Cardiff City Forum



A forum for all things Cardiff City

Re: Jol has agreed terms with Fulham

Sat Jul 17, 2010 11:08 am

Midfield general wrote:FFS please not another season with Jones and his 4-4-2 :twisted:



this is not the right time to lose dave jones

Re: Jol has agreed terms with Fulham

Sat Jul 17, 2010 11:10 am

yeah, couldn't stand another season challenging for promotion and scoring loads of goals. Bring back Alan Durban!

Re: Jol has agreed terms with Fulham

Sat Jul 17, 2010 11:41 am

:roll:

MG, can you give a rationale explanation for your 'hatred' of a manager who took us to 4th place last season - a season that saw us score for fun?

Losing Jones would be a disaster for this club at this moment in time - apart from being a very decent manager, he is the only continuity that we have got; if he were to go to a club like Fulham you can be fairly sure that players like Bothroyd, Chopra, Whittingham etc would follow.

If Jones is so bad, who would your alternative be?

Re: Jol has agreed terms with Fulham

Sat Jul 17, 2010 12:00 pm

Yes maybe he has lost us points - but on that basis you also have to give him credit for winning us games as well over the whole time he has been here.

Do I think he made mistakes in the Blackpool game - yes, Hudson should never have been selected. But arguably without him in the first game against Leicester we wouldn't have been in the play off final as he was superb in that game. Jones got that decision spot on.

Let's not forget that Blackpool were the form team in the last third of the season and they smashed a Forest team on the way to getting to that final.

To entirely lay the blame on Jones because we didn't beat them isn't really looking at all the facts. Over the course of the season we were the 4th best team in the league and 2 of the teams that finished above us were always going to finish in the top 2.

Jones isn't perfect, but I doubt any other manager is either; I still don't see who a better alternative is than Jones especially at this moment in time when the club is going through a massive transitional period.

Re: Jol has agreed terms with Fulham

Sat Jul 17, 2010 12:02 pm

Oh and how do you know that 'Jones is putting his name around for every job'?

Nobody in the media is talking about him for the Fulham job - that is a rumour that has started on messageboards?

What other jobs do you you know that Jones has applied for?

Re: Jol has agreed terms with Fulham

Sat Jul 17, 2010 12:25 pm

We also lose valuable points due to Jones' team selection. Every Manager does that throughout a season, thats footballLets be honest that play off final papered over huge cracks in the team. People on here seem to have rose tinted glasses when it comes to Dave Jones. A thin squad with no back up, done well to get to Wembley in the first place.The man never accepts that he is in the wrong which damages the team in the long term.

Even in the playoff final everyone knew that Adam was the man to stop but Jones' line up meant that Adam was passing balls all over the place and I'm sorry but anyone who feels that Kelvin should have come on instead of Ross is living in the clouds. :lol: :lol: Agree though ADAM is the person to stop when in full swing.By Jones' putting his name around to every job under the sun he clearly doesn't want to be here anymore so I was CCFC fucks him off !!! So who says hes been putting his name around, apart from you of course!

Re: Jol has agreed terms with Fulham

Sat Jul 17, 2010 12:30 pm

The problem for me is, looking at the positions, it seems we're improving every season.

But...

Look at the performances. Defensively, where we were solid with other defenders, I feel we'll concede goals. Kennedy, whose legs have gone, is being relied upon as first choice left back - having him fill in for games, sure, but the entire season?

Midfield? Jones still feels we don't need a ball winner there, that our midfield is fine.

Up front, Bothroyd with no backup for the target man role. Anyone with a brain cell can tell you Etuhu is a winger, not a targetman... wityh a small squad, at a pinch, Magennis could have replaced Bothroyd against Blackpool without necessarily comprimising our game plan.

Overly reliant upon 4-4-2, a refusal to adapt. Which is great if you're routinely blowing teams away, not so when there are struggles, ie versus teams wuith three in central midfield.

Predictable substitution.

Lack of in game adaption.

Jones has done a good job based upon what he's had. I just don't feel he can take us any further.

Re: Jol has agreed terms with Fulham

Sat Jul 17, 2010 12:42 pm

Nerd,

I respect your football opinion and certaintly agree with some valid points you make too.

As for taking the Club further, in the present circumstances I dont think even Jose Mourhino could do that!

It's baton down the hatches time, clearly, and Jones is probably the best person available for that!

Re: Jol has agreed terms with Fulham

Sat Jul 17, 2010 12:51 pm

Daya wrote:We also lose valuable points due to Jones' team selection. Every Manager does that throughout a season, thats footballLets be honest that play off final papered over huge cracks in the team. People on here seem to have rose tinted glasses when it comes to Dave Jones. A thin squad with no back up, done well to get to Wembley in the first place.The man never accepts that he is in the wrong which damages the team in the long term.

Even in the playoff final everyone knew that Adam was the man to stop but Jones' line up meant that Adam was passing balls all over the place and I'm sorry but anyone who feels that Kelvin should have come on instead of Ross is living in the clouds. :lol: :lol: Agree though ADAM is the person to stop when in full swing.By Jones' putting his name around to every job under the sun he clearly doesn't want to be here anymore so I was CCFC fucks him off !!! So who says hes been putting his name around, apart from you of course!


Midfield General,

Game, Set and Match?

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Re: Jol has agreed terms with Fulham

Sat Jul 17, 2010 1:01 pm

Midfield general wrote:Another season of not being able to play against a five man midfield, another season of Hudson being at his shit standard, another season of boring DJ's interviews that send you to sleep, another season of yawn, yawn Dave 'f*cking' Jones.

f**k off out of our club you boring c**t


The only boring c**t in this conversation is you MG.

Re: Jol has agreed terms with Fulham

Sat Jul 17, 2010 1:06 pm

chewbarker wrote:
Midfield general wrote:Another season of not being able to play against a five man midfield, another season of Hudson being at his shit standard, another season of boring DJ's interviews that send you to sleep, another season of yawn, yawn Dave 'f*cking' Jones.

f**k off out of our club you boring c**t


The only boring c**t in this conversation is you MG.


I think hes gone to Saturday Surgery :lol:

Re: Jol has agreed terms with Fulham

Sat Jul 17, 2010 1:27 pm

He was superb when he was at Leicester wasn't he!! Of all the people to come up with, Ian Holloway!

I'm going to hazard a guess that most of the teams we played last season, played with some form of a 5 man midfield - we won more games than we lost hence where we ended finishing up.

Our depth of squad may be something to do with the way we play or don't play - how would you combat a 5 man midfield with the players we have?

Re: Jol has agreed terms with Fulham

Sat Jul 17, 2010 1:42 pm

Midfield general wrote:Go like for like.

No-one in their right mind would want Hudson in their team.

Do you want me to list the other managers I know are better than Jones who would be available ?


Go on.... could do with a giggle, while you are there can you list where you think they would be better too?

Re: Jol has agreed terms with Fulham

Sat Jul 17, 2010 2:05 pm

Midfield general wrote:Mowbury, Dowie,, Megson, or I would even give a Steve Clarke a shot at it if he wanted too.
Brown

And what benefit do you see in your named list?

Re: Jol has agreed terms with Fulham

Sat Jul 17, 2010 2:41 pm

Midfield general wrote:Another season of not being able to play against a five man midfield, another season of Hudson being at his shit standard, another season of boring DJ's interviews that send you to sleep, another season of yawn, yawn Dave 'f*cking' Jones.

f**k off out of our club you boring c**t


Midfield general wrote:Mowbury, Dowie, Brown, Megson, or I would even give a Steve Clarke a shot at it if he wanted too.


You called Jones boring and then you name Mowbury, Dowie and Megson! :lol: :lol:

Brown hasn't got a clue about man management (Remember his on the pitch half time team huddle) and going back to boring, "Steve stay in the background Clarke!" :lol:

You're right about Hudson though, so one out of three ain't bad! :)

Re: Jol has agreed terms with Fulham

Sat Jul 17, 2010 2:47 pm

"Brown hasn't got a clue "" now theres a clear fact!

Midfield General, doesnt seem to grasp it either :lol:

Re: Jol has agreed terms with Fulham

Sat Jul 17, 2010 2:59 pm

You must be looking for a reaction to name that forward thinking bunch!?

So you accuse our manager of not being forward thinking - and then you tell him he needs to 'copy' our opposition by going like for like!!

In terms of going like for like, what you are basically saying is that you would let other sides (possibly inferior sides) dictate our style of play? If we went with a 5 man midfield, it is likely to be a striker that we lose - it certainly wouldn't be Hudson!

Do you think the likes of Arsenal and Man Utd should go with 5 man midfields when they play inferior teams such as Bolton, Stoke etc?

Re: Jol has agreed terms with Fulham

Sat Jul 17, 2010 3:30 pm

Midfield general wrote:People seem to have forgotten the embarrassment at Newcastle, Peterborough, Doncaster, and the playoff final.

May I also remind you that when the two best teams recently met in the world cup final they went 'like for like'.

Hudson, Taiwo, Kennedy, Marshall who can't handle any cross into the box, Rae, Kelvin, Eddie Johnson and many more have been a waste of time and expense.


You clearly seem to forget Ridsdales part in any of this, Hudson, agree is pony, Rids still went and overpaid him and Charlton.

Taiwo, cheap option worth a chance but clearly not good enough. Cheap otions have to be gambled on when you have a Chairman frittering funds all over the shop.

Marshall, still young for a keeper. Still better than those on the bench.

Kennedy - old head, another cheap option due to lack of funds.

Rae, been a good average player, albeit now going backwards but again was a cheapish option.

Eddie Johnson.... theres a right story with that one- another Riddler special!

As for the games you list, thats a total of 3 out of a full season , where Jones had to battle all the off field goings on around him, such as wages late, embargo's, locked out of training facilities , etc etc...... and you still moan??

Re: Jol has agreed terms with Fulham

Sat Jul 17, 2010 3:40 pm

Midfield general wrote:People seem to have forgotten the embarrassment at Newcastle, Peterborough, Doncaster, and the playoff final.

May I also remind you that when the two best teams recently met in the world cup final they went 'like for like'.

Hudson, Taiwo, Kennedy, Marshall who can't handle any cross into the box, Rae, Kelvin, Eddie Johnson and many more have been a waste of time and expense.


Even Alex Ferguson has bought some donkies and some who couldn't perform for him, but went on to play superbly for other teams, Diego Forlan for example!

No manager goes through his career without making poor signings, but if you weigh up the good signings he's brought in, like Bothroyd, Chopra, McCormack, McPhail, Burke, McNaughton, Roger Johnson, Loovens, even Routledge had we been able to keep him, his better signings far outweigh his poor ones!

He recently tried out a 4-3-3 formation at Bath, played a different formation when we outplayed and beat (Had you forgotten) a Swansea side quite comfortably last season, who playing their usual boring 4-5-1 formation!

We've improved year on year with him at the helm, give him a bigger squad with a couple of more decent signings to come in and I'm confident he'd take us up!

Re: Jol has agreed terms with Fulham

Sat Jul 17, 2010 3:43 pm

One of the main reason we did well against a 5 man midfield was because most midfields in the Championship were crap. When we came up against the likes of Newcastle and Swansea who mastered the 5 midfield setup we struggled and in some cases look embarrised. Prime example being against Peterborough who out of desperation went 5 in midfield after the break. Looked what happend there, it was shocking to be there.

Anyone noticed what formation we played at Bath? I could not quite work it out but it was not 4 4 2. I just wonder if DJ is going ot try something new this year. He will know the opposition and just perhaps is wondering he will need to change things.

Re: Jol has agreed terms with Fulham

Sat Jul 17, 2010 4:25 pm

Bakedalasker wrote:One of the main reason we did well against a 5 man midfield was because most midfields in the Championship were crap. When we came up against the likes of Newcastle and Swansea who mastered the 5 midfield setup we struggled and in some cases look embarrised. Prime example being against Peterborough who out of desperation went 5 in midfield after the break. Looked what happend there, it was shocking to be there.

Anyone noticed what formation we played at Bath? I could not quite work it out but it was not 4 4 2. I just wonder if DJ is going ot try something new this year. He will know the opposition and just perhaps is wondering he will need to change things.


We played a 4-3-3 at Bath, which is the same formation most teams used in the Wold Cup and which Blackpool beat us with at Wembley! :ayatollah:

Re: Jol has agreed terms with Fulham

Sat Jul 17, 2010 5:19 pm

MG, they might have gone like for like, but it was both teams 'natural' formation; you are also talking about a totally different level of player to that which we watch every week.

Of the 3 games you mention:

We lost heavily at the home of the Champions and a genuine Premiership quality team. Not the end of the world.
We went 4 nil up against P'boro and yes I agree that putting an extra man in midfield during the second half would have stemmed the flow.
Doncaster - every player was bad that day. We could have played with 15 and we still wouldn't have beaten them.

Our boring 4-4-2 seemed to do a fairly decent job against the likes of Bristol City (twice), Sheff Utd, West Brom etc. If you are going to quote poor games at least acknowledge the good ones.

In terms of the players, what do you want DJ to do - he has a very limited budget; do you acknowledge that the likes of Bothroyd, Whittingham, Chopra, McCormack, Johnson, Loovens, Burke, Routledge have been good signings under Jones or do you give him absolutely no credit whatsoever?

I'm still not sure who you would advocate bringing in if Jones walked out tomorrow - assuming they would want to come to the club in it's current situation.

Re: Jol has agreed terms with Fulham

Sat Jul 17, 2010 5:25 pm

Overthemoon wrote:
Bakedalasker wrote:One of the main reason we did well against a 5 man midfield was because most midfields in the Championship were crap. When we came up against the likes of Newcastle and Swansea who mastered the 5 midfield setup we struggled and in some cases look embarrised. Prime example being against Peterborough who out of desperation went 5 in midfield after the break. Looked what happend there, it was shocking to be there.

Anyone noticed what formation we played at Bath? I could not quite work it out but it was not 4 4 2. I just wonder if DJ is going ot try something new this year. He will know the opposition and just perhaps is wondering he will need to change things.


We played a 4-3-3 at Bath, which is the same formation most teams used in the Wold Cup and which Blackpool beat us with at Wembley! :ayatollah:


If you take a look at the interview with Jay B on the official site he mentions quite a few times in the first few mins about trying to get used to the new formation. Maybe we will see either something new this season or a plan b.

Re: Jol has agreed terms with Fulham

Sat Jul 17, 2010 5:38 pm

Midfield general wrote:Slightly late for a plan B now don't you think. Jones had all of last season to work on that before the playoff final and he hasn't had any new faces in so why didn't he work on this before..?


His plan A got us to our highest finish in years with a paper thin squad. While I agree he's vastly overpaid, we have seen an improvement every year. We do struggle when teams pack the midfield but we also seem to score a hell of a lot of goals. We were absolutely terrible in the playoff final but we were still only beaten by a single goal, with a bit more luck, i.e. the two Chopra efforts that hit the woodwork, we'd be in the premiership now. Would you still have the same doubts then? When this teams at their best, they're virtually unplayable at this level - we had a lot more good days than bad days last season.

The only improvement he can make this year is promotion, which is why I think he should be given the chance. If we don't improve again, then I think questions should be asked.

Re: Jol has agreed terms with Fulham

Sat Jul 17, 2010 5:39 pm

asz wrote:
Overthemoon wrote:
Bakedalasker wrote:One of the main reason we did well against a 5 man midfield was because most midfields in the Championship were crap. When we came up against the likes of Newcastle and Swansea who mastered the 5 midfield setup we struggled and in some cases look embarrised. Prime example being against Peterborough who out of desperation went 5 in midfield after the break. Looked what happend there, it was shocking to be there.

Anyone noticed what formation we played at Bath? I could not quite work it out but it was not 4 4 2. I just wonder if DJ is going ot try something new this year. He will know the opposition and just perhaps is wondering he will need to change things.


We played a 4-3-3 at Bath, which is the same formation most teams used in the Wold Cup and which Blackpool beat us with at Wembley! :ayatollah:


If you take a look at the interview with Jay B on the official site he mentions quite a few times in the first few mins about trying to get used to the new formation. Maybe we will see either something new this season or a plan b.


I've seen the interviews of all the players and the physio!

The best bit of Jay's interview was where he was asked about Trundle!

He struggled to stop laughing, said he didn't even know where Neath was and when he got back up off the floor, he wished Fatboy all the best! :lol: :lol:

Re: Jol has agreed terms with Fulham

Sat Jul 17, 2010 5:40 pm

Is this the same Mowbury that was awful at Celtic - a Celtic that play in a inferior league to the Champioship? He has a good season at West Brom but then doesn't every manager get them promoted? For me I still think he has a lot to do to actually prove himself.

Anyway if one of your pre-requistes for a manager is that they do exciting interviews, you'll want him sacked within a week!!

If TM is that good, why hasn't he been taken on by one of the other Championship clubs that have recently needed to employ a manager; maybe he has chosen not to pursue an interest in those jobs, but as said previously I find it hard to believe that we could get a manager of a higher stature than Jones to this club right now.

Re: Jol has agreed terms with Fulham

Sat Jul 17, 2010 5:41 pm

asz wrote:
Midfield general wrote:Slightly late for a plan B now don't you think. Jones had all of last season to work on that before the playoff final and he hasn't had any new faces in so why didn't he work on this before..?


His plan A got us to our highest finish in years with a paper thin squad. While I agree he's vastly overpaid, we have seen an improvement every year. We do struggle when teams pack the midfield but we also seem to score a hell of a lot of goals. We were absolutely terrible in the playoff final but we were still only beaten by a single goal, with a bit more luck, i.e. the two Chopra efforts that hit the woodwork, we'd be in the premiership now. Would you still have the same doubts then? When this teams at their best, they're virtually unplayable at this level - we had a lot more good days than bad days last season.

The only improvement he can make this year is promotion, which is why I think he should be given the chance. If we don't improve again, then I think questions should be asked.


It's never too late for a plan B, look at Holloway, he was out of work for quite a long time and studied the varying formations to play and took what I would call a mediocre squad of players, to where we should be!

Re: Jol has agreed terms with Fulham

Sat Jul 17, 2010 5:57 pm

Overthemoon wrote:
asz wrote:
Midfield general wrote:Slightly late for a plan B now don't you think. Jones had all of last season to work on that before the playoff final and he hasn't had any new faces in so why didn't he work on this before..?


His plan A got us to our highest finish in years with a paper thin squad. While I agree he's vastly overpaid, we have seen an improvement every year. We do struggle when teams pack the midfield but we also seem to score a hell of a lot of goals. We were absolutely terrible in the playoff final but we were still only beaten by a single goal, with a bit more luck, i.e. the two Chopra efforts that hit the woodwork, we'd be in the premiership now. Would you still have the same doubts then? When this teams at their best, they're virtually unplayable at this level - we had a lot more good days than bad days last season.

The only improvement he can make this year is promotion, which is why I think he should be given the chance. If we don't improve again, then I think questions should be asked.


It's never too late for a plan B, look at Holloway, he was out of work for quite a long time and studied the varying formations to play and took what I would call a mediocre squad of players, to where we should be!


Holloways team snuck into the playoffs and won the playoff lottery, while this was no mean achievement (and one I'd be happy with if it happened to us!) surely this is not what we want at city? What I mean by that is that we've been building for a few years now, so if/when we do go up we go up with a chance of staying there not as a one off and then disappear with a few memories of getting relegated by Easter.