Moyes, Guardiola, Pochettino

As far as I'm concerned Laudrup is just a potential flavour of the month who could disappear with the rest of them. Then again...

As for Pep, you don't start playing tica taca for no reason. I do however feel he could end up looking an arse at Bayern. Everything was set up for him to succeed at Barca, and although he won everything, the nobody who took over after him is doing just as well so far.

Southampton into the top 4? No. First they have to get past the two richest clubs in the world, the most successful league club in history, Arsenal, Spurs, us and the RS.

No club the size of Southampton got anywhere near, except for Ipswich before the 'big 4' occurred.

Moyes didn't win back-to-back promotion? Moyes out!

While I want Moyes out, I agree it would be hard to find someone who would have us in the top half of the table every year but enough of the relegation crap.

I was alive when we got relegated and that was an awful team. After what has gone on in recent years I want DM to stay and continue to produce teams that pound for pound are the best in the league.

I never fall into the trap of over estimation and realistically DM has done a fine job. Now, for the first time since he has led the side, we have a team that play top football reminiscent of the halcyon days. Now I feel frustration that the manager does not appear to have sufficient backing from the board to keep this team at the top.

If there was a magic formula that title winners have or had then how do we explain Kendall Mk II & III. To my mind, the main reasons for the success of Mk I is, along with better players, Kendall got lucky in getting a a good run out of the three (up till then) perennial sicknotes: Gray, Reid and Sheedy.

Ian, your point about playing the best (available at the time) 11 and playing them in their best positions, playing a formation that gets the best out of what you have is Coaching 101. This has been one of the main moans of the MOB.

But we all know (or should) that fine theories tends to go out of the window when the slings and arrows actual real life pile in... the main sling and arrow, the cause of Moyes's lack of better players are well known.

You also throw in the "Moyes will never win anything" line as part of the mix. While that has proven to be only too true these last ten years (with one massive exception EVERYONE seems to ignore!!!), it's not for want of having some pretty good players, and that is seemingly Moyes's best contribution (albeit also with some glaring exceptions).

But back to premise Number 1: I think it's bollocks. The way teams play is an expression and extension of their manager's personality. When they are successful, the manager rightly gets all the praise. The odd thing on here is that, when they are not successful the manager gets wrapped in this little cocoon of invented 'successes' to avoid saying anything 'negative' about the fact that, push to shove, he's not been successful were it ultimately matters.

Couldn't agree more with the quality of players argument but the Moyes criticisms tend toward is he getting the best out of what he has? – "square pegs in round holes, favourites, defensive minded" summarise the "tactics" critique and rightly so.

"Talent spotting" ability is one of the great false attributes of modern football alongside "work ethic and the team give me everything" -– vacuous words that fill air time – who can't recognise a good footballer for Christ's sake? And if they're not trying their best, get the fraud squad in!

Pep inherited the far sighted Cruyff's progeny, how good he really is we'll know within 6 months of his German excursion, and as for what he'd've done at our place, I really couldn't see him playing "hoofball".

The rest of your piece is a support of Moyes which is your opinion but, if someone takes Southampton to CL qualification in 3 seasons after being promoted from a state of near oblivion, it will be a damn sight more of an achievement than the legendary 4th Moyes did at one of the giants of English football.

I suspect Moyes will go this summer and when he does we'll just have to man-up, remember it's Everton we support, and get on with it.

Don't kid yourself: Southampton have just laid out £4 million for Forren, a player Everton were interested but have no money to make an offer for – even if they wanted to – without selling first.

I agree that Laudrup is probably the flavour of the month, he might have just got lucky but he comes across a lot better than some of the other managers. I always ask myself the question about managers. Would I put my body on the line for you if you were my manager, because that’s what will be going through the players minds. For example It doesn’t look good when the players are running around in the rain and the manager is wrapped up warm with a brolley like McClarren. If the manager has the respect of the players I think half the battle is won.

The point about Southampton reaching the top 4 I agree with witch is the point I was making, because it is just as difficult for Everton to break the top 4 but some people seem to think that the right tactics would get us there so the same must be true for Southampton.

As pointed out elsewhere, 'tactics' needs to be defined in some way, as the players you pick for your squad could be seen as a reflection of how you intend to play anyway. So player selection isn't the opposite of tactics; they are part and parcel of the whole.

Then there is coaching / training, analysis of the opposition, and the 'tactics' you determine are best for each game as it comes around (these may stay broadly the same but is there any harm in having a contingency plan). This is where, quite rightly in my view, DM comes in for some criticism. There have been times when the team selection / approach to the game has seemed to be determined with very little consideration for who we have been facing, or (and this is my biggest bugbear) when the opposition have turned up and presented an unexpected way of playing that we haven't reacted to as quickly or as appropriately as we could.

I don't think a lot of people want rid of David Moyes as I think the vast majority appreciate the good job he has done under difficult circumstances (that doesn't necessarily mean he couldn't be replaced as some insist). However, even those of us who agree he would be a hard act to follow can still see him as being 'overly cautious' at times (which is itself a reflection of his defensive sensibilities) and while he has made the team hard to beat and 'punching above its weight' we still seem to lack the ability to really change step in a particular game, or to deliver a knockout blow in the games that matter the most.

Particular points of debate keep getting over-stressed to distort their meaning and weaken their impact. Pep Guardiola's name was brought up by people seeking to defend DM from criticism following the draw with Swansea, using the spurious comparison of what Chelsea achieved in the Champions League. This completely overlooks the fact that DM has been called for his late and conservative substitutions in many games and against many different opponents. It is a long-standing and extensive concern, not a reaction to a one-off.

Take Swansea at Goodison last weekend: their "tactics" were to nullify our attacking threat, ie, Baines and Pienaar, and it worked; we were unable to score. Okay ,we had a few balls cleared off the line but, on the whole, they came with a plan and it worked.

Now, going back to playing to your strengths, that comes with having better players. When you have them man for man against the team your playing, then you should overcome the opposing team's tactics and use your own to win the game.

While some of them give the impression of being little more than moody and petulant teenagers, I am pretty sure that for 99% of them their respect for the manager isn't determined by whether he chooses to wrap up warm and protect himself from the elements.

If you’ve got a manager who is sincere and honest the players will generally return the favour or at least accept any punishment that comes their way should they break the rules. I have heard many interviews with Everton players talking about how hard Moyes works, that work ethic will be transmitted to the players, and so yes in some way I agree that the way team plays is an expression and extension of the manager's personality as Michael puts it.

Kevin,
I can see what you are trying to say regarding tactics but when you talk about Moyes putting Neville on Bale is a tactic. The way I see it is that the main role of the right back is to nullify the Left winger. If you want to win the game then man for man you have to win your own battle its as simple as that as you mention yourself. I don’t think Moyes or any manager has to be a genius to tell Neville to stop Bale, that is Nevilles job in the first place.

Tactics I feel are when your team isn't performing and you need to make an alteration in either your formation or personnel. Moyes has been lucky in the past with changes forced upon him working out, but also working with such a small squad gives him more insight into the players he has.

The argument about better players bears fruit when they fit into the system and team ethic. It's no surprise that Man Utd are successful with better players allied with a team ethic.

Deco and Ronaldinho were poor at best following Barca and Zlatan's ego was a big enough problem. Guardiola had faith in Barcelona's youth taking Messi from a wide ineffective position and playing him down the centre, or plucking Sergio Busquets from Barca B to play a vital role in the midfield.

His team were pass masters with an average of over 90% possession most games, but that was largely down to ball retention when possession was conceded, his players gave everything for the cause playing at an intensity we may never see again anywhere.

Pep instilled a team spirit and re introduced the Cryuff style Football, nobody else. He gave the players the opportunity to succeed and so they did.

Now, in all things, natural talent play a big part. But that only goes so far. The role that the manager plays is not just motivational, but tactical.

Did the 85-87 team have the best players? There were other teams who arguably had better individual players eg Spurs.

People often missed the fact that Kendall played a tactical game during the 1st leg away at Bayern during the semis. He wanted to hold them home, so that we can take them back at Goodison.

We have read how Kendall gets the defence to play high up. And he was able to do that because he has the players for it. Tactics were employed to get the best out of the players.

I am not defending Moyes; he has his limitations, but let's give credit where it is due.

I actually think Moyes is very good tactically when it comes to defending. He introduced the 4-5-1 formation in the Premier League, and we regularly feature among the teams conceding the lowest goals.

Where we struggle is scoring goals. I see signs that he is leaving the handbrake off a bit more. His last few signings have been more attacking – Naismith, Jelavic & Mirallas. And more importantly, he is letting them express themselves a bit more. Our formation is less rigid these days – we see both full backs bombing on, and some lovely inter-changing in midfield between Osman, Pienaar, Mirallas & Fellaini.

But make no mistake, tactics are a massive part of this. If not, these players would be stifled, a bit like Yak, Johnson & Beattie were.

I once played at Anfield (apologies) and we were in the away changing room. It was just after the season had ended, Villa had played there last. They had LFCs team on a whiteboard and I kid you not had "danger man" written next to Gerrard! If the villa players didn't know that beforehand, then god help them.

As for Guardiola, I was disappointed in his inability/refusal to change tactics in the semi-final last season. Fair enough he kept to his principles but he played into Chelski's hands alright. I can remember screaming "shoot" over an over but they just kept trying to pass the ball into the net.

Bayern are already runaway Bundesliga leaders, he would have to make a right mess of things if he didn't win the league. He will have to usurp Barca as the best team in Europe to be deemed a success I feel.

People get far too carried away on here and think managers like Guardiola are the equivalent to Isaac Newton or Charles Darwin. I remember SAF talking about Roy Keane saying what a clever man he was, hyping him up before he got into management at Sunderland, if I remember rightly. He said something along the lines. “Roy is a very clever man, I would often see him reading books on the bus on the way to games” – hahaha.

Now I don’t want to say all footballers and managers are thick because you do have managers like Wenger and Steve Coppel who have degrees, but let's be honest, most have put most of their time into playing football, not studying the books.

Danny, Was it not Guardiola who signed Zlatan for £40 m plus Eto’o? If Moyes wasted £40 million on a player he would be sacked. He is constantly beaten with the Beattie stick. You could also give it the argument that Guardiola couldn’t get the best out of a top top striker, just as the MOB state when it comes to Moyes.

Let's not forget that Barcelona had just won the CL they were a top team, yes Ronaldinho and Deco were past their prime so it didn’t take a genius to know that it might be time to move them on. They were also a bad influence on the other players.

You give Guardiola the credit for putting Messi central, but basically it sounds like he just caved into player demands in a similar way to Wenger with Walcott.

Do you think that Guardiola will have Bayern playing with the same kind of football we have seem at Barcelona and dominating German and European football over the next 3 years?

I believe over his tenure, our average finish is 8th, but guess where our wage bill rates?

Those who compare the likes of Bolton, Blackburn, Portsmouth and Leeds to us are quite frankly clueless. We have got £75k a week players on the books FFS!!

Some posters even argue Moyes is as good as Wenger, the man who won two League and Cup doubles, went a whole season undefeated, and has a minus net spend – that's how blinkered some fans are where Davey is concerned.

Does anyone actually remember the atrocious starts in the League, that were the norm for every season bar two? The defensive football that saw attendances fall by thousands – now proven to be the reason why attendances fell? Every fecker argued this was because we were all skint – wrong.

Moyes is being lauded this season, but we are still only squeezing wins by a single goal, take a look at the results.

A good manager, but no statue outside Goodison for this "great" – mind you he could pay for one himself with the money he has earned.

If only today's game was as innovative and forward thinking. Have you not seen the QPR players arguing during the game over who will take the free kicks? You won't even see that at Pub Sunday league level. Maybe Harry should forget the tactics and get the basics right.

James, if only Guardiola used Paul Ince's tactics against Chelsea to Shoot, he could have had another CL winner's medal.

Now you quote Wenger... a genius of a manager imo, but you do it with a little simplicity imo. Wenger inherited some top talents, including one of the truly great players to grace the Premier League in Bergkamp. He spent his money, in general, fantastically, and achieved wonders... but, since generating profit via transfers, Arsenal have become a team who generally finish fourth, and sometimes third. They haven't won a trophy since 2006, which, given the ability of their players, is certainly a failure... they have, without any doubt, got worse (as teams inevitably do), because they have not spent money.

We, on the other hand, have improved whilst spending a negligible amount... now how many teams in this league have consistently achieved our level of relative success with less than £1 million a year to spend?

To consider our wage bill, must be to consider our transfer spending, as they go hand in hand: when we find a Fellaini, or Baines, or Pienaar, or Jags, to keep them at this club, we must give them better wages. Our wage bill, when considered alongside other teams, will still render a positive stat... whilst we have the spending potential of a Championship team. But we are fighting for top four.

With respect to Pep, I think attempts to negate his incredible achievements are strange... the new coach is performing wonders, of course, but with a team and style inherited from the last manager. Pep in general made sound buys, although Ibra was a failure, as was the €15-17mil CB they signed and never played, but every manager in the world makes poor buys sometimes.

In general, Pep made Barcelona arguably better than any club side in recent times; he did so without as many marquee signings as Real Madrid, and he kept a talented squad extremely happy. He has made sound purchases for the future, and has played with a style which has transformed world football, and notably the Premier League, for the better.

The man is a genius: there are plenty of teams with top players, who fail... plenty who never realise their potential, or slip away before they should've... That Barca achieved so much, that Iniesta, Xavi, Messi, Busquets became so good, has a lot to do with Pep. He had one relatively bad season last year... but apart from that, he has been an overwhelming success. To compare him and Moyes is impossible: one has pennies, the other notes, one has some good players, the other has world class...

I don't think that, relatively speaking, Moyes's accomplishments can be compared to Pep's... but imo, they share a similarity, in that they have both achieved more than they should've. In this era of manager departures, of massive transfer fails, of so much underachievement, that is a very rare thing indeed... and when a team has a manager capable of doing it, they should do all they can to keep him around.

One question, Jim, on Moyes: good or great? — and no politician's answers, please!

Jim, as I say, I am happy to be proven wrong; I can't wait to see how Pep gets on at Bayern so see if he really is a "genius" but I don't believe the hype at this stage.

If the European Cup is king then Chelsea's best manager of recent times is Di Matteo, who failed at West Brom. Benitez and AVB, who succeeded elsewhere, can't/couldn't seem to get those same players working. Perhaps groups of players as entrenched as Chelsea's were collected to play in a certain way; even an average manager who recognises this can win... top ones who try and tinker with it perhaps don't.

Guardiola should be given credit for polishing up Rijkaard's side. The side that won the European Cup in 2006 was very good but this one is undeniably better. But Barcelona have been playing this way for years. Guardiola's genius was recognising that Messi, Busquets and Iniesta were a better fit than Ronaldinho, Deco and Marquez. Vilanova has taken that side and is winning, Aragones took the core of that and won with Spain as did Del Bosque; if you have a wondrous group of players like that and you let them play in a certain way, then they are going to win more than lose.

Could Moyes do this at Barcelona? If he resisted the urge to tinker with it, then yes, undoubtedly; most managers could if the players would play for them. What Moyes did at Everton was very different though and that is what Pochettino is now faced with. Average players can't just be told to go and play in a certain way, they need tactics. I believe that's what Moyes did in the early years and I think the fourth-placed finish showed that he did it better than anyone else of our level in the league.

I firmly believe he could go to any relegation club and save them quite easily, the level of performance he has dragged out from what have sometimes been shockingly average players is remarkable. Now of course the different challenge facing him is adapting now he has top players (that he bought – they didn't just land on him, contrary to popular belief). In my view, a valid criticism of him is that he's taken too long to adapt to this and we've had an inferiority complex in games we're we've been blatantly superior even though we have over the course of a season finished in the league where our squad deserved to be.

I do think though that this season there has been signs that that is changing; when all his top players are fit, we've played in the same style and it has worked and looked good. When we have injuries, however, I still think there is no better manager for marshalling a group of less talented players and finding a way to win, even if the purists amongst us don't like the fare.

For that reason, I do not buy that Moyes is tactically naive at all, indeed I think he's one of the top tactical coaches, but perhaps he is starting to learn that, at the top clubs, tactics aren't everything; sometimes you just put your best 11 out to play as they know. Has Moyes had an XI good enough to do this over the years? Very rarely, but the signs are this season that he is adapting better.

Southampton are owned by someone who seems to think the club can grow into one of the big clubs in England. Good luck with that; Southampton are about as big as they are going to get (minus the billionaire option).

It's not helpful that while advancing an argument for quality and downplaying tactics, you then Ian revert back to tactics and spell out what you think the best tactics ought to be in a given situation.

Can I suggest something else? Tactics are by far more important than the quality of the players (Oh, and by the way, don't you trust the gaffer to get us quality players?) and selection. Some gaffers get the best our of journeymen because tactically they get it spot on. Most teams with the sort of money we have at hand tend to be a mix of qualities.

Matchday: Moyes looks at what he has and he will be – for the next 12 hours or so – the most important factor in what transpires up until the final whistle.

(1) He picks the team;
(2) He decides where folks will play;
(3) He decides how we will play;
(4) He stands on the side watching the game unfold;
(5) He hopefully reacts watching the game unfold;
(6) He decides what needs to go in to the HT talk;
(7) He reacts to the game as it unfolds in the 2nd 45;
(8) He changes tactics, if necessary;
(9) He has a Plan B/C/D, if necessary;
(10) He makes timely and strategic subs to remedy problems;
(11) He makes timely and strategic subs to shore things up.

Nah, you're right, quality is more important than tactics or, by implication, Moyes. A good workman does not blame his tools, Ian. Moyes makes all the key moves with, we assume, a certain amount of consultation with, erm, Roundy and his lovely drawings.

Final whistle blown, we can say he was this and he was that and he scuffed that chance (how can you blame the gaffer for that), but the buck should always stop with the boss: although I think that he has rather more leg-room at EFC than most other gaffers get elsewhere. If he gets it right and the lads win, you say well done. If he gets it wrong and we lose or give away points in, for instance, a string of draws, you point fingers at what you think he could have done better.

So, am I one of the fully signed up members of the MOB as Dean Adams once said I was (even though I had never once said anything to that effect)? I hardly think so, do you. Perhaps you are one of the peeps on here who likes to see the world in black and white; like that fucking ridiculous post the other day that said that Michael Kenrick and Barry Rathbone were aAnti-Everton FFS because the silly poster said they were anti-Moyes.

I think that the vast majority of people on these boards are rather more like me. They might well have strong opinions about particular players and issues but when Moyes does well you say, "Well done" and when he does bad, you say, "Sort it out". Seems fair enough to me.

As Paul has pointed out it would make the coach's role largely redundant if it were all about what players you had and it would make following football pretty boring if it was just the richest team bought the best players and therefore won all the trophies.

Of course its a bit of both. What's up for debate, however, is which is the more important? For me it's the quality of the personnel which is most significant... other factors are of course important but less so in my opinion.

The finest race horses don't get whipped, the best employees manage themselves. The best managers use the football talent first, and then the tactics second. Pep getting beat by Chelsea proves no-one is foolproof.

Harry Redknapp was on football focus today and pretty much backed up everything I have said. He basically said the reason QPR are bottom the league are because of the quality of players, there’s no secret that if you have better players you will get better results and that is why he has a reputation for making lots of signings.

Maybe you're right though Paul, maybe if we had SAF as the manager of my amateur team, we could challenge for the league.

As far as I am concerned at EFC ability wise we have a few outstanding players, a few good players some average players with excellent attitudes and a few players who I would class as passengers.

As far as tactics and substitutions go I would say in DM's biggest weakness. As far as I am concerned DM has brought together a bunch of players who buy into EFC and all we stand for etc with excellent attitudes.

On the whole I would say that his strengths etc outway any tactical weakness he may have. My initial gut reaction is the same as everyone else, "What If" we hadn't been robbed of points by refs or won a couple of games that we dominated yet only drew.

When you think about it supporters of lots of teams can say the same thing, I can look back on my like and say what if but where does that get you. The fact is we are in 5th place and easily within touching distance of 3rd place.

Would anyone of us have turned this down if offered at the start of the season? Personally I thought the best we could hope for was 6th place and Europa League place at the best. As it is we are still in with a chance of finishing 3rd or 4th which I know will be difficult but would anyone of given us a chance of being in this position now given that we have been without several of our key players for a large number of games.

I know the frustration that many of you feel but lets get realistic and see how things go. Hopefully we should have a good idea how things are going after the next three games where I feel we have to get 7 points out of the 9 to keep up the pressure on Spurs and Chelsea. Here's hoping.

And don't be silly: mixture of abilities/qualities does not make 'your amateur team'; 'yours' eh? So, you disagree with me, as you have not answered me with substance, that Moyes is the most important person on any match day for the 11 reasons I stated? I'd like to hear your opinion.

Harry dropped all the players with poor attitudes who were not prepared to give their all to the team.

I agree Moyes is the most important person at the club, but not because of the tactical aspect but because he brought in the quality players with the attitude required who will give him everything in every game.

"I agree Moyes is the most important person at the club." That was not my question was it? I asked about match days and your blinkered one-sidedness hardly helps. A gaffer buys players and then for the ELEVEN reasons I ran through, he is the main reason for why we find ourselves at the final whistle.

And listen Brendan (856), unlike Ian's one-sided view of the match, I have said, and I will say it again for your benefit, it's what DM does with what he has available to him that has most bearing on results, and that, listen carefully here, includes the quality of what is available to him.

I'll say it again: we are a mixed bag of quality, I would much rather have Mirallas starting than Naismith, for instance, and then I have to trust that DM makes best use of him.

While tactics do play a part, a manager's personality and ideas also play a huge part. This is probably one of the worst squads that Ferguson has had in recent memory yet he only lost the title last season on goal difference on the last day of the season. Man Utd are currently five points clear of a far superior Man City squad with a game in hand. With Man Utd, you buy into the idea of winning or being nothing if they sign you as a player. For me, that is more beneficial than tactics or fancy players.

Man City under Mancini, on the other hand, appears to be a complete circus. You would have to wonder what kind of stamp Guardiola would put on this Man City squad. He walked into a Barcelona job where the dressing room was full of top players and what I would presume were also top egos. There was never any hint of players overstepping their mark.

For me, it says a lot about Guardiola that he picked German football over the Premier League. He could easily have gone to the PL and been handed huge amount of cash at Man City or Chelsea to do his thing. Instead he went to a league where clubs are financially prudent and where he will be given a more modest amount of cash. He has already done the big money thing in Spainish football.

Moyes has shown at Everton that you do not need a huge amount of money to succeed. Southampton, with the right manager, and a Board which is prepared to be patient, could do very well. It is a pity that Adkins wasn't given more time but it will be interesting to see how the club does between now and the end of the season.

Di Matteo would seem a sensible choice and I am not just talking about what he did at Chelsea, he was building a good reputation in the lower leagues before, so he would be my first choice – especially as he is still out of contract.

I suppose I subscribe to the popular media view, that the only England job definitely available to him was the Chelsea one, and he didn't fancy it. Three years in Germany, and as long as he isn't a flop, a big job will be awaiting him in England.

We just need to get Moyesie to sign that three year contract...