Thoughts on Ian Foster

[MGM]

Zackly. Plus we all seem to be forgetting Preston missed easily the best chance of that game, or any other game!

l dunno, that Coventry first half miss by Matt Godden was very difficult to beat.

 

[Biggs]

l dunno, that Coventry first half miss by Matt Godden was very difficult to beat.

True, forgot about that one!

 

[MGM]

The negative tactics mean that we had to score the only chance we had and Bundu missed it. Earlier in the season we could afford to miss a few chances as we were creating plenty.

So what would you like him to do, in order to change the perception they are negative tactics?

He has implemented an organised press, which in a 3-4-2-1, l never seen Schumacher do. Or even in the 4-3-3. Out of possession the press if utilised well can be an attacking weapon.

I‘m not saying Foster hasn’t got things wrong, but l’d like to know how people would change it. What attacking weapons could he use differently?

I just think under Schumacher we were clinical with our chances we made. If you take a game like Middlesbrough it made us look like this entertaining, flow scoring side if you just looked at the result. However, l think there have been some goals, like from Azaz earlier in the season, you wouldn’t expect to be replicated because they were of a uniquely high standard.

 

[greengodwin]

Can’t argue with any of that. Unless of course you are absolutely convinced you are right and nothing will change your mind. Personally with eight games to go I am going to stick with supporting the man our owners have backed to do his best.

And I’ll be back doing the same next season wherever we end up. I’ll be gutted if it isn’t the Championship. But I’ll still be here

Forty four years and counting. Three quarters of it below this level. It’s fine.

You get used to it. But at least try and enjoy the ride

Me too. 55 years and counting...and seen a lot worse than this current hiccup....

 

[SWTT]

Disagree that we were just fortunate and more clinical under Schuey. The stats back up that we created considerably more chances, which gave our attackers the opportunities to score.

Players that score 1 in 1 chances don't exist. Players that get closer to that come at a premium, we haven't got that level of budget so we need to ensure we create more opportunities in order to have a chance of goals.

We did that pretty successfully until January, when the tactical switch put emphasis on cutting out the defensive mishaps. And there has been a tactical change in our approach that has stifled our attack, write that off to Azaz if you wish, but let's be honest Schuey would have got more from Devine than Foster would have got from Azaz.

That said, the international break of moping is over. Schuey has gone and Foster is here to stay irrespective of our personal views. Time to get behind the lads and hope for the best that his coaching pedigree, which can't really be doubted, can conjure up a recovery of performances and he proves a lot of us wrong that he is the man capable of leading this squad.

 

[PL2 3DQ]

The negative tactics mean that we had to score the only chance we had and Bundu missed it. Earlier in the season we could afford to miss a few chances as we were creating plenty.

That's a good point, if we missed earlier this season it didn't matter because another chance would come along soon enough.
In Schumacher's last five games as manager (two defeats, a draw and two wins) we created an incredible 82 attempts on goal but we only scored five goals. Against Leicester we had 15 shots, against QPR with 10 men from the 25th minute we created 12 chances, against Rotherham we had an incredible 25 attempts on goal.
It could be argued that we were poor finishers.
Now we simply have to score from the rare chances we create. Our previously poor finishers now have to score from limited chances.

 

[Deacster]

So what would you like him to do, in order to change the perception they are negative tactics?

He has implemented an organised press, which in a 3-4-2-1, l never seen Schumacher do. Or even in the 4-3-3. Out of possession the press if utilised well can be an attacking weapon.

I‘m not saying Foster hasn’t got things wrong, but l’d like to know how people would change it. What attacking weapons could he use differently?

I just think under Schumacher we were clinical with our chances we made. If you take a game like Middlesbrough it made us look like this entertaining, flow scoring side if you just looked at the result. However, l think there have been some goals, like from Azaz earlier in the season, you wouldn’t expect to be replicated because they were of a uniquely high standard.

I think if Foster had been a bit braver and shown a little more tactical flexibility then people would show more faith.
The formation change against PNE was our first change in shape during his tenure.
Under SS we were unpredictable and flexible, we are now predictable and rigid. If the 3-4-3 isn't working, why not tweak to a 3-4-1-2 for example, with Bundu up top alongside Hardie and Morgs as a No.10. Morgs is getting man marked, if you move his position that gives the opposition something to think about.
We must be a very easy team to scout and deal with at present, opposition teams will know our formation and crowd out Whittaker, press our backline and close down our midfield forcing us to go long to Hardie who is isolated and doesn't hold the ball up.
We just haven't shown enough imagination or flexibility to catch out an opponent under Foster.

 

[keithobro]

I think if Foster had been a bit braver and shown a little more tactical flexibility then people would show more faith.
The formation change against PNE was our first change in shape during his tenure.
Under SS we were unpredictable and flexible, we are now predictable and rigid. If the 3-4-3 isn't working, why not tweak to a 3-4-1-2 for example, with Bundu up top alongside Hardie and Morgs as a No.10. Morgs is getting man marked, if you move his position that gives the opposition something to think about.
We must be a very easy team to scout and deal with at present, opposition teams will know our formation and crowd out Whittaker, press our backline and close down our midfield forcing us to go long to Hardie who is isolated and doesn't hold the ball up.
We just haven't shown enough imagination or flexibility to catch out an opponent under Foster.

I think it was interesting in the England v Belgium match. Foden and Bowen were out wide in a front 3 and first half, Foden was not particularly effective. It didn't help that Chilwell kept receiving the ball and giving it straight back to a central defender, instead of finding Foden up the flank. Second half, it seemed that both Bowen and Foden were permitted to drift in behind Toney, so the formation switched from 3 up to an 8 and a 10 behind the cf and both of them did much better that way. I think that's what Argyle need to do instead of rigidly keeping 3 forwards strung out across the park, isolated and easily marked. Whittaker, in particular, would benefit from that degree of freedom to roam, surely.

 

[JannerinCardiff]

Apart from Ryan Lowe, has anybody come out with public support for Foster?

There’s at least 1 other..


…. assuming I count.? 😊

 

[Lancastergreen]

There’s at least 1 other..


…. assuming I count.? 😊

You do count but I am not sure 16k fans will stop chanting about him if you were to suddenly grab a mic and tell them to stop being naughty

 

[MustardEagle]

I've been thinking on my day off work about our current managerial situation and the missed opportunity to make a change over the international break. I also have been pondering why there has been no board level statement backing Foster till the end of the season come what may.

Then I gave it some more thought and maybe Simon Hallett has given Foster one last chance in a game which we would be unlikely to get anything or even have more possession even if Schumacher had stayed. If he gets a draw then he's also given the Bristol City game.

However, another poor non-attacking performance and defeat would mean that they would cut their losses as they recognise that the Bristol City game which is a must win would be too toxic of an atmosphere to help the squad win the game. It would also mean that we were on no win in 5 games and that Argyle under 13 games under Foster in the league would dip below 1 point per game. Indeed, maybe all the external commentary over the international break (bar Carlton Palmer) stating we are terrible and should change manager has registered with Hallett.

Now we're this to be the case, an additional reason why we didn't pull the trigger over the international break would be that our choice to take over for the rest of the season would not be Nance and Dewsnip, or indeed Warnock, but one of the final three interviewees in Paul Cook. This is admittedly entirely speculative on my part, but it would make sense that Cook wouldn't want to leave Chesterfield before they were officially promoted which they were at their last match 5 days ago (they are also set to easily break the 100 point barrier this season and could do as soon as Easter Monday).

I was also admittedly underwhelmed when Cook was mentioned as a possible manager. However, having now had a look at both his record and his attacking managerial philosophy throughout his career and especially with Chesterfield of late, I now would very much welcome his appointment.

Interestingly, he has only been sacked once in his career, which was also one of his shortest spells in charge of a team (44 games) and that was with an impatient Ipswich, when he was there for under a year and was sacked with them in mid table. Otherwise, he has won promotion as champions from the National League, League Two and League One with various sides. He also managed Wigan in the championship, where he guided Wigan away from the drop in his first season and in his second led them to 13th with off the field financial chaos. The club were then deducted points after the season ended for entering administration and were subsequently relegated due to this, and at this point Cook left the club.

So all of this is to say, maybe Hallett does have an immediate managerial plan after all... (Here's really really hoping we do).

Managerial Analysis piece on Cook at Chesterfield:

https://totalfootballanalysis.com/h...chesterfield-202324-tactical-analysis-tactics


Managerial record of Cook:

Paul Cook - Manager profile

This is the profile site of the manager Paul Cook. The site lists all clubs he coached and all clubs he played for.

www.transfermarkt.co.uk

 

[MGM]

I think if Foster had been a bit braver and shown a little more tactical flexibility then people would show more faith.
The formation change against PNE was our first change in shape during his tenure.
Under SS we were unpredictable and flexible, we are now predictable and rigid. If the 3-4-3 isn't working, why not tweak to a 3-4-1-2 for example, with Bundu up top alongside Hardie and Morgs as a No.10. Morgs is getting man marked, if you move his position that gives the opposition something to think about.
We must be a very easy team to scout and deal with at present, opposition teams will know our formation and crowd out Whittaker, press our backline and close down our midfield forcing us to go long to Hardie who is isolated and doesn't hold the ball up.
We just haven't shown enough imagination or flexibility to catch out an opponent under Foster.

l think to be honest it’s true we haven’t shown enough imagination or flexibility under Foster. Even go as far to say adaptability to cope with the game situation as it unfolds.

However, if you’re going to be a front foot team you need people who can pass the ball well when the opposition have 10 behind the ball. You also need goals in your team, especially from wing backs & midfielders.

The narrative is that’s it’s Foster’s negativity but when l look at that squad l think it’s simply the a lack of depth in the squad. When Argyle play well, Whittaker & Hardie are on the score sheet. Yet when those two have bad games it seems to blunt us very badly.

I just think the problem lies with the manager & the quality of the squad. For example, now we lost Gyabi l just don’t see that energy & physicality in the squad that replaces him.

 

[MGM]

There’s at least 1 other..


…. assuming I count.? 😊

lm still 100% behind him. I just can’t give any Argyle manager three months in the job & put all the blame in him.

 

[TimHarris]

You do count but I am not sure 16k fans will stop chanting about him if you were to suddenly grab a mic and tell them to stop being naughty

I’d be interested to see that tested.

 

[PL2 3DQ]

I've been thinking on my day off work about our current managerial situation and the missed opportunity to make a change over the international break. I also have been pondering why there has been no board level statement backing Foster till the end of the season come what may.

Then I gave it some more thought and maybe Simon Hallett has given Foster one last chance in a game which we would be unlikely to get anything or even have more possession even if Schumacher had stayed. If he gets a draw then he's also given the Bristol City game.

However, another poor non-attacking performance and defeat would mean that they would cut their losses as they recognise that the Bristol City game which is a must win would be too toxic of an atmosphere to help the squad win the game. It would also mean that we were on no win in 5 games and that Argyle under 13 games under Foster in the league would dip below 1 point per game. Indeed, maybe all the external commentary over the international break (bar Carlton Palmer) stating we are terrible and should change manager has registered with Hallett.

Now we're this to be the case, an additional reason why we didn't pull the trigger over the international break would be that our choice to take over for the rest of the season would not be Nance and Dewsnip, or indeed Warnock, but one of the final three interviewees in Paul Cook. This is admittedly entirely speculative on my part, but it would make sense that Cook wouldn't want to leave Chesterfield before they were officially promoted which they were at their last match 5 days ago (they are also set to easily break the 100 point barrier this season and could do as soon as Easter Monday).

I was also admittedly underwhelmed when Cook was mentioned as a possible manager. However, having now had a look at both his record and his attacking managerial philosophy throughout his career and especially with Chesterfield of late, I now would very much welcome his appointment.

Interestingly, he has only been sacked once in his career, which was also one of his shortest spells in charge of a team (44 games) and that was with an impatient Ipswich, when he was there for under a year and was sacked with them in mid table. Otherwise, he has won promotion as champions from the National League, League Two and League One with various sides. He also managed Wigan in the championship, where he guided Wigan away from the drop in his first season and in his second led them to 13th with off the field financial chaos. The club were then deducted points after the season ended for entering administration and were subsequently relegated due to this, and at this point Cook left the club.

So all of this is to say, maybe Hallett does have an immediate managerial plan after all... (Here's really really hoping we do).

Managerial Analysis piece on Cook at Chesterfield:

https://totalfootballanalysis.com/h...chesterfield-202324-tactical-analysis-tactics


Managerial record of Cook:

Paul Cook - Manager profile

This is the profile site of the manager Paul Cook. The site lists all clubs he coached and all clubs he played for.

www.transfermarkt.co.uk

Apologies and I appreciate you took some time to type that message but it's another thread about Ian Foster so it's been merged with this main Foster thread.