although he may turn out to be a good manager, he's got nothing tactically. can't change a game when we go behind, his subs are much of a muchness. i mean did we really need to change wiseman for hassell.
He's got nothing tactically? He seemed to have his tactics spot on when they brought out the best in young Jacob, Vaz Te & Drinkwater, to name a few. He seemed to get the tactics spot on when we won at Elland Road and at Leicester. He seemed to get the tactics spot on when Leeds took Butterfield out of the game and he sent Vaz Te on. Yesterday was an awful game, no one played well, the side sent out didn't appear to have any ideas whatsoever. But to use it as an indictment of Hill's apparent inabilities to manage the team, or understand tactics is, quite frankly, a load of f**king ********. If someone doesn't rate the manager, fine. We all have opinions and are entitled to them. I didn't like Simon Davey, some don't like Keith Hill. However, I didn't try to re write history to substantiate my views on Davey.
Re: He's got nothing tactically? Well said Kev. But for me, Wiseman should have replaced McEveley and Bob gone to LB. But I am not the manager, and until we are beaten game in game out and sat where the GIANTS of Nottm Forest are, I think its a strange statement to question the tactical nous of our manager, who has us 12 pts above Forest
Taking into account the huge differences in budget between clubs How on earth are we managing to get better results and beat these teams, if not by tactics and the abilities of the manager? Listening to some, you'd think we were adrift at the bottom of the table, but we're not. We're twelve points clear of the third relegation spot, with a vastly superior goal difference. Does Keith Hill get everything right? No, of course he doesn't. Neither does any other manager though, past or present.
Ok so you love him. i'm still in the not sure category. had good games, had bad games. to me it's still not that much better than robins did.still didn't answer the bit about how many games he's managed to change when we go behind. We will get this season out of the way and probably finish around 14th - 20th. with the money spent will be a decent effort. To me, what he does in the summer will be key. if he resigns mceverley then i would be very disappointed.
Re: He's got nothing tactically? there is a point to be made tho' in that when we go behind,we generally loose and look incapable of getting owt from the game..i'm not particularly questioning the tactical nous of keith hill in general,but when we do go behind and are on the back foot we look pretty clueless...but...given what we've got available,i'm still positive about the season so far,,like you say,look at forest.
I was a big fan of Robins But he left because he didn't feel he could work within the financial constraints that were being put in place for this season. Hill did and has proved it can work. To try and claim Robins would've done as least as well flies in the face of all logic and reason, as Robins himself never had to face these problems at Barnsley. He wasn't prepared to even try and make them work. And we've achieved this by playing attractive football for the majority of the time.
Re: I was a big fan of Robins yep,aggree,keith hill knew there was no money and you've got to give him credit for havings the ball s to take the job on in the first place,if he keeps us up every year on what he's got to work with then i take my hat off to him..cause i certainly dont want to be re-visiting league 1.....i know he mentions the money regularly in interviews,but he's usually prompted into this and i bet a pound to a penny he also talks about it to re-iterate to the fans who seem to forget we've got nowt
As for being incapable of coming from behind in a game It didn't seem much of an issue with Andy Ritchie as manager. We won promotion under him without being able to win after being behind. In fact, we failed to do it from Christmas 2003, when we won at 2-1 Hartlepool, to our 3-2 victory at Hull, in August 2006. However, this is definitely an area that Keith Hill needs to work on. I think it's barmy to assume he doesn't realise this, though. Perhaps this is one of the areas Hill is talking about when he mentions 'work in progress'.
Re: As for being incapable of coming from behind in a game How dare you keep posting sensible comments?!
Re: As for being incapable of coming from behind in a game you're right,of cause he knows its a problem that when we go behind we've more or less had it....he's a straight talker that doesnt slag his players off to the media,but you can bet you're life they get it in the neck in the dressing room..
I already made the point about coming from behind in games - in fact we have gained just one draw all season from a losing position and are bottom of the points gained table. The problem is we seem to play much better on the counter attack and once sides shut up shop we cant break them down. Yesterday a classic example Not sure how much this is due to tactics or lack of players though looking at the bench yesterday who really could we have brought on to change the game? Last week when we were ahead we were getting pushed further and further back and when the ball was cleared it came straight back to us - Hill took off Addison and put Davies on - it made a huge difference as then we had an outlet and started breaking forwards and having the ball much further up the pitch - The move surprised me but definitely worked. With the players and budget he has to work with Hill is doing a remarkable job and he gets tactics right more often than wrong - but we definitely have a problem once we go behind - is it tactics or the players just arent good enough to open up a packed defence - or just a mental confidence thing I dont know - probably a combination of all 3. The good thing is at the moment is an annoyance - we score first in enough games and keep the leads to have us sitting comfortably mid table - so the manager is definitely doing more right than wrong