BPAS PODCAST: 14th Aug ‘23, S4E4: Fantastic Latics

[BP1960]

1 hour ago, Littlemoor Lad said:

Lose tomorrow night and get pasted Saturday and we're not even back to square one, win both and we're well on track but over his tenure so far, it's still game by game.

He hasn't earned the right because of a flash in the pan result Saturday 

 

The Aldershot performance looked different in the respect of no square pegs in round holes and better link play. and I wonder if Steve Thompson's coaching has brought this about? It appears to me with Lundstam and Green challenging for a place when returning from injury we could be in for an exciting season. We will soon have played two of best teams in the league away so there should be no fears thereon.   

Edited August 14, 2023 by BP1960

[Littlemoor Lad]

7 hours ago, BP1960 said:

 

The Aldershot performance looked different in the respect of no square pegs in round holes and better link play. and I wonder if Steve Thompson's coaching has brought this about? It appears to me with Lundstam and Green challenging for a place when returning from injury we could be in for an exciting season. We will soon have played two of best teams in the league away so there should be no fears thereon.   

Agreed,

I was fully expecting us to see off Aldershot, which, after coming off the back of a 4 nowt thumping would seem an entitled view, alas, the bar has been raised and we can now go into tonight's game with a great opportunity to put down a marker for Saturday's showdown,

Looking forward to it. 

 

[TheBigDog]

I listened to the latest Podcast this morning. A good listen as always.

I love a healthy debate and listening to both sides of an argument - and in the main the Podcast achieved that.

 

My perception was it was a podcast of two halves.

 

First half - In general the three were in agreement about the the huge difference in performance against Aldershot compared to the shambles at Southend. Clearly it was down to a number of positive factors:

A reaction to the previous week from the players, the fact that we were at home, the recruitment of a right back which allowed a change to the formation - whether it was 442 or 433 or 424 - so that we didn't start the game with four Centre backs and the positive impact of having a midfielder who was prepared to run at the opposition.

 

However - It seemed to me that there was a shift in attitudes that came immediately AFTER the Unsworth clip was played. The tone of the podcast changed to being more defensive of Unsworth and justifying his performance as a manager solely based on what he inherited. 

Matt placed too much emphasis on the small minority of keyboard warriors who call out Unsworth and continue to call out Unsworth. They are a minority and should be seen as that. 

 

A lot of the debate got bogged down in this defense of Unsworth approach and not giving Joe P's views due consideration. Like it or not, he was expressing opinions that reflect the current views of many Latics fans.

 

Matt went on to say that he doesn't understand why people forget how Unsworth turned it around. 

Its football isn't it?  - the expectations from the strong finish to last season, plus the good recruitment in the close season were totally shattered by an abject performance at Southend - and the reaction was understandable.

At the end of the day, Latics fans are no different to fans of teams throughout the footballing pyramid.

 

But I would argue that the vast majority of Latics fans are prepared to be patient and see that progress is happening.

Joe P made the point that Aldershot was the first game under Unsworth where Latics have actually gone for it - and it was completely at odds with anything we have seen before.

 

It was, and therein lies the rub - its taken a huge effort to get to this point and, like it or not, the fans have the right to question the manager, who at times does seem slow to change his tactical approach.

 

One final point - Unsworth seemed to want to absolve himself of any responsibility for the Southend performance by his non-presence at the club due to Covid - fair enough. But does that then raise the question about Ebbrell's coaching ability? Just saying like....

 

 

 

Edited August 15, 2023 by TheBigDog

[BP1960]

16 minutes ago, TheBigDog said:

I listened to the latest Podcast this morning. A good listen as always.

I love a healthy debate and listening to both sides of an argument - and in the main the Podcast achieved that.

 

My perception was it was a podcast of two halves.

 

First half - In general the three were in agreement about the the huge difference in performance against Aldershot compared to the shambles at Southend. Clearly it was down to a number of positive factors:

A reaction to the previous week from the players, the fact that we were at home, the recruitment of a right back which allowed a change to the formation - whether it was 442 or 433 or 424 - so that we didn't start the game with four Centre backs and the positive impact of having a midfielder who was prepared to run at the opposition.

 

However - It seemed to me that there was a shift in attitudes that came immediately AFTER the Unsworth clip was played. The tone of the podcast changed to being more defensive of Unsworth and justifying his performance as a manager solely based on what he inherited. 

Matt placed too much emphasis on the small minority of keyboard warriors who call out Unsworth and continue to call out Unsworth. They are a minority and should be seen as that. 

 

A lot of the debate got bogged down in this defense of Unsworth approach and not giving Joe P's views due consideration. Like it or not, he was expressing opinions that reflect the current views of many Latics fans.

 

Matt went on to say that he doesn't understand why people forget how Unsworth turned it around. 

Its football isn't it?  - the expectations from the strong finish to last season, plus the good recruitment in the close season were totally shattered by an abject performance at Southend - and the reaction was understandable.

At the end of the day, Latics fans are no different to fans of teams throughout the footballing pyramid.

 

But I would argue that the vast majority of Latics fans are prepared to be patient and see that progress is happening.

Joe P made the point that Aldershot was the first game under Unsworth where Latics have actually gone for it - and it was completely at odds with anything we have seen before.

 

It was, and therein lies the rub - its taken a huge effort to get to this point and, like it or not, the fans have the right to question the manager, who at times does seem slow to change his tactical approach.

 

One final point - Unsworth seemed to want to absolve himself of any responsibility for the Southend performance by his non-presence at the club due to Covid - fair enough. But does that then raise the question about Ebbrell's coaching ability? Just saying like....

 

 

 

 

Steve Thompson has just taken over the first team coaching so he may have had some say in the tactics and formation.

I noticed the passing and link up play was much  better, hope it continues.

[Londonboy]

17 minutes ago, TheBigDog said:

I listened to the latest Podcast this morning. A good listen as always.

I love a healthy debate and listening to both sides of an argument - and in the main the Podcast achieved that.

 

My perception was it was a podcast of two halves.

 

First half - In general the three were in agreement about the the huge difference in performance against Aldershot compared to the shambles at Southend. Clearly it was down to a number of positive factors:

A reaction to the previous week from the players, the fact that we were at home, the recruitment of a right back which allowed a change to the formation - whether it was 442 or 433 or 424 - so that we didn't start the game with four Centre backs and the positive impact of having a midfielder who was prepared to run at the opposition.

 

However - It seemed to me that there was a shift in attitudes that came immediately AFTER the Unsworth clip was played. The tone of the podcast changed to being more defensive of Unsworth and justifying his performance as a manager solely based on what he inherited. 

Matt placed too much emphasis on the small minority of keyboard warriors who call out Unsworth and continue to call out Unsworth. They are a minority and should be seen as that. 

 

A lot of the debate got bogged down in this defense of Unsworth approach and not giving Joe P's views due consideration. Like it or not, he was expressing opinions that reflect the current views of many Latics fans.

 

Matt went on to say that he doesn't understand why people forget how Unsworth turned it around. 

Its football isn't it?  - the expectations from the strong finish to last season, plus the good recruitment in the close season were totally shattered by an abject performance at Southend - and the reaction was understandable.

At the end of the day, Latics fans are no different to fans of teams throughout the footballing pyramid.

 

But I would argue that the vast majority of Latics fans are prepared to be patient and see that progress is happening.

Joe P made the point that Aldershot was the first game under Unsworth where Latics have actually gone for it - and it was completely at odds with anything we have seen before.

 

It was, and therein lies the rub - its taken a huge effort to get to this point and, like it or not, the fans have the right to question the manager, who at times does seem slow to change his tactical approach.

 

One final point - Unsworth seemed to want to absolve himself of any responsibility for the Southend performance by his non-presence at the club due to Covid - fair enough. But does that then raise the question about Ebbrell's coaching ability? Just saying like....

 

 

 

Ref Ebrell, from what I have seen on the pitch over the past 12 months, and heard in his pressers, absolutely begs the question about his coaching ability. 

Give me Muzza any day of the week over him.

[Londonboy]

1 minute ago, BP1960 said:

 

Steve Thompson has just taken over the first team coaching so he may have had some say in the tactics and formation.

I noticed the passing and link up play was much  better, hope it continues.

Hopefully it will be, but Aldershot seemed to set up with a lightweight midfield numbers wise, and were pretty brave in their formation which made it so much easier to pass forward with more time on the ball.

Southend were much quicker and Chesterfield will also not be too sluggish I expect.

Personally I'd like to see us have more of a go away from home as our away form has been shit for ages.

Within 2 weeks we will have played 3 of the top 7 contenders away from home, so I hope we have at least 3 points from them as a minimum.

 

Gonna need 90 points + if we have any chance of automatic promotion which means we need to win at least half our away games and pick up plenty of draws.

[League one forever]

39 minutes ago, TheBigDog said:

I listened to the latest Podcast this morning. A good listen as always.

I love a healthy debate and listening to both sides of an argument - and in the main the Podcast achieved that.

 

My perception was it was a podcast of two halves.

 

First half - In general the three were in agreement about the the huge difference in performance against Aldershot compared to the shambles at Southend. Clearly it was down to a number of positive factors:

A reaction to the previous week from the players, the fact that we were at home, the recruitment of a right back which allowed a change to the formation - whether it was 442 or 433 or 424 - so that we didn't start the game with four Centre backs and the positive impact of having a midfielder who was prepared to run at the opposition.

 

However - It seemed to me that there was a shift in attitudes that came immediately AFTER the Unsworth clip was played. The tone of the podcast changed to being more defensive of Unsworth and justifying his performance as a manager solely based on what he inherited. 

Matt placed too much emphasis on the small minority of keyboard warriors who call out Unsworth and continue to call out Unsworth. They are a minority and should be seen as that. 

 

A lot of the debate got bogged down in this defense of Unsworth approach and not giving Joe P's views due consideration. Like it or not, he was expressing opinions that reflect the current views of many Latics fans.

 

Matt went on to say that he doesn't understand why people forget how Unsworth turned it around. 

Its football isn't it?  - the expectations from the strong finish to last season, plus the good recruitment in the close season were totally shattered by an abject performance at Southend - and the reaction was understandable.

At the end of the day, Latics fans are no different to fans of teams throughout the footballing pyramid.

 

But I would argue that the vast majority of Latics fans are prepared to be patient and see that progress is happening.

Joe P made the point that Aldershot was the first game under Unsworth where Latics have actually gone for it - and it was completely at odds with anything we have seen before.

 

It was, and therein lies the rub - its taken a huge effort to get to this point and, like it or not, the fans have the right to question the manager, who at times does seem slow to change his tactical approach.

 

One final point - Unsworth seemed to want to absolve himself of any responsibility for the Southend performance by his non-presence at the club due to Covid - fair enough. But does that then raise the question about Ebbrell's coaching ability? Just saying like....

 

 

 

Great post BD. 
 

There’s also some rewriting of history as well. 
 

Matt says you can’t expect miracles of Unsworth in that first season and then claims the ‘numpties’ who wanted him gone were proved wrong by the club. 
 

Well, let’s look at both those points. 
 

Firstly - the squad was poor- but so is league. Shez won the same amounts of games as Unsworth did (pre new year) with a far less squad. The problem Unsworth had in the early stages was his absolute steadfast refusal to change the formation- while at the same time claiming formations don’t matter. In turns out- they do. We didn’t struggle pre Christmas because of legacy issues or abdallah or Barry. We struggled because Unsworth kept insisting on square pegs in round holes. He then ‘stumbled’ on something which turned out to be 442, and with a better squad than Shez (but still not great) got the third best form in league. Which proves how poor the league is. Imagine where we would have finished if Unsworth had dumped 352 straight away. . . 
 

Onto the numpties point- I remember the phone in after Notts county away and while they can’t explicitly say I want him gone he and Dave were right on the edge and said it had to improve very very quickly- which it did. So are they numpties as well? Or does the language not reflect what the actual  reality was- which was he had 3 wins in 17 and had us in the bottom four and everyone was really worried. 
 

Lastly- Joe said, we all agree about how fabulous the owners, and he’s right.  We need to stop conflating ownership with the managers ability to get results. Remember the time we all said ‘no manager can be judged under ALMO’ and won’t it be great to just talk about football. Well, 15 months on we’re still talking about legacy issues and how it’s unfair to judge a manager. . . 

[Littlemoor Lad]

38 minutes ago, TheBigDog said:

I listened to the latest Podcast this morning. A good listen as always.

I love a healthy debate and listening to both sides of an argument - and in the main the Podcast achieved that.

 

My perception was it was a podcast of two halves.

 

First half - In general the three were in agreement about the the huge difference in performance against Aldershot compared to the shambles at Southend. Clearly it was down to a number of positive factors:

A reaction to the previous week from the players, the fact that we were at home, the recruitment of a right back which allowed a change to the formation - whether it was 442 or 433 or 424 - so that we didn't start the game with four Centre backs and the positive impact of having a midfielder who was prepared to run at the opposition.

 

However - It seemed to me that there was a shift in attitudes that came immediately AFTER the Unsworth clip was played. The tone of the podcast changed to being more defensive of Unsworth and justifying his performance as a manager solely based on what he inherited. 

Matt placed too much emphasis on the small minority of keyboard warriors who call out Unsworth and continue to call out Unsworth. They are a minority and should be seen as that. 

 

A lot of the debate got bogged down in this defense of Unsworth approach and not giving Joe P's views due consideration. Like it or not, he was expressing opinions that reflect the current views of many Latics fans.

 

Matt went on to say that he doesn't understand why people forget how Unsworth turned it around. 

Its football isn't it?  - the expectations from the strong finish to last season, plus the good recruitment in the close season were totally shattered by an abject performance at Southend - and the reaction was understandable.

At the end of the day, Latics fans are no different to fans of teams throughout the footballing pyramid.

 

But I would argue that the vast majority of Latics fans are prepared to be patient and see that progress is happening.

Joe P made the point that Aldershot was the first game under Unsworth where Latics have actually gone for it - and it was completely at odds with anything we have seen before.

 

It was, and therein lies the rub - its taken a huge effort to get to this point and, like it or not, the fans have the right to question the manager, who at times does seem slow to change his tactical approach.

 

One final point - Unsworth seemed to want to absolve himself of any responsibility for the Southend performance by his non-presence at the club due to Covid - fair enough. But does that then raise the question about Ebbrell's coaching ability? Just saying like....

 

 

 

I think you've summed it up perfectly there,

Until we get to that place where we feel at total ease with what we're seeing on the pitch, on a regular basis, questions will always be raised from the so called minority and rightly so.

Atleast there's one common theme, we all want to move forward and the Aldershot game was a giant leap 

 

 

 

[League one forever]

2 minutes ago, Littlemoor Lad said:

Atleast there's one common theme, we all want to move forward and the Aldershot game was a giant leap 

[Steve_R]

1 hour ago, TheBigDog said:

I listened to the latest Podcast this morning. A good listen as always.

I love a healthy debate and listening to both sides of an argument - and in the main the Podcast achieved that.

 

My perception was it was a podcast of two halves.

 

First half - In general the three were in agreement about the the huge difference in performance against Aldershot compared to the shambles at Southend. Clearly it was down to a number of positive factors:

A reaction to the previous week from the players, the fact that we were at home, the recruitment of a right back which allowed a change to the formation - whether it was 442 or 433 or 424 - so that we didn't start the game with four Centre backs and the positive impact of having a midfielder who was prepared to run at the opposition.

 

However - It seemed to me that there was a shift in attitudes that came immediately AFTER the Unsworth clip was played. The tone of the podcast changed to being more defensive of Unsworth and justifying his performance as a manager solely based on what he inherited. 

Matt placed too much emphasis on the small minority of keyboard warriors who call out Unsworth and continue to call out Unsworth. They are a minority and should be seen as that. 

 

A lot of the debate got bogged down in this defense of Unsworth approach and not giving Joe P's views due consideration. Like it or not, he was expressing opinions that reflect the current views of many Latics fans.

 

Matt went on to say that he doesn't understand why people forget how Unsworth turned it around. 

Its football isn't it?  - the expectations from the strong finish to last season, plus the good recruitment in the close season were totally shattered by an abject performance at Southend - and the reaction was understandable.

At the end of the day, Latics fans are no different to fans of teams throughout the footballing pyramid.

 

But I would argue that the vast majority of Latics fans are prepared to be patient and see that progress is happening.

Joe P made the point that Aldershot was the first game under Unsworth where Latics have actually gone for it - and it was completely at odds with anything we have seen before.

 

It was, and therein lies the rub - its taken a huge effort to get to this point and, like it or not, the fans have the right to question the manager, who at times does seem slow to change his tactical approach.

 

One final point - Unsworth seemed to want to absolve himself of any responsibility for the Southend performance by his non-presence at the club due to Covid - fair enough. But does that then raise the question about Ebbrell's coaching ability? Just saying like....

 

 

 

This is a great post and sums up my feeling on the pod in general, which I largely enjoy. Matt’s opinion fluctuates all the time, and he doesn’t seem to have any time for anyone who doesn’t agree with whatever his view is at that moment. He definitely changed after Unsworth’s interview, previously admitting having the flutters when they pulled a goal back, then slamming anyone else who did and ‘it has to change’ because Big Dave said so.

We’re football fans, that what we do, as they do at every other ground up and down the country. 
Last week it was all “It must improve, and if not after 10 games the board will have a decision to make”, to this week that idea being ridiculous.

Everyone’s entitled to their opinion, but we all want the same thing, a successful Latics, and it doesn’t make you a numpty if you don’t agree with the mood of the moment.

[Theoutsider]

17 hours ago, League one forever said:

Oh dear.

 

 

See this is what you do Fluff, you create narratives in your head to suit your entrenched agenda of fan bashing. Which in reality is just people having an opinion on what they’re watching. 
 

At no point did I call for his head- what I did say was, it was absolutely brainless to start with a formation that put him under massive pressure last season with 3 wins in 17. I couldn’t understand why he wouldn’t play 442 which brought results and gave us the third best form in the league.  He completely shot himself in the foot. I even started a new thread called ‘the banishing of 352’ you’ll remember because you posted on it- saying it had nothing to do with the formation. . . . days later (and credit to Unsy) he does go back to what works in 442 and would you believe it- we win. So before you post absolute bollocks about what you think people are saying - re read what was actually said. 
 

In answer to your question, if he had a similar run to last season - say 2/3 wins over 15ish games he’s under big pressure. However if he’s got anything about him though, he’ll keep to 442 and with the quality of the squad- he wont struggle and will be absolutely fine. 

Is it the formation do you think or the tactics? Or combination of both? 

 

Saturday the midfield was 10-yards further forward and we mixed up some direct stuff with football on the floor, as opposed to constant hoof ball. 
 

Don’t think it is any coincidence Nuttall was miles better with a different style of play. 

[nzlatic]

9 minutes ago, Theoutsider said:

Is it the formation do you think or the tactics? Or combination of both? 

 

Saturday the midfield was 10-yards further forward and we mixed up some direct stuff with football on the floor, as opposed to constant hoof ball. 
 

Don’t think it is any coincidence Nuttall was miles better with a different style of play. 

Intent is everything. Saturday the intent was to go for it right from the start. We have done that before but the difference being it lasted longer than 10 minutes and we have better players now to capitalise on having a stranglehold in the game. Also the quality of the football was better. Last season any in game domination was territory based, on Saturday we passed it around a lot more. 
 

Football is much more nuanced than “playing 442 = more wins”.

[League one forever]

9 minutes ago, Theoutsider said:

Is it the formation do you think or the tactics? Or combination of both? 

 

Saturday the midfield was 10-yards further forward and we mixed up some direct stuff with football on the floor, as opposed to constant hoof ball. 
 

Don’t think it is any coincidence Nuttall was miles better with a different style of play. 

I think in those early days of his tenure, he tried to run before he could walk and came in with all these big ideas. Which is understandable but you to adapt quickly to what is in front of you- not impose what you want no matter what. I’m not wedded to 442 in any way- but it’s obvious the players in the second half of last season and on Saturday feel much more comfortable in that formation, and aren’t constantly worrying if their out of position and often end up in no man’s land. I think you make a good point about playing further up the pitch, and that is a definitely an added improvement on the formation. Last season- the 442 felt rigid and must not lose. Fine- it got results and wins. Saturday it felt much more fluid in possession, but crucially out of possession they found their shape really quickly again. 
 

So, yeah. Formation initially and it’s been added to with better tactics. 

[nzlatic]

2 hours ago, TheBigDog said:

I listened to the latest Podcast this morning. A good listen as always.

I love a healthy debate and listening to both sides of an argument - and in the main the Podcast achieved that.

 

My perception was it was a podcast of two halves.

 

First half - In general the three were in agreement about the the huge difference in performance against Aldershot compared to the shambles at Southend. Clearly it was down to a number of positive factors:

A reaction to the previous week from the players, the fact that we were at home, the recruitment of a right back which allowed a change to the formation - whether it was 442 or 433 or 424 - so that we didn't start the game with four Centre backs and the positive impact of having a midfielder who was prepared to run at the opposition.

 

However - It seemed to me that there was a shift in attitudes that came immediately AFTER the Unsworth clip was played. The tone of the podcast changed to being more defensive of Unsworth and justifying his performance as a manager solely based on what he inherited. 

Matt placed too much emphasis on the small minority of keyboard warriors who call out Unsworth and continue to call out Unsworth. They are a minority and should be seen as that. 

 

A lot of the debate got bogged down in this defense of Unsworth approach and not giving Joe P's views due consideration. Like it or not, he was expressing opinions that reflect the current views of many Latics fans.

 

Matt went on to say that he doesn't understand why people forget how Unsworth turned it around. 

Its football isn't it?  - the expectations from the strong finish to last season, plus the good recruitment in the close season were totally shattered by an abject performance at Southend - and the reaction was understandable.

At the end of the day, Latics fans are no different to fans of teams throughout the footballing pyramid.

 

But I would argue that the vast majority of Latics fans are prepared to be patient and see that progress is happening.

Joe P made the point that Aldershot was the first game under Unsworth where Latics have actually gone for it - and it was completely at odds with anything we have seen before.

 

It was, and therein lies the rub - its taken a huge effort to get to this point and, like it or not, the fans have the right to question the manager, who at times does seem slow to change his tactical approach.

 

One final point - Unsworth seemed to want to absolve himself of any responsibility for the Southend performance by his non-presence at the club due to Covid - fair enough. But does that then raise the question about Ebbrell's coaching ability? Just saying like....

 

 

 

It’s interesting how people see things differently. I don’t see it as Unsworth in vs Unsworth out. For me the defence put forward wasn’t necessarily a defence of Unsworth specifically, more a defence of the concept of patience and time when it comes to taking the club from where it was when the Rothwells took over to a place where it should be reasonably expected to challenge for promotion. 
 

Discussing things like 2nd half of season form and what he inherited squad and facilities-wise are not examples used to prove Unsworth is the right guy, it’s just a guide to assess board performance. That’s how I see it anyway. Yes I want us to win every game and get promoted asap, but more important to me is that the club is run correctly. That’s what will give us the best chance of long term success, not whether we have exactly the right manager today. So I’m looking at their decisions and judging them on whether I can see the logic in what they’re doing and with Unsworth I can 100% see the logic so far. 

[Dave_Og]

There's no doubt there's still a legacy from the Lemsagams - we're in Division 5! 

 

Entirely understandably that makes fans impatient, firstly because it should never have come to this and also because it's obvious that if we don't get back up pretty quickly then it's unlikely get any easier.  My default setting s patience with managers and as I don't see many games it's easy for me to focus just on results.  If Unsworth had got off to a flier then he'd have had instant goodwill but that was never the likeliest scenario given the squad he had, his own inexperience as a manager, and his lack of experience in any form at this level.  So, given the worrying position a few months after he came in his goodwill bank is overdrawn and he needs to restore that to credit as soon as possible.

 

In all the depressing statistics that we can pull out about the club the fact that Lee Johnson a decade ago was the last manager to start and finish a season is among the most horrific.  I'd love to see that put to bed.

[Worcester Owl]

2 hours ago, League one forever said:

Great post BD. 
 

There’s also some rewriting of history as well. 
 

Matt says you can’t expect miracles of Unsworth in that first season and then claims the ‘numpties’ who wanted him gone were proved wrong by the club. 
 

Well, let’s look at both those points. 
 

Firstly - the squad was poor- but so is league. Shez won the same amounts of games as Unsworth did (pre new year) with a far less squad. The problem Unsworth had in the early stages was his absolute steadfast refusal to change the formation- while at the same time claiming formations don’t matter. In turns out- they do. We didn’t struggle pre Christmas because of legacy issues or abdallah or Barry. We struggled because Unsworth kept insisting on square pegs in round holes. He then ‘stumbled’ on something which turned out to be 442, and with a better squad than Shez (but still not great) got the third best form in league. Which proves how poor the league is. Imagine where we would have finished if Unsworth had dumped 352 straight away. . . 
 

Onto the numpties point- I remember the phone in after Notts county away and while they can’t explicitly say I want him gone he and Dave were right on the edge and said it had to improve very very quickly- which it did. So are they numpties as well? Or does the language not reflect what the actual  reality was- which was he had 3 wins in 17 and had us in the bottom four and everyone was really worried. 
 

Lastly- Joe said, we all agree about how fabulous the owners, and he’s right.  We need to stop conflating ownership with the managers ability to get results. Remember the time we all said ‘no manager can be judged under ALMO’ and won’t it be great to just talk about football. Well, 15 months on we’re still talking about legacy issues and how it’s unfair to judge a manager. . . 

Absolutely spot on and fair comments you make there, L1F.

[Theoutsider]

1 hour ago, nzlatic said:

Intent is everything. Saturday the intent was to go for it right from the start. We have done that before but the difference being it lasted longer than 10 minutes and we have better players now to capitalise on having a stranglehold in the game. Also the quality of the football was better. Last season any in game domination was territory based, on Saturday we passed it around a lot more. 
 

Football is much more nuanced than “playing 442 = more wins”.

I expected to have improved in pre-season with better quality players having been brought in, went to the Mansfield friendly as was deflated as felt it was the same rubbish.
 

Was almost dreading Saturday as expected it to be the turgid rubbish that has been on display.  
 

Like you say, intent is key, with the quality of players we have (relatively speaking) don’t see why we cant take the game to the majority of opponents we play. 
 

More like Saturday please Mr Unsworth, there is no reason why not. 

[JoeP]

55 minutes ago, Dave_Og said:

There's no doubt there's still a legacy from the Lemsagams - we're in Division 5! 

 

It's their legacy that we're here, but I don't think we can point to the culture of the club remaining after their departure (I think this more Andy's point than Matt or Dave's) as any excuse for failure. It's a completely different club. We've got a new board, new manager and new players. What still remains of the Lemsegams? If there are still staff who embrace the culture the Lemsegams brought to the club, I can't see Frank standing for it!

 

We are in Division 5 and, as Matt rightly said, are possibly the most well run we ever have been. But we're also in the worst division we've ever been in.  Surely we should have really high ambitions?  We have to grab the opportunity, because I can't imagine the opportunity to get out of the division, spending as much as we are doing, is infinite so progress does actually have to be fast.

 

We all agree we've got the owners and infrastructure, I don't think we're far off with the players, but there are still doubts over the manager in many people's opinion, who plays a crucial part...

[nzlatic]

1 minute ago, JoeP said:

 

We have to grab the opportunity, because I can't imagine the opportunity to get out of the division, spending as much as we are doing, is infinite so progress does actually have to be fast.

The owners should be prepared to meet the financial commitments they’ve made without promotion. It falls back on what I was saying about being run properly. 
 

Luton took a few years, which doesn’t mean we HAVE to take a few years too, but it means it shouldn’t be terminal if we don’t go up this year. 
 

If we go down the road of needing promotion to pay for contracts we’ve committed to then that only ends with a Salford style hiring and firing and isn’t how I’d like to see the club run. 
 

As it stands I’ll trust the board to be doing things right and that they will continue to be financially committed to getting us up even if it doesn’t happen this season. 

[JoeP]

4 minutes ago, nzlatic said:

The owners should be prepared to meet the financial commitments they’ve made without promotion. It falls back on what I was saying about being run properly. 
 

Luton took a few years, which doesn’t mean we HAVE to take a few years too, but it means it shouldn’t be terminal if we don’t go up this year. 
 

If we go down the road of needing promotion to pay for contracts we’ve committed to then that only ends with a Salford style hiring and firing and isn’t how I’d like to see the club run. 
 

As it stands I’ll trust the board to be doing things right and that they will continue to be financially committed to getting us up even if it doesn’t happen this season. 

 

I'm positive the board will meet the financial commitments required without promotion. On this level though? I'm not sure that's sustainable. I don't expect us to sign a James Norwood every summer if we remain in this division...

[TheBigDog]

2 hours ago, nzlatic said:

Discussing things like 2nd half of season form and what he inherited squad and facilities-wise are not examples used to prove Unsworth is the right guy, it’s just a guide to assess board performance. That’s how I see it anyway.

It is a plea for more patience with Unsworth though - accepting that things relating to the playing side of the club were not good when he replaced Sheridan - and it’s a valid stance to take. 
 

I have always accepted that Unsworth has been learning on the job - and it is evident to me that he is becoming a better manager as facilities and playing staff (and his knowledge of the level we are at) improve.

 

However he has to be bolder in his approach away from home - after tonight we have Chesterfiekd and Borehamwood away - let’s see how he sets up when we are not at BP. 
 

[Dave_Og]

43 minutes ago, JoeP said:

 

It's their legacy that we're here, but I don't think we can point to the culture of the club remaining after their departure (I think this more Andy's point than Matt or Dave's) as any excuse for failure. It's a completely different club. We've got a new board, new manager and new players. What still remains of the Lemsegams? If there are still staff who embrace the culture the Lemsegams brought to the club, I can't see Frank standing for it!

 

We are in Division 5 and, as Matt rightly said, are possibly the most well run we ever have been. But we're also in the worst division we've ever been in.  Surely we should have really high ambitions?  We have to grab the opportunity, because I can't imagine the opportunity to get out of the division, spending as much as we are doing, is infinite so progress does actually have to be fast.

 

We all agree we've got the owners and infrastructure, I don't think we're far off with the players, but there are still doubts over the manager in many people's opinion, who plays a crucial part...

 

There's certainly doubts about the manager but there'd also be doubts about any replacement as well.  I can't recall who but plenty were pushing Askey last season but he went to Hartlepool and couldn't turn that round. No guarantees that anyone coming in will succeed. I'd like to see what stability and consistency might achieve.

 

As for the Lemsagams and the 25 years that preceded them,  legacy I do think that the frustration and anger hasn't fully dissipated yet. It's been a long time!  Absolutely we must have high ambitions.

[nzlatic]

31 minutes ago, TheBigDog said:

 

However he has to be bolder in his approach away from home - after tonight we have Chesterfiekd and Borehamwood away - let’s see how he sets up when we are not at BP. 
 

I agree totally. That’s part of having greater expectations of him and the team this season. 
 

And maybe most of the arguments between fans come because there are those who think he should have done that from the start when he got the job and those who accept there may be valid reasons that we didn’t? 

Edited August 15, 2023 by nzlatic

[GKing521]

I do wonder how long the podcast fellas will defend Unsworth to the hilt for.

 

[Monty Burns]

21 hours ago, TheBigDog said:

I listened to the latest Podcast this morning. A good listen as always.

I love a healthy debate and listening to both sides of an argument - and in the main the Podcast achieved that.

 

My perception was it was a podcast of two halves.

 

First half - In general the three were in agreement about the the huge difference in performance against Aldershot compared to the shambles at Southend. Clearly it was down to a number of positive factors:

A reaction to the previous week from the players, the fact that we were at home, the recruitment of a right back which allowed a change to the formation - whether it was 442 or 433 or 424 - so that we didn't start the game with four Centre backs and the positive impact of having a midfielder who was prepared to run at the opposition.

 

However - It seemed to me that there was a shift in attitudes that came immediately AFTER the Unsworth clip was played. The tone of the podcast changed to being more defensive of Unsworth and justifying his performance as a manager solely based on what he inherited. 

Matt placed too much emphasis on the small minority of keyboard warriors who call out Unsworth and continue to call out Unsworth. They are a minority and should be seen as that. 

 

A lot of the debate got bogged down in this defense of Unsworth approach and not giving Joe P's views due consideration. Like it or not, he was expressing opinions that reflect the current views of many Latics fans.

 

Matt went on to say that he doesn't understand why people forget how Unsworth turned it around. 

Its football isn't it?  - the expectations from the strong finish to last season, plus the good recruitment in the close season were totally shattered by an abject performance at Southend - and the reaction was understandable.

At the end of the day, Latics fans are no different to fans of teams throughout the footballing pyramid.

 

But I would argue that the vast majority of Latics fans are prepared to be patient and see that progress is happening.

Joe P made the point that Aldershot was the first game under Unsworth where Latics have actually gone for it - and it was completely at odds with anything we have seen before.

 

It was, and therein lies the rub - its taken a huge effort to get to this point and, like it or not, the fans have the right to question the manager, who at times does seem slow to change his tactical approach.

 

One final point - Unsworth seemed to want to absolve himself of any responsibility for the Southend performance by his non-presence at the club due to Covid - fair enough. But does that then raise the question about Ebbrell's coaching ability? Just saying like....

 

 

 

l didn't like it when DU did that attempted blame absolving thing. he did it in a manner that suggested he had totally no blame whatsover, right at a time when supporters are trying to fight a fire amongst themselves about not blaming him for what has gone before.

his answer to the question was delivered in suchaway that it shutdown the question. however, he did it to the wrong question.

you've got Matt and JoeP's debate on the pod highlighting it perfectly.

Matts passionately tryna say 'look its all brand new you gota be patient. its a three year thing, only blame David for stuff within his timeframe which incidentally is less than 12months old.'

then youve got JoeP with the same passion tryna say 'its difficult to do that when he has got literally everything on a plate. there are red flags and sirens l don't think he is the right man.'

both these mindsets will be triggered by the man himself with the same passion and a touch of emotion saying 'thats nothing to do with me.' 

when it fully and clearly was. that answer should have been delivered to any different, inevitable question that harked back more than 12 months.

 

l've marked my card as a back the manager man a long time ago, but l need to see learning and progress.

this week he started out well with that pod, his mistake was minor and glossable. then he went and did that last night.

if youve got people like littlemore on here saying 'l said l wont moan so l wont' and L14E biting his tongue to the max and trying not to explode bc he said he wouldnt then there's also going to be me with my over openness and occasionally uncomfortable astute spots and questioning.

 

southend WAS Rhino's fault and so was last night.

he hasnt even been in the job 12months.

there's a a belief (arrogance) about him which some don't feel he deserves because he earned it elsewhere. he has worn that thinner than thin. he doesnt seem to trust Football. last year we could defend him with 'yeah but these players man, they arent Footballers.' thats worn right thru and snapped. this is his squad and he seems reluctant to use it, thats a worry. he is primarily defensive and route one which l hate, but l'm out there bigging him up. it is a lot to ask on inexperienced shoulders, but he's big enough and he is taking it. but is he learning? it takes time to learn so we need to give him it. but it's an incrimental process, markers need to be met. signing players then not playing them, never giving subs long enough and never trusting basic Football are unpalatable when winning but are poisonous when losing. its not his bed yet, its not even built, so we can't tell him to lie in it. but we can start to see what it looks like.

 

sorry for putting this at the end but if l have mis-paraphrased anybody above l apologise.

Edited August 16, 2023 by Monty Burns
*unpalatable. l was never gona say that much wo requiring an edit was l!!!!!