[Highlights] Roar hand Jets A-League wooden spoon

Sorry, I can't reconcile your comment that you know little about him yet you go on to say he's "pompous". Surely the later statement requires the former? Anyway, I'm done now - this is no longer a discussion I'm interested in.

Thanks Waz, but I do have some difficulty reconciling timeframes in this discussion. AP announced his resignation as Roar coach on 24/4/2012, almost 3 years to the day. So just who is this Ken Stead? I know little about him, except for his decision not to be involved with ManU some 10 or so years ago, because he did not think they would change their ways so as to fit in with his ideas. This was when ManU was riding on a high more often than not! If this information is accurate, KS would appear to be somewhat pompous, don't you think? There again, if it is a case of misinformation, an entirely different scenario unfolds. Just when did he become "The Guardian"? And did he, in fact, inherit this title? I find it interesting, because he is now, and has apparently been for some considerable time, in charge of the Philosophy Dept. I might add that I find it somewhat unnerving that a UK national is left in charge of footballing philosophy. BTW, I am a UK national, so no Anglophobia!

I could be wrong but I thought you were referring to taking shots at goal when the opportunity presented it self including from the edge of the box.

I agree with you on stats, the two top scoring sides have fewer shots than Roar - so it's quality we need not quantity. Ange v Ken Stead, Ken Stead didn't create the Roar philosophy Ange did - so after Ange left the club they stated this is the way they want to continue to play football so Kens job as Head of the Football Department will be to ensure its consistent application; given the success of the youth players over the past 18 months (12 introduced to first team football) it would seem evident that whatever is going on in the back room is working. Most bigger clubs would have a structure that includes either a Technical Director or Head of Football Dept, it's rare these days for one person to be exclusivly in charge of coaching so when Mulvey wanted to make changes he needed to get buy in from a variety of people and not just do his own thing

Statistics can sometimes be quite amazing, as in CPI figures from time to time. I tend to side with Churchill on this subject "I only believe in statistics I have doctored myself" or Mark Twain "Lies, damned lies, and statistics". I have seen some of the shot statistics attributed to Roar, and have shaken my head in disbelief. That aside, did Ken Stead dictate to Ange Postecoglou how the Roar was to be coached? On the positive side, I have been impressed with the approach of the players promoted from the Youth team. Far more attack minded and positive than some of the first team regulars this season. It is almost as if they have been imbued with a different, changed, or new philosophy. A strange state of affairs, as has been Roar's season.

It's interesting you mention shots - only four sides have had more shots than Roar and two of those have less than ten more shots so we're not far off. Ken Steads been part of all the championship winning coaching sides and when you look at the kids coming through its clear he's been doing his job well

Regarding Ken Stead all I can gather about his role and influence at the club is that he is the "“Roar football guardian” - a title bestowed on him by managing director Sean Dobson. See http://www.couriermail.com.au/sport/football/roar-football-guardian-ken-stead-backs-a-league-club-over-decision-to-sack-mike-mulvey/story-fnk6pqhe-1227137580020 . In particular regarding where Mulvey failed - "The main thing is we get back to expressing ourselves because that was one of the best things about Brisbane Roar in the past five years - playing without fear and expressing ourselves. It’s part of our mantra at the club.” . I would think that shooting without fear is also part of 'expressing ourselves' but why Roar players do it so little is also a mystery to me.

I agree with Roar playing "...the high energy, aggressive pressing and possession based...football...". To me, however, the whole concept tends to fall down once we gain possession. At least, this was the impression I gained last season. Once in possession, it was extremely rare for a Roar player to strike the ball with any intention of attempting to score or create a goal. Countless times one would observe Roar playing the ball back from their opponents' penalty area to the halfway line, or even further! Each time this happened, Roar had ignored an opportunity of creating a scoring chance. For mine, that was not attacking football. As the ice hockey legend Wayne Gretsky has been quoted "You will miss 100% of the shots you don't take". If Ken Stead is all powerful as has been stated, and dictates the club's playing philosophy, why isn't he the coach? After all, any coach worth his salt will have his own playing philosophy, the success of which will be determined by results. I would be surprised if any coach at A League level would accept an assignment where some of the questions had already been answered and checked as correct. It certainly would not happen at any higher level, IMO. Only one club coped with Roar last season, which was perhaps just as well, for if they hadn't, Roar would have won the premiership by a staggering 19 points! That would have made it challenging for the hierarchy to offer a convincing excuse for sacking MM. I stand to be corrected, but the team I refer to is Newcastle Jets, who were victorious in all three encounters last season. From memory, the Jets also employed the high press in those games.

I will also say that the issue of who and how a player fits in the Roar style is largely a theoretical discussion. In reality the coach is the one who has to use the players he recruits in the a way that works for both the style and players' abilities. Every player is different so the coach has the job of making it work. That is why we need coaches to are good at recruitment as well as instructing. And as Waz mentioned, early proper pre-season is also essential.

Agree. Also I sincerely hope we do not repeat this type of debacle ever again. There are similarities with how Rado fell from grace and Mulvey. Both wanted to impose their own styles. Both made very bad recruitment decisions. Both started the seasons badly. If there is one thing that Roar has to improve on, then it's learning to refresh the squad properly esp. when key players leave. Promoting the youth is one thing but over relying on them will not do.

That sums it up neatly; the new coach on board good and early is a must, a proper pre-season training plan, decide who we are keeping and who's going (Steff and Sorata are the big two but then Young, Kaluderovic and Daning are all off contract), and presumably make one or two considered signings. The disappointing thing losing Frans is we have a whole new learning curve for the new guy to go through.

My input here about style and players fitting in (or not). There has been so many big changes after the season started, so for me this season has been a 'make do with what we have and who we hastily recruited (coach included)'. All 4 players (Kurtishi, Kaluderovic , DeVere, Polenz) were recruited without the benefit of going through pre-season so they had not been exposed to the 'style' that the team wants to play prior to hitting the ground running. Now we hear rumours that Roar will hire a new coach at the end of the season so I will bite my tongue and see how this pans out. He may very well see that Kaluderovic is someone he can use effectively, or maybe not at all. He may even let go of players whom we all have grown to like. I think what we can be assured of is that Ken Stead will dictate that Roar play the high energy, aggressive pressing and possession based attacking football that Roar are known for. The difference is how the new coach will use the players he's got and which new players he recruits. Fingers crossed for the finals series, and I also look forward to the next big announcements that Roar are about to make.

I don't disagree with your statement that 5 and 6 have been poorer, inconsistency is why they are where they are compared to the top four and occasional short runs of consistency have kept them above the bottom half. I can't see either City or Roar going on from here and winning it but can imagine the howls of derision if either do - the top 5 though have not been "stand out" in any way and all of them have had patches of inconsistency and their own poor games; MV I think are deservedly top but even then, only just. The GF champions this year will be the team (most likely in the top 4) that can put two or three good games together and not wobble as so many have over the premiers plate position this year, whoever does that bags the main prize but if all four top teams wobble or show uncertainty then either one of city or roar may just steam through and take an unlikely title. Possible but not probable imo.

Yeah. I agree that Perth had to be disqualified from the finals and that the 7th placed team had to make up the numbers to avoid massive turmoil for the finals, but even taking Perth out of the equation, Brisbane will finish as the 6th best team out of 9 with nearly double the teams above them as below. A few flukey wins won't change the fact that they have been poor this season. The finals system introduces a level of pressure that the league doesn't have and I'm fine with the champions being a different team to that which finishes on top at seasons end, but they should have to be in the race for the premiership at least. Any of the top 4 teams (5 if you include Perth) have been close enough and good enough this season that no one such team can claim to be significantly better than the others (MV fans will disagree but I'm not trying to take away from their achievement or downgrade it). City and Brisbane on the other hand have been well off the pace and would be undeserving winners in my opinion, especially if the finals games were close.

Both.

All good JB. Style of play and players fitting in was brought up by others. In this thread my input was merely people having different views. I congratulate you for putting in the effort to analyse deeper than most. Likewise I may not agree with everything which you or others write, and vice versa - such is life in these type of columns. Keep up the good work too :)

Well one can also say that Brisbane did not finish 7th taking in to account one team that cheated the whole system.

Waz I was at the game as usual and I thought it was an entertaining first half. The second half drifted a bit into what we were joking about in the stands as a bit of the 'keep possession but go nowhere' style that aflicts brisbane at times...we thought the senior players must have had something to say at half time telling the youngsters that all the attacking they were doing in the first half wasn't how to play the game. The match livened up again after Kofi came on at the traditional time that Mitch Nichols used to get dragged (68 minutes) which bought with it the first far post goal i have seen for a long time, good on Kofi for making that run so he could be on the spot to score. From that point on the game got entertaining again as the jets got in on goal a couple of times and found the equaliser. We responded by butchering a couple of gilt edge chances and scoring from a goal mouth scramble after a corner....a well worked set piece!!! Again i couldn't recall us scoring from a corner for a couple of seasons so the game had it all! Didn't think solorzano played poorly and he got pushed too wide by Yango in that 2 v 1 so couldn't criticize him there...Yango tried to do the right thing but could have had a crack himself. Overall good to finish with a win and thought most of the time the young guys handled the wooden spooners well.

jb - not sure if you saw this article but it's an explanation of the City Football Groups, and therefore MCFC's, philosophy: http://www.a-league.com.au/article/revealed-the-melbourne-city-fc-philosophy/1gy8dl9arz9qb14h93ufujnrhq My personal belief was at the time of Mulveys sacking they chose not to list the half-dozen things they felt Mike had done wrong nor did they feel justified in sacking a double winning coach 7 games into a season so by way of explanation they cited this deviation from "philosophy" which without any further explanation or understanding just made matters worse because fans didn't understand it. Last season I can't recall the word philosophy being used, this year it just crops up everywhere. The recent town hall meeting with Dobson helped where, when asked explicitly not to use the P word to explain Mulveys sacking Dobson gave an example on training methods being deviated from causing coaches and some players to do their own thing behind Mikes back. But even now, exactly what the Roar philosophy is or what it covers is not clear so it would all be guess work to try and define it imo

I just read a player rating article for this game where I thought they pretty much got every players rating right; the one exception was Solorzano (awarded the lowest score at 6.5 and panned quite badly as having a poor game) - I was there live and thought he had a good game generally despite his last minute miss ... what do others think?