What would you ask Nathan Jones to do?

soapboxsam

Radostanradical said:

NabySarr said:

Radostanradical said:

NabySarr said:

Radostanradical said:

Go four at the back. Its incredibly clear to anyone who has played the game at a professional level we do not have the CBs capable of playing in a 3, the gqme plan was so clear yesterday for Millwall - Bully Ramsey and Expose Macca hence why Coburn lined up againg LR and Azeez against Macca. When we play 3cbs there is an imperative for the WBs to get forward to provide and putlet but that exposes Macca.

Equally if go back 4 that gives us the chance to actually play with wingers, but that means he would have to admit he was wrong and play Apter in his actual position. Also the experiment has been run and the results are clear TC is not a striker, in fact the only time he looks effectives is when he is forced to go out to the wide. Lets just play him as a winger.

I don't think NJ will do any of this because he is a stubborn man and changing would admit he was wrong, also would mean binning off Kelman who he spent a lot of money on as dont think he can play up
top by himself.

So how come all of our centre backs have only done well in a back 3 in their careers? Plenty of people that have played in the professional game have signed them to play in a 3 and played them in a 3. But there’s actually very little evidence that any of them can be centre backs in a 4 vs plenty of evidence they’ve been successful in a 3 at past clubs and here 

What’s actually clear is that we don’t have the defenders capable of playing in a 4. And if we are to switch our setup to a back 4 (I doubt this is the plan) we’d need to sign 2 good defenders at a minimum this week

We’ve switched to a 4 recently in a couple of games. Middlesbrough (disaster) and yesterday (another disaster) 

Luckily for you I have a bit of time today so will educate you. Firstly you cant compare going to a back 4 when we are actually chasing the game to starting in a 451 or 433, I dont think I need to expand on why.

Where was Macca successful playing as a CB in a back 3? He got promoted at from L1 with plymouth ill give you that and then was dropped once they got to championship, as for Kayne he was a RWB? Lloyd can play on a back 3 I accept and maybe Burke but thats no good when he is injured every 2 mins.

If we insist on staying witha back 3 we need to sign another 2 cbs who can actually play that formation and arent injury prone plus another WB or 2.

Look it’s cute you thought you had a point but my advice is not to die on this hill, arguing in favour of something that has no factual bearing.

Gillesphey got promoted playing in a back 3 at Plymouth, he was then left out when they changed to a back 4 in the championship. He also obviously was promoted with us in a 3. Very obvious from his career that he’s better in a 3, he’s not good enough for the championship doing that but in a back 4 he’d be absolutely terrible at this level

Lloyd Jones didn’t really do anything in his career until he played well in a 3 at Cambridge and then signed for us, where he didn’t do well in a 4 (in fairness we were shite) but has been excellent in a 3 and it really suits his game. 

Amari’i Bell started out as a wing back, while at Luton he also started playing LCB in a 3 which he has continued to do very well for us. Really suits his game perfectly 

Burke in his recent career has played well in a 3 at Luton. Don’t know much about his earlier career but maybe he’s played well in a 4 before. Unfortunately he can’t play back to back games so that rules him out 

So out of all of our centre backs, only one maybe has played well in a back 4 in their entire careers, and he’s not fit enough to start 2 games in a row. Yet according to your “professional experience” we don’t have the players to play a 3 (despite all the evidence of their whole careers playing in teams that play 3) and instead should be in a 4 (which virtually none of them have ever done well at in the past). Makes sense 

Lol how arlbout you respond to the points I actually made and not just make up ypur own counter arguments to arguments I havent made or already debunked. Look this is a waste of my time and I jave no desire to derail this thread for my fellow addicks. I have givin my experienced, professional and expert opinion, you have your opinions and its free country even illogical opinions are allowed.

I have already throughly explained on this thread (and another) why I am right. Feel free to review them. I shant respnd anymore to you unless you respond showing you have actually read mynposts and are replying to what I have wrote not what you wish I have wrote

Can you explain how you have a professional opinion Rado ? Don't be shy. If you have explained it before tell me what thread it's on if you don't want to repeat yourself. 

I have listened and watched Professional coaches at work and most of them are mainly copying who ever was their coaching mentor.  Three of the guys now have top coaching jobs at Chelsea and they have skilful footballers plus a conveyor belt of talent from around the world to chose from. Polar opposite to cafc.

I think I learnt more when i coached and managed  about "man management" even if they were youngsters ! Parents could be the problem as any coach of kids will know. My manta was you had partnerships all over the pitch and you couldn't have a weak link in the chain; CAFC chain is broken. 

At least Nathan Jones doesn't have the parents in his ear BUT if it's true that he has had a big fall out with Docherty, plus Ramsey has gone from Potential Premier player to Harrogate player in a few games  then there are major man management issues and it's not just down to the Bell/Edwards partnership on the left not being available even if that has been the catalyst for our slide down the table.

Confidence is always tenuous unless you are winning but NJ decision making is looking as frantic as his jack in the box antics on the touchline.

Big week at Sparrows lane before the Leicester game for some team bonding because we are going down if anymore displays like Saturday which was humiliating and utter capitulation.  

Talal

NabySarr said:

Chris_from_Sidcup said:

                   Kaminski

Clarke  -  Burke  -  Jones  -  Chambers

         Coventry   -   Docherty

    Apter   -    Carey   -   Campbell

                     Leaburn

Chambers is an attacking full back. He gets forward and then you’re asking Jones to cover that space, taking him away from being the middle of our defence. It just doesn’t work when you’re taking our most important player out of where we need him and exposing him to that space. He’s so good in the middle of a 3 but if we played the above he’d struggle a lot more 

If we want to play 4 at the back we need a new LCB, or we need Bell to be fit at LB. You can’t have Jones next to an attacking full back 

And that’s before we even start on the rest of the problems here. Burke can’t play 2 games in a row, so what do you do for the next game? 

And then we have no cover for Apter and TC. Tanto and Fullah are not wingers at this level

Think you've probably made your point that you don't think a back four will work at the moment. 

Chris_from_Sidcup

Talal said:

NabySarr said:

Chris_from_Sidcup said:

                   Kaminski

Clarke  -  Burke  -  Jones  -  Chambers

         Coventry   -   Docherty

    Apter   -    Carey   -   Campbell

                     Leaburn

Chambers is an attacking full back. He gets forward and then you’re asking Jones to cover that space, taking him away from being the middle of our defence. It just doesn’t work when you’re taking our most important player out of where we need him and exposing him to that space. He’s so good in the middle of a 3 but if we played the above he’d struggle a lot more 

If we want to play 4 at the back we need a new LCB, or we need Bell to be fit at LB. You can’t have Jones next to an attacking full back 

And that’s before we even start on the rest of the problems here. Burke can’t play 2 games in a row, so what do you do for the next game? 

And then we have no cover for Apter and TC. Tanto and Fullah are not wingers at this level

Think you've probably made your point that you don't think a back four will work at the moment. 

So we're openly admitting we're totally screwed then? The current formation isn't working and we're now saying a back four won't work either. Perhaps we should try a back 6.......

Talal

Chris_from_Sidcup said:

Talal said:

NabySarr said:

Chris_from_Sidcup said:

                   Kaminski

Clarke  -  Burke  -  Jones  -  Chambers

         Coventry   -   Docherty

    Apter   -    Carey   -   Campbell

                     Leaburn

Chambers is an attacking full back. He gets forward and then you’re asking Jones to cover that space, taking him away from being the middle of our defence. It just doesn’t work when you’re taking our most important player out of where we need him and exposing him to that space. He’s so good in the middle of a 3 but if we played the above he’d struggle a lot more 

If we want to play 4 at the back we need a new LCB, or we need Bell to be fit at LB. You can’t have Jones next to an attacking full back 

And that’s before we even start on the rest of the problems here. Burke can’t play 2 games in a row, so what do you do for the next game? 

And then we have no cover for Apter and TC. Tanto and Fullah are not wingers at this level

Think you've probably made your point that you don't think a back four will work at the moment. 

So we're openly admitting we're totally screwed then? The current formation isn't working and we're now saying a back four won't work either. Perhaps we should try a back 6.......

It's not what I'm saying, might as well try something. Get Campbell and Apter out wide and give it a go. Though we all know the likelihood of Jones doing this is slim as it might lead to a few moments of exciting play.

Chris_from_Sidcup

Talal said:

Chris_from_Sidcup said:

Talal said:

NabySarr said:

Chris_from_Sidcup said:

                   Kaminski

Clarke  -  Burke  -  Jones  -  Chambers

         Coventry   -   Docherty

    Apter   -    Carey   -   Campbell

                     Leaburn

Chambers is an attacking full back. He gets forward and then you’re asking Jones to cover that space, taking him away from being the middle of our defence. It just doesn’t work when you’re taking our most important player out of where we need him and exposing him to that space. He’s so good in the middle of a 3 but if we played the above he’d struggle a lot more 

If we want to play 4 at the back we need a new LCB, or we need Bell to be fit at LB. You can’t have Jones next to an attacking full back 

And that’s before we even start on the rest of the problems here. Burke can’t play 2 games in a row, so what do you do for the next game? 

And then we have no cover for Apter and TC. Tanto and Fullah are not wingers at this level

Think you've probably made your point that you don't think a back four will work at the moment. 

So we're openly admitting we're totally screwed then? The current formation isn't working and we're now saying a back four won't work either. Perhaps we should try a back 6.......

It's not what I'm saying, might as well try something. Get Campbell and Apter out wide and give it a go. Though we all know the likelihood of Jones doing this is slim as it might lead to a few moments of exciting play.

Was more a reply to what NabySarr said about a back 4 not working, when our current back 5 is also not working.

I agree with you on giving Apter/Campbell a go on opposite flanks, hence my lineup on the last page. Probably not wise to do that away at Leicester but i think we have to try something different and attack the three home games at the start of Feb. Teams know how to play against us and we've been totally found out which is why our only wins in the last two months were against Oxford (who were awful and still we needed a late goal) and Sheff Utd who had 9 men.

Chizz

I would ask Nathan Jones to block out the external noise and remain committed to the methodical approach that delivered promotion. Short-term fluctuations in form are inevitable at Championship level, particularly with injuries, but the priority should be maintaining clear principles in selection, tactics and standards. Stability of decision-making now is more important than reactive change.  

I would also ask him to continue strengthening the club incrementally, not just through results but through the underlying health of the squad. That means building depth, developing younger players and recruiting with a long-term view rather than chasing immediate fixes. Sustainable progress in the Championship is built on improving the floor of the squad as much as raising the ceiling of the first XI. (If developed well, Ibrahim Fullah will become a far better Charlton player than any player Nathan Jones could ever persuade to sign for the club this month or this year).  

Finally, I would ask him to stay true to the diligent yet passionate leadership that has reconnected the team and supporters. If Charlton avoid relegation, steering the club to its highest finish since 2015 would represent tangible progress, even amid inconsistency. That won't be enough for some, of course.  But it will be more than enough to prove that he's the right choice now and for the future. 

The task now is not to rush the journey, but to keep moving forward - slowly, permanently, and with conviction.

Chunes

If we play a 4-2-3-1, who do we bring on if we need to take Apter or TC off?

Chris_from_Sidcup

Chizz said:

I would ask Nathan Jones to block out the external noise and remain committed to the methodical approach that delivered promotion. Short-term fluctuations in form are inevitable at Championship level, particularly with injuries, but the priority should be maintaining clear principles in selection, tactics and standards. Stability of decision-making now is more important than reactive change.  

I would also ask him to continue strengthening the club incrementally, not just through results but through the underlying health of the squad. That means building depth, developing younger players and recruiting with a long-term view rather than chasing immediate fixes. Sustainable progress in the Championship is built on improving the floor of the squad as much as raising the ceiling of the first XI. (If developed well, Ibrahim Fullah will become a far better Charlton player than any player Nathan Jones could ever persuade to sign for the club this month or this year).  

Finally, I would ask him to stay true to the diligent yet passionate leadership that has reconnected the team and supporters. If Charlton avoid relegation, steering the club to its highest finish since 2015 would represent tangible progress, even amid inconsistency. That won't be enough for some, of course.  But it will be more than enough to prove that he's the right choice now and for the future. 

The task now is not to rush the journey, but to keep moving forward - slowly, permanently, and with conviction.

How much longer would the current poor run (two and a half months) of form have to continue for in order for you to class it as medium to long term?

benjest1989

Try four at the back - Apter and Olafe/Campbell on the wings and a target man up front - coventry holding and two mobile centre midfielders ahead of him. When playing a decent side, expect the wingers to help out their full backs - Why have we not tried something different like this and played with a back 5, two up front and campbell wasted at lb 

MarcusH26

Chunes said:

If we play a 4-2-3-1, who do we bring on if we need to take Apter or TC off?

You'd end up shoehorning one of the other strikers out wide which wouldn't work, don't think any of the very promising academy talents like Enslin or Reuben Reid are ready. I really like the idea of 4231 but the squad is so heavily built for 352 

NabySarr

Funny thing is with the debate about 4 or 5 at the back. Really we need to go back to doing both of these in our hybrid 

Kaminski 
Clarke 
Jones 
Gillesphey (please sign someone) 
Apter 
Costello 
Coventry 
Chambers 
Carey 
Leaburn/Kelman 
Campbell 

This is the eleven players that it seems most want to see start. Some want it to be a 4-2-3-1 but I think that leaves us too open defensively. So get Apter doing what he did in August in the hybrid role and we can have the best of both worlds with 4-2-3-1 in possession and 5-3-2 out of possession 

golfaddick

The hokey-cokey.

bobmunro

NabySarr said:

Funny thing is with the debate about 4 or 5 at the back. Really we need to go back to doing both of these in our hybrid 

Kaminski 
Clarke 
Jones 
Gillesphey (please sign someone) 
Apter 
Costello 
Coventry 
Chambers 
Carey 
Leaburn/Kelman 
Campbell 

This is the eleven players that it seems most want to see start. Some want it to be a 4-2-3-1 but I think that leaves us too open defensively. So get Apter doing what he did in August in the hybrid role and we can have the best of both worlds with 4-2-3-1 in possession and 5-3-2 out of possession 

Even if we don't sign anyone - never again.

jimmymelrose

NabySarr said:

Chris_from_Sidcup said:

                   Kaminski

Clarke  -  Burke  -  Jones  -  Chambers

         Coventry   -   Docherty

    Apter   -    Carey   -   Campbell

                     Leaburn

Chambers is an attacking full back. He gets forward and then you’re asking Jones to cover that space, taking him away from being the middle of our defence. It just doesn’t work when you’re taking our most important player out of where we need him and exposing him to that space. He’s so good in the middle of a 3 but if we played the above he’d struggle a lot more 

If we want to play 4 at the back we need a new LCB, or we need Bell to be fit at LB. You can’t have Jones next to an attacking full back 

And that’s before we even start on the rest of the problems here. Burke can’t play 2 games in a row, so what do you do for the next game? 

And then we have no cover for Apter and TC. Tanto and Fullah are not wingers at this level

If you’re playing a flat back four then the full backs don’t need to attack much as the whole difference with the system is to allow Apter and Campbell to concentrate on attacking.

When attacking, the full back, in your example Chambers, can come beyond the half way line and support Campbell but he no longer needs to be he one actually doing Campbell’s job.

Jones may like to play in a back 3 because he has the support of 2 other defenders while the two wing backs are up the pitch. With a proper back four, he has the same if only one full back goes forward on the side the attack is being built on. The other full back drops back as a fully fledged defender.

Chizz

Chris_from_Sidcup said:

Chizz said:

I would ask Nathan Jones to block out the external noise and remain committed to the methodical approach that delivered promotion. Short-term fluctuations in form are inevitable at Championship level, particularly with injuries, but the priority should be maintaining clear principles in selection, tactics and standards. Stability of decision-making now is more important than reactive change.  

I would also ask him to continue strengthening the club incrementally, not just through results but through the underlying health of the squad. That means building depth, developing younger players and recruiting with a long-term view rather than chasing immediate fixes. Sustainable progress in the Championship is built on improving the floor of the squad as much as raising the ceiling of the first XI. (If developed well, Ibrahim Fullah will become a far better Charlton player than any player Nathan Jones could ever persuade to sign for the club this month or this year).  

Finally, I would ask him to stay true to the diligent yet passionate leadership that has reconnected the team and supporters. If Charlton avoid relegation, steering the club to its highest finish since 2015 would represent tangible progress, even amid inconsistency. That won't be enough for some, of course.  But it will be more than enough to prove that he's the right choice now and for the future. 

The task now is not to rush the journey, but to keep moving forward - slowly, permanently, and with conviction.

How much longer would the current poor run (two and a half months) of form have to continue for in order for you to class it as medium to long term?

The "current poor run" includes one win, two draws and two defeats in January, including a point claimed from the league leaders.  We've taken more points from our last six games than most of the teams below us in the table.  As long as a poor run of form isn't sufficiently poor to drop the team into the relegation zone, then it is bearable.  What's unbearable is continual chopping and changing of managers, hoping - against hope - that the next one, for some miraculous reason, will be the right one.  

We only have to end the season above three teams to finish in our highest position for fourteen years. Does the current run of form threaten that?  No, I don't think so.  If it were to drag on, might it?  Yes, it might.  And at that time it would be worth considering who might be a better, more suitable fit as manager than Nathan Jones.  I don't think there is anyone. 

It's twenty managers since we last had a manager who achieved promotion, without also seeing Charlton relegated.  Did sacking him and replacing him with, successively, Riga, Peeters, Nugent, Robinson, Bowyer, Jackson, Adkins, Jackson (again), Garner, Holden and Appleton produce the "fix" that was needed when Chris Powell's team's form faltered?  I don't think it did.  

When was the last time Charlton replaced a manager and saw an immediate form improvement that transformed the season? 

NabySarr

jimmymelrose said:

NabySarr said:

Chris_from_Sidcup said:

                   Kaminski

Clarke  -  Burke  -  Jones  -  Chambers

         Coventry   -   Docherty

    Apter   -    Carey   -   Campbell

                     Leaburn

Chambers is an attacking full back. He gets forward and then you’re asking Jones to cover that space, taking him away from being the middle of our defence. It just doesn’t work when you’re taking our most important player out of where we need him and exposing him to that space. He’s so good in the middle of a 3 but if we played the above he’d struggle a lot more 

If we want to play 4 at the back we need a new LCB, or we need Bell to be fit at LB. You can’t have Jones next to an attacking full back 

And that’s before we even start on the rest of the problems here. Burke can’t play 2 games in a row, so what do you do for the next game? 

And then we have no cover for Apter and TC. Tanto and Fullah are not wingers at this level

If you’re playing a flat back four then the full backs don’t need to attack much as the whole difference with the system is to allow Apter and Campbell to concentrate on attacking.

When attacking, the full back, in your example Chambers, can come beyond the half way line and support Campbell but he no longer needs to be he one actually doing Campbell’s job.

Jones may like to play in a back 3 because he has the support of 2 other defenders while the two wing backs are up the pitch. With a proper back four, he has the same if only one full back goes forward on the side the attack is being built on. The other full back drops back as a fully fledged defender.

It’s not the same though because Jones wouldn’t always be in the middle where we need him. Anytime Chambers is the one that goes forward (which he will often as it’s his natural game and why we signed him) and we lose the ball then you still end up with Jones having to cover that space. This set up would be so easy for the opposition to get at us. One ball down the side of Jones into that channel and we’re done for. Imagine us trying to defend any cross into the box without Jones there 

Teams can obviously get at us down the sides at the moment, but crucially Jones is always in the middle of the box to defend any cross or block any shot. If Jones is LCB then you need Bell or a new signing defensive left back next to him 

bertpalmer

curbs 16 - 1

Billy_Mix

NJ has to pick a formation and attendant tactics based on who he has fit and available
Square pegs in round holes is doubly counterproductive
E.g. TC at LWB is moronic - he'll run all day but he's no defender so leaves the LCB exposed
When the chosen option for LCB is the ponderous Gillesphey, we are an accident waiting to happen.

Same goes for playing it around at the back when the only vaguely capable and available ball playing CH is Lloyd Jones - expecting MG and Ramsay to pass the ball around under a high press is cloud cuckoo land.
With the paucity of talent available at the back we have to keep the ball as far from our goal as possible and get it away quickly.  As we now have multiple big strikers to get on the end of balls ugly hoofball becomes the pragmatic option until any of the talented players can return.

Struggling teams need effort and application over pretty play and bullshit notions of style.

Against Leicester I'd be inclined to select

Kaminski

Ramsay, Burke, L Jones, Chambers
TC, Rankin-Costello, Coventry, Apter
Dykes & Leaburn

4-4-1-1 when we don't have the ball

and 4-2-4 when we do

Anderson and Apter to both be out of our box when we're defending setplays, one on the back edge of the centre circle, the other on the wing on the halfway line so we have a choice of outballs and Leicester have to keep at least 3 bodies out of our box.

sm

Talk to Curbs and other experienced voices
Not fall prey to the prevailing pessimism
Stop making the team so predictable - other teams have worked out what we were doing earlier in the season

Radostanradical

soapboxsam said:

Radostanradical said:

NabySarr said:

Radostanradical said:

NabySarr said:

Radostanradical said:

Go four at the back. Its incredibly clear to anyone who has played the game at a professional level we do not have the CBs capable of playing in a 3, the gqme plan was so clear yesterday for Millwall - Bully Ramsey and Expose Macca hence why Coburn lined up againg LR and Azeez against Macca. When we play 3cbs there is an imperative for the WBs to get forward to provide and putlet but that exposes Macca.

Equally if go back 4 that gives us the chance to actually play with wingers, but that means he would have to admit he was wrong and play Apter in his actual position. Also the experiment has been run and the results are clear TC is not a striker, in fact the only time he looks effectives is when he is forced to go out to the wide. Lets just play him as a winger.

I don't think NJ will do any of this because he is a stubborn man and changing would admit he was wrong, also would mean binning off Kelman who he spent a lot of money on as dont think he can play up
top by himself.

So how come all of our centre backs have only done well in a back 3 in their careers? Plenty of people that have played in the professional game have signed them to play in a 3 and played them in a 3. But there’s actually very little evidence that any of them can be centre backs in a 4 vs plenty of evidence they’ve been successful in a 3 at past clubs and here 

What’s actually clear is that we don’t have the defenders capable of playing in a 4. And if we are to switch our setup to a back 4 (I doubt this is the plan) we’d need to sign 2 good defenders at a minimum this week

We’ve switched to a 4 recently in a couple of games. Middlesbrough (disaster) and yesterday (another disaster) 

Luckily for you I have a bit of time today so will educate you. Firstly you cant compare going to a back 4 when we are actually chasing the game to starting in a 451 or 433, I dont think I need to expand on why.

Where was Macca successful playing as a CB in a back 3? He got promoted at from L1 with plymouth ill give you that and then was dropped once they got to championship, as for Kayne he was a RWB? Lloyd can play on a back 3 I accept and maybe Burke but thats no good when he is injured every 2 mins.

If we insist on staying witha back 3 we need to sign another 2 cbs who can actually play that formation and arent injury prone plus another WB or 2.

Look it’s cute you thought you had a point but my advice is not to die on this hill, arguing in favour of something that has no factual bearing.

Gillesphey got promoted playing in a back 3 at Plymouth, he was then left out when they changed to a back 4 in the championship. He also obviously was promoted with us in a 3. Very obvious from his career that he’s better in a 3, he’s not good enough for the championship doing that but in a back 4 he’d be absolutely terrible at this level

Lloyd Jones didn’t really do anything in his career until he played well in a 3 at Cambridge and then signed for us, where he didn’t do well in a 4 (in fairness we were shite) but has been excellent in a 3 and it really suits his game. 

Amari’i Bell started out as a wing back, while at Luton he also started playing LCB in a 3 which he has continued to do very well for us. Really suits his game perfectly 

Burke in his recent career has played well in a 3 at Luton. Don’t know much about his earlier career but maybe he’s played well in a 4 before. Unfortunately he can’t play back to back games so that rules him out 

So out of all of our centre backs, only one maybe has played well in a back 4 in their entire careers, and he’s not fit enough to start 2 games in a row. Yet according to your “professional experience” we don’t have the players to play a 3 (despite all the evidence of their whole careers playing in teams that play 3) and instead should be in a 4 (which virtually none of them have ever done well at in the past). Makes sense 

Lol how arlbout you respond to the points I actually made and not just make up ypur own counter arguments to arguments I havent made or already debunked. Look this is a waste of my time and I jave no desire to derail this thread for my fellow addicks. I have givin my experienced, professional and expert opinion, you have your opinions and its free country even illogical opinions are allowed.

I have already throughly explained on this thread (and another) why I am right. Feel free to review them. I shant respnd anymore to you unless you respond showing you have actually read mynposts and are replying to what I have wrote not what you wish I have wrote

Can you explain how you have a professional opinion Rado ? Don't be shy. If you have explained it before tell me what thread it's on if you don't want to repeat yourself. 

I have listened and watched Professional coaches at work and most of them are mainly copying who ever was their coaching mentor.  Three of the guys now have top coaching jobs at Chelsea and they have skilful footballers plus a conveyor belt of talent from around the world to chose from. Polar opposite to cafc.

I think I learnt more when i coached and managed  about "man management" even if they were youngsters ! Parents could be the problem as any coach of kids will know. My manta was you had partnerships all over the pitch and you couldn't have a weak link in the chain; CAFC chain is broken. 

At least Nathan Jones doesn't have the parents in his ear BUT if it's true that he has had a big fall out with Docherty, plus Ramsey has gone from Potential Premier player to Harrogate player in a few games  then there are major man management issues and it's not just down to the Bell/Edwards partnership on the left not being available even if that has been the catalyst for our slide down the table.

Confidence is always tenuous unless you are winning but NJ decision making is looking as frantic as his jack in the box antics on the touchline.

Big week at Sparrows lane before the Leicester game for some team bonding because we are going down if anymore displays like Saturday which was humiliating and utter capitulation.  

Its not my job to educate you, Sam.

Sword65pf

I’d ask him to start sleeping at home, because it doesn’t seem like staying at the training ground is working.

CaptainBeefheart

NabySarr said:

Chris_from_Sidcup said:

                   Kaminski

Clarke  -  Burke  -  Jones  -  Chambers

         Coventry   -   Docherty

    Apter   -    Carey   -   Campbell

                     Leaburn

Chambers is an attacking full back. He gets forward and then you’re asking Jones to cover that space, taking him away from being the middle of our defence. It just doesn’t work when you’re taking our most important player out of where we need him and exposing him to that space. He’s so good in the middle of a 3 but if we played the above he’d struggle a lot more 

If we want to play 4 at the back we need a new LCB, or we need Bell to be fit at LB. You can’t have Jones next to an attacking full back 

And that’s before we even start on the rest of the problems here. Burke can’t play 2 games in a row, so what do you do for the next game? 

And then we have no cover for Apter and TC. Tanto and Fullah are not wingers at this level

I think Docherty could shift out to cover Chambers when he'd push forward, in a similar way to how Jordan Henderson did when Trent Alexander-Arnold would go forward for Liverpool. Obviously not to the same standards but it'd be fine for us.

Clarke has played Centre Back before so I could see him going central and Ramsay playing as a defensive Full Back. 

I take your point about not having cover for tc and apter byt im just dying to see wingers play in the winger position and get crosses into our lump strikers we've got it shouldnt be this complicated, its back to basics stuff when we are in dire need of some points to stay up.

Radostanradical

NabySarr said:

Chris_from_Sidcup said:

                   Kaminski

Clarke  -  Burke  -  Jones  -  Chambers

         Coventry   -   Docherty

    Apter   -    Carey   -   Campbell

                     Leaburn

Chambers is an attacking full back. He gets forward and then you’re asking Jones to cover that space, taking him away from being the middle of our defence. It just doesn’t work when you’re taking our most important player out of where we need him and exposing him to that space. He’s so good in the middle of a 3 but if we played the above he’d struggle a lot more 

If we want to play 4 at the back we need a new LCB, or we need Bell to be fit at LB. You can’t have Jones next to an attacking full back 

And that’s before we even start on the rest of the problems here. Burke can’t play 2 games in a row, so what do you do for the next game? 

And then we have no cover for Apter and TC. Tanto and Fullah are not wingers at this level

For once we actually agree Jones is very good in the middle of a 3, however when you have a CB in Macca who is clearly not at the level required, Ramsay who is primarily a RWB and getting found out by better clubs at CB at this level, coupled with Burke and Bell being unreliable in terms of fitness, it doesnt matter how good Jones is on the middle.

For what its worth and my piss taking aside you have a point about a back 3 possibly suiting better but we need to make signings at CB if we insist on playing this formation. Where as we have a back 2 ee are lessening the burden on Burke and Bell and I ddo believe Jones can play in a back 2.

BigDiddy

Part 1 - now

Buy/loan 2 defenders, a left wing back and a creative midfielder who is able to make a forward pass.

Then drop Macca, Karoy and Burke and possibly Ramsey 

We wont do any of that so we will get relegated.

Part 2 - summer 2026

In the summer, whether NJ survives or not and whether we get relegated or not, a total rebuild needs to begin, right through the squad

I would keep:

Gough - potential 
Fuller - potential 
Lloyd - best defender, though he will need resting 
Coventry - solid 
Carey - solid
Apter - not seen enough, so needs a chance 
TC - solid
Kelman - solid
Miles - solid

Bring back

Kanu - potential 
Mbick - potential 

The following need to go because they are not good enough:

…Those players the club could not offload in this window  
Kaminsky - not good enough 
Bell - too injury prone 
Berry - too old
JRC - don’t see what he does/too slow
Mannion - error prone
Ramsey - lost the plot
Olafae - not good enough 
Knibbs - not good enough
Burke - injury prone

I assume Clarke, Dykes and Chambers will be gone at the end of the season.

Obviously, if we get relegated, some of the above may do good in L1 [Tanto, Knibbs, etc] but we may be better off with a clear out.

If we get relegated, keep NJ and the bones of the current squad, then we may find ourselves marooned in L1 for quite a few years.

Owners needs a long look at whether NJ can turn this around, whatever happens this season