Eddie Howe

[Parsley]

To be fair, if Lascelles doesn't drop that clanger, I think we see the game out comfortably and probably grab another goal. Momentum was well with us at that point after the triple sub. 

[1892er]

Just now, dcmk said:

We took a battering just the other day.  Why would anyone expect it to be comfortable?  There are no easy games that you can just show up and win.

 

Sunderland being the exception.

I don't expect it to be comfortable but I'd prefer some semblance of coherent football at the very least.

[Interpolic]

2 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

ANOTHER POSTER SAID IT TO ABSOLVE HOWE OF RESPONSIBILITY.  I SIMPLY STATED MOTIVATING PLAYERS IS IN HOWES JOB DESCRIPTION = HOWE IS STILL RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PERFORMANCE 

 

Speak to people normally and stop being a prat.

[Tonalis Bookie]

16 minutes ago, RS said:

People wanting Howe out haven’t got a fucking clue. 

 

or we have a lot more of a clue about a number of things......

[KaKa]

1 minute ago, The Prophet said:

We definetly looked like we lacked confidence tonight, but its natural after getting absolutely cunted at the weekend.

 

Schar and Longstaff had absolute stinkers.

 

Schar and Longstaff were trolling tonight.

 

Schar dwelling on the ball just so he could then pass sideways or backwards for them to pressure us all night, and if not that then passing it 5 yards forward into Longstaff with a man right on him to give it away.

 

Disgusting performances from both.

[OCOCOL]

6 minutes ago, dcmk said:

Rock bottom  

Mebbes a 1992er

[Yorkie]

Any suggestions that the players didn't apply themselves to the fullest tonight is absolutely risible, like. Think I spotted someone in the match thread saying he'd lost the dressing room.  It wasn't a good technical performance but they left everything out there. Blackburn played well and had the backing of the crowd throughout; there's no way we'd have even got to ET, let alone pens, if the players hadn't given everything.

[RS]

Just now, Tonalis Bookie said:

 

or we have a lot more of a clue about a number of things......

Nah. Thick as fuck when it comes to football. 

[LiquidAK]

1 minute ago, Tonalis Bookie said:

 

or we have a lot more of a clue about a number of things......

Nah it's definitely not that like

[Tonalis Bookie]

Just now, RS said:

Nah. Thick as fuck when it comes to football. 

 

must be

[Gallowgate Toon]

7 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Someone said the players were awful and didn’t look motivated. I simply replied that it’s Howe’s job to motivate the players. Players not looking arsed doesn’t absolve Howe of responsibility as the person was suggesting. 
 

That is all.  If you think the players looked sharp and motivated - great. 

I didn't say that they weren't motivated.

 

I said there was a lack of responsibility from quite a few which felt gutless to me. Nowt to do with effort, all to do with, imo, very poor application of the basics of football when you're the superior quality side by a distance.

There's an angle to say Howe manages confidence; fair but we have a lot of seasoned pros where, imo, big accountability lies in this type of game to just get their job done.

[The College Dropout]

24 minutes ago, Gallowgate Toon said:

He sent out a team more than capable of smashing Blackburn and some of them put in genuinely spineless performances, like. 

 

You can go on about coaching blah blah blah but we're a significantly better side than them, players have to take responsibility in those scenarios. You can't have players pulling out of 50/50s, playing blind balls around corners or absolute hospital passes, relentlessly passing the ball backwards when you're 1v1. These are not things that have been synonymous with Howe for the vast majority of his tenure.

This was the post I was replying too and tbf he doesn’t say the team didn’t look motivated. Hold my hands up - I took a jump.  

 

 

But he mentions how a number of the them were not fully committed and were generally playing like bozos.  I still think my point stands that Howe is responsible when multiple players don’t seem mentally locked in.  It’s his job to get their minds right or choose players who will. 

[Gallowgate Toon]

How d'you know I'm a he? EH? 

[Terrymac1966]

Were missing big Joe our midfield tackles but doesnt win the ball in the way he does

Stick Dan Ashworth in there instead of his garden

[The College Dropout]

2 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

This was the post I was replying too and tbf he doesn’t say the team didn’t look motivated. Hold my hands up - I took a jump.  

 

 

But he mentions how a number of the them were not fully committed and were generally playing like bozos.  I still think my point stands that Howe is responsible when multiple players don’t seem mentally locked in.  It’s his job to get their minds right or choose players who will. 

And as I and others have mentioned. I think this is a confidence and composure thing in the main. Which links to motivation.  

[Big Jow]

I’ll need to watch that again to try and make sense of it because I struggled to ascertain what the plan was.

 

I think it was the semi-press approach of pressing in periods without fully committing to it and not across the whole match. It worked, to an extent.

 

Besides that I saw a more conservative approach which I assume was to try and keep the goals out, Lascelles with an absolute brain fart preventing that from happening.

 

It wasn’t pretty, it was a bit desperate at times but we got there in the end.

 

Howe looked like, for the first time, to be feeling the pressure. He looked a bit desperate at times. The subs were still not my cup of tea, but at least it was an improvement on Saturday, although that is a very low bar to meet.

 

A big test at the weekend. Not looking forward to Neto. Heres hoping we build on this and get a win. At this stage, with the players we now have back, a draw wouldn’t be good enough.

[Disco]

If nowt else it’s become increasingly obvious why we bought Tonali as someone else who can put their foot on the ball and slow the game down a bit. 

[Tonalis Bookie]

The things at play here arent a rush of blood to the head. I don't think he will be here first game next year regardless of what happens from now because of a few very important moments that add up. Its not knee jerk, so just a few points:

 

• Our defence has been on a rapid decline since around February last season when the brilliant streak of not conceding ended. It has steadily declined to a point now where most attacks lead to a chance or an effort at goal
• Our lack of ability to change into new systems to deal with both in game situations and pre game tactical issues is startling
• An example of refusing to make subs to impact a game is being shown every game. Please remember Wolves away when we wre struggling, trippier was having a mare and Eddie did nothing
• We are playing player who haven't trained or who are struggling with niggles. If you want a prime example, in the Carabao against Chelsea we sent an injured gordon out after HT and allowed him to play on for about 10 minutes which furthered his issues
• Despite players coming back and being 3 goals up we do not make subs to bring on players, even a Ritchie to see out 10 relatively easy minutes

It's very much a Bielsa moment for us at the moment. Eddie did an amazing job but the injuries we receive are muscle based, exactly what was happening at Leeds when players were playing in the red. If you look at the above and some of the other instances people will raise then it isnt just a snap reaction, its the acceptance of a large list of instances and decided we do not think they will improve over the coming months and into the new season

[Gawalls]

12 minutes ago, Parsley said:

To be fair, if Lascelles doesn't drop that clanger, I think we see the game out comfortably and probably grab another goal. Momentum was well with us at that point after the triple sub. 

So you’re saying if we’d scored more goals than them we would have won?

[The College Dropout]

2 minutes ago, Disco said:

If nowt else it’s become increasingly obvious why we bought Tonali as someone else who can put their foot on the ball and slow the game down a bit. 

From what I’ve seen and read. That’s not really his game. But he would have more pass and move ability than any nom Bruno CM by a distance. 

[madras]

11 minutes ago, Gallowgate Toon said:

How d'you know I'm a he? EH? 

There's a thread on Genrral chat for that.

[Disco]

6 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

From what I’ve seen and read. That’s not really his game. But he would have more pass and move ability than any nom Bruno CM by a distance. 

Know what you mean and he’s not specifically that type of player but clearly being able to take and play the ball under pressure and play one touch or round the corner would improve us so much. That and Bruno seemingly running in glue a lot of the time and no one covering when he pressing too far. Anyway, it’s a whole different conversation.

[Yorkie]

If there's one thing tactically I'm weary of seeing it's Trippier in that centre-midfield position. Honestly don't feel like it offers us anything substantial, meanwhile leaving Lascelles to trip over his feet in the auxiliary RB position, and leaving the centre prone to gaps when Fab goes walkabout.

 

Just keep him on the right. He builds play well enough from there. 

[Kid Icarus]

1 minute ago, Yorkie said:

If there's one thing tactically I'm weary of seeing it's Trippier in that centre-midfield position. Honestly don't feel like it offers us anything substantial, meanwhile leaving Lascelles to trip over his feet in the auxiliary RB position, and leaving the centre prone to gaps when Fab goes walkabout.

 

Just keep him on the right. He builds play well enough from there. 

Is it not more of a help out with numbers in midfield move? That's what I've seen it as, that Howe can see we have a problem there. 

[madras]

1 minute ago, Disco said:

Know what you mean and he’s not specifically that type of player but clearly being able to take and play the ball under pressure and play one touch would improve us so much. That and Bruno seemingly running in glue a lot of the time and no one covering when he pressed too far.

It's not that strange when last season Eddie spoke about needing to control and dominate games, more that we went and got someone who's role that is and that they've done it at elite level. Tonali was Longstaffs replacement in the XI, not role in the team.