@werdermouth as I recall Shakespeare's winter of discontent was "made glorious summer by this son of York".
Are you suggesting a return for Steve McClaren?
@peter-surtees If Doak had played all those other 11 games at 1.6 points per game = 51 with our game in hand.
However, Doak was being double marked and had not been as effective as when he first started.
I agree about the transition issue and losing the ball for whatever reason. However the defensive side of our game has too take the biggest share of the blame for the debacle that have gone on.
The stats that I posted previously about the games before and after the purple patch and “false dawn” cannot be argued against. We have failed to score more goals than we have conceeded.
Both before and after those three games. Without Doak and WITH Doak.
All teams and players make mistakes. You can see that in the Championship, especially outside of the top four places.
However it is up to the Coach to improve the percentages and reduce the number of errors. Carrick has failed to do that.
@lenmasterman and @peter-surtees : Good points, both of you!
@lenmasterman A bit like it used to be with Bryan Robson - a magnet. I hope Carrick to be better coach than Robson and get better results long term. Up the Boro!
@jarkko A similar scenario. Both untried in being in charge of a team and the difficulties.
If only Robson’s had got himself an experienced assistant, where might it have ended.
@pedro In the end he got Venables, but he did not want to stay longer. Did he go to Spain for sun and did not manage or coach since Boro? Up the Boro!
@pedro. I agree, I have been commenting for years on the need to have a strong defensive structure first and foremost if you are to have any chance of getting out of this league. This means that in most years you need to be conceding less than a goal a game.
We haven’t been able to do that for many a season, not helped at times by square pegs in round holes and personnel who have not been fit for purpose.
Additionally when on the offensive, for many games, we play at a pedestrian pace and allow the opposition to organise themselves defensively which we then cannot break down.
I agree with Len about the added value that MC’s reputation brings but that currency will devalue if he cannot show that he can bring the club success.
Setting apart the recent transfer debacles, I think that MC still has the resources at his disposal to at least get to a top six slot and he should be given the chance, until the end of the season, to see if he can achieve that; he may, however, not last that long should we lose the next two away games and then struggle at the next home game when the toxicity may become unbearable and prompt SG to change his mind.
Fingers crossed that doesn’t happen but I haven’t seen anything recently to suggest the tide can be turned. 😎
I’m with Len that sacking Carrick would be a big mistake but I do feel that his time might be up unfortunately. Once the fans turn against a manager there is no lasting way back with any and all defeats (or even failures to win) jumped upon as further evidence that the manager is not up to it. Diasboro is a good barometer of fan opinion because we’re generally a more patient and understanding bunch – if a few have turned here then the majority have elsewhere.
I think the Gazette’s recent stories that Boro have looked at it and have decided to retain him are nonsense – I don’t think the Boro hierarchy have considered sacking him for a second – but it’s likely to be a news story fed to the press to try and say to fans that the club hierarchy understand their frustration but want to draw a line under it. I simply don’t believe that the club are interested in paying a presumably large amount of compensation for a man who has made them millions in player development.
Finances aside, should he be sacked though?
Throughout most of his time with us, Carrick’s Boro have been a curious, equal-parts mix of fluid, front-foot fun and catastrophic, error-strewn calamity, with the kind of “soft underbelly” that can leave you uneasy with even a three goal lead so long as there’s time left on the clock to hand it back. Little seems beyond this group at either end of the pitch except, of course, consistency - even within the course of ninety minutes, nevermind game to game.
Carrick has increasingly taken the blame for the issues but tactics/philosophy/playing style - whichever you prefer - is surely only one ingredient in the cocktail.
There should be no question that Boro have lacked leadership, game management and a dose of the dark arts on the field this season. It is surely no coincidence that Boro’s four most prominent leaders - Howson, Lenihan, Ayling and Smith - have all missed large parts or all of the season (or even retired).
There should also be no question that if your transfer policy is skewed towards signing youngsters with potential then you’ll get a squad that is in large parts learning on the job and by nature naive - two pillars of inconsistency and frustrating flakiness.
Boro’s strategy is what it is for good reason as we battle to compete, sustainably and within the rules, against clubs with greater available funds. However, we should acknowledge that it is also one that prioritises possible value tomorrow over points today, the irony being that a single promotion to the Premier League is worth up to seven Latte Laths at once.
And what is the thinking behind a January rebuild such as we had this year? A feature of Carrick’s time at the club has been a large turnover of players in the summer, followed by a prolonged period of acclimatisation. What made anyone think it would be any different in January?
Carrick will be frustrated too. He will feel that, given the tools and the time, he can deliver a promotion winning team as he so nearly did in his first season at the club, despite it being only a three-quarter one following an awful start. That squad was more street-smart and ruthless with the slightly younger and most definitely fitter Howson, Lenihan and Smith as regulars alongside the guile of Akpom to coach and coerce the enthusiastic zest of the young attacking players around them. Solid pros like Crooks, Mowatt and Watmore were available from the bench for a period when further know-how was needed.
This year’s squad is different and, in truth, has been almost a deception. It is a larger group for sure with options across every position but ask yourself how many of the names would have broken into in Boro’s last promotion winning side under Aitor Karanka? How many would even get into Carrick’s XI from that first season? For me, this year’s squad has some promise for the future by design but for today it’s weighted more towards quantity than quality.
Despite all the above, it might still be reasonable to consider a finish anywhere below the playoff places as an underperformance. Carrick cannot be blameless for his porous defence or the player turnover and, though his squad may be missing some key ingredients, so does almost every other Championship squad. There are surely no more than one or two rival squads - three at a push - that are obviously stronger on paper.
That should trouble the Boro hierarchy and therefore pose the question of whether another management team would get more from the available resources. A possible response would be how many quality managers would be willing to work within an operating model that does not prioritise immediate results? Certainly not Carrick’s immediate predecessors, as we know.
Perhaps a better question is, are we getting the recruitment balance right? Are we improving the squad enough for now as well as having an eye on a profit in future? The Brightons and the Brentfords did that and, with respect to Chris Hughton and Dean Smith, didn’t need world class managers to make it stick.
Maybe then, the manager IS capable and the strategy IS broadly right but it’s the execution that requires some refinement.
I’ll say it again, when it comes to Carrick’s position, remember that he has made the club a small fortune in developing the likes of Morgan Rogers and Latte Lath into eight-figure value players. You’d imagine that Gibson, and particularly Scott, quite like that.
The question is therefore not should Gibson and Scott sack Carrick, but rather can they keep the fans onside with him?
@andy-r That's an outstanding post Andy and it's very difficult/impossible to argue with any of it.
I do hope Carrick's time is not up, now or in the summer. It makes me sick to think of us throwing out a good man who has shown, temporarily but absolutely, that he has potential to do very good things here.
Of all the Boro teams over the past 50 years, I think it's Bruce Rioch who bonded with his team and the fans and the area that stands out.
This is the template to aim for, where the fans feel for and believe in the management and club. We're not there but giving Carrick more time is a must.
@andy-r. Excellently balanced piece Andy, thank you for a most enjoyable read. 😎
Having a generally young inexperienced squad has been put forward as a real difficulty in being unable to compete for the top places. But it’s possible to be a good team with lots of young players- just look up the road . Sunderland have been doing it for the last 2-3 years.
Have we been fooling ourselves in saying this squad of players should be in the top 6. Are they not as good as we’re being told.
It seems to me that Carrick is too wedded to a style of playing with players who can’t execute what he wants. The better managers get a balance of style and choosing a style to suit the players.
We can’t get away from the fact that Carrick is new to managing. Nothing beats experience including learning from mistakes.
Philip of Huddersfield ☹️☹️
@andy-r an excellent and beautifully reasoned post. ( There have been so so many superb and highly intelligent posts since Saturday's disappointment, so thank you to everyone. I hope that the powers that be at the club have been following this thread.)
It certainly would be a mistake to remove Carrick, both from an economic, as well as a footballing, perspective. The season is not dead and we still have plenty to play for, no matter how grim it has become over the last 5 or 6 games.
For me it is our defensive posture that needs addressing. I do so wish that we were not committed to a back four, when we expect our wing backs to be used offensively. I get the idea that the midfield (Morris?) Is expected to fill in the space at the back when the wing backs are pushing forward, but you need Morris to be a part of that offensive movement, not covering the expansive gaps across the back line. If wing backs, then three centrebacks should be an immutable truth. If two centre backs, then two full backs, not wing backs.
It has been said many times before, including often in here, that successful sides are built on reliable defence. No team has the right to expansive, free flowing attacking football unless and until it has its defence in good order.
Just a couple of other observations that echo what others have been saying.
I recall posting on more than one occasion during that brilliant season that Carrickball intoxicated all of us, that we are too slow moving the ball around and there is insufficient off the ball movement to create the space or opening to play the ball rapidly. That has never changed and continues to make us susceptible to an aggressive and high press.
The other thing is being aware of when it is too risky to play tippy tappy and so choose to play the long ball forward, or even into row Z. Either the team is being coached never to make that choice, or the individuals on the pitch repeatedly make the wrong/bad decision.
Both of these things should be worked on in training to become second nature.
That post from @andy-r wouldn’t look out of place on the sports pages of any major newspaper. It’s quite simply one of the best pieces of writing that I’ve read about our current and ongoing situation. Chapeau, Andy, chapeau.
Philip - you correctly make the point that “nothing beats experience…”, but are you happy for MC to continue to gain that experience at MFC, or would you like him to be replaced and for him to learn from his mistakes at another club?
Thanks for your brilliant post, Andy. It quite made my morning and was a terrific read.
It gets to the heart of the matter in pinpointing the differences in time scale between running the club effectively with a clear strategy over a number of years, and the impatience of fans after a handful of defeats and below par performances.
I'd also want to link your post with Selwyn's crucial question which affects both management and fans alike: What kind of club is it that we wish to have and support?
I remember happening upon a Brentford supporters' forum a few years ago. It was the day after we had defeated them 0-1. It had been a typical Karanka-inspired performance from the Boro. We defended dourly for most of the game and, if memory serves, I think we won from an Ayala header from a corner.
What stayed with me long after the details of the game were forgotten was the consensus amongst Brentford fans that they were glad that their team had played the way that they did and lost rather than having to watch a side every week that put the emphasis on defence and hoping to sneak a goal against the run of play.
Three things struck me about that forum. Fist of all how unusual the attitude on display was amongst fans of any club. Secondly that, like Diasboro, it may have been untypical of a wider cross-section of fans. And thirdly that it was unlikely to have been an attitude that had appeared out of thin air. It must surely have been produced and encouraged by the club itself.
And that for me is the lesson that Steve Gibson and his management team might take to heart. Let the fans in on the wider vision, the longer-term plan, and encourage them to defer their gratification, if they can, for a little longer than the inevitable occasional poor run.
It certainly seemed to work for 'little', unfashionable Brentford
@lenmasterman That’s a very interesting post, Len. I think I’d rather see us stuck in the EFL playing attractive football, than achieving promotion via a dour, defensive heavy approach that ground out wins.
I suspect I’m atypical of most Boro fans in that regard but, to be fair to others’ points of view, I don’t go to the Riverside every other week and I guess I might appreciate more dour wins than exciting losses if I did!
@lenmasterman That’s a very interesting post, Len. I think I’d rather see us stuck in the EFL playing attractive football, than achieving promotion via a dour, defensive heavy approach that ground out wins.
I suspect I’m atypical of most Boro fans in that regard but, to be fair to others’ points of view, I don’t go to the Riverside every other week and I guess I might appreciate more dour wins than exciting losses if I did!
I agree, but there is a difference to having the foundation of a dependable defence on which to build an attractive footballing side and then playing the Karanka way. I believe it holds true that you can't have an attractive footballing side without a strong defence.
@powmillnaemore. I agree entirely with that. Jack’s promotion winning side were very solid at the back but played some good football and scored quite a lot.
It can be done; just don’t mention what came later, boring, boring Boro. 😎
Was out all day yesterday but missed your superb post with great analysis - many thanks as thought I was going to have to wait until your Easter preview for that 😉
Ha, yes - in the end I thought I’d go ahead with it anyway as Carrick might not be here by then!
Many thanks to everyone for your kind responses to the post.