SPOT ON DANIS SALMAN

[just_ste]

http://www.thisisplymouth.co.uk/Danny-S ... story.html

People have forgotten that football is meant to entertain

 

[pilgrim_pete]

Forgot all about his article on Thursday's.

Good timing really as it saves me nipping out later to get some toilet roll.

 

[Pafcintheplace]

Quite like his articles, better than that incoherent drivel that used to appear from Ryles.

 

[esmer]

He can be bit of a sh*tstirrer but he is absolutely right about the importance of retaining possession and playing good football.He doesn't seem to give Fletcher much credit for trying to build a team that plays that way, though.

 

[Nobby]

He is spot on with this article, we do need to be playing entertaining football that is effective, which is what he is getting at.

Unfortunately, unlike the teams mentioned, we do not play our passing game effectively enough in the attacking third and, as he points out, that tends to lead to rather aimless long shots pinging around all over the place. It looks good on the stats but is entirely meaningless without these shots looking like going in.

It is not entertaining to watch a side pass it around at the back and in the middle of the pitch if they then have next to no cutting edge in the final third. That's why it is boring to watch Argyle most of the time, and why even when winning 2 0 it wasn't very entertaining on Saturday. When you add this general lack of entertainment to the frustration of rarely keeping clean sheets, and therefore losing games, it is not surprising that gates are down and the atmosphere is flat.

There have been a couple of entertaining performances this season where our movement off the ball and accurate passing has led to us ripping teams apart and getting in behind the opposition defence to create actual goal scoring opportunities but they are few and far between. The one that stands out for me at home is the first half against Rochdale. We just don't play like that even often enough to threaten lower mid-table at the moment though so something will need to be done to rectify that and bring the entertainment back to Home Park.

I agree with most of this. I think the reason our football is not effective is because we lack a genuine goalscoring threat. Griffiths for me has goals in him and he gets into good positions around the box, but I don't think he has the mobility to be a lone striker in a 4-2-3-1, which is what we've been playing.

Look at the teams that play this formation and who the striker is: Dortmund - Lewandowski. United - RvP (Rooney has been playing as a CAM). Valencia - Soldado. Atletico - Falcao. Now obviously these are examples way above our standard but the common link is that all of those strikers have exceptional movement in the box and can also make runs for through balls through the back four, but importantly they can also play as target men and are a handful. These are all qualities that a lone striker in this system need and we don't have a player like that.

 

[esmer]

He is spot on with this article, we do need to be playing entertaining football that is effective, which is what he is getting at.

Unfortunately, unlike the teams mentioned, we do not play our passing game effectively enough in the attacking third and, as he points out, that tends to lead to rather aimless long shots pinging around all over the place. It looks good on the stats but is entirely meaningless without these shots looking like going in.

It is not entertaining to watch a side pass it around at the back and in the middle of the pitch if they then have next to no cutting edge in the final third. That's why it is boring to watch Argyle most of the time, and why even when winning 2 0 it wasn't very entertaining on Saturday. When you add this general lack of entertainment to the frustration of rarely keeping clean sheets, and therefore losing games, it is not surprising that gates are down and the atmosphere is flat.

There have been a couple of entertaining performances this season where our movement off the ball and accurate passing has led to us ripping teams apart and getting in behind the opposition defence to create actual goal scoring opportunities but they are few and far between. The one that stands out for me at home is the first half against Rochdale. We just don't play like that even often enough to threaten lower mid-table at the moment though so something will need to be done to rectify that and bring the entertainment back to Home Park.

Strange how we all see things differently, I find our football this season to be entertaining and enjoyable, albeit it would be more enjoyable if the results were better. And we are, of course, not by any means the finished article. What would scare me would be a return to the hoofball of our recent past.

 

[esmer]

He is spot on with this article, we do need to be playing entertaining football that is effective, which is what he is getting at.

Unfortunately, unlike the teams mentioned, we do not play our passing game effectively enough in the attacking third and, as he points out, that tends to lead to rather aimless long shots pinging around all over the place. It looks good on the stats but is entirely meaningless without these shots looking like going in.

It is not entertaining to watch a side pass it around at the back and in the middle of the pitch if they then have next to no cutting edge in the final third. That's why it is boring to watch Argyle most of the time, and why even when winning 2 0 it wasn't very entertaining on Saturday. When you add this general lack of entertainment to the frustration of rarely keeping clean sheets, and therefore losing games, it is not surprising that gates are down and the atmosphere is flat.

There have been a couple of entertaining performances this season where our movement off the ball and accurate passing has led to us ripping teams apart and getting in behind the opposition defence to create actual goal scoring opportunities but they are few and far between. The one that stands out for me at home is the first half against Rochdale. We just don't play like that even often enough to threaten lower mid-table at the moment though so something will need to be done to rectify that and bring the entertainment back to Home Park.

I agree with most of this. I think the reason our football is not effective is because we lack a genuine goalscoring threat. Griffiths for me has goals in him and he gets into good positions around the box, but I don't think he has the mobility to be a lone striker in a 4-2-3-1, which is what we've been playing.

Look at the teams that play this formation and who the striker is: Dortmund - Lewandowski. United - RvP (Rooney has been playing as a CAM). Valencia - Soldado. Atletico - Falcao. Now obviously these are examples way above our standard but the common link is that all of those strikers have exceptional movement in the box and can also make runs for through balls through the back four, but importantly they can also play as target men and are a handful. These are all qualities that a lone striker in this system need and we don't have a player like that.

You're pretty much correct. Movement and mobility are key for the lone striker role, allied to, certainly in this league, a physical presence.

 

[Mazza26]

He can be bit of a sh*tstirrer but he is absolutely right about the importance of retaining possession and playing good football.He doesn't seem to give Fletcher much credit for trying to build a team that plays that way, though.

I agree. He even has a little dig at the amount of shots we had on goal. So he turns a positive fact into a negative. Actually I don't mind that but again it can be made to suit your own agenda. It's blatantly obvious that he doesn't remotely rate Fletcher so once that creeps into your mindset it's difficult to lose that negative slant. For example IF we were keeping the ball and creating situations that were going to hurt the opposition what's to say that this won't work out (it didn't for some of our matches where we lost by the odd goal) and then it would be easy to say "have more shots on goal, 1 is bound to go in."

The problem I have is that because he shares a view that sounds so great on paper it means people will confuse this and probably think that Danis talks far more sense than Fletcher.

Give him credit though he gets people talking.

 

[Johndelve]

Nothing new In what he says and i largely agree, it is pointles playing pretty football in the middle of the pitch if there is no end product.

However, what i do disagree with is his notion that winning by playing entertaining football is the only way to put bums on seats. Simply winning will do that, whether it be a scrappy 1-0 win or a free flowing passing win.

People will follow a winning team, not just one that plays pretty football.

 

[Greenblooded1]

He can be bit of a sh*tstirrer but he is absolutely right about the importance of retaining possession and playing good football.He doesn't seem to give Fletcher much credit for trying to build a team that plays that way, though.

Like he's trying to build a team that wins you mean?

Does he deserve credit now, or should it really be if & when he actually achieves it?

Mr Salmans articles are getting better methinks.

 

[briangreen]

He is spot on with this article, we do need to be playing entertaining football that is effective, which is what he is getting at.

Unfortunately, unlike the teams mentioned, we do not play our passing game effectively enough in the attacking third and, as he points out, that tends to lead to rather aimless long shots pinging around all over the place. It looks good on the stats but is entirely meaningless without these shots looking like going in.

It is not entertaining to watch a side pass it around at the back and in the middle of the pitch if they then have next to no cutting edge in the final third. That's why it is boring to watch Argyle most of the time, and why even when winning 2 0 it wasn't very entertaining on Saturday. When you add this general lack of entertainment to the frustration of rarely keeping clean sheets, and therefore losing games, it is not surprising that gates are down and the atmosphere is flat.

There have been a couple of entertaining performances this season where our movement off the ball and accurate passing has led to us ripping teams apart and getting in behind the opposition defence to create actual goal scoring opportunities but they are few and far between. The one that stands out for me at home is the first half against Rochdale. We just don't play like that even often enough to threaten lower mid-table at the moment though so something will need to be done to rectify that and bring the entertainment back to Home Park.

I agree with most of this. I think the reason our football is not effective is because we lack a genuine goalscoring threat. Griffiths for me has goals in him and he gets into good positions around the box, but I don't think he has the mobility to be a lone striker in a 4-2-3-1, which is what we've been playing.

Look at the teams that play this formation and who the striker is: Dortmund - Lewandowski. United - RvP (Rooney has been playing as a CAM). Valencia - Soldado. Atletico - Falcao. Now obviously these are examples way above our standard but the common link is that all of those strikers have exceptional movement in the box and can also make runs for through balls through the back four, but importantly they can also play as target men and are a handful. These are all qualities that a lone striker in this system need and we don't have a player like that.

You're pretty much correct. Movement and mobility are key for the lone striker role, allied to, certainly in this league, a physical presence.

Griff has physical presence and many attributes of a good striker, but just don't feel that the rest of the team play to his strengths and he's the one that ends up looking like a plonker. Maybe the team should sit down and watch Griffiths on youtube playing for Llanelli and then maybe they'll know how to assist him.
I get a feeling there is a touch of the Matt Tubbs going on here, we have a diamond geezer but haven't a clue how to bring the best out of him. I mean, let's admit it you don't become a bad player overnight and the man knows where the net is.

 

[BadBoy]

He is spot on with this article, we do need to be playing entertaining football that is effective, which is what he is getting at.

Unfortunately, unlike the teams mentioned, we do not play our passing game effectively enough in the attacking third and, as he points out, that tends to lead to rather aimless long shots pinging around all over the place. It looks good on the stats but is entirely meaningless without these shots looking like going in.

It is not entertaining to watch a side pass it around at the back and in the middle of the pitch if they then have next to no cutting edge in the final third. That's why it is boring to watch Argyle most of the time, and why even when winning 2 0 it wasn't very entertaining on Saturday. When you add this general lack of entertainment to the frustration of rarely keeping clean sheets, and therefore losing games, it is not surprising that gates are down and the atmosphere is flat.

There have been a couple of entertaining performances this season where our movement off the ball and accurate passing has led to us ripping teams apart and getting in behind the opposition defence to create actual goal scoring opportunities but they are few and far between. The one that stands out for me at home is the first half against Rochdale. We just don't play like that even often enough to threaten lower mid-table at the moment though so something will need to be done to rectify that and bring the entertainment back to Home Park.

Strange how we all see things differently, I find our football this season to be entertaining and enjoyable, albeit it would be more enjoyable if the results were better. And we are, of course, not by any means the finished article. What would scare me would be a return to the hoofball of our recent past.

I agree with esmer results aside which have been poor to say the least the actual football on show is at times very good to watch, there is something missing though and I think like most its that elusive goalscoring centre forward.

 

[jespafc]

I disagree with him here to be honest. If Argyle were top 3 in this league we'd be getting 8,000 every week. I don't think at this level it matters how much pretty football you're playing.

Which scenario is going to attract the higher attendances at Home park?

1. We play like Arsenal and are 17th

2. We play hoofball and are 2nd

 

[tigertony]

Nothing new In what he says and i largely agree, it is pointles playing pretty football in the middle of the pitch if there is no end product.

However, what i do disagree with is his notion that winning by playing entertaining football is the only way to put bums on seats. Simply winning will do that, whether it be a scrappy 1-0 win or a free flowing passing win.

People will follow a winning team, not just one that plays pretty football.

and Pilgrim_Pete saying ''Good timing really as it saves me nipping out later to get some toilet roll''.

Between these 2 really. Is he paid to write that ???
Entertainment or winning ??? I'll take winning everytime.
When England won the rugby world cup was it with free-flowing rugby and try after try after try. No! It was linked to 2 feet attached to Jonny Wilks. Within 60 yards of the posts it was an almost dead cert 3 points and a try anywhere was +2 points.
Aussie press said ''Is that all you've got??'' We said ''Its all we need''

I'll take 1-0 1-0 if it = promotion.

 

[Ed_Blackburn]

I still think that we are a couple of players short in attack. I am happy with the 4-2-3-1 but to play this Chadders and Feeney both had to go in the summer, they didn't so we are already two players down in terms of having a squad of effective players. We have tried to plug some of the gaps with loans, Madjo and MacDonald, but really they should have been plugged in the summer. I'm also not a big fan of Gurrieri, who all too often flatters to deceive. He looks good on the ball because he can take it on, but rarely produces anything resembling an effective end product. If we had more pacey wingers, then I'd like to see us playing in the hole Young. Young uses the ball far better than Gurrieri and with pace out wide we might actually be able to get to the byline and give Griffiths (or someone else) the service they need to score.

This. With bells and whistles.