- This topic has 45 replies, 21 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 9 months ago by
.
-
5 users thanked author for this post.
He seemed at a loss to explain the second half performance but he sure sounded disappointed by it. Not the sort of stuff we are used to over the years from teams he managed when they came here, in fact Rochdale deserved the win based on their second half performance, we certainly were very poor and clearly didn’t adapt to the change of shape their subs gave them.
2 users thanked author for this post.
Was at pains to point out it was not him and the players that caused the problem.
You are certainly correct about that Keith.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Takes off Burns and Feeney today who were our best players. Burns kept the Dale defence busy whereas Nuttall did f#####l again.
Left Hackney on who is okay going forward but a liability in defence and far far too weak in the tackle, and right now we need grafters who will put a shift in not the lightweights.
As far as I am concerned Hill started with a complete and utter disaster left by Cox or I would be seriously questioning his tactics and team selections.
2 users thanked author for this post.
It is alright blaming the embargo, but seeing most clubs in our division are technically smaller than us they got by without taking the loan, a very costly exercise from very rich owners.
5 users thanked author for this post.
Hill said in his aftermatch interview that we should all stick together,
fans, players, manager, chairman, everyone. But when you have a chairman like SWANN who makes it obvious that he no longer wants to be at Scunthorpe United and can’t even be bothered to be present at matches this makes a mockery of Hill’s statement. We’re rotten at the top.3 users thanked author for this post.
You’re exactly right mistertonmick and so is Hill when he says it’s the embargo that will lose us our league status. Well Hill isn’t going to come out on the radio and say it’s SWANN’s doing is he? But we all know what he meant, he said it’s non of his doing or the players so who does that leave = SWANN. I fully agree with what Hill said and you need to read between the lines. We all know it’s one man’s fault = SWANN. Hill is protecting his players which is what he needs to do particularly the younger ones who are still learning their careers. I do hope fans don’t start blaming Hill for our present disastrous position as in my opinion this is what SWANN wants to happen as he wants no blame laid at his door. BUT WE ALL KNOW WHO IS TO BLAME!!!!!!!
6 users thanked author for this post.
Hill does speak out of turn though, he’s encouraged fans to turn out in number’s on the back of nothing, glad I wasn’t suckered in.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Thought right man at last. Changed opinion when someone who is suspended for 6 games for spitting at an opponent is retained !
And immediately gets recalled !
Stability was needed from day 1 of Mr Hill. 442 and as settled a bench as possible. As injuries occurred then you change. I read players can’t string passes together – it is a basic for goodness sake.
So 1 up, 2nd half some infer that there is a lack of interest or effort. Then 1-1 and even when I went you knew what was coming and it did ! What is more disturbing was the managers post match comments. He seemed mildly irritated but was more upset with a missed foul !! I detect less passion every interview and everything is the fault of the embargo !!
It is not the embargo at fault ! It is the person who took it because all the stability in a club run as a hobby had been wasted and a professional operation hadn’t a clue !
2 users thanked author for this post.
Was at pains to point out it was not him and the players that caused the problem.
You are certainly correct about that Keith.Sorry MK, I can’t agree. I’m no fan of Swann and I admire Hill’s efforts but today was solely down to manager and players IMO. Decent first half but the difference in the two managers half time team talks must have been massive. At least half of our players clearly have no desire to continue in league football.
2 users thanked author for this post.
The whole Rochdale match day squad stayed in the dressing room at half time, no subs out warming up till the blond haired lad who came on as first sub ( thought he was excellent btw ) trotted out two minutes before the second half began to stretch his legs. They were getting one hell of a bollocking after an insipid first half display and boy did the Rochdale manager get his team talk and tactics bang on for the second half, they fully deserved their win.
6 users thanked author for this post.
Asking for our support and to believe in his long/medium/short term plans. Whilst I think he is a very good manager after yesterday’s lethargic performance how does he expect the crowd to respond. We need to go on a run of not just unbeaten games but winning ones. Come on Keith go for it you’ve nothing to lose it’s not your fault.
1 user thanked author for this post.
I’m completely unconvinced by Hill: his record is even worse than Cox’s, performances are no better, we still can’t score, he changed half the squad in January seemingly just for the sake of it and his selections are increasingly confusing.
Then his interview on Saturday was very odd: blaming the referee for our defeat (I’ve not heard a single fan complain about the ref), blaming the embargo, telling fans we have to be realistic. Well, sorry Keith, we know we’re going down to the Conference, that’s our reality, but it doesn’t mean we have to be happy about it or settle for it.
Personally, at this rate, I think we’d be better off with a new manager in the summer for a fresh start in non-league.
1 user thanked author for this post.
I am losing faith in Hill, but I do note the change in tone. When Cox was, deservedly, sacked the rhetoric was that sacking a manager would do no good, because the previous times it was done it achieved nothing. Yet now it might work if we get rid of Hill.
I mean, it might do, but I don’t see how it’s any different to when we had Cox and we were told it wouldn’t do any good because no manager could improve things under Swann.
1 user thanked author for this post.
I mean, it might do, but I don’t see how it’s any different to when we had Cox and we were told it wouldn’t do any good because no manager could improve things under Swann.
Well if nothing else, that has been proven to be true!
2 users thanked author for this post.
One of the main problems is the continuing lack of experience on the pitch.
Old salts may possibly be able to take the pressure but youngsters having to constantly face defeat will eventually wither.
As I pointed out in a different post – the key moment on Saturday was the Rochdale first goal. Young heads finally dropped – there was no denying it and those with only very limited experience really were no better.One issue is that you cannot hope to make progress with players all over the pitch who lack creativity and are just continuity players, at best.
A smattering of flair players acts as a catalyst and through their presence belief builds amongst the rest.1 user thanked author for this post.
Deleney is a hit for me. League 2 quality and athletic and committed and more consistent than Taft.
Grant is an upgrade on Kenyon. Not much quicker around the pitch but has the nous to be in the right place. Still struggling to last the pace – I think he took a knock at the end of the first half Saturday which probably didn’t help.
Feeney has quality but it looks as if his legs are gone. Has a trick but no pace to get away with the ball and create space. May get better with more games but not so sure.
Sinclair, Pyke and Nuttall have not done anything yet. Not sure what has happened to Jarvis but him and Bunn if fit would probably replace any of those 3 on what we have seen so far along with Burns who needs to play every minute he is fit enough to do so.
Do I blame Hill or the players themselves. Not for me. It is what you get scraping the barrel in the last week of January with no money to spend. The only people to blame are those who have chosen who to recruit over the last 4 years. I think they are called Swann.
8 users thanked author for this post.
Lots of posters bulled Hill up,” won’t take any shit from Swann” ” he’ll walk if he’s not backed” and yet he let Loft go without a replacement, let hippo go when he was the most improved player, call for fans to turn up, an extra 1400 did and from what I’ve read left disappointed, 3 points out of 30 since the new year just not good enough, I am certainly not convinced by him at the moment.
1 user thanked author for this post.
One of the main problems is the continuing lack of experience on the pitch.
Old salts may possibly be able to take the pressure but youngsters having to constantly face defeat will eventually wither.
As I pointed out in a different post – the key moment on Saturday was the Rochdale first goal. Young heads finally dropped – there was no denying it and those with only very limited experience really were no better.Lack of experience?
Watson, 26, nearly 100 league games
Ross Millen, 27, getting on for 200 league games
Onarise, 25, getting on for 100 league games
Delaney, 25, 100 league games
Grant, 34, 500 games
Feeney, 35, 400 gamesThat’s more than half the team who not inexperienced.
Personally, I think that you’re being too forgiving on older players and too harsh on the youngsters – the likes of Burns, Rowe & O’Malley have been some of the brighter sparks in our team this year. Aside from Watson, none of the older heads listed above have shone particularly.
One issue is that you cannot hope to make progress with players all over the pitch who lack creativity and are just continuity players, at best.
A smattering of flair players acts as a catalyst and through their presence belief builds amongst the rest.I fully agree on this but to achieve it you also need some sort of system and a plan and we seem to be lacking both of those.
1 user thanked author for this post.
It’s SWANN who let Loft go. It was obvious he couldn’t wait to get some cash, even though a trivial amount and his was one of the first transfers in the January window. It was SWANN who said Loft wouldn’t leave without a replacement and Simon Elliott came out and said Burns was not the replacement.
3 users thanked author for this post.
Maybe he has it on authority Swann won’t be here next season,yippee if that’s true. Now that is an upgrade I can get behind.
2 users thanked author for this post.
You’re casting a lot of aspersions on Hill there awaywego. Not sure how much of it is fair and accurate tbh.
1 user thanked author for this post.
A bit harsh on Hill I think.
Whatever he may think privately he can hardly say publicly (well, perhaps not until he departs anyway). He has to try and be seen to be positive rather than just throwing in the towel.
Hill is a proven manager. His stats over nearly 2 decades don’t lie.
We have had other experienced managers – Robins, Alexander, Hurst etc – all of whom have been successful before and after leaving the club.
That paints a picture and illustrates the the real root cause.
It comes down to budget directly affecting the quality of the players any manager can bring in – pure and simple.
When you have a sub standard budget you end up with a sub standard squad.
That’s what we’ve got.
We can critique Hill’s tactical nous on match day and we can question his signings – but the reality is he’s been forced to rearrange the deckchairs on a sinking ship on a weekly basis because he hasn’t received the support needed to be able to bail it out.
We’ve got a non league budget and a chairman and executive management team who have overseen that – and whose own ability level will be ‘well suited’ shall we say to non league football – which is exactly where we are heading.
Whether we had Hill or Jurgen Klopp in charge – the end result would be the same.
6 users thanked author for this post.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.