We've heard of the philosophy, identity, pathway bla bla bla. Under Adkins we never started a game outside of 433/ 4231, it may have been a preference from the club, it may have been Nigel stubbornness.
We'll probably never know for sure, but, today we saw a different formation and players playing to clear instructions, if JJ is allowed to do what he wants and it works. Long may it continue.
Unbelievable result.
I think we do know for sure. Adkins has played the 4231 for his entire career. That's his system and we knew he would play that here. The idea that he's been made to play it by Ged and the heirarchy, even when it wasn't working, is for the birds.
Adkins hasn't played 4231 for his entire career......
Ok. Overstatement. It's his preferred formation and it's what we knew he would play coming through the door. Obviously he has not played it every single game in his career, he's been a manager for a long time and the game has changed over that period. Plus he played 352 twice with us. (Again proving he wasn't being told what tactics to play). But it is a conspiracy theory.
It might just be a conspiracy theory, I suppose it definitely is because it's only based on opinions not fact.
But there are questions, that will never truthfully, be fully answered.
Was Adkins appointed, either in part or totally because he used/wanted to use that formation? Its surely mentioned in the recruitment process and it is what our age groups have played for a while. It's also the most used formation in the top 3 divisions on English football.
Why did the "recruitment committee" sign 2 wingers and nearly two different ones in January when Bowyer, in 3 years, have never shown a preference for wingers?
Why/how did we sign, or resign, about a dozen players over the summer and end up with a squad either unable, or unwilling, to play a system they were all signed to play in?
The thing I can’t get my head around is that was it so bad under NA the team had literally given up and didn’t want to play for him? I understand the manager you work for has a massive impact on how you feel at work, for everyone, not just footballers, but was he really that bad to play under?
Bit of a rhetorical question on my part, pondering, rather than asking, but it seems that within a couple of days there has been a massive facelift.
As others have posted, players probably didn’t like playing in set ups that were confusing, and there were too many changes, but I find it crazy how it seems to have done a complete 180 in a matter of days. I don’t believe it’s a new manager bounce. I really think the players just weren’t feeling it
I think people can over simplify putting effort in. When you lose belief in how things are going at work, trust in your manager, and there's just a nasty feeling of failure in the air, it's hard to get the best out of yourself. You can just get stuck in a routine of flatness.
Once Adkins left of course that shakes things up, there's hope for change, and the players are re energized. What we saw against Sunderland was the players going at damn close to 100% effort. I think its unrealistic to keep that level of commitment and focus consistently, unless there is a winning run of confidence and something to play for.
That's why it would be foolish to both criticize them for "not bothering to try for Adkins" or to give JJ the job based on 1 game.
The thing I can’t get my head around is that was it so bad under NA the team had literally given up and didn’t want to play for him? I understand the manager you work for has a massive impact on how you feel at work, for everyone, not just footballers, but was he really that bad to play under?
Bit of a rhetorical question on my part, pondering, rather than asking, but it seems that within a couple of days there has been a massive facelift.
As others have posted, players probably didn’t like playing in set ups that were confusing, and there were too many changes, but I find it crazy how it seems to have done a complete 180 in a matter of days. I don’t believe it’s a new manager bounce. I really think the players just weren’t feeling it
Watching the Accrington game on Tuesday, the players certainly looked like they were trying to me. How about when Washington busted a gut to get onto Gilbey’s long ball which led to Stockley’s goal? There was real commitment as they tried to get something from the game.
Maybe the issue isn’t that simple and has been due to a combination of factors - lack of a consistent team selection; uncertainty of job roles; the blend of players not being quite right; not playing to our strengths; rigidly sticking to a tactic that wasn’t working. Why play Stockley as lone striker and then complain when the players were lumping it forward to him?
Maybe they just didn’t really warm to Adkins - he was maybe a bit too “old school” - a bit like a teacher or ones dad - for this bunch of 20 and 30 somethings…
It was interesting that Jacko highlighted in his post match interview that he told the players that if you want to play in one of his teams then 100% effort and work is the minimum he expects and the players that fail to meet that standard won’t play for him. You can argue that shouldn’t need to be said but it certainly got a reaction from them yesterday and makes you wonder what Adkins had been telling them.
I've watched it a few times and can't see a headbutt in any shape or form. Stockley is being physical but there a big difference between that and headbutting.
The way Johnson talks about a "definite" three match ban for something that didn't happen is deflection, and I look forward to Stockley's public "acquital" so that we can see Johnson throw his toys out of the pram again.
A lot of shoulder barging by both, nothing else. I don't expect a manager to come out and openly praise the opposing side after being beaten by them, I would probably rather they didn't, but Johnson has trailed out every excuse in the book for the defeat. The only one he hasn't offered up is ' I got out foxed by the shape that the Charlton team presented and I could not work how to get around it', instead we got 'ban him for three games' 'we have been travelling a lot' 'we were flat because all my players had a nasty sniffle' Proper Cock !!
The thing I can’t get my head around is that was it so bad under NA the team had literally given up and didn’t want to play for him? I understand the manager you work for has a massive impact on how you feel at work, for everyone, not just footballers, but was he really that bad to play under?
Bit of a rhetorical question on my part, pondering, rather than asking, but it seems that within a couple of days there has been a massive facelift.
As others have posted, players probably didn’t like playing in set ups that were confusing, and there were too many changes, but I find it crazy how it seems to have done a complete 180 in a matter of days. I don’t believe it’s a new manager bounce. I really think the players just weren’t feeling it
Watching the Accrington game on Tuesday, the players certainly looked like they were trying to me. How about when Washington busted a gut to get onto Gilbey’s long ball which led to Stockley’s goal? There was real commitment as they tried to get something from the game.
Maybe the issue isn’t that simple and has been due to a combination of factors - lack of a consistent team selection; uncertainty of job roles; the blend of players not being quite right; not playing to our strengths; rigidly sticking to a tactic that wasn’t working. Why play Stockley as lone striker and then complain when the players were lumping it forward to him?
Maybe they just didn’t really warm to Adkins - he was maybe a bit too “old school” - a bit like a teacher or ones dad - for this bunch of 20 and 30 somethings…
What concerns me is the same thing has happened twice, in the space of a year and all the reasons you suggested were there in Adkins first 12 games, why did they become an issue in his second 12?
One defeat in 12 to 8 defeats in 12 is quite a staggering turn round. Last season, under Bowyer, we won 6 games on the spin, then it took another 22 games to win 6 more. Bowyer never won 2 consecutive games again.
Maybe it will take nipping a bad run in the bud for me to be convinced it won't happen again because that seems to have been completely beyond the previous two managers.
What a result and with a performance to match. Jacko found a formation and lineup that worked. No one predicted Leko as a wing back - turned out it was a great way to balance the team, with a natural defender in Purrington on one side and an attacker on the other. It didn’t hold Leko back at all, it was nothing like Bowyer’s experimenting with Paul Smyth in the same position. He’s such a threat at his level, I rrally hope we sign him permanently. We appear to be the perfect club for him, somewhere he can play his best football.
Like the diamond it’s a formation that gives us numbers in the middle and a partnership up front, the weakness is the lack of numbers out wide. If the players offer movement and energy that weakness can be covered. Using an extra CB rather than a 10 in the diamond allows our wing backs to push higher up. As well as Leko running at them and getting crosses in Purrington is dangerous on his own way - you can rely on him getting in the box. That was something we did much better yesterday, when Leko was attacking down the right we had several players in there looking to get onto the cross.
Matthews and Gunter don’t have the same energy as Purrington, that RCB role could turn out to suit either of them far better than expecting them to get forward from RB. I’m glad JJ went for Matthews, despite his poor season he’s been the better player for us. Focussing on defending saw him perform much more like we know he can.
Everything about our performance was better than we had seen all season. Under Adkins it almost felt like every game was the same. I said after several games how poor our defending, attacking, passing from the back and pressing were. Everyone did it better than us. Today that wasn’t the case, it was a close game but throughout we always had a chance of getting a result. After 20 minutes or so I wondered if we’d see the usual drop off, fortunately we got through it and improved again.
Really pleased for Dobson, some rated him early on, others didn’t, for me he was a player I wanted to see more of to judge. I felt Adkins dropped him far too early, especially when the replacements were Watson and Arter. I won’t write off Arter yet but given their ages and the fact Arter is on loan Dobson has enough about him to give him a run in that holding role and see if he can develop into the player we want him to be.
Up front we’re a better team with Washington in it and Stockley is better with a partner. If we stick with 2 up front I can see us looking for a striker in January, though with Davison, Burstow and Kanu having good seasons we have three promising strikers all he could potentially step up and challenge Stockley and Washington. Worth giving them chances before we go out and pay half a million for a new striker.
It’s only one game but isn’t it great to have that hope back that we could have the right manager? I never believed this was a bottom half League 1 squad, the question is can they go on a run, show consistency and look like a top 6 side?
JJ has shown he’s got his own ideas on tactics and has an understanding of where Adkins was going wrong. Would love him to be the manager we need, more adventurous than Powell, calmer than Bowyer and although I can’t explain why it should matter 100% Charlton. Regardless of his inexperience he has as much chance as any candidate of succeeding and he couldn’t have got off to a better start.
The choice of who played wing backs plus Matthews over Pearce was very smart but Jacko. Leko stayed switched on throughout and did lots of defensive running but still manged to be a real threat going forwards. He even made a few tackles, with one peach inside our area in the first half to stop a cross. However, by selecting Matthews, a natural right back, it meant if Leko did get caught upfield then there was a player behind him who would read the game like a right back and be comfortable out in that area on the cover.
Purrington isn’t everyone’s favourite but I think this idea he doesn’t get forward is a bit of a myth. 9 times out of 10 he scores that chance yesterday and playing him at LWB looks like an even smarter move.
I’m very encouraged that there was more to yesterday than just the players upping the effort. Jacko’s tactics had an impact too and he also used his players smartly to bring balance to the team even though on paper it looked a bit lopsided.
The thing I can’t get my head around is that was it so bad under NA the team had literally given up and didn’t want to play for him? I understand the manager you work for has a massive impact on how you feel at work, for everyone, not just footballers, but was he really that bad to play under?
Bit of a rhetorical question on my part, pondering, rather than asking, but it seems that within a couple of days there has been a massive facelift.
As others have posted, players probably didn’t like playing in set ups that were confusing, and there were too many changes, but I find it crazy how it seems to have done a complete 180 in a matter of days. I don’t believe it’s a new manager bounce. I really think the players just weren’t feeling it
Watching the Accrington game on Tuesday, the players certainly looked like they were trying to me. How about when Washington busted a gut to get onto Gilbey’s long ball which led to Stockley’s goal? There was real commitment as they tried to get something from the game.
Maybe the issue isn’t that simple and has been due to a combination of factors - lack of a consistent team selection; uncertainty of job roles; the blend of players not being quite right; not playing to our strengths; rigidly sticking to a tactic that wasn’t working. Why play Stockley as lone striker and then complain when the players were lumping it forward to him?
Maybe they just didn’t really warm to Adkins - he was maybe a bit too “old school” - a bit like a teacher or ones dad - for this bunch of 20 and 30 somethings…
Or maybe yesterday was a blip & we will revert to type next Saturday. Who knows, ......hopefully this IS the start of a recovery & by the end of November we are clear of the relegation places, but remember that 1 swallow doth not a summer make.
This is better than the Sky highlights, showed how much pressure we had at times.
Shows that we are still crap at taking a corner. Most go sailing over the players in the box & none look threatening. Ball needs to be landing between the 6 yard line & the penalty spot.
Just gonna say that if JJ is not appointed manager, there are a lot of other clubs in either L1 or L2 that might pull out the chair for him soon. How many managers has he worked under now? He is not gonna just keeping being an assistant for manager after manager for the rest of his life. Use him or lose him.
Just gonna say that if JJ is not appointed manager, there are a lot of other clubs in either L1 or L2 that might pull out the chair for him soon. How many managers has he worked under now? He is not gonna just keeping being an assistant for manager after manager for the rest of his life. Use him or lose him.
He isn't 40 yet, 100s of "number 2s" never get a chance. Dozens do in their mid to late 40s, even 50s. Many reasons to give, or not give, him the job. That's not one of them, unless he really wants it to be.
Sometimes you can be a flop at one place, but move on to be a legend elsewhere.
Who is he?
Seriously? Bob Stokoe managed us went on to manage Sunderland to a surprise FA Cup final win over the all conquering Leeds Utd of the 60s & 70s. The Mackems keeper Jim Montgomery made a Banksesque worldly save to clinch victory.
With regard to Lee Johnson’s comments there on Stockley then I am pretty sure that Stockley has a strong case for defamation.
To be accused of deliberately head butting a fellow professional is an extremely serious allegation that would, quite clearly, damage Stockley’s reputation amongst any reasonable group of people.
The problem for Johnson is that it did not happen.
If I were Stockley I’d be asking the club to engage m’learned friends on my behalf, you can’t just go around accusing people of serious violent conduct without hard evidence.
I do not have an English degree only an O level but good lord the spelling mistakes in that piece....doesn't anyone proof read this stuff before posting
It’s recorded speech and we don’t speak as we would when committing to the written page. Thinking grammar rules are logical is a myth and it’s only the influence of the “superior” upper classes of the last two centuries that created the concept of grammar having to reflect classical Latin syntax.
Syntax is only one part of grammar.
Syntax is not grammar. The syntax of speech differs from the syntax of the written word. Speech conforms to the instinctive grammar learned when we learned to speak as opposed to the arbitrary rules of grammar we are taught as “proper” English.
If I say “Billy and me go to a football match” it’s syntax that everyone understands. It’s only “bad” grammar for the pedant.
Why do we say “Arn’t I late” instead of “Amn’t I late” and not get pulled up for bad grammar? It’s simply because the syntax would be alien to our ears and no one really cares if it’s grammatically logical or not.
That Sunderland defender handling the ball on on the goal line.
He couldn't prevent the goal as Stockley's header was too powerful - but a a deliberate handball, actively attempting to prevent a goal by cheating. Red card offence but not even a caution. Lucky for him the referee turned a blind eye.
Yup, even though we scored it's a sending off, like when players get sent off for intent when they go in two footed or high, even if they miss the opposition player
Kind of PWR and I'm not really here but...this is one of the most insane things I've ever read on here, lol
Comments
But there are questions, that will never truthfully, be fully answered.
Was Adkins appointed, either in part or totally because he used/wanted to use that formation? Its surely mentioned in the recruitment process and it is what our age groups have played for a while. It's also the most used formation in the top 3 divisions on English football.
Why did the "recruitment committee" sign 2 wingers and nearly two different ones in January when Bowyer, in 3 years, have never shown a preference for wingers?
Why/how did we sign, or resign, about a dozen players over the summer and end up with a squad either unable, or unwilling, to play a system they were all signed to play in?
Shame about the group of teenagers who followed us back to the metro station throwing rocks and bottles.
Once Adkins left of course that shakes things up, there's hope for change, and the players are re energized. What we saw against Sunderland was the players going at damn close to 100% effort. I think its unrealistic to keep that level of commitment and focus consistently, unless there is a winning run of confidence and something to play for.
That's why it would be foolish to both criticize them for "not bothering to try for Adkins" or to give JJ the job based on 1 game.
Maybe the issue isn’t that simple and has been due to a combination of factors - lack of a consistent team selection; uncertainty of job roles; the blend of players not being quite right; not playing to our strengths; rigidly sticking to a tactic that wasn’t working. Why play Stockley as lone striker and then complain when the players were lumping it forward to him?
Maybe they just didn’t really warm to Adkins - he was maybe a bit too “old school” - a bit like a teacher or ones dad - for this bunch of 20 and 30 somethings…
One defeat in 12 to 8 defeats in 12 is quite a staggering turn round. Last season, under Bowyer, we won 6 games on the spin, then it took another 22 games to win 6 more. Bowyer never won 2 consecutive games again.
I did read the first few pages of last seasons Sunderland away game this morning (link here https://forum.charltonlife.com/discussion/91501/post-match-thread-sunderland-v-charlton-sat-10-april-2021/p1) and its exactly the same comments as today. The same players brought back into the fray, Pearce having his best game of the season by far, after being, rightly, written off by most. Its so similar its spooky.
Maybe it will take nipping a bad run in the bud for me to be convinced it won't happen again because that seems to have been completely beyond the previous two managers.
If the ref had seen it, would've had to have been a penalty with the ball in play.
Here you go; https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PZmFoo4payA
To be accused of deliberately head butting a fellow professional is an extremely serious allegation that would, quite clearly, damage Stockley’s reputation amongst any reasonable group of people.
The problem for Johnson is that it did not happen.
If I were Stockley I’d be asking the club to engage m’learned friends on my behalf, you can’t just go around accusing people of serious violent conduct without hard evidence.
If I say “Billy and me go to a football match” it’s syntax that everyone understands. It’s only “bad” grammar for the pedant.