| Should he stay or should he go? 13:07 - May 16 with 13001 views | ProudDale |
Surely this is the question on every fans' mind after last night, and hopefully on the Ogdens.
In the credit column, BJ is a decent guy and has steered the Dale ship through very choppy waters. The players seem to like him, and you would probably argue that a semi final place in the FA Trophy, and a quarter final exit in the Playoffs is above par based on expectations at the start of the season. He knows the squad, and should know its strengths better than anyone, and SHOULD know where it needs improving. Are we just a few pieces away from a winning jigsaw?
The counter arguments are plentiful - if one definition of insanity is repeating the same thing and expecting different results, we all have collectively experienced deja vous too many times to count. Game management has been woeful at the crunch points - Spennymore, and the 70 minute mark yesterday being the most damning. The style of football is boring to watch, and his tactical inflexibility seems to be known to every opposition manager, particularly the ones with lesser resources whose cunning plan of the "low block" seem to have us totally stumped. Does anyone remember having a winger like Mendez-Laing galloping down the wing, taking men on, and delivering juicy crosses? Combative strikers in the mould of Grant Holt and CoG actually jumping for headers and taking shots whenever the opportunity arises? Keepers who can command their box, and save shots rather than aiming to be a Pirlo. Those are the things which will deliver bums on seats, and gives us a chance of Project 5000.
Should we go again with a few tweaks in the right places, or do we roll the dice and get an experienced, progressive manager for the National League who understands when to mix it, when to go for it, and when to circle the wagons? If the latter, surely now's the time to do it with a full Summer ahead of us rather than loading the bullet in November after the squad is full of another man's players and behind the chasing pack.
|  | | |  |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 23:09 - May 16 with 3241 views | The_Referee |
I'm at a bit of a cross roads with him.
Last night in some respects I felt we were not a million miles off. We fell off the wagon so to speak with the quality of player available off the bench. People blamed the defence. I felt when Bird went off. We didn't have a player of Bird's style to come on and lost the out ball, the hold up play to give the defence the chance to get out.
Mitchell's confidence is shot to pieces, we didn't get Hendo in to the game. Nor did we get any of the other attacking subs in to the game. Was that tactics, tiredness from the shift they all put in or a lack of depth in the squad.
I have read all the posts on this thread and there are some very reasoned points both for and against him staying or going. I couldn't find any faults or many things I could disagree with on both sides of the arguments.
Trying to look at it rationally. The positives are. This is Jim's first job in management. He has had a tough start by having to stabilise a sinking ship from when we got relegated. Regardless of tactics and style of football. Compared to last season. We have improved on results in all three of the major competitions from last season.
Ability wise. I actually believe we have a strong first team and we don't need too much work for next season. I would get us an actual number one goalkeeper who is ours. No more messing around with loans. I'm not expecting us to be able to get Bird back. But we need a centre forward in his ilk and act as a good foil for Rodney. If we can then add a little bit of quality to the bench. I think we could challenge.
The downside is when we really needed it. Our teams mentality has been weak by throwing away winning positions. So do we need to add more leadership on the field? The pitch problems didn't help. Meant we had to play too many games in a short period of time leading to increased fatigue and injuries. I agree with the points about when opposition pack defences. We lack ideas and drive. Again coming back to mentality and leadership.
There were reports linking Jim to higher up jobs. So people obviously think he has potential. Especially with the tough start he has been given.
Like you would with any young player coming through the ranks. He is basically still learning his trade with us. Which isn't mentioned much with inexperienced managers.
I think overall he has done a good job. But how high is his ceiling as a manager? Has he taken us as far as he can and a more experienced manager to take us to the next step?
Does he have the ability to learn from his mistakes this season and show progression as a manager like you would see with a young player moving from 0-100 games then 100-200 games?
Would an experienced mentor working with him help? Kenny Dalglish had Bob Paisley working with him the season Liverpool won the double in 85/86 and I am sure there are other examples of this but non come to mind.
As I write this. I think I have moved more in to the keep him camp but he needs to show he can evolve as a coach and not be a one trick pony. [Post edited 16 May 23:12]
| | | |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 07:49 - May 17 with 2913 views | somdale |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 22:43 - May 16 by Cedar_Room |
Oh wow a semi final?? Do you get a medal for that? |
Oh yh forgot, we have reached so many in our glorious past haven't we.
And damn, we have failed in those pesky play offs again, how many times is that now, | | | |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 08:10 - May 17 with 2840 views | 442Dale |
Now the dust has settled a bit, some further reflection…
The Southend game/this season:
Selection - I got a text that morning “if it’s East and Gilmour, I’m going home.” Now of course that was said in jest, but that was my own fear as well. The evidence backs up the thought that we’re better when it’s not them both in a midfield two; even last season we were far more effective when East played further forward when we played three centrally. This year we’ve seen how well we finished the campaign after East got injured against York. Both Edwards and Barlow even more so made us look far more effective when they played there. Even at Oldham we saw the impact of Burger in midfield again after he’d done well there when Gilmour was injured in the autumn. If we are so wedded to a two man midfield, we’re better with someone in there who offers something a bit different.
The bench too limited us. Kingdon made a mistake on the last day and he might have been injured, but if not he’d have been a better choice because of his ability to play right across the back line. He’s proven it. The others have proven they can’t.
Which brings us onto the substitutions, seen as the turning point that killed us. And that would be correct to say… but they were compounded by the historical tactical errors made by McNulty and actually not committing fully to what they were presumably trying to achieve.
It’s been said by a few people that if we were making a change, which was needed as Allarakhia was tiring and they were continually causing us problems getting crosses in, then we could have done a like for like swap. Bringing on Buyabu would have mean no mental and positional readjustments for anyone else. It’s what we’ve done all season long so it was a monumental error to move away from that now. Beckwith looked visibly confused at first and that reflected subsequently.
Not committing fully? That was because we didn’t even attempt to “hold onto our lead” in the traditional sense and have everyone drop twenty yards and await the bombardment. There was no calmness (we’ll come onto that). The game continued in the same manner - end to end, space all over the pitch and Dale pushing up when we were in their half. The third goal illustrates that perfectly.
Even after they drew level it was chaotic, albeit great entertainment, as seen when both EEL and Hogan stayed up after a free kick and were seen trying to slalom through midfield! Meanwhile, we had one defender on the halfway line and two Southend players ready to break. That sub didn’t make sense because of the obvious fact that Hogan struggles anywhere but in the centre, but also because it threw everything else. Even how we were meant to be playing.
The other subs didn’t help either, but again it’s that demand that we stick to one formation that’s been an identifiable problem since way before Christmas. Take East off, play Barlow in midfield and Henderson behind a two of Bird and Rodney who can both stretch them wide. Take Bird off (he was hobbling a bit when he went off) for Henderson as the only change, play Gilmour/East/Barlow in midfield and Henderson and Rodney in a two. We never make the opposition think with our structure. It’s not everything, but tactically McNulty hasn’t been good enough. Especially when it has really mattered.
The future:
If we are talking about being one of the 2/3 teams who are looking to win the league, and we should be, we can reflect on the couple of occasions when we have had actually looked like winning a league.
In 09/10 and 13/14 we could and probably should have taken first place. There’s no point in dissecting now why we didn’t, but there’s a lot to take from why we were in a position to win League 2 in those seasons.
Calmness. It was almost tangible on and off the pitch. The players and, to some extent, the fans were turning up for games not only expecting to win, but knowing we’d win. You could see that in Barnet this season.
That calmness came from the types of players we had and were best exemplified in Jason Taylor and Peter Cavanagh.
The run we went on from Nov ‘09 with Taylor and Jason Kennedy in midfield was Dale at their most untouchable. It was simply a matter of how many we’d score because Taylor’s presence allowed everyone else to play knowing he was there to calmly deal with any rare opposition threat. As good as Gary Jones was, and we still did well after his return, we were never as ruthlessly efficient… and that’s what you’ve got to be to be fighting for a title.
It was the same with Cavanagh four years later, his inclusion meant everyone else around him were able to steamroller teams without worrying about being undone with a lucky breakaway. Matt Lund was a cracking player, but he was never as good as he was knowing he could fly into the box at will because Cavanagh was stood in front of our centre halves analysing where there might be danger. Same with Jamie Allen when they all played in a three.
To some extent, Hill tried to mould Michael Rose into a similar player in this role and it worked to an extent. He saw the value of that position. (For some fairness and because revisionist history is a bugbear when others use it, we only clinched promotion in 13/14 when Cavanagh was left out after a poor run with Bastien Hery coming in to play a significant role in the win at Bristol Rovers)
That calmness and the type of player required that ensures it has, so far, appeared to be off McNulty’s radar. Even with the experience we do have, it’s rare we look to be in total control. To challenge to win a league we need that. To challenge to win a league we need to be more flexible tactically. To challenge to win a league we need to be committed to changing how we play for different games and within different games.
Can McNulty achieve all that? I have serious doubts based on the evidence. He’s probably earned the chance to try though.
If nothing else, we’ve now at least got a connection between the fans and their team again, that’s the big plus of McNulty’s reign. One look around the faces in the Sandy at 3-1 up the other night told that story. People actually believe in Dale again, they’re still turning up in good numbers for bigger games despite the trauma of the last five years.
Of course, those same faces had that small look of concern knowing what could and did happen after that first substitution… Typical Dale? Of course. Shifting that mindset? That’s the challenge for everyone. [Post edited 17 May 9:20]
|  |
| |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 08:35 - May 17 with 2798 views | TalkingSutty |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 13:37 - May 16 by Dale_4_Life |
I would say Stay.. but only if when he has his review he can explain how he is going to take us forward in 25/26.
Young Coach, progressive but showing a trait that needs ironing out (below)
Throwing away 3 big games all at home from winning positions all in quite a similar fashion.
Bromley FA CUP - Winning in Extra Time - LOST
Spennymoor FA Trophy - Winning in the 95th minute LOST
Southend Play Off - Winning with a 2 goal cushion less than 20 mins remaining. LOST
Failing to kill off Oldham and Ebbsfleet away.
Boston & Ebbsfleet at Home were a terrible watch as was the 2 games v relegated Dagenham home and away.
Looking at the benchmark sides at season end 2025 in Barnet and York four games zero points and two heavy defeats at home.
There is a lot to unpick the biggest of which has Big Jim the hunger to go again and put all the negatives of last season to one side and quickly develop a fast placed team that is hungry to win week in week out?.
Hope Big Jim comes out firing.. My first choice.
If he is any more morose then with regret it is time to pass the mantle. [Post edited 16 May 13:37]
|
He's already more or less admitted in his interviews that he can't take us forward though. He keeps telling us that we aren't good enough to compete with teams because we don't have the same clout or budget. Thats not going to change because every season there are always teams with more clout and budget.Hill promoted us twice against teams with more clout and budget. Barnet walked the league this season while competing against clubs with more clout and budgets. McNulty uses it as a excuse to fail. That's not going to change, it's always been the case. Good managers find ways of coping with that, they don't sit in interviews with a daft smirk on their faces using clout and budgets to justify their own tactical ineptitude. No attempt to explain the implosion on the pitch..just clout and budgets. Never his or his sidekicks fault. We need a new manager because we're just treading water and wasting time and money with this one. [Post edited 17 May 11:11]
|  | | |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 08:42 - May 17 with 2770 views | TalkingSutty |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 20:52 - May 16 by NorthernDale |
I agree with many of the comments about McNulty making the same mistakes, not only in key games, but in many league games as well and the fact he as not learnt from the mistakes is worrying. Yes he is quite inexperienced in that, he is only into his second year of football management and it is the same with Kevin Gibbons, and that may be a factor in the management teams decisions. But as also highlighted,they should be learning from their mistakes by now, so I would Keith Hill back in a form of Director of Football role to run all aspects of football at Rochdale and act as a mentor to McNulty at the same time.
I would also like McNulty to take responsibilities for his decision making, last night he repeated the same tired excuses. |
McNulty, Hill etc are all mates together. Nothing would change, Hill was sacked remember after taking us to the verge of relegation and collecting more players than we've ever seen. We need a clean sweep, Gibbons needs to leave also. | | | |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 08:45 - May 17 with 2728 views | 442Dale |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 08:35 - May 17 by TalkingSutty |
He's already more or less admitted in his interviews that he can't take us forward though. He keeps telling us that we aren't good enough to compete with teams because we don't have the same clout or budget. Thats not going to change because every season there are always teams with more clout and budget.Hill promoted us twice against teams with more clout and budget. Barnet walked the league this season while competing against clubs with more clout and budgets. McNulty uses it as a excuse to fail. That's not going to change, it's always been the case. Good managers find ways of coping with that, they don't sit in interviews with a daft smirk on their faces using clout and budgets to justify their own tactical ineptitude. No attempt to explain the implosion on the pitch..just clout and budgets. Never his or his sidekicks fault. We need a new manager because we're just treading water and wasting time and money with this one. [Post edited 17 May 11:11]
|
The interviews are really bad and don’t help raise supporters mood. That said, Keith Hill was never one to shy away from mentioning about budgets himself!
He never used the c word though. Wish that would stop. | |
| |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 08:52 - May 17 with 2722 views | WhitworthDale |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 08:35 - May 17 by TalkingSutty |
He's already more or less admitted in his interviews that he can't take us forward though. He keeps telling us that we aren't good enough to compete with teams because we don't have the same clout or budget. Thats not going to change because every season there are always teams with more clout and budget.Hill promoted us twice against teams with more clout and budget. Barnet walked the league this season while competing against clubs with more clout and budgets. McNulty uses it as a excuse to fail. That's not going to change, it's always been the case. Good managers find ways of coping with that, they don't sit in interviews with a daft smirk on their faces using clout and budgets to justify their own tactical ineptitude. No attempt to explain the implosion on the pitch..just clout and budgets. Never his or his sidekicks fault. We need a new manager because we're just treading water and wasting time and money with this one. [Post edited 17 May 11:11]
|
Have to agree TS that the smirk is irritating after defeats like last night, someone with a better grasp of psychology than me may be able to explain it. Reminds me of the Boris Johnson smirk when he lies.
This thread is academic - McNulty will absolutely be the manager next season, so we need to get used to that. Ultimately I'm in the camp of keeping him, I know it probably sounds somewhat entitled to outside observers but for all the reasons stated there is a nuance to this.
The relevant question is how do we measure whether he should stay after *next* season? I think the answer has to be that we need to see obvious improvement from this year - dropping far fewer points from winning positions, signing players that give us more steel and leadership, and a better points tally and/or league position. Far fewer truly awful performances too. The goal should be promotion next year - that means finishing first - no excuses. We're historically a football league club, we should be acting like it and get some arrogance about us like other teams do.
I can put up with the banal interviews if he meets those criteria. Even if he uses the word clout. | | | |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 09:23 - May 17 with 2630 views | Cedar_Room |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 07:49 - May 17 by somdale |
Oh yh forgot, we have reached so many in our glorious past haven't we.
And damn, we have failed in those pesky play offs again, how many times is that now, |
You want to bring up the play offs of the past OK great - when we lost in the final at Wembley how many people were calling for Keith Hill to go as he bottled the big game and had reached the limit of what he was capable of? That he would never be able to motivate the team to get us over the line? Or - were people saying we had a great season, tried our best but on the day were outperformed by a team with somewhat higher resources? That time we had a manager who talked us up, who tried to get the fans to believe rather than insist we weren’t good enough or in the right place to go up. Who played attractive, attacking football which people enjoyed watching. Who played with heart and grit and determination. We had a manager who most fans thought just needed a bit more time and resources which if given we’d have an incredible chance at promotion.
Contrast all that with what we have now. You have learnt nothing from the Hill era with your small time mentality that failures of the past means we should be happy now with failure again. McNulty inspires absolutely none of the confidence and hope that Hill did and without those things it’s very very difficult to support a club like Rochdale. McNulty needs to go. |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Should he stay or should he go? on 09:29 - May 17 with 2599 views | fitzochris |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 08:10 - May 17 by 442Dale |
Now the dust has settled a bit, some further reflection…
The Southend game/this season:
Selection - I got a text that morning “if it’s East and Gilmour, I’m going home.” Now of course that was said in jest, but that was my own fear as well. The evidence backs up the thought that we’re better when it’s not them both in a midfield two; even last season we were far more effective when East played further forward when we played three centrally. This year we’ve seen how well we finished the campaign after East got injured against York. Both Edwards and Barlow even more so made us look far more effective when they played there. Even at Oldham we saw the impact of Burger in midfield again after he’d done well there when Gilmour was injured in the autumn. If we are so wedded to a two man midfield, we’re better with someone in there who offers something a bit different.
The bench too limited us. Kingdon made a mistake on the last day and he might have been injured, but if not he’d have been a better choice because of his ability to play right across the back line. He’s proven it. The others have proven they can’t.
Which brings us onto the substitutions, seen as the turning point that killed us. And that would be correct to say… but they were compounded by the historical tactical errors made by McNulty and actually not committing fully to what they were presumably trying to achieve.
It’s been said by a few people that if we were making a change, which was needed as Allarakhia was tiring and they were continually causing us problems getting crosses in, then we could have done a like for like swap. Bringing on Buyabu would have mean no mental and positional readjustments for anyone else. It’s what we’ve done all season long so it was a monumental error to move away from that now. Beckwith looked visibly confused at first and that reflected subsequently.
Not committing fully? That was because we didn’t even attempt to “hold onto our lead” in the traditional sense and have everyone drop twenty yards and await the bombardment. There was no calmness (we’ll come onto that). The game continued in the same manner - end to end, space all over the pitch and Dale pushing up when we were in their half. The third goal illustrates that perfectly.
Even after they drew level it was chaotic, albeit great entertainment, as seen when both EEL and Hogan stayed up after a free kick and were seen trying to slalom through midfield! Meanwhile, we had one defender on the halfway line and two Southend players ready to break. That sub didn’t make sense because of the obvious fact that Hogan struggles anywhere but in the centre, but also because it threw everything else. Even how we were meant to be playing.
The other subs didn’t help either, but again it’s that demand that we stick to one formation that’s been an identifiable problem since way before Christmas. Take East off, play Barlow in midfield and Henderson behind a two of Bird and Rodney who can both stretch them wide. Take Bird off (he was hobbling a bit when he went off) for Henderson as the only change, play Gilmour/East/Barlow in midfield and Henderson and Rodney in a two. We never make the opposition think with our structure. It’s not everything, but tactically McNulty hasn’t been good enough. Especially when it has really mattered.
The future:
If we are talking about being one of the 2/3 teams who are looking to win the league, and we should be, we can reflect on the couple of occasions when we have had actually looked like winning a league.
In 09/10 and 13/14 we could and probably should have taken first place. There’s no point in dissecting now why we didn’t, but there’s a lot to take from why we were in a position to win League 2 in those seasons.
Calmness. It was almost tangible on and off the pitch. The players and, to some extent, the fans were turning up for games not only expecting to win, but knowing we’d win. You could see that in Barnet this season.
That calmness came from the types of players we had and were best exemplified in Jason Taylor and Peter Cavanagh.
The run we went on from Nov ‘09 with Taylor and Jason Kennedy in midfield was Dale at their most untouchable. It was simply a matter of how many we’d score because Taylor’s presence allowed everyone else to play knowing he was there to calmly deal with any rare opposition threat. As good as Gary Jones was, and we still did well after his return, we were never as ruthlessly efficient… and that’s what you’ve got to be to be fighting for a title.
It was the same with Cavanagh four years later, his inclusion meant everyone else around him were able to steamroller teams without worrying about being undone with a lucky breakaway. Matt Lund was a cracking player, but he was never as good as he was knowing he could fly into the box at will because Cavanagh was stood in front of our centre halves analysing where there might be danger. Same with Jamie Allen when they all played in a three.
To some extent, Hill tried to mould Michael Rose into a similar player in this role and it worked to an extent. He saw the value of that position. (For some fairness and because revisionist history is a bugbear when others use it, we only clinched promotion in 13/14 when Cavanagh was left out after a poor run with Bastien Hery coming in to play a significant role in the win at Bristol Rovers)
That calmness and the type of player required that ensures it has, so far, appeared to be off McNulty’s radar. Even with the experience we do have, it’s rare we look to be in total control. To challenge to win a league we need that. To challenge to win a league we need to be more flexible tactically. To challenge to win a league we need to be committed to changing how we play for different games and within different games.
Can McNulty achieve all that? I have serious doubts based on the evidence. He’s probably earned the chance to try though.
If nothing else, we’ve now at least got a connection between the fans and their team again, that’s the big plus of McNulty’s reign. One look around the faces in the Sandy at 3-1 up the other night told that story. People actually believe in Dale again, they’re still turning up in good numbers for bigger games despite the trauma of the last five years.
Of course, those same faces had that small look of concern knowing what could and did happen after that first substitution… Typical Dale? Of course. Shifting that mindset? That’s the challenge for everyone. [Post edited 17 May 9:20]
|
I was reading through this thread with a view of adding my own thoughts, but you’ve basically said everything I wanted to say there. Pretty much point for point where I currently stand. [Post edited 17 May 9:30]
|  |
| |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 09:37 - May 17 with 2566 views | 442Dale |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 09:23 - May 17 by Cedar_Room |
You want to bring up the play offs of the past OK great - when we lost in the final at Wembley how many people were calling for Keith Hill to go as he bottled the big game and had reached the limit of what he was capable of? That he would never be able to motivate the team to get us over the line? Or - were people saying we had a great season, tried our best but on the day were outperformed by a team with somewhat higher resources? That time we had a manager who talked us up, who tried to get the fans to believe rather than insist we weren’t good enough or in the right place to go up. Who played attractive, attacking football which people enjoyed watching. Who played with heart and grit and determination. We had a manager who most fans thought just needed a bit more time and resources which if given we’d have an incredible chance at promotion.
Contrast all that with what we have now. You have learnt nothing from the Hill era with your small time mentality that failures of the past means we should be happy now with failure again. McNulty inspires absolutely none of the confidence and hope that Hill did and without those things it’s very very difficult to support a club like Rochdale. McNulty needs to go. |
You’re right, everyone was fully behind Hill and the team after we lost at Wembley and thought we could give it a really good go the next season.
However, let’s not ignore the fact that there were real concerns about how we blew promotion from a good position in 08/09, meandered into that season’s playoffs and lost to Gillingham in a tie we never looked like winning.
That same concern existed at the start of the following season when we had an uninspiring start and Le Fondre was sold. Then we signed COG and everything changed. Even then, I can still remember the mood in the away end at Morecambe when we were 3-0 down…
This is not a comparison or comment on the current situation, but an assessment of what happened in the past. History should not be rewritten. [Post edited 17 May 9:41]
| |
| |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 09:50 - May 17 with 2527 views | Nerazzurri |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 09:37 - May 17 by 442Dale |
You’re right, everyone was fully behind Hill and the team after we lost at Wembley and thought we could give it a really good go the next season.
However, let’s not ignore the fact that there were real concerns about how we blew promotion from a good position in 08/09, meandered into that season’s playoffs and lost to Gillingham in a tie we never looked like winning.
That same concern existed at the start of the following season when we had an uninspiring start and Le Fondre was sold. Then we signed COG and everything changed. Even then, I can still remember the mood in the away end at Morecambe when we were 3-0 down…
This is not a comparison or comment on the current situation, but an assessment of what happened in the past. History should not be rewritten. [Post edited 17 May 9:41]
|
Absolutely, I also remember the mood after we lost at home to Bury twice in 3 days and then lost 5 home games on the bounce without scoring in 4 of them in 07/08. Hill being the "cheap option"
It takes time to build a team that can get over the line, it took Hill 3 years. If we're saying that 4th isn't good enough with the 4th best scoring record & 4th best defensive record & 4th best home record we are setting a high bar for any manager. And there's no difference between 4th with McNulty or 4th with any other manager. They will still have their deficiencies, still lose a similar amount of games & probably in a similarly frustrating fashion. |  |
| |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 10:01 - May 17 with 2455 views | 442Dale |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 09:50 - May 17 by Nerazzurri |
Absolutely, I also remember the mood after we lost at home to Bury twice in 3 days and then lost 5 home games on the bounce without scoring in 4 of them in 07/08. Hill being the "cheap option"
It takes time to build a team that can get over the line, it took Hill 3 years. If we're saying that 4th isn't good enough with the 4th best scoring record & 4th best defensive record & 4th best home record we are setting a high bar for any manager. And there's no difference between 4th with McNulty or 4th with any other manager. They will still have their deficiencies, still lose a similar amount of games & probably in a similarly frustrating fashion. |
Then there was the reaction to Hill’s own interviews during the L1 halcyon days when we had outside chances of a playoff spot. Every time he used the word “expectation” it would inevitably trigger a wave of annoyance amongst some.
It’s funny how the past always seems better if you ignore the bits you didn’t like. | |
| |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 11:02 - May 17 with 2303 views | samueloneils |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 08:10 - May 17 by 442Dale |
Now the dust has settled a bit, some further reflection…
The Southend game/this season:
Selection - I got a text that morning “if it’s East and Gilmour, I’m going home.” Now of course that was said in jest, but that was my own fear as well. The evidence backs up the thought that we’re better when it’s not them both in a midfield two; even last season we were far more effective when East played further forward when we played three centrally. This year we’ve seen how well we finished the campaign after East got injured against York. Both Edwards and Barlow even more so made us look far more effective when they played there. Even at Oldham we saw the impact of Burger in midfield again after he’d done well there when Gilmour was injured in the autumn. If we are so wedded to a two man midfield, we’re better with someone in there who offers something a bit different.
The bench too limited us. Kingdon made a mistake on the last day and he might have been injured, but if not he’d have been a better choice because of his ability to play right across the back line. He’s proven it. The others have proven they can’t.
Which brings us onto the substitutions, seen as the turning point that killed us. And that would be correct to say… but they were compounded by the historical tactical errors made by McNulty and actually not committing fully to what they were presumably trying to achieve.
It’s been said by a few people that if we were making a change, which was needed as Allarakhia was tiring and they were continually causing us problems getting crosses in, then we could have done a like for like swap. Bringing on Buyabu would have mean no mental and positional readjustments for anyone else. It’s what we’ve done all season long so it was a monumental error to move away from that now. Beckwith looked visibly confused at first and that reflected subsequently.
Not committing fully? That was because we didn’t even attempt to “hold onto our lead” in the traditional sense and have everyone drop twenty yards and await the bombardment. There was no calmness (we’ll come onto that). The game continued in the same manner - end to end, space all over the pitch and Dale pushing up when we were in their half. The third goal illustrates that perfectly.
Even after they drew level it was chaotic, albeit great entertainment, as seen when both EEL and Hogan stayed up after a free kick and were seen trying to slalom through midfield! Meanwhile, we had one defender on the halfway line and two Southend players ready to break. That sub didn’t make sense because of the obvious fact that Hogan struggles anywhere but in the centre, but also because it threw everything else. Even how we were meant to be playing.
The other subs didn’t help either, but again it’s that demand that we stick to one formation that’s been an identifiable problem since way before Christmas. Take East off, play Barlow in midfield and Henderson behind a two of Bird and Rodney who can both stretch them wide. Take Bird off (he was hobbling a bit when he went off) for Henderson as the only change, play Gilmour/East/Barlow in midfield and Henderson and Rodney in a two. We never make the opposition think with our structure. It’s not everything, but tactically McNulty hasn’t been good enough. Especially when it has really mattered.
The future:
If we are talking about being one of the 2/3 teams who are looking to win the league, and we should be, we can reflect on the couple of occasions when we have had actually looked like winning a league.
In 09/10 and 13/14 we could and probably should have taken first place. There’s no point in dissecting now why we didn’t, but there’s a lot to take from why we were in a position to win League 2 in those seasons.
Calmness. It was almost tangible on and off the pitch. The players and, to some extent, the fans were turning up for games not only expecting to win, but knowing we’d win. You could see that in Barnet this season.
That calmness came from the types of players we had and were best exemplified in Jason Taylor and Peter Cavanagh.
The run we went on from Nov ‘09 with Taylor and Jason Kennedy in midfield was Dale at their most untouchable. It was simply a matter of how many we’d score because Taylor’s presence allowed everyone else to play knowing he was there to calmly deal with any rare opposition threat. As good as Gary Jones was, and we still did well after his return, we were never as ruthlessly efficient… and that’s what you’ve got to be to be fighting for a title.
It was the same with Cavanagh four years later, his inclusion meant everyone else around him were able to steamroller teams without worrying about being undone with a lucky breakaway. Matt Lund was a cracking player, but he was never as good as he was knowing he could fly into the box at will because Cavanagh was stood in front of our centre halves analysing where there might be danger. Same with Jamie Allen when they all played in a three.
To some extent, Hill tried to mould Michael Rose into a similar player in this role and it worked to an extent. He saw the value of that position. (For some fairness and because revisionist history is a bugbear when others use it, we only clinched promotion in 13/14 when Cavanagh was left out after a poor run with Bastien Hery coming in to play a significant role in the win at Bristol Rovers)
That calmness and the type of player required that ensures it has, so far, appeared to be off McNulty’s radar. Even with the experience we do have, it’s rare we look to be in total control. To challenge to win a league we need that. To challenge to win a league we need to be more flexible tactically. To challenge to win a league we need to be committed to changing how we play for different games and within different games.
Can McNulty achieve all that? I have serious doubts based on the evidence. He’s probably earned the chance to try though.
If nothing else, we’ve now at least got a connection between the fans and their team again, that’s the big plus of McNulty’s reign. One look around the faces in the Sandy at 3-1 up the other night told that story. People actually believe in Dale again, they’re still turning up in good numbers for bigger games despite the trauma of the last five years.
Of course, those same faces had that small look of concern knowing what could and did happen after that first substitution… Typical Dale? Of course. Shifting that mindset? That’s the challenge for everyone. [Post edited 17 May 9:20]
|
Agree with all your sentiments.
Few adds.
Jim`s recruitment 12 months ago left is woefully short of attackers. Will he do the same again? I have seen the advantage of having an experienced attack front line in several teams this season.
Surely he can see that EEL and Hogan is one too many when organising the back line?
We (almost) all see big problems with Jim`s game management, which came to a head in the debacle on Thursday. He is not improving. We (almost) all think the bulk of the squad is good.
There are about 75 days to go before we kick off again.
I for one have no confidence that Jim will take us forward next time. | | | |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 12:15 - May 17 with 2156 views | 49thseason |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 09:50 - May 17 by Nerazzurri |
Absolutely, I also remember the mood after we lost at home to Bury twice in 3 days and then lost 5 home games on the bounce without scoring in 4 of them in 07/08. Hill being the "cheap option"
It takes time to build a team that can get over the line, it took Hill 3 years. If we're saying that 4th isn't good enough with the 4th best scoring record & 4th best defensive record & 4th best home record we are setting a high bar for any manager. And there's no difference between 4th with McNulty or 4th with any other manager. They will still have their deficiencies, still lose a similar amount of games & probably in a similarly frustrating fashion. |
Building teams over time has always been difficult at Rochdale simply because as soon as we have found a key defender or goalscoring forward they have been sold off or refused to sign new contracts and moved away. The resulting money was put into the " running expenses" pot and not reinvested in the team. Hopefully things will change now that we have the Ogdens in charge with their moves to make the club sustainable from off pitch activities.
I left the ground on Thursday shaking my head at throwing away a huge opportunity, but in the cold light of Friday morning came to the conclusion that, in the round , it had been a much better season than any since pre-covid days and at least the club was back in a position to attract better players and keep them.
We are attempting to overcome a century of dismal football interspaced with the occasional good season, its going to take time and there will be bumps in the road, but " continuous improvement" has to be the plan.
McNulty has to retain the younger talent and will need to replace some of the senior players, its a critical close season for him. He needs to figure out how he will win more games and score more goals, the essential elements of the game. I doubt he will execute a whole new plan but we do need more height, power and athleticism front and back, more like Crystal Palace than Man City, Bird proved that..... Conceding 3 headers on Thursday was just poor and needed fixing earlier when their tactic of throwing everything into our 6 yard box became so obvious so he needs to be prepared to change earlier in the game and not wait until 70mins as per usual.
And then there is McNulty himself, and how much help he gets, does he have a mentor? Are there people he can talk to outside the club who add perspective? Does he have time to read or visit other clubs? Because he should..... |  | | |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 13:31 - May 17 with 2019 views | tony_roch975 |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 10:01 - May 17 by 442Dale |
Then there was the reaction to Hill’s own interviews during the L1 halcyon days when we had outside chances of a playoff spot. Every time he used the word “expectation” it would inevitably trigger a wave of annoyance amongst some.
It’s funny how the past always seems better if you ignore the bits you didn’t like. |
Aye, nostalgia ain't what it used to be | |
| |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 13:50 - May 17 with 1981 views | dingdangblue |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 09:37 - May 17 by 442Dale |
You’re right, everyone was fully behind Hill and the team after we lost at Wembley and thought we could give it a really good go the next season.
However, let’s not ignore the fact that there were real concerns about how we blew promotion from a good position in 08/09, meandered into that season’s playoffs and lost to Gillingham in a tie we never looked like winning.
That same concern existed at the start of the following season when we had an uninspiring start and Le Fondre was sold. Then we signed COG and everything changed. Even then, I can still remember the mood in the away end at Morecambe when we were 3-0 down…
This is not a comparison or comment on the current situation, but an assessment of what happened in the past. History should not be rewritten. [Post edited 17 May 9:41]
|
COG was immense and his contribution that season will never be forgotten. I remember when his loan ended and there was speculation Oldham wouldn't let him come back - the massive boost when it was announced he'd signed permanently was incredible (I think he then scored a hat trick at Cheltenham in his first game back)?
Craig Dawson being thrown into the team too when McArdle dislocated his shoulder - that first game when he looked like a Rolls Royce defender from the first minute and was pinging 50 yard diagonal balls across the pitch. Dawson and O'Grady were the missing pieces from the season before when it all ended so disappointingly.
And finally Tom Heatons contribution in his 12 games. 8 wins, 3 draws, 1 defeat. The need for a very good goalkeeper next season is a priority. |  |
| |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 14:20 - May 17 with 1912 views | Cedar_Room |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 08:10 - May 17 by 442Dale |
Now the dust has settled a bit, some further reflection…
The Southend game/this season:
Selection - I got a text that morning “if it’s East and Gilmour, I’m going home.” Now of course that was said in jest, but that was my own fear as well. The evidence backs up the thought that we’re better when it’s not them both in a midfield two; even last season we were far more effective when East played further forward when we played three centrally. This year we’ve seen how well we finished the campaign after East got injured against York. Both Edwards and Barlow even more so made us look far more effective when they played there. Even at Oldham we saw the impact of Burger in midfield again after he’d done well there when Gilmour was injured in the autumn. If we are so wedded to a two man midfield, we’re better with someone in there who offers something a bit different.
The bench too limited us. Kingdon made a mistake on the last day and he might have been injured, but if not he’d have been a better choice because of his ability to play right across the back line. He’s proven it. The others have proven they can’t.
Which brings us onto the substitutions, seen as the turning point that killed us. And that would be correct to say… but they were compounded by the historical tactical errors made by McNulty and actually not committing fully to what they were presumably trying to achieve.
It’s been said by a few people that if we were making a change, which was needed as Allarakhia was tiring and they were continually causing us problems getting crosses in, then we could have done a like for like swap. Bringing on Buyabu would have mean no mental and positional readjustments for anyone else. It’s what we’ve done all season long so it was a monumental error to move away from that now. Beckwith looked visibly confused at first and that reflected subsequently.
Not committing fully? That was because we didn’t even attempt to “hold onto our lead” in the traditional sense and have everyone drop twenty yards and await the bombardment. There was no calmness (we’ll come onto that). The game continued in the same manner - end to end, space all over the pitch and Dale pushing up when we were in their half. The third goal illustrates that perfectly.
Even after they drew level it was chaotic, albeit great entertainment, as seen when both EEL and Hogan stayed up after a free kick and were seen trying to slalom through midfield! Meanwhile, we had one defender on the halfway line and two Southend players ready to break. That sub didn’t make sense because of the obvious fact that Hogan struggles anywhere but in the centre, but also because it threw everything else. Even how we were meant to be playing.
The other subs didn’t help either, but again it’s that demand that we stick to one formation that’s been an identifiable problem since way before Christmas. Take East off, play Barlow in midfield and Henderson behind a two of Bird and Rodney who can both stretch them wide. Take Bird off (he was hobbling a bit when he went off) for Henderson as the only change, play Gilmour/East/Barlow in midfield and Henderson and Rodney in a two. We never make the opposition think with our structure. It’s not everything, but tactically McNulty hasn’t been good enough. Especially when it has really mattered.
The future:
If we are talking about being one of the 2/3 teams who are looking to win the league, and we should be, we can reflect on the couple of occasions when we have had actually looked like winning a league.
In 09/10 and 13/14 we could and probably should have taken first place. There’s no point in dissecting now why we didn’t, but there’s a lot to take from why we were in a position to win League 2 in those seasons.
Calmness. It was almost tangible on and off the pitch. The players and, to some extent, the fans were turning up for games not only expecting to win, but knowing we’d win. You could see that in Barnet this season.
That calmness came from the types of players we had and were best exemplified in Jason Taylor and Peter Cavanagh.
The run we went on from Nov ‘09 with Taylor and Jason Kennedy in midfield was Dale at their most untouchable. It was simply a matter of how many we’d score because Taylor’s presence allowed everyone else to play knowing he was there to calmly deal with any rare opposition threat. As good as Gary Jones was, and we still did well after his return, we were never as ruthlessly efficient… and that’s what you’ve got to be to be fighting for a title.
It was the same with Cavanagh four years later, his inclusion meant everyone else around him were able to steamroller teams without worrying about being undone with a lucky breakaway. Matt Lund was a cracking player, but he was never as good as he was knowing he could fly into the box at will because Cavanagh was stood in front of our centre halves analysing where there might be danger. Same with Jamie Allen when they all played in a three.
To some extent, Hill tried to mould Michael Rose into a similar player in this role and it worked to an extent. He saw the value of that position. (For some fairness and because revisionist history is a bugbear when others use it, we only clinched promotion in 13/14 when Cavanagh was left out after a poor run with Bastien Hery coming in to play a significant role in the win at Bristol Rovers)
That calmness and the type of player required that ensures it has, so far, appeared to be off McNulty’s radar. Even with the experience we do have, it’s rare we look to be in total control. To challenge to win a league we need that. To challenge to win a league we need to be more flexible tactically. To challenge to win a league we need to be committed to changing how we play for different games and within different games.
Can McNulty achieve all that? I have serious doubts based on the evidence. He’s probably earned the chance to try though.
If nothing else, we’ve now at least got a connection between the fans and their team again, that’s the big plus of McNulty’s reign. One look around the faces in the Sandy at 3-1 up the other night told that story. People actually believe in Dale again, they’re still turning up in good numbers for bigger games despite the trauma of the last five years.
Of course, those same faces had that small look of concern knowing what could and did happen after that first substitution… Typical Dale? Of course. Shifting that mindset? That’s the challenge for everyone. [Post edited 17 May 9:20]
|
“Can McNulty achieve all that? I have serious doubts based on the evidence. He’s probably earned the chance to try though”
This is the bit I don’t understand and fundamentally disagree with. Why has he earned the chance to try when you’ve already highlighted the attributes he is missing and have serious doubts he’ll be able to do what’s necessary?
What the hell is the point in continuing?
Despite the fact he hasn’t even tried to sign the profile of player you say is required (and it’s been clear to anyone we have been missing that midfield presence of a Taylor or Cavanagh or Jones) why would he all of a sudden next season go and get one? It’s not been about failed recruitment - as you’ve said this type of player isn’t even on his radar.
Why after 2 seasons of rigid formation and sticking to a system week in week out will McNulty all of a sudden change his approach next year? Why can you possibly think he’s now going to become adaptable with Plans B and C in his back pocket when required?
He’s shown us who he is and what sort of manager he’s about. You seem to imagine he’s magically going to become the manager you want him to be - rather than accept him for the manager that he is. | | | |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 14:34 - May 17 with 1864 views | Cedar_Room |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 09:37 - May 17 by 442Dale |
You’re right, everyone was fully behind Hill and the team after we lost at Wembley and thought we could give it a really good go the next season.
However, let’s not ignore the fact that there were real concerns about how we blew promotion from a good position in 08/09, meandered into that season’s playoffs and lost to Gillingham in a tie we never looked like winning.
That same concern existed at the start of the following season when we had an uninspiring start and Le Fondre was sold. Then we signed COG and everything changed. Even then, I can still remember the mood in the away end at Morecambe when we were 3-0 down…
This is not a comparison or comment on the current situation, but an assessment of what happened in the past. History should not be rewritten. [Post edited 17 May 9:41]
|
History isn’t being rewritten you’re just deciding to bring up a completely separate point.
I’m comparing two managers after they’ve failed in their first go at the play offs and how the fans felt about them and, in particular, whether the fans had belief in their ability to get us up. Nowhere do I say Hill was always beloved and trusted. Nowhere do I say there were periods he wasn’t criticised or people doubted he could do it. | | | |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 14:40 - May 17 with 1831 views | James1980 |
In fans forums and interviews he has alluded to knowing the formula and processes (I know these words have some recoiling) for getting out of the national league. That it isn't a one season 'process' with that in mind next season should see continued improvement.
If we can have more games at The COA like the one against Hartlepool and less like the one against Ebbsfleet that should hopefully boost crowds | |
| |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 15:45 - May 17 with 1706 views | 442Dale |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 14:34 - May 17 by Cedar_Room |
History isn’t being rewritten you’re just deciding to bring up a completely separate point.
I’m comparing two managers after they’ve failed in their first go at the play offs and how the fans felt about them and, in particular, whether the fans had belief in their ability to get us up. Nowhere do I say Hill was always beloved and trusted. Nowhere do I say there were periods he wasn’t criticised or people doubted he could do it. |
And I acknowledged that people were fully behind Hill after Wembley. The other points were made to illustrate, which Nerazzurri also did with examples about that very same season, that we all can ignore those bits we didn’t like. It was to respond to the mention of the “Hill era” which I presumed meant more than that one season.
But yes, there’s no doubt that fans felt a lot more positive about the manager after Wembley than they do now. My own post further up shows how much concern I have over McNulty. And, to address your second post within this one, those concerns and obvious solutions are not me seeming “to imagine he’s magically going to become the manager you want him to be - rather than accept him for the manager that he is”, because, as you noted, I actually said: “ Can McNulty achieve all that? I have serious doubts based on the evidence.” So no, I don’t seem to think that.
The earning the right to try? No problem with anyone disagreeing with that, it’s personal opinion. Mine is based on the fact that thinking his employers will look at the team’s performance across the season and that says 4th place and a semi final. That’s why the word “probably” was included. Now, I’d agree there is a lot of context within that which should be considered, but I acknowledge that it’s a results business and McNulty can point to his record with context ignored.
Actually, going back to the Stockport game for minute, I do recall much consternation about the decision to play Ramsden in midfield that day when we had an experienced midfielder on the bench… [Post edited 17 May 15:53]
| |
| |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 16:21 - May 17 with 1631 views | YouTubeDale |
On the face of it we have a decision making board who are professional in their approach. I would like them to show further proof of their quality and call a meeting of directors which should conclude that McNulty isn't the manager to take us forward and therefore relieve him of his duties. The Board made a mistake giving him a 3 year contract, but the Board can make amends by sacking him, thereby giving the club a quantum leap in progressing towards promotion in the near future and helping achieve the Project 5000 target at the same time. |  |
| |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 16:48 - May 17 with 1573 views | Cedar_Room |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 15:45 - May 17 by 442Dale |
And I acknowledged that people were fully behind Hill after Wembley. The other points were made to illustrate, which Nerazzurri also did with examples about that very same season, that we all can ignore those bits we didn’t like. It was to respond to the mention of the “Hill era” which I presumed meant more than that one season.
But yes, there’s no doubt that fans felt a lot more positive about the manager after Wembley than they do now. My own post further up shows how much concern I have over McNulty. And, to address your second post within this one, those concerns and obvious solutions are not me seeming “to imagine he’s magically going to become the manager you want him to be - rather than accept him for the manager that he is”, because, as you noted, I actually said: “ Can McNulty achieve all that? I have serious doubts based on the evidence.” So no, I don’t seem to think that.
The earning the right to try? No problem with anyone disagreeing with that, it’s personal opinion. Mine is based on the fact that thinking his employers will look at the team’s performance across the season and that says 4th place and a semi final. That’s why the word “probably” was included. Now, I’d agree there is a lot of context within that which should be considered, but I acknowledge that it’s a results business and McNulty can point to his record with context ignored.
Actually, going back to the Stockport game for minute, I do recall much consternation about the decision to play Ramsden in midfield that day when we had an experienced midfielder on the bench… [Post edited 17 May 15:53]
|
But if he’s ‘probably’ not going to improve and achieve what we’d want him to then what exactly is the point of giving him more time? | | | |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 17:10 - May 17 with 1501 views | James1980 |
It could be argued that this has really been his first 'proper' season. He has been a caretaker manager of a club in turmoil and his first full season he was at the helm of club that was holed below the waterline. Yes other managers have tricky situations to navigate but I think those BJ has to steer the club through in the 23/24 were far more taxing than the average.
In this season it is unfair to say he hasn't improved or that he has reached the summit of his potential as the manager of Rochdale [Post edited 17 May 17:13]
| |
| |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 17:26 - May 17 with 1461 views | 442Dale |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 16:48 - May 17 by Cedar_Room |
But if he’s ‘probably’ not going to improve and achieve what we’d want him to then what exactly is the point of giving him more time? |
He’ll point to the fact he has improved, results back that up. The context are the factors we can only wonder if and when the board will consider.
My opinion is it’s going to take some luck or a once in a lifetime season to get out of this league whoever is manager because there’s only one team automatically promoted. Being involved in knockout football at the end of the season will require that - something DDB observed with his post about Southend’s second goal.
If Oldham go up, Mellon will be further proof of that. Doubt there would have been many of their fans who would have complained had he been sacked last month. Ignore this if they get battered by York! | |
| |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 18:07 - May 17 with 1377 views | Duckegg |
| Should he stay or should he go? on 14:20 - May 17 by Cedar_Room |
“Can McNulty achieve all that? I have serious doubts based on the evidence. He’s probably earned the chance to try though”
This is the bit I don’t understand and fundamentally disagree with. Why has he earned the chance to try when you’ve already highlighted the attributes he is missing and have serious doubts he’ll be able to do what’s necessary?
What the hell is the point in continuing?
Despite the fact he hasn’t even tried to sign the profile of player you say is required (and it’s been clear to anyone we have been missing that midfield presence of a Taylor or Cavanagh or Jones) why would he all of a sudden next season go and get one? It’s not been about failed recruitment - as you’ve said this type of player isn’t even on his radar.
Why after 2 seasons of rigid formation and sticking to a system week in week out will McNulty all of a sudden change his approach next year? Why can you possibly think he’s now going to become adaptable with Plans B and C in his back pocket when required?
He’s shown us who he is and what sort of manager he’s about. You seem to imagine he’s magically going to become the manager you want him to be - rather than accept him for the manager that he is. |
"Why after 2 seasons of rigid formation and sticking to a system week in week out will McNulty all of a sudden change his approach next year?"
This sticking to his style cost Dale quite a few points and would those points have made a difference hell yes as Dale could have finished 3rd.
That will be his down fall his inability to change...
This summer JM has so much to get right with his recruitment if he fails to do so then he maybe gone by the end of October [Post edited 17 May 18:12]
|  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
