End of season Craig Levein poll

[i wish jj was my dad]

3 hours ago, Pasquale for King said:

Because I want better? Because its been bad is it not human nature to want the good times to be more often?Building for the long term is great, Budge deserves praise for many things that she has accomplished bit is not exempt from criticism. Unfortunately football is about the here and now and Levein is the King of jam later, two 6th place finishes is unacceptable, no matter the excuses people trot out. I don’t  know who Shirley is ??‍♂️?.

We all want it be better (at least most of us do) but football should be about optimism and hoping this will be our year. Even if the reality is different. I don't know anybody who thinks sixth is acceptable but there were very obvious reasons why it happened. I thought Levein would go if he didn't achieve at least fourth but I saw enough from watching what we could do when anywhere near full strength to believe we are not far away. 

[Nookie Bear]

1 minute ago, maidstonejambo said:

Referees played their part..

 

St Johnstone: https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/sport/football/hearts/st-johnstone-2-hearts-2-jam-tarts-denied-by-controversial-penalty-1-4840005

Rangers: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/46333044

 

Two real sucker punches at a time when we really needed those points to regain our confidence and kick on.

 

I had forgotten about that St Johnstone one. Thanks for reigniting the seethe.

 

But our proper first XI would have been out of sight by then

[Leveins Battalion]

Big Craig will come back all guns blazing next season and have all the doubters feeling very very foolish.

 

[JamboAl]

2 hours ago, busby1985 said:

That’s the MANAGERS JOB to figure out. It’s his job to have a back up plan and not simply just blame the injuries. A better summer recruitment plan would’ve helped, replacing Lafferty would’ve helped, a better pre season not involving 1970’s running up and down sand dunes, changing shape to have more balance in the team, playing to the strengths of the squad you have not just simply changing the personnel and hoping for the best, not playing Craig Wighton, the list is endless as to how we could’ve coped better. Gerrard coped without Morelos, Rodgers coped without Ntcham and so on and so on. We had no plan B. Like everything with Levein it’s all about what’s coming round the corner and excuses as to why it’s not here now. Murrayfield, not playing at tynie, Cathro’s squad, too many young players, too many injuries........it’s always something and never Leveins fault. Why are you so happy to just accept his excuses? Surely you can see he could’ve done things better? We’ve just finished back to back 6th. Second season running we’ve finished below hibs. We had an 11 point gap between us and hibs, we finished 3 points behind. Ended the season without a win in 8. We didn’t handle anything that came up in the season well, that buck stops at the managers door. 

7

The same old nonsense time and time again. 

 

I am fully aware it's the manager's job but at least you can give us some idea of what you think a Plan B might have looked like. 

 

So Gerrard coped without Morelos.  That's just one player; we had 4 or 5 of our best players off at the same time  Who took Morelos' place?  Oh yes, a man (Defoe) who was probably costing them in excess of £30k per week.  How many of our 2nd choice players earn that?  I doubt if the whole X1 of our 1st choice team earn that much in total.

Ntcham - that's just one man too but in any event, Celtic have a bigger and better squad due to their far superior financial clout and thus find it easier to cover the odd injury.

Now, back to your Plan B.

[Absolute Scenes]

29 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

Any other excuse for his laughable attempts at a LONG throw, he barely throws it a few yards intp the box on one the smallest pitches in the league. But you already know that.

 

No need to attack the guys physique though

[maidstonejambo]

12 minutes ago, Nookie Bear said:

 

I had forgotten about that St Johnstone one. Thanks for reigniting the seethe.

 

But our proper first XI would have been out of sight by then

 

 I know, I know, sorry to be raking it all up again. Still smarting from it myself. Andrew Dallas ?

[busby1985]

19 minutes ago, JamboAl said:

The same old nonsense time and time again. 

 

I am fully aware it's the manager's job but at least you can give us some idea of what you think a Plan B might have looked like. 

 

So Gerrard coped without Morelos.  That's just one player; we had 4 or 5 of our best players off at the same time  Who took Morelos' place?  Oh yes, a man (Defoe) who was probably costing them in excess of £30k per week.  How many of our 2nd choice players earn that?  I doubt if the whole X1 of our 1st choice team earn that much in total.

Ntcham - that's just one man too but in any event, Celtic have a bigger and better squad due to their far superior financial clout and thus find it easier to cover the odd injury.

Now, back to your Plan B.

Are you just not reading what am writing or just blind rage that you have to defend Levein at all costs? I listed off a few ways in which we could’ve dealt with the situation better. You’ve done this to me before where you’ve asked me a question, I’ve answered and you just ask me the same question again ?. 

 

 

[Beast Boy]

On 05/06/2019 at 13:15, Pasquale for King said:

None so blind as those that can’t see.

Do you see any Neil Lennon or Phil Stamp types kicking about nowadays? Anyone like De Vries, absolutely steaming the night before scoring 4 against Hibs and our most nights?

Players coming back over a stone overweight after a two month break? 

Players wearing fitness monitors in training and in games, being weighed weekly.

All aspects of the game have changed, and moved on I’m afraid.

There is a much higher demand on players physically,though CL knows this as they gave them a very tough pre season. 

The players ability to complete high intensity actions such as sprints, tackles, blocks, jumps have become even more important than how distances covered. 

Corners and free kicks also define more match winning moments than they used to. 

Our problems probably linked to not having players that can play the patient game.

https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/jose-mourinho-news-next-manchester-united-manager-next-job-manager-a8688671.html

 

I see plenty players kicking about our top-flight that are comparable fitness wise to the players you mentioned. Don't know what you were watching in 2004? If you had said the 1970s or something, then I may have been able to bow to your knowledge of what it was like then, but I was in my twenties in 2004 and I remember it clear as day. There was, as there is now, a mixture of players at different levels of skill and fitness spread over the league. Sport Science has improved and fitness levels are bound to be better, but if you are seriously trying to tell me that Mark De Vries at the age and fitness he was when he signed for us, would not do a job in today's Hearts team, then frankly you are deluded.

 

Can you identify the season when this epic improvement in fitness took place? We have narrowed it down to some point between 2004 and 2019 so far. I'd like a little more detail, so I can start thinking trying to see your point.

[Bazzas right boot]

2 hours ago, mitch41 said:

 The only reason it’s not Likely is because our management of the team isn’t up to the job.

It should be achievable and if our management and it’s backers don’t believe it possible 

they shouldn’t be at Hearts.

 

A load of shite. 

 

It is not the only reason it's not Likley - 

 

Other reasons are:

Celtic have far better players and a better team. 

Rangers have some better players. 

Hibs have a budget similar to ours, although going unbeaten against them is duable,  hibs will have other ideas. 

 

Unsure if you're being deliberately obtuse or just being  plain stupid in your understanding of football. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Bazzas right boot]

12 minutes ago, Icon of Symmetry said:

 

I see plenty players kicking about our top-flight that are comparable fitness wise to the players you mentioned. Don't know what you were watching in 2004? If you had said the 1970s or something, then I may have been able to bow to your knowledge of what it was like then, but I was in my twenties in 2004 and I remember it clear as day. There was, as there is now, a mixture of players at different levels of skill and fitness spread over the league. Sport Science has improved and fitness levels are bound to be better, but if you are seriously trying to tell me that Mark De Vries at the age and fitness he was when he signed for us, would not do a job in today's Hearts team, then frankly you are deluded.

 

Can you identify the season when this epic improvement in fitness took place? We have narrowed it down to some point between 2004 and 2019 so far. I'd like a little more detail, so I can start thinking trying to see your point.

 

 

Kris Boyd, Charlie Adam, Swanson, commons are examples that blow the Kings theory to bits. 

 

At the very elite level he may have a point. Maybe. 

[Bazzas right boot]

1 hour ago, Nookie Bear said:

 

We were 6 points clear at the top before injuries kicked in last year, Craig has had another year in the job, the younger players are a year older and we are hopeful of recruiting well in the summer.

 

Referees didn't stop us being top of the league, injuries did.

 

3rd would be failure imo

 

 

I agree, 3rd place is plane hiring time. 

 

[Pasquale for King]

43 minutes ago, Absolute Scenes said:

 

No need to attack the guys physique though

It’s probably part of the problem though. People in glass houses though ?.

[Pasquale for King]

19 minutes ago, Icon of Symmetry said:

 

I see plenty players kicking about our top-flight that are comparable fitness wise to the players you mentioned. Don't know what you were watching in 2004? If you had said the 1970s or something, then I may have been able to bow to your knowledge of what it was like then, but I was in my twenties in 2004 and I remember it clear as day. There was, as there is now, a mixture of players at different levels of skill and fitness spread over the league. Sport Science has improved and fitness levels are bound to be better, but if you are seriously trying to tell me that Mark De Vries at the age and fitness he was when he signed for us, would not do a job in today's Hearts team, then frankly you are deluded.

 

Can you identify the season when this epic improvement in fitness took place? We have narrowed it down to some point between 2004 and 2019 so far. I'd like a little more detail, so I can start thinking trying to see your point.

De Vries would obviously do a job but he wouldn’t get away with his partying as he did back then, due to having your fitness monitored on a daily basis. So you agree about the fitness but want dates to prove it? I believe it would’ve berm a gradual process, not a revolutionary jump.

[mitch41]

2 hours ago, Jim Panzee said:

 

genuine question - where do you think that should be in terms of league position?

 

historically, Hearts have averaged around 4th / 5th spot in the top flight.

History is nothing to do with this season coming. We need to be up there in the top 3 mix. Europe should be achieved every season. Let’s get back to being unbeatable again where nobody wants to play the Hearts.

[Pasquale for King]

10 minutes ago, Olly Lee's left boot said:

 

 

Kris Boyd, Charlie Adam, Swanson, commons are examples that blow the Kings theory to bits. 

 

At the very elite level he may have a point. Maybe. 

Boyd yes, Commons isn’t playing. Adam is no body builder but he’s not particularly overweight .Swanson is much fitter now than he used to be. The point is that fitness levels have got better and less robust players are playing, wouldn’t you agree?

[mitch41]

14 minutes ago, Olly Lee's left boot said:

 

A load of shite. 

 

It is not the only reason it's not Likley - 

 

Other reasons are:

Celtic have far better players and a better team. 

Rangers have some better players. 

Hibs have a budget similar to ours, although going unbeaten against them is duable,  hibs will have other ideas. 

 

Unsure if you're being deliberately obtuse or just being  plain stupid in your understanding of football. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Your words are of a loser and Hearts don’t want losers in the team or in the stands.

[i wish jj was my dad]

2 hours ago, Pasquale for King said:

Good post.

Not quite the same as being without Berra, Souttar, Naismith, Haring and Uche though.

[i wish jj was my dad]

4 minutes ago, mitch41 said:

History is nothing to do with this season coming. We need to be up there in the top 3 mix. Europe should be achieved every season. Let’s get back to being unbeatable again where nobody wants to play the Hearts.

When were we ever unbeatable?

[JamboGraham]

5 minutes ago, mitch41 said:

 Let’s get back to being unbeatable again.

 

Where the heck are we going back to in order to achieve this???

[Pasquale for King]

3 minutes ago, i wish jj was my dad said:

Not quite the same as being without Berra, Souttar, Naismith, Haring and Uche though.

We were never at any without those five players at the same time. Apart from Berra the other four are injury prone, Levein said himself brought  in 20 players to cover for injuries.We were absolutely fine until Naismith was injured, it then all fell apart and the manager and his coaches couldn’t arrest the decline.

[Nookie Bear]

15 minutes ago, Olly Lee's left boot said:

 

 

I agree, 3rd place is plane hiring time. 

 

 

Give me one reason why we cannot match our points tally after 10 games. Let's allow a couple of points dropped due to bad luck/Willie Collum.

 

If we can avoid injuries, is there any reason why we can not sustain that?

 

Same Head Coach, everyone a year more experienced, new additions to the squad etc etc

[mitch41]

4 minutes ago, JamboGraham said:

 

Where the heck are we going back to in order to achieve this???

2005

[mitch41]

6 minutes ago, i wish jj was my dad said:

When were we ever unbeatable?

Burley was the man.

[Bazzas right boot]

Just now, Nookie Bear said:

 

Give me one reason why we cannot match our points tally after 10 games. Let's allow a couple of points dropped due to bad luck/Willie Collum.

 

If we can avoid injuries, is there any reason why we can not sustain that?

 

Same Head Coach, everyone a year more experienced, new additions to the squad etc etc

 

 

Nope, not gonna play. 

 

You're right, only we will improve and want to win games 

 

Every other team will just Mince about with their finger up their arse and let us. 

 

 

 

[i wish jj was my dad]

1 minute ago, mitch41 said:

Burley was the man.

I loved Burley's time but he had a budget we can only dream of today. Levein made a similar start to the season with a fraction of that budget. And Burley's record after he left suggests he wouldn't be much of an upgrade now.  

[Nookie Bear]

Killie and Aberdeen will not be as strong, we reckon.

Hibs will lose their 'new manager bounce'

Rangers will be an issue for us, granted.

Celtic will be weaker.

We have everything in place to carry on from last season's start, as long as we avoid all those injuries.

 

How about we target the following: by the time of the split, it should be mathematically possible for us to win the League, even if we fall short.

[Bazzas right boot]

11 minutes ago, mitch41 said:

Burley was the man.

 

 

Hibs beat us and we never won in Glasgow. 

 

Thought that was your criteria? 

 

 

[Forever Hearts]

We weren't just unfortunate with injuries, we were doubly unfortunate that every other team in the league didn't get a single injury between them. Poor wee Hearts. 

[JamboGraham]

13 minutes ago, mitch41 said:

2005

 

We lost 13 games in 2005. How is that unbeatable?

[Pasquale for King]

16 minutes ago, Nookie Bear said:

 

Give me one reason why we cannot match our points tally after 10 games. Let's allow a couple of points dropped due to bad luck/Willie Collum.

 

If we can avoid injuries, is there any reason why we can not sustain that?

 

Same Head Coach, everyone a year more experienced, new additions to the squad etc etc

I don’t think anyone can avoid injuries though. The average is around 75% of your squad missing games (ours has been higher the last two years).Avoiding injury to the main players would obviously make a difference, the problem is they seem to be injury prone. You then options or other players to step up, we didn’t even after signing 20 players.

[Beast Boy]

21 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

De Vries would obviously do a job but he wouldn’t get away with his partying as he did back then, due to having your fitness monitored on a daily basis. So you agree about the fitness but want dates to prove it? I believe it would’ve berm a gradual process, not a revolutionary jump.

 

I think in general sport science will have improved athletic performance, but not to anywhere near the extent you are suggesting, where players from fifteen years ago in the SPL would struggle against the finely tuned athletic machines of today's SPFL Premiership. You said that the game has moved on, and that this is the reason Levein has us finishing 5th and 6th rather than 3rd. I disagree with you, as the game has not changed dramatically enough in that time, to have left the manager behind. If anything Levein is one of the more progressive managers and always has been. He is far more likely to implement current technology and ideas than many of his generation. You used athleticism as the yardstick by which the game has changed beyond recognition to a coach like Levein.

 

All I am asking you for, is a better defined tideline, to show when the water level went over Levein's head and his 'old-skool' methods became redundant?

[rudi must stay]

5 minutes ago, Olly Lee's left boot said:

 

 

Hibs beat us and we never won in Glasgow. 

 

Thought that was your criteria? 

 

 

 

McGlynn was boss when we played Hibs

 

[Pasquale for King]

6 minutes ago, Nookie Bear said:

Killie and Aberdeen will not be as strong, we reckon.

Hibs will lose their 'new manager bounce'

Rangers will be an issue for us, granted.

Celtic will be weaker.

We have everything in place to carry on from last season's start, as long as we avoid all those injuries.

 

How about we target the following: by the time of the split, it should be mathematically possible for us to win the League, even if we fall short.

What we could is wrap Naismith in cotton wool, if we are winning easily take him off (3 nil up at Dens for example). Ask Scotland not to play him two full games on the bounce, one a meaningless friendly, he was injured shortly.  

[Bazzas right boot]

Just now, rudi must stay said:

 

McGlynn was boss when we played Hibs

 

 

 

Still got beat in that season of them. 

 

 

Livingston beat us as well. 

 

 

[Pasquale for King]

11 minutes ago, Icon of Symmetry said:

 

I think in general sport science will have improved athletic performance, but not to anywhere near the extent you are suggesting, where players from fifteen years ago in the SPL would struggle against the finely tuned athletic machines of today's SPFL Premiership. You said that the game has moved on, and that this is the reason Levein has us finishing 5th and 6th rather than 3rd. I disagree with you, as the game has not changed dramatically enough in that time, to have left the manager behind. If anything Levein is one of the more progressive managers and always has been. He is far more likely to implement current technology and ideas than many of his generation. You used athleticism as the yardstick by which the game has changed beyond recognition to a coach like Levein.

 

All I am asking you for, is a better defined tideline, to show when the water level went over Levein's head and his 'old-skool' methods became redundant?

I don’t think made such a dramatic statement that they couldn’t compete at all but as you agree fitness levels have moved on. 

There is a much higher demand on players physically now,though CL knows this as they gave them a very tough pre season. 

The players ability to complete high intensity actions such as sprints, tackles, blocks, jumps have become even more important than how distances covered. 

Corners and free kicks also define more match winning moments than they used to. 

This has all happened this decade I would say, it’s been a gradual process 

Levein has been progressive in certain areas, but tactically some of the stuff we do he learnt from Alex MacDonald. The style of football in the main for two seasons has been awful.

[Pasquale for King]

11 minutes ago, rudi must stay said:

 

McGlynn was boss when we played Hibs

 

Also his only game in Glasgow was a draw at Celtic, he also has a 100% record against Rangers at Tynecastle. So does Levein but it’s 100% failure to beat them, ever.

[Nookie Bear]

36 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

I don’t think anyone can avoid injuries though. The average is around 75% of your squad missing games (ours has been higher the last two years).Avoiding injury to the main players would obviously make a difference, the problem is they seem to be injury prone. You then options or other players to step up, we didn’t even after signing 20 players.

 

We did have a number of long term injuries to key players though,, i don't think that is in doubt.

 

Without those, who know what we can achieve!?

[Pasquale for King]

3 minutes ago, Nookie Bear said:

 

We did have a number of long term injuries to key players though,, i don't think that is in doubt.

 

Without those, who know what we can achieve!?

We did but everything was manageable until Naismith was injured, the team couldn’t function without him. 

[ri Alban]

3 hours ago, Pasquale for King said:

I’m not sure it was with attack in mind he played that way, it’s the best way to defend against them also as this season games has proved. Sit back and defend 0-3&0-5,press 1:0& 2x 1:2 and that glorious 4 nil in 2017.

I'll never forget that day (4-0). Brilliant. The Poznan thingy

Edited June 6, 2019 by ri Alban

[Pasquale for King]

1 minute ago, ri Alban said:

I'll never forget that day (4-0). Brilliant. The Poznan thingy

Oh the wee Hibs are shite was my favourite ?

[Beast Boy]

On 05/06/2019 at 11:41, Pasquale for King said:

You could say the same about McInnes, they play the same percentage football and rely on free kicks and corners, it would appear both sets of fans are at least sick of the football and about 50% want change.

 

Yet later on you go on to say that the game has changed, and corners and freekicks are more important. Surely it's a good thing that we have realised this and are trying to ensure we take it in to account?

 

On 05/06/2019 at 11:53, Icon of Symmetry said:

 

Consistency can be a very good thing if you up the quality of the team. Back to back third place finishes and the group stages of the UEFA Cup are testimony to that.

 

On 05/06/2019 at 12:07, Pasquale for King said:

That time has passed, the football is the same but the game has moved on. It’s much harder to get to the group stage now, 3rd place sees you back in  June for preseason and one our players weren’t too happy about allegedly.

 

So the football is still the same? Or it has changed, and it's more athletic, and more reliant on corners and freekicks?

 

On 05/06/2019 at 12:17, Icon of Symmetry said:

 

An oft trotted out nonsensical assertion that sounds insightful, but is really just a lot of piffle. ?

 

I said above, that I don't think football has changed as much as you suggest. Certainly not in Scotland in the last fifteen years.

 

On 05/06/2019 at 12:30, Pasquale for King said:

Football is completely different now compared to then, players are much faster and fitter. The game is therefore played at a much higher tempo. It can still be played in the way Mcinnes and Levein try to do it, unfortunately when teams get men behind the ball this style doesn’t work. Get the ball forward quickly, play on mistakes. Levein has consistently said his players didn’t move the ball quickly enough. Lennon wants Celtic to play much quicker with two strikers, it will work to an extent in our league but the ponderous nature of our midfield especially doesn’t help.

 

Here you say that the "game has changed", again. Not that "the football is the same". Which is it? So far you have claimed that the game has changed so much since 2004, that Levein has been left behind. The changes that you have cited, are the athleticism of the players, and the greater reliance on set-plays. You say that it is "completely different". On the same thread however, you are saying that "the football is the same". You also claim that the reason Hearts and Aberdeen fans are unhappy with what they are watching, is because McInnes and Levein put too much emphasis on set-plays (corners and freekicks etc), whilst later claiming that the game has changed, and that one of those changes is more reliance on freekicks and corners.

 

On 05/06/2019 at 13:15, Pasquale for King said:

None so blind as those that can’t see.

Do you see any Neil Lennon or Phil Stamp types kicking about nowadays? Anyone like De Vries, absolutely steaming the night before scoring 4 against Hibs and our most nights?

Players coming back over a stone overweight after a two month break? 

Players wearing fitness monitors in training and in games, being weighed weekly.

All aspects of the game have changed, and moved on I’m afraid.

There is a much higher demand on players physically,though CL knows this as they gave them a very tough pre season. 

The players ability to complete high intensity actions such as sprints, tackles, blocks, jumps have become even more important than how distances covered. 

Corners and free kicks also define more match winning moments than they used to. 

Our problems probably linked to not having players that can play the patient game.

https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/jose-mourinho-news-next-manchester-united-manager-next-job-manager-a8688671.html

 

I have said a few times now, that i don't see this massive change in the game up here fitness wise as having changed the game drastically enough to render Levein's tactics ineffectual. The major problem I am having with your points on this thread, is that you are contradicting yourself repeatedly, and it makes debate almost completely impossible. So far you are saying:

 

"You could say the same about McInnes, they play the same percentage football and rely on free kicks and corners, it would appear both sets of fans are at least sick of the football and about 50% want change." - So Levein realises that the game is more reliant on set-pieces, and so factors this in to his tactics. Something which the fans don't like.

 

"That time has passed, the football is the same but the game has moved on." - Football is the same you say, in this post.

 

"Football is completely different now compared to then, players are much faster and fitter." - Football is completely different now, in this post.

 

"All aspects of the game have changed, and moved on I’m afraid." - The game remains different in this post, and the changes (athleticism, freekicks and corners) are what levein has been left behind on.

 

"There is a much higher demand on players physically,though CL knows this as they gave them a very tough pre season." - Here you repeat that there is a far greater physical demand on players, but you now change the script to Levein realising this, and that being reflected in how he organised pre-season training.

 

"Corners and free kicks also define more match winning moments than they used to." - Here you repeat the greater importance of freekicks and corners... something that you have claimed Levein has been left behind with, yet also that he relies on them too much, and this is why many fans want him out.

 

 

1 hour ago, Icon of Symmetry said:

 

I see plenty players kicking about our top-flight that are comparable fitness wise to the players you mentioned. Don't know what you were watching in 2004? If you had said the 1970s or something, then I may have been able to bow to your knowledge of what it was like then, but I was in my twenties in 2004 and I remember it clear as day. There was, as there is now, a mixture of players at different levels of skill and fitness spread over the league. Sport Science has improved and fitness levels are bound to be better, but if you are seriously trying to tell me that Mark De Vries at the age and fitness he was when he signed for us, would not do a job in today's Hearts team, then frankly you are deluded.

 

Can you identify the season when this epic improvement in fitness took place? We have narrowed it down to some point between 2004 and 2019 so far. I'd like a little more detail, so I can start thinking trying to see your point.

 

48 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

De Vries would obviously do a job but he wouldn’t get away with his partying as he did back then, due to having your fitness monitored on a daily basis. So you agree about the fitness but want dates to prove it? I believe it would’ve berm a gradual process, not a revolutionary jump.

 

Gary MacKay Stevens got utterly mortal and fell in the river Kelvin not that long ago. Scott Brown got so pished he was slumped in a doorway on Sauchiehall Street drooling in to his chippie, Godinho got wrecked and fell of a pub table, George Street is very often rammed to the gunnels with pished Edinburgh Footballers.

 

18 minutes ago, Icon of Symmetry said:

 

I think in general sport science will have improved athletic performance, but not to anywhere near the extent you are suggesting, where players from fifteen years ago in the SPL would struggle against the finely tuned athletic machines of today's SPFL Premiership. You said that the game has moved on, and that this is the reason Levein has us finishing 5th and 6th rather than 3rd. I disagree with you, as the game has not changed dramatically enough in that time, to have left the manager behind. If anything Levein is one of the more progressive managers and always has been. He is far more likely to implement current technology and ideas than many of his generation. You used athleticism as the yardstick by which the game has changed beyond recognition to a coach like Levein.

 

All I am asking you for, is a better defined tideline, to show when the water level went over Levein's head and his 'old-skool' methods became redundant?

 

Above I state my belief that you are overemphasising or overestimating the improvement in fitness and athleticism in our game, and the changes that it has brought about. You feel it has changed the game so much, that Levein has been left behind by these changes, and so won't be able to emulate the high finishes of fifteen years ago.

 

6 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

I don’t think made such a dramatic statement that they couldn’t compete at all but as you agree fitness levels have moved on. 

There is a much higher demand on players physically now,though CL knows this as they gave them a very tough pre season. 

The players ability to complete high intensity actions such as sprints, tackles, blocks, jumps have become even more important than how distances covered. 

Corners and free kicks also define more match winning moments than they used to. 

This has all happened this decade I would say, it’s been a gradual process 

Levein has been progressive in certain areas, but tactically some of the stuff we do he learnt from Alex MacDonald. The style of football in the main for two seasons has been awful.

 

Above you are saying that it won't have changed the game so dramatically that the players from 15 years ago could no longer compete, and that in fact, Levein recognises the change in the game and has taken it in to account when organising pre-season training.

 

This is what I'm trying to understand so I can debate the points with you, but your stance keeps changing, and it makes it look as though you are just wanting a change, and not actually thinking your reasons for this through properly before presenting them

[JamboAl]

2 hours ago, busby1985 said:

Are you just not reading what am writing or just blind rage that you have to defend Levein at all costs? I listed off a few ways in which we could’ve dealt with the situation better. You’ve done this to me before where you’ve asked me a question, I’ve answered and you just ask me the same question again ?. 

 

 

Although the tripe that you write is not worth reading I do in fact read it for comedy purposes.

When I asked for your Plan B I wondered how you were going to replace the injured Uche, Berra, Soapy, and Naisy when they were all out at the same time.  Add to that Haring was playing with a hernia and M Smith was out for 2 months. 

There are (at least) 2 ways

- you have sitting on the bench like-for-like reserves who can just hit the ground running when needed

- you can get in  replacements which can sometimes be a bit difficult when the transfer window is closed

Give us some idea of your preference.

 

PS - I am sorry to ask you difficult questions which cause you to think I'm defending CL.  I'm defending fact.

[Pasquale for King]

28 minutes ago, Icon of Symmetry said:

 

Yet later on you go on to say that the game has changed, and corners and freekicks are more important. Surely it's a good thing that we have realised this and are trying to ensure we take it in to account?

 

 

 

So the football is still the same? Or it has changed, and it's more athletic, and more reliant on corners and freekicks?

 

 

I said above, that I don't think football has changed as much as you suggest. Certainly not in Scotland in the last fifteen years.

 

 

Here you say that the "game has changed", again. Not that "the football is the same". Which is it? So far you have claimed that the game has changed so much since 2004, that Levein has been left behind. The changes that you have cited, are the athleticism of the players, and the greater reliance on set-plays. You say that it is "completely different". On the same thread however, you are saying that "the football is the same". You also claim that the reason Hearts and Aberdeen fans are unhappy with what they are watching, is because McInnes and Levein put too much emphasis on set-plays (corners and freekicks etc), whilst later claiming that the game has changed, and that one of those changes is more reliance on freekicks and corners.

 

 

I have said a few times now, that i don't see this massive change in the game up here fitness wise as having changed the game drastically enough to render Levein's tactics ineffectual. The major problem I am having with your points on this thread, is that you are contradicting yourself repeatedly, and it makes debate almost completely impossible. So far you are saying:

 

"You could say the same about McInnes, they play the same percentage football and rely on free kicks and corners, it would appear both sets of fans are at least sick of the football and about 50% want change." - So Levein realises that the game is more reliant on set-pieces, and so factors this in to his tactics. Something which the fans don't like.

 

"That time has passed, the football is the same but the game has moved on." - Football is the same you say, in this post.

 

"Football is completely different now compared to then, players are much faster and fitter." - Football is completely different now, in this post.

 

"All aspects of the game have changed, and moved on I’m afraid." - The game remains different in this post, and the changes (athleticism, freekicks and corners) are what levein has been left behind on.

 

"There is a much higher demand on players physically,though CL knows this as they gave them a very tough pre season." - Here you repeat that there is a far greater physical demand on players, but you now change the script to Levein realising this, and that being reflected in how he organised pre-season training.

 

"Corners and free kicks also define more match winning moments than they used to." - Here you repeat the greater importance of freekicks and corners... something that you have claimed Levein has been left behind with, yet also that he relies on them too much, and this is why many fans want him out.

 

 

 

 

Gary MacKay Stevens got utterly mortal and fell in the river Kelvin not that long ago. Scott Brown got so pished he was slumped in a doorway on Sauchiehall Street drooling in to his chippie, Godinho got wrecked and fell of a pub table, George Street is very often rammed to the gunnels with pished Edinburgh Footballers.

 

 

Above I state my belief that you are overemphasising or overestimating the improvement in fitness and athleticism in our game, and the changes that it has brought about. You feel it has changed the game so much, that Levein has been left behind by these changes, and so won't be able to emulate the high finishes of fifteen years ago.

 

 

Above you are saying that it won't have changed the game so dramatically that the players from 15 years ago could no longer compete, and that in fact, Levein recognises the change in the game and has taken it in to account when organising pre-season training.

 

This is what I'm trying to understand so I can debate the points with you, but your stance keeps changing, and it makes it look as though you are just wanting a change, and not actually thinking your reasons for this through properly before presenting them

I meant Leveins style football is the same, he’s always been reliant on free kicks and corners so maybe he’s a revolutionary?

All those incidents of players being drunk happened, they’re not out every night though as it would be noticeable because of the modern day monitoring. As I said De Vries and others could obviously play today, but they would have to adhere to the modern day football fitness regime. Proper rest periods, football is an all year round sport. Our players have a three week break this summer, they can’t go on a Vanacek style holiday can they?

Whether you believe me is here nor there, a lot of what I’ve said comes from people who know far more than I do about modern football, an Uefa A licensed coach for example. 

As you don’t believe me perhaps it would be better to research it yourself.

Ps, the evidence in the main of the last two seasons show Levein won’t be able to recreate the “success” of fifteen years ago.

 

 

 

Edited June 6, 2019 by Pasquale for King

[Beast Boy]

1 minute ago, Pasquale for King said:

I meant Leveins style football is the same, he’s always been reliant on free kicks and corners so maybe he’s a revolutionary?

All those incidents of players being drunk happened, they’re not out every night though as it would be noticeable because of the modern day monitoring. As I said De Vries and others could obviously play today, but they would have to adhere to the modern day football fitness regime. Proper rest periods, football is an all year round sport. Our players have a three week break this summer, they can’t go on a Vanacek style holiday can they?

Whether you believe me is here nor there, a lot of what I’ve said comes from people who know far more than I do about modern football, an Uefa A licensed coach for example. 

As you don’t believe me perhaps it would be better to research it yourself.

 

 

 

 

 

So what in all of that backs up your assertion that the game has moved on and rendered Levein incapable of keeping up then? That was your original point.

[mitch41]

1 hour ago, JamboGraham said:

 

We lost 13 games in 2005. How is that unbeatable?

We were unbeatable until 2 games after Burley left.

[Beast Boy]

4 minutes ago, mitch41 said:

We were unbeatable until 2 games after Burley left.

 

We were unbeatable for 11 games last season.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Icon of Symmetry said:

 

We were unbeatable for 11 games last season.

 

13 or so in all competitions I think. Longest unbeaten run outwith Celtic.

[Pasquale for King]

19 minutes ago, Icon of Symmetry said:

 

So what in all of that backs up your assertion that the game has moved on and rendered Levein incapable of keeping up then? That was your original point.

As I’ve said a few times the players are fitter and faster (you agreed) the game is therefore quicker, passing the ball backwards and up the wings or hoofing it don’t get you anywhere with one up front and consequently isolated when the ball arrives. 

He did indeed give them a hard preseason as he should, for whatever reason though the squad were out on their feet again by the time the top six fixtures came around.

Have the last two seasons not shown this? 

Or is it Murrayfield, not his own players,didn’t have a proper preseason under Cathro, injury prone players getting injured shock? Non stop excuses, who knows what’s next.

Have you any proof he’s up to the job, as opposed to what he did a decade ago? 

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

As I’ve said a few times the players are fitter and faster (you agreed) the game is therefore quicker, passing the ball backwards and up the wings or hoofing it don’t get you anywhere with one up front and consequently isolated when the ball arrives. 

He did indeed give them a hard preseason as he should, for whatever reason though the squad were out on their feet again by the time the top six fixtures came around.

Have the last two seasons not shown this? 

Or is it Murrayfield, not his own players,didn’t have a proper preseason under Cathro, injury prone players getting injured shock? Non stop excuses, who knows what’s next.

Have you any proof he’s up to the job, as opposed to what he did a decade ago? 

 

Levein has proven he thinks about tactics and tries new things. The pressing game, the 3 at the back i don’t remember him playing in his first spell, even the 4-6-0 and embracing the DoF setup, focuing on bringing through young coaches German style. Just hiring cathro was a progressive move. 

 

The idea that Levein is a dinosaur stuck in the 90s/00s is laughable. Not everything he tries comes off but he does try new things.

[Beast Boy]

1 minute ago, Pasquale for King said:

As I’ve said a few times the players are fitter and faster (you agreed) the game is therefore quicker, passing the ball backwards and up the wings or hoofing it don’t get you anywhere with one up front and consequently isolated when the ball arrives. 

He did indeed give them a hard preseason as he should, for whatever reason though the squad were out on their feet again by the time the top six fixtures came around.

Have the last two seasons not shown this? 

Or is it Murrayfield, not his own players,didn’t have a proper preseason under Cathro, injury prone players getting injured shock? Non stop excuses, who knows what’s next.

Have you any proof he’s up to the job, as opposed to what he did a decade ago? 

 

Okay, so now it’s that he plays too direct? That is something else entirely. So when we won the 11-13 games on the bounce, was that by playing one way (less direct?), whilst the games we lost were played another way (more direct)? Or was there yet another - as yet unmentioned - factor behind the contrasting form?

 

I have no more prof that he’s up to the job, than you do that he isn’t. I am not trying to claim he is definitely up to the job, so I can’t prove that which I don’t claim to be fact. I do however think he is up to the job, and that is my opinion.