What can the manager do if players decide to make mistakes

[JohnMaddocksAxe]

Regardless of your opinion of Mark Hughes, global warming or anything else, can we not have people coming out with this ludicrous phrase.

If the a football manager didn't bear responsibility for the actions of his players on the pitch then none of them would ever get the chop.

There might be a semblence of a decent point if you were referring to things or poor performances that only occur once every season, but every manager is responsible for their team's performances, mistakes, moments of magic and screaming goals.

So stop pretending they aren't please.

They get credit when their team is in a position to, and feels confident enough, to pull out moments of magic.

And they are also responsible when their players are so confused, nervous, at odds with the style they are being adked to play, that they perform well below their ability or make individual mistakes.

Otherwise you could say that Alan Ball should have kept his job because it wasn't his fault that people like Symons and Summerbee kept letting him down

 

[cookster]

Sensible post - Hughes signed 9 of the 11 that started today. It's his player, his team that are regressing on a weeky basis.

Get dicked by Liverpool and gift Hull a point at Eastlands and the press will be having field day!!

 

[citoeast]

Sensible post - Hughes signed 9 of the 11 that started today. It's his player, his team that are regressing on a weeky basis.

Get dicked by Liverpool and gift Hull a point at Eastlands and the press will be having field day!!

Agreed 100%.

 

[skybluekings]

The manager has to take responsibility. especially our manager because he has spent over £200m.
Think about it. If it were your team. You gave a manager over £200m to spend. Would you really be thinking about what players aren't performing? No. You'd be thinking what is Hughes doing with the money I gave him. Its HIS players. He has FULL control. What do you do then?

The buck stops with the manager.

 

[JohnMaddocksAxe]

I'm not just bringing this back for the sake of it.

But the amount of times I continue to see people saying "what can the manager do if the defence decides to go walkabout/a player makes a mistake - he's not on the pitch with them" continues to be at ridiculous levels.

It's everything to do with the manager!

Every team sees people make mistakes throughout the season. But the good ones restrict it and they are not common. The poor ones see people making mistakes and errors on a regular basis.

When that is the case and players make mistakes over and over there are only two reasons. Either the players are nowhere good enough (which is still a cop out because many managers have moulded poor players into an organised and mistake free - on the whole - unit) or the team is so poorly managed that they are in a frame of mind/confusion/disorganisation where mistakes occur regularly.

Given that City have had 18 months of people citing 'individual mistakes', with some people using it as an excuse in a "well, there's nothing the manager can do about that" type style constantly, then it can't be to do with the quality of player.

Well managed teams minimise mistakes and are orgnaised units which play to the player's strengths. Poorly managed teams are the opposite and littered with mistakes and poor organisation.

So stop with the "managers can't do anything about individual errors" line.

Of course, they can. It's the most ridiculous argument seen on this board. It's worse than the "you don't like him because he's a rag" line. At least that is true of a small amount of jokers.

 

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

The manager has to take responsibility. especially our manager because he has spent over £200m.
Think about it. If it were your team. You gave a manager over £200m to spend. Would you really be thinking about what players aren't performing? No. You'd be thinking what is Hughes doing with the money I gave him. Its HIS players. He has FULL control. What do you do then?

The buck stops with the manager.

The buck stops with the manager, but the performance starts with the players.

 

[mammutly]

It is also the case that teams who are playing well can overcome individual errors and carry a below par performance on the part of one or two players.

The top teams are not immune to individual errors. Ferdinand gifted Belllamy a goal at the swamp, for example. Such mistakes are part of the game, but good teams rarely lose matches on the basis of one such event.

If a team's performance consistently contains enough individual errors to influence the results, then that is de facto the responsibility of the manager. No other explaination.

 

[bizzbo]

Individual errors are rooted in a lack of confidence, uncertainty as to the tactics or gameplan, and pressure.

So the manager's job is to create an air of confidence in the players own abilities. There must be absolute clarity as to what is expected of everyone at every moment, and the players must feel confident that they are trusted to handle the unexpected. You can't dictate totally. You give them a framework and give them the confidence to know when they have to depart from it.

Most importantly, the managers job is to get the players to respond healthily to pressure. Fear of failure is not healthy, but fear of getting called for not doing everything in your powers to win, probably is.

 

[Danamy]

Individual errors are rooted in a lack of confidence, uncertainty as to the tactics or gameplan, and pressure.

So the manager's job is to create an air of confidence in the players own abilities. There must be absolute clarity as to what is expected of everyone at every moment, and the players must feel confident that they are trusted to handle the unexpected. You can't dictate totally. You give them a framework and give them the confidence to know when they have to depart from it.

Most importantly, the managers job is to get the players to respond healthily to pressure. Fear of failure is not healthy, but fear of getting called for not doing everything in your powers to win, probably is.

Good and accurate post especially the first line.

Take the first 4 games for instance........win 4 games back to back playing a system that get's drummed into the players 4-3-3, it's working and confidence is high.
Lose at the swamp after scoring 3 goals playing the same system then it get's changed.
4-4-2 is introduced to the team..........uncertainty creeps in.........confidence takes a knock.......players start to put pressure/question themselves......nobody shows for the ball so it has to go long etc

Football players have massive ego's that need massaging constantly for them to perform at the highest level and it's the managers job to make sure all them ego's are on the same wavelength whilst there on the pitch for 90 mins.

 

[Miami Weiss]

This really is a chicken and egg question, a very good one too.
The players fault could be due to the actions and the reactions of the manager or he simply could of just slipped up himself.

9/10 times we will never know and it'll come down to the manager, always will imo.