Match Day Thread : Charlton (Play-offs second leg)

Yeah, even I would keep him. I’ve been critical of him since the beginning but I fear we would become an even bigger laughing stock if we let him go now. My biggest fear is that we become a club like Watford or Hull.

4 Likes

I agree @prufrock though its been tough to watch, Dodds got a poisoned chalice, had no say in signings and inherited a winning team, we all hope he can pull it out of the bag next season. My dilemma is he seemed to make the team that were really at it…fail miserably.

2 Likes

I think he’s made some bad decisions along the way, however I wonder if some circumstances along the way made him doomed to fail, as you say. No say in signings, inherited a team that must’ve been a bit shell-shocked by Blooms going, Harvie injured, teams becoming a lot more aggressive towards a tiring Kone - perhaps I’m willing myself to be optimistic that with a full summer and smart, early recruitment, Dodds can figure it out.

2 Likes

Shell-shocked by Sam Grace being replaced with a crap version of Sam Grace

6 Likes

Half of the job is dealing with the cards you are dealt, Not all ideal but he took over a good side and a range of fresh options, some to be used, some to be ignored. Over reliance on the same players and formation didn’t work. Understand people not wanting us to chop and change but he’ll need a good start next season if he is still there.

1 Like

How can taking over a winning team be a “poisoned chalice”? Surely that definition is more appropriate for Gareth getting appointments at QPR and then Shrewsbury? Would you really prefer to manage a relegation threatened club instead of a team in second place.
I am convinced that 90% of managers would have got us over the line and would not have resorted to the soul destroying tactics employed by Dodds.

3 Likes

Because you will struggle to match your predecessor even if your team is successful, and chances are you will do worse which makes you look bad.

Whereas if you take over a team at a low ebb you have more scope to look good by turning them around.

1 Like

Especially if the bloke you’re replacing is one of the most loved in the club’s history

7 Likes

I agree you might struggle to maintain those high levels, however a competent manager would not put that team into a rapid nosedive as Dodds did.

1 Like

All PR that though isn’t it? The successful team was successful because it had good players, good attitudes etc. A new manager at a poorly performing club can have a bit of a bounce bringing people back into the fold but he rarely gets the chance to swap out everyone or make them better players

I think I agree in that it’s basically reputation management, but I disagree that that doesn’t matter or isn’t a big part of what can influence a manager’s future career.

Even if we give Dodds a huge break for the sheer uncertainty of transition (which is a fair attitude to have), I think there are some concerns that have nothing to do with the transition.

Firstly, if a manager makes formation choices that fans deride before the game and the fans turn out to be correct (the best example is Kone getting isolated) that is a very concerning look. Most of us have no coaching experience at all, so for us to see something obvious that the paid coach somehow misses is not ideal.

Secondly, the lack of substitutions. Obviously the biggest knock overall has been our poor attack under Dodds, as the defence has been generally respectable, and at times superb. But there have been so many instances where it is simply not clicking going forward, and even with the injuries there were the likes of Kodua, Sadlier, Fred or McCleary on the bench, and nothing was done to freshen things up. This is a clear contrast to Bloomfield, who not only tended to make significant changes on the hour, but instilled a “finishers” mindset to give the subs the eye of the tiger. But with our season on the line and nothing happening, Dodds left a 38 year old GMac and struggling Udoh out there, when there were great options on the bench.

The two examples above have nothing to do with the struggles of transition, as they are basic management choices (formation and substitutions) that were mishandled. This, for me, is why I am so concerned over MD overall - even the controllable basics are baffling.

9 Likes

Agree with this. I’m generally not a fan of multitude of subs but I thought the concept of the ‘finishers’ off the bench after about an hour was a brilliant idea.

It must have given all the forward players a real boost knowing that they had a role to play even when not in the starting 11 and it must have been quite imposing on tired defenders knowing that fresh legs would be coming on to drag them all over the place.

One of the highlights for me of last autumn was the perpetual movement of the front three ably supported by one of the overlapping full backs.

9 Likes

One of Bloomfield’s biggest strength this season gone was making those changes. One of Dodds’ biggest weaknesses (and indeed Bloomfield’s early on) was subs or lack of them.

9 Likes

Rotation and good use of subs is particularly key now you are allowed 5 subs and the game is getting quicker. If you are too slow with subs you are now allowing half of your opposition team to be much fresher. Allowing them to shore up the defence or rotate the forwards while you just hope you’ll hang on isn’t very clever.

4 Likes

Yep, on 62 mins. You could set your watch by him.

1 Like

@StrongestTeam It also implies you don’t trust or rate the subs on the bench if you only bring them on with barely a few minutes to go. Which is ludicrous when you consider how big the squad is.

4 Likes

I was particularly frustrated on Sunday that it took 7 mins to get subs on after the goal.

It may not have happened, but Dodds should have had a plan of how to react quickly incase we conceded at any point in the second half. As it was, it felt like he was having to come up with a plan while the minutes and the game, and our hopes drifted away

4 Likes

I think he should have put Joe Low upfront as soon as we conceded

1 Like

I’d assumed Low was going to be the Plan B in the absence of many other robust threats.