Predictability v Spontaneity

[ablueclaret]

When one watched Burnley in the 60's and early 70's there was perhaps a fine balance between the two, every player had his function, from architect to destroyer each player knew his role and fitted in to a well oiled machine, a machine with a soul, where the odd magician be it McIlroy Morgan Thomas or James could have his say and turn the humdrum into true excitement.
In recent times we've had Blake and Ings even Elliott to provide that odd bit of flair, that touch of skill which gets you off your seat, but what has characterised SD's successful time here has been the framework, that self-imposed discipline which has made us a formidable unit, a force which far outweighed the sum of its parts. By employing a simple but effective method which every player could take on board SD has provided a team based on cohesion and resilience which is rarely going to be taken apart.
It was my contention last season that without the signing of Barton and Gray we would have struggled, but those two signings gave us pace, power focus and fear, it gave the side that edge, it rose above predictability.
Now the Premier League is a League which quickly finds out the sides without a method, without a viable framework, we are not one of those, but it also demands players capable of spontaneity, of speed of thought on and off the ball, players who may not fit into a framework who play outside the rules. As we have seen in the past those who play just for themselves can actually be destructive but those that meld into the team ethic without being crushed by it, players who are allowed a degree of freedom become the players who bring success.
SD for all his virtues finds such players problematic, his recruitment is driven by efficiency and fit he doesn't really do the wild cards, but even with the players he has you feel he sometimes diminishes talent rather than enlarging it. Take for instance Boyd who for me has the skill set to unnerve Premier League defences given a freer role, somehow he has been forged into a defensive component, a worthy runner and coverer but no longer the free spirit
which suits him best (his hair gives him away).
Somehow this side needs to gain spontaneity, Gray provides a little of that, Defour when fit may prove an inspiration. Yes the framework is important, but fortune favours the brave and sometimes one feels SD needs a transfusion of EH's thinking, let talent speak don't diminish it, let magic marry with method, finesse with the framework. That is the way our great sides did it, that is the way this side needs to do it if it is to survive.

[claretdom]

Which category would you put your posts in ?

[ablueclaret]

Inspirational

[claretdom]

Haha, well at least you have retained some humour (or local cider) over the years

[ablueclaret]

It's always been fun following Burnley just as much during the so called dark days as now, in fact some of the personality has gone out of the side and places since those times, visiting sombre bleak grounds watching Hancock producing his tricks ! A little of the romance has gone out of football and I feel our play, fine resilient side that SD has made us. We do lack characters and creativity.

[SGr]

He's right you know.
All well and good having players who will work hard off the ball and keep the shape, but once possession (finally) turns over these days we have no pace or spark. Hence why we give it away again almost immediately.

[NottsClaret]

You really should come and watch us ablue. Defour has more skill than Blake, Ings or Elliot. Gray has more pace and power than we've seen before. And Keane is the most complete centre half we've had in the last 30 years.

If you had a seat at the Turf, they'd get you off it.

[ablueclaret]

Seen them all.
As I said early last season Keane and Mee would make our best central pairing for decades, SD eventually caught on.
Defour is talented but still to be convinced he can change games in the manner Ings or Blake could.
Gray as I mentioned has the potential to unnerve defences but he requires the player with the eye for his runs.
All is not without hope and I believe within this squad there is a side capable of survival but to do so requires a break with the past rather rigid and sterile set-up.
SD has a big point to prove, not to us or me, but to other managers and clubs, that he can become adaptable and visionary that he can meld efficiency with finesse and flexibility. I believe he can do it but to do so he needs to be prepared to fail, I think that fear is what holds him back.

[evensteadiereddie]

I'm sure Dyche will have taken notice of your wise words.................so you've not actually seen them play this season ?

[ablueclaret]

Do you get that feeling ESE.

[Bordeauxclaret]

Didn't you want Mee in midfield??

[Wile E Coyote]

Well written piece ablueclaret,

[evensteadiereddie]

Yet no mention of the potential power and creativity of Hendrick and Gudmundsson ? I think you're writing this side off far too early.

[roamingclaret]

I agree with ablueclaret. As for Tony Hancock, mentioned earlier & often mocked & riducled on here...I remember taking my young son to watch training at Gawthorpe. During a practise match Hancock produced an amazing overhead kick that flew into the net infront of us...the sort thing you'd be happy to pay good money to see. As we left, the coach, Mick Docherty was lecturing him, saying "It's a team game, son!".

[Wile E Coyote]

I was watching an age old clip of us at united when best ,Law and Charlton were playing us Think it was around 68. Burnley looked good I must say.
Both sides seemed a lot more reliant on players being prepared to do lot more work individually with the ball before they got rid of it.
It was clear that the more talented ball players could make their mark back then (best).
No doubt the way they were set up would not enable them to succeed against modern day teams.
Less emphasis on athelticism and structure.
Our opponents thesedays are clincal and methodic, they are super fit too. To match that , we also have to play in a similar way. The difference is that the top, monied sides can afford numerous quality players who combine all the desired attributes of running and pace, with great skill.
Burnley do not have such players usually. We might have gone a long way down the fitness road, but don't really have enough flair.
Defour is one recent example of attempting to add to this but it isvery limited in terms of results.That's why we conceded heavily to Chelsea and Leicester and southampton.We have got plenty of resilience and work rate, but it can only take us so far.
When our system works properly as it did against Liverpool at the Turf,it shows just how far Dyche's organisational abilities can take us.
Playing like that has to be tough, if the consistancy begins to waver even slightly, it all goes to pot .I don't know where the threat to other teams will come from .Vokes can seem isolated to often, Gray may or may not be good enough to improve things for us in this department.
Barnes is injured. If we have to defend like trojans in most matches, it means our attacking style will hardly get the chance to be tested.

[ablueclaret]

Back in those days it really was one v one, and a marvellous game for wingers against cynical full backs, forwards were forwards 5 of them and defenders defenders 4 of them, even 3 at times. It was on the wings as much as in midfield that genius lay and the emphasis was to go forward, it was a great era that retreated as tactics and fitness made the pitch smaller and gave players less space. In a way it was headless football but that for me suited the intelligence of the average footballer. Once it became cerebral something primitive and urgent was lost.

[ontario claret]

"Inspirational"? I think you're being too modest, blue. How about "life-transforming"? It would be hard to beat that.

[ontario claret]

Following BFC was for me.

[ontario claret]

"Primitive and urgent". Sounds like KRBFC.

[boatshed bill]

I've given this some thought:
It's possible to be predictably spontaneous
but not spontaneously predictable....

I think???

Mendoza's Beefsteak Club Malbec tonight

[bodge]

Spontaneity is the name of the game.

[ewanrob]

Well written piece, Defour has more skill than RB.....not having that Nottsclaret

[walter the softy]

I'm confused. Aren't Wile Coyote and A Blue Claret the same person? I thought that this was just common knowledge. No problem with that but it's a bit fresh giving your own posts "likes"!

Anyway, good on you (both?)...the posts are always worth a read in any case.

[ablueclaret]

Only in Lord Beamishs mind but he's just a doddery old befuddled soul long into his dotage.
Me and Coyote are as different as chalk and cheese, smooth sophistication as against passionate hyperbole !

[walter the softy]

I know there were some on the old/other board who thought that Butterfly Venom bloke was ABC but that was obviously wrong. Totally different styles that occasionally had in common imaginative insults, cultivated adjectives and a hankering for "the good old days". ABC and WEC though...that is too similar to my mind to be a coincidence.

Benefit of the doubt though, are you twins or related somehow or do you even know each other?! You say different as chalk and cheese ABC but I would say two sides of the same coin. After all, there used to be A Red Claret too if memory serves me right.

Ha, you wouldn't let us in on it even if you were leading us all on a merry dance so you might as well carry on.

UTC!

[ablueclaret]

Butterfly Venom is WEC, ablue remains ablue.
Aredclaret got banned unfortunately, now he was my alter ego, and before that jfclaret, but as I've been taken for Karl Lafferty, OC, Claret Tony even SD it really does become hard to follow for a simple country boy like myself.

[BennyD]

Only in Lord Beamishs mind but he's just a doddery old befuddled soul long into his dotage.
Me and Coyote are as different as chalk and cheese, smooth sophistication as against passionate hyperbole !

Obviously you are the passionate hyperbollocks.

[ablueclaret]

Oh dear must be doing something wrong.

[walter the softy]

Butterfly Venom is WEC, ablue remains ablue.
Aredclaret got banned unfortunately, now he was my alter ego, and before that jfclaret, but as I've been taken for Karl Lafferty, OC, Claret Tony even SD it really does become hard to follow for a simple country boy like myself.

This makes sense now. When you put yourself in self-imposed exile a while back, WEC popped up relatively soon afterwards and it seemed that this was just your more acerbic alter-ego. Sometimes the similarities in both yours and his posts are striking though.

[ablueclaret]

Just to remind you that I've been pretty consistent in what I've been saying.

[taio]

that is the way this side needs to do it if it is to survive.