DoofersDad

This is supported by the clip posted at 415. There is a very clear suggestion that he thinks the players are not working hard enough. Where I think he may have a point is that there is a tendency to stand off too much and not close down quickly enough. But that ignores the real issue. The issue is what we are doing with the ball when we have it. If he would use some width and allow the players to attack the space with pace, he'll soon see that the players have heart. These players got us to 2nd in the league. They are good enough alright and we are lucky to have them. What we need is for the manager to have the guts to change his tactics to suit the very considerable talent and heart at his disposal.

I think Gingerjaggy's idea is a good one. It is not a media grilling that is required but politely asking questions about what is concerning us. As Bughtmaster says, using the wings creates the space in the middle and it would be reasonable to ask him questions about why he seems so reluctant to use the wings. This would give him an opportunity to explain in a bit more detail what he is trying to do without anyone trying to catch him out.

Were you actually at the game last night and if so, were you in the dugout? The players who you obviously feel are letting the club down are the players who had the team up in 2nd place before the new manager came in. They are the same players who gave their all yesterday in trying to play to a system which they know is not going to work and who were obviously very frustrated about it. All the players have their good days and their bad days but yesterday you certainly could not fault them for lack of effort. It was a bit like a new conductor telling the string section of an orchestra to play the wind instruments. They can huff and puff all they want but it won't sound good and it won't be their fault.

I've given this a bit of thought and so the first thing to say is to apologise for the length of this post. My immediate response to Mahonio's original post was simply to post . I didn't expand on that as I felt it encapsulated my frustration at folk who are not prepared to give folk a chance to bed into a new role. It is, after all, a common criticism that football clubs don't give managers time and this club has a record of bucking that unfortunate trend. That is not to say that I did not have any concerns, but my view was that it was far too early to judge the man and we would need to be struggling well into next season before it would be reasonable to ask such questions. Since then, my concerns have been growing and yesterday rapidly took things to a new level - his comments before and after the match and the tactics on show during the match were simply not acceptable. So, should he be sacked? Rather than say a definite "No" as I did a short while ago, or a definite "Yes", I think it all depends on discussions between the Board and the Manager - and if such discussions have not taken place today, they need to take place very soon because having taken over the Manager's position at a period when the most successful season in the club's history was all but assured, Hughes has catapaulted the club into crisis in just a few short weeks. I don't use the word "crisis" lightly, but crisis it is. Hughes has now very publicly stated that the style of football the squad are good at and which the fans love to see is not his style. His style is to play it through the middle - a style he has not been able to achieve results with elsewhere and which we all know he will not acheive results with here. Not only are we to play it through the middle but the guys are to pass it at all costs. No wonder we are creating little up front and are nervous as hell at the back and are giving away soft goals. Not only is it not going to work, it is boring to watch. The frustration of players and fans alike was evident at the game yesterday. For me it was encapsulated at a first half free kick midway in our own half. With most of the team moving up towards the 'Well penalty area there was an exchange between Warren and Draper. Warren was calling Draper back to receive a short free kick and it seemed to me that Draper was effectively saying something like "what's the point" whilst Warren was saying it was what they'd been told to do. A short kick was taken and inevitably came to nothing. Presumably when Draper has been "educated" on how to pass the ball to Billy's feet through the 6 or 7 opposition players in the way, all will be well. If Hughes hasn't already lost the dressing room he appears to be doing his best to lose it and he is certainly losing fans through the turnstiles. If his insistance on his fundementally flawed tactics is allowed to continue then there are number of implications:- We will not win a European place next year. Whilst a European adventure at our level may not be very lucrative and might even cost in the short term, the experience for the players and fans and the kudos it would bring to the club would be huge. The longer term impact would be to attract more fans to the club and it would make it a more attractive club to potential future players. Barring miracles, what recently seemed probable this season is now highly unlikely. Players will want to leave. Perhaps we would get some money in for them as they are all under contract but it will not be much. Our current form is relegation form or close to. If this style of play carries on to next season and we lose some of our better players then relegation is a real possibility. Post independence, a European adventure will mean a trip to Berwick. Crowd numbers which are already low, will drop alarmingly and that will have a major impact on the financial position of the club. This will be a much bigger factor than any transfer income. Club finances will be further hit by a lower league position (or a position in a lower league) and no windfall through cup success It is a distinctly gloomy prospect. Hughes came here in the fortunate position of inheriting the best squad this club has ever had and with most of them contracted to the end of the following season or beyond. Since Butcher has left others have committed to the club, Tansey has rejoined and Christie has emerged as a real talent. In short, the scene was set to build on Butcher's legacy and take the club forward. Butcher and his management team certainly did well in assembling the squad and had them playing an effective style of play which, when the team was on form, could be exhillerating to watch. Where Butcher was weak was that he was often tactically naive and had no plan B. It was in this aspect of the game that I for one had high hopes of Hughes. I believed he could bring a different dimension to build on that legacy: little did I think he would simply knock it down. This is a crisis not just because of what we see happening to the team just now, but because of the potential of next season. The Rangers and Hearts are out of the equation and Hibs will be rebuilding. That's half of Scotland's big 6 teams. This year and next represent the best chance we have ever had or are likely to have for many a long year to finish in the top three and to win a European place. With the excellent squad we have available to us it really must be a priority for the club to secure a top 3 finish next season. We may never have a better opportunity as the following year will almost certainly see The Rangers back and challenging and possibly one or both of the Edinburgh clubs. Aberdeen and Dundee Utd will probably continue to strengthen. Bottom line for me is that we simply can't afford to start next season playing Hughes' "through the middle" nonsense. If he is given the chance and 10 games in we are sitting close to the bottom then it will be too late for anyone else to turn it around. We have to get back to doing what our players do best now. The Chairman needs to tell him that and if he won't do it, then out he goes. Many have said that so early in his contract the Board can't afford to sack him, but in my view the financial consequences of him continuing to do what he is currently doing would cost far more than buying out his contract. I don't know what gets written into contracts but is Hughes not in breach of his contract by radically changing the way we play? Surely the interview process must discuss a candidate's proposals for basic playing style and tactics. Unless the Board felt that this nonsense was a good idea then Hughes will be in breach of his contract and he can leave "by mutual consent". If the Board were conned because they did not have a football man on the panel then they should have the guts to make a sound business decision and cut their losses. So Mahonio, my original to you is now directed to Hughes and his fatally flawed philosophy. For raising the topic I now give you

Putting the 2 previous posts together it sounds perhaps as though he was there - but hiding under the bench.

The really worrying thing about tonight's game for me was that I thought the players gave their all and actually played pretty well within the tactics that were deployed.How bad will it get when performance levels drop off? Shinnie, Draper, Tansey and Vincent all worked hard in midfield but time and time again it all came to nothing because there was no width. But it's worse than just there being no width - I got the impression that players have been told to play the ball to feet. On the odd occasion that Raven or Tremarco were wide in space the ball was played to feet and so by the time the ball reached them their way forward was blocked and so it was sideways or back again. A few months ago the same players would have had the ball played into space for them to run onto. It was the same with the forward ball - lack of width meant there were few gaps to exploit and therefore sideways it went again. Motherwell had players out tonight and were there for the taking. With the effort our lads put in we would have taken them to the cleaners if the tactics had been better. Unless things change soon it is going to be a disappointing 6th for us at the end of the season. Very proud of the effort of the players tonight but hugely disappointed at the way they were told to play.

Further to my comment above, it was interesting to see Esson try to play a short ball whenever possible. Sometimes he looked for alternative short options before resorting to the normal keeper's hoof. He looked uncomfortable trying to play the short ball. Makes me wonder whether Brill was dropped because he's been involved in one or two mix ups recently or because he wasn't following instructions.

Of course! Thanks for the clarification.

Motherwell also have some significant injuries so I don't necessarily see that as being too light weight. Is Tansey available? I would probably start with him with a view to bringing Christie on later. For me it's more a question of what the game plan is rather than who is going to play. Yogi's quote on the BBC preview is "I think we play football and we still don't know how to keep a clean sheet. That's all down to hard work and shape. "I will pick a team and let them go and play, sit back and analyse it and get the answers. "And, if it's not those guys, I keep saying to them, football evolves. If it's not you, it will be someone else. "You can't do any more than give them the jersey and say 'go and play and show me you can take this club where we want to go'."

He starts his job proper after the County game and all the fixture congestion.

Maybe someone with more knowledge of the game than me can shed some light on what seems to be a bit of a contradiction in the way players are told to play. A lot of comment has been made about an apparent pass at all costs mentality which seems to have got us into a lot of defensive difficulty when a good hoof up or out of the park, whilst not pretty, would have cleared the immediate danger. However, as soon as the ball gets back to the keeper it appears that he is instructed to let everyone get into position up the park and then - hoof! Quite often Raven and Shinnie make themselves available for a safe out ball but Brill waves them up the park. So, when a defender has the ball and it is risky to pass they are being encouraged to pass, but when the keeper has the ball and it is safe to pass and keep possession he is being told to hoof it. Can't get my head around it.

At one time it did look as though he might get more game time and he certainly looked promising when he did get on. But then we seemed to accumulate more and more palyers to give options in midfield and he rarely makes the bench. I don't know if he's been offerred a change to go out on loan but I would have thought that would have been a good option for him. But if the lad does not feel particularly settled in Inverness and wants to try somewhere else then fair enough. Hopefully he can find a club at a decent level and make some progress with his career.

Mr Angry? I'm Mr Angry. I'm English and I like cricket. Talk about a team going downhill!

I think Dougal has been consistent on this point - and it is a good one. As a club we suffer from the mentality of locals who would rather support Celtic, some other longer established club or even the newly established club down Ibrox way. To a large extent this will be because there was not a Scottish League side in the Highlands when they started watching football. In many cases this disease is passed on from parents to children but if the kids can be immunised against it by getting a dose of ICT from time to time then we may slowly get crowds picking up. The situation with incomers is a different matter. You can't expect folk born and brought up elsewhere in Scotland to suddenly support ICT just because they live here. That cuts both ways and it is important for the quality and volume of our away supporters that Invernesians exiled in the Central Belt that they maintain their allegience to ICT. For incomers like me from South of the Border there is less of a problem. ICT are never going to play my home town team so there is no conflict of interest. No reason whilst we shouldn't support ICT and, as Dougal observes, there are good numbers who do. But back to the OP's post. If this bloke's girlfriend looks like his Dad he is hardly in a position to criticise others for errors of judgement - every reason to be angry, though.

Can you explain how playing it slow and narrow through a congested midfield is more open and attractive than breaking with speed down the wings?

No doubt about his talent but his attitude is not what is required of a professional footballer. Its a real shame - there are loads of kids with the right attitude who would give anything to have his talent, but he has the talent and wastes it. Only he can sort it, but sadly I don't think he ever will. Such a waste.

Lots of Bull but no doubles or trebles.

I would like to see our front men do that a little more determindly as well. Opposition keepers are rarely threatened in that way but can look just as shakey as Brill on the rare occasions they are.

I doubt that some of the players would have lasted the full ninety minutes.

Welcome back, Lawrence! Haven't seen a post from you for a while.

I'll be optimistic and wait until after the St Mirren match before replying.

Personally I think it is the failure to score that is making our defence and our keeper nervous. Errors at the back are so much more costly when you are not scoring at the other end.

He's done that before with others. He's probably past his best now and whilst capable of inspirational performances on the park, they are becoming a bit few and far between. Perhaps it's time to think about him having a role more off the park than on it. Perhaps a regular place on the bench and the occasional appearence when the defensive midfield needs strengthened late in the 2nd half. At the very least I think he needs a rest for a couple of games.

Intersting point about Yngwie's ratings is that Brill and Tansey who were stand out players at the week were apparently poor tonight. It appears that nobody (with the probable exception of Shinnie) is playing to a reasonable standard with any consistency at the moment. Just as you think someone seems up for it they disappoint in the next match and vice-versa. Makes it difficult to know who to persist with and who to rest. Perhaps a significant freshening up of the starting XI will do the trick.

This is your OP Mahonio. Sorry, but can't see any question marks in that. The thread title may have a question mark attached but you make your position very clear in your post. Your post was a strong criticism of the manager and was not a question. If you don't like people disagreeing with you then you only have yourself to blame. I'm glad you have posted something more positive about giving the youngsters more of a chance. I'm sure most folk will agree with you on that.