Roberto Martinez Discussion - Including Live Poll (Poll Reset 1st May)

[a bell maul]

The anger is strong in this one Luke.........

I think someone accused his Ma of having crabs .if I was Bungle, I'd be angry too

 

[larbert toffee]

Dr David France on this week.

What a cracking fella Dr David France is.

 

[LouReedwalkonthewildside]

What a cracking fella Dr David France is.

Yeah he's a gent, really love listening to him talk.

 

[blueblue]

Think Martinez saying he didn't have a problem with Lukaku touting himself around Europe in an interview, but then in the same breath drag in Baines to apologise for saying the team doesn't have any chemistry (which is true) probably doesn't help in the dressing room, it has a whiff of favouritism.

There needs to be a divide between manager and player, everybody needs to know who the boss is and players need to know what is expected of them.
I can imagine Alex Ferguson dealing with the showboating of Stones or the stories by Lukaku in the press. Mirallas would have been moved on long ago.

I think RM may be more suited to the assistant manager/coach role. He could mix and mingle with the players, get involved in coaching, while all the while the boss is looking over the shoulder dictating tactics and keeping players in line.

 

[blue_order]

In hindsight it's actually mental that we bothered to get him. 16th, 16th, 15th, 18th + Relegated. Some record that is. Don't care who it was with, what team he had etc. NSNO is our motto isn't it?

 

[Saint Domingo]

Will answer after work mate

You mean you're not on here all day? Pffft *sigh*

 

[catcherintherye]

Don't agree about Stones taking it on himself to do the Cruyff turns. If that was the case RB would have dragged him off as soon as he did so. I do think Stones believes he is Cruyff but the manager should be there to bring him down to earth and motivate him in the right way to develop the player. I don't RB has done this. I agree with your assessment of Lukaku and think this contributed greatly to his terrible game at Wembley. He was completely off the pace.

I don't think he has the control or respect to drag him off though, that's the problem. I think he has lost the respect of the players and that is a very hard place to be.

As for Lukaku I actually thought Wembley was his best game in 6 weeks. He could have scored 4-5 but for another day. He has been coasting for a while relying on his goal scoring abilities to bail out a lack of effort. People forgave lack of effort while he was scoring but as soon as the goals dry up people become aware of it. I think his behaviour over the last 6 weeks has been absolutely disgraceful and unlike Stones would be very happy to see him sold for 50 million+ in the summer.

 

[catcherintherye]

Think Martinez saying he didn't have a problem with Lukaku touting himself around Europe in an interview, but then in the same breath drag in Baines to apologise for saying the team doesn't have any chemistry (which is true) probably doesn't help in the dressing room, it has a whiff of favouritism.

It was complete favouritism and indicative of a manager who has lost the respect of his players.

 

[catcherintherye]

I've mentioned this before, but I do think that's a bit of a red herring. I think the make up of our squad is pretty standard really, with an equal spread of youth, experience, and players at their peak. Whether the players at their peak are of sufficient quality is obviously open to debate, but we certainly have them.

Robles, Funes Mori, Coleman, Baines, Oviedo, McCarthy, Gibson, Lennon, Mirallas, Niasse and Kone all fall into that category, so we could effectively put out a balanced team full of players in their peak years. I'd also say that Lukaku and Besic are now coming to an age where, while they may not be right at their peak, they are well past the novice stage. I think the young and inconsistent line has been way overused in relation to this squad, particularly when some of the young players have been among the more consistent performers.

We do have players in that age range, but disproportionately few. I also think a lot of them are unreliable. Baines I think is almost coming to the age where he is past his best now. Mori first season needs to step up. Coleman has disappointed this year. Gibson is never fit. McCarthy is still a bit young to be considered. Kone is probably too old, Oviedo too injury prone.

So of that list you are left with Lennon who has performed quite well and Cleverley who has done ok. Neither of them are star men. I remember when we had Cahill, Arteta, Peinaar, Osman, Jagielka, Lescott, Yakubu all in and around that age range all at the peak of their powers.

 

[brieverton]

In hindsight it's actually mental that we bothered to get him. 16th, 16th, 15th, 18th + Relegated. Some record that is. Don't care who it was with, what team he had etc. NSNO is our motto isn't it?

I don't think anyone at Everton bothered very much. He was the bloke down the road, relatively cheap and easy to appoint. I doubt there were any serious discussions, or discussions at all with any other "candidates". A convenient, lazy appointment, certainly not in keeping with NSNO.

 

[ted45]

In hindsight it's actually mental that we bothered to get him. 16th, 16th, 15th, 18th + Relegated. Some record that is. Don't care who it was with, what team he had etc. NSNO is our motto isn't it?

Never thought about it like this. We actually brought him in on the strength of a cup win. Crazy!!

 

[Lanolin]

We do have players in that age range, but disproportionately few. I also think a lot of them are unreliable. Baines I think is almost coming to the age where he is past his best now. Mori first season needs to step up. Coleman has disappointed this year. Gibson is never fit. McCarthy is still a bit young to be considered. Kone is probably too old, Oviedo too injury prone.

So of that list you are left with Lennon who has performed quite well and Cleverley who has done ok. Neither of them are star men. I remember when we had Cahill, Arteta, Peinaar, Osman, Jagielka, Lescott, Yakubu all in and around that age range all at the peak of their powers.

Yeah as I say, the quality can be debated, but not the numbers. I named 11 and actually forgot Cleverley (and McGeady who is technically our player), so that's 13 players who are in their peak years - effectively half the squad. I don't think that's disproportionate at all, I think most squads would ideally be looking for those sort of numbers, supplemented by a few younger and a few older.

James McCarthy is 25, he'll be 26 in November. His game is based almost exclusively on running round and physicality,so I think he's very much at his peak. In fact, with 350 senior games under his belt already, I wouldn't be surprised if he tailed off in a couple of years with injuries/burn out taking their toll. The fact that you mention Baines being past his best when he's only 31 shows that the idea of players always peaking in their late 20s isn't always accurate.

 

[deipnosophist]

In hindsight it's actually mental that we bothered to get him. 16th, 16th, 15th, 18th + Relegated. Some record that is. Don't care who it was with, what team he had etc. NSNO is our motto isn't it?

I have , over the last few months also pondered how on earth he got the job. Tbf, initially I was taken in by all his BS...not any more

 

[toffee matt]

Mate, you're calling all people who disagree with you either WUMs or Kopites.
Whilst I am used to good natured abuse, mainly from @orly and @Eric Djemba-Djemba - both of whom have me howling with laughter regularly as they assasinate me and my defence of the manager, I don't think there is any need for the stance you're taking.
Probably there isnt a need to call you 14 years old - apologies, but there is SO MUCH to debate about and criticise me and Davek for however my 'agenda' for having a different opinion isnt one of them.
Let's put this to bed and just enjoy the debate.

Fair enough mate x

 

[mkrudden]

If we get a new manager and if the new manager is allowed to spend the amounts of money we could only have dreamed of previously, then, yes, the new manager will have a far shorter settling in period than previous managers.
David Moyes had a relatively trouble free run for almost his entire time at Everton. He built the club from incredibly weak foundations and turned us into a top six side. He was allowed a decade to do this.
RM has had three years and that lloks to be it.
Neither manager have had pots of money to spend and both needed to be very careful how it was spent.

If, for instance, a new manager comes in and spends 100m to add to the players already there why would they not be assessed more critically ?

So why is RM getting 2 years (first one doesn't count because he performed well, which is no barometer of his abilities apparently) and Moyes got 11?