THE CONCRETE ROUNDABOUT (TCR)

Karl Robinson introduced a style of football and a philosophy to the club which will be remembered fondly by most, but also it will be something every new manager and regime will be compared to. Karl's ideas will not be compared to because they were the best or the most successful, but it was something he was so passionate about and something we witnessed for over 6 seasons.

His style brought relative success. Two play off finishes the two mid table finishes followed by promotion. That year was not amazing because of the promotion but we did it Robinson's way, something he believed it so much. It was an absolute joy to watch.

As we start a new journey I'm curious as to what people see as more important, or what others want to see more. Style and success arnt necessarily connected. Mourinho has won variois leagues and the Champions League with a style, whilst Klopp and Guardiola both have different styles and also achieved.

I am not saying direct football will achieve promotion, nor am I saying we will struggle with a passing style. But if you had to compromise one or prioritise going forward what would it be? Is winning actually more important on here to people than the football being played? Does there even have to be a compromise?

We move into a new era. No Robbo, none of that old guard. We may see a very different style going forward. I'm just curious as to the priorities of fans going forward

(Another long post, I don't apologise)

They’re not mutually exclusive.

I find it unfair to say we had “two mid table finishes” under Robinson. We missed out on the playoffs by I think 4 points in 2012/13, a season where we lost our goalkeeper for 3 months. Overall I still stand by that that was a good season considering. We missed out by a smidge but had plenty of highlights that season. Unfair to call it mid table just because we didn’t finish inside the playoffs.

The next season was an obvious transitional year which saw the end to some “dead wood”.

Regardless, anyway as said above I think we can have both. People have had this odd thing about “rather win ugly than play well and not win” etc. Why not both. You can have both

_________________
The most optimistic pessimistic person on this forum.

Apparently.

UTF

Having one or the other is important for the club as both help put bums on seats, trouble is under Robbie we had neither which is why we are in a downward spiral.

I never said they were.

I'm questioning would people be happy if one were to be compromised for the other, not that they have to be

I’d rather us play good attacking football with a team who play well together and link up well. That stands a better chance of success for me.

_________________
The most optimistic pessimistic person on this forum.

Apparently.

UTF

The style that gets a result on the day. There’s no point dumbly persisting with one style (Robboball for example) if it is not working.

Whatever we mean by style, you have to adapt it to the circumstances of each match. In fact, be able to adapt during each match.

Simple answer...let's play the old Wimbledon "crazy gang" way. Never did them any harm.

Like most I believe a good style will bring success, but it does need to be tempered with a bit of steel. I believe Liverpool go a bit too gun ho, but who would deny them the success they have achieved recently, while I also admire Atletico Madrid, even when they go six at the back. In the end you need good players to play whatever system and I can't see the old Wimbledon style working, we would have only 9 players on the pitch every game, although we did win that one.

_________________
Disclaimer: All my comments are my opinions unless stated otherwise. I'm just a fan following my club.

I grew up with Segers fash goal. Did me no harm.