at home, for instance, or not getting humped at home by Birmingham in the cup.

 

And again, please enlighten me on which performances have been excellent, because I can't think of a single game where we were convincing.

 

Portsmouth at home.

 

Spurs at home apart from 20 mins in first half.

 

West Ham away.

 

Portsmouth was good, but not spectacular. Honestly can't remember Spurs at home that well (demon drink). West Ham were/are struggling. I could list a lot of seriously bad games to counter these but I haven't got time.

 

I was convinced in all 3. You asked for one game.

 

Spurs was excellent in parts.

 

If it had happened in Robson's time it would have been instantly forgettable. Plus it says something when you have to exclude a large part of the game.

 

Anyway, something is wrong imo, I just can't quite put my finger on it or articulate it. I would say though that the correct time to judge Roeder will be at the end of his first full season.

[Howaythetoon 0]

Renton, Isegrim

 

How can any manager who has had at times, upwards of 10 or more players unable to train, hope to create a brand of football on the training pitch, much less make them tactically tip top?

 

He can't and it is unrealistic to expect any manager to instil a way of playing and team shape into a team that changes from one week to the next, a team that has often been without its best players or in the case of defence, without defenders (Solano at RB, others at LB?).

 

 

You can't plan around those things, you just have to make do and Roeder is actually doing the correct thing by keeping things simple and just getting by as he is. If he or any manager came in and tried to introduce a sophisticated way of playing, tactics and instructions and all that crap, with a team that changes from one week to the next, it would be utter choas out on the pitch.

 

I liken our situation to a team filled with lots of new players that will take time to gell.

 

Give him the benefit of the doubt until he has at least a full team to send out, with most of its best players, and on a consistent basis. Only then will we see a shape and style develop, or maybe not in which case you would then have a valid point.

[Isegrim 8876]

Renton, Isegrim

 

How can any manager who has had at times, upwards of 10 or more players unable to train, hope to create a brand of football on the training pitch, much less make them tactically tip top?

 

He can't and it is unrealistic to expect any manager to instil a way of playing and team shape into a team that changes from one week to the next, a team that has often been without its best players or in the case of defence, without defenders (Solano at RB, others at LB?).

 

 

You can't plan around those things, you just have to make do and Roeder is actually doing the correct thing by keeping things simple and just getting by as he is. If he or any manager came in and tried to introduce a sophisticated way of playing, tactics and instructions and all that crap, with a team that changes from one week to the next, it would be utter choas out on the pitch.

 

I liken our situation to a team filled with lots of new players that will take time to gell.

 

Give him the benefit of the doubt until he has at least a full team to send out, with most of its best players, and on a consistent basis. Only then will we see a shape and style develop, or maybe not in which case you would then have a valid point.

Utter rubbish in my opinion. I've seen managers changing the style of play within weeks even though with limited players or players with limited talent. Roeder has had 12 months including a whole pre-season. Except of the very young defenders coming in most players who started are either internationals or wannabe-internationals or still players of a higher calibre. I can expect those players to understand and realise instructions given to them from the managing staff. And regarding our awful build up of the game from the back it was significant that actually it were the likes of Huntingdon and Edgar who were rather looking for doing the right pass than just hoofing the ball up front. Latter is something I easily expect to get restricted, but it isn't.

[Happy Face 29]

Renton, Isegrim

 

How can any manager who has had at times, upwards of 10 or more players unable to train, hope to create a brand of football on the training pitch, much less make them tactically tip top?

 

He can't and it is unrealistic to expect any manager to instil a way of playing and team shape into a team that changes from one week to the next, a team that has often been without its best players or in the case of defence, without defenders (Solano at RB, others at LB?).

 

 

You can't plan around those things, you just have to make do and Roeder is actually doing the correct thing by keeping things simple and just getting by as he is. If he or any manager came in and tried to introduce a sophisticated way of playing, tactics and instructions and all that crap, with a team that changes from one week to the next, it would be utter choas out on the pitch.

 

I liken our situation to a team filled with lots of new players that will take time to gell.

 

Give him the benefit of the doubt until he has at least a full team to send out, with most of its best players, and on a consistent basis. Only then will we see a shape and style develop, or maybe not in which case you would then have a valid point.

Utter rubbish in my opinion. I've seen managers changing the style of play within weeks even though with limited players or players with limited talent. Roeder has had 12 months including a whole pre-season. Except of the very young defenders coming in most players who started are either internationals or wannabe-internationals or still players of a higher calibre. I can expect those players to understand and realise instructions given to them from the managing staff. And regarding our awful build up of the game from the back it was significant that actually it were the likes of Huntingdon and Edgar who were rather looking for doing the right pass than just hoofing the ball up front. Latter is something I easily expect to get restricted, but it isn't.

 

Look at Shevchenko at Chelsea. Is he shit? No. Is Mourinho shit? No. Even world class players need to settle into a team and get on the same wavelength. The fact that no-one in our team has had the opportunity to do that with each other means they aren't going to be marauding all over the opposition with exquisite one touch football. They have to grind out results until a settled team of quality can look to play more stylish football. I hate watching us hoof the ball all over the place, but needs must imo.

[Renton 17828]

Renton, Isegrim

 

How can any manager who has had at times, upwards of 10 or more players unable to train, hope to create a brand of football on the training pitch, much less make them tactically tip top?

 

He can't and it is unrealistic to expect any manager to instil a way of playing and team shape into a team that changes from one week to the next, a team that has often been without its best players or in the case of defence, without defenders (Solano at RB, others at LB?).

 

 

You can't plan around those things, you just have to make do and Roeder is actually doing the correct thing by keeping things simple and just getting by as he is. If he or any manager came in and tried to introduce a sophisticated way of playing, tactics and instructions and all that crap, with a team that changes from one week to the next, it would be utter choas out on the pitch.

 

I liken our situation to a team filled with lots of new players that will take time to gell.

 

Give him the benefit of the doubt until he has at least a full team to send out, with most of its best players, and on a consistent basis. Only then will we see a shape and style develop, or maybe not in which case you would then have a valid point.

Utter rubbish in my opinion. I've seen managers changing the style of play within weeks even though with limited players or players with limited talent. Roeder has had 12 months including a whole pre-season. Except of the very young defenders coming in most players who started are either internationals or wannabe-internationals or still players of a higher calibre. I can expect those players to understand and realise instructions given to them from the managing staff. And regarding our awful build up of the game from the back it was significant that actually it were the likes of Huntingdon and Edgar who were rather looking for doing the right pass than just hoofing the ball up front. Latter is something I easily expect to get restricted, but it isn't.

 

That's another thing that bugs me about Roeder. It was our injury crisis that forced him to play many of the younger players in our squad, which is when our results improved. Ironically, if we had not had an injury crisis, and not got the younger, eager players like Edgar in, I think we would have fared much worse than we have.

 

I honestly believe he is going through one hell of a lucky spell. If it continues I'll be happy to admit I'm wrong though.

[Howaythetoon 0]

Renton, Isegrim

 

How can any manager who has had at times, upwards of 10 or more players unable to train, hope to create a brand of football on the training pitch, much less make them tactically tip top?

 

He can't and it is unrealistic to expect any manager to instil a way of playing and team shape into a team that changes from one week to the next, a team that has often been without its best players or in the case of defence, without defenders (Solano at RB, others at LB?).

 

 

You can't plan around those things, you just have to make do and Roeder is actually doing the correct thing by keeping things simple and just getting by as he is. If he or any manager came in and tried to introduce a sophisticated way of playing, tactics and instructions and all that crap, with a team that changes from one week to the next, it would be utter choas out on the pitch.

 

I liken our situation to a team filled with lots of new players that will take time to gell.

 

Give him the benefit of the doubt until he has at least a full team to send out, with most of its best players, and on a consistent basis. Only then will we see a shape and style develop, or maybe not in which case you would then have a valid point.

Utter rubbish in my opinion. I've seen managers changing the style of play within weeks even though with limited players or players with limited talent. Roeder has had 12 months including a whole pre-season. Except of the very young defenders coming in most players who started are either internationals or wannabe-internationals or still players of a higher calibre. I can expect those players to understand and realise instructions given to them from the managing staff. And regarding our awful build up of the game from the back it was significant that actually it were the likes of Huntingdon and Edgar who were rather looking for doing the right pass than just hoofing the ball up front. Latter is something I easily expect to get restricted, but it isn't.

 

You are correct, Roeder has had a full pre-season and has been in the job 12 months now but the one consistent theme of his tenure from day one has been, through no fault of his own, an inability to pick his best team week in week out, much less work with them on the training pitch. If you expect him, on top of every other thing he has to do in his role as manager, to put his energy and efforts into making a group of players who he would have mostly regarded as back-up or players he'd like to replace with the majority of players or players not ready (academy players), into a team that plays good controled football, I'd say you're not only being unrealistic, but unfair also. His first priority is results, not performances. Like I said, lets wait and see what manifests out on the pitch when he gets to work with his best team on the training pitch on a consistent basis, I'm positive when that happens, we'll see a team that plays better football. In the meantime I'll take 3 points thank you and to hell with performances.

[Happy Face 29]

Like I said, lets wait and see what manifests out on the pitch when he gets to work with his best team on the training pitch on a consistent basis, I'm positive when that happens, we'll see a team that plays better football.

 

But will undoubtedly lose more games

[Howaythetoon 0]

I honestly believe he is going through one hell of a lucky spell. If it continues I'll be happy to admit I'm wrong though.

 

I disagree, I think he's been very unfortunate, he has lost Shearer not only as a player and Captain, but as an assistant, he then loses Michael Owen, and then his new assistant Bond. Then his players keep dropping like flies to injury leaving him but with no choice but to raid the academy. All things that he has had no control over. I really am amazed we are not down there at the bottom or he hasn't been under more fire, which I'm pleased with actually because it shows fans understand the situation and have accepted he's doing the best he can, that the team are doing the best they can too. All that while working under Fat Fred and Co and being a shit manager.

 

As someone once said on here: Roeder the world's best shite manager

Edited February 2, 2007 by Howaythetoon

[Happy Face 29]

My mate was saying on Wednesday how George Graham went to Spurs in the middle of an injury crisis and told every player in the treatment room that they had to report for some form of training at not just 9am but also 5pm after an afternoon break.

 

Even Darren Anderton made a miraculous recovery.

 

It can't just be bad luck all these injuries.

[Isegrim 8876]

Renton, Isegrim

 

How can any manager who has had at times, upwards of 10 or more players unable to train, hope to create a brand of football on the training pitch, much less make them tactically tip top?

 

He can't and it is unrealistic to expect any manager to instil a way of playing and team shape into a team that changes from one week to the next, a team that has often been without its best players or in the case of defence, without defenders (Solano at RB, others at LB?).

 

 

You can't plan around those things, you just have to make do and Roeder is actually doing the correct thing by keeping things simple and just getting by as he is. If he or any manager came in and tried to introduce a sophisticated way of playing, tactics and instructions and all that crap, with a team that changes from one week to the next, it would be utter choas out on the pitch.

 

I liken our situation to a team filled with lots of new players that will take time to gell.

 

Give him the benefit of the doubt until he has at least a full team to send out, with most of its best players, and on a consistent basis. Only then will we see a shape and style develop, or maybe not in which case you would then have a valid point.

Utter rubbish in my opinion. I've seen managers changing the style of play within weeks even though with limited players or players with limited talent. Roeder has had 12 months including a whole pre-season. Except of the very young defenders coming in most players who started are either internationals or wannabe-internationals or still players of a higher calibre. I can expect those players to understand and realise instructions given to them from the managing staff. And regarding our awful build up of the game from the back it was significant that actually it were the likes of Huntingdon and Edgar who were rather looking for doing the right pass than just hoofing the ball up front. Latter is something I easily expect to get restricted, but it isn't.

 

You are correct, Roeder has had a full pre-season and has been in the job 12 months now but the one consistent theme of his tenure from day one has been, through no fault of his own, an inability to pick his best team week in week out, much less work with them on the training pitch. If you expect him, on top of every other thing he has to do in his role as manager, to put his energy and efforts into making a group of players who he would have mostly regarded as back-up or players he'd like to replace with the majority of players or players not ready (academy players), into a team that plays good controled football, I'd say you're not only being unrealistic, but unfair also. His first priority is results, not performances. Like I said, lets wait and see what manifests out on the pitch when he gets to work with his best team on the training pitch on a consistent basis, I'm positive when that happens, we'll see a team that plays better football. In the meantime I'll take 3 points thank you and to hell with performances.

Yes, and I regard many results as lucky or if you want it the other way round, some of our non-results simply down to our performances. We were very fortunate to beat the likes of Tottenham away, drawing ManU, even the game against Villa was fortunate. But we dropped the points against teams like Sheffield, Fulham, Bolton etc. because of our poor performances.

As I said I am happy about the results, but are not very optimistic in Roeder really being able to give a team any sort of shape. He hasn't been able to accommodate the likes of Parker and Emre for example - and there were plenty of opportunities. He hasn't been stopping the likes of Given and Bramble bumping the balls straight to the opposition etc. That's all things who have nothing to do with injuries or other exterior circumstances. In my eyes they are down to a lack of managerial ability. Maybe I am unfair, I like to get proven wrong in case he is really to get the best out of what he considers his best team (also I think it's unlikely that a manager will ever have this privilege).

[Howaythetoon 0]

My mate was saying on Wednesday how George Graham went to Spurs in the middle of an injury crisis and told every player in the treatment room that they had to report for some form of training at not just 9am but also 5pm after an afternoon break.

 

Even Darren Anderton made a miraculous recovery.

 

It can't just be bad luck all these injuries.

 

I've long been suspicious of our injury problems, more than meets the eye with a good few of them, Baba, Carr etc. I suspect Roeder is suspicious too.

[Howaythetoon 0]

Renton, Isegrim

 

How can any manager who has had at times, upwards of 10 or more players unable to train, hope to create a brand of football on the training pitch, much less make them tactically tip top?

 

He can't and it is unrealistic to expect any manager to instil a way of playing and team shape into a team that changes from one week to the next, a team that has often been without its best players or in the case of defence, without defenders (Solano at RB, others at LB?).

 

 

You can't plan around those things, you just have to make do and Roeder is actually doing the correct thing by keeping things simple and just getting by as he is. If he or any manager came in and tried to introduce a sophisticated way of playing, tactics and instructions and all that crap, with a team that changes from one week to the next, it would be utter choas out on the pitch.

 

I liken our situation to a team filled with lots of new players that will take time to gell.

 

Give him the benefit of the doubt until he has at least a full team to send out, with most of its best players, and on a consistent basis. Only then will we see a shape and style develop, or maybe not in which case you would then have a valid point.

Utter rubbish in my opinion. I've seen managers changing the style of play within weeks even though with limited players or players with limited talent. Roeder has had 12 months including a whole pre-season. Except of the very young defenders coming in most players who started are either internationals or wannabe-internationals or still players of a higher calibre. I can expect those players to understand and realise instructions given to them from the managing staff. And regarding our awful build up of the game from the back it was significant that actually it were the likes of Huntingdon and Edgar who were rather looking for doing the right pass than just hoofing the ball up front. Latter is something I easily expect to get restricted, but it isn't.

 

You are correct, Roeder has had a full pre-season and has been in the job 12 months now but the one consistent theme of his tenure from day one has been, through no fault of his own, an inability to pick his best team week in week out, much less work with them on the training pitch. If you expect him, on top of every other thing he has to do in his role as manager, to put his energy and efforts into making a group of players who he would have mostly regarded as back-up or players he'd like to replace with the majority of players or players not ready (academy players), into a team that plays good controled football, I'd say you're not only being unrealistic, but unfair also. His first priority is results, not performances. Like I said, lets wait and see what manifests out on the pitch when he gets to work with his best team on the training pitch on a consistent basis, I'm positive when that happens, we'll see a team that plays better football. In the meantime I'll take 3 points thank you and to hell with performances.

Yes, and I regard many results as lucky or if you want it the other way round, some of our non-results simply down to our performances. We were very fortunate to beat the likes of Tottenham away, drawing ManU, even the game against Villa was fortunate. But we dropped the points against teams like Sheffield, Fulham, Bolton etc. because of our poor performances.

As I said I am happy about the results, but are not very optimistic in Roeder really being able to give a team any sort of shape. He hasn't been able to accommodate the likes of Parker and Emre for example - and there were plenty of opportunities. He hasn't been stopping the likes of Given and Bramble bumping the balls straight to the opposition etc. That's all things who have nothing to do with injuries or other exterior circumstances. In my eyes they are down to a lack of managerial ability. Maybe I am unfair, I like to get proven wrong in case he is really to get the best out of what he considers his best team (also I think it's unlikely that a manager will ever have this privilege).

 

I'll use Parker and Emre as a fine example of Roeder wanting to change things and actually working on changing their games which to a point was having an effect, up until injuries. Now that plan or idea to work with them has went out the window as he neither has the time or resources to work on them and that area.

 

BTW, I agree we don't play good football and it is a concern, but I'm not bothered by that at this moment in time because I don't think Roeder can do anything really, until he can work with his best team on a consistent basis, something he hasn't been able to do since he took over. For a lot of our players they are lost causes, players like Carr, I don't expect them to play intelligently or to suddenly be able to control a ball regardless of who was coaching them. Roeder is doing the right thing IMO by keeping things simple and getting by and to prioritise results over performances. Next season is the time to work on both together. I've read comments from him this season where he hasn't even been able to put on full training sessions due to the injuries, or had to modify training sessions. Sorry but good football, shape and tactics comes from the training ground and if your plans are being affected due to injuries and what not, what can he do? Anyway I'll agree to disagree

[Guest Patrokles]

The foundations for a solid football team start at the back. Considering that not only have we very very rarely been able to name an unchanged back four, and considering that, even then, we're looking at extremely inexperienced players playing out of position, then you can't expect a huge amount. Roeder's taken a step towards addressing this with Onyewu, let's see what he does in the summer with a lot more players available.