Ronald Koeman discussion

[davek]

There seems to be some debate about whether Koeman is an "Everton man". That seems to be a lot of the frustration towards him. I'll be honest I don't think he's an Everton man, but we do have to ask ourselves what does an "Everton man" really mean now?

As a club we have won 1 trophy in 29 years and nothing in 21 years. Our highest league finish in that time has been 4th. We've carved out a niche and identity for ourselves in that context, which is as a club we accept failure if it means we are decent people. Koeman seems a bit the opposite of that image we have created. He moves around clubs (some may harsh label a mercenary) doesn't want to build for the long term, doesn't sugar coat a message or tell us what we want to hear, but above all else puts winning first.

Now it's not for me to say which outlook is superior. The are benefits to both. However Koemans outlook does differ greatly from what our own has been for a while. I wonder if Evertonians, in all honesty are using a dislike for Koeman for what is actually a dislike of the truth? He's not an Everton man, but maybe he's the catalyst to change the way we view the game?

As for a broader point it's poor currently. I remember when studying the Bolsheviks the question of the Civil war dominates historical paradigms, one side saying the brutality was put upon the Bolsheviks against their will, another side saying it was inherent to their thinking. I always remember Sheila Fitzpatrick stated that the civil war was a formative experience for the Bolshevik outlook, but a formative experience they were looking for.

It's similar to Koeman. The squads in a bad way and not fit enough but if you look at the wider trends for Koeman he does struggle at these periods of a season. The difficulty in fixtures between say gameweek 11-21 always led to what I felt would be a tougher run. After GW 21 we have a good run and I hope we can go on the sort of run he did with Southampton aided with players signed in January? Either way, in a convoluted manner what I'm asking is, what did people expect from Koeman? It's a poor squad. If we finished top half in an ugly way that would be progress. We may not like to admit that, but it's progress from where we were. Unfortunately I think a lot of Evertonians don't hold those low aspirations and maybe aren't as au fait with a more honest and frank analysis.

That approach to the situation (the 'Koeman isn't an Everton man but he gets the job done') is only reasonable if you were talking about a man with a glittering cv of going to clubs and being consistently successful. The truth is that Koeman has a pretty undistinguished managerial career, so it's not a case of holding your nose and going with him because he's a winner.

And on your other point of his inconsistency of performance: we cant afford (literally) to employ someone who'll give us such undulating contours to a season. We need incremental development at this club, not a snakes and ladders type of manager who'll drive us mad with month(s) long down turns.

 

[ijjysmith]

I was watching the game yesterday and there were times where I thought that no manager in the world could make these players play any better.

It was shambolic, laughable even. I think it was a period mid way through the send half where the ball was just aimlessly bouncing of limbs with no intent or direction. I've lost count the times Koeman has mentioned starting games with intensity is what we needed to do, and whether the players can't or won't, the players aren't doing it.

There's a sense that everybody knows the players aren't good enough now. The manger knows it, the fans know it, the backroom staff know it, the players know it.

The one thing I can't understand is how Holgate and Davies haven't been given a run. Other than that, Koeman's hands are tied. What options did we really have yesterday, even with only one injury before the game?

The more this season progresses, the less ridiculous my opinion that only Gueye deserves a starting place next season seems.

The majority of these players have gone as far as they can go. Time to give the manager a chance to change things, because you'll be waiting forever of you think that these players are capable of that.

Well. I agree.

 

[moyes cardy]

All this team required was someone to sort out the defence. It's still a shambles, though. And the attacking side of our game has been obliterated.

These players can get on the ball and attack in numbers. They've proven it often enough in the past. Koeman has come in and adopted a scorched earth policy. Is it any wonder the players haven't got a clue what to do now - and that's the reason we've taken just 7 of the last 27 points on offer.

Your view is flawed here, to change the defensive structure of course has to change the offensive plan. For example our full backs were pushed right up often found in opposition penalty areas, some goals I agree came from this but we were quickly found out on the counter, hence so many teams simply sat back let us have the ball and picked us off. In the end lots of possession but no end product and games lost with opposition having at times the ball no more than 40%.

 

[Mikey_Fitzgerald]

I'm giving him Jan and Summer to improve the team at the very least

Only exception will be if he has us down in the bottom half scrapping for survival like Martinez was taking us towards

As it currently stands, we're in the top half, playing unexciting football and are treading water at best. If we're still doing so after he's had a chance to bring more players in, well then I may take a dimmer view to his position

Right now though, I'm backing him and we'll see what happens

At the end of the day, I struggle to get too invested in the Koeman debates because of his icy demeanour and the fact he's clearly just passing through. So-so results and finishing top 8 for the time being will get barely a shrug from me. Once he has his players in though, the game changes

To me, whether Koeman is a success or not in the long run hinges on what he leaves for his eventual successor, and that's how I'll judge him

 

[davek]

Your view is flawed here, to change the defensive structure of course has to change the offensive plan. For example our full backs were pushed right up often found in opposition penalty areas, some goals I agree came from this but we were quickly found out on the counter, hence so many teams simply sat back let us have the ball and picked us off. In the end lots of possession but no end product and games lost with opposition having at times the ball no more than 40%.

Our problem defensively was dealing with balls into the box. And our attacking wouldn't suffer if both FBs played a more conservative game in a flatter back four. They offered nothing in Martinez's last period in charge of the club, Baines and Coleman were equally hopeless pushing on. We could still have a lot of fire power going forward with the defence set up in that manner.

 

[mawders]

Mourinho
""Everton is not a passing team any more like they were in the past. Everton is a team that plays direct: goalkeeper direct, Ashley Williams direct, Ramiro Funes Mori direct. Everything direct."

He's bang on. The football we play mostly is long ball. It's horrible. We are so predictable. I hate watching us at the moment.

 

[Jacko93]

Your view is flawed here, to change the defensive structure of course has to change the offensive plan. For example our full backs were pushed right up often found in opposition penalty areas, some goals I agree came from this but we were quickly found out on the counter, hence so many teams simply sat back let us have the ball and picked us off. In the end lots of possession but no end product and games lost with opposition having at times the ball no more than 40%.

I was going to put exactly that. If it was that easy, every team would have a separate attacking and defensive coach.

 

[Jacko93]

Our problem defensively was dealing with balls into the box. And our attacking wouldn't suffer if both FBs played a more conservative game in a flatter back four. They offered nothing in Martinez's last period in charge of the club, Baines and Coleman were equally hopeless pushing on. We could still have a lot of fire power going forward with the defence set up in that manner.

Our problem defensively was having no fullbacks there to stop the crosses into the box, cause they were in the opponents half

 

[davek]

I'm giving him Jan and Summer to improve the team at the very least

Only exception will be if he has us down in the bottom half scrapping for survival like Martinez was taking us towards

As it currently stands, we're in the top half, playing unexciting football and are treading water at best. If we're still doing so after he's had a chance to bring more players in, well then I may take a dimmer view to his position

Right now though, I'm backing him and we'll see what happens

At the end of the day, I struggle to get too invested in Koeman because of his demeanour and the fact he's clearly just passing through

To me, whether Koeman is a success or not in the long run hinges on what he leaves for his eventual successor, and that's how I'll judge him

My view is that there's undue emphasis being placed on the current personnel and that belief that changing their names is going to be the solution will prove false.

This is a systemic issue we have here, not personnel. The inability of this manager to set up a team in any cohesive formation or style of play is both surprising and frightening in equal measure.

 

[davek]

Our problem defensively was having no fullbacks there to stop the crosses into the box, cause they were in the opponents half

No mate. The FBs were usually there, they just didn't get close enough to wide men to stop them swinging crosses in...just like they're still not doing.

 

[Mikey_Fitzgerald]

My view is that there's undue emphasis being placed on the current personnel and that belief that changing their names is going to be the solution will prove false.

This is a systemic issue we have here, not personnel. The inability of this manager to set up a team in any cohesive formation or style of play is both surprising and frightening in equal measure.

Well we'll see that theory put to the test if he signs some more players won't we?

If we're still tosh after he brings in some new blood, then I expect the criticism will ramp up, as it probably should

 

[Mikey_Fitzgerald]

But yeah, we're top half thus far, so no knives out from me, even if we're not impressing

He gets time to prove his worth

If we start dropping though, I'll expect something from Koeman in response

 

[Jacko93]

No mate. The FBs were usually there, they just didn't get close enough to wide men to stop them swinging crosses in...just like they're still not doing.

The big issue we had as far as I remember is that they weren't, which led to the CB's becoming stretched opening space up in the centre for the ball to be put into, which it was, regularly.

 

[Foot Long Hot Dog]

No mate. The FBs were usually there, they just didn't get close enough to wide men to stop them swinging crosses in...just like they're still not doing.

The FB's under Brown shoes were regularly caught out of position on the counter, he employed the 2x DM's to supposedly cover the wide areas but we were often undone by a ball into the full back channel

 

[Khalekan]

It is.

The more times you hit it long in an area, the likelihood of something happening

Hoof it to Bolasie 10 times, something will happen at least once.

Its as clear as day that none of our attacks are structured, no build up, just repetition until we catch a break.

What was the stat yesterday? 30% were long balls?

A theory first expounded by the guru of the long ball game....one Charles Hughes.

(there's one for the teenagers)

Mr. Hughes was some kind of a technical bod and coaching honcho at the F.A. in the 70s and 80s.

And his theory was to knock the ball long into what he called the POMO........the Position Of Maximum Opportunity.

The POMO being the final third of the pitch or preferably as deep into enemy territory as one could welly a bladder ball and then one's men go charging after it.

Chuck had no time for intricate passing movements, patient build up or the idea of football as an art form.

No sir.

He believed stoutly, based on number crunching a century's worth analysis, that "most goals" came from moves which involved three passes....or less.

Hence his doctrine was hit the POMO with a hoof and let the Devil sort out the rest.

Bizarrely, part of his theory was based on RAF tactics during the war

It might sound ridiculous to our younger friends on here now, but this theory held sway, still holds sway to a great extent, in this country for decades and among its practioners were Jack Charlton, Howard Wilkinson, Graham Taylor, anyone whom managed Wimbledon in the 80s and Big Sam.

In the present era Pardew, McCarthy, Hughes and Pulis among others adhere to it.

Moyes does to an extent....and it looks to me like Koeman is off that ilk.

And Charlie Hughes, almost single handedly, is the reason England's international team has fallen so far from grace this past three or four decades and why English players are so technically inept compared to those in other countries.

Because while Spain and France were advancing Pele's notion of the Beautiful Game in their academies, English lads at Lilleshall and at their parent clubs were being coached by disciples of Charles Hughes and being urged to hit the POMO in under three passes

Of "hoofs" as we like to call them round these parts