When times are hard
at Ipswich Town, it's often the angriest voices that seem loudest.
That's why, when I read East Anglian Daily Times columnist
Karl Fuller talking passionately about why he feels Mick McCarthy should be
relieved of his duties, I felt compelled to write a response.
Since my own article appeared in the paper on Friday a few
people have contacted me to ask if they can read it online. Unfortunately, it
isn't available on the website so I thought I would issue a more detailed
version here on my blog.
Because, although I'm equally frustrated with our current
form I don't think things are as bad as some fans believe. I also thought it
was important to highlight that not all fans are calling for Mick's head.
I recently ran a poll on Facebook and Twitter asking who
believed McCarthy should leave and who wanted him to stay: with almost four
hundred people taking part, 51% voted for him to stay. That provides a decent
guide to how split the fan base is currently.
Karl's 'Fuller
Flavour' piece last Monday contained a letter from fan Mark Holdaway who
summarised the reasons he feels McCarthy's time at Ipswich should be at an end.
Whilst I respect Mark's opinions, I do not entirely agree
with them, here I have picked out the main points:
'The partnership of
Skuse and Douglas does not work.'
The midfield partnership - affectionately known as Skuglas -
does frustrate at times due to a lack of creativity. The two are very similar
players and fielding them together generally results in a defensive performance
from our side.
But, it is no coincidence that whilst the duo were in the side we
had the second best defensive record in the league. Furthermore, it is telling
to me that with Skuse unable to play against Newcastle we conceded three goals.
While during our home victory over Burton, with Douglas absent, we reportedly allowed
the opposition more opportunities to score.
For me, playing defensively is not an issue. In fact, it is
going to be essential to us having any success this season. But I do understand
this results in less entertaining football and agree that sometimes it is
appropriate to set up the team with a more attacking approach.
'I also see a captain
played out of position just to accommodate him a place in the team...'
Luke Chambers has received some stick for his success (or
lack of) at right back for some time now, but it feels somewhat harsh.
Again, I agree he is not productive to an attacking
formation and is prone to errors, but he has appeared in the EFL Championship
team of the year several times. Only last week, following that home win over
Burton, he was named in that team again, which has to suggest he isn't all bad,
surely?
'...And one striker up
front at home'.
I agree without reservation that a formation with two men up
front would suit our current squad best. Neither Sears nor Best have shown
themselves capable of producing the goods alone, so my preference would
definitely be to play them together.
But without a main striker, like Murphy or McGoldrick, confidence
in playing an attacking game will be low.
The sale of Murphy came very, very late and left us little
time to sort a replacement. Whether you agree with Evans refusing to pay the
increased prices demanded for our planned replacements or not, I personally do,
turning down the high sum for Murphy would have been ludicrous.
The welcome return of McGoldrick should lift the pressure,
giving us a player who can create chances and intimidate the opposition. But,
he will need time to return to full match fitness and I suspect McCarthy will
continue with the defensive approach until then.
It's daunting playing in this tough league without a first
choice striker and it's understandable that McCarthy has reverted back to a
'tight at the back', defensive approach to games, at least until that situation
is resolved, hopefully in January.
The sale of Murphy came very, very late and left us little
time to sort a replacement. Whether you agree with Evans refusing to pay the
increased prices demanded for our planned replacements or not, I personally do,
turning down the high sum for Murphy would have been ludicrous.
When it comes to
Mick, I am yet to be convinced that the time has come for him to move on,
though I am not unsympathetic to the opinions about why he ought to leave.
At the beginning of the summer I said he ought to be given
time to show what he can do in the transfer window and then we should wait and
see how the 'improved' team were doing come the end of October.
As we near that date I find I have wimped out of reaching
for my pitchfork and chasing him out of Suffolk, but for good reason. Until the
final week of the transfer window, McCarthy made some good purchases, bringing
in some potentially exciting youngsters (something most Ipswich fans were
calling out for last season, but few seem to be acknowledging this season) and
a couple of wingers too.
Add to the sale of Murphy the list of injuries that we've
experienced, it's clear McCarthy has been put in a difficult position and is
making the best of what he has available.
Of course, these are
all simply my opinions and being able to discuss different points of view is
one of the joys of being a football fan in the age of social media. Less
enjoyable is the tendency to criticise those with opposing opinions.
Karl and Mark have been branded disloyal because they have
criticised McCarthy and that is not fair. Fans like Karl, who travel the
country to watch our team play, should never be made to feel inferior to any
other fans. In fact, the same should be true for any person who still cares
about this club after nearly fifteen years in the Championship - whatever their
opinions on McCarthy and Evans.
That includes those who, like me, understand and support the
decisions made by our manager and owner. I don't think any of us are happy with
the current run of performances, but to be called 'deluded' on a daily basis is
frustrating when I too simply want the best for our club.
Last week I saw fans ridiculed for being stuck 'in the dark
ages' because they defended our performances, as I have here. Equally, the
names thrown at McCarthy, 'dinosaur' and so on, are unhelpful.
The mood and attendance at Portman Road will improve with
better performances and results, should we really allow it to become quite so
toxic in the meantime?
We all want what is best for our club; the fact we disagree
on how that should be achieved does not mean we should be at loggerheads all
the time.
That's not the Ipswich way.
