Ipswich Town FC: the unofficial season review
Quite a confusing season, really. A transformation of the management and first team, but disappointingly few signs of progress. I think everyone has a better feeling about the current setup than a year ago, but the facts are that at 14th, we finished just one place higher than last year, with six more points, a performance which had rightly led to Royle’s exit. And even the obvious excuse that it takes a while for a big change to take effect doesn’t really hold water if you consider we were higher (11th) after the first third of this season, and the same position as we ended up (14th) after two-thirds. So there was little progress over the season in terms of the table. But equally, the optimist in me says that W7 D2 L3 in the last 12 games is an 88-points-a-season rate, which would have put us up there with Sunderland.
So how has Jim’s first season been characterised? I think he knew what he didn’t want as much as what he did want, and cleared the space accordingly, which is why we had so many loanees (such as Noble, Walton and Macken) filling in key positions for long periods. But the only other player who actually put in an appearance this season and is now off the books is Nicky Forster. There were presumably therefore quite a few squad players who weren’t considered good enough, but not released either, so I think we can expect a number of departures this summer.
What other differences do the stats show over the Royle era? We had a much better goal difference than last season (+5 compared to -13) but that was largely due to the pathetic 28 goals scored at home returning to a more respectable 40. If the Royle years were characterised by a dreadful defence, then this season’s 59 goals conceded is a little better than last season’s 66 but worse than the previous season’s 56. So not much progress there.
Then there’s the disciplinary record, which was appalling. Six red cards and 94 yellows meant that only West Brom’s astonishing nine reds kept us from an unwanted table-topping. Yet we weren’t a dirty side at all, so perhaps the conclusion (once you’ve discounted unlikely refereeing conspiracies) is that we were an indisciplined, stupid side. And that rather goes against the perception that Magilton has focused on bringing in, and promoting, more intelligent players. If, for example, you have any criticism of Alex Bruce as a centre half, it might be that he’s not hard enough. Yet twelve yellows and two reds don’t back that up on paper. Once again, it’s all a bit confusing.
So let’s look at the players. We started with two decent young keepers, Supple perhaps having the edge, but Jim eventually settled on Price as number one, and he had a pretty decent season. Neither are probably as good as Richard Wright was at that stage, but they’re good enough, and talking of Wrighty, it may well be that after all the opportunity Price has been given, we’re going to have to let him go now anyway. But it would most likely have been the same if Supple had been the first choice - in fact, they might both have wanted to leave if Jim now brings in a more experienced keeper.
The defence has, of course, had a major overhaul. We finished the Royle era with a changing lineup at the back, but the most common selection being Wilnis, Naylor, De Vos and Barron. Now it’s most likely Wright, Bruce, De Vos and Harding. That seems a big improvement to me, although we still seem to give away far too many silly goals. Both full-backs have failings, but they’re the most promising pair we’ve had for years (although the competition isn’t exactly great at this club).
The midfield is just as much Jim’s, as you might expect. No complaints in any respect about Legwinski, who he brought in, or Garvan and Williams, who he’s brought on. Jim has been extremely loyal to the two wingers, who have had every opportunity to prove themselves, but I’m not sure either have made the grade: Peters is a hard-working crowd-pleaser who’s progressed really encouragingly, but just can’t deliver; and Roberts started well, but really has seemed out of his depth in the second half of the season.
Up front, Jim has never got it right. Lee has been even more infuriatingly inconsistent as last season; the experiment of playing him with a similar player (Macken) was a disaster, but he’s failed to gel with Clarke, Haynes, Jeffers or Walters. There must be a message there. On the other hand, he was our top scorer by miles. Walters looks as promising as anyone Jim has brought in, and Jeffers is classy (then again, so was Marcus Bent).
Out of interest, I reported on just about half of the league games this season, and my average ratings for the first half of the season (for players who I rated 5 or more times) were:
Roberts: 7.0
Williams: 6.8
Legwinski: 6.7
Harding: 6.3
Noble: 6.1
De Vos: 6.1
Lee: 6.0
Walton: 5.8
Price: 5.7
Richards: 5.6
Bruce: 5.5
Naylor: 5.1
Macken: 5.0
Wilnis: 4.6
In the second half of the season, things changed considerably! Fab had an Indian Summer, but I obviously got very frustrated with Lee and Roberts:
Legwinski: 6.8
Walters: 6.8
Wilnis: 6.8
Garvan: 6.8
Peters: 6.7
De Vos: 6.3
Bruce: 6.0
Wright: 5.8
Harding: 5.7
Price: 5.6
Roberts: 5.4
Lee: 5.3
Overall, though, my players of the season on ratings alone were
Legwinski: 6.7
Williams: 6.7
Garvan: 6.6
Where do we go from here? Can we hang on to Garvan? Even Magilton? Could we cope without them? Where should Jim spend the money he’s got? What about if we got a big windfall from Darren Bent moving on, or a new investor? What do we expect from the team next year?
Comments
Leave a Reply