The difference between an amateur and a professional.

Torquay lose to non league opposition at their own ground a shock and embarrassing result to the Gull's supporters, Argyle lose away to a lowly Blue Square South team - a shock and embarrassing result to the Green army, so two almost identical football situations.
But there is a difference one manager (Martin Ling) has come out and said it as it is objectively, with measured composure and retained his dignity and support of the fanbase. The other (Carl Fletcher) has come out and not said it as it is, as usual there are some kind of mitigating circumstances, this time the referee, he never says it as it really is e.g what the fans see and understand or say as Ling does we played poorly "no excuse".
The way Fletcher talks about his players e.g "Feeno, Willo, Youngey" exposes how he still sees himself as one of the lads, as part of the team almost, in short he is lacking that managerial cutting edge. Just listen to Ling talk about his players - none of this old pals nonsense.
I don't need to go on anymore, because it seems obvious there is a prevailing view amongst the Argyle fanbase that they want an experienced manager. Whether that comes to pass sooner rather than later remains to be seen.

For me it was always a tricky tie and the cameras were there because an upset was always possible.

What I didn't realise until a day or two before the game was how different it was for the two clubs. How far Dorchester were below us in terms of facilities and standard of players.

When you hear about these guys day jobs, then consider they train after putting in a shift at work, when our players have already relaxed and put their feet up, spent time with loved one's, for a couple of hours, before heading off to Nandos, that you begin to see what an advantage we should have over them.

Bad weather our players train indoors. Bad weather for them probably means training is cancelled.

A management team, supposedly, against a guy who has played for their club for years, knowing he wasn't good enough to make the grade, but still carried on out of love of the game.

Managing Dorchester probably involves sorting lifts to games and arranging for the kit to be laundered, and usually in front of a few hundred hardy souls.

Yes it was like their cup final, but someone who's been in an FA cup final should have made sure that his team of professionals was also up for it, even if it was so they didn't embarrass themselves on t.v..

Could have told the younger players it was an opportunity to put themselves in the shop window.

Instead it looked a bunch of disinterested guys against a team. A team who had each others back, who wanted to win more than anything. The pitch was bad? Didn't see Dorchester struggle too much.

Hourihane probably should've gone straight away for his nasty challenge, and maybe the ref realised that and was always going to book him again if he stepped out of line in any way at all. Refs may say that's not how they think, that each incident is taken on merit and previous incidents don't come into it, but that's rubbish. Of course they do.

Anyone can get beaten by a lesser team, there are cup upsets all the time, but after last season's debacle our management should have drummed it into the players how vital it was not to let it happen again.

I don't think ours did in Sunday, and if they did then it was the players not being up for it or not listening to the manager. If that's the case then Fletcher needs to be giving the players a kick up the backside and not try and blame the referee.

Worked their socks off? No Carl, doing a shift in the factory then training, then turning up on a push bike and beating a club two leagues higher is working your socks off.

When a person evolves from the playing squad to management it is best to get away from the environment (and hence club) he has been playing in so that he can immediately define that area of distance he needs to establish in order to do his job properly.

It always annoys and puzzles me when managerial vacancies come up and so many people automatically assume that former players make the best candidates.

I think if truth be told, Carl Fletcher got the Argyle job because he was the most senior of the players then on the books at the time and his appointment had as much to do with achieving a compliant dressing room as regards the nonsense that was going on regards their wages as anything football related.................in short the club was rid of Peter Reid and his salary and utilised a vastly over paid player in his role.

From a distance the club still lacks proper football leadership and football seems way down on the priority list of those who call the tune.

Is John Deeham still at the club, if so his profile seems unbelievably low considering that he is (or was) supposed to be Director of Football...............he was wasn't he?

The very first priority of any manager of Plymouth Argyle at the moment HAS to be preserving Football League status and to be fair to Flethcer he will probably achieve that this season.

The first priority of the club ownership might well be the same, but they certainly don't put that over very well to the fan base. But then too many of the fan base stil come accross as deluded as to the reality of the club's situation.................palatable or not, Plymouth Argyle are a small football club struggling to stay in the Football League and a million miles from where they used to be.

But that means that management must be as professional as is possible and the example of Martin Ling is an excellent one as is the management of Paul Tisdale at Exeter City ~ managers who know how to maximise minimal resources.

John Deehan left at the end of last season.

I've heard from several good sources that he was "frozen out" by Fletcher.

akagreengull wrote:

Torquay lose to non league opposition at their own ground a shock and embarrassing result to the Gull's supporters, Argyle lose away to a lowly Blue Square South team - a shock and embarrassing result to the Green army, so two almost identical football situations.
But there is a difference one manager (Martin Ling) has come out and said it as it is objectively, with measured composure and retained his dignity and support of the fanbase. The other (Carl Fletcher) has come out and not said it as it is, as usual there are some kind of mitigating circumstances, this time the referee, he never says it as it really is e.g what the fans see and understand or say as Ling does we played poorly "no excuse".
The way Fletcher talks about his players e.g "Feeno, Willo, Youngey" exposes how he still sees himself as one of the lads, as part of the team almost, in short he is lacking that managerial cutting edge. Just listen to Ling talk about his players - none of this old pals nonsense.
I don't need to go on anymore, because it seems obvious there is a prevailing view amongst the Argyle fanbase that they want an experienced manager. Whether that comes to pass sooner rather than later remains to be seen.

Quite so....familiarity breeds contempt as they say.

david_fisher wrote:

John Deehan left at the end of last season.

I've heard from several good sources that he was "frozen out" by Fletcher.

I can well believe it. Our improved form last season coincided with Sean O'Driscoll and John Deehan being involved. This season Fletcher's been on his own, hasn't cleared out the deadwood from the squad, in fact has added to it in some cases, and we're still shit.

18th in League 2 and dumped out of the Cup by Dorchester, and the bloke sees fit to spurn the only assistance on offer

The difference? A lot more pride as a pro, not wanting to let your mates down and far more fear of failure. Failing on a Sunday morning doesn't really matter and the same has happened with long contracts and overpaid players. This lot look like it doesn't matter that much, will still get paid and the manager doesn't know who he'll pick; why worry about performance, total lottery who'll be picked anyway, especially when everyone else is shit - no competition for places. much safer to sit on the bench and lose; not my fault. Let's have a manager that installs a bit of fear and some pride.

The difference? A lot more pride as a pro, not wanting to let your mates down and far more fear of failure. Failing on a Sunday morning doesn't really matter and the same has happened with long contracts and overpaid players. This lot look like it doesn't matter that much, will still get paid and the manager doesn't know who he'll pick; why worry about performance, total lottery who'll be picked anyway, especially when everyone else is shit - no competition for places. much safer to sit on the bench and lose; not my fault. Let's have a manager that installs a bit of fear and some pride.

david_fisher wrote:

John Deehan left at the end of last season.

I've heard from several good sources that he was "frozen out" by Fletcher.

Interesting David.
I personally believe Fletcher is a bit of a political animal on the quiet, a bit like a certain forum ex moderator. He's dominated the changing room throughout our disaters, seen off three managers, Mariner almost deferred totally to the guy as captain if rumour is correct, he was the main man behind the player thumbs protest, and as the senior professional he must have had a lot of influence in keeping all the players in check during the disgusting unpaid period, and then the worst captain in living memory lands a plumb job from Ridsdale before he's even finished as a player ! .... and he's the apple of the new owner's eye with a seemingly open ended contract.
He must be some charmer.