Did we play three centre halves against the mighty Altrincham?

That's three out and out stoppers, not two and a sweeper like Appleby or Flemming who can run with the ball, or move over to cover at full back, or step forward to play in midfield, but three big blokes whose main job is to head the ball away.

Or, did we think we think we'd be under so much pressure that we needed to play one of those big blokes in midfield? Not a skilful player who might grab us a goal or provide an assist, but another player to stop Alty playing, to help out Scowen and Pearson who are also selected to stop the opposition playing.

Losing to a non league side can happen to anyone. Other than any number of Barnsley games, my favourite ever domestic match was when Sutton United beat Coventry. I still remember the name of the lad who scored the winner (Matthew Hanalan). Coventry were a bloody good side and finished the season in 7th place in the 1st division (Premier League), so that result was a real shock. Yesterday wasn't a shock. The only surprise to me was that we lost by just the one goal. We're not a bloody good side, we're ******* atrocious.

I hope it's starting to dawn on people that we haven't assembled a good squad - a team of lions led by a lamb. We've put together the worst group of players that most of us have ever seen. There's a few more senior contributors to this forum who may well have seen worse (although that is debatable) but if your experience of watching Barnsley does not go further back than when Alan Clarke was brought in to the club in 1978, then you're currently watching the worst side we've fielded in at least 37 years. That'd be fine if we couldn't afford to compete, but last February our CEO was interviewed by Radio Sheffield and told us we'd just sacked our very experienced and very capable manager because our attendances were in the top 6 in the division, our budget was in the top 6 in the division, our war chest was supplemented by the generous donations of our owner and mid-table simply wasn't good enough. He didn't actually say the last bit, the club spoke of the fear of relegation, but as we were just as close to the play-off as we were the bottom four, those of us without an agenda to see the manager sacked took that for what it was: ********.

You may think the above is in preparation of a defence of Lee Johnson. It's not. He's proving week in and week out that, at the present time at least, he's not good enough. But be careful about where you apportion the blame.

Back in February we didn't employ a manager, a position that the club has always considered vital for the previous 125+ years (including those 37 years that I've been watching when we've always been considerably better than we are now), we employed a head coach. Did we change the job title for the man in charge of first team affairs, because, as Ben Mansford explained, it's simply a modern take on a position that remains much the same as it always was, or, did we do it because, despite what we were told, some of the head coach's responsibilities have actually been taken away and those upstairs believe that they know best?

I don't know. One of the reasons I don't know is that, from my perspective at least, we don't appear to get a straight answer to anything. If I've got that wrong, would anyone care to explain to me, from the information we've been given, how our recruitment process works?

I know how it used to work, when we were at our most successful: Danny Wilson told John Dennis which player he would like us to sign. John Dennis got in touch with that player's club and tried to buy him. Sometime he was successful, sometime he wasn't, such is life. I know this is how it worked because both John Dennis and Danny Wilson have explained the process to fans at a number of meetings. The account from each person tallied perfectly with the other.

Anyone any idea if that's what we do now? If you're certain it is, then our problems begin and end with Lee Johnson (with a little bit to spare for the board for hiring the man in the first place). If you're not, then where do you point the finger? I'm not absolving Lee Johnson, he has to shoulder some of the blame. I don't doubt that he selects the team, the formation and the tactics. What I question is whether the squad of players from which he has to pick were his choice.

Having said all that, I don't know if Conference sides have to adhere to the rules of SCMP, so maybe it's just that we haven't the finances to ******* compete.

Well done to the lads at Altrincham btw. We are a big scalp, it's a great result for you, but in actuality you'll rarely face an easier FA Cup tie.

 

I actually thought we had been bought out by Ed Nygma judging by the complicated contradictory information that comes from the club.

And its not your fault that you don't understand scmp jay

 

"We've put together the worst group of players that most of us have ever seen."

Do you genuinely believe that what we've got today is worse than the shower under Hodges in 2004/05? I've not seen us play since August, thank god, but from what I saw we were nowhere near as bad as that side. Obviously things have gone downhill since then, but I was of the opinion that we had quite a solid backbone which with two or three experienced additions (that either the manager or the board seemed reluctant to make, but that's another story) would be able to challenge at the right end of the division. I'm not saying you're wrong, as you've seen a lot more of this side than me, but that Hodges team sticks in my mind as being atrocious to the point of being unwatchable, and definitely the worst BFC side I've ever seen (I go back to 1987).

 

With a few experienced players we could become a solid mid table team. To be a good side wholesale changes are needed

 

By a factor of about 50. These players that you might read are pretty good, they're just not. Some of them might go on to be with time and experience, but they're not right now. We've got one really good player, Hourihane, and even he has limitations. He's still a long way from what someone with his skill is capable of. But without him in the side, we can barely score a goal (Coventry away being the exception).

The team we had last season were two or three players away from challenging at the right end of the division. The team we have now is miles off.

 

Your regular pm is incoming shortly Mr Jay

 

I think that given the current situation we'd all be happy with that as a starting point.

I just think that from what I saw we've got a lot of decent players, but they look a lot worse than they are due to the lack of experience in the side. The really sad thing is, either it could kill their careers before they've even started, or some of the better ones such as Winnall, Hourihane and Scowen will move away from Oakwell where they will really shine.

 

I think we're a very bad team but I think we have some decent individual's who are low on confidence & experience but with some good coaching, a settled formation, a regular goalkeeper & some experience alongside them could be performing much better.

I'm thinking of Roberts, Wabara, Mawson, Scowen (still one of our best but worse than last year), Smith & Winnall

 

Fair point, and I suppose it depends how you define "good". The way they are playing at the minute is clearly not remotely good by anyone's definition of the word. However, if we were able to drop some of today's lot into one of our better sides, my feeling is that they'd shine with good players around them. It's been done to death on here how Winnall would quickly realise his potential if he was played in the correct system, with someone to partner him. Without any hint of irony, I reckon that Sam Winnall would have looked pretty good alongside John Hendrie in our 96-97 team.

I know that by even mentioning Winnall in the same breath as anyone from the 96-97 team, I'm running the risk of making myself look a little daft. But if we were put some of our better players from out teams of old into the current side and system, how good would they look?

Paul Wilkinson on his own, up front in this team would not look much better than his namesake Conor. Andy Saville or Mike Sheron would both be just as ineffective as Winnall in the current system.
If we replaced Scowen with Darren Sheridan, would the team actually look much better if no other changes were made?
Would Clint Marcelle look any good if he was played in a system in which he saw very little of the ball, and when he did get it he was constantly isolated?

I'm not for a minute suggesting that any of our current players are even close in ability to the ex-reds I've mentioned. However, the team which they played in was arguably much greater than the sum of its already talented parts. The current system that we are using seems to be making the sum total of the team's output far weaker than its already quite modest parts, and it seems that even some much better players than we have now would be stifled by it.

 

I wouldn't argue with that, but, and it is a very big but, even playing to their maximum potential, what we've got right now would struggle in this division. They probably should be doing better than we are currently, and in that gap lies the fault of the manager, but I believe any manager would be doing superbly to get this side in to the top half of the table. I said before a ball was kicked that I would be very happy if we could avoid relegation (well, not ecstatic or owt, but you know what I mean) and I've seen nothing so far to make me reassess that.

 

I agree the internal workings of the club are a bit of a mystery.

I remember listening to P Cryne on here talking about J Stones being let go for whatever paltry figure it was, and it seemed like no-one in the club knew how good he was and what figure to put on his head. All that was required was some scoring system to be put in place...which incidentally gave perennial substitute James Bree a higher score. This seemed like a very muddled public announcement to make.

Now a smile appears on Johnson's face when he talks about coffee-shop entrepreneur Hugo Colace coming to train with us, which makes me wonder what involvement Lee Johnson had in that.

Then there is the involvement/non-involvement of P Cryne's son James, which I don't quite follow either. I really don't know how much say Lee Johnson has over the players he gets to work with.

What I blame Lee Johnson for is why every team he picks has 7/8 players who are defensively minded and 3 or 4 players who are attack minded. It should be obvious why we don't score from open play. I've seen enough individual skill from certain players like Scowen and Pearson to make me think they would be good in the appropriate team. But every time I look at the team sheet I think that the balance looks all wrong.

 

Can't argue with any of that. I do believe Johnson is at fault, I just don't know how much.

 

You may well be right. At the minute it's all conjecture of course, but I genuinely believe it won't be for much longer. I can't envisage Lee Johnson still being manager of BFC come the turn of the year if the current run carries on.

 

I'm against sacking managers, but even I'm struggling for reasons to keep him other than I'm against sacking managers, which is no reason at all really. I'll not be calling for him to go, but I've lost the will to carry on defending him. I could handle us losing 7 league games in a row, and an FA Cup tie to non-league opposition, if I saw a glimmer of hope, but our performances have been every bit as bad as our results and the defeats fully deserved.

During the first half of last season we took a few heavy defeats. You could ask almost anyone and they would have told you what was wrong... "Wes Brown's brother is ****, we need a winger because the two we have are fat and lazy, and we're crying out for a defensive midfield player". We got rid of Brown, signed Scowen, and tried to bring in O'Sullivan. So the manager saw it too. Unfortunately we also lost Winnall, Cole and Williams.

Ask someone what's wrong now and you'll get similar agreement..."******* everything."

 

I think most people on here are against sacking managers, other than the usual barmpots. However, sometimes it really is the correct thing to do. A couple of weeks ago, I drifted from the "give him more time" camp into "don't care" territory. Unfortunately, and I feel a bit disappointed with myself for thinking this, I now actively want to him to leave, as I think that time has come. LJ definitely isn't completely to blame for the current shambles, but Cryne and Mansford certainly didn't instruct Johnson to play for a draw against Doncaster, or any of the other baffling decisions he's made.

 

The problem is that considering how poor the squad is, what other options did he have yesterday? Because I've struggled to pick anything other than the XI he's started the last few weeks.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

 

Well we didn't need 5 defenders or to play wilkinson

 

Even with limitations of the players at his disposal, there isn't really any excuse for him not to be able to set them up to comfortably beat a part time side who are 6th from bottom of a league two rungs below ours. It's pretty much the same as Sunderland or Aston Villa not being able to beat us at Oakwell in a cup game.

 

But this is my point - we play 4 at the back, what midfield do you play? Because we've no wingers and only one decent striker.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk