So basically I do believe Fletcher is a negeative manager when he goes to set us up for games. I dont believe he coaches this team well because we are constantly poor at defending, shooting and crossing. Basically, the basics of football.
Yet, I am trying to look for a positive spin to think about what I am missing that perhaps some other people see. The only thing I can cling onto from what I have seen is that in every 1 game out of about 2/3 games we suddenly stop hoofing the ball and try to play some passing football. The prime example is Rochdale at home at the beginning of the match for the first 20-30 mins. It was good. Then all of a sudden we lose our way again and to be honest, like in a lot of games, are lucky to cling on for a positive result (eg they missed a penalty 2nd half that was the turning point).
So the question really is that in about 270 mins of football (eg every three games home or away) we are seeing this 20-30mins purple patch of decent football. Yet is this really acceptable? Is this signs of progress? Or just the fact we are capalising on teams poor periods in games and it looks better than it really is? I cling onto this is shoots of recover but a reality dawns in my head that actually Fletcher and his backroom staff arent really upto the job because the other 240mins of these every three games are littered with bad shooting, crossing, defending and a tatical naivity that most league two managers are picking off with ease!!
Can Fletcher make the team convert these 20-30mins of decent spells of football, from the odd match, into 90mins of consistent good football, week in/week out?
Yet, I am trying to look for a positive spin to think about what I am missing that perhaps some other people see. The only thing I can cling onto from what I have seen is that in every 1 game out of about 2/3 games we suddenly stop hoofing the ball and try to play some passing football. The prime example is Rochdale at home at the beginning of the match for the first 20-30 mins. It was good. Then all of a sudden we lose our way again and to be honest, like in a lot of games, are lucky to cling on for a positive result (eg they missed a penalty 2nd half that was the turning point).
So the question really is that in about 270 mins of football (eg every three games home or away) we are seeing this 20-30mins purple patch of decent football. Yet is this really acceptable? Is this signs of progress? Or just the fact we are capalising on teams poor periods in games and it looks better than it really is? I cling onto this is shoots of recover but a reality dawns in my head that actually Fletcher and his backroom staff arent really upto the job because the other 240mins of these every three games are littered with bad shooting, crossing, defending and a tatical naivity that most league two managers are picking off with ease!!
Can Fletcher make the team convert these 20-30mins of decent spells of football, from the odd match, into 90mins of consistent good football, week in/week out?
