GlasgowCeltic
Full Member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2006
- Messages
- 6,194
I thought he'd get his trophy that year they had Wigan at home in the semi, instead he shat himaelf, played Phil Neville in midfield with Fellaini and got walloped 3-0
He was not expected to go on a 21 game winning streak or still be in for the quadruple in April though. He was not expected to be on course for 90+ league points while challenging on all fronts. You're really dumbing down how good a season City are having.
Like I said in the post above yours...
EDIT: Don't get me wrong, I think Moyes is doing great and is currently only behind Pep and just ahead of Bielsa in my estimation. If Pep had messed up in one of the cups and was out of the CL, I would have given it to one of the other two.
Don’t most of cities goals come from this and are known and lauded for it?
as Shit as he was here he’s done a pretty good job at both Everton and West Ham imo and the football is hardly dreadful.
Exactly how I see itThis is his peak, a club like United was a step too far for him but he can take a mid-bottom of the table club and get them into the top half and knocking on the top 4 door.
I think his career deserves an FA or League Cup but I can't see him doing anything bigger than that.
Fair enough. I don’t think his football is that bad really, unless I’m remembering wrong I was often impressed with his everton team too playing some good stuff.It was more a play on his comments when he was manager here.
City do intricate passes to drive into the box and play cut backs. Moyes expects long balls into the box or crosses played from runs down the wing. That's 20 years out of date.
Not really, because they haven't managed to get through and be known. Maybe they would be if these dinosaurs weren't around.
It's the anti-football tactics this type of manager employs that frustrates me the most. It holds the English game back a lot. As good as our team was in the latter SAF years, and others have been since, we are often comfortably outplayed in Europe against top opposition. It's partly because our teams spend half their time focusing on beating sloggers like Moyes and Pulis instead of developing innovative tactics like teams in other leagues are able to.
And don't get me started on the national team!
I appreciate how good a season they're having.
However, if at the start of the season I told you that Man City would run away with the league while going on an insane winning streak and that West Ham would be in the Champions League finishing above Liverpool, Chelsea and Spurs, which would you find more believable?
I appreciate how good a season they're having.
However, if at the start of the season I told you that Man City would run away with the league while going on an insane winning streak and that West Ham would be in the Champions League finishing above Liverpool, Chelsea and Spurs, which would you find more believable?
Yes and that was a laughable decision. Up there with Scott Parker winning FWA Player of the Season for heroically getting West Ham relegated in last place. Not trying to take away anything from Moyes' and West Ham's performance this season, but it's entirely possible to give credit without making a mockery of the entire thing.Well said. The last winner of the Manager of the Season who did not win the league was Pulis in 13/14, for rescuing Palace from relegation zone and they finished 11th. Moyes has achieved much this season.
It was more a play on his comments when he was manager here.
City do intricate passes to drive into the box and play cut backs. Moyes expects long balls into the box or crosses played from runs down the wing. That's 20 years out of date.
Don't know about that. It's certainly a style of play that's been around for a long time, but if it's so out of date how is he doing well with it? All the modern managers with their modern tactics should be battering West Ham week in week out and they should be well down the table if that were true. It wouldn't work yet here we are with West Ham punching above their weight with an effective style of play.
I agree on Moyes though. The metrics of success in this country are ridiculous. Bielsa at Leeds should give all clubs something to target. Play football, not attritional anti-football. It’s possible, and needn’t cost more to do so.
That's kind of what is happening though? Since he took over they haven't beaten us, City, Liverpool or Arsenal once. They have one win against Chelsea, by the skin of their teeth in the last minute. Of the 8 teams they have a better than 50% win ratio against, 3 got relegated last season, 1 is about to be this season, and 2 are newly promoted. He's got them doing the simple, basic things properly, but they are hardly setting the world alight with their play.
He’s doing a great job but they’ll likely fall away to a more mid table position next season.
Don't really know what you mean with the kind of happening part and don't want to talk at cross-purposes.
I just think it's clear that their tactics are working or they wouldn't be where they are, and if they are working today in this very moment then they can't really be out of date. They don't have to have beaten those 4 specific teams for that to be the case in my opinion, they're doing enough against the others who make up the bulk of the league and that's fine.
Would agree that they're not setting the world alight with their play.
It was the quarters not the semi they'd been in variable form but had been playing decent football until then. It was still fresh in my mind when he got announced as United manager a few weeks laterI thought he'd get his trophy that year they had Wigan at home in the semi, instead he shat himaelf, played Phil Neville in midfield with Fellaini and got walloped 3-0
West Ham are not beating big teams because their players have undeniably less quality than City's, Liverpool's and ours. This never proves Moyes' tactic is outdated, if that's your purpose at the beginning. On the contrary, the fact they are very consistent in taking points off poor (and midtable) teams provides a strong evidence that their tactic is working really well indeed.I mean West Ham are not beating big teams and are very consistent in taking points off poor teams.
Their tactics work for what he wants them to do; be hard to beat and nick goals here and there against the big teams. It works for Burnley too but it's even clearer there to see the negative impact that has on the league. English teams will never perform as expected in Europe if we are preparing for an aerial assault and physical battle against those teams every week.
West Ham are not beating big teams because their players have undeniably less quality than City's, Liverpool's and ours. This never proves Moyes' tactic is outdated, if that's your purpose at the beginning. On the contrary, the fact they are very consistent in taking points off poor (and midtable) teams provides a strong evidence that their tactic is working really well indeed.
After 2 pages of discussion, I still can't see how you could logically relate Moyes' "dinosaur" tactic to English teams' struggle in Europe or the so-called lack of innovative ideas. You are either overestimating Moyes' influence, or oversimplifying the difference between English and other leagues.
These managers hang around in management not because they hit success once a decade, but because they actually deliver results at the moment. I watched Everton vs Palace yesterday and Hodgson was actually playing short-passing football with a lot of one-twos. Not sure if this is anti-football by your definition.
I mean West Ham are not beating big teams and are very consistent in taking points off poor teams.
Their tactics work for what he wants them to do; be hard to beat and nick goals here and there against the big teams. It works for Burnley too but it's even clearer there to see the negative impact that has on the league. English teams will never perform as expected in Europe if we are preparing for an aerial assault and physical battle against those teams every week.
West Ham are not beating big teams because their players have undeniably less quality than City's, Liverpool's and ours. This never proves Moyes' tactic is outdated, if that's your purpose at the beginning. On the contrary, the fact they are very consistent in taking points off poor (and midtable) teams provides a strong evidence that their tactic is working really well indeed.
After 2 pages of discussion, I still can't see how you could logically relate Moyes' "dinosaur" tactic to English teams' struggle in Europe or the so-called lack of innovative ideas. You are either overestimating Moyes' influence, or oversimplifying the difference between English and other leagues.
These managers hang around in management not because they hit success once a decade, but because they actually deliver results at the moment. I watched Everton vs Palace yesterday and Hodgson was actually playing short-passing football with a lot of one-twos. Not sure if this is anti-football by your definition.
It's a simple difference. These managers set out primarily to stop the opposition playing football. That, to me, is not good for the league.
So West Ham play attritional anti-football and Leeds play beautiful attacking football?
Weird then that West Ham have scored more goals (and conceded way less) this season.
Do you actually take the time to watch them? West Ham aren't City, but they actually play decent football this season at times. The first half of their game on monday for example.
They have the 6th highest goal tally in the PL. This idea that they're just burnley with slightly better players is not doing them justice imo
Did you watch them in their recent game against Wolves? Obviously they defended in the second half, but did they set up to counter in the first half?What is West Hams style of play and main tactics in your opinion?
Moyes for me is a very pragmatic manager. Every time I've watched them this season they've been set up to keep it tight at the back and hit teams on the counter. Would you disagree with that assessment?
Did you watch them in their recent game against Wolves? Obviously they defended in the second half, but did they set up to counter in the first half?
I mean West Ham are not beating big teams and are very consistent in taking points off poor teams.
Their tactics work for what he wants them to do; be hard to beat and nick goals here and there against the big teams. It works for Burnley too but it's even clearer there to see the negative impact that has on the league. English teams will never perform as expected in Europe if we are preparing for an aerial assault and physical battle against those teams every week.
Do you actually take the time to watch them? West Ham aren't City, but they actually play decent football this season at times. The first half of their game on monday for example.
They have the 6th highest goal tally in the PL. This idea that they're just burnley with slightly better players is not doing them justice imo
What does that have to do with it?
I say they'd be getting beat week in week out by modern managers with their modern tactics if the tactics were so out of date. You say that is kind of happening because they haven't beaten any of 4 specific teams in the past 16 months or so that you cherry-picked, all of whom are some of the richest clubs on the planet.
Do they play these 4 teams week in week out? No.
Do these 4 teams all have modern managers deploying modern tactics? Some might argue United don't.
Does the rest of the league, i.e. three-quarters of it have no modern managers who use modern tactics? Surely there's a number who do.
A West Ham collapse is somewhat inevitable, isn’t it?
A sniff of top four and the anti-football mentality will kick in, sort of like it did during their pathetic display against us more recently.
A West Ham collapse is somewhat inevitable, isn’t it?
A sniff of top four and the anti-football mentality will kick in, sort of like it did during their pathetic display against us more recently.
Well I doubt they get top 4 and maybe not 6, but depending on how it goes in terms of how many points they get 7th wouldn't necessarily be a collapse in my book. They're only on 1.73 points per game anyway so far which I think is very low to be 4th at this point in a season. Even if they keep that up or similar they might well move down the table. The table is extremely tight and a lot of those just behind them have better players who I'd fancy to get more points than them in any random block of 8 matches. Might include Everton in that in other times too but their own form is on the downward just now as well.
Certainly expect West Ham to be lower than where they are now by season's end although I haven't looked a the fixtures/everyone's run-in.
I think he was unlucky to walk in straight after SAF. If he had come in after someone else inevitably failed (anyone following SAF was unlikely to succeed) then he may have done a lot better.
Don't want him back at United under any circumstances but I'm pleased to see him doing well with West Ham
Leicester & Chelsea at home in April, but if they can get through this month still in touching distance then they will fancy their chances in every one of their last 5 fixtures in May
Burney A
Everton H
Brighton A
West Brom A
Southampton H
They have a chance.
Jose should have replaced SAF. He wasn't on such a downward spiral at the time, had the ego to handle replacing possibly the greatest manager ever and had an older squad which he likes dealing with normally. A few years with him and then whoever followed wouldn't have such a legacy to come in after. Still shouldn't have been Moyes even then though!