I would like to give you my opinion on the current situation at the club.
I am impressed by some of the improvements this season the team are mentally stronger, well organised, and fitter.
So far this season there are some positives. However, my main concern is the style of play.
When Aidy became manager he promised attacking football, playing down the sides and between the lines. That interview convinced me to give him a chance and get a season ticket. Like many city fans I was initially very disappointed with the appointment because of his reputation for the long ball game.
The fans were hoping for someone like Tony Mowbray, Sean O'Driscoll, Brendan Rogers, Gus Poyet, or Stuart Pearce. Instead we got Boothroyd, who not one fan wanted, but after hearing his comments and reading that he had studied at some of the best clubs in the world: "I went to Ajax, PSV, AZ Alkmaar, Milan, Bayern Munich and teams in this country just to have a little look at what they do at the very top level because the more you learn, the better chance you have of improving yourself." I decided to see if he could prove the doubters wrong.
I hoped that he would have been educated by these clubs, and moved away from his long ball philosophy. I was anticipating attractive football, out and out wingers, and a creative deep lying forward. Like When Ian Holloway was sacked by Leicester he went to study from clubs in Spain and Holland, he then returned to football with Blackpool, abandoned his traditional 4-4-2 and long ball tactics in favour of the more advanced 4-3-3 and possession play continental tactics, and is now having tremendous success. Unfortunately for us Aidy has not implemented what he learned from the top European clubs, and continues to persist with 4-4-2 and direct play.
The first game of the season was very promising we had width and a variety up front. After a few poor away performances he reverted back to what he knows best - the long ball game.
It appears that he did not learn anything from his time studying football in Holland, Italy, and Germany.
Boothroyd claims that we are only playing at 60% of our potential, but a lot of city fans, think that we are playing to our potential, because we are so 1 dimensional. Our game is based on long balls to Platt and attempting to win 2nd balls. We have no width as our wide players main roles are to get close to Platt and concentrate on 're-starts'. Is this the best that we can hope to see?
When his 'work in progress ' is complete will that be when we are the tallest, most direct and physical team in the league?
If the team had variety in attack, then we could reach our full potential, but without width and a deep lying forward between the lines, the attacking options are extremely limited. We never get crosses in from the attacking third, and we never play any through balls, because our attackers are not down the sides or between the lines, like Aidy promised the fans in an interview on CWR.
I am very concerned by the low attendances, and the huge amount of criticism of the style of play in the media and by the fans. I fear the attendances will get lower and the clubs negative image as an ugly long ball team will have bad consequences for the club, and we will end up losing money, having to sell players, and getting a reputation like Wimbledon in the 80's and 90's.
There appears to be too much emphasis on being defensive and keeping the shape. The 4-4-2 formation, does not allow for as much variety in attack. Our wide midfield players are never in a position to exploit counter attacks, and we have no threat between the lines. That is why we should change the formation to 4-2-3-1 or 4-4-1-1
The team should be built around King and not Platt. If King had 2 wide players supplying crosses and a deep lying partner like Eastwood, Gunnarsson, Baker or Jutkiewicz, playing between the lines and providing through balls, then I believe that King would score 20 goals a season.
At the moment he is feeding on scraps. The constant long balls to Platt often result in us giving possession away. When Platt does win headers, they are often hopeful flick on's that never lead to a chance for King. Aidy says penetration is more important than possession, but long balls and flick on's are very rarely penetrating. Penetration comes from through balls, and crosses from the attacking third.
The style of play does not suit Carsley either. The long ball game is often bypassing him, which makes it appear that he contributes very little and has come in for criticism from the fans.
The club has some of the best midfield players in the division, but they are having the passing and movement coached out of them.
Long ball teams are not successful. If they were, don't you think everyone would be playing this way? No long ball team has ever won the Premier League, Champions League, or World Cup, because the higher the level of football, the more important ball retention is.
As we have found out against the best teams in the division, the higher the level of football the more important possession is, and because we can't keep possession we are often punished. As a Coventry fan, I do see good football at the Ricoh, but it is always from the opposition.
I feel sorry for Eastwood and Jutkiewicz, they are talented footballers that are a threat in many different situations. They offer the team pace, movement, skill and goals. But Aidy prefers Platt even though he lacks all of these qualities, but he is 6"4.
I remember a recent quote stating that Aidy likes to play Richard Wood at left back because of his height, and stating that 'a good big un always beats a good little un'. Well, this is wrong, just as Mike Tyson and Manny Pacquiao proved in Boxing. Skill is more important than height.
Ashley Cole is 5"9 and is one of the best left backs in the world. Barcelona are one of the smallest teams in the world, but also the best, because the emphasis is on possession, movement and creativity. Not Like Boothroyd who prefers tall players and percentage play.
Another comment that stands out from Aidy is that 'since Spain won the world cup everyone wants to see tiki taka possession football'. Again, this is not true. Football fans have always preferred to see possession play instead of the long ball game. Liverpool in the 70's and 80's, Clough's Forest in the 80's, Man Utd and Arsenal in the last 15 years.
Fans have never wanted to see long ball football. This is one of the reasons why our attendances are so low. If we played attractive football like Doncaster, Swansea, and Cardiff etc, we would have a much higher average attendance.
I remember a comment from Chris Coleman last season: 'I would pay to watch Doncaster because they play such good football'. Well because we play like a Sunday league team, we get such poor attendances.
I prefer watching Greg Rioch's under 18's because they play football 'the right way' based on possession and movement, in a 4-4-1-1 formation, instead of hit and hope to a big striker.
I remember Aidy's final season at Watford where he promised the fans that he would change the style of play and actually try to play football. Not long after he was sacked. Is this why he is so against possession play, because he could not coach good passing and movement?
I am fed up of Boothroyd referring to his time at Watford 5 years ago, where he had one good season. Just like the following managers who have had one good season, and are now nowhere to be seen:
Micky Adams, 2002/03, Leicester
Iain Dowie, 2003/04, Crystal Palace
Paul Jewell 2004/05, Wigan
Phil Brown 2007/08, Hull
Look at Colchester, they have had the best start to a season since 1983, and the fans are delighted that Aidy left and they are now playing attractive, entertaining, passing football.
Last season at Colchester, Boothroyd only won 2 of the last 14 games because teams had sussed out his 1 dimensional tactics, even in May when they finished 8th he was still saying they were a 'work in progress'. That squad was one of the best in the division, but he failed to get the best out of them due to his blind faith in percentage play. I can not understand how he has got a UEFA Pro Coaching Licence, when he is only capable of coaching the awful long ball game.
If he does get Coventry promoted in the next few years, it appears that what happened at Watford will repeat itself. He will get promoted, the long ball game won't work in the Premier League and he will get relegated. He will get criticism for the style and promise to change, and he will be incapable of coaching possession play and will get sacked.
Look at Doncaster and Swansea, our players are much better than theirs but they play better football because they have better coaches.
We are horrible to play against but we are also horrible to watch. That is why our attendances are so low and the style of play attracts so much criticism from the fans and media.
All I would like to see is for the club to give the fans value for money and entertainment by getting the team playing attractive attacking football, that we have not seen since Eric Black was in charge.
Aidy seems to have a defeatist mentality by believing that we can't pass, dribble or shoot as good as the opposition, so the only we can beat them is in the air or from set pieces. This lack of faith in the players can't be good for their confidence.
This is the best group of players that Aidy has ever had, but he is not playing to their strengths, the only player that this style of play suits is Clive Platt.
GOOD POINTS
. 2 good players for every position
. Well organised defence
. Threat from set pieces
. Excellent youth academy
. Good blend of youth and experience
. Good stadium
. Catchment area of over 300,000 people with no major local rivals
THINGS TO IMPROVE
. Passing and movement
. Style of play lacks variety it is boring, predictable and not value for money
. Lack of width
. Need an attacking threat at left back to exploit the space that McSheffrey leaves out wide
. With 2 out and out target men, there is no option to play between the lines and exploit space
. Lack of creativity in midfield without Clingan.
. Need a partner for King. Either Eastwood, Jutkiewicz, Baker or Gunnarsson. They can provide more chances and score more goals than Platt.
. The movement is awful, all the players expect the diagonal ball to Platt, and do not make themselves available to provide other options
. Keogh's final ball is very poor, he often gives possession away and very rarely gets in good crosses. He has also been at fault for so many goals and the opposition continually exploit his defensive weaknesses.
. We are 1 dimensional, and do not play through midfield or use the wings.
. New contracts for Westwood, Gunnarsson, King, McPake, Clingan and Eastwood.
. Sell McIndoe, and Doyle (when Osbourne and Deegan are fit)
. Get a left back on loan until Hussey and O'Halloran are ready for the first team
. Instead of focusing on winning 2nd ball. Focus on a quality passes that lead to a cross, through ball or shot.
. Loan out academy graduates to gain 1st team experience
. Direct play gives the ball away more often, against good teams we will be punished
. Attempt to form the previously mentioned partnership with Sporting Lisbon, or another top European club
. Improve ball retention and dominate possession more at home
. All the emphasis appears to be on diagonal balls and restarts, we must have more emphasis on attacking variety, and work on through balls and crosses.
. We often let the opposition dominate games at the Ricoh, because we can't keep possession
. Improve the image of the club by playing attractive attacking football, our defence is good but the attacking play is awful, and lacks movement, creativity, variety and flair.
I am very worried about the attendances and feel that we will have to sell players to balance the books. As long as we play the long ball game we will not get an average attendance of over 20,000, even if we were top of the league or in the Premier League.
Aidy is a supposedly a very forward thinking manager and modern in his approach, but the one thing that lets him down is his out dated tactics of 4-4-2, direct play and target men. This was common in the 70's and 80's but football has evolved. The most successful teams throughout history have always been based on possession and movement, and used a split striker system, with a creative forward
Aidy has potential because of his man management skills and attention to detail, but as long as he persists with the long ball game, we will not reach our potential.
Great managers such as Shankly, Paisley, Clough, Ferguson and Wenger, have always had these things in common:
A philosophy based on short passing and quick movement.
4-4-1-1 formation, with a deep lying creative forward that provides through balls like Cantona, Bergkamp, Sheringham and not a 1 dimensional target man
2 dominant central midfield players playing zonally
In Europe the focal point of the team is the no.10, the playmaker, as he creates goals and scores goals. Whereas, in Aidy's teams, the focal point of the attack is a tall forward. He offers the team very little and creates less and scores less than a deep lying forward.
I feel I have to make an effort to write this email in the hope that the fans can be more vocal to try and influence Aidy to change his style of play so that I, along with thousands of other Coventry fans can enjoy football again. I just believe that long ball football belongs in the amateur leagues, and professional teams have a duty to entertain the fans.
Kind regards,
A concerned fan