[Archived] Sam Allardyce

[tony gale's mic]

Hughes had masterminded brilliant results against top class international opposition with Wales.

Ince had won the Johnstone's Paint Trophy.

You cannot compare the two appointments.

[Eddie]

He'd also seen things turn stale for Wales. Ince had a very good track record in the lower leagues. The comparison between the two is fair, but it was a poor appointment.

[Tris]

Some of SA's biggest detractors have gone mighty quiet since the end of yesterdays match! Is that silence actually the sound of licking wounds?

waggy, Tris and eddie must be sooooo disappointed now that safety has virtually been assured and that we will be in the Prem next year with lardarse the gum chewing slug still at the helm!

Well apologies for celebrating 40 points with a few beers last night and having a 6 hour Sunday morning lie in today! Clearly I should have run straight home from Ewood Park to my laptop to engage in verbal jousting with the keyboard warrior brigade

Now we'll see if the manager knows anything beyond the rubbish "football" served up thus far. If Rovers pass their way around Chelsea and nick three points next Sunday I might even buy an "I love Sam" t-shirt ...

[jodrell]

I can't see a link to this but Sam has some interesting points on survival

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/m...day/8042010.stm

[den]

I don't know if anyone else heard Ryan Nelsen's interview, pre match yesterday on Radio Rovers? He was asked straight out, "without Allardyce, would we have stayed up?" Unequivocally the answer was "no". "we were in a mess and were heading for the championship".

He also said that each player now knows his role and everyone else's role as well. That wasn't the case before.

So, for the people still in denial about the situation under Ince and whether he would have turned it around - the team captain is certain that he wouldn't.

[American]

While I agree, as captain, he should be ashamed at his performances under Ince. If the matter of the manager is going to effect how he plays, he should be stripped of the captaincy. Have lost a lot of respect for him after this, especially since he hasn't stepped up and admitted his part in the shambles of the Ince era.

[John]

I don't know if anyone else heard Ryan Nelsen's interview, pre match yesterday on Radio Rovers? He was asked straight out, "without Allardyce, would we have stayed up?" Unequivocally the answer was "no". "we were in a mess and were heading for the championship".

He also said that each player now knows his role and everyone else's role as well. That wasn't the case before.

So, for the people still in denial about the situation under Ince and whether he would have turned it around - the team captain is certain that he wouldn't.

Ditto Andy Cole who said a "good friend" at the club told him they thought we were going down under Ince.

[broadsword]

While I agree, as captain, he should be ashamed at his performances under Ince. If the matter of the manager is going to effect how he plays, he should be stripped of the captaincy. Have lost a lot of respect for him after this, especially since he hasn't stepped up and admitted his part in the shambles of the Ince era.

If you had a rubbish manager at work, who was ruining your best efforts, you'd end up turning in rubbish performances too.

[Amo]

That's absurd, American. Because Nelsen is wearing the magic armband, he is therefore impervious to Ince's mismanagement and disorganized tactics?

[den]

While I agree, as captain, he should be ashamed at his performances under Ince. If the matter of the manager is going to effect how he plays, he should be stripped of the captaincy. Have lost a lot of respect for him after this, especially since he hasn't stepped up and admitted his part in the shambles of the Ince era.

Who has said that American? If you read my post about his interview yesterday, you should realise that if the players go onto the park not sure of what's expected of them, that is bound to affect them all - which it appears it did.

[American]

If you had a rubbish manager at work, who was ruining your best efforts, you'd end up turning in rubbish performances too.

I've had crap managers and I still do a good job, no matter what.

Gerrard has a crap manager, he still plays brilliantly.

[Commondore]

Some of SA's biggest detractors have gone mighty quiet since the end of yesterdays match! Is that silence actually the sound of licking wounds?

waggy, Tris and eddie must be sooooo disappointed now that safety has virtually been assured and that we will be in the Prem next year with lardarse the gum chewing slug still at the helm!

btw has Ince got the Port Vale job yet or have they found a better option from the ranks of Potteries park football?

A little good old fashioned revisionism there? I've never said anything about Allardyce not being able to keep us in the Premiership. What I have said is that a number of other managers could have done it just as well with a more positive use of tactics which wouldn't make us a safe bet for lower mid-table (or worse) next season, as well as one of the more disliked teams in the league.

I've had crap managers and I still do a good job, no matter what.

Gerrard has a crap manager, he still plays brilliantly.

Benitez is a crap manager?

Or are you referring to Paul Gerrard?

[LeChuck]

I've had crap managers and I still do a good job, no matter what.

Not to belittle whatever it is you do American, but I doubt you're justified in comparing yourself to a top level professional athlete.

I don't know whether you're doing this on purpose or not, but you're heavily implying Nelsen was playing poorly deliberately because he didn't like Ince. Do you not remember how many times we let opposition midfielders run at our defence unchallenged?

Ince was the reason Nelsen was performing poorly, not the other way round.

[Exiled in Toronto]

I for one have been surprised that essentially the same group of players were good under Hughes, crap under Ince and relatively good under Allardyce. Ince was only here 6 months and apparently hardly ever came into work anyway. I would have thought good players would largely ignore a bad manager.

If individual players' performances are so dictated by the competence of the manager, then why do we pay them so much?

[tony gale's mic]

I for one have been surprised that essentially the same group of players were good under Hughes, crap under Ince and relatively good under Allardyce. Ince was only here 6 months and apparently hardly ever came into work anyway. I would have thought good players would largely ignore a bad manager.

If individual players' performances are so dictated by the competence of the manager, then why do we pay them so much?

I don't see what all the surprise is for. Surely ever since you've been watching football you've seen several examples each season of a team doing badly and then a new manager coming in and them doing markedly better? This is hardly unique to Rovers.

Of course performances are going to be better under a better manager. A good manager tells players how to work together as a team, forms a successful gameplan, gets things right tactically etc etc. If players are being given a poor gameplan, being played out of position, and generally playing badly as a team then obviously the individual performances are going to be poor too.

[Amo]

Players still need guidance and encouragement. Ince was tactically naive, and obviously didn't instil confidence into the players. That's why Sam came in and recognized how to play to the team's strengths.

[philipl]

I think there was a fair indication that the players had remembered how to play as a unit with the decent start we made.

By the end it was painfully obvious that nobody had any clue as to where they were supposed to be on the field in relation to each other culminating in Rovers chasing after the ball in packs like 11 year olds in the Wigan game.

Also helps if the boss' idea of team bonding isn't a Bryan Robson-style bender which most of the players objected to.

[thenodrog]

Well apologies for celebrating 40 points with a few beers last night and having a 6 hour Sunday morning lie in today! Clearly I should have run straight home from Ewood Park to my laptop to engage in verbal jousting with the keyboard warrior brigade

Now we'll see if the manager knows anything beyond the rubbish "football" served up thus far. If Rovers pass their way around Chelsea and nick three points next Sunday I might even buy an "I love Sam" t-shirt ...

Better still get three Tris.

[American]

Not to belittle whatever it is you do American, but I doubt you're justified in comparing yourself to a top level professional athlete.

I don't know whether you're doing this on purpose or not, but you're heavily implying Nelsen was playing poorly deliberately because he didn't like Ince. Do you not remember how many times we let opposition midfielders run at our defence unchallenged?

Ince was the reason Nelsen was performing poorly, not the other way round.

I'm not implying he was doing it deliberately, but I'm saying that he is the captain, he should be setting an example, not being our worst player on the pitch.

EIT pretty much sums it up.

Oh, and Nelsen telling Williams the players were going to step it up was a reason Ince lasted longer than he should have. They failed to step it up.

Edit: And I shouldn't be comparing myself to a professional athlete, as EIT says, he's being paid much more than I am, and should be doing his job no matter what.

[tony gale's mic]

This argument is totally absurd.

It's not that he wasn't trying his hardest, but under a bad manager players don't perform to their potential. It's something that happens across multiple sports and what happened at Rovers was no exception.

[Lathund]

This argument is totally absurd.

Indeed. Is the argument that's being made here essentially: Ince wasn't a good manager, but it's the players' fault that it showed? Which strikes me as a rather odd pro-Ince argument.

It's a team sport, any one player can only do so much no matter how good he is. A centre half being given no support by his midfielders, and (When Simpson and Olsson played) very little from his full backs, then he is obviously going to play worse than he would in a cohesive back four. Players obey the managers instructions, and do the best they can within those parameters. You can't have the players just ignore a manager if they don't like what he's doing. He is the one in charge, and it's not the players job to ignore him.

[Exiled in Toronto]

I don't see what all the surprise is for. Surely ever since you've been watching football you've seen several examples each season of a team doing badly and then a new manager coming in and them doing markedly better? This is hardly unique to Rovers.

Of course performances are going to be better under a better manager. A good manager tells players how to work together as a team, forms a successful gameplan, gets things right tactically etc etc. If players are being given a poor gameplan, being played out of position, and generally playing badly as a team then obviously the individual performances are going to be poor too.

So why are there always good players in bad teams? Every year this board is full of suggestions to sign so and so from whoever has just been relegated. If some can still shine in adversity, I don't see why others are absoved.

At the team level I agree, but not down to individuals. Nelsen was totally rubbish for a large chunk of this season: bad choices, bad execution, bad covering, bad heading. Doesn't he carry any individual responsibility at all? Warnock also; back to his worst yesterday despite the change in manager.

[dave birch]

Players obey the managers instructions, and do the best they can within those parameters. You can't have the players just ignore a manager if they don't like what he's doing. He is the one in charge, and it's not the players job to ignore him.

If I remember correctly, in the first game v Everton, where we won 4-3, that is exactly what the players did. Ince wanted them to play out the draw, the players disobeyed his instructions and came away winners.

[jim mk2]

Nelsen was totally rubbish for a large chunk of this season: bad choices, bad execution, bad covering, bad heading. Doesn't he carry any individual responsibility at all?

Probably not. If footballers are unhappy for whatever reason - row with missus, Ferrari leaking oil or, more usually, when they have no respect for the manager, they play badly. End of story really.

[tony gale's mic]

So why are there always good players in bad teams? Every year this board is full of suggestions to sign so and so from whoever has just been relegated. If some can still shine in adversity, I don't see why others are absoved.

At the team level I agree, but not down to individuals. Nelsen was totally rubbish for a large chunk of this season: bad choices, bad execution, bad covering, bad heading. Doesn't he carry any individual responsibility at all? Warnock also; back to his worst yesterday despite the change in manager.

They're the exceptions that prove the rule. There's all sorts of reasons why certain players may have done particularly well in a relegated side, but they're in the minority. Plus not all relegated sides have bad managers, a lot of the time the players themselves aren't good enough, but the players that are good shine through. In Nelsen we had a player who was good enough who was part of a shambles of a defence which was overseen by Ince. You would expect defence to be an area where players would come off particularly bad in teams managed badly, since so much of it is about organisation and tactics.