I don't think it too surprising.
Or things are made up to further an agenda! I'm far from ITK but some of the things being said about KR and SD were ridiculous. The idea that Derry was an alcoholic who was disrupting training and punching players is beyond people getting a little fraught. And Robinson has repeatedly been spoken positively of by experienced pro's in Holmes, Mackie and now Henry, as well as those being developed like Baptiste, Browne and Whyte. People can question tactics and some of the actions on the touchline and in the media, but man-management is something that Robinson and co. seem to get right more often than not.
All true. But it took KR a while to get those 3 in their best positions. Myself and my son have been saying since the first few games of this season that JM and JH should be playing where they are now. It was KR's stubborness with the formation that prevented it. We have looked a much more solid and capable side since Southend away when Dickie came back in and Mous played in front of the back 4. CB with more opportunity to get forward and JH using his craft to get in and around the box more centrally.
Mmm not sure that is strictly true. Henry's 'proper' position for many years in the Championship was as a wide player or number 10.
He has kept the formation pretty much the same and it has hardly done us any harm?
Striker is not mentioned in the lead post.
Sorry for being pedantic, but I think it's 4141, but the Oxford Mail doesn't dare print that.
Yep. At times it's 41311. Experienced players through the spine knowing exactly what they are doing.
The atmosphere at the training ground is indicative of a content and united squad.
I think there’s a lot in this but not necessarily the stubbornness. It’s not just Henry but Brannagan who have finally been allowed to get forward due to the presence of a holding midfielder covering them, and their form has escalated as a result. You could call it stubbornness from KR not to change it until then, but I would suggest it’s improved awareness of his players’ relative strengths from having had the opportunity to work with them more - what comes with giving time to a manager who is still relatively new to the team but is struggling for results.
Yes perhaps stubborness is a bit strong. But I do think he hung on too long hoping/thinking that all would come right by sticking with his original plan. A few tweaks with players and formation and we hit some form. Could he have done it sooner? Mackie's fitness apart I think yes it was possible.
That’s fair. I suspect it’s maybe more difficult to depart from a formation that you know very well and that has stood you in very good stead throughout your managerial career than it perhaps appears from the terraces. But I reckon the ability to adapt is an indication of a good manager - just look at (on a more dramatic scale) the plaudits Emery is getting at Arsenal this year for changing his entire formation pretty much every game at half time!
