I think a lot of that is fair. My two questions would be;
1) Was Barkley immune from the lads who downed tools. I see him as very much part of the group that dropped off. In all honesty I blame the majority of them equally.
2) Re Mirallas/Lukaku has he not already admonished them publically?
At his first press conference he stated "Lukaku needs to work harder and improve". When he returned to fitness he didn't go straight back into the team.
Mirallas likewise was told "he needs to work hard for 90 minutes" and remember him being dropped pre season. He too has been substituted early in games.
I think the issue for Koeman will probably be how long can he be publically critical of players for before they, their agents and the local press start to turn. I'm not sure you can manage indefinitely by being so open, at least very few other managers adopt this. That being said if he's here for 2-3 years he may well avoid the problem.
As for me I am in favour of his approach, for two reasons one which I accept is not a good one. Primarily because I see that group of players let the club down last season and let down someone who I felt was a decent man who had tried to talk most of them up. While Martinez has rightly taken a lot of flak I won't forget the Anfield capitulation for some time to come. I accept though this is not a particularly helpful instinct and doesn't lead to good management.
The more important reason is that I think they require a stricter approach. In the latter years of Moyes and Martinez Everton became quite a closeted, tight knit group where favouritism developed. It's an extension of the "family club" stuff Kenwright has always pushed. I think lads need to be pushed more, even if just for the short term.
I can understand why you think it's targeting of Barkley but I'm not sure it is. I think this is Koemans approach to management. There are definitely faults to it but right now do you not think we need such an approach. Secondly would making a lad like Barkley immune to it not lead to a world where the favouritism would be re-created?
I am a big Barkley fan but it is up to him now. If he can't cope with some honest criticism in public from his manager I don't think he will emulate Scholes/Gerrard/Lampard which should be his aim.
Excellent post again. I think personally that Koeman just doesn't engage in too much pre-analysis of his public assessments on the players - that is unique and different to the norm in many respects. I think in some ways he has this free rein with Barkley in particular - if the desired improvement does not come / is not maintained in the longer-term then Barkley's next move will be downwards - I don't think Koeman regards him as a talent that has to be protected and cosseted in that regard, or is afraid of him being poached if he gets too upset.
The less direct "criticism" of Lukaku, if you can call it that, was more an acknowledgement of his lack of fitness and perhaps a slight dig at the amount of time he has needed post Euro 16 to regain sharpness. He did also make, fleetingly, on Monday night, a comment along the lines of "if he can keep quiet" but we all know what he meant there, and most of us would agree. I expect that Koeman shares the general belief that, barring qualification for the Champions League, this is Lukaku's final season with us, that won't mean Koeman is liberal with him, but if there are periods where his work-rate and attitude seem to be dragging again, then I think he will feel a certain freedom to let rip a little.
