-
This site is sponsored by Lang & Potter.
Philosophy and identity
- Thread starter Kit Kat and Oranges
- Start date
What an odd thing to do. I would have thought that a bigger pitch would suit a footballing side. Which is what I thought Adams was trying to do.
Never understood that decision to make the pitch smaller, fans lapped it up at the time though, attention to detail and all that bollocks. I’m not even sure Adams knew why he was doing it.
Did they dig up the grass at the edges of the pitch and replace it with astroturf ? It never looked like much had gone to me.
Army green":3d2fb42m said:
It was a clever strategy. Bring in wide players like Wylde and Ainsworth so opponents think you will play an expansive game then narrow the pitch and don't play wide men. :think:
Article here about how Norwich successfully built a new approach because they had to deal with the loss of parachute payment income. Focus on academy players and playing decent football and not throwing money after old pros.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/48148055
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/48148055
LG1980":3vzzk7oh said:
Yes, it's obviously on a different financial scale, but the principle is the same, focus on an attractive playing style, dont veer from it and try and get hungry, young players. Easier said than done im sure, but i do think that playing style ethos should be at the heart of what Argyle do moving forward. If you can't be the richest or the best at least try and be one of the most attractive or innovative.
Biggs
Administrator
Staff member
✅ Evergreen
🎫 S.T. Donor 🎫
✨Pasoti Donor✨
🌟Sparksy Mural🌟
Part of the problem is the unique obsession.
Apart from a paranoia about remoteness, there's nothing so different about Argyle from the other 70 or so in the EFL, noting to exclude the global brands in the Prem; so much that can be copied, if forgetting this comfort blanket of uniqueness, oh it can't be done simply because everything has to be different once the train's in sight of the English channel.
We had a painfully slow and ponderous set of players under Adams, that's the sort of players he trusted; shortening/decreasing the pitch made complete sense therefore! Writing that down as sporting philosophy is kind of ugly, but it certainly wasn't nonsensical.
Apart from a paranoia about remoteness, there's nothing so different about Argyle from the other 70 or so in the EFL, noting to exclude the global brands in the Prem; so much that can be copied, if forgetting this comfort blanket of uniqueness, oh it can't be done simply because everything has to be different once the train's in sight of the English channel.
We had a painfully slow and ponderous set of players under Adams, that's the sort of players he trusted; shortening/decreasing the pitch made complete sense therefore! Writing that down as sporting philosophy is kind of ugly, but it certainly wasn't nonsensical.
Somebody has obviously mentioned it before on here no doubt but Argyle really should have a real think about adopting the moneyball theorem at Home Park, there are already yank money links to the club so I would be surprised if the chairman hasn’t at least looked at it.
IJN":3n122oyz said:
Hear Hear IJN
DA's unauthorised (without fan consultation) narrowing of length and width of the pitch really made me unhappy.
The playing surface seems to be superb. The ground staff are superb, but the acres of wasted, unused and ugly space to the sides (especially the Lyndhurst side) and at each end seriously detract from the look and atmosphere of the ground and inhibit attractive football.
Jeez, we have more unused space to sides and behind our goals than Tottenham's magnificent new ground. That can't be right.
Morally, the pitch is sacred; belongs to the fans and no temporary manager (sorry DoF) has the right to touch it ; ever!
I'm not based in Plymouth obviously, so can people please make my point to Mr Hallett.
Not helpful Todric.
You don't get my point on sanctity of pitch dimensions and DA's ruination of our pitch.
Assume your family has not supported Argyle for over 100 years?
Dork! - to use modern parlance
You don't get my point on sanctity of pitch dimensions and DA's ruination of our pitch.
Assume your family has not supported Argyle for over 100 years?
Dork! - to use modern parlance