gazza ladra Posted February 23, 2009 Share Posted February 23, 2009 take martins, owen, viduka and barton out of the "free flowing month" and would it have been the same? would it f***. anybody remember the months prior to the "free flowing" one? It took time to bring the change about FFS. He had to get the players minds switched from nagative football to open football. Birmingham was the turning point, where got a draw but could have won it. Libertine always sniping at KK, any little chance. Its ok tho, you just bend history to suit your argument. it took time to get 3 very good players back (and staying fit) to take the team forward in matches and score goals. the front 3 took the pressure off the shit midfield the same as a good midfield will take the pressure off a defence. simple as that. Obviously the manager doesn't deserve any credit at all for changing the whole shape of the team though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Libertine Posted February 23, 2009 Share Posted February 23, 2009 take martins, owen, viduka and barton out of the "free flowing month" and would it have been the same? would it f***. anybody remember the months prior to the "free flowing" one? It took time to bring the change about FFS. He had to get the players minds switched from nagative football to open football. Birmingham was the turning point, where got a draw but could have won it. Libertine always sniping at KK, any little chance. Its ok tho, you just bend history to suit your argument. it took time to get 3 very good players back (and staying fit) to take the team forward in matches and score goals. the front 3 took the pressure off the shit midfield the same as a good midfield will take the pressure off a defence. simple as that. Obviously the manager doesn't deserve any credit at all for changing the whole shape of the team though. to some extent. "playing your best players" is what its called at other clubs. dropping smith and ameobi to play martins and viduka isnt rocket science. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj Posted February 23, 2009 Share Posted February 23, 2009 take martins, owen, viduka and barton out of the "free flowing month" and would it have been the same? would it f***. anybody remember the months prior to the "free flowing" one? It took time to bring the change about FFS. He had to get the players minds switched from nagative football to open football. Birmingham was the turning point, where got a draw but could have won it. Libertine always sniping at KK, any little chance. Its ok tho, you just bend history to suit your argument. it took time to get 3 very good players back (and staying fit) to take the team forward in matches and score goals. the front 3 took the pressure off the shit midfield the same as a good midfield will take the pressure off a defence. simple as that. Obviously the manager doesn't deserve any credit at all for changing the whole shape of the team though. to some extent. "playing your best players" is what its called at other clubs. dropping smith and ameobi to play martins and viduka isnt rocket science. You're absolutely pathetic. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Libertine Posted February 23, 2009 Share Posted February 23, 2009 take martins, owen, viduka and barton out of the "free flowing month" and would it have been the same? would it f***. anybody remember the months prior to the "free flowing" one? It took time to bring the change about FFS. He had to get the players minds switched from nagative football to open football. Birmingham was the turning point, where got a draw but could have won it. Libertine always sniping at KK, any little chance. Its ok tho, you just bend history to suit your argument. it took time to get 3 very good players back (and staying fit) to take the team forward in matches and score goals. the front 3 took the pressure off the shit midfield the same as a good midfield will take the pressure off a defence. simple as that. Obviously the manager doesn't deserve any credit at all for changing the whole shape of the team though. to some extent. "playing your best players" is what its called at other clubs. dropping smith and ameobi to play martins and viduka isnt rocket science. You're absolutely pathetic. martins or viduka didnt start a game for keegan before the birmingham match and then they come back in and we start doing well. did keegan "change their mentality" or did we just get 2 very decent/vital players back in place of 2 shit ones? the keegan thing. obviously. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gazza ladra Posted February 23, 2009 Share Posted February 23, 2009 take martins, owen, viduka and barton out of the "free flowing month" and would it have been the same? would it f***. anybody remember the months prior to the "free flowing" one? It took time to bring the change about FFS. He had to get the players minds switched from nagative football to open football. Birmingham was the turning point, where got a draw but could have won it. Libertine always sniping at KK, any little chance. Its ok tho, you just bend history to suit your argument. it took time to get 3 very good players back (and staying fit) to take the team forward in matches and score goals. the front 3 took the pressure off the shit midfield the same as a good midfield will take the pressure off a defence. simple as that. Obviously the manager doesn't deserve any credit at all for changing the whole shape of the team though. to some extent. "playing your best players" is what its called at other clubs. dropping smith and ameobi to play martins and viduka isnt rocket science. You're absolutely pathetic. martins or viduka didnt start a game for keegan before the birmingham match and then they come back in and we start doing well. did keegan "change their mentality" or did we just get 2 very decent/vital players back in place of 2 shit ones? the keegan thing. obviously. That's why when Allardyce had everyone healthy, we saw the same free flowing attack. It was all just a return to form. FFS. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted February 23, 2009 Share Posted February 23, 2009 take martins, owen, viduka and barton out of the "free flowing month" and would it have been the same? would it f***. anybody remember the months prior to the "free flowing" one? It took time to bring the change about FFS. He had to get the players minds switched from nagative football to open football. Birmingham was the turning point, where got a draw but could have won it. Libertine always sniping at KK, any little chance. Its ok tho, you just bend history to suit your argument. it took time to get 3 very good players back (and staying fit) to take the team forward in matches and score goals. the front 3 took the pressure off the shit midfield the same as a good midfield will take the pressure off a defence. simple as that. Obviously the manager doesn't deserve any credit at all for changing the whole shape of the team though. to some extent. "playing your best players" is what its called at other clubs. dropping smith and ameobi to play martins and viduka isnt rocket science. You're absolutely pathetic. martins or viduka didnt start a game for keegan before the birmingham match and then they come back in and we start doing well. did keegan "change their mentality" or did we just get 2 very decent/vital players back in place of 2 shit ones? the keegan thing. obviously. can see both sides of this; until Birmingham keegan didn't have that much of a noticeable effect on either results or performances as i recall it, once the players come back in he has to be credited with playing owen deeper than martins/viduka if martins/viduka didn't come back when they did we might have been having a very different discussion but they did, the two things can't be divorced from each other shit argument by the way lads, really shit Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Libertine Posted February 23, 2009 Share Posted February 23, 2009 take martins, owen, viduka and barton out of the "free flowing month" and would it have been the same? would it f***. anybody remember the months prior to the "free flowing" one? It took time to bring the change about FFS. He had to get the players minds switched from nagative football to open football. Birmingham was the turning point, where got a draw but could have won it. Libertine always sniping at KK, any little chance. Its ok tho, you just bend history to suit your argument. it took time to get 3 very good players back (and staying fit) to take the team forward in matches and score goals. the front 3 took the pressure off the shit midfield the same as a good midfield will take the pressure off a defence. simple as that. Obviously the manager doesn't deserve any credit at all for changing the whole shape of the team though. to some extent. "playing your best players" is what its called at other clubs. dropping smith and ameobi to play martins and viduka isnt rocket science. You're absolutely pathetic. martins or viduka didnt start a game for keegan before the birmingham match and then they come back in and we start doing well. did keegan "change their mentality" or did we just get 2 very decent/vital players back in place of 2 shit ones? the keegan thing. obviously. That's why when Allardyce had everyone healthy, we saw the same free flowing attack. It was all just a return to form. FFS. completely different managers. when has allardyce ever been a gung ho attacker? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatwax Posted February 23, 2009 Share Posted February 23, 2009 take martins, owen, viduka and barton out of the "free flowing month" and would it have been the same? would it f***. anybody remember the months prior to the "free flowing" one? It took time to bring the change about FFS. He had to get the players minds switched from nagative football to open football. Birmingham was the turning point, where got a draw but could have won it. Libertine always sniping at KK, any little chance. Its ok tho, you just bend history to suit your argument. it took time to get 3 very good players back (and staying fit) to take the team forward in matches and score goals. the front 3 took the pressure off the s*** midfield the same as a good midfield will take the pressure off a defence. simple as that. Obviously the manager doesn't deserve any credit at all for changing the whole shape of the team though. to some extent. "playing your best players" is what its called at other clubs. dropping smith and ameobi to play martins and viduka isnt rocket science. You're absolutely pathetic. martins or viduka didnt start a game for keegan before the birmingham match and then they come back in and we start doing well. did keegan "change their mentality" or did we just get 2 very decent/vital players back in place of 2 s*** ones? the keegan thing. obviously. The players coming back was obviously instrumental but it was Keegans tactics that got us the results we did. Not many managers would have had the balls to play Owen, Martins & Viduka together. Allardyce certainly didn't. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Libertine Posted February 23, 2009 Share Posted February 23, 2009 take martins, owen, viduka and barton out of the "free flowing month" and would it have been the same? would it f***. anybody remember the months prior to the "free flowing" one? It took time to bring the change about FFS. He had to get the players minds switched from nagative football to open football. Birmingham was the turning point, where got a draw but could have won it. Libertine always sniping at KK, any little chance. Its ok tho, you just bend history to suit your argument. it took time to get 3 very good players back (and staying fit) to take the team forward in matches and score goals. the front 3 took the pressure off the s*** midfield the same as a good midfield will take the pressure off a defence. simple as that. Obviously the manager doesn't deserve any credit at all for changing the whole shape of the team though. to some extent. "playing your best players" is what its called at other clubs. dropping smith and ameobi to play martins and viduka isnt rocket science. You're absolutely pathetic. martins or viduka didnt start a game for keegan before the birmingham match and then they come back in and we start doing well. did keegan "change their mentality" or did we just get 2 very decent/vital players back in place of 2 s*** ones? the keegan thing. obviously. The players coming back was obviously instrumental but it was Keegans tactics that got us the results we did. Not many managers would have had the balls to play Owen, Martins & Viduka together. Allardyce certainly didn't. keegans tactics did nothing for the few months before 2 vital players were fit again. worth noting in the context of the thread. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted February 23, 2009 Share Posted February 23, 2009 take martins, owen, viduka and barton out of the "free flowing month" and would it have been the same? would it f***. anybody remember the months prior to the "free flowing" one? It took time to bring the change about FFS. He had to get the players minds switched from nagative football to open football. Birmingham was the turning point, where got a draw but could have won it. Libertine always sniping at KK, any little chance. Its ok tho, you just bend history to suit your argument. it took time to get 3 very good players back (and staying fit) to take the team forward in matches and score goals. the front 3 took the pressure off the s*** midfield the same as a good midfield will take the pressure off a defence. simple as that. Obviously the manager doesn't deserve any credit at all for changing the whole shape of the team though. to some extent. "playing your best players" is what its called at other clubs. dropping smith and ameobi to play martins and viduka isnt rocket science. You're absolutely pathetic. martins or viduka didnt start a game for keegan before the birmingham match and then they come back in and we start doing well. did keegan "change their mentality" or did we just get 2 very decent/vital players back in place of 2 s*** ones? the keegan thing. obviously. The players coming back was obviously instrumental but it was Keegans tactics that got us the results we did. Not many managers would have had the balls to play Owen, Martins & Viduka together. Allardyce certainly didn't. and prior to those players coming back? where were the tactics and the balls? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NG32 Posted February 23, 2009 Share Posted February 23, 2009 take martins, owen, viduka and barton out of the "free flowing month" and would it have been the same? would it f***. anybody remember the months prior to the "free flowing" one? It took time to bring the change about FFS. He had to get the players minds switched from nagative football to open football. Birmingham was the turning point, where got a draw but could have won it. Libertine always sniping at KK, any little chance. Its ok tho, you just bend history to suit your argument. it took time to get 3 very good players back (and staying fit) to take the team forward in matches and score goals. the front 3 took the pressure off the s*** midfield the same as a good midfield will take the pressure off a defence. simple as that. Obviously the manager doesn't deserve any credit at all for changing the whole shape of the team though. to some extent. "playing your best players" is what its called at other clubs. dropping smith and ameobi to play martins and viduka isnt rocket science. You're absolutely pathetic. martins or viduka didnt start a game for keegan before the birmingham match and then they come back in and we start doing well. did keegan "change their mentality" or did we just get 2 very decent/vital players back in place of 2 s*** ones? the keegan thing. obviously. The players coming back was obviously instrumental but it was Keegans tactics that got us the results we did. Not many managers would have had the balls to play Owen, Martins & Viduka together. Allardyce certainly didn't. keegans tactics did nothing for the few months before 2 vital players were fit again. worth noting in the context of the thread. He was trying to turn the mentality of the team around. Did you expect instant results? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parky Posted February 23, 2009 Share Posted February 23, 2009 take martins, owen, viduka and barton out of the "free flowing month" and would it have been the same? would it f***. anybody remember the months prior to the "free flowing" one? It took time to bring the change about FFS. He had to get the players minds switched from nagative football to open football. Birmingham was the turning point, where got a draw but could have won it. Libertine always sniping at KK, any little chance. Its ok tho, you just bend history to suit your argument. it took time to get 3 very good players back (and staying fit) to take the team forward in matches and score goals. the front 3 took the pressure off the s*** midfield the same as a good midfield will take the pressure off a defence. simple as that. Obviously the manager doesn't deserve any credit at all for changing the whole shape of the team though. to some extent. "playing your best players" is what its called at other clubs. dropping smith and ameobi to play martins and viduka isnt rocket science. You're absolutely pathetic. martins or viduka didnt start a game for keegan before the birmingham match and then they come back in and we start doing well. did keegan "change their mentality" or did we just get 2 very decent/vital players back in place of 2 s*** ones? the keegan thing. obviously. The players coming back was obviously instrumental but it was Keegans tactics that got us the results we did. Not many managers would have had the balls to play Owen, Martins & Viduka together. Allardyce certainly didn't. keegans tactics did nothing for the few months before 2 vital players were fit again. worth noting in the context of the thread. He was trying to turn the mentality of the team around. Did you expect instant results? Quite. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted February 23, 2009 Share Posted February 23, 2009 take martins, owen, viduka and barton out of the "free flowing month" and would it have been the same? would it f***. anybody remember the months prior to the "free flowing" one? It took time to bring the change about FFS. He had to get the players minds switched from nagative football to open football. Birmingham was the turning point, where got a draw but could have won it. Libertine always sniping at KK, any little chance. Its ok tho, you just bend history to suit your argument. it took time to get 3 very good players back (and staying fit) to take the team forward in matches and score goals. the front 3 took the pressure off the s*** midfield the same as a good midfield will take the pressure off a defence. simple as that. Obviously the manager doesn't deserve any credit at all for changing the whole shape of the team though. to some extent. "playing your best players" is what its called at other clubs. dropping smith and ameobi to play martins and viduka isnt rocket science. You're absolutely pathetic. martins or viduka didnt start a game for keegan before the birmingham match and then they come back in and we start doing well. did keegan "change their mentality" or did we just get 2 very decent/vital players back in place of 2 s*** ones? the keegan thing. obviously. The players coming back was obviously instrumental but it was Keegans tactics that got us the results we did. Not many managers would have had the balls to play Owen, Martins & Viduka together. Allardyce certainly didn't. keegans tactics did nothing for the few months before 2 vital players were fit again. worth noting in the context of the thread. He was trying to turn the mentality of the team around. Did you expect instant results? no but he might have expected better than we saw prior to the return of these players, i.e. anything other than playing duff & smith Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gazza ladra Posted February 23, 2009 Share Posted February 23, 2009 take martins, owen, viduka and barton out of the "free flowing month" and would it have been the same? would it f***. anybody remember the months prior to the "free flowing" one? It took time to bring the change about FFS. He had to get the players minds switched from nagative football to open football. Birmingham was the turning point, where got a draw but could have won it. Libertine always sniping at KK, any little chance. Its ok tho, you just bend history to suit your argument. it took time to get 3 very good players back (and staying fit) to take the team forward in matches and score goals. the front 3 took the pressure off the shit midfield the same as a good midfield will take the pressure off a defence. simple as that. Obviously the manager doesn't deserve any credit at all for changing the whole shape of the team though. to some extent. "playing your best players" is what its called at other clubs. dropping smith and ameobi to play martins and viduka isnt rocket science. You're absolutely pathetic. martins or viduka didnt start a game for keegan before the birmingham match and then they come back in and we start doing well. did keegan "change their mentality" or did we just get 2 very decent/vital players back in place of 2 shit ones? the keegan thing. obviously. That's why when Allardyce had everyone healthy, we saw the same free flowing attack. It was all just a return to form. FFS. completely different managers. when has allardyce ever been a gung ho attacker? So you agree then, that the manager does make a fucking difference. No? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatwax Posted February 23, 2009 Share Posted February 23, 2009 I'm not going to argue that we looked awful and it was looking inevitable that it we were in a relegation fight til the end - the Blackburn game springs to mind where we tried and tried and they got a goal from a counter attack at the death. I'm not going to argue because I'd be wrong. Like I said before, having Martins & Viduka come back was a massive, massive boost for us and we didn't start to look crap until Viduka was replaced at half time against Chelsea at which point we went don't by 2 goals. The fact is though that Keegan made a formation to accommodate the very best players and got them playing together very quickly. You could argue that anybody could have done this but playing Michael Owen as an attacking midfielder from deep? I hadn't heard anybody ever suggest this on here, or any other manager bring it up whilst working with him for that matter. Everybody on here were saying that they couldn't wait to get rid of Owen until Keegan gave him a new position and then the opinion changed amongst a fair few and his potential in a good attacking system became apparent. You're right that key players coming back got the ball rolling but to say that Keegan had no part in it is just stupid. I'm not a blind Keegan follower, but I'll give the man credit when he deserves it. That goes for any player in the squad aswell. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parky Posted February 23, 2009 Share Posted February 23, 2009 I'm not going to argue that we looked awful and it was looking inevitable that it we were in a relegation fight til the end - the Blackburn game springs to mind where we tried and tried and they got a goal from a counter attack at the death. I'm not going to argue because I'd be wrong. Like I said before, having Martins & Viduka come back was a massive, massive boost for us and we didn't start to look crap until Viduka was replaced at half time against Chelsea at which point we went don't by 2 goals. The fact is though that Keegan made a formation to accommodate the very best players and got them playing together very quickly. You could argue that anybody could have done this but playing Michael Owen as an attacking midfielder from deep? I hadn't heard anybody ever suggest this on here, or any other manager bring it up whilst working with him for that matter. Everybody on here were saying that they couldn't wait to get rid of Owen until Keegan gave him a new position and then the opinion changed amongst a fair few and his potential in a good attacking system became apparent. You're right that key players coming back got the ball rolling but to say that Keegan had no part in it is just stupid. I'm not a blind Keegan follower, but I'll give the man credit when he deserves it. That goes for any player in the squad aswell. You only have to look at the first game of this season for the KK factor. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Libertine Posted February 23, 2009 Share Posted February 23, 2009 take martins, owen, viduka and barton out of the "free flowing month" and would it have been the same? would it f***. anybody remember the months prior to the "free flowing" one? It took time to bring the change about FFS. He had to get the players minds switched from nagative football to open football. Birmingham was the turning point, where got a draw but could have won it. Libertine always sniping at KK, any little chance. Its ok tho, you just bend history to suit your argument. it took time to get 3 very good players back (and staying fit) to take the team forward in matches and score goals. the front 3 took the pressure off the s*** midfield the same as a good midfield will take the pressure off a defence. simple as that. Obviously the manager doesn't deserve any credit at all for changing the whole shape of the team though. to some extent. "playing your best players" is what its called at other clubs. dropping smith and ameobi to play martins and viduka isnt rocket science. You're absolutely pathetic. martins or viduka didnt start a game for keegan before the birmingham match and then they come back in and we start doing well. did keegan "change their mentality" or did we just get 2 very decent/vital players back in place of 2 s*** ones? the keegan thing. obviously. The players coming back was obviously instrumental but it was Keegans tactics that got us the results we did. Not many managers would have had the balls to play Owen, Martins & Viduka together. Allardyce certainly didn't. keegans tactics did nothing for the few months before 2 vital players were fit again. worth noting in the context of the thread. He was trying to turn the mentality of the team around. Did you expect instant results? glenn roeder could but keegan couldnt? shock horror. this is hardly something to cling to when plenty of new managers taking over during the season have "honeymoon periods" when results improve fairly instantly for a while. sunderland or blackburn for a recent example. even tottenham had one. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NG32 Posted February 23, 2009 Share Posted February 23, 2009 take martins, owen, viduka and barton out of the "free flowing month" and would it have been the same? would it f***. anybody remember the months prior to the "free flowing" one? It took time to bring the change about FFS. He had to get the players minds switched from nagative football to open football. Birmingham was the turning point, where got a draw but could have won it. Libertine always sniping at KK, any little chance. Its ok tho, you just bend history to suit your argument. it took time to get 3 very good players back (and staying fit) to take the team forward in matches and score goals. the front 3 took the pressure off the s*** midfield the same as a good midfield will take the pressure off a defence. simple as that. Obviously the manager doesn't deserve any credit at all for changing the whole shape of the team though. to some extent. "playing your best players" is what its called at other clubs. dropping smith and ameobi to play martins and viduka isnt rocket science. You're absolutely pathetic. martins or viduka didnt start a game for keegan before the birmingham match and then they come back in and we start doing well. did keegan "change their mentality" or did we just get 2 very decent/vital players back in place of 2 s*** ones? the keegan thing. obviously. The players coming back was obviously instrumental but it was Keegans tactics that got us the results we did. Not many managers would have had the balls to play Owen, Martins & Viduka together. Allardyce certainly didn't. keegans tactics did nothing for the few months before 2 vital players were fit again. worth noting in the context of the thread. He was trying to turn the mentality of the team around. Did you expect instant results? glenn roeder could but keegan couldnt? shock horror. this is hardly something to cling to when plenty of new managers taking over during the season have "honeymoon periods" when results improve fairly instantly for a while. sunderland or blackburn for a recent example. even tottenham had one. Honeymoon period? I seem to remember it took a while to turn things round. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted February 23, 2009 Share Posted February 23, 2009 take martins, owen, viduka and barton out of the "free flowing month" and would it have been the same? would it f***. anybody remember the months prior to the "free flowing" one? It took time to bring the change about FFS. He had to get the players minds switched from nagative football to open football. Birmingham was the turning point, where got a draw but could have won it. Libertine always sniping at KK, any little chance. Its ok tho, you just bend history to suit your argument. it took time to get 3 very good players back (and staying fit) to take the team forward in matches and score goals. the front 3 took the pressure off the s*** midfield the same as a good midfield will take the pressure off a defence. simple as that. Obviously the manager doesn't deserve any credit at all for changing the whole shape of the team though. to some extent. "playing your best players" is what its called at other clubs. dropping smith and ameobi to play martins and viduka isnt rocket science. You're absolutely pathetic. martins or viduka didnt start a game for keegan before the birmingham match and then they come back in and we start doing well. did keegan "change their mentality" or did we just get 2 very decent/vital players back in place of 2 s*** ones? the keegan thing. obviously. The players coming back was obviously instrumental but it was Keegans tactics that got us the results we did. Not many managers would have had the balls to play Owen, Martins & Viduka together. Allardyce certainly didn't. and prior to those players coming back? where were the tactics and the balls? Keegan did his best to inject confidence into the "name" players like Duff and Smith but in the end dropped them and accomodated all three strikers saying that he couldn't see any goals in the team and he didn't want to go into any future matches without goals in the team. By the way not only did it take balls to play 4-3-3, the most important factor was Keegan's refusal to stop playing passing football. That's actually what this thread is about, not about Keegan, he's gone and you can't turn back the clock. It's about the football and Ashley being overjoyed by the way Keegan's team swept the ghost of Allardyce's turgid shite away with proper football...carpet football as SBR would say. That's what had Mort saying "Kevin's got them playing again". I just wonder what Ashley's vision for the club is now? With Keegan you knew what it was about. Is Ashley happy with muck and nettles football now? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Libertine Posted February 23, 2009 Share Posted February 23, 2009 take martins, owen, viduka and barton out of the "free flowing month" and would it have been the same? would it f***. anybody remember the months prior to the "free flowing" one? It took time to bring the change about FFS. He had to get the players minds switched from nagative football to open football. Birmingham was the turning point, where got a draw but could have won it. Libertine always sniping at KK, any little chance. Its ok tho, you just bend history to suit your argument. it took time to get 3 very good players back (and staying fit) to take the team forward in matches and score goals. the front 3 took the pressure off the s*** midfield the same as a good midfield will take the pressure off a defence. simple as that. Obviously the manager doesn't deserve any credit at all for changing the whole shape of the team though. to some extent. "playing your best players" is what its called at other clubs. dropping smith and ameobi to play martins and viduka isnt rocket science. You're absolutely pathetic. martins or viduka didnt start a game for keegan before the birmingham match and then they come back in and we start doing well. did keegan "change their mentality" or did we just get 2 very decent/vital players back in place of 2 s*** ones? the keegan thing. obviously. The players coming back was obviously instrumental but it was Keegans tactics that got us the results we did. Not many managers would have had the balls to play Owen, Martins & Viduka together. Allardyce certainly didn't. keegans tactics did nothing for the few months before 2 vital players were fit again. worth noting in the context of the thread. He was trying to turn the mentality of the team around. Did you expect instant results? glenn roeder could but keegan couldnt? shock horror. this is hardly something to cling to when plenty of new managers taking over during the season have "honeymoon periods" when results improve fairly instantly for a while. sunderland or blackburn for a recent example. even tottenham had one. Honeymoon period? I seem to remember it took a while to turn things round. which is my point. fucks sake. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cp40 Posted February 23, 2009 Share Posted February 23, 2009 take martins, owen, viduka and barton out of the "free flowing month" and would it have been the same? would it f***. anybody remember the months prior to the "free flowing" one? It took time to bring the change about FFS. He had to get the players minds switched from nagative football to open football. Birmingham was the turning point, where got a draw but could have won it. Libertine always sniping at KK, any little chance. Its ok tho, you just bend history to suit your argument. it took time to get 3 very good players back (and staying fit) to take the team forward in matches and score goals. the front 3 took the pressure off the s*** midfield the same as a good midfield will take the pressure off a defence. simple as that. Obviously the manager doesn't deserve any credit at all for changing the whole shape of the team though. to some extent. "playing your best players" is what its called at other clubs. dropping smith and ameobi to play martins and viduka isnt rocket science. You're absolutely pathetic. martins or viduka didnt start a game for keegan before the birmingham match and then they come back in and we start doing well. did keegan "change their mentality" or did we just get 2 very decent/vital players back in place of 2 s*** ones? the keegan thing. obviously. The players coming back was obviously instrumental but it was Keegans tactics that got us the results we did. Not many managers would have had the balls to play Owen, Martins & Viduka together. Allardyce certainly didn't. keegans tactics did nothing for the few months before 2 vital players were fit again. worth noting in the context of the thread. He was trying to turn the mentality of the team around. Did you expect instant results? glenn roeder could but keegan couldnt? shock horror. this is hardly something to cling to when plenty of new managers taking over during the season have "honeymoon periods" when results improve fairly instantly for a while. sunderland or blackburn for a recent example. even tottenham had one. Honeymoon period? I seem to remember it took a while to turn things round. which is my point. fucks sake. Fact is keegan , got the tean Attacking, this is what he does, he gives his teams freedom to attack, and its far better to watch. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Libertine Posted February 23, 2009 Share Posted February 23, 2009 take martins, owen, viduka and barton out of the "free flowing month" and would it have been the same? would it f***. anybody remember the months prior to the "free flowing" one? It took time to bring the change about FFS. He had to get the players minds switched from nagative football to open football. Birmingham was the turning point, where got a draw but could have won it. Libertine always sniping at KK, any little chance. Its ok tho, you just bend history to suit your argument. it took time to get 3 very good players back (and staying fit) to take the team forward in matches and score goals. the front 3 took the pressure off the s*** midfield the same as a good midfield will take the pressure off a defence. simple as that. Obviously the manager doesn't deserve any credit at all for changing the whole shape of the team though. to some extent. "playing your best players" is what its called at other clubs. dropping smith and ameobi to play martins and viduka isnt rocket science. You're absolutely pathetic. martins or viduka didnt start a game for keegan before the birmingham match and then they come back in and we start doing well. did keegan "change their mentality" or did we just get 2 very decent/vital players back in place of 2 s*** ones? the keegan thing. obviously. The players coming back was obviously instrumental but it was Keegans tactics that got us the results we did. Not many managers would have had the balls to play Owen, Martins & Viduka together. Allardyce certainly didn't. keegans tactics did nothing for the few months before 2 vital players were fit again. worth noting in the context of the thread. He was trying to turn the mentality of the team around. Did you expect instant results? glenn roeder could but keegan couldnt? shock horror. this is hardly something to cling to when plenty of new managers taking over during the season have "honeymoon periods" when results improve fairly instantly for a while. sunderland or blackburn for a recent example. even tottenham had one. Honeymoon period? I seem to remember it took a while to turn things round. which is my point. fucks sake. Fact is keegan , got the tean Attacking, this is what he does, he gives his teams freedom to attack, and its far better to watch. when we got 2 very good strikers back, yes. before that, no. its no coincidence that the first game where martins and viduka were fit to start was the game we started attacking teams. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NG32 Posted February 23, 2009 Share Posted February 23, 2009 take martins, owen, viduka and barton out of the "free flowing month" and would it have been the same? would it f***. anybody remember the months prior to the "free flowing" one? It took time to bring the change about FFS. He had to get the players minds switched from nagative football to open football. Birmingham was the turning point, where got a draw but could have won it. Libertine always sniping at KK, any little chance. Its ok tho, you just bend history to suit your argument. it took time to get 3 very good players back (and staying fit) to take the team forward in matches and score goals. the front 3 took the pressure off the s*** midfield the same as a good midfield will take the pressure off a defence. simple as that. Obviously the manager doesn't deserve any credit at all for changing the whole shape of the team though. to some extent. "playing your best players" is what its called at other clubs. dropping smith and ameobi to play martins and viduka isnt rocket science. You're absolutely pathetic. martins or viduka didnt start a game for keegan before the birmingham match and then they come back in and we start doing well. did keegan "change their mentality" or did we just get 2 very decent/vital players back in place of 2 s*** ones? the keegan thing. obviously. The players coming back was obviously instrumental but it was Keegans tactics that got us the results we did. Not many managers would have had the balls to play Owen, Martins & Viduka together. Allardyce certainly didn't. keegans tactics did nothing for the few months before 2 vital players were fit again. worth noting in the context of the thread. He was trying to turn the mentality of the team around. Did you expect instant results? glenn roeder could but keegan couldnt? shock horror. this is hardly something to cling to when plenty of new managers taking over during the season have "honeymoon periods" when results improve fairly instantly for a while. sunderland or blackburn for a recent example. even tottenham had one. Honeymoon period? I seem to remember it took a while to turn things round. which is my point. f***s sake. Dont you swear at me Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted February 23, 2009 Share Posted February 23, 2009 take martins, owen, viduka and barton out of the "free flowing month" and would it have been the same? would it f***. anybody remember the months prior to the "free flowing" one? It took time to bring the change about FFS. He had to get the players minds switched from nagative football to open football. Birmingham was the turning point, where got a draw but could have won it. Libertine always sniping at KK, any little chance. Its ok tho, you just bend history to suit your argument. it took time to get 3 very good players back (and staying fit) to take the team forward in matches and score goals. the front 3 took the pressure off the s*** midfield the same as a good midfield will take the pressure off a defence. simple as that. Obviously the manager doesn't deserve any credit at all for changing the whole shape of the team though. to some extent. "playing your best players" is what its called at other clubs. dropping smith and ameobi to play martins and viduka isnt rocket science. You're absolutely pathetic. martins or viduka didnt start a game for keegan before the birmingham match and then they come back in and we start doing well. did keegan "change their mentality" or did we just get 2 very decent/vital players back in place of 2 s*** ones? the keegan thing. obviously. The players coming back was obviously instrumental but it was Keegans tactics that got us the results we did. Not many managers would have had the balls to play Owen, Martins & Viduka together. Allardyce certainly didn't. keegans tactics did nothing for the few months before 2 vital players were fit again. worth noting in the context of the thread. He was trying to turn the mentality of the team around. Did you expect instant results? glenn roeder could but keegan couldnt? shock horror. this is hardly something to cling to when plenty of new managers taking over during the season have "honeymoon periods" when results improve fairly instantly for a while. sunderland or blackburn for a recent example. even tottenham had one. Honeymoon period? I seem to remember it took a while to turn things round. which is my point. fucks sake. Fact is keegan , got the tean Attacking, this is what he does, he gives his teams freedom to attack, and its far better to watch. when we got 2 very good strikers back, yes. before that, no. its no coincidence that the first game where martins and viduka were fit to start was the game we started attacking teams. That wasn't a coincidence mate, not many managers would have convinced Owen he should play in midfield with two other strikers ahead of him and make it work. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio Posted February 23, 2009 Share Posted February 23, 2009 What teams were you passing off the park? If it was a prolonged period of time then I certainly missed it. Fulham and Reading for 90 minutes, a good first half against Sunderland and quality second half performances against Birmingham and Spurs. It was like watching Brazil for just over 300 minutes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now