Singularly the most impressive thing about Brentford, they hassled so much and it was difficult to get in to any rhythm, I was pleased we had picked three largely ball playing midfielders and even with McGugan having a poor game we were still ~ok~ at moving the ball in midfield. I actually got frustrated with Wednesday (this happens a lot
) but I was more frustrated at the idea of 'Why aren't we as fit as Brentford', Brentford enjoyed a lot of possession in the full back area, across the defence and wide. It was frustrating that our players basically did not have the fitness or discipline to work Brentford more.
I had read this, Warburton is a good manager (as he is showing) and his ability to organise, coach and motivate a team is excellent. He was very nearly tactically spot on last night. I know little about McParland so why is he so unpleasant?
I actually think it is a shame that Warburton could not adapt to the new model, our owners are talking about a director of football for bringing players in. I have absolutely no problem with that model (in fact I prefer it) but it needs a manager whom can put his trust in the director of football and a director of football whom does not have an ego that leads him to 'meddle' with coaching / first team.
They have said the ground (pitch) is a priority and work 'should' start immediately after the final home match against Leeds. They gave Gray money in January, however, it was a bit 'rushed' in the search for players and they players moved in to the club in January seemed a little short term. They have said money will be available for playing staff (and coaching staff) as they feel the team needs real investment (as is clear to see) and their 'plan' is to get back in to the Premier League.