That c*** Allardyce

[Taansend]

Now I'm no Allardyce lover but was I watching a different game here as I'm sure their keeper kept them in the game in the first half.

I was there mate (first time I've been since saying I would never go again whilst Sam was in charge).

And I don't know why I've quoted on my own original post, I was answering castirons question.[/quote]

[jameskel]

Taans, losing is not really the problem, it was the manner in which we lost. No effort, no pace, no aggression. We went through the motions, as did the manager. He sat back most of the night, while Clough was on the sidelines, throwing a fit.

I am a cynical c.unt, but I do believe that our boards recent "playing attacking football" comment, was for the sale of season tickets, thats it.
As far a your Palace comment, they were f.ucking dog****, and although we played well, I will wait for a sterner test

[EastEastEastLondon]

Curious all this.

People are saying we should not blame the manager for an embarassing loss to an inferior team.

If we win, I assume that is also nothing to do with the manager?

So, the question is, if nothing is down to him regarding performance, what the merry fu(k is his job?

The bovine (unt is the man in charge.

Good or bad.

We lose, it's his fault.

We win, it's he who takes the plaudits.

If he blames the players for not performing, it's like a shop owner blaming his staff for poor turnover. Who recruited them. Who trained them? Who motivated them? Whose strategy was it?

You don't want any criticism or responsibility? Don't sit in the big chair.

Must say, I can't do much else but agree. Every team will have its off days, that is understandable, but the buck should always stop with the manager.

I think the company analogy slightly break downs as in football you do have an opposition that are working directly against y

[JimmyV66]

Funny how so many of you who were absent after the Palace result have suddenly all turned up

Names Taans. I saw loads of anti Allardyce posters show up and post on here after the Palace game, many myself included giving the team praise for what was a cracking result and good performance.

[Whiskyman]

If he blames the players for not performing, it's like a shop owner blaming his staff for poor turnover. Who recruited them. Who trained them? Who motivated them? Whose strategy was it?

You don't want any criticism or responsibility? Don't sit in the big chair.

Agree with all that apart from the "motivation" bit. If a professional sportsman needs motivating to perform then he shouldn't be a professional sportsman.

A professional sportsman should be, or aspire to be, a winner. That in itself should be motivation enough to perform, shouldn't it?

FFS if the actual satisfaction of winning isn't enough to "motivate" him what chance has the c_unt got of actually doing it?

[JimmyV66]

No effort, no pace, no aggression. We went through the motions, as did the manager. He sat back most of the night, while Clough was on the sidelines, throwing a fit.

Something many have pulled Sam up in his spell as our manager.

He sits slumped in his seat chewing his gum and looking like he wants to be anywhere else but there.

While other managers are up and on the touchline shouting and barking orders to thier players, giving them advice, support and geeing them on.

Can any of our players ever look over to Sam and get inspired?

What the flip did he say to the players at half time ffs? They came out and looked completly uninterested in the game.

Biggest part of a managers job in football is to motivate the players and make sure they go out and give thier all in every game.

So many times under Sam we have actually looked ok in the first half only to come out second half and play the game like it is a friendly.

[Taansend]

Taans, losing is not really the problem, it was the manner in which we lost. No effort, no pace, no aggression. We went through the motions, as did the manager. He sat back most of the night, while Clough was on the sidelines, throwing a fit.

I am a cynical c.unt, but I do believe that our boards recent "playing attacking football" comment, was for the sale of season tickets, thats it.
As far a your Palace comment, they were f.ucking dog****, and although we played well, I will wait for a sterner test

True but we still have ten times more posts after a loss than a win.

Why?

[mickyj]

Taans, losing is not really the problem, it was the manner in which we lost. No effort, no pace, no aggression. We went through the motions, as did the manager. He sat back most of the night, while Clough was on the sidelines, throwing a fit.

I am a cynical c.unt, but I do believe that our boards recent "playing attacking football" comment, was for the sale of season tickets, thats it.
As far a your Palace comment, they were f.ucking dog****, and although we played well, I will wait for a sterner test

True but we still have ten times more posts after a loss than a win.

Why?[/quote] Simple, the numbers go up when I'm logged in

[frogiron]

If he blames the players for not performing, it's like a shop owner blaming his staff for poor turnover. Who recruited them. Who trained them? Who motivated them? Whose strategy was it?

You don't want any criticism or responsibility? Don't sit in the big chair.

Agree with all that apart from the "motivation" bit. If a professional sportsman needs motivating to perform then he shouldn't be a professional sportsman.

A professional sportsman should be, or aspire to be, a winner. That in itself should be motivation enough to perform, shouldn't it?

FFS if the actual satisfaction of winning isn't enough to "motivate" him what chance has the c_unt got of actually doing it?[/quote]

Hello W -

I believe a huge part of being a successful sportsman is mental. i.e. motivation.

It's all very well to point to money etc, but there is a damn good reason that sportsmen employ psychologists - bec

[frogiron]

Curious all this.

People are saying we should not blame the manager for an embarassing loss to an inferior team.

If we win, I assume that is also nothing to do with the manager?

So, the question is, if nothing is down to him regarding performance, what the merry fu(k is his job?

The bovine (unt is the man in charge.

Good or bad.

We lose, it's his fault.

We win, it's he who takes the plaudits.

If he blames the players for not performing, it's like a shop owner blaming his staff for poor turnover. Who recruited them. Who trained them? Who motivated them? Whose strategy was it?

You don't want any criticism or responsibility? Don't sit in the big chair.

Blame the manager for the style, blame the manager for not investing in youth, blame the manager for not playing the fringe players, blame the manager for not playing an attacking system, blame the menager for not playing the bo