I want Xisco to be fired 30 mins after promotion is secured just to ensure maximum outrage and confusion in the press.
The man has got us working incredibly efficiently, a bit like Quique in his first spell up until Christmas. However we are playing excellent football (when the pitch allows), unlike Quique. We don't have a decent striker to rely on, unlike Quique. And Xisco took over when morale was pretty non-existent, unlike Quique. Give him Toney or Pukki, and Xisco would have had the Championship title tied up weeks ago. Get the man a statue.
It depends on who else is available. If we continue to beat the top teams in the division over the next few weeks, then my guess would be yes.
I think excellent football is a stretch. Norwich was just about the most perfect 90 minutes, but not every game is like that. We tend to play well in patches, sometimes for only 5-10 minutes per game. Our build up play is often quite stilted and lacking in ideas. Norwich more regularly play excellent football, as in many passages of play that are pleasing to the eye.
I see where miked2006 is coming from regarding the "excellent football". Personally I've been very impressed by some of the football played since the formation change, it's just as good as if not better than what we played under Joka. We all agree on how good the Norwich game was, but these are matches (or parts of) I've enjoyed the most in no particular order: Bristol City (h) Rotherham (a) (This was the most entertaining for me - five goals, a penalty saved, and us hitting back immediately after conceding. Along with the Birmingham game it reminded me of the Huddersfield home game under Gracia - a satisfying dispatching of relegation candidates that was far less one-sided than the scoreline suggested) Birmingham (h) First half of Forest (h) Most of Derby (h) and Blackburn (a) Even Preston (a), while not a classic was pleasing because after the frustrating Millwall game, it showed that we'd worked out how to break down a defensive team, by playing with pace and variation, and not simply trying to pass it through the middle (or hoof it when that wasn't working). Not only that, we are scoring with style and the players for the most part look like they are enjoying themselves. And for all that, Munoz does deserve some credit - yes, he's got good players, but there are plenty of managers with far more experience who likely would have this team playing distinctly average football with the same if not worse results - Michael O'Neill or Steve Cooper for instance, out of the top of my head. I've admitted before that football isn't my main interest and some matches I've watched/been to have been more out of obligation than a burning desire to watch a football game. It's thanks to Munoz that I'm looking forward to every match and have been more than prepared to reschedule other things planned way ahead to watch them.
I think the key with Munoz is he’s motivated the players and got them playing for each-other, a common cause, 100% commitment. The opposite to Ivic who was negative and wanted everyone to know he was a tough boss and hard man. Winning football matches takes more than just tactics. The football hasn’t always been great but work rate, positive attitude and desire has seen us grind out results in some pretty even matches that would not have happened under Ivic. The challenge next year, if we go up, will be finding a way to score whilst keeping tight at the back and keeping team morale and togetherness as good as it is today when we lose more than we win. A smile and a fun personality will only go so far.
Seemed to me Ivic had only one plan of attack. Work it slowly out to the wings and then get the ball in. Nothing ever went quickly, and nothing through the centre. And I don't think he encouraged Sarr to try and beat his man. I think Xisco has given more licence to play quicker and take a few risks.
I’m in absolutely no way comparing us to Burnley here, but in seasons gone by their have often been comparisons made between us and them. It’s often said that although they don’t necessarily play the best football their fans are entertained by their results. Obviously we’ve had a fantastic run of results and that in itself is entertaining. I don’t personally believe the actual football on show is always massively entertaining, as I said, it is in parts but we don’t always play well and sustain long periods of fluid play, however you can’t argue the results aren’t entertaining which for many naturally make the football entertaining.
This. Lots and lots of positive things about Xisco’s tenure and they are all listed in various posts above. But I do think 2 things aren’t really spoken about enough that trouble me in terms of him staying on... Lots of talk about his positivity etc etc - but let’s not forget that his boundless smile was worthless during that awful run of performances (not results) where the majority (not everyone) on here wanted him gone. His interviews were always saying the same thing and his team selections were very very puzzling. Morale was clearly through the floor - fair enough that may have been an Ivic hangover of sorts. But the reaction of the bench vs Norwich in his first game to the glum nature around the team in just a few weeks was very very concerning despite his infectious smile. And also that the turnaround in attitude and belief came from WTE rallying the squad and calling a team meeting, not Xisco reading the riot act or telling home truths. Had WTE not called that meeting, would our form have continued? From what he said the other week, I believe it would have. And it worries me how the players rarely talk about how well Xisco has done or the change he has made. I’m sure they all believe he has had an input in the turnaround for sure - but I’m not convinced they credit him massively. I want to believe Xisco can take us forward at PL level. I like the guy and think in a perfect world I’d like him to get the opportunity. But it’s not a perfect world and I just have my doubts that it’s not just a case of stars aligning that forced his hand selection/formation wise - that paid off in terms of early results and improved morale and it’s been a ball that’s gathered pace since. Certainly wouldn’t go overboard if he’s kept on for next season as Head Coach. But it feels like a massive risk and one I think we would regret. When I think of it like that, and remember Gino isn’t really wired to make that type of call, I see little chance of him being in charge. And as I have said a number of times, I’m very very concerned about him tactically and think he’d get exposed often in the PL, especially ‘in-game’ where his changes are often puzzling.
In fairness to Ivic, did we have the players to play through the middle? Sarr does indeed have more license to charge forward, but I think that's more of a system thing, he wasn't really doing it in a 4-4-2 under Xisco, but he is now that he's got more protection in a 4-3-3
In fairness, Chalobah gave credit to Xisco after Birmingham, which is good because I read that during the Coventry game, he was one of the players who was most confused by his garbled instructions
Oh yeah, I wasn’t suggesting the players have been purposely mute on Xisco. More that if he has been having the hugely positive effect that some of the fans claim, I would have expected to have heard about it far more when the players speak. The train of thought that a lot of the turnaround is down to him doesn’t marry up with the point that the players barely mention it and have pointed more towards things they have done as a squad as opposed to anything Xisco has done. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not trying to downplay Xisco. Merely that I wonder if we are guilty at times of overstating what how much of it is down to him.
Fair point. It just looked like we never worked it through the midfield at all. Even in a 4-4-2 you'd hope the midfield 2 could link with the strikers, or each other, or bring the ball forwards, not pass it wide all the time.
Thank god it's highly unlikely we'll ever see that insipid formation ever again at this club. Until Fat Sam comes in to save us next season.
I think you may have it backwards; it's the lack of rumours being reported about issues behind the scenes that tells the true story. Every time a squad is unhappy with a manager, rumours start to fly as disgruntled players leak info and try to put pressure on the manager. We basically have radio silence right now, which likely indicates that everyone is on board.
Or until the ‘Wheel of Football’ spins around to make it the most successful formation again, of course.
Your opinion doesn't mean I have it backwards and the opposite is the 'true story'. I have never said the players could be or even are unhappy with Xisco. Just that maybe all the talk of how his appointment alone turned us around is overstated and the players own motivation is a bigger driving force in our form. We have all been witness to the Pozzo-era...radio silence is not an indication of their happiness as far as they are concerned.
That’s three things you’ve listed You expressed a similar opinion before the Norwich game which I didn’t see until after that match and I didn’t want to challenge it before you had another say. But now that your view basically remains the same, can you explain what exactly is “disastrous” and “very very concerning” about Xisco’s in-game management and tactics? I can’t really think of any examples where his game management has cost us points. Swansea can be discounted as it was very early on, QPR was more the result of a generally bad performance and unbalanced team selection. Of games after the formation change where we let points slip late on (Boro and Luton away) those were down to individual or collective brain farts rather than poor game management. And he’s got the tactics right when it really mattered (Reading at home and Norwich away). And firstly surely the performances would have improved (well they couldn’t get any worse after Coventry!) even if weren’t for that team meeting due to the fact Deeney was out of the team if nothing else, and secondly, if Munoz’s role in the turnaround in form and performances has been overstated, why could that not be said about managers in general, if it seems a team of talented players is capable of getting together and doing the job themselves?
I'm not really sure how you can ask for examples - and then discount some good examples for your one reasoning. At this level maybe his decisions haven't gone on to cost us many points but I think that says a fair bit about the level of opposition really. As I've said, I don't really want to detract from the job he's done as I think he's done well on the whole. As for examples - the jury is out on the Deeney situation but I think its a big coincidence if we are suggesting Xisco suddenly had an epiphany about him at the exact same time he suffered a season ending injury... He rammed Gray down supporters throats for weeks when he was clearly all over the place in terms of ability and mentally. And then when Gray did get a few goals, he's banished him below an utterly ineffective Isaac Success... And Isaac Success who has also been preferred over Joseph Hungbo more often than not, despite the latter showing more drive, promise and determination in his cameos than Success has at any point... Randomly taking Sierralta out earlier in the season against a team well known for their aerial threat... Strangely moving around the CM trio against L*ton making Hughes the most advanced despite him shining in a deeper role and playing Zinckernagel in that more combative role rather than a more natural advanced position... Keeping Achraf Lazaar on the pitch in that game when its been reported that even his own backroom team quoted he was 'away with the fairies'... And any number of subs in games that have left a number of fans generally scratching their heads. And a desire to always make them at a certain time of the game (although I accept many coaches do this, I just prefer the more pro-active approach!) I disagree that L*ton and Middlesbrough were solely down to individual errors rather than poor management. Sema had been committing that same foul against Boro all afternoon for instance - poor management didn't spot that and do anything to change it. And if they told him and he didn't listen, get him off. Bad in-game management. As I have said....its difficult to write the above and not seem like I'm properly going after the bloke - but I'm really not! I think he's done brilliantly! I just don't trust he's of the required level to keep us up in the PL. I'm more than willing to accept I could be wrong on that. But I also don't think I'm alone in believing it.
I think his main weakness is not being ready to switch to a more mixed approach in games like Boro & scum when it was clear we were getting swamped in midfield by an intense press coupled with man-for-man. In both cases, putting on a more physical striker so we could have mixed up the play would’ve been a better option than continuing with the same approach. Even if that striker has to be Success!
I would say Bournemouth was a good example of bad in game management. Like for like subs when losing and only brought an extra attacker on (Perica) at 84 minutes.
There's more than a touch of the Gracias about him. Nice, won't ruffle any feathers amongst our toxic squad and so gets the best out of them for a good run. When things get tough, however, there's no evidence he has any tactical answers. Morale won't always be tip top and the team will have long tough patches. Take away the feel good factor and what does he offer? Nothing. Get rid.
Keep this at the top of the page please folks, just in case our owners are browsing the forum. They need to realise the level of negativity there is towards this guy. If he stays, we're down.
100% agree. Thanks for taking over the best squad ever to play in the championship and scraping second place due to the incompetence of our rivals, now *** off.
