Valérien Ismaël: Blackburn Rovers Head Coach

[chaddyrovers]

2 hours ago, sharpysharps86 said:

I am not a fan of Ismael really. I don't like his general demeanour, and I think there's an unjustified arrogance to him that just doesn't sit well with me. HOWEVER...there is no doubt that the players in the team are putting their all in, whether its for the manager or themselves, I don't really care. There is a team spirit, that much is clear. Of course team spirit and ability are two different things, which is why Rovers are not pushing for the playoffs this year, as I think last season the quality of the squad with Travis, Hyam, Beck, Brittain, etc. was better overall.

Although I don't generally like his comments in the media where he calls certain players out (that kind of thing should be kept behind closed doors IMO), I can't argue with him being brutal with the likes of Gueye, De Neve, Kargbo (before he got injured), because these are all players that have been a massive disappointment to me.

I think his demeanour and arrogance is just the way he is. A lot of French people are similar. 

I think someone he is too honest and blunt with his answers when asked, I thought he was right to be honest about Travis wanted to leave and I think hos comments about leaving players out during to their training effort and attitude was right. 

2 hours ago, roversfan99 said:

Ultimately his overall record result wise is poor. You can split it into home and away to try and suit an agenda but ultimately its the overall record that matters.

If you want to assume that his man management is really good to try and big him up, I think thats based on circumstantial evidence but thats up to you and it is an assumption. 

Main thing, is his overall record of results good here? I would say no. 

What agenda have I got? apart from wanting to win games and keep supporting my club like everyone on here

Like I have said, The home form needs improve and he knows that. The away form is very good. Given how we played, we are more suitable away from home. So I like said previously to today, the home form needs improve and tinkering of the plan that work away from home, which we witness in the Millwall game. 

You can't keep saying his man management or the team spirit isn't good, you wouldn't be picking away wins and seeing young players coming into that squad without good man management and good team spirit. Also Cantwell as captain as a part to play in this

[islander200]

1 hour ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Yes, because according to him, the squad's better or at least comparable to last year. Didnt he get very prickly about it in that press conference?

I dont agree, but they're his players. It's a bit of an odd excuse to make for him to say, 

"Ah he's doing  ok because look at all the shite he's signed".

(My word not yours but you get the drift Im sure)

What do you expect him to say these players are shit that we signed. 

Whoever the manager Is under gestede Owen and Pascha we would be shopping in the same market as the players brought in this summer.

I will repeat I think he is doing alright considering the amount of changes and the injuries we have had.

Il make it clear I prefer Eustace but when injuries hit us last season when he was in charge we also struggled to win matches. I think we has 2 wins in our last 10 or 11 matches under him 

[roversfan99]

25 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

I think his demeanour and arrogance is just the way he is. A lot of French people are similar. 

I think someone he is too honest and blunt with his answers when asked, I thought he was right to be honest about Travis wanted to leave and I think hos comments about leaving players out during to their training effort and attitude was right. 

What agenda have I got? apart from wanting to win games and keep supporting my club like everyone on here

Like I have said, The home form needs improve and he knows that. The away form is very good. Given how we played, we are more suitable away from home. So I like said previously to today, the home form needs improve and tinkering of the plan that work away from home, which we witness in the Millwall game. 

You can't keep saying his man management or the team spirit isn't good, you wouldn't be picking away wins and seeing young players coming into that squad without good man management and good team spirit. Also Cantwell as captain as a part to play in this

Agenda as in to suit the argument which always for you when a manager is employed by the club (barring an occasional blip) is to make them seem as good as possible.

What use is it that "he knows" that the home form is crap? I know and you know that its crap. Until that knowledge turns into results, its of no use.

My argument is not that his man management is bad. Its that we cant possibly know in my opinion that its strong enough to be used as a positive in regards to him being our manager. We dont know either way, I have pointed out some red flags regarding how he manages his players, members of the squad not trying in training, not running back in games, being questioned personally in public etc, when brought up you take any debate off on weird tangents. But I couldnt strongly say his man management is poor.

Why does playing youngsters prove good man management? Or winning the odd match? Coyle and Kean won the odd match, obviously Ismael isnt on par with them but every manager wins sometimes. You could easily say he loses more than he wins so his man management must be crap, its such a weak argument because there are so many variables that lead to results.

Are there any areas of Ismael's management that concern you beside the generalised observation that the home form is poor (although even then you try to qualify that by saying "he knows"), and what do you think of his overall record in charge without splitting it into home and away?

[roversfan99]

1 hour ago, M_B said:

You're rewriting history, nobody mentioned Eustace's home form in isolation until he started winning away.

You were the main protagonist and I pointed it out to you more than once. You did exactly with Eustace what you're criticising others doing with Ismael. 

You are yourself re writing history.

At that time, Eustace's overall record was poor. In a fresh season after a full pre season he obviously then showed himself as a very good manager, unlike Ismael so far. But at the time, he was struggling.

Notice how no manager doing well has his record split into home and away. At the time, Eustace had an ok away record but his home record combined with that meant that his overall record was poor.

If you split out Ismael within the inflexible argument that we are bad at home and good away, that suggests that we would level out right in the middle. The fact that we arent suggests that such an implication is misleading.

Splitting into home and away is partly flawed because teams on average pick up more points at home than they do away. Our away form is 6th best, so its certainly above average. Our home form isnt below average, its truly woeful, 2nd worst, 2 points less than a point per game. If we had collected the points we have away at home, it would actually be the 17th best rather than the 6th. But by saying bad at home and good away, it makes us look better than we actually are doing.

[chaddyrovers]

9 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Agenda as in to suit the argument which always for you when a manager is employed by the club (barring an occasional blip) is to make them seem as good as possible.

obsessing over agendas now which no-one has apart from wanting their team to win

Ismael has his bad points like not winning enough home games or not using Pickering but has good points like changing formation and being flexible or using Pickering sooner as left wing back, like every head coach and manager. 

9 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

What use is it that "he knows" that the home form is crap? I know and you know that its crap. Until that knowledge turns into results, its of no use.

Ismael has acknowledge that home results need improving and hopefully we can build on that Millwall home

9 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

My argument is not that his man management is bad. Its that we cant possibly know in my opinion that its strong enough to be used as a positive in regards to him being our manager. We dont know either way, I have pointed out some red flags regarding how he manages his players, members of the squad not trying in training, not running back in games, being questioned personally in public etc, when brought up you take any debate off on weird tangents. But I couldnt strongly say his man management is poor.

Its you who is arguing that it isn't with your comments and this same old boring line you regular throw out "we can't possibly know". 

Ismael has dealt with players not performing in training by dropping them from the 1st team squad, is that not good man management? how he managed players, like talking the fans that Travis wanted out of Rovers? 

9 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Why does playing youngsters prove good man management? Or winning the odd match? obviously Ismael isnt on par with them but every manager wins sometimes. You could easily say he loses more than he wins so his man management must be crap, its such a weak argument because there are so many variables that lead to results.

How easy the younger players fit into the team and performed in their 1st game and since. You wouldn't know they haven't played before for like Pratt at PNE and Litherland against Millwall. 

Its an argument you don't agree with or suits yuou

9 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Are there any areas of Ismael's management that concern you beside the generalised observation that the home form is poor (although even then you try to qualify that by saying "he knows"), and what do you think of his overall record in charge without splitting it into home and away?

same generic question you asked me possible every couple of weeks nowadays. Nothing to add to my previous answer probably. 

[Tomphil2]

I'll be honest i quite like him hes grown on me a bit more.

As said he seems a bit aloof but he's a Frenchman and who wants to listen to the verbal drivel some of the more jovial coaches spout.  I liked Eustace but listening to him at times was like listening to the speaking clock.

In terms of his coaching and the team i do have some issues with what he was doing subs wise at times and i definitely think that has cost us some vital points.

He seems to have learned though and the later game management has improved on the back of it recently.

With the squad we have i really don't think he could've rinsed much more out of them. They clearly play for him and he seems to have forged a connection with the players which is more important than anything he says or doesn't say to the media.

Of course he's a yes man but i also think he knows exactly what hes walked into.

As a team we do play some good stuff at times and bringing in a few more young hungry academy lads with a connection to the club seems to have upped the anti with the defence in particular who are throwing themselves in front of everything.

I think we are evolving but as usual we are only one bad performance and bad window away from disaster.

Edited 46 minutes ago by Tomphil2

[roversfan99]

Surely the fact the whole squad wasnt training properly in the first place is tbe bigger worry.

If someone had a house that set on fire and put it out, you would be more worried as to why their house set on fire.

Playing youngsters has no real relevance to man management.

We can pick apart which players he has used, not used, speculate about training, split things home and away etc. The main thing to judge him on is his record which I think (if I have tallied up correctly) is 11 wins 8 draws and 16 losses.

[Tomphil2]

How can you say playing youngsters has no relevance to man management ?

Of course it does.

 

Talk about finding a stick to beat just for the sake of it.

You don't like him, his record isn't great  so why not just leave it at that.

[roversfan99]

4 minutes ago, Tomphil2 said:

I'll be honest i quite like him hes grown on me a bit more.

As said he seems a bit aloof but he's a Frenchman and who wants to listen to the verbal drivel some of the more jovial coaches spout.  I liked Eustace but listening to him at times was like listening to the speaking clock.

In terms of his coaching and the team i do have some issues with what he was doing subs wise at times and i definitely think that has cost us some vital points.

He seems to have learned though and the later game management has improved on the back out recently.

With the squad we have i really don't think he could've rinsed much more out of them. They clearly play for him and he seems to have forged a connection with the players which is more important than anything he says or doesn't say to the media.

Of course he's a yes man but i also think he knows exactly what hes walked into.

As a team we do play some good stuff at times and bringing in a few more young hungry academy lads with a connection to the club seems to have upped the anti with the defence in particular who are throwing themselves in front of everything.

I think we are evolving but as usual we are only one bad performance and bad window away from disaster.

To be fair I find most managers boring to listen too. They all throw out the same mixture of cliches and excuses to varying degrees. Ismael comes across as particularly cold but Eustace was particularly monotonous publically yet results were very good which is what it boils down to. Tomasson had more charisma and was more interesting but also could appear smarmy.

The one thing I could point at Ismael as a positive is his willingness to change formation. Results havent massively improved overall but they have slightly.

I think the academy players are out of necessity really. They didnt get a sniff for most of the season.

[roversfan99]

Just now, Tomphil2 said:

How can you say playing youngsters has no relevance to man management ?

Of course it does.

 

Talk about finding a stick to beat just for the sake of it.

You don't like him, his record isn't great  so why not just leave it at that.

Its a seperate point surely. How is giving youngsters a game specifically a sign of good man management?

Im not saying its a bad thing, far from it. Im just saying that it doesnt prove anything about his man management.

[Tomphil2]

5 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Its a seperate point surely. How is giving youngsters a game specifically a sign of good man management?

Im not saying its a bad thing, far from it. Im just saying that it doesnt prove anything about his man management.

I'm sure there is pressure inside the club to always look to the academy first because getting them mins is usually the quickest route to adding squad value.

I still think it's his call though to actually play them considering who he had on the bench but that might have meant altering formations slightly.  So he says right you've been working hard, here is your chance, take it and do your best.

In doing so he's giving those lads a vote of confidence sometimes over more experienced guys or ones they've paid a fee for.

That in itself is man management.