What it was like being part of Crawley Town manager Colin Kazim-Richards' post-Cheltenham press conference

This season is my first official season attending press conferences on behalf of Crawley Observer and how I have always viewed an interview, and what I believe makes a good interview, is taking (to an extent) a relaxed and casual approach to make the interviewee feel comfortable as if it’s a discussion or conversation rather than I ask a question and you give me an answer.

Of course the purpose of an interview is to gather information from responses by asking questions because that is a role of an interviewer and interviewee, but I stand firm in my belief that the approach I reference in the previous paragraph ultimately makes for a fascinating interview, and I most certainly feel that was achieved in the post-match interview with Kazim-Richards as the Reds still on the search for their first home win of the season.

I design my questions to get the interviewee really thinking and I know I have achieved that when they ask me questions back, which relates back to this idea of it being a discussion or conversation.

This was very much evident especially within a couple of my questions where I was asked questions back and I felt I dealt with it with full honesty, respect and professionalism.

I asked the Crawley Head Coach about the Reds not making the most of their dominance when they were the better side in the game and what he can put that down to. I asked; “As we already highlighted, it was a great start, but I felt like we didn't quite capitalise whilst we were on top. Is that still a gelling problem within the team in terms of, obviously, we have lots of new players still getting to know each other's game. Do you think that's still one of the main reasons why that hasn't quite clicked in the final third? Or is it something a bit more complex than that?”

Kazim-Richards responded; “No, it's, you know, like, I think if you look at any team that has obviously had this, the amount of new faces that we have, it is a time period. You understand? If you're asking me the question, do I think it's part of the play, 100% people are still connecting and finding their way of how to assume accountability and responsibility to, obviously, when people are holding them accountable. I definitely believe that.

“I agree with you. We didn't capitalise. I think that's one of the things we have to get better at, because we've had moments in every single game.It's not a game that we've been dominated in, right? We have to capitalise on the moments that we have. And I think when we are able to capitalise more, then we'll be able to be more consistent. But we have to capitalise on those moments.

“Like, even today, if we're honest, right? And he's a very experienced manager and stuff like that, right? But where did they control the game today? If I'm being honest, being subjective, I'm asking you guys, where did you think?”

I answered back to the Reds boss saying; “I'd probably say in midfield. That was a big, key area within the game. I thought we had a good share of dominance within there. But I think there's a few times where we switched off, where maybe they got the better of us.”

I understand I may have not explained my point in the clearest way but what I was trying to argue was that while Crawley did dominate with regards to possession in the second half at the point where they were chasing the game they did actually have an even split in possession, 53% in favour of the Reds.

More to the point I believe that Cheltenham dominated in a different sense winning the key battles in key moments. The dynamic movement from their midfield players with the likes of Charlie McCann who dropped deep to effect the game as well as Ben Stevenson who dictated the build up play for the Robins was crucial and their forward thinking, attacking runs of Crawley midfielders caught the Reds off guard in the key moments.

The second instance this type of situation occurred during the interview was when I questioned how susceptible Crawley looked on the counter attack during the game. I asked about this trend saying; “I think we look quite susceptible in the counter-attack at times. I think it maybe could have been a few more, bar a few times. I think, obviously, we mentioned switching off, maybe sort of failing to always close players down. Is that like a team mentality, individual mentality?”

Kazim-Richards was understandably quick to respond “No, so you have to understand. So are we susceptible to counter-attacks? If you look at us, the way we play, we're very expansive, right? So then what do we have to be on the ball? We have to be better on the ball, right? So then if we lose the ball, making unforced errors, then we're going to be susceptible to one ball getting down.

“But I still think that Priestley [Priestley Farquharson] and Bark’s [Charlie Barker] cleaned it up very well. That won't show in the numbers because the way we want to clean it up is coming out with the ball.It's not just a kick out and into the stands and then we want to draw or whatever. We regain the ball every time a team counter-attacks us.

“So when you say susceptible, was there any goals today from a counter-attack? Apart from the long ball from the mistake, if you call that a counter-attack, that's more of a mistake from us. You know, I don't think you'll see Barks do that again. You know, I think he's turned his body the wrong way and he's come off the back of his heel. But in terms of a counter-attack breaking through us and going through, have you seen many teams score a goal from us?”

I made clear in my response that “No, I think in previous games, we've been very good at making sure that doesn't happen. But I think in this game that I've noticed, I feel like we were a little bit more susceptible on the counter-attack. They might have not scored on every, all their goals weren't from the counter-attack, but I think it could have quite easily been. But as I said, with a couple of shots that they hit the crossbar, I think it could easily have been.”

The former Derby County striker came back with “How many shots did they have on target? Three? We hit the bar as well. We did, right, Osman? One cleared off the line. So really cutting levels, yeah, I think a little bit. But I understand what you're saying. But also you have to look at it in terms of, we play expansive. Midfield is a rotational midfield. So when we make our own mistakes, you know, we are going to have to run back and it's going to look like it's a counter-attack. And then we clean up again and we try to play again. I think when you're in the process of building something, you know, there's going to be teaming problems.

“There's going to be things that people are not used to. There's going to be things that people don't like, you know. And that's the way of being. Sorry, you're in the process. That's what happens when you're in the process. You're not used to it, right? A lot of people in this league are used to getting in a certain position and spinning it and playing seconds and thirds and fourths. That's what people are used to. So when you are building and people are getting nervous and then sometimes they're trying to rush the goalkeeper and then all of a sudden, two seconds later, we get through and we're on the edge in the yard box.

“Everyone's clapping, right? So there are moments where I understand and it does look like there needs to be a bit of urgency. But sometimes, you know, the way we're playing, we like to commit other teams. We're trying to commit them to bring them out to have the space to be able to play into the space. So sometimes it can seem like that when we do have a bad pass or we are misplaced, a bad decision, and then it will look like that.”

I completely understand what Kazim-Richards is trying to make clear, giving reason for why it looks like his side are open to the counter attack because of the way they play. However, the point I was trying to get across was there is nothing wrong with playing expansive football and “commiting” players forward but it is about making sure that the players are well drilled with instructions so they understand their role whether that be in a counter press or retreat when there is a turnover in play so that there is organisation within the recoveries.

While the Reds haven’t been carved open on the counter attack like that this season, I believe that is partly down to the effect that they haven’t been involved in such a game where the opponents are so dangerous on the counter attack, where they sit back, soak up pressure and break away in numbers and with speed. I am also by no means am I taking any credit away from how the Reds have dealt with it on occasions in other matches.

Of course it is still very early into the season but with football being a results based business I guess the question is at what point do results dictate the way you play?

While some may say that Kazim-Richards was being defensive, he was well within his right to ask me questions back to understand my standpoint in more detail, which made for a great interview to be a part of despite the result going against the Reds and I look forward to many more great interviews with the Crawley Town Head Coach.