to openly say oops. We forget to carry out the most basic strategy to ensure some success in our field, is ridiculous. I find it inconceivable that by saying, guess what, we've literally just realised how football works, and we’re going give that a go now, just makes them look like prize fools.
They should have just issued a genuine apology and not got into a bunch of manipulating hogwash.
Perhaps I'm naive, but I don't see this as 'manipulating hogwash' at all.
After a season of failure and missed opportunities, what I want to see is genuine analysis rather than glib platitudes. IMO KT is correct in his diagnosis of the main issues:
1. 'We didn't recruit enough League 1 experience'
2. 'I don't think we recruited to the style of play Keith was looking to play'
3. we possibly needed a target man and more strength at the back
4. Need for more data-driven recruitment
5. Disconnect between the youth team and first team in terms of style of play (making it difficult to integrate young players)
Given that our budget was 'not a bottom four budget' (Whiting), the primary responsibility has to be born by Curle and Tracey for their poor recruitment.
You imply that fully data-driven recruitment is a 'basic strategy' but I suspect that it is still far from universal in L2 and the lower end of L1. I suspect there are still many old-school managers (Curle and Sheridan to name two) who prefer to recruit on gut-instinct. Curle has said in podcast interviews that he recruits primarily on 'character' which is why we've ended up with a squad of plucky triers without the requisite quality to perform in L1. (I suspect KT's contentment with character-based recruitment might be an over-correction based on the talented but gutless squad of Crooks, Van Veen, Grimes and Periera who got us relegated so meekly last time around.)
The signing of Harry Smith is a classic example of where we've been going wrong. I strongly suspect that Curle saw him score and play well against us, took in his 6'5 height and build, took a cursory glance at his record of 9 goals in 39 games for struggling Macc
and decided that he was the answer to his search for that elusive target man. If we had a proper data analyst then they might well have uncovered that he wins comparatively few 'aerial duals' and this hold-up possession to lay-off ratio is low: in other words, he ain't no targetman. Danny Rose is another case study: a player with good 'character' and 'work rate' who was seemingly signed without anyone properly analysing whether he would thrive on the type of chances we were creating (or not creating) at the time.
IMO KT's acknowledgement of these issues is an important step forward, however modest and belated it might be. I also welcome his implicit acknowledgement that the club's style of play or 'identity' needs to evolve beyond the hoofball purveyed by messers Curle and Boothroyd. There's a reason why virtually every team in L1 plays passing possession football these days, with Gillingham (who have some artisans like Dempsey to compliment the directness) the exception that proves the rule. Hoofball merchants like Curle are found out at L1 level and it's time for us to leave that behind.
Time will tell if KT can deliver on his recruitment promises. However, this is the first time I've seen him properly analyse and acknowledge the structural issues underpinning our L2-L1 yo-yo cycle, and that for me is a positive step forward.
Poll
