In Omer Riza’s first game in charge of Cardiff City, the ailing team went to Hull and were beaten 4-1. Yet, in a way, there were promising signs in that while it might be an exaggeration to say City showed more attacking intent and ability in that single game than they had done in the previous six under the baleful influence of Erol Bulut, they were certainly much improved going forward.
In Riza’s third match in charge, City went to Ashton Gate and, when you look at Bristol City’s current position, you’d say they returned with a creditable 1-1 draw – the truth was something different though.
Riza’s reign as manager came to an end yesterday after thirty seven league games and nearly seven months in charge (quite long by the recent standards of this shambles of a club), but, in truth, we learned virtually all there was to know about him in those two of his first trio of matches in charge which I mentioned above.
Riza was described as an attack coach when he first came to the club last summer and that Hull match suggested that he could make a big difference in that area of the game if given the freedom to do so. That impression only grew when Riza’s team scored five in beating Plymouth in his second home game in charge and they could have scored as many in his third one, against Portsmouth, three days later.
City went on to have a strange goalscoring record under Riza. For long spells, it was very unusual for us not to score, but, once the initial flurry of goals subsided, it was only against Swansea that we scored more than two in a league game. Too often though it was only the one goal we scored and now, with none scored in three of our last four matches, even that’s stopped happening.
The other tell tale sign from the first match of the Riza era was that a Hull team that have struggled for home wins and goals all season long managed to score four. Now, for a very short while, Riza offered the hope that he was capable of solving our problems at both ends of the pitch because in the six matches after Hull, we kept four clean sheets as we went unbeaten through October.
It couldn’t last though and it soon became business as usual at the back culminating in the 7-0 embarrassment at Elland Road early in the New Year. Back in late October, City drew 0-0 at West Brom and since then we’ve stopped the opposition scoring in a league game on just three occasions.
Now I go on to the 1-1 draw at Bristol City. After a pretty nondescript first half, City got right on top early in the second period and scored a fine goal through Ollie Tanner – there were good chances missed to add at least two more as well, but it didn’t seem to matter because we were tearing the wurzels’ defence apart and it seemed that a win was ours for the taking as we went into the final quarter of the game.
However, it was then that Riza made what were, essentially, three defensive substitutions as he opted to sit on the 1-0 lead we had. To the surprise of very few City fans, we soon conceded an equaliser and spent much of the rest of the game defending desperately at times to the extent that it felt like we’d escaped with a point from a match we’d been totally dominating twenty odd minutes earlier.
So that was Riza’s football philosophy laid bare in his first three games as City boss. The “attack coach” became more concerned with shoring things up at the other end of the pitch (understandable to an extent, given our defensive record) and, despite making a definite difference when it came to the attacking side of the game, there was always the desire to tighten things up and try to hold on to leads – in my view, this happened far too early in games, what we saw at Bristol wasn’t an isolated incident.
In basic terms, Riza soon stopped doing the things he had shown himself to be pretty effective at as he tinkered with selections, formations and approach to try and resolve a malady in his side he never came close to curing – we couldn’t stop conceding goals.
The approach, home and away, became more cautious and players such as Joel Bagan and Cian Ashford, who were generally having good seasons when given the chance, disappeared from the team for weeks on end with, as far as I could see, no justification for their absences.
Far from curing our defensive woes, selections and formations at the back seemed to be adding to them by the end as Riza made it clear that he had little idea what his best team was.
From my point of view, I probably placed too much faith in the attacking play we saw for that brief period in October. That made me more supportive of Riza than most fans, but in the last month, even I had to change my mind about him as his team drifted towards relegation with barely a whimper and he was powerless to do anything to stop it.
Things came to a head in the last few days as Riza accused sections of the club’s support of being “clueless” and there was a post game interview at Bramall Lane where he became snappy at the line of questioning he was getting from a journalist (must admit I had sympathy with him here mind because the questions were the sort of asinine rubbish that gives journalism a bad name).
Having said that, you have to wonder about the timing of the sacking for all sorts of reasons. The honest truth is that Riza felt very close to the sack for probably 90% cent of his time in the job and I don’t think many supporters believed that the job was definitely his until May when it was announced he’d be manager until the end of the season back in December.
For me, there have been two seismic losses within the last six weeks or so which have allowed the belief that we’re going down to take a hold within the fanbase. The second came with the loss to Stoke eight days ago and I just don’t get why, if there was a desire to get rid of Riza among those at the top of the club at that time why they let him stagger on for another week, and another loss in a match they were always likely to lose. Riza should have gone this time last week surely?
In fact, given that the Board did not stick to their decision to let Riza stay for the season, you have to ask why a change was not made straight after the first of the two shattering defeats I referred to earlier against Luton?
On a personal level, nearly everybody says Omer Riza is a good bloke and you have to remember that he’s only recently gone through the trauma of losing a father that we’re told he was very close to. Certainly, it looked like the strain was getting to him in recent weeks and no one should blame him if it was – he’s probably best off out of it (especially at a basket case of club like this one) and I wish him well in whatever he does in the future.
The statement from the club announcing Riza’s departure is similar to some other recent ones from them in that it appears to be written as if there is the same sort of restriction on the number of characters that can be used like you get on things like Twitter. It tells us that Gavin Ward will remain part of the first team training team, so the non appearance in there of Tom Ramasut, Darren Purse and Richard Shaw suggests that they will not.
Not making the situation clear will lead to speculation, so let me indulge in some by saying that the almost complete disappearance of the first team training regime is suggestive of a breakdown in relations between staff and players and, if that is the case, then the “new broom” as represented by Messrs Ramsey, Ralls, Gunter, Bloxham etc appears to be a sensible way to go.
In a squad often accused of lacking natural leaders, it’s a shame that both Aaron Ramsey and Joe Ralls are at a stage in their playing careers where their places in the team cannot be taken for granted in the way they once would have been. I don’t think either of them fall into the tub thumping type of leader as represented by some of those former captains of the club who attended the Stoke game. However, they both lead by example and, in the case of Ramsey, perhaps the biggest thing he’s got in his favour is the respect gained through what he’s achieved in his career.
Chris Gunter was clearly a very influential presence in the Wales dressing room and the desire to get him involved in a role with the FAW is confirmation that this remains the case. Like Ramsey and Ralls, he surely has the best interests of the club at heart and, all in all, having made the the change, the club have probably done as well as they could have in this appointment once it became clear that they were not bringing in an experienced firefighter type manager like a Warnock or an Allardyce.
Avoiding the drop still seems like a long shot to me, but, generally speaking, the change seems to have been well received and at least there should be a better and more positive atmosphere in the ground tomorrow for the first of our remaining games against Oxford.
Finally, there is the chance for the three former City players now involved in the management/coaching side to further enhance their standing with supporters by pulling us clear of the bottom three. However, in the likely event that they do not do this, they can feel safe in the knowledge that only the most idiotic would start blaming them for us going down.If we do get to the position where blame is being apportioned after relegation, then I think the overwhelming majority of fans know where to look first.
