' Russell Slade Defends his tactics and Blames '

Cardiff City manager Russell Slade defends attacking gamble as play-off hopes take a hit


The manager believed it was defensive lapses that cost his side the points.

BY PHIL SMITH

Sunday 10th April 2016

Slade threw on two strikers as his team chased a winner against Fulham, leaving the door open at the back to concede late on


Russell Slade has no regrets about his attacking gamble after a late Fulham winner left their play-off hopes in the balance.

Cardiff City were on the back foot when he threw on Kenneth Zohore and later Idriss Saadi in an attempt to force what would have been a major winner.

Slade said: “That's what its about. At this stage, you have to take one or two chances to go and get the three points. We threw our strikers on and put Lex in behind them in an effort to win the football match.”



Slade also decided to rest Stuart O'Keefe, despite the midfielder's impressive form in recent weeks.

He said: “After the international break, the three games very quickly so we've rotated in those three games. You've got to trust and believe in the group, and sometimes those fresh legs can give you the edge.”

The manager believed it was defensive lapses that cost his side the points.

He said: “The goals we conceded today were unlike us, normally we're good with that sort of detail, very resilient and efficient in terms of our defensive work.

Scott Parker celebrates his goalScott Parker celebrates his goal
Recap: Fulham 2 v1 Cardiff City - As it happened

"We're disappointed with the goals we've conceded. But this is a good squad with a good spirit and we'll work hard to win as many games as we can before the end of the season.

“[the first goal] Its a midfielder so we've not tracked, not read the danger and dealt the situation.

“We've not given it up, that is the message. There's no way, we've worked so hard to get ourselves into this situation and we've got to see it through.”

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Cardiff City manager Russell Slade defends attacking gamble as play-off hopes take a hit


The manager believed it was defensive lapses that cost his side the points.

BY PHIL SMITH

Sunday 10th April 2016

Slade threw on two strikers as his team chased a winner against Fulham, leaving the door open at the back to concede late on


Russell Slade has no regrets about his attacking gamble after a late Fulham winner left their play-off hopes in the balance.

Cardiff City were on the back foot when he threw on Kenneth Zohore and later Idriss Saadi in an attempt to force what would have been a major winner.

Slade said: “That's what its about. At this stage, you have to take one or two chances to go and get the three points. We threw our strikers on and put Lex in behind them in an effort to win the football match.”



Slade also decided to rest Stuart O'Keefe, despite the midfielder's impressive form in recent weeks.

He said: “After the international break, the three games very quickly so we've rotated in those three games. You've got to trust and believe in the group, and sometimes those fresh legs can give you the edge.”

The manager believed it was defensive lapses that cost his side the points.

He said: “The goals we conceded today were unlike us, normally we're good with that sort of detail, very resilient and efficient in terms of our defensive work.

Scott Parker celebrates his goalScott Parker celebrates his goal
Recap: Fulham 2 v1 Cardiff City - As it happened

"We're disappointed with the goals we've conceded. But this is a good squad with a good spirit and we'll work hard to win as many games as we can before the end of the season.

“[the first goal] Its a midfielder so we've not tracked, not read the danger and dealt the situation.

“We've not given it up, that is the message. There's no way, we've worked so hard to get ourselves into this situation and we've got to see it through.”

Overall Slade didn't do too much wrong in trying to win the game.

However, to not play O'Keefe was silly and to replace him with Gunnarsson rather than Dikajoi is simply madness based on recent form.

People have to realise that whilst Gunnar will run through a brick wall for us a wall is stationary and midfield players, including old ones like Parker, actually run !! His lack of pace it what you notice most after watching O'Keefe.

The ability to nip the ball in tight spots is something good,mobile midfielders have and it was sorely missed today.

Dropping am inform okeefe was a big mistake and such a stupid decision

O'Keefe needed a rest after running himself to exhaustion in the Derby & Burnley games. If he had played and turned in a poor performance due to fatigue then Slade would have been slaughtered for not utilising the squad.

Also there is no guarantee that playing O'Keefe would have made any difference as both Fulham goals were due to defensive lapses, personally I would be asking why Malone continues to play when clearly he doesn't fancy the defensive part of being a left-back.

O'Keefe needed a rest after running himself to exhaustion in the Derby & Burnley games. If he had played and turned in a poor performance due to fatigue then Slade would have been slaughtered for not utilising the squad.

Also there is no guarantee that playing O'Keefe would have made any difference as both Fulham goals were due to defensive lapses, personally I would be asking why Malone continues to play when clearly he doesn't fancy the defensive part of being a left-back.

Of course there's no guarantee but we have just had an international break so for him to be rested after 2 games after a international break is ludicrous if he needs resting after 2 games of football with a 2 week break then he shouldn't be a professional footballer . Slade made a mistake in resting him and it backfired

O'Keefe needed a rest after running himself to exhaustion in the Derby & Burnley games. If he had played and turned in a poor performance due to fatigue then Slade would have been slaughtered for not utilising the squad.

Also there is no guarantee that playing O'Keefe would have made any difference as both Fulham goals were due to defensive lapses, personally I would be asking why Malone continues to play when clearly he doesn't fancy the defensive part of being a left-back.

Of course there's no guarantee but we have just had an international break so for him to be rested after 2 games after a international break is ludicrous if he needs resting after 2 games of football with a 2 week break then he shouldn't be a professional footballer . Slade made a mistake in resting him and it backfired

The international break is an irrelevance as O'Keefe played 2 high tempo games within 4 days and it took its toll. O'Keefe's job is to cover a lot of ground in games and the decision wouldn't have been made without speaking to the player. Again you state it 'backfired' yet there is no direct evidence that playing O'Keefe would have made any difference as both Fulham goals were due to defensive lapses

O'Keefe needed a rest after running himself to exhaustion in the Derby & Burnley games. If he had played and turned in a poor performance due to fatigue then Slade would have been slaughtered for not utilising the squad.

Also there is no guarantee that playing O'Keefe would have made any difference as both Fulham goals were due to defensive lapses, personally I would be asking why Malone continues to play when clearly he doesn't fancy the defensive part of being a left-back.

Of course there's no guarantee but we have just had an international break so for him to be rested after 2 games after a international break is ludicrous if he needs resting after 2 games of football with a 2 week break then he shouldn't be a professional footballer . Slade made a mistake in resting him and it backfired

The international break is an irrelevance as O'Keefe played 2 high tempo games within 4 days and it took its toll. O'Keefe's job is to cover a lot of ground in games and the decision wouldn't have been made without speaking to the player. Again you state it 'backfired' yet there is no direct evidence that playing O'Keefe would have made any difference as both Fulham goals were due to defensive lapses

Again how is it irrelevant ? a professional footballer should be able to play more than 2 games after an international break . By that logic all the players who played in the 2 games ,should have been rested for Fulham. Okeefe was inform and shouldn't have been dropped , would it of made a difference? who knows but to drop an inform player after just 2 games with a 2 week break before is a mistake

O'Keefe needed a rest after running himself to exhaustion in the Derby & Burnley games. If he had played and turned in a poor performance due to fatigue then Slade would have been slaughtered for not utilising the squad.

Also there is no guarantee that playing O'Keefe would have made any difference as both Fulham goals were due to defensive lapses, personally I would be asking why Malone continues to play when clearly he doesn't fancy the defensive part of being a left-back.

Of course there's no guarantee but we have just had an international break so for him to be rested after 2 games after a international break is ludicrous if he needs resting after 2 games of football with a 2 week break then he shouldn't be a professional footballer . Slade made a mistake in resting him and it backfired

The international break is an irrelevance as O'Keefe played 2 high tempo games within 4 days and it took its toll. O'Keefe's job is to cover a lot of ground in games and the decision wouldn't have been made without speaking to the player. Again you state it 'backfired' yet there is no direct evidence that playing O'Keefe would have made any difference as both Fulham goals were due to defensive lapses

Again how is it irrelevant ? a professional footballer should be able to play more than 2 games after an international break . By that logic all the players who played in the 2 games ,should have been rested for Fulham. Okeefe was inform and shouldn't have been dropped , would it of made a difference? who knows but to drop an inform player after just 2 games with a 2 week break before is a mistake

The International break is irrelevant as it happened before these games. If we were to have one now then I could understand gambling on O'Keefe's fitness. All players are different and can pick up knocks during 180 minutes of football or can be suffering from cold/viruses etc. It is up to the management to assess and make a decision taking the players view into consideration. Your exact science of looking at the situation is at best naïve and Slade made a call which had absolutely no baring directly on the result.

O'Keefe needed a rest after running himself to exhaustion in the Derby & Burnley games. If he had played and turned in a poor performance due to fatigue then Slade would have been slaughtered for not utilising the squad.

Also there is no guarantee that playing O'Keefe would have made any difference as both Fulham goals were due to defensive lapses, personally I would be asking why Malone continues to play when clearly he doesn't fancy the defensive part of being a left-back.

Of course there's no guarantee but we have just had an international break so for him to be rested after 2 games after a international break is ludicrous if he needs resting after 2 games of football with a 2 week break then he shouldn't be a professional footballer . Slade made a mistake in resting him and it backfired

The international break is an irrelevance as O'Keefe played 2 high tempo games within 4 days and it took its toll. O'Keefe's job is to cover a lot of ground in games and the decision wouldn't have been made without speaking to the player. Again you state it 'backfired' yet there is no direct evidence that playing O'Keefe would have made any difference as both Fulham goals were due to defensive lapses

Again how is it irrelevant ? a professional footballer should be able to play more than 2 games after an international break . By that logic all the players who played in the 2 games ,should have been rested for Fulham. Okeefe was inform and shouldn't have been dropped , would it of made a difference? who knows but to drop an inform player after just 2 games with a 2 week break before is a mistake

The International break is irrelevant as it happened before these games. If we were to have one now then I could understand gambling on O'Keefe's fitness. All players are different and can pick up knocks during 180 minutes of football or can be suffering from cold/viruses etc. It is up to the management to assess and make a decision taking the players view into consideration. Your exact science of looking at the situation is at best naïve and Slade made a call which had absolutely no baring directly on the result.

have to agree to disagree

O'Keefe needed a rest after running himself to exhaustion in the Derby & Burnley games. If he had played and turned in a poor performance due to fatigue then Slade would have been slaughtered for not utilising the squad.

Also there is no guarantee that playing O'Keefe would have made any difference as both Fulham goals were due to defensive lapses, personally I would be asking why Malone continues to play when clearly he doesn't fancy the defensive part of being a left-back.

Of course there's no guarantee but we have just had an international break so for him to be rested after 2 games after a international break is ludicrous if he needs resting after 2 games of football with a 2 week break then he shouldn't be a professional footballer . Slade made a mistake in resting him and it backfired

Agree 100 %with you Darran, what was achieved at Burnley was totally wasted at Fulham

O'Keefe needed a rest after running himself to exhaustion in the Derby & Burnley games. If he had played and turned in a poor performance due to fatigue then Slade would have been slaughtered for not utilising the squad.

Also there is no guarantee that playing O'Keefe would have made any difference as both Fulham goals were due to defensive lapses, personally I would be asking why Malone continues to play when clearly he doesn't fancy the defensive part of being a left-back.

Of course there's no guarantee but we have just had an international break so for him to be rested after 2 games after a international break is ludicrous if he needs resting after 2 games of football with a 2 week break then he shouldn't be a professional footballer . Slade made a mistake in resting him and it backfired

The international break is an irrelevance as O'Keefe played 2 high tempo games within 4 days and it took its toll. O'Keefe's job is to cover a lot of ground in games and the decision wouldn't have been made without speaking to the player. Again you state it 'backfired' yet there is no direct evidence that playing O'Keefe would have made any difference as both Fulham goals were due to defensive lapses

Again how is it irrelevant ? a professional footballer should be able to play more than 2 games after an international break . By that logic all the players who played in the 2 games ,should have been rested for Fulham. Okeefe was inform and shouldn't have been dropped , would it of made a difference? who knows but to drop an inform player after just 2 games with a 2 week break before is a mistake

Spot on Darran.