Another of those “well, it could have been worse” games.

CoymayI spent the first four months of the season thinking that December, January and February would be the time when we could take some huge strides towards keeping our Premier League status this season. The reason why I felt this was that, having played virtually all of the big guns at home, the winter months saw a succession of matches at Cardiff City Stadium against teams we should view as beatable. Apart from Southampton, Liverpool and Chelsea, all of our remaining twelve home games were against teams in the mini league from which the three relegated sides would come.

On the other side of the coin, after a couple of easier looking games at Stoke and Palace to start December, the away fixtures for those three months looked very testing and with visits to Spurs and Everton to come in March, we had a run of seven away games where it seemed to me that only the derby at Swansea could be a reasonable bet for us to take any points from.

Of course, football being what it is, we turned in our worst performance in an away match since Palace in the Swansea game, but the other five matches we’ve played against teams in the current top seven since the match at Selhurst Park have all followed a similar pattern. The matches lost at Liverpool, Arsenal, Manchester City, Manchester United and yesterday by 1-0 to Tottenham all had City staff and the media making fairly encouraging noises about what each performance might lead to, while supporters heaved a sigh of relief that things had not worked out as badly as they feared they might.

Now, all of this could be seen as mildly encouraging if the supposed good things emerging from these defeats were carried into the home matches which followed them, but I’m afraid that, both in terms of performances and results, nothing of the sort has happened.

Roberto Soldado scores just his second Premier League goal from open play this season to decide yesterday's game.*

Roberto Soldado scores just his second Premier League goal from open play this season to decide yesterday’s game.*

 

The encouragement of “winning” the second half at Anfield (the result might have been even closer if referee Lee Probert had seen fit to penalise the wrestling holds Martin Skrtel had on a couple of City players in his own penalty area while “defending” dead ball situations) was followed by the awful Boxing Day showing against Southampton and the great Christmas giveaway against Sunderland, while a gritty defensive showing at the Emirates on New Years Day brought the feeble reaction we saw against West Ham. Okay, the visits to Manchester were followed by a win over Norwich, but it is still something of a mystery how we managed to get the three points that afternoon and the performance level was little better than what has come to be the norm these days at Cardiff City Stadium.

Hull brushing us aside last week following another poor home showing in losing to Wigan in the FA Cup offered further evidence that the positive noises we hear after away games count for nothing if they do not bring some sort of dividend in home games. Interestingly though, there was something from yesterday that was different to what we saw in those earlier away matches and, maybe, it could be the thing that gives us that bit of impetus for next week’s crucial showdown with Fulham at Cardiff City Stadium.

In my report for Saturday’s Academy team game with Barnsley I mentioned that the City youngsters played a version of 3-5-2. It was the first time I could remember them playing such a formation and now the first team have followed suit in using three central defenders (with Craig Bellamy being used behind Fraizer Campbell, it could be argued that we played something like 3-6-1 at White Hart Lane) . Now, I’m sure there will be those who see that system as being defensive, but I would argue that, just like 4-5-1, it’s the people you use within it which defines how attacking or otherwise a system is, not the system itself.

Anyway, with Ole mentioning that 3-5-2/3-6-1 might be something we see again, it seems likely that it will be all change again next week – I also see that the local media (in the form of Terry Phillips) are saying  “I can’t imagine he (Solskjær) will even think of similar tactics against Fulham at home” – I for one hope he does.

Now, speaking as someone who ended up despairing at the inflexibility which saw Dave Jones play 4-4-2 week after week, I largely welcome the fact that Ole is prepared to try different things, but it also needs to be said that the other extreme  of changing things week by week hardly strikes me as the best way to ensure your team stays up. Given, that it largely worked against the team in fifth position, I’d say yesterday’s formation (or, at least, the three centrebacks part of it) did enough to earn a continuation into next week – the goal we conceded came from a break from one of our attacking dead ball opportunities, so Spurs did not really break the three centre back defence down.

I say this in the knowledge that to stay up we simply need to start scoring at about twice the rate we have been and start conceding goals at around half the rate we have until now. Put like that, our task looks a huge one, but it’s worth pointing out that apart from the Norwich and Villa games, both of which saw us hanging on desperately at the end, we had conceded at least two goals in each of Ole’s first seven league matches in charge. Therefore, before yesterday, we needed to score at least three goals (something we have done once in thirty three competitive matches so far this season) in more than two thirds of our games under our new manager to stand any chance of getting the wins we so desperately need.

We need to start getting it right at both ends of the field, but we couldn’t go on conceding goals at the rate we were and, although I accept the evidence that three central defenders will lead to an improvement in our goals conceded per game figure is thin at the moment, the little we have suggests it will – hopefully, we may see the improvement we need at one end of the field anyway.

Obviously, the tougher part of the double  we require is the second one – finding a way to improve our appalling goalscoring figures. On the face of it, using three centerebacks is not going to help as far as that goes, but one of the reasons why the system worked for the Academy on Saturday was that all three centrebacks were good enough in possession to come out from their defensive situation and join in with the midfield at times. In a must win match like Fulham at home, Cala and Caulker could, and should, do that now and again, while I’d also say that a couple of personnel changes here and there, as well as some minor tweaks to the system could lead to something which enables us to get enough players forward while remaining pretty solid defensively.

Fabio in action in the sort of areas of the pitch where we    are likely to see more of the qualities which persuaded Ole to sign him - using him as a wing back has it's risks given his defensive limitations, but our need for wins makes it one that i feel is worth taking.*

Fabio in action in the sort of areas of the pitch where we are likely to see more of the qualities which persuaded Ole to sign him – using him as a wing back has it’s risks given his defensive limitations, but our need for wins makes it one that I feel is worth taking.*

Having Gary Medel back makes a big difference and, although I would prefer a couple of wing backs who were stronger defensively, Fabio and John are probably the best we have when it comes to the attacking side of that role, so, as we need the win, I’d stick with them. Again, the need for three points means that, for me, Gunnarsson has to miss out for one of Mutch, Eikrem or, the forgotten man, Whittingham – I’d go for the first named with instructions to get forward as much as he can. I’d keep Bellamy and Campbell in the side with the former given instructions to operate in the same sort of roving role behind the front man as he had against Norwich.

The toughest choice for me is who has that last place in the side – the candidates for me are Noone (if fit), Zaha, Jones and Dæhli. Ideally I’d say you need to play two out and out strikers, but I don’t think Jones does enough in a relegation struggling team to justify a starting role at the moment. Also, I’m not sure about out and out wingers in a system which includes two wing backs selected more for what they do going forward than what they do defensively – if either Noone or Zaha were more competent when having to defend, I’d be very tempted to include at least one of them as a wing back, but I think I’d keep them both on the bench as options to use if things are going wrong.

That leaves Mats Dæhli then who I’d give the same sort of roaming role to as Bellamy would have – both of them would have to get out to support the wing backs at times when we were attacking and there would have to be a real commitment from at least five of our players to make runs beyond our lone striker when they can (we’ve been rubbish at doing that this season). It needs to be remembered that a draw won’t be much good for Fulham either, so I expect them to be more attack minded than most teams we’ve seen at Cardiff City Stadium recently. Therefore, I believe there will be counter attacking opportunities for us as well and, given Fulham’s awful defensive record, there will surely be chances to end our goal drought – scoring first in a home game would make such a difference.

* courtesy of http://www.walesonline.co.uk/

Posted in Out on the pitch | Tagged | 2 Comments

Tan’s timing truly dreadful as he tells his side of the story.

CoymayOle Gunnar Solskjær must despair – he’s got a hard enough task trying to keep us in the Premier League as it is, without the continuous disruption caused by senior figures at the club doing the very thing they accused Malky Mackay of doing (washing the club’s dirty linen in public) when they sacked him. In the aftermath of Ole’s only league win so far against Norwich, owner Vincent Tan decided to compare him favourably with Mackay thereby deflecting attention away from on field matters and on to the sort of off field rubbish which has made survival in the top flight that much harder than it could have been.

After getting a rare clean sheet and hard earned point against Villa that should have set things up nicely for the FA Cup tie with Wigan (which Ole had made clear he really wanted to win), CEO Simon Lim (no doubt acting as his master’s voice) blundered in a couple of days later with a statement that started by praising Ole before getting on with the real business of rubbishing Mackay through the Andreas Cornelius transfer in particular.

After a demoralising defeat by Hull which left the confidence level amongst supporters and, I would assume, players at it’s lowest ebb of the season, Ole, reportedly, decided to act by tearing into the team after that 4-0 hiding and then by cancelling the warm weather training that had been planned for this week. Our manager talked of a week to be spent trying to put right the glaring deficiencies of last weekend, but it wouldn’t be too much of a surprise if attention has been diverted by Vincent Tan’s musings on Cardiff City Football Club as broadcast on Football Focus yesterday.

To make matters worse, what Tan had to say was first broadcast on radio on Thursday, so it was the three days leading up to today’s match at Spurs which were dominated by the interview rather than just the one – the timing of the interview was disastrous and, although owner and CEO both talk about how confident they are about Ole’s ability to keep us up, they do seem intent on making the manager’s task that much harder!

As for what was said, here is a video which has most of it and this is a pretty comprehensive breakdown as well.

Now I’ll admit I have sympathy for Mr Tan when he talks about the media being “a bit racist”. I believe certain elements of the media took one look at him at the Man City game and decided he was someone they could have a bit of fun with during the season – would we have seen ridiculous stuff about him wanting to see his goalkeeper shoot or him  booing his team if he was Vince Tandy from Bridgend? I don’t think we would have.

Furthermore, I fully accept that Malky Mackay did make some poor signings in the summer and I can understand how Mr Tan could compare what Hull and Palace have spent compared to us and come to the conclusions that he has – even though I maintain that his original, and strongest, complaint about the summer spending was more to do with the fact that more was spent than he wanted rather than any misgivings about the quality of player signed.

However, although Mr Tan proves he’s not the brainless idiot that some would have you believe (and I have suspected him to be from time to time), there is nothing else in what he says that I can support him on.

The contention that he can learn about football by setting aside a couple of months to study it is illuminating for a couple of reasons. Firstly, there is an arrogance involved which percolates through much of what he says and, second, it shows that he may know more about football than he did, but how much of this is what I would call the really important stuff? By that I mean that I have spent over fifty years watching the game while also reading more than I can remember about it and I like to think I know a fair bit about football by now. However, by and large, I still watch the game as a supporter would rather than a professional – for example, I’m better than I was at noticing what players do when they don’t have the ball and I can judge a player’s all round game better than I could, but I’m sure I don’t have the expertise to earn a living as a professional scout from the game.

If Mr Tan genuinely thinks he can look at a player, judge how good he is and then apply that knowledge to contractual negotiations to a standard which ensures Cardiff City are successful in playing and financial terms after a couple of months of study, then I think he is deluding himself.

Now, of course, it’s only fair to point out that Malky Mackay and Iain Moody proved last summer that the professionals aren’t infallible when it comes to these judgments. The Cornelius deal will always be used against them by those who want to criticise their work at Cardiff, but I have to say that, ordinarily, the purchase of a 20 year old striker considered to be good enough to have already played for his country on a five year contract seems on the face of it to be a better deal than a 32 year old on a three year deal after a career that has seen the player performing at the second level of his domestic league for much of his career. Vincent Tan was keen to use the signing this summer of Javi Guerra as evidence of his new found football expertise, but a three year contract on wages which are, apparently, much more than he earns at Vallidolid, is that really such good business?

You can only guess what Sir Alex Ferguson is thinking here. Surely, one of Vincent Tan's dreams when he came to Cardiff was that his team would be hosting the likes of Manchester United on a regular basis. Why is it then that a seemingly intelligent man seems so intent on making sure it doesn't happen again in the foreseeable future with continued interventions throughout February from him and his CEO which have only made the task of staying up all the harder?*

You can only guess what Sir Alex Ferguson is thinking here. Surely, one of Vincent Tan’s dreams when he came to Cardiff was that his team would be hosting the likes of Manchester United on a regular basis. Why is it then that a seemingly intelligent man seems so intent on making sure it doesn’t happen again in the foreseeable future with continued interventions throughout February from him and his CEO which have only made the task of staying up all the harder?*

Hardly surprisingly, Mr Tan compares what was spent under his watch in January with what was spent in the summer, but the fact that none of the January signings have realistically suggested that they can make the difference between us going down or staying up is conveniently ignored. I really would like to see some evidence that Eikrem, Jones, Zaha, Fabio and the rest have it in  them to keep us up, but I’ve seen none so far – based on their showings up to now, the seven of them were correctly valued collectively at around £6 million and, generally speaking, buying players at around £1 million each in January isn’t going to keep you in the Premier League come May.

I could go on for so long about what was said, but will end with three admissions by Mr Tan which make me fear for the future of the club under his ownership and increase my feeling that, very uncertain future or not, I’d prefer to see him leave Cardiff City;

1. Leaving aside arguments about the change of shirt colour for now, the most relevant thing about his views on the re-brand was what he didn’t say – there was no mention of any business justification for what he did. It’s becoming more obvious that the club hasn’t made money from the change to red and that those who said it was all just down to one man’s whim were right all along.

2. His laughable contention that he and his CEO should have somehow been cut some slack when it came to the amount spent in the summer because they, effectively, didn’t know what they were doing is mind boggling. When the whole Moodygate thing blew up I presumed that Tan and Lim would not just have let their manager and head of recruitment do as they pleased – well, it seems that they did! Frankly, that would be a suicidal policy for a team like, say, Chasetown to indulge in, let alone one in the Premier League and it would be hard not to feel that the two of them had got what they deserved, were it not for the fact that, as usual, it’ll be the football club that ends up paying for their ineptitude.

3. Worst of all, I was one of what I would have thought were very many who were prepared to give Vincent Tan the benefit of the doubt nearly two years ago when the re-brand was originally mooted because of a promise that his debt would be converted into equity. Back in May 2012, a group of us were told at Cardiff City Stadium that such a conversion was “imminent” and that, to all intents and purposes, City would be a debt free club. Now, twenty two months later with a potentially devastating relegation, in financial terms, seemingly imminent, Tan is showing increasing signs of reneging on his promise.

Surely this means that anyone who saw themselves as a “reluctant red” at the time of the re-brand, now has to give serious thought to their position because it’s looking like the goalposts have been moved quite substantially – I used to dread what the future would hold without Vincent Tan, but, if he is going to be trying to get his money back come what may, then my attitude towards him leaving has become  one of bring it on while we are still receiving the finances (i.e television money and, almost certainly, parachute payments) which will soften the blow to some extent.

* picture courtesy of  http://www.walesonline.co.uk/

 

Posted in Up in the Boardroom | Tagged | Comments Off on Tan’s timing truly dreadful as he tells his side of the story.