Valérien Ismaël: Blackburn Rovers Head Coach

[M_B]

3 hours ago, RevidgeBlue said:

When the players probably knew Ismael waa coming in.

In the time honoured tradition on here of unfairly claiming or denying victories or attributing or not attributing defeats to managers Im tempted to mark that one down to VI as well.

So it's Swanseagate then? At least Eustace was at the ground 🤣

[Upside Down]

55 minutes ago, booth said:

Looking at our form since Dec 21st, our form under Eustace was better but it's not exactly glowing is it.





Prior to our 6 game unbeaten run.



We had a decent start, then it went to pot a bit, then a six game unbeaten run and then since the injuries and lack of investment, in my opinion we've been shit.

And that's the crux of it.

No surprise our form dipped when key players started to pick up injuries, just like the season before.

Also just like the season before, there was no investment or strengthening of the squad.

And again like the season before, the manager did everything he could to get out of this place due to being lied to and taken for a ride.

 

[islander200]

4 hours ago, Hasta said:

I cant really argue against much of what you say there Chaddy. I agree with most of it. 

It's purely when people say something along the lines of "the rot had already set in" or "all he's done is continue the bad form we were already in" that is bugging me. It's not true. We had just played very well and won recent games. I'm not sure how that is being disputed. 

 

 

Look at the post from Booth below lots of mini winless runs ,the 6 match winning run is what put us in the top 6 and the teams closest to us had poor form themselves hence us staying in it for as long as we did.

We struggled against teams lower than us that we feel we should be winning with other managers aswell.

[simongarnerisgod]

read the latest in the telegraph,ismael talks shite imo and he has`nt got a clue about his players

[roversfan99]

Under Ismael though its not just been a continuation of below par form. There has been a dip even beyond that. Based on previous form, we probably wouldnt have necessarily picked up 7 or 9 points from 3 of the bottom 5 but we would have at least got some results on the board.

Everything seems confused. He has gone from not wanting to change much to trying to force change. Hes gone between formations, neither of which have worked. We have become noticeably more passive, noticeably more keen to pass for the sake of passing. The players look totally confused and particularly disjointed. We have started every single game slowly.

The argument that we were crap anyway is flawed, as if he hasnt made things worse. Yes the owners are the issue and the team is patched together on a shoestring but its better than 1 points from these 4 games and better than the performances weve seen.

[Hasta]

53 minutes ago, islander200 said:

Look at the post from Booth below lots of mini winless runs ,the 6 match winning run is what put us in the top 6 and the teams closest to us had poor form themselves hence us staying in it for as long as we did.

We struggled against teams lower than us that we feel we should be winning with other managers aswell.

FFS. But that doesn’t make Ismael’s 4 games “a continuation of our recent form.”. 

These 4 games aren’t because “the rot had already set in”
 

Just like when Eustace didn’t get a win in 4 games earlier this season (as identified in Booth’s post) that also wasn’t a continuation of “our recent form“ or “rot”.

Edited March 17 by Hasta

[chaddyrovers]

6 hours ago, RevidgeBlue said:

When the players probably knew Ismael waa coming in.

In the time honoured tradition on here of unfairly claiming or denying victories or attributing or not attributing defeats to managers Im tempted to mark that one down to VI as well.

The move for Ismael wasn't started until after the Swansea game actually. That defeat started the process being speeded up according to Alan Nixon. 

and the players wouldn't know who we were going for. Do you really think they were getting update by Gestede or Pasha?

6 hours ago, Hasta said:

I cant really argue against much of what you say there Chaddy. I agree with most of it. 

Thanks for the reply and I very much apprenticed 

5 hours ago, martonrover said:

Ismael is a square peg in a round hole.

It’s not just about the downturn in his career, he clearly just  wasn’t the right fit .

why wasn't he the right fit and what was the right fit for us? 

[roversfan99]

Ideally, someone capable of getting any points against 3 of the bottom 5 as to at least keep any hopes of the top 6 going beyond the international break 4 games into his employment.

[martonrover]

10 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

The move for Ismael wasn't started until after the Swansea game actually. That defeat started the process being speeded up according to Alan Nixon. 

and the players wouldn't know who we were going for. Do you really think they were getting update by Gestede or Pasha?

I’d be amazed if that was the case. There would’ve been contact of some description prior to the Swansea game
Compared to the scraps of info we were hearing, you’d be very naive to think that the players aren’t privy to far more inside information.

10 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

why wasn't he the right fit and what was the right fit for us? 

Not right for the situation of having to come in and tread very carefully.

All the stuff you hear about Ismael is that he’s very dogmatic and set in his ways.

If we were going to hire someone so much the opposite of Eustace, at least go for someone the players could relate to.

As I’ve said before (and I’m not the only one) it just didn’t feel right, and so far that feeling has been vindicated.

Edited March 17 by martonrover

[simongarnerisgod]

5 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

The move for Ismael wasn't started until after the Swansea game actually. That defeat started the process being speeded up according to Alan Nixon. 

and the players wouldn't know who we were going for. Do you really think they were getting update by Gestede or Pasha?

Thanks for the reply and I very much apprenticed 

why wasn't he the right fit and what was the right fit for us? 

uninspiring choice and judging by the players appearance and demeanor they think the same,they are certainly not pulling for him,though in fairness to him,the contract situation regarding players reaching their last year and seemingly no negotition on extensions,it can`t be good for morale,i kind of feel sorry for anyone who takes the ewood park job,they are on a loser from day one,it`s only going to get worse for ismael

[chaddyrovers]

1 hour ago, roversfan99 said:

The argument that we were crap anyway is flawed,

I thought every player were crap according to you 😂

1 hour ago, roversfan99 said:

Under Ismael though its not just been a continuation of below par form. There has been a dip even beyond that. Based on previous form, we probably wouldnt have necessarily picked up 7 or 9 points from 3 of the bottom 5 but we would have at least got some results on the board.

 

1 hour ago, roversfan99 said:

Everything seems confused. He has gone from not wanting to change much to trying to force change. Hes gone between formations, neither of which have worked. We have become noticeably more passive, noticeably more keen to pass for the sake of passing. The players look totally confused and particularly disjointed. We have started every single game slowly.

so instead of keep the ball when we can't created a chance what should we do? give the ball to the opposition? 

Did the players really seem confused cos the plan was fairly easy to understand, give the ball wide and try to keep the ball more to created more chances? is just created a couple of chances per game sustainable? 

players look confused? care to explain more if that was case why did the players keep looking to get the ball wide and full backs pushing on? 

 

[chaddyrovers]

8 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Ideally, someone capable of getting any points against 3 of the bottom 5 as to at least keep any hopes of the top 6 going beyond the international break 4 games into his employment.

like your choice Rob Edwards? 🤔

[chaddyrovers]

9 minutes ago, martonrover said:

I’d be amazed if that was the case. There would’ve been contact of some description prior to the Swansea game

He was interviewed by zoom as were several candidates before Rovers have a final shortlist which appears to be Ismael and Wagner, but the move for Ismael as he was the choice of 4 people were made after Swansea 

9 minutes ago, martonrover said:

Compared to the scraps of info we were hearing, you’d be very naive to think that the players aren’t privy to far more inside information.

I think you are naïve thinking Waggott, Pasha or Gestede are going to tell them who is interviewed or not. Interviews were done via Zoom and in London.  

9 minutes ago, martonrover said:

Not right for the situation of having to come in and tread very carefully.

All the stuff you hear about Ismael is that he’s very dogmatic and set in his ways.

hear from where? 

9 minutes ago, martonrover said:

If we were going to hire someone so much the opposite of Eustace, at least go for someone the players could relate to.

As I’ve said before (and I’m not the only one) it just didn’t feel right, and so far that feeling has been vindicated.

Yes I remember quite alot of people saying similar things about Eustace when he came in. 

Ismael and Wagner were 2 names I mentioned from day one cos that the type of appointment I thought it what we would go for.

[islander200]

1 hour ago, Hasta said:

FFS. But that doesn’t make Ismael’s 4 games “a continuation of our recent form.”. 

These 4 games aren’t because “the rot had already set in”
 

Just like when Eustace didn’t get a win in 4 games earlier this season (as identified in Booth’s post) that also wasn’t a continuation of “our recent form“ or “rot”.

Look at that graph in the 7 games prior to the 6 game winning run 5 defeats 1 win 2 draw, we then don't win in 5 3 defeats and 2 draws ,then win a game then 3 defeats in a row, the squad on multiple occasions thus season have gone runs of games losing .It is not something new created by Ismael.It can't be said for certain we would have won any of those last 3 games under another manager or the previous one 

 

[roversfan99]

1 hour ago, chaddyrovers said:

I thought every player were crap according to you 😂

 

so instead of keep the ball when we can't created a chance what should we do? give the ball to the opposition? 

Did the players really seem confused cos the plan was fairly easy to understand, give the ball wide and try to keep the ball more to created more chances? is just created a couple of chances per game sustainable? 

players look confused? care to explain more if that was case why did the players keep looking to get the ball wide and full backs pushing on? 

 

Youve seemingly come up with a functional game plan that youve seen that no one else has and something that clearly hasnt worked.

He said at the start that he didnt want to really change anything. Since, he changed the formation and changed it back, and talked about now adapting to a new style. And it is clearly different. We have not pressed at all, we stand off and we pass a lot more from side to side. You flippantly said should we give the ball to the opposition. Thats not the only alternative to keeping possession for the sake of it.

We havent started creating more chances under Ismael.

1 hour ago, chaddyrovers said:

like your choice Rob Edwards? 🤔

I think it would be a very small minority of managers who would have got 0 points from the last 3 games. 

58 minutes ago, islander200 said:

Look at that graph in the 7 games prior to the 6 game winning run 5 defeats 1 win 2 draw, we then don't win in 5 3 defeats and 2 draws ,then win a game then 3 defeats in a row, the squad on multiple occasions thus season have gone runs of games losing .It is not something new created by Ismael.It can't be said for certain we would have won any of those last 3 games under another manager or the previous one 

 

You keep repeating that we have had bad runs before. Obviously we have. But the one under Ismael off the back of 3 wins in 5 has been particularly bad against bottom 5 sides. 

If he had won all 4, we wouldnt say oh well weve won 6 on the bounce earlier in the season. We have looked even worse since he joined than at any point in the season.

[chaddyrovers]

1 hour ago, roversfan99 said:

Youve seemingly come up with a functional game plan that youve seen that no one else has and something that clearly hasnt worked.

If you couldn't see it that ain't my problem is it? 

1 hour ago, roversfan99 said:

He said at the start that he didnt want to really change anything. Since, he changed the formation and changed it back, and talked about now adapting to a new style. And it is clearly different. We have not pressed at all, we stand off and we pass a lot more from side to side. You flippantly said should we give the ball to the opposition. Thats not the only alternative to keeping possession for the sake of it.

I explained the change of formation at Derby and what I witnessed at Derby from my seat. 

Cos he has seen things he wants to change and progress in the time he been here. He wants to create chances. 

If we can't find forward pass what should we do? You tell me, it's a simple question RF9

 

1 hour ago, roversfan99 said:

We havent started creating more chances under Ismael.

That's what need to change and that's what he trying to do. 

1 hour ago, roversfan99 said:

I think it would be a very small minority of managers who would have got 0 points from the last 3 games.

why is Edwards a downgrade on Eustace? 

How can a head coach with promotion on his CV be a downgrade on one that's doesnt. You cant answer this simple and easy question. Wonder why you can't. 

[Southside Rover]

To be honest VI must have been interviewed prior to Swansea, it's the only sense I can draw from signing Woodrow in that it was VI's pending arrival that was known well before any of us did. Could add Dennis to that too

[chaddyrovers]

1 hour ago, Southside Rover said:

To be honest VI must have been interviewed prior to Swansea, it's the only sense I can draw from signing Woodrow in that it was VI's pending arrival that was known well before any of us did. Could add Dennis to that too

Eustace only left 10 days after the transfer window closed on 13th Feb

Swansea game was on 22th February. The transfer window shut on the 3rd of Feb. 

[islander200]

6 hours ago, roversfan99 said:

Youve seemingly come up with a functional game plan that youve seen that no one else has and something that clearly hasnt worked.

He said at the start that he didnt want to really change anything. Since, he changed the formation and changed it back, and talked about now adapting to a new style. And it is clearly different. We have not pressed at all, we stand off and we pass a lot more from side to side. You flippantly said should we give the ball to the opposition. Thats not the only alternative to keeping possession for the sake of it.

We havent started creating more chances under Ismael.

I think it would be a very small minority of managers who would have got 0 points from the last 3 games. 

You keep repeating that we have had bad runs before. Obviously we have. But the one under Ismael off the back of 3 wins in 5 has been particularly bad against bottom 5 sides. 

If he had won all 4, we wouldnt say oh well weve won 6 on the bounce earlier in the season. We have looked even worse since he joined than at any point in the season.

Again yeah the 4 games have been disappointing majorly but it's 4 games he has been here...Eustace was Eusless by many  at the same point in his rovers career.

Ismael is pathetic and absolutely useless because we couldn't win at Derby not taking into consideration we have lost our last 11 away games against newly promoted sides.

The graph clearly shows we have had more than 1 or 2 runs where we have lost multiple games In a row.

[islander200]

6 hours ago, Southside Rover said:

To be honest VI must have been interviewed prior to Swansea, it's the only sense I can draw from signing Woodrow in that it was VI's pending arrival that was known well before any of us did. Could add Dennis to that too

?.Eustace hadn't gone anywhere when Woodrow was brought In.The Derby job wasn't even available. Ismael didn't want Dennis when he was at Watford 

[Herbie6590]

This on Twitter this morning…

[M_B]

I don't normally take any notice of all that expected goals malarkey, but for a team which doesn't score many, I'd expect the loss of our top scorer to have an effect.

[roversfan99]

2 hours ago, islander200 said:

Again yeah the 4 games have been disappointing majorly but it's 4 games he has been here...Eustace was Eusless by many  at the same point in his rovers career.

Ismael is pathetic and absolutely useless because we couldn't win at Derby not taking into consideration we have lost our last 11 away games against newly promoted sides.

The graph clearly shows we have had more than 1 or 2 runs where we have lost multiple games In a row.

To lose a single game in isolation against a struggling side would be bad but it can happen. 3 in a week is the issue. We had also won 3 in 5 prior to his arrival.

It really is scraping the barrel to defend him because weve lost games or had runs of losses in the past.

I get that he is only 4 games in so I understand that side of not writing him off. But even beyond results, I have seen not one positive in terms of performances, nothing to cling onto. Your argument seems to be just that we have lost games in the past. Have you seen anything at all in his first 4 games that has impressed you in any way?

[Mercer]

Think Ismael's position is indefensible.

Can any poster on here identify one positive thing Ismael has done since being appointed?

In my eyes he doesn't have the players behind him - they are not busting a gut which is the minimum expectation.  The players seem confused and there is now no semblance of a playing identity.

Do we look more competitive: No

Do we look tighter defensively: No

Do we carry a bigger goal threat: No

Already, the alarm bells are screaming and I think we are firmly in Jim Iley territory and for those too young to recall Jim,  Jim was appointed a few weeks before a season end and was fired some 2 months into the following season.  Similarities, players not putting it in for him, players looking confused, no playing identity and a win record of just 2 games in about 20 games!!!

I think Ismael is a total dud, full of bullsh1t, and a mutual agreement for his immediate exit should be reached and then QUICKLY appoint a manager who might just give those players who seem inevitably heading for the exit door as their contracts run down some reason to stay.

Edited March 18 by Mercer

[sharpysharps86]

8 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

why is Edwards a downgrade on Eustace? 

How can a head coach with promotion on his CV be a downgrade on one that's doesnt. You cant answer this simple and easy question. Wonder why you can't. 

Not as simple as that though is it? Edwards has one promotion to the premier league on his CV. By that logic Owen Coyle wouldn't be a downgrade on Eustace either 😂.

For what it's worth I think its clear now that Edwards would've been a better pick than Ismael at this moment in time, regardless of whether we think Edwards is better than Eustace or not.