TorquayFans.com | Torquay United Fans Forum

ferrarilover wrote:"Wise men say, only fools rush in..."

Elvis Presley.

Matt.

Technically it wasn't. It was Creatore, Perretti & Weiss. Elvis just delivered the message.

Consistently poor performance should rightly be addressed. Starting slowly when introducing new players and methods is not that.

Are we not getting off the main points of the original post - yes, the fact is that AK loves amassing forwards and particularly wingers, and is wedded to a 4-2-4 formation with no midfield creativity. It just is not working as other teams control the midfield and outmuscle our wide players.
In the second half against Portsmouth we continued to play 4-2-4 when facing the wind (when you have to play a more controlled passing game) and knowing that Pompey were going to chase the game, so, even when we won the ball, we just kicked it away again. Not good enough.
AK says we get crosses into the box - to whom? - mostly to large defenders or to the keepers hands.
Our corners against Pompey, as against Mansfield, were totally wasted by an unvaried floating past the far post.
Not good enough.

So why do we not change formation when we have a dire need to control a match and to ensure points? Hearty endeavour is fine but is not achieving results.

A lover of bright red Ferraris
Seems wedded to visions of Knill:
Borrowing bods near and far is
A route leading, surely, downhill.
Recruiting a squad at the bar is
A cocktail devoid of real skill..
(..or spirit, or roots, or midfield creativity,
or a brand of football worth shelling out for
every other week).

notexactlyshakespe wrote:A lover of bright red Ferraris
Seems wedded to visions of Knill:
Borrowing bods near and far is
A route leading, surely, downhill.
Recruiting a squad at the bar is
A cocktail devoid of real skill..
(..or spirit, or roots, or midfield creativity,
or a brand of football worth shelling out for
every other week).

Me thinks it is time for your medication!

royalgull wrote:Ling's position was untenable to be honest. We had bad runs under both him and Buckle and both were backed by the board for as long as possible.

We will never know for certain why Ling was sacked but having not been there for half a season he was never going to come back to the job.

Interesting when you talk about bad runs. Knill has now managed for 14 games in each season with the following record:
2012/13 Played 14, Won 2 Drawn 5 Lost 7
2013/14 Played 14, Won 4 Drawn 4 Lost 6
Thats a combined record of Played 28, Won 6 Drawn 9 Lost 13, that equates to approx .96 points per game.

Lings record was Played 72, Won 31 Drawn 22 Lost 19, that equates to approx 1.6 points per game.

(I haven't included the I believe six games that Taylor was in charge and haven't had chance to work out Buckles stats yet!)

If Ling was backed by the board for as long as possible then Knill must be getting worried as his record doesn't stand up to scrutiny, just how long does he get.............if people are concerned and post as such then based on above figures isn't it their right to share their dissatisfaction on the forum?

I would say that this weekends game is a definite must win or the writing is on the wall............

"PL21gull"]Are we not getting off the main points of the original post - yes, the fact is that AK loves amassing forwards and particularly wingers, and is wedded to a 4-2-4 formation with no midfield creativity. It just is not working as other teams control the midfield and outmuscle our wide players.
In the second half against Portsmouth we continued to play 4-2-4 when facing the wind (when you have to play a more controlled passing game) and knowing that Pompey were going to chase the game, so, even when we won the ball, we just kicked it away again. Not good enough.
AK says we get crosses into the box - to whom? - mostly to large defenders or to the keepers hands.
Our corners against Pompey, as against Mansfield, were totally wasted by an unvaried floating past the far post.
Not good enough.

So why do we not change formation when we have a dire need to control a match and to ensure points? Hearty endeavour is fine but is not achieving results.[/quote]What a good post someone who understands football

arcadia wrote:"PL21gull"]Are we not getting off the main points of the original post - yes, the fact is that AK loves amassing forwards and particularly wingers, and is wedded to a 4-2-4 formation with no midfield creativity. It just is not working as other teams control the midfield and outmuscle our wide players.
In the second half against Portsmouth we continued to play 4-2-4 when facing the wind (when you have to play a more controlled passing game) and knowing that Pompey were going to chase the game, so, even when we won the ball, we just kicked it away again. Not good enough.
AK says we get crosses into the box - to whom? - mostly to large defenders or to the keepers hands.
Our corners against Pompey, as against Mansfield, were totally wasted by an unvaried floating past the far post.
Not good enough.

So why do we not change formation when we have a dire need to control a match and to ensure points? Hearty endeavour is fine but is not achieving results.

What a good post someone who understands football. What you are saying is right with two in midfield Mansell is restricted and that is not his game.

To supplement Rooster's excellent stats, Paul Buckle's League Two performance over two seasons at Plainmoor (excluding play-offs) is 1.37 points per match.

notexactlyshakespe wrote:To supplement Rooster's excellent stats, Paul Buckle's League Two performance over two seasons at Plainmoor (excluding play-offs) is 1.37 points per match.

Welcome to the Forum notexactlyshakespe. Fav player - Larry Baxter. Now, there's a player-and-a-half from the mists of time ! A word of warning, though - 'there are lies, damn lies and statistics'

notexactlyshakespe wrote:To supplement Rooster's excellent stats, Paul Buckle's League Two performance over two seasons at Plainmoor (excluding play-offs) is 1.37 points per match.

Thanks very much, hadn't got round to it........

rooster wrote: Interesting when you talk about bad runs. Knill has now managed for 14 games in each season with the following record:
2012/13 Played 14, Won 2 Drawn 5 Lost 7
2013/14 Played 14, Won 4 Drawn 4 Lost 6
Thats a combined record of Played 28, Won 6 Drawn 9 Lost 13, that equates to approx .96 points per game.

Lings record was Played 72, Won 31 Drawn 22 Lost 19, that equates to approx 1.6 points per game.

(I haven't included the I believe six games that Taylor was in charge and haven't had chance to work out Buckles stats yet!)

If Ling was backed by the board for as long as possible then Knill must be getting worried as his record doesn't stand up to scrutiny, just how long does he get.............if people are concerned and post as such then based on above figures isn't it their right to share their dissatisfaction on the forum?

I would say that this weekends game is a definite must win or the writing is on the wall............

One of the arguments put forward by those suggesting we wait for Knill to get it right is the comparison with Martin Ling's early games in his first season.

That year our first 14 games, funnily enough, took us to the end of that 8 game run without a win and consecutive 1-4 and 2-5 defeats against Southend and Gillingham. That was followed by the 4-0 win over Wimbledon and then it felt like we won every game until March. Sandwich among those first 14 games were 1-4 defeat to Southampton and 1-2 at Cheltenham in the League and Paint Cups.

Ling's first 14 league games
1. H v Burton D 2-2
2. A v Bristol R W 2-1
3. A v Aldershot W 1-0
4. H v Crawley L 1-3
5. A v Dag & R D 1-1
6. H v Macclesfield W 3-0

Therefore it took, Martin Ling 6 games, under similar circumstances, after having to bring in lots of new players, to get the 11 points it has taken Alan Knill's team.

7. Northampton A D 0-0
8. Cheltenham H D 2-2
9. Rotherham H D 3-3
10. Shrewsbury A L 0-2
11. Morecambe H D 1-1
12. Bradford A L 0-1
13. Gillingham H L 2-5
14. Southend A L 1-4

P 14 W 3 D 6 L 5 F 19 A 25 Pts 15 GD -6 points per game 1,07

The 15th game was the 4-0 win at home to AFC Wimbledon.

I'm not sure what League position we were in, but based on this year, it would put us around 18th.

So - I can concede that this record is not breathtakingly better than Alan Knill's is (this season - although, only those wanting to put a case for Knill will discount his from record last season as well) but it was bad enough to cause some concern.

So this weekend's Bury game for Knill, is Martin Ling's Wimbledon.

However, the main difference is that in those early months, Ling was playing, largely the same team. He did not sign many new players and therefore delay the 'gelling' of the team even further. Knill seems to have done the opposite - signed players, then jettisoned them, signed more players and so on.

My feeling is that this team is not about to embark on an astonishing run, like Martin Ling's team did. At best, one imagine's an inconsistent season where we win one, or may be even two, lose a couple draw one and so on. I would probably accept that now, if we could climb away from the danger zone. At worst, a team that will hardly ever win based on Knill's record at this club since February and his previous roles.

I think this game really is a bit of a deal-breaker for Knill. Lose to Bury and we could easily be bottom of the league by Saturday with a team of players that should not be at the bottom. Perhaps a win could offer some seeds of recovery after a promising performance against Portsmouth.

However, I'm hoping that Knill can turn it around. I agree, that ideally, we need stability, need not to have to sack another manager so soon after the last and that in an ideal world a manager should be given time to get it to work.

November offers fairly winnable games for any team that is supposedly not crap. In fact, not until Exeter on 29th December do we face any teams that you would imagine are really tough games - other than Chesterfield at home, in what seems a pretty poor league this year - nobody like Gillingham and Port Vale last year.

If Knill cannot harvest a decent points return from those games, then he deserves to go.

So, while my feeling is that Alan Knill and Torquay United will ultimately be a fairly short-term marriage - I just do not think we suit - I will accept from those the argument that we maybe need to wait, in the hope that by Christmas he has started to turn things around. If he hasn't by then, then he is never going to and should go.

I'm not really into stats Hector although it makes interesting reading.

IMO Knill has 3 shots at beating either Accy, Bury or Scunny. Four points from these 3 and a certain loss against Chesterfield would be the bare minimum he could get away with. That's not to mention the FA Cup game at home to Rochdale which must not be lost at home. A win obviously would be great but a replay is again the bare minimum.

I believe these targets are perfectly reasonable and attainable for a squad such as ours and given the fact that 3 of the 5 teams are almost as crap as we are at the moment.

November is going to be very interesting anyway.

That is an excellent post, Hector - totally, totally agree. Andy - you're forgetting the Argyle match again !!!! :B

Andy, you'll be surprise to learn I agree with the last post! Relating to Hector's post, I think what he says is pretty reasonable. The comparison with Ling and the expectation of improvement, which is clearly required if he is to be a tenable manager this season. I suppose the only difference is I don't remember Ling having to deal with injuries. I am still a glass half full supporter, but these, in my opinion, are reasonable expectations.