Roberto Martinez discussion

[Raino85]

Martinez would be far better as a director of football i think.
He likes to concentrate on youth, has a good eye for a player (apart from Kone),

Were he faulters is tactics, player motivation and his people skills

 

[bluestevon]

We did to City what WBA did to us on Saturday - frustrated them and got lucky with Aguero hitting the post and some shots going just wide - until Atkinson's decision changed the game.

City had created far less chances than we did against West Brom as well. If we'd have got a goal the other day (with or without help from the ref) the floodgates would have opened.

I agree with the principle but not when the game turns on an official's decision, and then you didn't even mention it?

Deulofeu was knackered, and was costing us possession. Lennon should have been the sub and RM's mistake was bringing on Kone to try and get Rom into the game.

But again, it wasn't Kone that cost us that game, it was the fact the referee didn't do his job - which he then managed to do just fine yesterday in the Arsenal game in an identical situation - and from that we collapsed and City's £200mil attacking line punished us.

Thing is mate i honestly don't think we were going to hold out regardless of that decision in the City game, we'd shot our bolt and just invited city to push up 15 yards onto us as soon as we took Del off and it was just a matter of time as we had absolutely zero outlet and it was coming back at us again and again - as you said it was not a sub that did us that day - it was the wrong sub - Lenno was perfect to provide the threat to keep them honest and the work-rate to help a team running close to empty, instead we chose Kone - a player who doesn't work too hard and has no pace whatsoever.

I just think Martinez makes too many wrong decisions in crunch games, like him in a lot of ways and for a lot of things he is or has done, but just don't believe he is good enough if we ever do want to see our club become significant besides in L4 again

As people have said - he would likely make a bloody good director of football as thats a role which would suit all his positive attributes whilst not relying on his weaknesses

 

[bluestevon]

Martinez would be far better as a director of football i think.
He likes to concentrate on youth, has a good eye for a player (apart from Kone),

Were he faulters is tactics, player motivation and his people skills

Actually think he would make a tremendous director of football - especially if he was working with a manager who had similar ideas but who was tactically sounder and more pragmatic

 

[BlueToff]

Thing is mate i honestly don't think we were going to hold out regardless of that decision in the City game, we'd shot our bolt and just invited city to push up 15 yards onto us as soon as we took Del off and it was just a matter of time as we had absolutely zero outlet and it was coming back at us again and again - as you said it was not a sub that did us that day - it was the wrong sub - Lenno was perfect to provide the threat to keep them honest and the work-rate to help a team running close to empty, instead we chose Kone - a player who doesn't work too hard and has no pace whatsoever.

I just think Martinez makes too many wrong decisions in crunch games, like him in a lot of ways and for a lot of things he is or has done, but just don't believe he is good enough if we ever do want to see our club become significant besides in L4 again

As people have said - he would likely make a bloody good director of football as thats a role which would suit all his positive attributes whilst not relying on his weaknesses

He's more than capable of making it as a manager, and he's at the right club. That's my honest belief.

Yes his decisions in some big games have cost us, but at least he makes those decisions rather than Moyes who was pretty much non-existent tactics wise in crunch matches.

And yeh I'm not saying we'd have gone on to win that City game, far from it, but the fact is that the game did change on that massive call.

We were doing exactly what West Brom did to us the other day. Sitting deep, riding our luck etc. West Brom's luck stayed with them the other day, against City ours ran out.

The thing is, you can always see the logic in RM's decisions. Even Saturday, the logic was sound. We had to be more direct and to do that he brought on another forward, for example. Lennon had played well but we needed a different type of threat so he brought on Del.

Mirallas should have probably come on, but I don't think him staying on the bench cost us the game or anything. Just think it was one of them that we could play on for another 3 hours and not score!

 

[Cork Evertonian]

He's more than capable of making it as a manager, and he's at the right club. That's my honest belief.

Yes his decisions in some big games have cost us, but at least he makes those decisions rather than Moyes who was pretty much non-existent tactics wise in crunch matches.

And yeh I'm not saying we'd have gone on to win that City game, far from it, but the fact is that the game did change on that massive call.

We were doing exactly what West Brom did to us the other day. Sitting deep, riding our luck etc. West Brom's luck stayed with them the other day, against City ours ran out.

The thing is, you can always see the logic in RM's decisions. Even Saturday, the logic was sound. We had to be more direct and to do that he brought on another forward, for example. Lennon had played well but we needed a different type of threat so he brought on Del.

Mirallas should have probably come on, but I don't think him staying on the bench cost us the game or anything. Just think it was one of them that we could play on for another 3 hours and not score!

When you're chasing a game against a side as defensive as West Brom.A player like Mirallas was exactly what was required to drag us back into it.There's a big difference between Mirallas and Kone in terms of attacking threat and danger.

 

[BlueToff]

When you're chasing a game against a side as defensive as West Brom.A player like Mirallas was exactly what was required to drag us back into it.There's a big difference between Mirallas and Kone in terms of attacking threat and danger.

Kev rarely is the player to come on and break teams like that down.

I agree that he should have been brought on to add extra pace and guile, but really I think the first change should have probably had been Pienaar anyway. We needed a player who could pick a pass. Neither Kone nor Kev are exactly good at that.

 

[bluestevon]

He's more than capable of making it as a manager, and he's at the right club. That's my honest belief.

Yes his decisions in some big games have cost us, but at least he makes those decisions rather than Moyes who was pretty much non-existent tactics wise in crunch matches.

And yeh I'm not saying we'd have gone on to win that City game, far from it, but the fact is that the game did change on that massive call.

We were doing exactly what West Brom did to us the other day. Sitting deep, riding our luck etc. West Brom's luck stayed with them the other day, against City ours ran out.

The thing is, you can always see the logic in RM's decisions. Even Saturday, the logic was sound. We had to be more direct and to do that he brought on another forward, for example. Lennon had played well but we needed a different type of threat so he brought on Del.

Mirallas should have probably come on, but I don't think him staying on the bench cost us the game or anything. Just think it was one of them that we could play on for another 3 hours and not score!

Disagree thought the logic behind the subs on Saturday was terribly flawed, a team that set out with 4 cb's determined to stifle the opponent and block everything centrally, so we decide to start the game narrow by only playing one natural wide player - who incidentally gave them fits, so as a change we decide to go even narrower bringing Kone on and effectively allow West Brom to fully focus on nullifying the right side as they knew then we had absolutely nothing down the left to bother about, meaning they just shifted their back line 10yards over to our right

Game was crying out to try to pull their back 4 wider instead we played the exact game they wanted by going narrow and trying to force it through the middle which was never ever going to work, Martinez has failed to get us scoring three years in a row against west brom, he hasn't learned how to play against a pullis side that sets up the way they always will do mate.

Theirs no luck involved when you set out to limit the opponent to pumping balls into the box, getting bodies between anyone and the goal and limiting 95% of the shots to long range punts

Agree about one thing though, with Martinez as the manager we could have played 3 hours and not scored as he was unable to see the blindingly obvious and made it worse with each decision he made

 

[BlueToff]

Disagree thought the logic behind the subs on Saturday was terribly flawed, a team that set out with 4 cb's determined to stifle the opponent and block everything centrally, so we decide to start the game narrow by only playing one natural wide player - who incidentally gave them fits, so as a change we decide to go even narrower bringing Kone on and effectively allow West Brom to fully focus on nullifying the right side as they knew then we had absolutely nothing down the left to bother about, meaning they just shifted their back line 10yards over to our right

Game was crying out to try to pull their back 4 wider instead we played the exact game they wanted by going narrow and trying to force it through the middle which was never ever going to work, Martinez has failed to get us scoring three years in a row against west brom, he hasn't learned how to play against a pullis side that sets up the way they always will do mate.

Theirs no luck involved when you set out to limit the opponent to pumping balls into the box, getting bodies between anyone and the goal and limiting 95% of the shots to long range punts

Agree about one thing though, with Martinez as the manager we could have played 3 hours and not scored as he was unable to see the blindingly obvious and made it worse with each decision he made

First point, we started a team that has won the two previous PL games 3-0. We stuck by a winning formula.

I'd agree if we hadn't created any chances, but we really did.

And Cleverley isn't a 'natural wide player' at all, but yes he was playing well. As I said, the sub should probably have been Pienaar, but I can see the logic in wanting a second striker in order to give their defenders another threat to deal with as we went more direct. It didn't work.

Agree on the point about going wide, but Mirallas almost always drifts really far inside anyway when he plays on the right. We brought Del on to provide that width.

And i'm sure you'd have said that we were 'getting lucky' when City hit the post twice against us in the semi-final? Surely us doing the same thing means that WBA 'got lucky'. Luck has an awful lot to do with it in those situations.

 

[Lanolin]

He's more than capable of making it as a manager, and he's at the right club. That's my honest belief.

Yes his decisions in some big games have cost us, but at least he makes those decisions rather than Moyes who was pretty much non-existent tactics wise in crunch matches.

And yeh I'm not saying we'd have gone on to win that City game, far from it, but the fact is that the game did change on that massive call.

We were doing exactly what West Brom did to us the other day. Sitting deep, riding our luck etc. West Brom's luck stayed with them the other day, against City ours ran out.

The thing is, you can always see the logic in RM's decisions. Even Saturday, the logic was sound. We had to be more direct and to do that he brought on another forward, for example. Lennon had played well but we needed a different type of threat so he brought on Del.

Mirallas should have probably come on, but I don't think him staying on the bench cost us the game or anything. Just think it was one of them that we could play on for another 3 hours and not score!

I could not agree any less with that. Some of his decisions are genuinely baffling, and leave the majority of fans scratching their heads. Fans aren't booing because they see his logic, they're booing because they believe the decision to be a bad one.

To me the logical changes on saturday would have been to sacrifice a holding player for one of the attacking options on the bench and drop Barkley deeper, and to give ourselves more width by bringing on a winger on the left. Instead we became more narrow, and took off the only consistent threat we'd had to replace him like for like. And that happens regularly, the City game you're talking about was the same. It was absolutely not logical to replace the fastest player in your team with a crab when relying on counter attacks to keep your opponents honest.

 

[BlueToff]

I could not agree any less with that. Some of his decisions are genuinely baffling, and leave the majority of fans scratching their heads. Fans aren't booing because they see his logic, they're booing because they believe the decision to be a bad one.

To me the logical changes on saturday would have been to sacrifice a holding player for one of the attacking options on the bench and drop Barkley deeper, and to give ourselves more width by bringing on a winger on the left. Instead we became more narrow, and took off the only consistent threat we'd had to replace him like for like. And that happens regularly, the City game you're talking about was the same. It was absolutely not logical to replace the fastest player in your team with a crab when relying on counter attacks to keep your opponents honest.

I agree on the point about the holding midfielder.

When Del came on for Lennon, I'd have liked to have also seen Kev on for McCarthy.

The logic i'm referring to is bringing on a second forward when we were a goal down. I don't see much wrong with that.

In the City game, again, he was looking for Kone to come on and hold the ball up and help Rom out, which he did for the 10 mins after he came on, but ultimately the incident with their second goal happened and we collapsed. In hindsight, the right change was probably Lennon for Del.

 

[Lanolin]

I agree on the point about the holding midfielder.

When Del came on for Lennon, I'd have liked to have also seen Kev on for McCarthy.

The logic i'm referring to is bringing on a second forward when we were a goal down. I don't see much wrong with that.

In the City game, again, he was looking for Kone to come on and hold the ball up and help Rom out, which he did for the 10 mins after he came on, but ultimately the incident with their second goal happened and we collapsed. In hindsight, the right change was probably Lennon for Del.

I think it's all to do with the way you play the game. Bringing on a second striker is obviously the first page of the 'Management 101' chapter titled 'Chasing a game'. What it would usually mean, however, is playing a standard 442 and being much more direct. We don't tend to do that. Kone spent the majority of his time on Saturday on the left, so while he is (allegedly) a striker, he was effectively just playing in exactly the same way Cleverley had been. It hadn't been working for 70 minutes, but we decided to just keep trying. Illogical in so many ways.

Same principle against City. A second striker to hold on to the ball would be fine, but you then need your midfielders to get up with play or there's no point in holding it up. You want the ball holding up and then wingers getting up with play and crossing for the striker who's laid it off. We didn't have wingers, so the ball was always coming straight back, just having been held up for 10 seconds beforehand. I honestly don't think it takes hindsight to believe that we needed to keep some pace on the pitch in the City game. Who knows whether it would have changed the outcome, but I think the substitution cost us badly in that game.

 

[BlueToff]

I think it's all to do with the way you play the game. Bringing on a second striker is obviously the first page of the 'Management 101' chapter titled 'Chasing a game'. What it would usually mean, however, is playing a standard 442 and being much more direct. We don't tend to do that. Kone spent the majority of his time on Saturday on the left, so while he is (allegedly) a striker, he was effectively just playing in exactly the same way Cleverley had been. It hadn't been working for 70 minutes, but we decided to just keep trying. Illogical in so many ways.

Same principle against City. A second striker to hold on to the ball would be fine, but you then need your midfielders to get up with play or there's no point in holding it up. You want the ball holding up and then wingers getting up with play and crossing for the striker who's laid it off. We didn't have wingers, so the ball was always coming straight back, just having been held up for 10 seconds beforehand. I honestly don't think it takes hindsight to believe that we needed to keep some pace on the pitch in the City game. Who knows whether it would have changed the outcome, but I think the substitution cost us badly in that game.

Fair enough mate, agree on the whole I think we just look at certain things slightly differently.

As for the City game, that sub definitely didn't help, but it pails in comparison to Atkinson.

 

[Carlito]

I think Martinez has come along a few years too late. Back before the TV deal brought social mobility to the Premier League, when the crap teams were properly crap, he probably could have achieved similar to results to Moyes on the back of an abstract philosophy - even if it doesn't really amount to much more than never going long from the back.

Now, though, the playing field has been levelled, and every game is an actual contest, requiring the sort of hands on management that Martinez, with his 'Appy 'Arry levels of tactical neglect, isn't capable of providing.

He won't adapt, and if he was working at a club with any semblance of ambition he wouldn't survive.

Also, please stop talking up 72 points as being tantamount to finishing fourth. By that logic, Brendan Rodgers is an uncrowned Premier League champion.

 

[Saint Domingo]

I think Martinez has come along a few years too late. Back before the TV deal brought social mobility to the Premier League, when the crap teams were properly crap, he probably could have achieved similar to results to Moyes on the back of an abstract philosophy - even if it doesn't really amount to much more than never going long from the back.

Now, though, the playing field has been levelled, and every game is an actual contest, requiring the sort of hands on management that Martinez, with his 'Appy 'Arry levels of tactical neglect, isn't capable of providing.

He won't adapt, and if he was working at a club with any semblance of ambition he wouldn't survive.

Also, please stop talking up 72 points as being tantamount to finishing fourth. By that logic, Brendan Rodgers is an uncrowned Premier League champion.

The best claim I like is how Roberto's first season is somehow better than Pochettino's with Spurs because they haven't got 72 points...yet. Spurs as a minimum will be top 4 and are currently fighting for the title, 2 things we never did even in that first season.

Looking back on that season we could have overtaken Liverpool had we won the Anfield derby. We lost though, and whereas they kicked onto title winning form we floundered around, then won a string of games when there was absolutely zero pressure, then bottled it once we were actually in position to achieve something. That season cannot be compared to what Leicester and Spurs are doing this season going away and winning at City, Leicester beating Liverpool and Spurs, long winning runs, all under the intense pressure of a title run in.

Quite simply a different level of football, the physical and mental aspects combined, that Martinez has never reached in his time at Everton. The Arsenal home game in 13/14 is probably the only game which had positive pressure attached to it (as in we needed to win to achieve something) that we've actually performed in. All of the rest: all of the derbies, Arsenal cup QF, Kiev away, City away, Palace home 13/14, we've choked and not performed. Just nowhere near the mental fortitude that Ranieri and Pochettino have instilled in their sides.

 

[Rollo Tomassi]

He blew Champions League in the closing games of that season too.


I think this line of thinking is incredibly harsh as to continue the run we were on would have been nigh on impossible. Before that Palace game we had won 7 straight games there is no way we could have carried on winning until the end of the season. Everton won 9 out of the last 12 league games which is a superb run one of those defeats being to the eventual champions.