City v. Hayes and Yeading

yuffie wrote:We moved up a place in the table.

For what it is worth Steve Phillips might make a good manager. Certainly wouldn't lack passion.

An interesting idea. Has he any coaching qualifications?

Not sure about formal qualifications, although he was player/coach at Crewe for a couple of seasons. Though that was probably goalkeeper related.

Any successful ex goalkeeper managers? I recall Shilton not being great.

As much as I like Jim Rollo, I agree that a new manager needs to be separate from the current managerial set-up. If Torquay's results continue as they are, we may be able to speak to Mr Nicholson...? Issue as always is finances.. Based on the short time I've been coming to Twerton Park (last three seasons), Board will sit on their hands (getting knocked out of the Trophy got barely a mention or any hint of analysis in the Chairman's notes in the programme).
With a realistic managerial option in mind, I agree with the Billy Clark suggestion made by earlier poster.

The first half today was an embarrassment. Bear in mind that H&Y had a midweek cup game which they lost so would have been tired and maybe a little demoralised, we should have been going at them from the off, instead they were fresh and enthusiastic, ran rings round us and could have been 3 or 4 up at half time. Although our lads gave it a go in the second half, which at least made for some entertainment, we ended up getting what we deserved. As the games go by those first six wins are looking like relegation savers (hopefully).

I have been one of the patient and understanding ones up until now. After all we have bigger issues at stake than winning a game of football, but the time has come for fresh ideas on the pitch. The manager has to leave and we need someone from outside the club to come in.

I know that there are more important things in life and, indeed, to do with the club but Hayes and Yeading's second goal was a disgrace in the manner that it was conceded especially when they had gone so close to scoring only a minute or two earlier.

I am the first one to say that going to football isn't really about the style of football or even the winning, it is about much more than that. If we came to football just to see wins, we would support Barcelona or something. However, at the end of the day, we have come to see players or, perhaps more pertinently, the management earning their roles if not their money. Otherwise we would all just come together and stay in the pub.

I have said before that whenever there is any effort to improve crowds the team plays sh*t. It is beginning to look like sabotage.

Ha ha, although I am not one for conspiracy theories can see your thinking.

I've said it before and I will say it again, people aren't drawn to football for pretty football or guaranteed wins otherwise everyone would be a Barcelona supporter (although it seems that that may be the case). In my years of my supporting Cardiff, the season we ended up at the lowest position we had been in ever was one of the best I had - not least for the gallows humour typically generated by football supporters. The years we spent in Division 2 (in old money) were nowhere near as good fun due to the succession of clowns that we had running the club. Needless to say, I don't regret missing that club's supposed peak in the Premiership.

The issue is, however, that the atmosphere around the ground is making it a hard sell. I am not someone who thinks that supporters should stand behind the team no matter what and think that they were perfectly within their rights to boo the team and, probably more, the management after that first half horror show yesterday. However, any newcomer to Twerton Park would have thought that they saw a great game on the whole by fulltime and, sometimes, an exciting goalfest like yesterday brings people back even if the home team are on the wrong end of it.

I think, however, that the 0-0 bore draw against Basingstoke was much more damaging as not only were there students encouraged to come down but literally nothing happened in the game. They would probably enjoyed yesterday more than that game even if us long-suffering supporters didn't.

Marc Monitor wrote:Ha ha, although I am not one for conspiracy theories  can see your thinking.

I think, however, that the 0-0 bore draw against Basingstoke was much more damaging as not only were there students encouraged to come down but literally nothing happened in the game. They would probably enjoyed yesterday more than that game even if us long-suffering supporters didn't.

On the three occasions wehave offered a deal to students we have performed poorly.

As I say, though, Colin, were the other two losses with lots of goals or were they boring games with no goals like Basingstoke? If newcomers, who haven't yet forged a loyalty to the club, come to a game like, say, the Oxford City game, they will have seen at least one good footballing side and lots of goals. They aren't going to switch to Oxford City but may be drawn back because it was an enjoyable afternoon watching football. It is only as they develop a long-term support and emotional investment in the team that they will be put off by such defeats.

The 0-0 with Basingstoke, on the other hand, had nothing to recommend it to anyone - Bath City supporters, Basingstoke supporters or the neutral.

But was it a good game? It was good in terms of a fightback but what about the quality of football overall?

I admit to finding it hard to judge how good or bad a game is, as I largely base that on whether we've won or not. However, I would suggest a neutral would have found a lot to enjoy in the game yesterday. At the end of the day it is Conference South football so you aren't going to see a technically perfect match but it had moments of quality, including from us during the second half plus a wonder solo goal.

You must really have enjoyed the last three months then!

I have to laugh at some comments I've heard/read saying we play negative football. Starting with three forwards, three of them I'd class as out-and-out forwards in the second half, is negative?

As for whether it's time for Arch to go, well, whoever comes in within a few weeks I'm sure the fans will have something else to criticise anyway. It's happened to the last five managers or so. If he did jump/gets pushed it'd be symetrical at least - his reign started with a 3-2 defeat at home to Hayes & Yeading.

comrade powell wrote:You must really have enjoyed the last three months then!

Well, it hasn't kept me away!

I might be alone in this but whilst I have left games disappointed at the end result, this feeling hasn't lasted as long as it used to. And I honestly think this is still a hangover from the North Ferriby game. From then on even last minute goals like yesterday and Bognor, whilst disappointing, seem minor compared to that February afternoon on Humberside.

BenE wrote:But was it a good game? It was good in terms of a fightback but what about the quality of football overall?

Good question. First half, we let H & Y play a very good game. Second half, we had an exciting if a touch scrappy but successful first 20-30 minutes. H & Y cam back into it which made for an exciting last 15. As faor good football, H & Y played the best in that first half but it was exciting enough. I have seen a fair few games where the football hasn't been of a great quality but there have been lots of goals and lots of excitement. Indeed, the Premiership is built on it.

As I say, I am not sure that neutral newcomers are that bothered about good football, they want to be entertained and, to be fair, they probably would have been yesterday. Regular supporters of Bath City, however, will feel differently and rightly so.

yuffie wrote:From then on even last minute goals like yesterday and Bognor, whilst disappointing, seem minor compared to that February afternoon on Humberside.

I am surprised about that. Away to North Ferriby, I was proud of the team that had kept on going through the run. Yes, there were mistakes but the commitment was there. The management have to be given credit for that as well, as they should and have been from me whenever they get the team playing as well as they can and succeeding. The Rovers game I thought was a real success for the management. They got everything right that afternoon.

Marc Monitor wrote:As I say, I am not sure that neutral newcomers are that bothered about good football, they want to be entertained and, to be fair, they probably would have been yesterday. Regular supporters of Bath City, however, will feel differently and rightly so.

I'm pretty sure people have said on here before that they were happy to settle for entertaining football whatever the result, which is absolutely ridiculous. Second half yesterday had pretty much everything, which ruined my intended viewing of the snooker on the laptop (I had little else to do with the PA system dieing for the umpeenth time). Would have swapped it all for an unremarkable 1-0 win.

I think that it is pretty odd, for a long-term supporter, to say that they are happy to settle for entertaining football what the result. As it goes, with Bath CIty in the seasons I have been watching, when we play in an manner full of passing and good technique, we are successful.

However, if we were successful grinding out 1-0 wins at home and 0-0 draws away, I could probably live with it. Of course, opposing supporters slag that style off when a team is successful - see George Graham era Arsenal - but will happily put up with it when it is your team - see George Graham era Arsenal.

Like I say though, neutral newcomers like to see exciting games full of goals and sometimes two teams making mistakes can make for good games to watch.

For long-term committed supporters, yesterday on the back of a terrible run are like the straw that breaks the camel's back. For neutrals, 0-0 against Basingstoke can be the real damage.

I was introduced to a first timer after the game ended. He had thoroughly enjoyed it.

stillmanjunior wrote:I have to laugh at some comments I've heard/read saying we play negative football. Starting with three forwards, three of them I'd class as out-and-out forwards in the second half, is negative?

As for whether it's time for Arch to go, well, whoever comes in within a few weeks I'm sure the fans will have something else to criticise anyway. It's happened to the last five managers or so. If he did jump/gets pushed it'd be symetrical at least - his reign started with a 3-2 defeat at home to Hayes & Yeading.

It is all very well to say that we are now starting with three forwards, but this has been a long time coming, and in the past we have certainly been negative. You only have to look at the number of games in previous seasons that ended 1-1 because we tried to hold a 1-0 lead rather than pushing for 2-0. The best recent example of the negative approach was in the first half of the home game against North Ferriby, when rather than trying to make sure we took a lead into the second leg we effectively played 4-5-1 and paid the price. I still maintain that those 45 minutes were every bit to blame for our failure to get to Wembley as the missed penalties.    

As for any future manager being criticised, well that goes with the job and applies whatever club they are at.

A chance to enjoy the highlights...

http://www.hayesandyeadingunited.co.uk/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=2853&start=15

I have to say that I have never particularly thought of us as negative as it goes. I don't really think that the reason we aren't scoring is because we are going out of our way to be negative either.

As for the three forwards, you can't just stick three forwards on and hope that the numbers will come through. You have to explain to them who is leading the line and who is playing of that player. You still have to say whether all three players are up in the face of the goalie and defenders, which ones are or aren't or, indeed, if any are and you actually going to sit back. You also have to explain how you are going to make up for the deficiency in midfield. Does one of the attackers have a responsibility to track back? If so, always the same one? Either that or you have a full back pushing up (or both?).

When we played 3 up front, it didn't look as if the players had been given any instruction apart from "Play like you normally do" or "Do what you want"