The New Manager of MFC - Introducing Kim Hellberg

[Kieran 125 129]

18 minutes ago, LBP said:

??

Everyone playing a low block against you is a compliment, if we didn't weaken the attack 2 years in a row...

Whoever the next manager is, I can accept if the football isn't as good as Carrickball so long as it's not as dreary as Edwardsball

We can't afford to waste money on forwards if the manager is going to kill their careers

I refuse to wait 20 years to see another 20 goal a season man also

Never said it wasn’t a compliment but we could not break teams down at all and have teams not played a low block against us at times this season like? Because the games we struggled in this season was when we dominated the ball we couldn’t break teams down again

[Kieran 125 129]

15 minutes ago, LBP said:

Yes! We consistently dominated the ball, were one of the league's highest scorers and xG generators!

And attacking individuals thrived statistically!

Yeah and mid table for xga as well… the opposite of Edwards I’d say were much more likely to do better with a good defence and poor going forward then a poor poor defence and good going forward my point was we need a balance not just reverting back to how it was under Carrick 

[LinoJo3 7,799 16k]

13 minutes ago, CrossmanMFC said:

Little bit more too it than that, I think Carrick's biggest issue was a clear regression in the second half of every game. Especially at home last year it felt to me we were out coached most of the time and weakened as the game went on. Edwards was far more proactive in changing a game,

Equally you could say Edwards set up his team badly and we often had poor first halves, this whole half time subs thing totally went to everyone’s heads. In the last few weeks he ended up changing systems and half the team in one go. It’s not really the flex people think it is.

[LinoJo3 7,799 16k]

The guy on fmttm saying we’re looking at jfh to come in as a coach, I’d be ok with that. Someone mentioned he was an attacking coach for england

[KeithLambsFaxMachine 984 572]

4 minutes ago, LinoJo3 said:

Equally you could say Edwards set up his team badly and we often had poor first halves, this whole half time subs thing totally went to everyone’s heads. In the last few weeks he ended up changing systems and half the team in one go. It’s not really the flex people think it is.

I agree partially. While it's obviosly much better to get it right the start, recognising that it's not right, and addressing that, is a talent that is way beyond many managers.

[LinoJo3 7,799 16k]

2 minutes ago, KeithLambsFaxMachine said:

I agree partially. While it's obviosly much better to get it right the start, recognising that it's not right, and addressing that, is a talent that is way beyond many managers.

Fair enough if it happens once or twice, it was a regular basis thing here, surely there comes a point where you say great you can fix it when it’s broken but can we just start well for once? It almost cost us when fry almost going off putting us down to 10 men, then fry had to come off again last week maybe because he played through an injury in the previous game.

He was doing stuff managers do in the 85th minute of a cup final, not the 60th minute of a league game in October.

[JTG 4,791 4.4k]

I find it absolutely baffling that anyone is advocating for us to go back to Carrick.

The same people who have been slaughtering Edwards for the attack (even whilst we’ve been picking up points) want us to revert to Carrick who demonstrably can’t organise a defence. It’s all just much of a muchness.

I’m also not sure where this narrative has come from that we wanted to keep Carrick and he fell on his sword because of his loyalty to his coaching team. Nothing Scott said regarding the review last summer indicated that was ever an option.

[TeaCider24 21,192 25.6k]

11 minutes ago, LinoJo3 said:

The guy on fmttm saying we’re looking at jfh to come in as a coach, I’d be ok with that. Someone mentioned he was an attacking coach for england

Wouldn't be against that, though I feel like finding the coaching staff before the head coach is a bit of a strange way to go about it.

[JTG 4,791 4.4k]

34 minutes ago, LBP said:

Yes! We consistently dominated the ball, were one of the league's highest scorers and xG generators!

And attacking individuals thrived statistically!

And yet we finished 8th and 10th.

We were regressing under Carrick. It was the right decision to part ways.

[Redcar Rioja 10,171 9.8k]

Prime Carrickball was great to watch but I have better bladder control than Carrick had in the 2nd half of too many games as time went on. Had he been able (or more likely willing) to adapt and change tactics to match his opposite number he would still have been here and we would probably have been in the Premiership.

Edwards stoic defence was a great relief after watching us prat around at the back and create or own problems in doing so, but like Carrick he had his flaws. Whilst Carrick would never change and waited until the 60th minute to make a seemingly reluctant sub, Edwards had himself in such a mess at times that he was throwing on 4 or 5 subs at a time, not good and not clever.

They both had their strengths and both had their weaknesses. Neither were useless but neither were perfect. It looked to me however that Edwards over the last 6 or 7 games or so was starting to get sussed in much the same way that Carrick had been rumbled, albeit it took a lot longer and until Coventry in the Play Offs to really hit home with Carrick.

["KM" 2,923 16.2k]

6 minutes ago, TeaCider24 said:

Wouldn't be against that, though I feel like finding the coaching staff before the head coach is a bit of a strange way to go about it.

We're going with Adi Viveash. 

[LinoJo3 7,799 16k]

11 minutes ago, JTG said:

I find it absolutely baffling that anyone is advocating for us to go back to Carrick.

The same people who have been slaughtering Edwards for the attack (even whilst we’ve been picking up points) want us to revert to Carrick who demonstrably can’t organise a defence. It’s all just much of a muchness.

I’m also not sure where this narrative has come from that we wanted to keep Carrick and he fell on his sword because of his loyalty to his coaching team. Nothing Scott said regarding the review last summer indicated that was ever an option.

I’m not advocating for Carrick to come back in 1.0 form. The same way nobody would want Gerrard here without good coaches I wouldn’t want Carrick here without good coaches. 
 

I think you need to drop the idea of it being all the same as before, Carrick alongside Viveash and another similar type coach who CAN organise a defence and analyse games well etc, yes I wouldn’t be against that. The issue being Carrick this time would have to agree to take their input on board otherwise there’d be just no point.

[Obii 880 984]

JFH has gained a pretty great rep as a coach at England. Not sold on him being the manager but think he would great as a background appointment. 

[Neverbefore 17,072 30.8k]

Shouldn't have to be said, but theres a difference between comparing what Carrick done here and what edwards done here and wanting carrick back

[Dan_Boro_Till_I_Die 1,675 4.6k]

20 minutes ago, LBP said:

Yes! We consistently dominated the ball, were one of the league's highest scorers and xG generators!

And attacking individuals thrived statistically!

He also developed our player's and made them better.