Kalyl said:
when I say coaching, I mean it as a mentorship sort of way, which is probably often done with younger players to give them rolemodels etc.
YES most definetly! so silly having four, five CB's that's all inj prone! Kab isn't exactly injury proof either! However, the problem I feel is that we didn't have a clause in Caulker's contract to be able to recall him on a moments notice should we need it. I think we should do that next season if we get Beryl and Dawson is back to fitness if both King and Gallas stays, even if only one of the two stays it might be the better option, although I would love for King to mentor Caulker BEFORE he retires to become our defensive coach
Yeah I understand your point about coaching whilst on the pitch, and it is evident whilst watching a game up close, but it honestly is pointless if the player in the mentor role plays one week and physically can't play another
(sorry Ledley, I love you really and you can do whatever you want). It might quick fix one or two results but it is ultimately detrimental as it prevents other potential players developing a partnership or leadership role. Furthermore, if you do rely on Gallas, or King to be the leadership role and the next match they turn up burnt out or don't turn up at all, no one else assumes the leadership position because they don't actually learn it off that player. What really happens is because they have relied on that player beside them they actually tend to fuck up more when they are gone.
If you look at Chelski's defence for example, it is always their leader (the racist) that generally automatically starts and then one other player who comes in alongside him. With Spurs, it is always the less experienced player that automatically starts (Kaboul) and then whoever is older that is over 50% fit can be chucked in to tell them what to do. What that actually does is it now makes Kaboul the more experienced player despite him being younger because he is the only one that consistently has an experience of a partnership with one of the more crocked older guys that will randomly appear beside him. He doesn't actually rely on "Gallas", or "King", per se - he just relies on that kind of playing style and "leadership figure" alongside him. But the key thing here is if Gallas and King ever left for a significant period of time, he'd be forced to eventually learn to assume their leadership roles because the new player alongside him would consistently be at the same level of less experience than him and need telling what to do like he needed in the past.
That player alongside him could have been Khumalo, Bassong, Caulker etc. - but then you are going to say, well hold on... they are shit (or unknown). But the fact is Kaboul was also shit before he was given game time and told he could do it and no one knew Ledley before he was chucked in the deep end. It's the same with any player that has broken through lately in other positions; Walker, Bale etc. There really is no point in players being bought or kept on high wages if they aren't going to play.
Ultimately players learn from playing and making mistakes more than anything... If they are good enough, it doesn't matter what age they are, they will eventually swim given a run of games and a bit of confidence from the manager. If they aren't good enough to play a run of games, young or old, then why were they even bought in the first place by the manager and what are they doing in the squad? That's what pisses off a board more than anything. Why even bother having a promising young player and then choose not to play them? And why buy an older player that physically isn't up to the demand of playing but on higher wages?
Yet somehow we're still always down to our "bare bones" more so than other teams at the business end of the season.
