|
Post by stuartB on Jan 6, 2009 21:59:04 GMT
He did indeed take us to 4th from bottom in his season in charge. A TUFC failure. End of. But I suspect he won't try to impose his negative nil-nil football on something which is already working well. here's hoping ;D
|
|
|
Post by daveshaw on Jan 7, 2009 3:37:34 GMT
Roy Mc in charge at Burton? Fantastic! I watched some of the poorest football ever under the tenure of that man. Yes, he brought in some quality players but he went thro a hell of a lot of dross to get them. McNeil had the mobility of a skip and was crap at everything. I think MB told me that the bill for triallists expenses topped 40k under him. Something to do with his agent connections was dodgy too. So, great for us i hope.
|
|
|
Post by gullsdiv2 on Jan 7, 2009 13:42:47 GMT
David Graham to burton? stranger things have happened!
|
|
merse
TFF member
Posts: 2,684
|
Post by merse on Jan 7, 2009 16:10:27 GMT
David Graham to burton? stranger things have happened! Not with Roy MacFarland in charge he won't be!
|
|
|
Post by ohtobeatplainmoor on Jan 7, 2009 20:56:41 GMT
I think that people are looking at Macfarland's tenure at our club with "reverse rose-tinted specs" (whatever they are!!).
He came into a club that had just scraped-out of what looked like certain relegation and found itself without a manager almost the week before pre-season training (and had missed out on several targets due to CL's departure) and inherited a group of players that were plainly not good enough for another battle at the bottom. He really had a "demolishon job" to do before he could properly re-build. He identified the "dead wood", moved them on with the minimum of fuss and went about building a spine to the team, bringing-in the players that were a vast improvement on what we had before - his aim was to make the team solid from the back going forward.
He was a straight talker (anyone remember when he said "I'm not going to bulls**t the paying public by saying that performance was good enough" after a win against Darlo, I believe?!). He had the team training properly and had some good contacts that allowed us to bring-in some half decent players that were streets ahead of the ones that departed. Yes, he did bringing-in Matty McNeil and Gary Brabin (which might have worked-out) but you weigh that up against the decent players that we managed to bring-in and I believe his transfer record was no worse than the vast majority of managers that we have seen here.
The style of football was dour, but it took months to bring the team up to the standard required. By the time the players were in place they were really having to grind-out the results to keep in the league. We'll never know how things would have worked-out with Roy Macfarland, but I think he deserves some credit at the very least for giving us a very good platform with which to move forward.
**EDIT** I forgot to add that he is a good choice for manager at Burton. He know the team, the club and has the contacts should he need to bring-in additional players. I still think that Burton have it in their hands unless something very drastic happens - I hope to be proved wrong!
|
|
Dave
TFF member
Posts: 13,081
|
Post by Dave on Jan 7, 2009 22:13:31 GMT
Well what a display the Derby team put on for their new manager, OK man u had a few players who are not first team regulars playing in the game, but nothing should be taken away from Derby, for their hard work and good play.
What a good looking stadium as well and I believe he will do well at the club.I do wonder if Derby expected to lose the game tonight, as Clough takes over tomorrow, maybe the Derby board did not want his first game to be a defeat, but if he had taken over today, he would have been an instant hero with the fans thats for sure.
|
|
Jon
Admin
Posts: 6,913
|
Post by Jon on Jan 7, 2009 22:55:01 GMT
I think that people are looking at Macfarland's tenure at our club with "reverse rose-tinted specs" (whatever they are!!). I think there may be an element of people overstating the downside of McFarland's reign to counter the oft-repeated fallacy that Leroy Rosenior won promotion with McFarland's team. The squad that McFarland inherited was not that bad. Saunders had lost the plot, but Lee soon organised them into a decent unit. McFarland certainly had a lot of attacking talent at his disposal when he arrived in Graham, Williams and Brandon - but he got nothing out of them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2009 9:21:02 GMT
I think there may be an element of people overstating the downside of McFarland's reign to counter the oft-repeated fallacy that Leroy Rosenior won promotion with McFarland's team. This is without comment. Firstly, the sixteen at Southend (May 2004) and when they signed: Van Heusden - Nov 2002 Hazell - Jan 2002 Woods - Aug 2001 Taylor - Feb 2003 (loan later permanent) McGlinchey - Sept 2003 Rosenior - March 2004 (loan) Hockley -July 2000 Russell - Aug 2001 Hill - Aug 1997 Graham - March 2001 Kuffour - Oct 2002 Bedeau - July 1997 Woozley - Aug 2001 (loan then permanent) Gritton - Aug 2002 Fowler - Nov 2001 Canoville - Sept 2001 Dates from Barry Hugman's book of player records (Bedeau and Hockley - dates signed pro rather than as trainee).McFarland in charge season 2001/2002; Rosenoir from 2002/03. Secondly, the teams picked by each manager for their first game in charge. This is more random information because of injuries, suspensions, etc, etc. McFarland's first selection v Bristol Rovers (away) Aug 2001: Dearden, Tully, Herrera, McNeil, Aggrey, Russell, Brandon, Healy, Bedeau, Williams, Graham. Subs: O'Brien, Roach, Jones, Rees, Hockley. Rosenior's first selection v Bristol Rovers (home) Aug 2002: Dearden, Hockley, Hazell, Hankin, Woozley, Russell, Prince, Fowler, Bedeau, Gritton, Hill. Subs: Ashington, Benefield, Douglin, Richardson, Attwell.
|
|
Jon
Admin
Posts: 6,913
|
Post by Jon on Jan 8, 2009 13:44:45 GMT
I think there may be an element of people overstating the downside of McFarland's reign to counter the oft-repeated fallacy that Leroy Rosenior won promotion with McFarland's team. This is without comment. Firstly, the sixteen at Southend (May 2004) and when they signed: No comment necessary! The Southend team was 5 Rosenior, 3 McFarland, 3 pre-McFarland. The Southend 16 was 6 Rosenior, 6 McFarland, 4 pre-McFarland. McFarland only just pulled us clear of relegation by finally getting a watertight defence to gel. You can't even claim that this "laid the foundations" for Leroy as McFarland used a five man defence which Leroy immediately discarded and returned to an orthodox back four. There is far more of a case for saying that Cyril Knowles nearly got promotion with Stuart Morgan's team - you never hear anyone saying that!
|
|
Rob
TFF member
Posts: 3,607
Favourite Player: Asa Hall
|
Post by Rob on Jan 8, 2009 19:21:31 GMT
I'm glad that one's been put to bed on here. Credit where it's due.
|
|