+ Visit Notts. County FC Mad for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 41

Thread: FGR did us more of a favour!

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    11,288
    It's the "building up his fitness with game time" that doesn't make sense to me.

    If someone is blowing out their @$$ in a competitive game you sub them. You surely don't leave them out there as a liability to gain more minutes/fitness.

    You've got all those non matchday training sessions to build up fitness.

    When a player turns it around , or hits a purple patch you can always rely on a fan to tell us that it's the manager / head coach's fault that it didn't happen sooner.

    Unless you know the players, seeing the training sessions it's pretty much guesswork.

    You could well be right it probably should have been fixed sooner, people make mistakes (players, head coach). What I do know is IB got far more out of him than NA, and I'd guess IB inherited a fitter, more disciplined RR than NA did.

    We can critique and comment as much as we like but never forget we have the glorious benefit of hindsight and no responsibility as fans, it's a wonderful hugely advantageous combination.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    5,355
    I would say that RR is a success story and everyone at Notts has had a hand in it.
    When he first arrived he was hopelessly unfit. He was dead on his feet after 60 mins and didn’t influence games nearly as much. I remember him having a few stinkers. From memory he got injured and we went on a good run of form meaning he struggled to get back in, and rightly so. IMO I don’t think NA did much wrong with the player he was then. IB inherited a much fitter RR and made him an integral part of the team. Under LW he’s become even fitter, plays much deeper and has become a more rounded player that is part of a system. Although he’s not scoring as many goals I think he’s still just as influential but his influence comes earlier in the phases of play.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    8,974
    Quote Originally Posted by laddo View Post
    It's the "building up his fitness with game time" that doesn't make sense to me.

    If someone is blowing out their @$$ in a competitive game you sub them. You surely don't leave them out there as a liability to gain more minutes/fitness.
    Building stamina progressively through more and more game time is normal in sports.

    I remember those games, Ruben was doing better but taking him off became a reflex even when games were settled and he was still OK physically. Then he would start on the bench or not feature at all. NA and the old pros were probably light years away from acknowledging the truth that RR was already the best player at the club and the most important to our fortunes.
    Kind of thing that'll end up costing you your job ultimately.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    2,515
    Quote Originally Posted by the_anticlough View Post
    Building stamina progressively through more and more game time is normal in sports.

    I remember those games, Ruben was doing better but taking him off became a reflex even when games were settled and he was still OK physically. Then he would start on the bench or not feature at all. NA and the old pros were probably light years away from acknowledging the truth that RR was already the best player at the club and the most important to our fortunes.
    Kind of thing that'll end up costing you your job ultimately.
    Bit harsh on Ardley who said "Ruben can be anything he wants to be" in a post match interview. He had RR on a special training regimen through the summer when he first signed to try and get him fitter so must have known there was an issue.
    I think the only player Ardley wasted was Adam Chicksen who just looked terrible under him.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    4,381
    Quote Originally Posted by optipez View Post
    Bit harsh on Ardley who said "Ruben can be anything he wants to be" in a post match interview. He had RR on a special training regimen through the summer when he first signed to try and get him fitter so must have known there was an issue.
    I think the only player Ardley wasted was Adam Chicksen who just looked terrible under him.
    Agree and I think Rubens comments towards IB are a bit harsh. Rubens a great player and seems a very decent lad but the at the end of the day he isn’t 20, he’s 26. In todays game it’s a given you need to be physically at your peak and on it mentally and that has to be part of self realisation as a player especially when you’re well into your 20s.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    7,301
    The fitness thing is fair, but the biggest issue with NA’s use of Ruben was that thing managers often do with creative players - shifting them out wide even though they’re not really suited to it. Getting fitter helped, but more important was IB and now LW getting him into the centre of the team as the main creative outlet.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    11,389
    Quote Originally Posted by laddo View Post
    It's the "building up his fitness with game time" that doesn't make sense to me.

    If someone is blowing out their @$$ in a competitive game you sub them. You surely don't leave them out there as a liability to gain more minutes/fitness.

    You've got all those non matchday training sessions to build up fitness.

    When a player turns it around , or hits a purple patch you can always rely on a fan to tell us that it's the manager / head coach's fault that it didn't happen sooner.

    Unless you know the players, seeing the training sessions it's pretty much guesswork.

    You could well be right it probably should have been fixed sooner, people make mistakes (players, head coach). What I do know is IB got far more out of him than NA, and I'd guess IB inherited a fitter, more disciplined RR than NA did.

    We can critique and comment as much as we like but never forget we have the glorious benefit of hindsight and no responsibility as fans, it's a wonderful hugely advantageous combination.
    The issue with Ardley was that he preferred to play people that he knew and trusted. I suspect he may have been under pressure to play the radar signings but, opted to play the likes of Doyle and Reeves in the hope of a quick return to the EFL. For all we know that may have been the reason for his sacking. Every manager is under pressure to produce the goods, NA is no different, but decided to do it is way. IB was a one directional coach, and simply had no idea how to deal with the high press and also defend crosses coming into the box. An issue of which he never got to grips with. And from the sounds of it, some things never chance,
    Last edited by SwalePie; 16-11-2022 at 01:41 AM. Reason: Fixed typo

  8. #38
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,850
    Quote Originally Posted by Chicken Balti Pie View Post
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/63625433

    Looks like RR would have left had Burchnall stayed! So double bonus!
    I wonder if Austin was brought in as a proactive signing just in case Ruben left, we did our business pretty early on in the summer.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    11,288
    Quote Originally Posted by the_anticlough View Post
    Building stamina progressively through more and more game time is normal in sports.

    I remember those games, Ruben was doing better but taking him off became a reflex even when games were settled and he was still OK physically. Then he would start on the bench or not feature at all. NA and the old pros were probably light years away from acknowledging the truth that RR was already the best player at the club and the most important to our fortunes.
    Kind of thing that'll end up costing you your job ultimately.
    Bit harsh on Ardley.

    We shouldn't downplay that when he arrived and for a good period of time afterwards he seemed "hopelessly unfit. He was dead on his feet after 60 mins". Hence the patchy form, drifting in and out of some games along with the obvious moments of sheer quality, head and shoulders above the rest that got me excited about the player's ability early. Which many on here didn't seem to spot for a very long time.

    When you are battling for a playoff spot, trying to pick up another ***** 3 points playing a knackered player who isn't match fit any longer than you should is not a good move. You can't carry players who are a liability due to lack of fitness. You play the players you trust, they become the manager's favourite.

    If you are struggling for fitness, you don't want them central, I think you can get away with it more out wide in an advanced position rather than in the heart of the action where a fully fit RR operates best.

    Ultimately when a player is underperforming it's probably the result of both player and coach to varying degrees. Same applies when a player is performing great. It's unrealistic to think the blame or credit should be exclusively attributed to one party.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Posts
    620
    Jimmy Knowles, I'd forgotten about him. Briefly known as Jimmy Goals.

    He's still got time to come again, but it gives perspective to our current team.

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •