I think this is far better than the Bloomfield era. We’ve got rose tinted memories now but the Bloomfield era also contained a long period of Dodds style nonsense. Duff hasn’t done the for a second.
3 Likes
To be fair to Dodd’s I think he was just being clumsy in his choice of words when he said this. At the time he also emplied he was relaxed in the belief that they would improve and the results would therefore come.
Both Bloomfield and Ainsworth said on quite a few occasions that they were more concerned with the performances than the results,as good performances would result in winning football matches.
Dodds would have to be a lunatic to literally not care about results and then take a job as a head coach.
2 Likes
Dodds also said after defeat to our biggest rivals that the result didn’t matter. That’s not clumsy, that’s signing your own death warrant.
1 Like
This is interesting analysis and not something I’ve spotted. If anything I thought Leahy was the one player whose role hasn’t changed in the transition from Dodds to Duff - it’s just that he’s now playing in a midfield that isn’t expected to do all the work with Norris kicking long plenty of times. Has his role really changed? What exactly is the difference between a normal deep lying midfielder and a pivot?
Spot on.
The idea that Duffsy ball is anything like Doddsball is incredible.
One was a joyless, miserable day out where the plan seemed to be try and keep it goalless first half and nick a set piece second half.
If we conceded first we were finished.
That feeling of pure resignation before the Charlton play off games was surreal. Everyone knew we had zero chance.
Doddsy has come in, made sense of the huge squad and picked up points steadily from day 1.
We’re shaping up really nicely and it’s very exciting to see how it can continue from here.
11 Likes
The only similarity I see between dodds ball and duff ball is that they have the same players at hand bar say bell and cauley…. Who were bought in as emergency saviours…. as dodds was failing to get out of the current players what was required. Desperation from those above.
Any similarity between duff and dodds can only be based on they both believe we have decent enough players to do the job.
Duff actually has them playing how they can and is utilising their personal skill sets to benefit the team as a whole, while the other total pillock was trying to force players to play his way without considering if that player actually has the attributes and skill set to play in the magical mystery perfect (in his head) role he had in mind for them.
Duff utilises the players qualities to supplement and create the style of play he wants… that is the critical difference.
3 Likes
Are we now nearer to Doddsball or Bloomball?
It’s a very good question…
However, everyone can see that the players are now enjoying themselves and the crowd are loving it (*). That’s the reality of Duff v Dodds and yes maybe it only needed the odd moment in a game to be different to change the momentum but my word how much more enjoyable it is now than 11 weeks ago.
(*) I don’t need stats or complex data analysis to tell me this. I see it with my own eyes in how we play. I feel it in the atmosphere. I hear it with every chant. I see it in every players smile. I can sense it at every game.
1 Like
Getting closer to O’Neillball
Penultimate paragraph - Duff, not Doddsy.
I think the key difference is that Duff can motivate the players whereas Dodds couldn’t. The motivation aspect is partly due to the fact that the players are now able to adjust their style of play to reflect how the game is going.
1 Like
The problem is when we were losing most of us did not understand the football we were watching and were throwing our toys out of the pram. Now we are winning most of us don’t understand football and are over enthusiastic about the football we are watching though apparently nothing much has changed.
3 Likes
I think most of us have a smidgen of understanding of football and realise that a lot has changed.
11 Likes
The main difference for me is that I now have to leave the pub an hour earlier than I did under Dodds as I might miss us do something in the oppositions penalty area in the first half
I think it was well established that Dodds was awful in his communication. There were multiple times he said things ithat were intentionally, unintentionally and, I believe, almost maliciously misunderstood by people.
I’m on the @oilysailor bandwagon in that there isn’t gulfs in differences between Duff and Dodds approach (Duff even moved from his favoured back five to Dodds back 4) but I think the key issue with Dodds, was that communication. It came across all wrong with the fans and i dare say it did with the players too.
The big difference between Dodds and Duff really is the clarity. You know what Duff wants and expects. No one did under Dodds.
The biggest frustration I had in the end with Dodds is I could see how close they where in the way he wanted to play and that it really could work. In the rare occasions - I’m talking once or twice a game if we were lucky - it had the beating of anyone. It was that last polish he couldn’t get across. The lack of clarity came out in defence and shooting ourselves over and over again.
Duff has used a bit of grit, as anyone knows you have to when polishing things, to take the rough edges of, and now with a finer grade of communication is reaping the rewards.
FWIW, I dont think Duff has a Plan B. Not in the way Dodds was trying to refer to it. Plan A is keep running, work for your teammates and do what we worked on in training or you won’t get selected.
If Plan A is wrong on game day, Duff will take that on his shoulders. Tactics, finer details and getting down in the weeds of the detail - that will change. The actual over all Plan A will, and always will, stay the same.
That’s what Dodds meant that Plan A has to be done better. Duff is ensuring Plan A is done better.
3 Likes
The biggest difference between the two is experience.
Duff has been through it all at almost all levels of football and it radiates confidence.
It’s chalk and cheese really.
1 Like
Dunno - sure expirence plays a huge part. But my gut suggests that Duff was a better communicator in his first manager/head coach role than Dodds was.
Experience clearly helps. There are also a lot of poor (but experienced)mangers and some good (but inexperienced) managers though. You’'ve either got it or you haven’t. Dodds hasn’t.
Part of his issue was extremely poor communication,to the point where it seemed you had to disect and analyse what he had said to try and make sense of it.
2 Likes
I’ve said this before but it beggars belief that Dodds and his backroom staff he brought in had no one who had played a game of professional football in their lives.
As good as the “coaching” might have been, they had can have had no idea how to relate to the players in terms of understanding what it’s like to play football in front of thousands of fans.
Duff clearly has that ability to relate and that understanding
1 Like
Dodds didn’t bring his back room staff in. They were appointed
I think at the end of the day Dodds was a crap manager and Duff is a good one, backed up by better results and better performances.
You’ll never see Dodds manage in the football league again.
8 Likes