JamesB
TFF member
Posts: 1,526
|
Post by JamesB on Oct 30, 2013 14:36:31 GMT
Bury are so far the only club in League Two to have sacked their manager, with former Torquay goalkeeper Kevin Blackwell dismissed on 14th October after winning just 13 of his 57 games in charge of the Shakers. Former Huddersfield striker and Gillingham manager "Rocket" Ronnie Jepson has been appointed as caretaker manager, having acted as Blackwell's assistant since June. Under Jepson, Bury lost 1-0 to Portsmouth, drew 0-0 with Mansfield, and won 2-1 in Wycombe - continual progress!
Theoretically, Bury's squad should be quite strong - in Shaun Harrad and Ashley Grimes (recently absent from the line-up), they have strikers noted for scoring plenty at this level, along with Rotherham loanee Danny Hylton (formerly of Aldershot) and former New York Red Bulls striker (and brother of Wayne) John Rooney. Former Crystal Palace and England U21 midfielder Tom Soares acts as playmaker in a midfield that also includes the experienced Tommy Miller, and former Burnley goalkeeper Brian Jensen lines up between the sticks
However, names and reputations don't make a football team - this is a side that was totally rebuilt in the summer, and clearly Blackwell has either struggled to get them to gel or struggled to find a winning formula. Either way, they remain a dangerous team despite their poor form
Line-up vs Wycombe:
Gk Brian Jensen
Def Shaun Beeley
Def Nathan Cameron
Def William Edjenguele
Mid Andrew Procter
Mid Chris Sedgwick
Mid Danny Mayor
Mid Tom Soares
Mid Jordan Mustoe
For Shaun Harrad
For Danny Hylton
Subs: Reice Charles-Cook (Gk), Richard Hinds (Def), Euan Holden (Mid), Tommy Miller (Mid), Anton Forrester (For), John Rooney (For), Regan Walker (For)
Head-to-head:
Bury wins - 22
Torquay wins - 11
Draws - 13
Last match: Bury 1-2 Torquay (Holroyd 4; Stanley 61; Zebroski 70), League Two, March 2011
Last match at Plainmoor: Torquay 3-4 Bury (Robertson 18; Zebroski 20; Lowe pen 27; Ajose 33; Schumacher 51; Zebroski 56; Jones 71), League Two, October 2010
Last victory for the home team: Bury 3-2 Torquay (Lockwood 10; Hewlett OG 40; Speight 42, 49; Hill 90), League Two, January 2006
The seven league fixtures between the two sides since then have either ended in draws or victories for the away side. Torquay have won the last three matches between the teams at Gigg Lane
Alan Knill's record at Bury: 165 Games, Won 71, Drawn 44, Lost 50
|
|
|
|
Post by lambrettagull on Oct 30, 2013 17:27:05 GMT
I reckon if we lose this one, the board should think seriously about replacing Knill. I dont care how much it costs them. They should not have been so foolish as to appoint him in the first place. He has shown he is naive in his setting up of the team and does not seem to know even at this stage which players can do what for the team. I do not think Downes should be rushed back. We should have adequate cover at the moment. What I do not want to see is even more changes to the starting 11. History shows clearly that teams who do badly use too many players over the season. I see no reason why McKenzie should not start instead of a loanee if needed. he was ok at Port Vale last season, so where`s the progress? An intelligent manager would have utilized the squad much better. There is no reason why, looking at the players available we should not win this one. COYY
|
|
petef
Match Room Manager
Posts: 4,626
|
Post by petef on Oct 30, 2013 17:42:31 GMT
It's absolutely vital that we try and build on last Saturdays performance.
Another lazy lackluster defeat would knock us back again and more than likely see us in the bottom two for the first time this season.
Although I missed probably the best performance of the season on Saturday most of the reports were positive whereas I came away from the Mansfield match in a very negative state of mind, and although the result and points tally were Identical for both matches I have suddenly rediscovered my positive head.
For me Its all about being able to at least see some signs of quality, consistency and a pattern in our play that will see us pull away from the danger zone over the coming months and I hope the players realise that they need to perform like they did on Saturday in every match. Bury will be in the same frame of mind after a rare win at Wycombe so anticipate this one will again be a very hard fought encounter.
|
|
rjdgull
TFF member
Admin
Posts: 12,227 
|
Post by rjdgull on Oct 30, 2013 18:31:51 GMT
To be fair to Knill, MacKenzie has been out with diabetes this season and only making his comeback from this condition so has not been available...
|
|
Rags
TFF member
Posts: 1,210
|
Post by Rags on Oct 31, 2013 7:39:45 GMT
To be fair to Knill, MacKenzie has been out with diabetes this season and only making his comeback from this condition so has not been available... Lambrettagull isn't interested in facts, he's only interested in trolling. |
|
|
|
Post by Ditmar van Nostrilboy on Oct 31, 2013 9:53:25 GMT
Clearly has a grasp of the meaning of "we will give it 10 games and then look at what changes need to be made" as well.
Knill has had his 10 matches to have a good look at his squad in real matches and, as we can see, is making changes in people and tactics.
|
|
Rob
TFF member
Posts: 3,607
Favourite Player: Asa Hall
|
Post by Rob on Oct 31, 2013 20:26:09 GMT
Lambretta seems to be advocating a change to the central defensive pairing of Pearce and O'Connor. Unnecessary that.
|
|
JamesB
TFF member
Posts: 1,526
|
Post by JamesB on Oct 31, 2013 20:40:51 GMT
What I do not want to see is even more changes to the starting 11. History shows clearly that teams who do badly use too many players over the season. I think you've mixed up the cause and effect there - teams use a lot of players because they are doing badly, not the other way around Managers make changes because the players aren't playing well. If you've got a team with players which the manager knows aren't good enough, he's not going to keep playing those same players in the hope that a miracle occurs, unless he's totally hamstrung financially. This is why we used a lot of players in the years we struggled - reinforcements, because we were playing badly Additionally, the best way of running a squad these days is to rotate the starting XI. Ling's refusal to do so cost us promotion two years ago, because he kept playing the same players every week and by April/May they were mostly too tired to repeat their good performances from earlier in the season |
|
rjdgull
TFF member
Admin
Posts: 12,227
|
Post by rjdgull on Oct 31, 2013 21:16:43 GMT
Ling struggled himself for the first 15 league games but knew the squad had enough quality to be competitive but was probably too successful to go cap in hand to the board. MOTM in January and March and was a whisker away in getting promotion. Injury to Rene I think cost us.
|
|
Jon
Admin
Posts: 6,912
|
Post by Jon on Oct 31, 2013 23:20:12 GMT
I dont care how much it costs them. I'm not surprised. The people who care what it costs tend to be the people who have to pay. |
|
|
|
Post by Ditmar van Nostrilboy on Oct 31, 2013 23:59:25 GMT
Additionally, the best way of running a squad these days is to rotate the starting XI. Ling's refusal to do so cost us promotion two years ago, because he kept playing the same players every week and by April/May they were mostly too tired to repeat their good performances from earlier in the season To be honest, I dont think he had much option really in rotating the players. One thing that struck me was that although our 1st eleven was probably on a par with most teams, as soon as we had to make a change, we looked a lesser team. You could make valid points that is was too big a squad so the quality was spread too thin outside the starting 11, not utilising the loan market to improve the bench, what ever reason you want to be honest. I think Lings non-rotation was probably the realisation that the squad as a whole just wasnt good enough to allow resting the usual starters. Would have been fun to watch Eunan ripping apart teams in March/April and we might even have given a good account of ourselves in the playoffs instead of looking so one dimensional... |
|
rjdgull
TFF member
Admin
Posts: 12,227
|
Post by rjdgull on Nov 1, 2013 10:45:40 GMT
linkMixed news on the injury front. McCallum is fit for tomorrow as is Downes! Whether the latter will start after just 45 minutes in midweek is debatable and suspect will just provide back up on the bench. I suppose as StuB suggests O'Connor could cover at left back if Knill wants to play him particularly as Cruise is a doubt along with Cameron. So all in all, looks like a very similar line up to last week. Suddenly, with Bodin out along with Cameron and Niall/Yeoman away on loan, we are looking a bit light on the wings and up front. Maybe Craig could cover a wing slot from the bench? Benyon as ever is a useful substitute with his terrier like attitude.
|
|
|
|
Post by lambrettagull on Nov 1, 2013 11:10:26 GMT
rjd - i knew MacKenzie had diabetes but did`nt realise it has affected so much of this season. Perhaps he needs more support in managing the condition. But my point was, players in the squad like MacKenzie, should be used before a loanee is bought in. My initial statement illustrates my lack of skill in participating in a forum. But I get there in the end!
Rags - I don`t know what trolling is but I`ll take it as a compliment.
Rob - I`m not advocating another change in the central defensive parnership. Again, stating that a squad player (in this case MacKenzie) should have been used first. If he was not fit, fair enough. But I would like to see him given a chance in the event of Pearce or Downes not playing in the future. Knill seems to go for the loan market too quickly in my opinion. We have other players who I thought were in contention for a first team place. After all, Knill kept them on and publicly supported some of them at least. He then loans them out to get the loanees in. When the loanees go back, what have we got? The fringe players come back still without League Two experience. The team then changes again and we are back to square one. Where`s the progress? I might also add that getting these preferred loanees in has not helped our league position.
James - I can go either way on this point. But my point that I so dismally failed to convey was, history does show that teams who do badly use a lot of players and I do not want to be in a situation at the end of the season, rueing that poor results were due in part to the manager not having a settled team. That is what a squad is for. The spirit, loyalty and consistency come from within that squad. Push out the fringe players for loanees, and those team qualities vanish. If the fringe players are not good enough, Knill should get rid and get in players who are better. But this is not what he seems to be doing. I see Knill as creating problems later on when he should taking problems off the horizon. If he does get sacked, the new manager would have to sort this out when Knill should be doing that as part of his job now. Ling persevered with the nucleus of his squad and he did`nt do too badly did he? I am unashamedly a Ling man. I do tend to compare Knill with Ling. I know I should`nt because its pointless. But I will get over it. But, if you make a change (of manager) it has to be for the better. I do not beleive in this instance it is.
|
|
|
|
Post by gullone on Nov 1, 2013 17:04:28 GMT
Additionally, the best way of running a squad these days is to rotate the starting XI. Ling's refusal to do so cost us promotion two years ago, because he kept playing the same players every week and by April/May they were mostly too tired to repeat their good performances from earlier in the season To be honest, I dont think he had much option really in rotating the players. One thing that struck me was that although our 1st eleven was probably on a par with most teams, as soon as we had to make a change, we looked a lesser team. You could make valid points that is was too big a squad so the quality was spread too thin outside the starting 11, not utilising the loan market to improve the bench, what ever reason you want to be honest. I think Lings non-rotation was probably the realisation that the squad as a whole just wasnt good enough to allow resting the usual starters. Would have been fun to watch Eunan ripping apart teams in March/April and we might even have given a good account of ourselves in the playoffs instead of looking so one dimensional... If my eyes dont deceive me theres almost a hint of apprecietion for Martin Lings efforts from DVN ! Im obviously reading it wrong......its been a long week. |
|
|
|
Post by Ditmar van Nostrilboy on Nov 1, 2013 23:32:10 GMT
To be honest, I dont think he had much option really in rotating the players. One thing that struck me was that although our 1st eleven was probably on a par with most teams, as soon as we had to make a change, we looked a lesser team. You could make valid points that is was too big a squad so the quality was spread too thin outside the starting 11, not utilising the loan market to improve the bench, what ever reason you want to be honest. I think Lings non-rotation was probably the realisation that the squad as a whole just wasnt good enough to allow resting the usual starters. Would have been fun to watch Eunan ripping apart teams in March/April and we might even have given a good account of ourselves in the playoffs instead of looking so one dimensional... If my eyes dont deceive me theres almost a hint of apprecietion for Martin Lings efforts from DVN ! Im obviously reading it wrong......its been a long week. Get yourself down to Specsavers matey... No "apprecietion" implied... |
|
