Didn't he also say recently that he sits back on the touchline because he does not want to transmit anxiety to his players? This I can understand, but maybe he will realise that he can transmit desire to them too?Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory
Ahh, I never knew that about his Monaco days. You can see he holds it all back in most games but then you see stuff with water bottles.I think I recall him saying his stint in Japan really mellowed him out and changed his thinking on coaching.
Putting the laughter back into manslaughter
I think the way he sits on the bench also transmits passivity. You could argue that's what ends up on the pitch when we play as well.
He sits on the touchline because he doesn't have the ability or want to effect things from the side. If he ever made early changes to either the shape or the team it would suggest he was wrong in the 1st place & we simply can't be having that. Same thing about substitutions, never makes one at half time to give the player a good 45 minutes to effect the game even if we're losing. Instead we have the blind faith that he is always right so the original team he picked will still win the game. He sees early substitutions as a sign of failure, of getting his team wrong - which shows an horrendous lack of tactical nous. we may have smashed Utd on Sunday but did you see the effect 2 substitutions had that LVG made, less room for Santi & picking up the 2nd balls.
It took Wenger 20 mins of the 2nd half to see what this was doing which was when he pushed Ramsey inside & Ozil over to the right - its very worrying, seriously - I wonder if he's age maybe causing him to not see things he used to.
Should a manager really have to tell the players where things are going wrong during the game?
Depends on the players. Some have better footballing minds than others. Clearly.
Putting the laughter back into manslaughter
Agree with that. if a player looks over and thinks "oh, look at the boss, kicking back in a chair, why should I bother?" then he wont go very far at arsenal or any club. How many manager make a change at half time anyway, other than if forced to do? Listening to the radio today they spoke of Rodgers at Liverpool doing odd things `like making half time subs`.
Some managers sit back, some scream and shout at the edge of their technical area, and I doubt it has any correlation on the success of their team.
That's like saying we dont need a captain or leadership on the pitch. It's psychological. You won't find many sports where the coach isn't there to support the athlete.
Some players self-motivate. Others are motivated but need direction in what to do. Others are complacent. Insofar as they are coaches, managers can undoubtedly help many players during games.
Putting the laughter back into manslaughter
I'd say leadership on the pitch is more important than someone shouting from the sidelines.
That is something else we've been sadly lacking since Vieira left.
A manager also has a wider persepective of the game, which means players will not always see the problems happening across the pitch and react accordingly. The fact that every successful manager in the modern game does it, tells us that it has an effect on the team.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote