The Jol Vote

[Bill_Oddie]

2 points and then a cheeky question for Stoof.

1. It is generally agreed that Jol is a shadow of the man we know and love (yes, dammit, love). This does seem to come from the behaviour/actions/whatever of the board.

2. How come when Chelsea did exactly the same thing last season (Grant goes to Klinnsmann and offered him the job, Abramovich offered job to Hiddink, etc etc) and Mourinho knew all about it (in the papers in the latter case, the former it is impossible to think he wouldn't have heard about), they still managed to do rather well. Perhaps not as well as they might have done, but they actually got better as the season went on/when these issues were arising?

The players were no different (albethem better than our lot).

It must be that their manager can cope with adversity and shitty situations.

It makes me sadder than a puppy left in the pound on Boxing Day to say this - but BMJ has never dealt with difficult situations well. Thats why I understand why the board are naturally looking elsewhere. And they do need to do this before things go irreperably wrong - however 'nasty' that looks in the press.


Sory, big fella. You're a very good manager and have been wonderful for us. If you could stay as a number 2, I'd love it, but the bell is tolling and tolling for thee.

 

[Bill_Oddie]

Oh, I forgot my cheeky question for Stoof:


Fella, you've admitted yourself that you've posted lots of times that transfers work in the following way:

Jol gives the roles he wants filling to DC
DC makes shortlist
Jol agrees to shortlist
DC passes to DL
DL buys them

Anyway, my question is, why is this process not working and the players being brought in not working out, not Jol's fault more than the other members in that process? It strikes me that if Jol doesn't want players they won't be bought. In fact, contrary to conventional wisdom, Jol has the biggest role in this process. So, is he exempt from criticism? You mention before that you don't think he's been faultless. So, to what extent do you blame the big man for the current malaise?


Still love you, brudda. :up:

 

[Tottenham_OZpur]

I will agree with you that there was a difference in the starting blocks but am interested to hear why you believe that a very young Arse team purchased in the main in the last 3 years is flourishing and how a young Spurs team purchased in the main in the last 3 years at considerably more expense is going backwards at an alarming rate.

having a DOF does have its drawbacks, but one of the positives is that it gives the manager more time to work on the training ground, as he doesn't have to deal with the transfer stuff etc

This is where I am wondering wtf is going on in our training sessions, our younger players are not progressing and in some cases are actually going backwards as you say and our problem areas have still not been fixed, with the same mistakes again and again.

Some people will blame the board for this aswell, as surely Jol and the coaching staff, yes I said coaching, are not responsable for our training sessions :roll:

I love Jol to and have yet to say Jol out once ( wanting him to have the rest of the season, only if we get knocked out of all the cups early or a manager too good to turn down comes up would it be ok earlier ), but come on, can't blame the board for our poor training sessions.

Surely having a DOF gives the manager more time to sort this stuff out, which is one reason you have them ? :shrug:

 

[Mullers]

Two fifth place finishes and a very good run in all three cups this season, qualified for europe through the league for the first time I can remember in a long time. We havent had a bad season with him in charge I am very confident he can turn it around and I would at least give him untill the end of his current contract.
If it was up to me I'd offer him a extension.

 

[Stoof]

Oh, I forgot my cheeky question for Stoof:


Fella, you've admitted yourself that you've posted lots of times that transfers work in the following way:

Jol gives the roles he wants filling to DC
DC makes shortlist
Jol agrees to shortlist
DC passes to DL
DL buys them

Anyway, my question is, why is this process not working and the players being brought in not working out, not Jol's fault more than the other members in that process? It strikes me that if Jol doesn't want players they won't be bought. In fact, contrary to conventional wisdom, Jol has the biggest role in this process. So, is he exempt from criticism? You mention before that you don't think he's been faultless. So, to what extent do you blame the big man for the current malaise?


Still love you, brudda. :up:

Just because our process is unnecessarily complicated involving 3 parties where other clubs only involve a manager (and occasionally the chairman in big deals; others just sign the cheques) - it doesn't take any 'risk' away from a transfer of a player.

I don't think you can argue that we've bought overly badly. Everyone said (and I do mean that in the most sweeping, generalising way) that we would suffer for not having a left winger. Yet the two players who have been asked to fill that role (Bale and Malbranque) have arguably been our only shining lights this season, along with Keane.

We needed to force up the middle of the park, and we didn't. I don't know whose fault that is, if it's out of Tottenham's hands and is just a case of the market not budging to satisfy our dilemmas? But then it could be the case that one or two of the 3 people in the decision-making process vetoed a potential transfer that would have seen a holding midfielder come in.

I understand the future proofing that occurs with the multi-level committee set up. But does it help us short term? Levy has always stood by the fact that the coach can be easily replaced, as is the fluidity of the continental arrangement - but we'll always be looking abroad for managers/coaches who are used to that system, it won't be an Englishman any time soon.

I've digressed here - Jol's fault in all of this. The odd team selection hasn't been great (personally I get a bit cold on seeing DZ's name there, but people already have enough stuff on me with all that) - I suppose you have to question an unwillingness to drop underperforming players. But yet he did it with Berbatov, to the moans and the groans here.

People go on about dropping Dawson - but there's no-one else at the moment. We have 2 fit centre-halves and a bunch of kids. So I don't think there's ground for dropping him.

Paul Robinson. Now here's a subject that'll divide, he's lost his confidence and fortunately injured himself. Radek is good enough but not better. And maybe this will shift the burden of fault on to the defenders and defensive role of the midfield to where it should belong, rather than in Robbo's built shadow.

Substitutions - do they work? They've changed two games this season, they've lost us points in a further two. Isn't that just the world of changing a player? Isn't that down to the probabilities that govern our existence in the first place?

As for tactics, I still don't buy some on here's claim he is "tactically inept". The only manager who justifies his substitutions so openly in the press, listen to him and read his articles - the man couldn't possibly be tactically inept. I think people push this theory, and push me further into defending the big man - a siege mentality, kinda.

I know he hasn't been given the time he deserves. The results aren't good enough. The silly thing is, if we beat Blackburn on Sunday, we'll be a point better off than last season (comparatively fixturely).

A big if at this time - I hope that goes some way to answering your question.

 

[markie]

Where's the Chris Hughton option?

:stupid::stupid::stupid::stupid::stupid::stupid::stupid::stupid:

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

 

[SpurSince57]

Surely SS, you are not denying that we have set out to mimick arsenal's aquisition strategy almost to a tee, including procuring their former head of scouting/recruiting as our DOF.

Signing people like birchichie, Olsen, peckhart, Taarabt, Dervitt, Kaboul, not to mention all the young english players.

The major difference I can see is that their kids seem to be fitter, faster, harder working, play for each other,move better off the ball, more creative and improve for being coached by Wenger.

Whatwas the difference that you refer to.

The difference in our relative situations, obviously.

Wenger took over an extremely strong side that had been under-achieving since Graham's departure, added Henry, Viera, Petit, etc. to give some flair and creativity, and most importantly transformed a 'Let's bore the opposition into submission' mentality that had prevailed since the 1930s. Since then he's enjoyed a decade of more or less unbroken success in which to build up his academy and coaching systems. Youngsters have had top-class role models to understudy before being fed gradually into the first team—look at how virtually seamlessly Clichy has stepped into Cashley's shoes. You still have a core of experienced players, and judicious signings of more experienced players (Rosicky, Hleb, Sagna) to fill specific roles. Wenger is also an exceptional coach and manager.

We're trying to build up a similar system on the back of 20 years of underachievement and mediocrity, at the same time trying to maintain and imrove upon a relatively modest level of success that no-one was really expecting three years ago.

 

[Bill_Oddie]

Just because our process is unnecessarily complicated involving 3 parties where other clubs only involve a manager (and occasionally the chairman in big deals; others just sign the cheques) - it doesn't take any 'risk' away from a transfer of a player.

I don't think you can argue that we've bought overly badly. Everyone said (and I do mean that in the most sweeping, generalising way) that we would suffer for not having a left winger. Yet the two players who have been asked to fill that role (Bale and Malbranque) have arguably been our only shining lights this season, along with Keane.

We needed to force up the middle of the park, and we didn't. I don't know whose fault that is, if it's out of Tottenham's hands and is just a case of the market not budging to satisfy our dilemmas? But then it could be the case that one or two of the 3 people in the decision-making process vetoed a potential transfer that would have seen a holding midfielder come in.

I understand the future proofing that occurs with the multi-level committee set up. But does it help us short term? Levy has always stood by the fact that the coach can be easily replaced, as is the fluidity of the continental arrangement - but we'll always be looking abroad for managers/coaches who are used to that system, it won't be an Englishman any time soon.

I've digressed here - Jol's fault in all of this. The odd team selection hasn't been great (personally I get a bit cold on seeing DZ's name there, but people already have enough stuff on me with all that) - I suppose you have to question an unwillingness to drop underperforming players. But yet he did it with Berbatov, to the moans and the groans here.

People go on about dropping Dawson - but there's no-one else at the moment. We have 2 fit centre-halves and a bunch of kids. So I don't think there's ground for dropping him.

Paul Robinson. Now here's a subject that'll divide, he's lost his confidence and fortunately injured himself. Radek is good enough but not better. And maybe this will shift the burden of fault on to the defenders and defensive role of the midfield to where it should belong, rather than in Robbo's built shadow.

Substitutions - do they work? They've changed two games this season, they've lost us points in a further two. Isn't that just the world of changing a player? Isn't that down to the probabilities that govern our existence in the first place?

As for tactics, I still don't buy some on here's claim he is "tactically inept". The only manager who justifies his substitutions so openly in the press, listen to him and read his articles - the man couldn't possibly be tactically inept. I think people push this theory, and push me further into defending the big man - a siege mentality, kinda.

I know he hasn't been given the time he deserves. The results aren't good enough. The silly thing is, if we beat Blackburn on Sunday, we'll be a point better off than last season (comparatively fixturely).

A big if at this time - I hope that goes some way to answering your question.

Mate, thats a top answer, and I hope you know I agree with all that.

I wonder though about Jol's mentality. Ironically, that which he demands in others above all else appears to be the thing that may be his undoing. Other people have coped with pressure much worse than this - although I would be unfair if I didn't also point out that others have crumbled under less.

By this I'm talking about his break to The Netherlands. I mean, no-one deserved a break more than him and by jove did he need it, but the very fact that he needed that break, when another big manager would have wanted to be all over the 1st team training (regardless of whether he was missing 7/8 names) is a worry.

Hence, why I think that even if he survives the current episode, Jol isn't the man for a tense battle for 4th or final of a Cup - which is where we are now (obviously, thanks to his excellent efforts). Perhaps I could use his performance in matches against the Top 4 as further evidence.

Finally, the only issue regarding your post I have would be the piece I underlined. By outlining the way our transfers are conducted, you simply have to admit that the 'blame/fault' lies with Jol. If we haven't strengthened the midfield, either Jol hasn't asked for any players, or he hasn't agreed to Commolli's suggestions.

 

[Stoof]

If we haven't strengthened the midfield, either Jol hasn't asked for any players, or he hasn't agreed to Commolli's suggestions.

Or the clubs we went to didn't want to sell. Or their fees were astronomical. Or the player didn't want to come. Or his fees were astronomical.

That's why I said I don't know whose fault it is. If it it's our end, then yes MJ could be at fault. So could Comolli for not coming up with an appropriate list. So could Levy for not agreeing to pay a certain fee.

Like I said - who knows?

 

[Bill_Oddie]

Yeah, fair point. I remember thinking options must be fairly limited at the time.

Either way, the least we need to agree on (not you and I, I mean all of us) is that however he remains as manager of this club - hopefully years of success, obviously - he gets our support wherever we can make a difference for him.

 

[fozzi44]

well seems the majority got their wish then.