Odd statement from Adams

[The Large One]

Yes, it IS about man-management. But that doesn't mean PANDERING to the players for fear of upsetting them. Playing devils advocate, if Adams felt that (for example) Elphick needs a rest and he wanted to try slotting Virgo into the back four tomorrow, then thats his prerogative. Its then down to Adams to explain his reasons for it to Elphick - thats the man-management side of it, not coming out with "I'm worried about doing something scapegoatish", or nonsense about all-or-nothing changes to the team.

Adams has left his balls in Leicester.

Interesting, but that's not the scenario here.

He is not pandering to them. He is considering dropping the lot of them.

His defence - all of them, with maybe the exception of McNulty - played shit on Tuesday. And doubtless he told them so.

'Right, lads. The defence last night was collectively shit. As a unit you defended like f***ing tossers. Tommy - you're rested because you were shit, and I'm going to try you Virgs at centre. There that will work...'

So 'resting' Elphick and 'try' putting Virgo in is going to achieve what? Especially when there would be more to the defensive considerations than merely tinkering with the personnel. You might want to tinker, Adams has clearly identified bigger issues.

Using your scenario, rounding on one player, however you explain your reasons, is not going to do the individual or collective morale much good. It IS scapegoating. And keeping morale is also one of the parts of a manager's job.

I don't get this vitriol about ""I'm worried about doing something scapegoatish", or nonsense about all-or-nothing changes to the team.". To me, they're perfectly normal managerial considerations.

 

[Easy 10]

I think normal managerial considerations are about considering your options and making decisions on each individual position in the team, with a view to getting the absolute best out of the collective. Not arbitrarily deciding that "either everything goes or no-one goes", with nothing considered in between. What kind of selection policy is that ?

Tuesday was always gong to be difficult, with 5 new players chucked straight in. It was never going to just "click". So work on it. Adjust it where it needs adjusting. Don't just throw the hands up and say its either major surgery or as you were.

 

[Silent Bob]

The remarkable logic-knots you have to tie yourself into to make Adams sound like a manager who has a clue what he's doing say it all.

 

[The Large One]

I think normal managerial considerations are about considering your options and making decisions on each individual position in the team, with a view to getting the absolute best out of the collective.

That's precisely what he's doing.

Not arbitrarily deciding that "either everything goes or no-one goes", with nothing considered in between. What kind of selection policy is that ?

'Arbitrarily'? 'Nothing considered in between'? What are you on about?

His consideration is that he has looked at the individuals, looked at the whole, and thought about what he needs or wants to do about the predicament. By using those phrases, you're making out that this is the first thing he's thought of, therefore it's what he's going to go with. How do you know he hasn't considered a whole raft of options?

Tuesday was always gong to be difficult, with 5 new players chucked straight in. It was never going to just "click". So work on it. Adjust it where it needs adjusting. Don't just throw the hands up and say its either major surgery or as you were.

Five players can be considered 'major surgery' in its own right. 'So work on it' - he is working on it.

We're assuming in this scenario that's it's the defence that's the main problem (and he did allude to this himself). It could be he wants to do other things upfront as well. Or it could be that he has to keep faith with what he had and get everyone playing individually and collectively a lot better. All options are open to him.

There is also the small consideration of the fact that he might want to keep the Carlisle boss guessing. But that is a small consideration.

 

[Easy 10]

"I’ll either make none or I’ll make sweeping changes – that is the dilemma I’ve got.”

Sorry Al, but that is NOT making decisions on individual places in the team.
And its not a "dilemma" that Adams has got at all. If this is his selection method for tomorrow, then its a problem he has created for himself by imposing this strange rule upon himself.

 

[The Large One]

"I’ll either make none or I’ll make sweeping changes – that is the dilemma I’ve got.”

Sorry Al, but that is NOT making decisions on individual places in the team.
And its not a "dilemma" that Adams has got at all. If this is his selection method for tomorrow, then its a problem he has created for himself by imposing this strange rule upon himself.

If he is making sweeping changes, then of course he is considering individual places. Just more of them than usual. If he is changing nothing, he is still considering individual places. You can't select the whole without considering the individual.

Alternatively, he might change his mind and make one or two changes. That's his prerogative.

Just because he's voicing his options in the Press, it does not mean he is imposing this sort of stuff on himself at all. 'Oh no, I've said it in the Press. Better keep to my word, hadn't I? Let me see - all or nothing? All or nothing...?' Per-lease.

 

[Easy 10]

So now he's LYING to us ?

 

[Gritt23]

Do you reckon the players all have a similar debate after team talks as they try to work out what the hell the guy is thinking, and what he means by his various comments?

 

[Simster]

Despite Alan's attempts to justify this nonsense, it's a RIDICULOUS idea. How many other managers decide not to make one or two changes?

Grizzling? Do me a favour. The manager lives by his results and what he says, goes. And anyway, he could easily rotate the 3 or 4 guilty shithouse players until he finds a combination that WORKS.

Christ. Thicky Adams really does come across as completely clueless at times.

 

[The Merry Prankster]

The remarkable logic-knots you have to tie yourself into to make Adams sound like a manager who has a clue what he's doing say it all.

Agreed. Sorry Al but this is muddle headed nonsense of the highest degree from Adams.

 

[BensGrandad]

What I cant understand is why he said anything at all why not just discuss the same thing with his assistants and leave it at that. He doesnt have to speak to the papers about everything and everyday.

 

[Gritt23]

He doesnt have to speak to the papers about everything and everyday.

Maybe that is the sort of thing that gets the local media fighting your corner and dismissing last seasons far better performances as "not being down to the manager."

 

[The Large One]

Agreed. Sorry Al but this is muddle headed nonsense of the highest degree from Adams.

His statement seems perfectly logical to me. Of course it's not the be-all and end-all of his thought processes - it's merely one part of it. All he's saying is he hasn't made a final decision as to how he is going to approach tomorrow's game (or at least hadn't when he said what he said). Not rocket science.

And so what if he changes his mind and only makes one or two changes?

The main thing that concerns me is his need to publicly verbalise his thoughts. He should really keep it in-house, because at the end of the day, it's an improvement in performance and results I'm paying to see - not (to a certain extent) how it's achieved.

 

[The Merry Prankster]

The main thing that concerns me is his need to publicly verbalise his thoughts. He should really keep it in-house, because at the end of the day, it's an improvement in performance and results I'm paying to see - not (to a certain extent) how it's achieved.

Exactly. If all he has to say is nonsense then keep quiet, go home. order thoughts, share them with those who need to know.

Normally I would go along with the last part of your statement but currently I really need to know if there is any method in the madness and if there is, what is it. His baffling tactics and substitutions need to be explained to me as I have no idea at times what he is trying to do. If I could see his plan and it wasn't working (as happened with Wilkins quite often) it would be tolerable but I honestly have no idea what is being attempted a lot of the time.

 

[Jim in the West]

I agree with his view sweeping changes or no changes so as not to isolate 1 or 2 players but IMHO the biggest problem on Tuesday was that Forster was a complete waste and offered no back up to Virgo on the right side of the field when defending, which you wouldnt expect him to. Hence George Boyd capitalised on that weakness. What is worrying is that in the interview on SCR after the game MA said that Forster did well.

Spot on - that's the main reason why we lost the game. In retrospect it was unfortunate that we had to play such a good side the first time the new players were together. You could see that Adams desperately wanted to experiment, and I was pretty happy with the team when it was announced. Unfortunately Boyd then ran the game, and we didn't react quickly enough. Adams did talk a bit in his SCR interview about Boyd giving Virgs a very tough time.

Perhaps Adams' statement is the precurser to both Virgs and Forster being dropped? This would make sense if Whing is fit, or gives an opportunity to El Abd to move to RB with Birchall going into midfield.

It would be VERY difficult for Adams to drop Forster, but perhaps that's what he's grappling with. The new signings certainly give him some selection problems, which is good news.

 

[Mr Blunt]

I think we might see this defence tomorrow

Kuipers

Whing Virgo Hawkins McNulty

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Indecision in a manager is not a good attribute.

 

[SirDouglasLoft]

I think we might see this defence tomorrow

Kuipers

Whing Virgo Hawkins McNulty

El-Abd in for Hawkins and that's what it'll be I think.

 

[Mr Blunt]

Yeah maybe but Adams likes El-abd in midfield for his mobility, i think thats the reason he pick's him over Livermore . He will rest Elphick for tuesday as he is one yellow away from a ban.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Yeah maybe but Adams likes El-abd in midfield for his mobility, i think thats the reason he pick's him over Livermore . He will rest Elphick for tuesday as he is one yellow away from a ban.

I find it incredible anyone can pick El Abd over Livermore.