Torquay United Fans Forum

If you look at it objectively, he thought he had Craig to groom as a replacement for O'Kane, he wasn't to know that Mansell and Lathrope would nosedive in form, he had Bodin come in as a really decent prospect and he signed Downes to replace Ellis/Robertson. He signed Easton as cover and had Macklin, Stevens, Jarvis and Yeoman as attacking options along with Morris when he regained fitness. I think the key to our poor form can be traced to Mansell and Lathrope, even Howe went off his game for a large part of the season. I'm not being pedantic but I can't lay too much blame at Lings door because based on the previous season, losing the spine and the supposed option to strengthen when needed (unfortunately denied) I think he was very unlucky. His tactics worked very well before and not many complained last season, at least until the last few games where our poor run started.

Fair comment Dave, to replace with similar quality was never even a possibility considering the lack of funds at his disposal. But I'd still question the make-up of the squad. Despite the lack of funds, he could still have constructed a squad with options. Instead, he overloaded it with pragmatic midifelders and poor quality wingers. The fact his transfer dealings saw us entering the season with 2 strikers (plus Yeoman, who only really started to challenge seriously towards the end) in the squad, was a good indication his tactics were likely to cautious.

Not a really fair assessment, Shane. He'd had the spine of "his squad" ripped away and in the process made the club over £500k.It was always going to be a struggle to replace the quality he lost when he wasn't given the funds.

The reason our record was poor after Ling left is because the team was already by that point devoid of all confidence - make no mistake the rot had already set in. The one up-front, play on the break tactics had been found out, and due to the squad created by ML, there weren't the correct options within the squad to change it until the new man had come in and made a couple of signings. Playing cautiously away from home, sitting deep and hitting teams on the counter attack is perfectly justified. Having that as your only tactic - so having to play the same way in home games proved ineffective, and boring. And attendances reflected that.

It's like this, take the scenario as if he approached away games going gung ho then yes, we may have started getting slaughtered 2,3 and 4 now and again, won the odd game here and there but by and large the system and tactics obviously weren't working. He could then have identified this problem and tightened it up at the back and in midfield and changed tactics slightly. That is what any normal human being acting as a football manager would have done IMO. Martin approached each away game especially tight as a ducks arse and not wanting to get out of our own half too much. This is rubbish to watch but last season it worked, this season the system he relied upon failed him as we generally conceded but never looked like scoring. So, did he identify a problem and change things accordingly like any normal human being acting as a football manager would have done? You have your answer as to why Ling takes much of the blame.

In fairness Lings home record before he left was ok but i recall many of you highlighting the poor performances and lump it to Howe style long before the Harrogate defeat so although you could argue that results wise at home he did ok, if he transferred some of this 'form' into trying to win away games we wouldn't have been in the sh*t in the first place. So yes, i do blam Ling for a lot of problems this season as a different approach and a plan B now and again could have seen us easily mid table even with the squad we had and if Knill had had the same players to work with last season then i have no doubts we'd have been mid table but played some decent stuff on a regular basis to boot.

In fairness, under Ling last year, we played 13 home games, won 6, drew 5 and lost 2. We scored 24 and conceded 20 for 23 points and a GD of +4. Once Dinger went, we played 10, won 3, drew 1 and lost 6. We scored 14, conceded 20 for 10 points and a GD of -6.

Under Ling, at home, we had a perfectly decent record. As usual, it is when he leaves that things go wrong and, as usual, this inconvenient truth will be ignored by those hell bent on blaming Ling for our plight last season.

Matt.

Bit clutching at straws really if thats PR.

More goals at Plainmoor because we conceeded more than any other team in L2, and only bettered by Carlisle and Bristol City in all the leagues.

And to be quite honest Andy, whilst I take your point about away performances, its the home results that have screwed us this season. With a "fortress plainmoor" to bank on, the playoffs were likely. We only gathered 2 less points than Burton on our travels.

Before anyone says something like, 'why was our home goals record so favourable then? It can't all have been down to Ling'. Then may i remind you some of the home 'performances' you were 'treated' to this season. Humping it long to an isolated Howe for many games by all accounts. Yes we scored a lot of goals at home but we also still played sh*t and conceded loads too hence why we nearly went down. A similar attitude to Knill's away games by Ling would have us not even talking about relegation as some of those 1-0 capitulations would have been draws or the odd win by being a little more adventurous and some of the 0-0 draws would have been wins too. I've said before, our early away games at Fleetwood, Chesterfield, Rotherham etc we could easily have won if we actually bothered getting out of our own half. We didn't win them , we lost at Rotherham and drew the other 2 which meat 2 points instead of at least 3 or a possible 4 or 6 by stepping it up a gear. This pattern continued throughout the rest of the season away and, well, we all know the rest.

[quote="tufcfans"]People have often been saying that Torquay's approach when away is a lot more negative than when playing at home which is understandable for any club. But, Torquay have seen the largest amount of goals in their home games compared to any other League 2 club this year [color=#FF0000]and the least amount of goals in their away games. So why are our two styles so vastly different compared to any other club in the league?[/color]You could also say it makes the Plainmoor the most exciting place to watch football in League 2!! 3.39 goals on average are scored in every game at Plainmoor which can only be bettered in England at The Emirates, The Etihad, at Bristol City and at Crystal Palace. Not bad at all...

[b]Goals at games at the Home Ground[/b]
[url]http://www.statto.com/football/stats/england/league-two/2012-2013/total-goals/home[/url]

[b]Goals in games when on the road[/b]
[url]http://www.statto.com/football/stats/england/league-two/2012-2013/total-goals/away[/url][/quote]


Martin Ling.

Knill showed us we can get results or at least put in decent performances on the road WITHOUT resorting to sticking 11 men behind the ball and praying for a point and a shot at goal.

People have often been saying that Torquay's approach when away is a lot more negative than when playing at home which is understandable for any club. But, Torquay have seen the largest amount of goals in their home games compared to any other League 2 club this year and the least amount of goals in their away games. So why are our two styles so vastly different compared to any other club in the league?

You could also say it makes the Plainmoor the most exciting place to watch football in League 2!! 3.39 goals on average are scored in every game at Plainmoor which can only be bettered in England at The Emirates, The Etihad, at Bristol City and at Crystal Palace. Not bad at all...

[b]Goals at games at the Home Ground[/b]
[url]http://www.statto.com/football/stats/england/league-two/2012-2013/total-goals/home[/url]

[b]Goals in games when on the road[/b]
[url]http://www.statto.com/football/stats/england/league-two/2012-2013/total-goals/away[/url]