K23
Ivor Allchurch
A few years ago on MoTD, I saw Alan Shearer telling off one of his co-pundits in no uncertain terms for praising one of the teams for giving 100%. Shearer's point was that any professional footballer or team should be giving 100% every time they were on the pitch and it struck me that he was right, they should do that for professional pride at the very least let alone the ridiculous amount of money they were being paid.
So, was the Swans performance against Cardiff the 100% bar for our team? I certainly hadn't seen a better one for quite some time but surely the purpose of the coaching staff is to get the team playing as close to their 100% potential as possible every game and certainly not less than 90%. Maybe it is statistically unlikely that every single player can be at 95% of their potential or better all at the same time but now we know what 100% looks like, are we entitled to judge the team, every player and the coaching staff against that performance? And if that was 100%, then what on earth was that 25% performance 6 days earlier against Bristol City and who was responsible for it?
If we can play like that once, then we should be able to replicate it at least, say, 30 times over a season like more successful teams do and even if there are inevitably games we play like that but don't win, it should still give a platform to amass something like 100 points and a realistic stab at promotion. I have been dissatisfied with a lot of the performances this season, but now I know what our potential is, I'm even more dissatisfied with those performances because at the time, I had thought, that's where we are as a team and I now know we've been playing most of our games in neutral instead of in the higher gears. The saddest part is, all those lacklustre performances were starting to become acceptable because it seemed like that was the best we could do. It isn't.
So, was the Swans performance against Cardiff the 100% bar for our team? I certainly hadn't seen a better one for quite some time but surely the purpose of the coaching staff is to get the team playing as close to their 100% potential as possible every game and certainly not less than 90%. Maybe it is statistically unlikely that every single player can be at 95% of their potential or better all at the same time but now we know what 100% looks like, are we entitled to judge the team, every player and the coaching staff against that performance? And if that was 100%, then what on earth was that 25% performance 6 days earlier against Bristol City and who was responsible for it?
If we can play like that once, then we should be able to replicate it at least, say, 30 times over a season like more successful teams do and even if there are inevitably games we play like that but don't win, it should still give a platform to amass something like 100 points and a realistic stab at promotion. I have been dissatisfied with a lot of the performances this season, but now I know what our potential is, I'm even more dissatisfied with those performances because at the time, I had thought, that's where we are as a team and I now know we've been playing most of our games in neutral instead of in the higher gears. The saddest part is, all those lacklustre performances were starting to become acceptable because it seemed like that was the best we could do. It isn't.