Excuses, excuses

BBC reports Carlos Carvalhal as saying that:

the results under his predecessor Paul Clement were the cause for Swansea's relegation.

"I think the few points we did in the first 20 games - just 13 - made it difficult to recover and achieve a better position," Carvalhal added.

This is, to use a technical sporting term, bollocks. Swansea City were, at the time of his appointment one of half-a-dozen teams in danger of relegation and were not reckoned to be favourites for the drop. Since then, their rivals have pulled away with a combination of determination on the field and tactical planning by their managers. To take a couple of comparative results, Swansea lost to Chelsea at home, whereas Huddersfield held them to a draw at Stamford Bridge; Huddersfield held Manchester City to a draw at the Etihad, after Swans were tanked 5-0 there. Southampton beat Bournemouth 2-1; Swansea lost 1-0 when they should have at least have gleaned a draw against a team which had nothing to play for at the time. I could quote several other examples.

The truth is that Carvalhal scores highly on enthusiasm and media-friendliness, but low on tactical nous and team selection. The loss to Brighton (where Huddersfield drew 1-1) is a prime example. Carvalhal  turned a narrow deficit into a rout by poor half-time substitutions.

The owners, as detailed in that BBC report, have accepted part of the blame for Swans' relegation. It is surprising that Carvalhal cherishes any hope that his contract may be renewed. The owners have nothing to lose by taking their time in selecting the right man to take Swansea City forward. It would be great to see the Swans promoted again playing the attractive passing football which they plied under Martinez and Rodgers, but they must at least appoint someone with man-management skills and a tactical brain.