Martinez new Belgium head coach

[Groucho]

Success everywhere he goes:

Swansea - dead and buried as a club: Martinez gets them an identity and playing again...a way of playing that takes them to the PL eventually and is retained to keep them there for years.

Wigan - takes a pub team and beats the most expensively assembled British team ever to hand them their one and only major trophy.

Everton - has us playing like the School of Science again and hands us our best ever PL season in terms of points and wins.

Belgium - less than 18 months to make himself that nations most successful ever manager.


....but, yeah, "ee torks ded funny lad".

Facts dictate that this is a debate you can never win...you do realise that, dont you?

Yeah some good points mate, he did do some good things. This post though does omit his negatives such as relegation, not being able to adapt with a backup plan (a lesson he's side half-learned) and also while great in our first season with him, let's be honest things went sour very fast and simply wasn't good enough by the end.

...if he did he'd go from Very good to great rapidly.

He's adapting though. The WC underlined that. The move to put Fellaini on and shake things up saved them against Japan. People learn. People evolve.

I think he'd go from bang average to very good, but yes he does appear to have had a rethink of his methods.

Conceded a set piece goal...at the World Cup that was avalanched by...set piece goals?

That's pretty damning stuff!

The feller is a very good manager. Only a gaggle of people on twitter and Everton forums wish to denigrate him but the vast majority of the football world see a very good manager. In short: the war's over. You lost.

This is where we differ mate - I reckon I'm reasonably level headed but I simply don't rate him, and I'm hardly a knee jerker mate.

 

[davek]

Reminiscent of George W Bush declaring the Iraq war to be over and won!

It was.

 

[davek]

Yeah some good points mate, he did do some good things. This post though does omit his negatives such as relegation, not being able to adapt with a backup plan (a lesson he's side half-learned) and also while great in our first season with him, let's be honest things went sour very fast and simply wasn't good enough by the end.




I think he'd go from bang average to very good, but yes he does appear to have had a rethink of his methods.

This is where we differ mate - I reckon I'm reasonably level headed but I simply don't rate him, and I'm hardly a knee jerker mate.

Is there any top manager anywhere without a blemish on their CV? I can guarantee anyone you care to rate does.

It's not my view that he's a top manager, btw. Not right now. But he is tactically astute enough to make a big impact wherever he's landed. That is inarguable. The rest is just style preferneces over the way he handles the media/fans.

 

[dholliday]

Player B "is one of the best English players ever."

B: Gareth Barry

Obviously pushing it but Barry was a very good player, consistently, for good clubs over a very long period. So not too bad a comment, to be fair.

Everton - has us playing like the School of Science again

Not quite. Our school of science has traditionally been a mix of sweet football with fair brawn. Our best sides always had a bit of physicality about them, which was neatly mixed with tidy football. Martinez didn't bring that essential ingredient of the School of Science to the table.

 

[BigMick]

Obviously pushing it but Barry was a very good player, consistently, for good clubs over a very long period. So not too bad a comment, to be fair.




Not quite. Our school of science has traditionally been a mix of sweet football with fair brawn. Our best sides always had a bit of physicality about them, which was neatly mixed with tidy football. Martinez didn't bring that essential ingredient of the School of Science to the table.

Agree 100% with the latter - that's an excellent description that should be emphasised to every Everton manager!

With Barry, I'm a big admirer but, as usual, Roberto went way over the top, almost as far as Gerrard on Naysmith, in his description.

 

[BigMick]

It was.

Not when Dubya said it, it wasn't. Sadly.

And just as the Iraq war continued for several more years, so this much more amicable discussion will continue until Roberto actually wins a trophy with Belgium or your prediction of one of the big clubs beating a path to his door comes true - actually any club would do - and him winning something there, or at the very least, leaving them in a much healthier state when he goes on to bigger and better things, having had time to make his mark on the team's fitness, tactics and recruitment.

[QUOTE="davek, post: 6483252, member: 1745.

He's adapting though. . People learn. People evolve.[/QUOTE]

I remain unconvinced. For instance, why say' "We only lost to a set-piece goal" after the France game. Only? A goal's a goal whether it's a set-piece or not - he never did seem to value them quite as much.

Another quote from the World Cup: "Tactically, I've never lost a game on the tactics board." That suggests someone with an ego as big as Samuel Allardyce and just as set in his ways.

Personally, I reckon Roberto is shrewd enough to stick with Belgium as long as he can, unless a Barca or PSG or Bayern really do come knocking, which I doubt, in the knowledge that, like many an England manager, he will always win many more than he loses until the big game comes along, which in international football is only every couple of years at the WC or Euros.

 

[davek]

Obviously pushing it but Barry was a very good player, consistently, for good clubs over a very long period. So not too bad a comment, to be fair.




Not quite. Our school of science has traditionally been a mix of sweet football with fair brawn. Our best sides always had a bit of physicality about them, which was neatly mixed with tidy football. Martinez didn't bring that essential ingredient of the School of Science to the table.

Barry and McCarthy were a very robust central midfield partnership. And from what I've heard and read, I'd hardly describe Harry Catterick's 1969/70 team as physical.

 

[dholliday]

Barry and McCarthy were a very robust central midfield partnership. And from what I've heard and read, I'd hardly describe Harry Catterick's 1969/70 team as physical.

Tommy Wright & Johnny Morrissey are at least two that come to mind who were strong physical presences, essential partners to the sweet football of the holy trinity.

 

[davek]

I remain unconvinced. For instance, why say' "We only lost to a set-piece goal" after the France game. Only? A goal's a goal whether it's a set-piece or not - he never did seem to value them quite as much.

Another quote from the World Cup: "Tactically, I've never lost a game on the tactics board." That suggests someone with an ego as big as Samuel Allardyce and just as set in his ways.

The first quote underlines a fact: a set piece is a situation that gives both teams an equal chance to get a telling touch on the ball to either convert or clear it; goals from open play should be much easy to defend if you're drilled well as a team.

The second quote was a humble admission that he personally has not always been able to translate his plan from tactics board to players - a way of taking responsibility for a reversal himself and not blaming a player/players.

I really dont know what the motivation is or what the pay off is in denying Martinez's qualities. Is he a top class manager in world football? No. Is he a tactically astute manager who can get the better of top managers when players carry out his plan? Yes.

There's no credibility left for anyone arguing a case to the effect that Martinez is a poor manager. That's been shut down emphatically. He is what he is: a very good manager who can get results wherever he goes and at any level. His CV underlines that fact.

 

[davek]

Tommy Wright & Johnny Morrissey are at least two that come to mind who were strong physical presences, essential partners to the sweet football of the holy trinity.

Yes, but they were noted for their free-flowing football and artistry rather than a mix of guile and grit.

You have the proportions all wrong, IMO.

 

[dholliday]

Yes, but they were noted for their free-flowing football and artistry rather than a mix of guile and grit.

You have the proportions all wrong, IMO.

A mix of artistry & grit, that was my point. That is traditionally what our trophy-winning sides always had, even '95. Martinez, despite Barry & McCarthy, didn't quite have it (as evidenced by allowing 0-4 pummellings by the RS of all teams).

 

[BigMick]

The first quote underlines a fact: a set piece is a situation that gives both teams an equal chance to get a telling touch on the ball to either convert or clear it; goals from open play should be much easy to defend if you're drilled well as a team.

The second quote was a humble admission that he personally has not always been able to translate his plan from tactics board to players - a way of taking responsibility for a reversal himself and not blaming a player/players.

I really dont know what the motivation is or what the pay off is in denying Martinez's qualities. Is he a top class manager in world football? No. Is he a tactically astute manager who can get the better of top managers when players carry out his plan? Yes.

There's no credibility left for anyone arguing a case to the effect that Martinez is a poor manager. That's been shut down emphatically. He is what he is: a very good manager who can get results wherever he goes and at any level. His CV underlines that fact.

Those first two paragraphs are worthy of the Great Man himself! The final sentence worthy of Rafael!

But the second one was nothing like what you suggest - it was exactly the opposite: the players have to be good enough to carry out my tactics.

 

[BigMick]

Tommy Wright & Johnny Morrissey are at least two that come to mind who were strong physical presences, essential partners to the sweet football of the holy trinity.

Sandy Brown too. Morrissey was one of the hardest players ever to play the game. HK and John Hurst could certainly look after themselves, as could Colin. @davek is right in that they wouldn't be described as a physical team, but that's mainly because the Holy Trinity overshadowed everything else. As Brian Labone half-jokingly said: they were the only 3 man team to ever win the league! But no team managed by Catterick was ever a soft touch.

 

[davek]

A mix of artistry & grit, that was my point. That is traditionally what our trophy-winning sides always had, even '95. Martinez, despite Barry & McCarthy, didn't quite have it (as evidenced by allowing 0-4 pummellings by the RS of all teams).

It's not 50/50 artistry and grit. There has to be variations between teams that sees one have more of one value than the other(s). The unifying thing you could say about Catterick's 69/70 team and Kendall's 84/85 team and Martinez's 13/14 team (not that I'm giving the last named equivalency in terms of status) is that they all had toilers to one degree or another to go along with the ball players. The only matter to discuss is in what ratio.

 

[dholliday]

It's not 50/50 artistry and grit. There has to be variations between teams that sees one have more of one value than the other(s). The unifying thing you could say about Catterick's 69/70 team and Kendall's 84/85 team and Martinez's 13/14 team (not that I'm giving the last named equivalency in terms of status) is that they all had toilers to one degree or another to go along with the ball players. The only matter to discuss is in what ratio.

The ratio isn't important. What's important is that physical gritty determination & technical-artistry are both obviously present in the team. The former wasn't obviously present in a Martinez team. Both qualities were present in all our trophy-winning teams.

The term 'school of science' didn't even come from an Evertonian, initially. It was an opponent of one of our 20's Dixie-inspired teams. He praised the advanced technical craft, the almost scientific application, of our football. It's controlled power, like indeed a science experiment.

Online you'll find many indications that school of science means determination as well as art (the appliance of science involves both). Here's one for example:

Walter Smith knew that his number was up after last Sunday's FA Cup quarter- final defeat by Middlesbrough. It was shoddy, spiritless performance which cut across even the most meagre aspirations of the Everton supporters. Long gone are the days when the former manager Harry Catterick and Sir John Moores, the Littlewoods pools millionaire, could justifiably claim that any season outside the top six was to be regarded as a failure, but this was the pits. Everton were reduced to spineless also-rans, a travesty of science - a horrible mutant of today's Premiership where money buys everything.

A scientist afraid to take a chance won't succeed. Proper application of the school of science includes not to be fearful. '95 & '96, and arguably 04/05, were the last times we applied the school of science correctly.