A Microcosm of his Tactics

You've said what I was trying to say on Saturday (only far better) when challenged as to why I would dare to call the Moyesiah "overly cautious".

The truth is every time Moyes and his team face a massive game, we bottle it. Cup Final, Semi-Final, derbies at Anfield, Villarreal in the Champions League — all end in tears. Moyes is a loser and will never change.

Saturday I looked at the fixtures and thought Arsenal, Liverpool and Spurs could all lose and all we have to do is win to make up some ground. Arsenal & Liverpool did lose Spurs drew and Moyes fucked up again. Forget CL spots — we've no chance.

Moyes has never looked like winning anything since he arrived and I won't hold my breath waiting for change.

But bringing on Naismith was never going to get Goodison buzzing, I saw his limited abilities early on in the season and unfortunately he has failed to improve since then.

Arsenal yesterday despite being down to 10 men and trailing by 2 goals still attempted to carry the fight to City — what would Moyes have done? He would have shut up shop to keep the score down.

Unless Moyes takes more risks in trying to win games, I think we could struggle to get into Europe this season, which will likely lead to our better players leaving for CL footy is they can get it.

James Martin posted in another thread about Fellaini; I wouldn't sell him but I'd move him back into midfield now and put a ball-player behind Jelavic.

And Neville should never play in midfield again and with Coleman coming into his own at right back I think Phil would be great at keeping the bench warm.

I also hope Moyes doesn't sign another contract; time for a change.

Out of the 92 professional clubs in England we currently sit in fifth position. In the Premier League, there are fifteen teams below us, whose supporters are equally entitled to exercise the nebulous, and hypothetical, 'if's & buts,' line of complaint.

Of the four teams above us, we've beaten two of them, and taken a point from the champions away from home.

It takes more than a 'steady Eddie,' to completely and overwhelmingly transform the mentality & capability of the club he inherited in 2002, Jim.

We have lost only THREE of the last THIRTY ONE Premier League games.

Tony, I'm going to print and frame your post. Loved it.

What about the Spurs game where we came back to beat them? What about the Newcastle game where we came back and beat them? Tactical genius then surely?

And what if Jela had stuck it top corner in the 89th minute? Then we would never have this article going on about overly cautious blah blah bollocks.

We're 5th in the table, well in touch with 3rd and 4th. We're playing some of the best football seen at the club in 20 years. Try and enjoy it ffs.

I personally think that's a touch harsh.

We are having a good season.

Oviedo on the left tends to stifle Baines in my opinion, as they both go for the byline, and Piennar on the right is just not as effective as he is on the left.

Except for the odd crossbar splintering long range effort, Hitzelsperger hasn't shown much that would make me think he can provide the kind of attacking intent and creativity we were lacking.

As far as I can see it, Swansea very effectively shut down the Baines/Pienarr/Osman axis through which nearly all of our attacking play is derived from. I'm not sure who we could have brought off the bench to change that?

We blitzkrieged Swansea and they battled well for a point.

And lo and behold, the 'Moyes out' brigade emerge from the woodwork.

This is a totally different, expansive, increasingly confident Everton nowadays.

Yes, Swansea took a point home, but by god we battered them, as we have done the vast majority of teams we have played this season: from United at home to City away.

When will some people see the bigger picture, appreciate the tangible progress we are making (on a shoestring budget) and the team we are building.

Everton are, at last, becoming a genuinely feared side, who keep going from the first whistle to the last - but of course, Moyes has nothing do with that has he?

We had more than double the amount of goal attempts than they did, yet they took the lead via a deflected goal.

So, can I presume that we would, in your view, have been somehow more deserving if our two goals had been scored earlier, perhaps?

On the subject of late goals that have cost us points, do you, by the same token, therefore class Reading, Newcastle & Norwich also lucky against us?

Or has Jamie Sweet characterised your outlook perfectly?

Moves was appointed to build a good team capable of playing in Europe and avoid relegation. That was the sum total of his remit from the board I think. To win silverware is unrealistic in Moyes eyes, he has neither the players or does not make enough luck to mount such a challenge , the FA cup is his best, only, opportunity to win silverware.

I think Norwich and Newcastle were very lucky to get anything out of those two games as we went to sleep for the Newcastle equaliser and Gave away a contentious free-kick for the Norwich goal.

Reading was us not kicking on when we had one goal, and them working extremely hard.

Jamie Sweet, it isn't always good luck when we win. Most of our wins have been down to good management and players either putting in enough work in the first half, or not giving up late in the game. Just because I think one of our wins was lucky doesn't mean I won't give the manager some credit. That was a typical polarised response that everyone's been talking about lately.

1. Neville is in midfield because he is the only fit mid who can hold our shape in CM.
2. Vellios did come on for Anichebe...
3. Pienaar plays on the left because he drifts inside and drags his marker there so Baines can overlap. Pienaar on the right will mean no space for Coleman to move into since he will naturally play wider.
4/5. Baines at LM, Coleman at RM??? Havin a laugh?

Thank god this guy isn't the manager! Doesn't seem to know much about football.

At the end of the day, we played a Swansea team in good form, didn't take our few chances and have pretty much no options on the bench to change the game. Also the idea Baines/Pienaar seems to not be true. Have a look at The Executioner's Bong page, he does a good analysis.

http://theexecutionersbong.wordpress.com/

Does he make the most of what he has?

Don't think he does.

We are in touching distance of 3rd and 4th and playing the best football in years.
Swansea shut up shop for most of the game and we couldn't break them down, Moyes felt that bringing on Vellios and Naismith would've changed the game. It didn't work, but it's not his fault, sometimes you get it right, i.e. Newcastle, Tottenham. Sometimes you don't.

We dominated the match and created opportunities from start to end, it's not like we had a red hot striker on the bench anyway, just some youth players and a pacey if unproven Costa Rican.

The most hypocritical thing I have read lately was the proposal of Spurs, Arsenal, Liverpool and Man Utd to get together to block Man City and Chelsea from spending so much on transfers. The only club out of the 4 that hasn't spent bundles recently is Arsenal.

I reckon the other fifteen clubs should get together and stop selling players to them all. They have devalued the top league and turned it into a SFA where winning the title is meaningless.

It was far and away a better competition when it was the old First Division without SKY biased pundits who cream themselves over foreign players so long as they play for the supposed super clubs.

I don't enjoy admitting it but when Liverpool were dominant it was without foreign players and every team had an equal chance. Man Utd were squirming in those days and Chelsea were a joke team. Man City were also rans and Spurs were the easy beats away from home.

I'm sick of seeing the same teams paying out big transfer fees for any player who can control a football and sit him on their bench so that they cannot play for anyone else.

However, I think Moyes' substitutions against Cheltenham summed him up. With the game over he decided to give Hitz & Naismith some game time instead of any of the lesser used subs. I think it was him saying that these are the next two players I'm going to use throughout the season regardless of what needs to be changed on the pitch.

He'll use these two and shuffle the pack to suit. Now the Gueye substitution doesn't tie in with my point. In fact it makes no sense at all. But I do think that he's unwilling to shuffle his attacking players around in the hope that something new might come off.

In other words, more than enough for any manager with a "set of balls" and anything remotely resembling the tactical awareness of the opening poster to have us sitting 12 points clear at the top of the Premier League!

Liverpool won all their European Cups without foreign players so back then we were good enough, but not now.

I'm probably a lot older than most subscribers to this site and I well remember when both our city sides ruled the roost. That was without the imbalance we have today. Teams like Ipswich, Leeds and Portsmouth won titles because money was not the factor.

I used to have a bet on Everton for the league and cup with a chance of winning money...

I was commenting to a Chelsea fan this morning about the table and how strange it was where we were after what I consider to be a poor season...considering.

Saying this just explains why experts say that planet Earth is in trouble. Don't get me wrong: I'm not a Buddhist or anything like that, I just really feel sorry for you.

I wish you could come to Hungary and watch a few top league games. You would shit yourself how embarrassing watching football can be.

I hope we qualify for CL and I wish I could be there in the UK when it happens, next to you, and be the first person to listen to your opinion how 3rd place would've been better.

Once Swansea had revealed their gameplan, Coleman should have been pushed further forward with Neville moving to right back during the first half.

Another option that never gets used is 3 at the back; when a team has declared their intent that they are not coming out of their own half, why do we keep a back 4 to snuff out the threat of one very lonely striker.

Barry Rathbone asks: "Does (Moyes) make the most of what he has?" Allow me to reflect on what he had on the bench against the Swans:

A goalkeeper who's made just 7 senior appearances in two years, a 21-year-old kid defender with them exact same number of games under his belt.

A crock midfielder who's last two professional contracts were cancelled by Wolfsburg & West Ham, and an 18-year-old Scot yet to even make a debut, another Scottish 'freebie', a cheapo utility player who hasn't even begun to settle-in; and (another) kid striker who's managed just 7 career goals thus far...

Barry, consider the depth & vastly superior quality of the ONLY FOUR squads above us in the table, then avail us of what would, in your opinion, be a more credible league position, based on "what he has."

4th, perhaps?

Top...?

It's a tad hypocritical to take the moral high ground and dismiss someone's post as a "typical polarised response that everyone's been talking about lately" right after telling us you are going to print off and frame a post which describes the manager of the club as "a loser" (a post which just happens to be from the man who polarises opinion like no other on this site)

To address the OP, the only microcosm I see here is this article relative to TW.

Everton fail to win game.

Article posted blaming manager. No fault attached to players or their limitations.

Editor triumphantly celebrates said blaming of the manager as the nail being hit on the head.

Usual suspects leap in to counter any criticism of Moyes.

Usual suspects respond to this with further criticisms of the manager.

Some excellent points lost amid the bickering.

Repeat ad nauseum until Moyes makes some throwaway comment to the media so this can be scrutinised to the nth degree.

I've thought in the past that Moyes should go as he had taken the team as far as he can. These days part of me wishes he'd go just to compare how the new guy would be viewed on here.

Nail...head..ker-pow!

Kevin, "a cheapo utility player who hasn't even begun to settle-in;"? Is this the same player that has, in his handful of appearances shown more promise and enterprise than more than half our squad has throughout the whole season?

To pretend to know better than Moyes smacks of arrogance not knowledge.

When Moyes has a Sturridge, Hernandes or a Ba on the Bench then judge him but in the meantime whatever he can do is probably not what he would ideally like to do given the quality afforded to him.

Anyone think with Fellaini coming back into midfield the idea would have been to draw Swansea out and exploit the space they leave? They didn't fall for it. So they shouldn't. They had their game plan. We've done it so many times before.

This continual move by some posters into pro- and anti-Moyes is tedious. When and if Moyes leaves the club, will those who support him without question start following his new club or will they – as they often threaten to do – castigate those that question his ability and sit back and say, "See, we told you to be careful what you wish for"?

Personally, I don't care who's in charge of Everton FC; whoever is in the hot seat has to take the rough with the smooth, no manager is beyond criticism – not even SAF at OT.

If some of the posters had been around in 1892, we would still be playing at Anfield because they would have said "Well you know it's not too much of a rent increase and the landlord does have a lot of money and influence, much better that we pay him what he wants rather than cause ourselves the bother of starting over."

Evertonians always want better, we want every player to improve all the time. If Jelavic scores 20 goals in a season, we want him to score 30 in the next season, that's just natural for any football fan – not just Evertonians.

It's for this reason that the players and manager earn more in a month than most of us can earn in a year.

Not teams like Swansea of course, but games where the opponent turns up for an away draw - it is the bread and butter of most Champs League teams, that they win their home games and get a draw away from home.

We need to be able to beat teams at home regardless of how they set up. If we can't get through them on the ground, we need to play to force the set piece, not just wait for it to happen.

Basically, it's good and well saying we dominate possession, but that doesn't automatically mean we dictate the game. Dictating the game is essential at home.

Some fans would give him the benefit of the doubt, especially in the supposed "honeymoon period".

Some fans would want to give him lots of time and not be too hasty in proffering their judgement.

Some fans would point up his successes and identify his failings, especially if there was a pattern that started to develop.

Some fans would hold him to the highest historical standards espoused by Everton FC from the get-go.

And of course some fans would worship the very ground he walked on, giving him a semi-religious title that embraces his position as their spiritual leader, hanging on his every utterance, and constructing seemingly rational explanations that seek to justify the circumstances under which he manages to screw things up despite the almost divine status he as been accorded.

Choose your group wisely!

"I think some supporters are forgetting this is the same Swansea that beat Chelsea at Stamford Bridge earlier in the week playing exactly the same way."
So we are better than Chelsea or Swansea were lucky to get the result at Stamford Bridge (based on the actual results)? But Chelsea beat us, so.... silly me, I keep forgetting that they were lucky to do so! This was a different game. You do not assume the result on what happened elsewhere and whenever, otherwise what is the point of turning up for some games. Instead, you plan for it, adapt your tactics, etc. You play the game and the manager reacts to what is happening on the pitch, simple as that.

"To pretend to know better than Moyes smacks of arrogance not knowledge." Everyone understands what is put forward on this site is largely conjecture, but as long as people are prepared to provide their reasoning why should it be considered arrogant? Sharing opinions and ideas is something that was essential for our evolution and is hard-wired into us. Questioning the decisions of others is just as natural, especially when those decisions impact on us in some way.

"When Moyes has a Sturridge, Hernandes or a Ba on the Bench then judge him but in the meantime whatever he can do is probably not what he would ideally like to do given the quality afforded to him."
Why can't we consider what he does with the players he has now? He still has options and what he does affects how the team performs.

I, like a fair few others now, have been wondering exactly what is Steve Round's input???....

No doubt (knowing this chairman) it's the ability to work for peanuts.

£4 million a year for managing the team? Yeah he should have a plan to win every match, and be critisized if not, but the ridiculous amount of money players and coaches get every year is not their fault.

I tell you if everything stays the same I need to work 1,166.6 years to earn £4 million but, after a point, people just cannot get better no matter how much money they get. The amount of money they earn is the system's fault and the fault of everybody who were involved in letting this out-of-control sports economy happen.

Had he thrown caution to the wind and gone for the win and Swansea sneaked one, he'd be slammed for being naive. He tried to change things with the options he has on the bench and it didn't work so we settle for a point and he's one-dimensional, timid etc. It's a no-win situation.

Folks seem to forget that Moyes sees these guys everyday so he knows better than most who can do what. What he gets paid has nothing to with anything – if it did then we'd be asking questions of most of the 11 players on the pitch. That said, what he sees in Naismith over Oviedo is beyond me.

I would love to see us go on a decent FA Cup run; however, the money from the CL and the chance to keep some of the players at the club is paramount to building a squad capable of competing, year-in, year-out.

Moyes brought on Vellios and Naismith... Maybe he could have brought on Oviedo to shake things up. There are many options and just because he doesn't do what one or other thinks, he is labelled as negative in the usual repetitive rants. Moyes isn't perfect but, given the circumstances, I believe he is doing pretty well. Unfortunately, for some, I don't believe anyone will be deemed good enough.

The Recent Chelsea game at home is the perfect example. We had an opportunity to declare to the league that we are serious contenders and the start of the game followed last year's script with an early Pienaar goal. With no pressure last season we went on to win but this year Lampard showed us what a champion's will is all about. Many Owners in the PL will know this which is why Moyes is looking at Germany as an option to get CL exposure.

Like everyone else I'm hoping we beat Spurs and Arsenal to 4th but until we start winning the big games Europa is all we can aim for.

He's a good manager but a long way short of a genius – and the top clubs recognize his limitations tactically as has been set out above. That's why if he feels in need of a move it will have to be to Germany where it's a much more even playing field and avoiding too many defeats is very highly regarded!

If Moyes had RVP we would have won; it's the quality of the players, end of story.

1. Play the ball on the deck through the Baines/Pienarr combo to stretch defenders out of shape and get the ball in the box.

2. Have Jags and Distin hit it long for Fellaini hoping for the big Belgian to use that chest control of his to lay the ball off to Jelavic.

When these don't work, we pull Fellaini back and push another striker forward hoping that defenders will follow him into the midfield allowing space for the forwards. As Nick says this didn't work either against Swansea. Not sure Moyes had anyone on the bench capable of providing a 4th option. Also it's worth highlighting that these approaches meant Swansea had to play re-actively to nullify our threat rather than playing pro-actively to create one of their own.

There are only two players in our squad who in my opinion would have provided a 4th option. Gibson with his range of forward passing, and Mirallas with his pace and skill.

What makes me laugh is people are complaining that Moyes is negative because he plays Naismith instead of Oveido. Naismith is a striker, Oveido is defender so the more positive attacking move was to bring Naismith on. Naismith might not be the best but he has shown he has a knack of making late runs into the box to score important goals.

Some people on here are just so desperate for anything to attack Moyes with... I really don't understand it when we are playing better than we have for ages and dominated a team who had beaten Chelsea away in their previous match.

Point number 2, That's exactly what he did and it didn't work.
Point number 3 and 4 bring Oviedo on for Anichebe. A defender for an attacker who has been scoring goals, hmm, very negative. If Moyes did that there would be hell to pay on here.

Point number 1, Moyes has at least twice this season won a game directly as a result of pulling Fellaini back into midfield.

Basically, because Moyes didn't do what you wanted and it didn't pay off for him, he is not the right man for a bigger club.

Laudrup won this one because they had no intention of playing football and defended well. The nullified Baines/Pienaar and unfortunately Mirallas wasn't on the right to try and get at them down that wing.

It comes to something when a manager's winning tactic is to "win" a draw.

I wonder if people will quote this negativity when they put Laudrup's name about for our next manager when Moyes leaves/is sacked?

Fellaini does well up front but I'd like us to have him back in his best position, which means finding a player who'll win the ball up front and work together with other players in a similar way. I wonder if Vellios could be that player.... given the chance??

Although he must be one of the favourites to be sacked or relegated this season. To be fair I think he is a decent manager but he has been exposed which has helped to highlight what happens when a manager loses his best players is given no money and has to play kids and other shite players. It shows what a brilliant manager Moyes realy is.

As a club we clearly have no ambition to actually achieve anything other than stay up. Moyes has ambition but I don't think he will stick around that much longer.

We have the best chance of CL we have had in a decade and we haven't even been able to scrape together the budget of a Championship side.

Our squad isn't big enough for the league and cup let alone Europe.

As for the second bit, allow me to be extremely confused as yesterday I was basically attacked for calling Coleman and Baines defenders instead of attackers, and now you're trying to counter my opinions by saying "Naismith is a striker, Oveido is defender so the more positive attacking move was to bring Naismith on."

First problem here is that Naismith was not put on in the position of striker. My second problem here is that I think you and I differ in our definition of "positive move". For me, it's replacing a player who is having a shocker with a player that might improve the standard on the field. Less than a few days earlier we all saw Naismith struggle to play a basic level of football against a team in League Two. Why bring on such a player to try and win a game against a supposed great side like Swansea?

For the first time in years we have a team that entertains and can beat any team on its day when at full strength. James is right... our bench is a disgrace and there is no one who can turn a game sitting on it.

We desperately need two or three top players which include a goalkeeper a central midfielder and a striker. Lukaku would be great plus Butland and a real playmaker eg; Modric or his like.

We are stumbling along by shopping at Charity shops and taking players other teams don't want. Heitinga was not wanted elsewhere, neither was Naismith or Hitzelberger. Even the one or two players who have come good were not competed for eg; Fellaini, Gibson and Mirallas. If ANY other club show interest in a player we drop out of the bidding and that includes many teams below us in the division.

We are a club who give anyone a job so long as he is cheap. Reminds me of a TV programme 'Never mind the quality, feel the width'. Davey boy is expected to make silk purses out of sows' ears and he has done quite well all things considered.

Your second point, I wasn't the one arguing with you saying Coleman and Baines defenders.

Your final point, I saw Rooney have a shocker against Shrewsbury Town, it happens, although I didn't think Naismith was as bad as people made out; he is just the latest whipping boy whether he plays good or bad. IMO bringing on Oviedo instead of Naismith would have made little difference but, if he did bring on Oviedo instead of Naismith, I have no doubt someone else would not be happy with the decision.

Add to that the fact that Moyes has dropped some players before for not playing well in a previous match, but Naismith still gets a run after the shite he has served up. It's the same nationalism from Moyes that brought McFadden back last season.

Ian, I wasn't throwing blame at you for the defenders as attackers, I was simply asking for clemency for my confusion after being told two different things from different people arguing the same points.

For the record, I believe that Moyes probably thinks he made the right decisions yesterday – that fucking quote after the Stoke game two years ago haunts me – but that doesn't mean for one second that I have to agree with him.

Additionally, for me you must see a different game watching on-line as to sitting at the stadium. Neville played well against the bar codes, disrupted most of their attacking play and kept Osman and Fellaini ticking over. Anichebe was also immense, so you knew that Moyes would pick both for the team playing Swansea.

Swansea entered our half 5 times, twice in the first half and three times in the second half (once from kick off) – do you think that was out of choice? That they couldn’t be arsed, or do think that Michu and his attacking chums thought fuck it? Nope, Neville & Fellaini disrupted everything they put together, Neville ran around like a mule. But hey, you must have seen that on-line – fuck, Swansea can pass for fun, their back four were continually looking for options – but nothing was happening, nothing was available. We were continually breaking up their play and reverting to attacking footy. But you have off-days, our final ball was either too long or too short, additionally, Swansea’s back four and keeper played like demon’s – well drilled and wasted time like I have never see at GP before.

Neville is not in the CM to find the killer pass he is there to break up the opposition – Osman and Fellaini were doing well, finding both sides of the park and attacking through the middle at will. So, what is it you guys want? We gained a point on the RS and the Arsenal, Spurs drew at QPR after dominating most of that game – but, as per Everton, they were unable to put the ball in the net.

If Jagielka or Distin could head a ball straight we'd have been one up and would probably have ran out winners by a couple of goals as Swansea would have had to come forward. How is it Moyes' fault that his players don't put easy chances away? He picked a team and formation that dominated Swansea and despite their best attempts to nullify us we still carved out numerous chances. Moyes can't do much more than that.

For all Naismith's limitations, he's notched a couple for us so why not give him a go, it's a very different prospect from having Van Persie and Hernandez sitting on your bench though isn't it. Alright it didn't work out for Moyes this time but againt Sunderland and Tottenham it did, against Newcastle and West Ham away it did, or do we only take single examples of games and use them to build entire arguments event though all the evidence this season would suggest that when Moyes has been behind in games he has more often than not found a way to get the win or at least a draw.

Teams will defend deeply against superior teams (we've all seen ourselves do it); we'll have to get used to a few more teams doing this at Goodison park. With the options in our squad we'll never be able to break them all down every single week. Mind you I'm sure all the so-called big clubs with top managers used to feel the same whenever we'd go over there shut up shop and nick a point. Genius when Laudrup does it; KITAP1 when Moyes does it.

Basically all it doesn't really matter what Moyes does as long as we get results does it. There's been some wins this season achieved by horrendous football that Moyes has been lauded for and other teams when we've ripped teams to shreds with amazing football but, because of a defensive lapse or bad finishing, Moyes gets called a PE teacher who is tactically naive.

You're absolutely right about the wrong substitution, I would have gone with the first one personally.

But from what I understood from the article, you thought he put Naismith on to go for 1 point? He put a defensive midfielder off and put an attacking midfielder on to try and save the point?

I agree that Naismith ain't very good, but he is an attacker for god's sake! Moyes didn't go for the point — I think it's a bit if a stupid point if I'm honest, just trying to find excuses for this negative nonsense.

I note your tacit agreement relating to the paucity of our bench, as outlined by me in post: 858.

Instead, you suggest that Oviedo could have been the solution to Saturday's impasse. That's a perfectly reasonable guess, but you ruined it by then insisting that he, in your eyes, has, "in his handful of appearances shown more promise and enterprise than more than half our squad has throughout the whole season.."

So, he's done more than Pienaar, Baines, Anichebe, Jelavic, Mirallas, Naismith, Coleman, Gibson & Fellaini has he? Even Vellios flicked-on a winning goal...How many goals has Oviedo scored, or even set-up?

I'm sure you know the answer, therefore your theory is pure fresh air. The man has not made a single, substantive contribution to any match.

He has potential. That's all I've seen so far.

He then took off Vic, who was being deployed on the right and threw on Vellios. At that time we have Jelavic, Pienaar, Osman, Vellios and Naismith on the pitch searching for a goal. Of all the good defensive work Pienaar does, you can't say he is a defensive midfielder.

Simply put, there was enough on that pitch to beat Swansea but no-one had the wherewithal to put the ball into the next.

Laudrup's brilliant tactic was KITAP1.....now seemingly lauded over Moyes tactic of actually having a go.....ironic isn't it?

That's pretty much our entire attacking line-up who've shown "less enterprise" than Oviedo.

I have said it for a while that Pienaar's final ball has been missing and apparently others feel the same way. One of the lads I go the match with had seen a poll on an Everton site, which asked who we were the most disappointed with for the first half of the season, Pienaar was third.

Fine, he was a bit off-colour and Laudrup had half his team on Baines and Pienaar. Why do you think teams are doing this? Because they know that Pienaar is what makes us tick that's why he's continuously kicked out of every game.

Yet again though Fellaini has escaped without criticism, must have been Jelvaic's fault, must have been Osman's, Pienaar's, Neville's, and of course Moyes's. What about our 'world class' 'could play for anyone' dominates every game' midfielder? Where was he on Saturday? Passing a few shots to Vorm (although of course only Osman can be criticised for this), turning like a cruise boat when he had the ball practically on the goal line (Think Jelavic would have taken that long?)

Where were all those defense splitting passes (sorry forgot he hasn't got that in his armoury). Once again when he came up against centrebacks of any sort of quality he got absolutely nothing out of them and got in the way of Jelavic. If people want this team to find a cutting edge then Fellaini should have been subbed off against Swansea and someone with a bit of pace and craft should have come on.

Moyes's biggest failing is that he won't contemplate a team without Fellaini in it but just look at the results whenever he doesn't play. When Mirallas hasn't played, with Fellaini uptop we struggle to score more than one goal a game. As soon as he was moved back, we scored two against Tottenham and the winner against Sunderland, not to mention Vic's goal against Newcastle where Fellaini seemingly stayed out the way on the wing.

When we needed a big performance against Swansea, he was nowhere to be seen as usual but the blame of course can just pass to Pienaar who was doing more than anyone to try and get us in front in the game.

If we got 4th, he would be under pressure that his heart can't take believe me. This ain't no search for the next Dorothy from Wizzrd of Oz — it's invest and have a go... or don't and be ridiculed again.

I am not suggesting that Pienaar is not a very goodt player, but his final ball the last couple of months has been missing. Also Fellaini is certainly not immune from criticism, I think his shooting is quite poor, as do many on here.

As I mentioned before, I was not surprised to see Pienaar on that list of disappointments, as we know he can do so much better.

I'm in the camp that is on balance more positive about what he's doing on a shoestring. But I really couldn't believe he'd brought Naise on. I read it to be an intended positive move, trying for 3 points still. But we'd added something (Felli) to an area which didn't need strengthening (for all Nev's poor game, defensively we were never being overrun); and seriously diminished our strength going forward (Naise for Felli?!).

Our problem was not defensively, not in failing to get the ball into the box (ok sometimes we dwelt on it) but in providing crisper balls into the box that gave more than half chances. I'm one who'd like to see Bryan getting more chance to show his ability to do that. Throw the dice and put him on for Anichebe (who I would praise for much of his increased efforts of late, if not always his impact).

For all his attacking nous, Naismith came on, offered nothing, but for one instance when he was in a great position to contribute something he completely bottled it when it would have been easier not to. Once again, it is not hindsight. I watched this bloke against Cheltenham and quite frankly it was the worst performance I've seen an Everton player put in in the 11 years I've followed the team. Now, on that merit alone, I wouldn't have given him the time of day in a home match when three points would have pushed us up the table.

I've seen Rooney playing anchor man for Man Utd in certain games for example and Mourinho often went to five up front.

In a game where the opposition parks the bus I would be inclined to bring our runners (Baines, Coleman) inside because ultimately the wide players are made redundant by the depth of defending, let them run at the goal rather than the flank.

If the other team don't attack take off CB's or push one or both up front to knock down in the box and pull your ball players (CM's) back to where they can act as the quarterbacks.. Not revolutionary, the best managers think like this already but I can't see ours taking the risk.

I offered some alternatives, not as an armchair critic, but as a passionate Evertonian who wants even more. Yes, Moyes wanted to win and everyone on this site wants us to win every game, but is he tactically astute enough to do that often enough for us? Or indeed to attract another suitor? I accept that tactics do come down to the individual coach and their knowledge of their players and some will argue, quite rightly, that he knows the players far better than any of us.

But my question is: what philosophy does he have when he considers tactical changes? Conservative? Negative? Pragmatic? Defensive? Whatever you choose, his philosophy reflects the tactics and would anyone use the phrases 'imaginative', 'expansive' or most critically 'risky'? True leadership any walk of life is about balancing risk with success — and there is no success without risk (and sometimes failure).

We are talking about our manager, what he did against Swansea on Saturday, and whether he has some traits (late substitutions, over-reliance on 'Steady Eddies') that spoil his record.

Swansea may have defended well, but I think they were left in a much more comfortable state than Chelsea were in their two games against Barcelona.

We may have had chances against Swansea, but no-one (other than some Everton fans) is saying that we dominated them like Barcelona did with Chelsea (over two legs).

Ultimately, Barca failed because like us they didn't score more than the opposition. Did they fail in exactly the same way as we did? If Guardiola did something wrong, or just failed to do everything he could, does he have a history of making the same 'mistakes'? Those things may not make any difference to the result but they may make a difference to how the managers are perceived overall.

The same could be said about the back two, 18 games or whatever it was and they barely ever get changed. Yet people are banging on about him bringing Naismith or whatever instead of Oviedo off the bench because he's some sort of favourite.

The real favourites are the culprits in the starting line up that are leaking goals and not scoring them yet the only ones getting bashed seem to be Osman and Neville despite neither of these things being their prime priority. If people want to talk about favourites then talk about the real favourites who aren't producing rather than which squad player he might bring on for 10 minutes here or there.

Being too cautious with his substitutes this comes from his general reactive approach to management.
Having his favourites and playing them regardless of their current form.
Playing people out of position
Having an almost overwhelming reluctance to just give some young players a go
Being by and large too predictable with his changes, was any one not expecting Naismith to come on first and Velios to only get 10 minutes.

Moyes is a good manager but he needs to address some of these things in order to improve. If we had really gone for it and not won or lost the game then fair enough but that isn't what we did in my opinion.

Guardiola

No plan B sticks rigidly to one way of playing only
Overreliance on key players - so much young talent wasting away in Barcas reserves
plays players out of position (Song and Mascherano at CB)
Keeps buying the same type of player even though the squad doesn't need it

Mourinho

Has his favourites, barely considers anyone who isn't
plays dour negative football
plays the same formation most games
plays player sout of position (Etoo and Pandev on the wing)

Ferguson

Doesn't give youth a chance - sticks with Scholes and Giggs
Has his definite favourites
Players play out of position (Carrick CB, Welbeck Rooney LW)
Adverse to buying central midfielders

You can play the game for anyone, these are not traits individual to Moyes, the comparison is only fair though if Moyes' negative traits are put alongside his positive traits

Excellent starting team selection (Some managers such as our friend across the park our deemed visionary if they make 3 subs in a second half and snatch a draw from defeat after getting pounded, I just consider it picking the wrong starting team. When was the last time someone came out the traps and blew us away? Not often, we usually dominate first halfs of matches, the team selection is usually spot on)

Genius in the transfer market (5 million for Kevin Mirallas, less money than what Downing, N Zogbia, Sinclair, Adam Johnson (basically any wide player) went for)

Tactical nous: Stars of the premier league don't seem to play well against us. Bale, Silva, Mata, other teams top players are usually well contained even with the likes of Neville or Hibbert marking them. Meanwhile teams find it difficult normally to contain Baines and Pienaar no matter how good their flank is. It may be a similar formation but Moys is good at adapting people's roles within it depending on the opposition.

Gives youth a chance when its right to: Those that have been good enough (Coleman, Rooney, Rodwell, Anichebe, even Gosling) have been/were given more chances here than they could have reasonably expected at any other top 6 club. Those that haven't been good enough have had chances but not taken them.

Not quite true, if you asked 100 Evertonians who is the better winger, Anichebe or Oviedo, I think you'd struggle to find 1 who answered Anichebe.

No we haven't seen enough of Oviedo to have a proper opinion of him as a winger but what I have seen is more than enough of Anichebe on the wing to be able to come to this conclusion.

Virtually anyone would be better on the wing than him.

James of course Moyes has his good points, the question to me is he good enough and can he improve? Some of the points that you list against some of the other managers are laughable though. For instance Ferguson - doesn't give youth a chance, don't you remember Hansen's infamous comment about one of his sides. He's consistently given youth a chance throughout the vast majority of his career in management. Mourinho plays dour negative football, christ he broke all sort of records the other season at Real Madrid including most goals scored in a season in La Liga!!

I would say the difference in quality between Barcelona and Chelsea is not much different to the difference in quality between Everton and Swansea so the two scenarios can be compared.

Is Guardiola not a top top manager? I might be jumping to conclusions but I imagine Brian thinks he is because of all the hype around him and there are a few sheep on here who like to follow the crowd and lap up everything the media tell them.

I fairness I think Guardiola is the most overrated manager on the planet. He had more or less the Spanish World cup winning side with arguably the greatest player ever and Mourinho still out did him in the end. Guardiloa couldn’t take the pressure when the going got tough and he quite. And since he left, Barcelona have carried on where they left off.

We will see how good he really is at Beyern. As far as I am concerned he hasn’t really proved himself. The Barcelona team was already built for him. People say Moyes fails with strikers what about the signing of Zlatan? He was able to spend big and have the pick of the best players in the world only for Madrid to piss on him.
I want to see him build a team from scratch without the big money to splash out.

If people think Bayern are going to start playing Barcelona type football because of the arrival of Guardiola then they are deluded. The only way that will happen is if he signs the Barcelona first team.

As for Mourinho everyone saw his team at Chelsea and Inter, their style even hacked Abramovich off, he knew how to win though. Style is a great thing to bleat on about when you're losing but no one was going on about bad football that year we came 4th. Mourinho adapted his style in Madrid to quell the locals, he even admitted so himself, its brought him one league title but continuous European failure and some heavy thumpings from Barca. Everywhere else he's gone he' virtually guaranteed the league and has a great European record. Now he can't seem to win it with Ronaldo in the team and the players don't want to play the way he tells them. Personally i'd trust the man who's won 2 European cups but obviously the fans seem to know better and are happy to sacrifice this on the altar of 'good football'.

This season is an anomaly, as the Fifa and Uefa teams of the year indicate. Jack Wilshire is one of the few players that truly excites me with the usual suspects of RvP, Rat Face, Juan Mata and a couple of others, for the most part the PL is full of slightly above average journeymen. If the PL was as strong as it was in 2005, we wouldn't even get near a top 4 spot.But you can only beat what's in front of you, so we still have a chance.

It would be a shame if we miss out due to a lack of adventure when it really matters as was the case in last year's Semi-Final and in most big games away from Goodison. To compare DM with the managers that you have is to my mind ludicrous – each of them has a proven track record of winning trophies for fun.

Even though I don't like Brenda, it is worrying me that he does have a plan and he may just be lucky enough to get the other lot going just as the usual competitors are falling short of the standards that they used to have. It is for this reason that Everton FC and David Moyes will never have a better opportunity to get into the CL and it might be a very very long time before that chance comes our way again.

In a nut shell, we really, really need to finish in the top four.

With better passing giving the receiving player more space to move we might be able to take more chances.

My sincere thanks must go to every single contributor on this thread. An absolute classic. Special thanks to Mike Dwyer (#931} for momentarily transporting me to Goodison Park. Great stuff.

What a debate. Every single tactical issue turned upside down,inside out and back again. OK,it won't achieve anything apart from the health benefit of letting off steam but.for me ,it has been more entertaining than the Telly and radio put together.

Eric, I have been saying the same for years. Put the ball in front of the man. It really isn't that difficult, look where the man is, where he will be running to and put the ball a little bit ahead of him...... it's such a simple concept, yet we see our players constantly having to check their runs because of poorly placed passes. It's so frustrating watching it.....and then of late you have Pienaar and Fellaini trying back heels or flicks that are never going to come off.

It really is amazing, given the list of Moyes's weaknesses, that we ever win at all...

Peter – I think deep down you hold Moyes in high regard. I mean if someone really didn't like him then there'd be no reason to get frustrated with him. If he's a bad a manager as you say then he's obviously not going to get us anywhere near the Champions League and drawing at home to Swansea shouldn't be the end of the world therefore you should not have disappointed expectations. Disappointment is rife because Moyes has raised the expectations so high by giving us tastes of what he and this team can achieve; it is therefore ultimately annoying the times when they don't.

How can Moyes be blamed for not getting the best out of the players at his disposal? They're all his players so it's not as though he's inherited a proven quality squad and is underperforming. You can't criticise him for not getting the best out of good players but fail to acknowledge his managerial acumen for bringing these good players in in the first place.

How do you know they are any good? Only from what we've seen of them under Moyes. Therefore you must have seen a level of performance from them under Moyes that is not being replicated all the time, otherwise you'd have no idea of what quality they're capable of.

If he was always tactically inept then you'd not know what level these players are capable of. That suggests he isn't... you just think he is when we don't win every single game.

Sitting fifth in the table suggests he is not tactically inept. Winning away after falling behind at West Ham and Newcastle suggests he is not tactically inept. Unbeaten against United, City, Arsenal, and Tottenham suggests he is not tactically inept. Making what you perceive to be the wrong substitutions against a Swansea team with 11 behind the ball does not make him tactically inept; at worst it means he made a mistake, at best it means Swansea played well and the luck didn't go our way.

We've dominated most teams home and away this year despite having a large injury list and very little transfer money; yes, we could have done better, everyone wants us to, but player errors, refereeing errors, and bad luck means we are where we are. The first 0 - 0 draw of the season does not, however, mean that Moyes is tactically inept.

Just accept that Moyes is a tactically inept PE teacher who is dour, defensive etc etc and you will live a happy life. It's all there for you... just take it!

James – Moyes didn't give Hibbert a chance he was already in the team and being picked by Walter Smith.

I think Moyes's handling of young players has been poor. If he hasn't got the resources to buy players then he needs to bring them through. He's had enough time in charge to do this.

Ferguson obviously has a lot more resources and can buy virtually any player that he wants to. I think if you have a look at his record over the course of his career he has always given young players a chance. He may not have had as many coming through in recent times but he's still given them opportunities which Moyes has shown an extreme aversion to.

It seems that some people are not willing to admit that Moyes has any weaknesses at all despite the evidence over the preceding 10 years staring them in the face. He's Gordon Lee — not Howard Kendall (First time around).

I am struggling to recall one youngster that we have let go that has come back to haunt us... not a one. (I don't include Shrek.)

If Moyes had utilised his players minus the "tactical ineptitude," that your superior footballing brain would wish to avoid, just how great an improvement COULD we have made on the 2 defeats in the last thirty-one Premier League games, do you suppose?

In relation to last season's repetitive MOB critique of Moyes, his team have made significant strides; yet a successfully parked-bus, brings them out demanding perfection.

This thread is a 'microcosm,' of ToffeeWeb...

The trouble with forums is that the post and subsequent arguments demand that you ignore overall context because the original poster has already made certain assumptions on your behalf.

I don't think half the points made on these threads would come of an Evertonians own volition working independently and as such they sometimes seem extreme when considered in isolation.

Not necessarily relevent but a little philosophy I like to consider before I start my post (usually beginning "A.N. Nobody @ 107 - Complete bollocks... etc")

Ian (#273) - I get the point of the gulf in resources and the fact that you are responding to what you perceive as an attack on DM purely for failing to beat Swansea, but it is more about whether he really went for the win, or whether he chose options that did not really shake-up what was happening on the pitch. This is seen by some as an overly cautious trait that he has largely failed to overcome. You picked out a very rare occasion in Guardiola's stewardship of Barcelona to compare with the latest example of a much more common circumstance for Everton under David Moyes. In my opinion you are saying "Apples and oranges; they are identical because they are both fruit" which doesn't move the debate on at all.

It is not a case of 'Moyes Out!', but rather 'Roll the dice more Davey; sometimes the bigger gamble is merited."

It is not about raising your stake (which elevates winnings without the odds being hiked), nor chasing better odds with higher risks. It is about whether taking a greater risk (taking off someone with good defensive ability but limited attacking prowess and replacing them with a better attacking threat that is likely to leave some space behind) is warranted for the reward that could be attained. If the way the opposition is playing lowers the risk but the potential winnings (an elusive goal perhaps securing a valuable 3 points) stay the same, then the gamble becomes even more attractive, ie, the odds are in your favour.

All football managers are 'gambling' on the outcome of the games if they have any element of choice as to who starts and what substitutions are made. The ability to recognise a worthwhile gamble is a desirable trait.

As for a 'safe' bet, some gambles carry less risk than others which you know full well. No-one was calling for the manager to take off the keeper and the 2 centre backs and chuck on just anyone from the bench.

Your comparison was exaggerated beyond what was reasonable and therefore a misrepresentation of what people were suggesting.

It's exactly the kind of thing that would have had some on here calling him negative, dour etc etc

Damned if you do, damned if you don't...

Ouch! Si #604, You forgot to say exactly how many times I have to write that out... & how long I'm grounded for....

It is a fallacy to label players as only attacking or defending. It is there ability to do either one or both that determines how they can be used in the team / in a particular game. Each situation needs to be assessed on its merits, not simply having stock answers that we try automatically. Haven't we had defenders operating quite well as strikers before?

Other players have scored more goals than Naismith. The alternative to bringing on Naismith was to bring on someone who could potentially give the other strikers we have more opportunities, either directly or by easing the attention on Baines and Pienaar by increasing our threat on the other side of the pitch. Pienaar is right footed but links up well with Baines on the left, potentially Oviedo and Coleman could do something similar on the right.

Brendan (#631), what has produced goals consistently before is only part of what the manager needs to consider when making decisions. Looking at what is happening on the pitch and who he has available should weigh heavier, in my opinion. DM does not have a reputation for regularly changing games with his substitutions that I am aware of, and we would benefit from turning more of our draws into wins, so complacency derived from experience seems strange in this instance.