Martin's Words

[Longlostjack]

They may have very sensibly decided not try to sign players with the current management structure. If you bring players into a failing structure it is very hard to turn them around when the structure improves. Add to that any incoming manager will have his own ideas about how to set up the team and who he wants to bring in, and you don't want to find yourself with a bunch of new recruits with long contracts who no longer fit in.

Pushing a load of dosh into a failing managerial system, and it is failing, that much is clear, is just wasting money. It will inevitably reduce the money available for any new manager.

If that’s the case they need to take a long hard look in the mirror and employ a director of football who knows the business. „They“ are ultimately responsible for this shambles.

 

[Swanjaxs]

They may have very sensibly decided not try to sign players with the current management structure. If you bring players into a failing structure it is very hard to turn them around when the structure improves. Add to that any incoming manager will have his own ideas about how to set up the team and who he wants to bring in, and you don't want to find yourself with a bunch of new recruits with long contracts who no longer fit in.

Pushing a load of dosh into a failing managerial system, and it is failing, that much is clear, is just wasting money. It will inevitably reduce the money available for any new manager.

Or, some might say if the "owners" had a clear pathway to the way forward, they would have sacked Martin eight weeks ago and got a credible replacement in ready for the January window to "spend the dosh" wisely for a playoff push.
Then again, others might say the "owners" have absolutely zero interest in the current manager, or progressing Swansea City as a viable commodity at the moment.
They are probably as fed up of us as we are of them...

 

[Cinio Dydd Sul]

They may have very sensibly decided not try to sign players with the current management structure. If you bring players into a failing structure it is very hard to turn them around when the structure improves. Add to that any incoming manager will have his own ideas about how to set up the team and who he wants to bring in, and you don't want to find yourself with a bunch of new recruits with long contracts who no longer fit in.

Pushing a load of dosh into a failing managerial system, and it is failing, that much is clear, is just wasting money. It will inevitably reduce the money available for any new manager.

Well if that's the case the owners have been even bigger liars than we already knew. They were prepared apparently to make a loan player our highest paid player (a move which was going through until outside factors intervened) and apparently we're prepared to pay for at least 1 other but he didn't want to move here.

I dont disagree with what youve said, but we're not likely to have an incoming manager though are we? They won't sack Martin unless this run continues on and other teams below us go on an uncharacteristic purple patch and no one else is going to want him.

We didn't spend money because of terrible planning and a flawed system of recruitment behind the scenes, the no spending because Martin is our manager doesn't stack up.

I go back to my previous post, we're already threadbare in a number of positions and with no obvious successors in positions that we are going to be short on in the summer.

I wouldn't be sad if Martin walked tomorrow, but realistically we're stuck with him for a few windows to come. So when would this austerity you and others advocate end? Do we again in the summer not sign anyone?

 

[RodgerTheDodger]

Or, some might say if the "owners" had a clear pathway to the way forward, they would have sacked Martin eight weeks ago and got a credible replacement in ready for the January window to "spend the dosh" wisely for a playoff push.
Then again, others might say the "owners" have absolutely zero interest in the current manager, or progressing Swansea City as a viable commodity at the moment.
They are probably as fed up of us as we are of them...

How can they have a clear way forward? They cannot make changes at this time, and it's clearly not working with Martin. So wait until the Summer, re-assess, plan the next season - then you have away forward. That may, or may not, include Martin. Who knows what freedoms they have under his contract and what structures they can impose? You only make changes in January when you are desperate. It hasn't come to that.

 

[Cinio Dydd Sul]

How can they have a clear way forward? They cannot make changes at this time, and it's clearly not working with Martin. So wait until the Summer, re-assess, plan the next season - then you have away forward. That may, or may not, include Martin. Who knows what freedoms they have under his contract and what structures they can impose? You only make changes in January when you are desperate. It hasn't come to that.

Do you trust our owners to swiftly deal with the issue and quickly appoint an appropriate successor then? And then allow them to shape the squad before the window shuts? After the summer before last, is that likely?

 

[RodgerTheDodger]

Well if that's the case the owners have been even bigger liars than we already knew. They were prepared apparently to make a loan player our highest paid player (a move which was going through until outside factors intervened) and apparently we're prepared to pay for at least 1 other but he didn't want to move here.

I dont disagree with what youve said, but we're not likely to have an incoming manager though are we? They won't sack Martin unless this run continues on and other teams below us go on an uncharacteristic purple patch and no one else is going to want him.

We didn't spend money because of terrible planning and a flawed system of recruitment behind the scenes, the no spending because Martin is our manager doesn't stack up.

I go back to my previous post, we're already threadbare in a number of positions and with no obvious successors in positions that we are going to be short on in the summer.

I wouldn't be sad if Martin walked tomorrow, but realistically we're stuck with him for a few windows to come. So when would this austerity you and others advocate end? Do we again in the summer not sign anyone?

But you we don't know what went on with Grant, we really don't. Did Martin want him, push for him, or was it someone else's idea and Martin said "I won't pick him"? We don't know. Was it all going swimmingly, then his wife said "Swansea? Then you're on your own"? We don't know (It has happened). Were the terms all agreed and at the last moment someone upped the price? We don't know. Etc.

It is the fate of all football fans to not find out what actually went on until years later, and half of it is not true.

How are you going to persuade players to join a team whose idea of closing out a game is to pass the ball to and fro across the goal until the opposition have scored goals? Bad career move.

I don't agree that the team is threadbare in many positions. I've watched them, I think the defence is good, possibly very good. But soldiers are only as good as the General who leads them. I see the schoolboy mistakes - they have been told to play that way. And the strike force is effective, when the team was set up to let them play, which it hardly ever is.

 

[RodgerTheDodger]

If that’s the case they need to take a long hard look in the mirror and employ a director of football who knows the business. „They“ are ultimately responsible for this shambles.

It's football management. Martin might have worked, might have been another Brendan. It hasn't worked out. If you think anyone in sports knows how to get it right every time, I disagree.

What will they do in the summer? I have no idea.

 

[Swanjaxs]

How can they have a clear way forward? They cannot make changes at this time, and it's clearly not working with Martin. So wait until the Summer, re-assess, plan the next season - then you have away forward. That may, or may not, include Martin. Who knows what freedoms they have under his contract and what structures they can impose? You only make changes in January when you are desperate. It hasn't come to that.

You clearly need to read my post again mate, they could, and should have made "a change" months ago, never mind how his contract is structured blah blah blah, he's a cràp manager who is taking us down with him and his backroom staff in tow, if not this season definitely next.

Our owners have no way forward, they are prepared to leave us in limbo and cash in if anyone of any ability attracts the attention of any suitors.

Same boat as Brisbaine (whatever they are called) that these bunch of cùnts own mate.
Suck it up aye

 

[Cinio Dydd Sul]

But you we don't know what went on with Grant, we really don't. Did Martin want him, push for him, or was it someone else's idea and Martin said "I won't pick him"? We don't know. Was it all going swimmingly, then his wife said "Swansea? Then you're on your own"? We don't know (It has happened). Were the terms all agreed and at the last moment someone upped the price? We don't know. Etc.

It is the fate of all football fans to not find out what actually went on until years later, and half of it is not true.

How are you going to persuade players to join a team whose idea of closing out a game is to pass the ball to and fro across the goal until the opposition have scored goals? Bad career move.

I don't agree that the team is threadbare in many positions. I've watched them, I think the defence is good, possibly very good. But soldiers are only as good as the General who leads them. I see the schoolboy mistakes - they have been told to play that way. And the strike force is effective, when the team was set up to let them play, which it hardly ever is.

Isn't it pretty open that WBA wouldn't let him leave because they failed to bring in that Hutchinson? Whether Martin wanted him or not, it was so late on and so advanced I doubt any discussions about Martin not playing him had any bearing at all.

So if we aren't threadbare, who would you play in goals now? Who would you play if Fisher has a terrible run or gets injured? Who would you pick on the right side of defence? Who would you pick up front if Piroe gets injured? Who will you play on the left next season when Manning goes and we sign no one but Martin's still the manager?

This no man's land can't work (and I don't think its the case anyway) - if Martin's staying we need to improve the squad ASAP or sack him ASAP and then sign players. .

Keeping Martin and signing no one until he leaves the club would be a ridiculous state of affairs.

 

[RodgerTheDodger]

I know you've used words like likely, probably and usually for obvious reasons, but just wondering how close to the truth are those figures? Not doubting you, just interested.

Your post gave me cause to consider, so I did some counting. It's not as I had thought - the dangers of forming 'impressions' without counting, eh? I counted the Possession percentage for all EFL results up to and including Blackpool away. I took the average, the median average which I think id the most meaningful here, and the range excluding the 10% worst outliers,

Win: Average 62.9, Median 64, Range 46-76
Draw: Average 68.2, Median 68.5, Range 61-70
Lose: Average 64.9, Median 65, Range 50-76

There is nothing there to support the view I stated in my post.

 

[K23]

Your post gave me cause to consider, so I did some counting. It's not as I had thought - the dangers of forming 'impressions' without counting, eh? I counted the Possession percentage for all EFL results up to and including Blackpool away. I took the average, the median average which I think id the most meaningful here, and the range excluding the 10% worst outliers,

Win: Average 62.9, Median 64, Range 46-76
Draw: Average 68.2, Median 68.5, Range 61-70
Lose: Average 64.9, Median 65, Range 50-76

There is nothing there to support the view I stated in my post.

Thanks for doing that, curiosity obviously got the better of you! They are interesting figures though and although you can't draw irrefutable conclusions, it appears to be fact that our win probability is higher when our possession is lower which probably means we are playing more 50/50 balls in the final third some of which pay off and we often win and some don't and our possession drops.

It's. also interesting that the higher our possession the more likely we are to draw and I wonder if this is because we spend more time and energy trying to keep possession rather than cause the opposition problems in their own box but because we've got the ball they are also less likely to score.

It’s all about risk. If we take risks, our possession drops but our chances of winning improve. If we don't take as many risks then our possession increases but we're more likely to draw or lose.

This is making my brain tired now