Lowe post Rochdale match comments

[Balham Green]

Lowe needs to take some responsibility. I don't hear it. Responsibility for the predictable and very naive tactics which are the same every week. Responsibility for a squad and a team which is unbalanced and very easy to pick off. Responsibility for being unable to change things when going wrong except making panicky ridiculous subs like taking Edwards off yesterday, Camara off after 10 minutes at Fleetwood.

Take responsibility for what?

The side was unchanged from the side which won 2-0 against Lincoln City (who are 4th in League One).

What do you want Lowe to hold his hands up and apologise to the fans for?

The players played sh1te and they need to examine that fact themselves.

It's his team and his tactics! He gets the credit when things go well

 

[phil thefluter24]

I don't usually bother with post-match interviews as its all just spin and cliches. However, I was very curious to see how Ryan Lowe responded to this defeat.

He said he doesn't want to blame people and the team win, lose and draw together, but he was very clear that he felt the coaching staff had prepared and done everything they needed to do, and players let him down. So, he kind of plays it both ways but that sounds like blame to me, and it is clear he does not take any responsibility himself.

Maybe the players did let him down, but how does a team collectively go on the pitch and turn in a performance like that having been hit for 5 just the other day? That suggest a problem in the system, the training or the make-up of the team.

It is clear that we are shaky at the back. We felt this last season in L2 but went up thanks to a couple of strong results just before lockdown. Those issues were not resolved during the break and we are now trying to play football out from the back in L1 with L2 cloggers.

Lowe seems frustrated that the players don't do what he is asking of them. My feeling is that sometimes what he is asking of them is beyond them. It's fine wanting to play the game 'the right way', but one of the great skills of a lower league manager is getting a tune out of the mixed bag of players your team can afford/attract. That means horses for courses and adapting to what you have in front of you. Not necessarily all option A or all option B, but to have the variety in game and see which method is most effective. It's this playing through the thirds and patterns of play that becomes too predictable. Wanting to be the L1 Pep or Klopp is fine, but they have the greatest players in the world at their disposal; we don't.

Apart from getting taken apart by Exeter and the odd poor showing, this is the biggest challenge Lowe has had to face at Argyle. I am interested to see how his 'jolly scouser' persona is tested during this time. There are all the usual lines being offered, but the response seems confused, contradictory and emotional. I think if we continue to get poor results and the pressure builds we will really get to know what Ryan Lowe is all about in the weeks ahead.

Spot on Chicago Green. Agree with this being the first big test of his managerial career. Optimistically I see this as a good learning. opportunity for a young promising manager and his team. I hope he can take a step back and put his hand up to see what has gone wrong and what he is responsible for and fix it. Thats what top leaders and managers do. I don't think we need to rip up the playbook and philosophy but we do need to tweak our system and get more out of our players. I expect a couple of weeks of dodgy performance before he does it get right. Hopefully it is fixed in time of the Xmas fixtures.

Spot on summary it does appear all is not well at HP for the players to put in a no show like they did last night , thats 2 thumpings in a couple of weeks

 

[phil thefluter24]

Got a few observations.
Our crap run started with the five subs and in his pre-match interview before it came in, RL said he didn’t really have a clue how to handle it, so maybe put he’s gone and put the jinx on himself about it.
RL has started to use the phrase “we’re overachieving” (which I remember all too well from Derek Adams’s time!), and I think this is a very negative approach, primarily because it makes players feel they’re not really who the manager would have if he could afford better. Bad for their confidence. And what we see is a great lack of confidence in our players, even Jephers missed two sitters last night!
Both these things coincide with our poor run, and maybe they are not just unrelated coincidences.
RL seems to be blaming the players now, and that gets nowhere, because it destroys team spirit. I thought his body language and going and sitting on the bench last night was poor.
It all has to come from the manager, and so I believe RL has it all in his own hands. I have belief in him to change things round.

Agree entirely with comment about Lowes body language last night. He seemed as though he had given up before half time really not what the team want to see from their manager. We certainly saw a different side of him

 

[EyeOpener]

Lowe needs to take some responsibility. I don't hear it. Responsibility for the predictable and very naive tactics which are the same every week. Responsibility for a squad and a team which is unbalanced and very easy to pick off. Responsibility for being unable to change things when going wrong except making panicky ridiculous subs like taking Edwards off yesterday, Camara off after 10 minutes at Fleetwood.

Take responsibility for what?

The side was unchanged from the side which won 2-0 against Lincoln City (who are 4th in League One).

What do you want Lowe to hold his hands up and apologise to the fans for?

The players played sh1te and they need to examine that fact themselves.

I wouldn't be using this game as support for your questions. Appleton played pretty much all his bench for this game and tbf to them they should have scored a hatful against us. Some posters have mocked Appletons after match comments about 'could've scored 6' but imo he wasn't wrong. Maybe not 6 specifically but they certainly should have scored a few. I would go so far to say that if he put out his starting eleven then we wouldn't have won that game. Be interesting to see the result when they come down for the league game.

 

[max]

The fellow Reeves was by far the best Argyle last night. He's mobile, tackles and scores the odd goal. Mayor plays like he's doing us a favour!
Also, why does Nouble alway try not to head the ball from our keepers goal kicks?

 

[WoodsyGreen]

The fellow Reeves was by far the best Argyle last night. He's mobile, tackles and scores the odd goal. Mayor plays like he's doing us a favour!
Also, why does Nouble alway try not to head the ball from our keepers goal kicks?

Other opinions are available and all that but I must have missed whatever Reeves did well last night.

My one abiding memory of him was when Jephcott was holding the ball up on the edge of the area with his back to goal, crying out for Reeves to make a run into the box so he could lay it off to him. Instead Reeves just stood there and watched; Jephcott inevitably lost possession as a result and suddenly Rochdale were on the attack again.

 

[Guiri Green]

Lowe did say something about the players not doing what they were told. Always worrying to hear, as it opens up several trains of thought.

 

[Balham Green]

The fellow Reeves was by far the best Argyle last night. He's mobile, tackles and scores the odd goal. Mayor plays like he's doing us a favour!
Also, why does Nouble alway try not to head the ball from our keepers goal kicks?

Other opinions are available and all that but I must have missed whatever Reeves did well last night.

My one abiding memory of him was when Jephcott was holding the ball up on the edge of the area with his back to goal, crying out for Reeves to make a run into the box so he could lay it off to him. Instead Reeves just stood there and watched; Jephcott inevitably lost possession as a result and suddenly Rochdale were on the attack again.

Yes don't remember all these tackles either! The 'odd goal' is correct. I remember him instinctively looking to go backwards every time he received the ball. Completely the opposite to Camara. Doesn't always come off with him but he has the right idea. When he is not subbed after 10 mins. :facepalm:

 

[Ave IT]

That was really not a great interview. He was clearly upset and frustrated (as he should be) but some things should be kept in the dressing room. You can’t say “we’re all in it together” in one breath then blame the players for not doing what they were told to do in the next and say “the lads who performed out there and made the errors that cost us the game - they have to take full responsibility”. That smacks of throwing players under the bus. You’re the manager Ryan - you set the team up and after a disastrous first half things barely improved. Tell them home truths in private but don’t go venting frustrations at them in public – rather something along the lines “there were individual errors and the lads are very disappointed but that happens sometimes and I know they’ll be desperate to put things right with hard work…blah …blah”

We all loved the enthusiasm and positivity RL brought to the club which at the lower levels get you a long way. We all (mostly) appreciate the ‘style’ he’s trying to bring – the default setting is clearly to attack, and not just with high energy up-and-at-‘em manner but with some intelligence and technique. After DA’s rather downbeat and cautious playing style (admittedly interspersed with some really good performances) that’s a breath of fresh air. For those reasons I and probably most of us still back him to succeed. This patch (hopefully) is something of a blip in a higher league and we would have been happy with this position at this stage at the start of the season. The worry is though that if the positivity and morale drops, to date he hasn’t shown much in the way of tactical nous. We rarely make changes in the game to improve things – if they start bad they tend to stay bad (the Wimbledon game excepted) and sometimes when we start well it tails off as the opposition reacts. The stats show 60% of our goals come in the first half whereas nearly 60% of opposition goals come in the second half – and that includes the Fleetwood & Rochdale drubbings where they were out of sight by half time.

But Hey – as IPA pointed out in his post, RL is still something of a rookie learning the ropes. He’ll make mistakes and as long as he learns from them he could still be a great success – at least he’s trying to play decent attacking football but he does need to think about tactics – match tactics - not just try to apply some philosophical ‘style’ of play with little regard to the players we have and how the opposition set-up to counter it. He also needs to think about what he says in public.

 

[oldage]

That was really not a great interview. He was clearly upset and frustrated (as he should be) but some things should be kept in the dressing room. You can’t say “we’re all in it together” in one breath then blame the players for not doing what they were told to do in the next and say “the lads who performed out there and made the errors that cost us the game - they have to take full responsibility”. That smacks of throwing players under the bus. You’re the manager Ryan - you set the team up and after a disastrous first half things barely improved. Tell them home truths in private but don’t go venting frustrations at them in public – rather something along the lines “there were individual errors and the lads are very disappointed but that happens sometimes and I know they’ll be desperate to put things right with hard work…blah …blah”

We all loved the enthusiasm and positivity RL brought to the club which at the lower levels get you a long way. We all (mostly) appreciate the ‘style’ he’s trying to bring – the default setting is clearly to attack, and not just with high energy up-and-at-‘em manner but with some intelligence and technique. After DA’s rather downbeat and cautious playing style (admittedly interspersed with some really good performances) that’s a breath of fresh air. For those reasons I and probably most of us still back him to succeed. This patch (hopefully) is something of a blip in a higher league and we would have been happy with this position at this stage at the start of the season. The worry is though that if the positivity and morale drops, to date he hasn’t shown much in the way of tactical nous. We rarely make changes in the game to improve things – if they start bad they tend to stay bad (the Wimbledon game excepted) and sometimes when we start well it tails off as the opposition reacts. The stats show 60% of our goals come in the first half whereas nearly 60% of opposition goals come in the second half – and that includes the Fleetwood & Rochdale drubbings where they were out of sight by half time.

But Hey – as IPA pointed out in his post, RL is still something of a rookie learning the ropes. He’ll make mistakes and as long as he learns from them he could still be a great success – at least he’s trying to play decent attacking football but he does need to think about tactics – match tactics - not just try to apply some philosophical ‘style’ of play with little regard to the players we have and how the opposition set-up to counter it. He also needs to think about what he says in public.

I don't agree. Why pussyfoot around when your players have let us all down.There is no excuse for the debacle last night and if the players can't accept criticism they shouldn't be in the team.
RL must also share the blame and admit he got it wrong.

 

[Metal Green Mickey]

One thing that concerned me yesterday about his comments were “the players didn’t do what we asked of them”.

What if the players aren’t good enough to do what was asked of them? Then you have to adapt your tactics to surely what they can do.

 

[Tugboat]

One thing that concerned me yesterday about his comments were “the players didn’t do what we asked of them”.

What if the players aren’t good enough to do what was asked of them? Then you have to adapt your tactics to surely what they can do.

That’s been my point for a long time MGM, square pegs in round holes.

The fullbacks aren’t good enough so leave massive gaps in behind that the CB’s can’t cope with. The DCM player is needed to protect the back 3 because they are crap and that leaves us short in midfield with only 2 players who are lost without wingback support.

That in turn completely isolates the 2 forwards who are feeding in scraps.

Play 3 CB’s (not canavan or Wootton) and get the DCM swapped out for a forward playing player like Cooper of Reeves playing balls to cooper in the hole and commit to the wingbacks getting forward then we may have a chance in keeping the ball up the pitch and threatening the opposition into a defensive retreat more often.

Loose that wingback support and DCM and we are a wounded animals fighting off bite after bite. Sooner or later we get flawed and can’t recover.

It’s tactics more than ability.

 

[EyeOpener]

One thing that concerned me yesterday about his comments were “the players didn’t do what we asked of them”.

What if the players aren’t good enough to do what was asked of them? Then you have to adapt your tactics to surely what they can do.

That’s been my point for a long time MGM, square pegs in round holes.

The fullbacks aren’t good enough so leave massive gaps in behind that the CB’s can’t cope with. The DCM player is needed to protect the back 3 because they are crap and that leaves us short in midfield with only 2 players who are lost without wingback support.

That in turn completely isolates the 2 forwards who are feeding in scraps.

Play 3 CB’s (not canavan or Wootton) and get the DCM swapped out for a forward playing player like Cooper of Reeves playing balls to cooper in the hole and commit to the wingbacks getting forward then we may have a chance in keeping the ball up the pitch and threatening the opposition into a defensive retreat more often.

Loose that wingback support and DCM and we are a wounded animals fighting off bite after bite. Sooner or later we get flawed and can’t recover.

It’s tactics more than ability.

Exactly, that is why Edwards needs to be there. He has the energy to work from side to side to cover for the wingbacks, he has the bite necessary to make the challenge and break down the attack and he has the ability and composure to look up and play the intelligent 10 yard pass forward. Lowe started off playing Edwards there in the early league 2 days and he never put a foot wrong. Why he changed that I'll never know.

 

[Forest of Dean Green]

One thing that concerned me yesterday about his comments were “the players didn’t do what we asked of them”.

What if the players aren’t good enough to do what was asked of them? Then you have to adapt your tactics to surely what they can do.

That’s been my point for a long time MGM, square pegs in round holes.

The fullbacks aren’t good enough so leave massive gaps in behind that the CB’s can’t cope with. The DCM player is needed to protect the back 3 because they are crap and that leaves us short in midfield with only 2 players who are lost without wingback support.

That in turn completely isolates the 2 forwards who are feeding in scraps.

Play 3 CB’s (not canavan or Wootton) and get the DCM swapped out for a forward playing player like Cooper of Reeves playing balls to cooper in the hole and commit to the wingbacks getting forward then we may have a chance in keeping the ball up the pitch and threatening the opposition into a defensive retreat more often.

Loose that wingback support and DCM and we are a wounded animals fighting off bite after bite. Sooner or later we get flawed and can’t recover.

It’s tactics more than ability.

Exactly, that is why Edwards needs to be there. He has the energy to work from side to side to cover for the wingbacks, he has the bite necessary to make the challenge and break down the attack and he has the ability and composure to look up and play the intelligent 10 yard pass forward. Lowe started off playing Edwards there in the early league 2 days and he never put a foot wrong. Why he changed that I'll never know.

I recall at the time he said something about Edwards not being progressive enough and looking for the forward pass in that position? Well, if that was so, he’s been about our most progressive player over the last few games and by rights should be very peeved at being subbed off yesterday

 

[Tugboat]

One thing that concerned me yesterday about his comments were “the players didn’t do what we asked of them”.

What if the players aren’t good enough to do what was asked of them? Then you have to adapt your tactics to surely what they can do.

That’s been my point for a long time MGM, square pegs in round holes.

The fullbacks aren’t good enough so leave massive gaps in behind that the CB’s can’t cope with. The DCM player is needed to protect the back 3 because they are crap and that leaves us short in midfield with only 2 players who are lost without wingback support.

That in turn completely isolates the 2 forwards who are feeding in scraps.

Play 3 CB’s (not canavan or Wootton) and get the DCM swapped out for a forward playing player like Cooper of Reeves playing balls to cooper in the hole and commit to the wingbacks getting forward then we may have a chance in keeping the ball up the pitch and threatening the opposition into a defensive retreat more often.

Loose that wingback support and DCM and we are a wounded animals fighting off bite after bite. Sooner or later we get flawed and can’t recover.

It’s tactics more than ability.

Exactly, that is why Edwards needs to be there. He has the energy to work from side to side to cover for the wingbacks, he has the bite necessary to make the challenge and break down the attack and he has the ability and composure to look up and play the intelligent 10 yard pass forward. Lowe started off playing Edwards there in the early league 2 days and he never put a foot wrong. Why he changed that I'll never know.

But what I mean is sort the back 3 out and maybe we wouldn’t need the DCM.

When we play with 3 CB’s, 2 wingbacks as full backs and a midfielder covering the CB’s we lose all our forward play.

If the wingbacks were competent we could defend much much higher up the pitch and keep the ball also.

If we don’t have the players then we need to stop playing this way because it’s completely counter productive.

It’s like trying to driving a big sporty modified car that looks awesome but only powered by a 1.2 Vauxhall nova engine and port worn tyres.