- This topic has 39 replies, 19 voices, and was last updated 2 weeks, 1 day ago by
.
-
18 users thanked author for this post.
Very interesting and insightful. I wonder if this partly explains Butler shouldering much of the blame for recent performances? Perhaps he understands he needs to shift the target narrative if he wants the players to move up a gear? Time will tell in his future interviews.
I’m convinced that Butler isn’t happy but also convinced he’s had bad PR advice or training. It’s clear he wants to deflect but he’s bad and clumsy at it .
The safety narrative is a good positive but after a bad defeat to use it seems churlish .Leave it until the pre match interviews the following week and frame it as “even though we’re happy safety has been achieved were aware our form could be better and are working hard everyday to get fresh impetuous into tired kegs and minds ”
After a 6-3 home loss, suck it up, be factual about the game and don’t get into emotive comments would be my adviceVery insightful, hope you sent a copy to Glanford Park as they are definitely playing, like its job done.
Think AB needs to stop thinking he is a premiership manager with his late sub tactics, which is ok if you’re bringing premiership, or York City players on but not ours.
Our last 5 home matches, a lot have said they were not trying, hence we give teams a goal or 2 head start.
Can’t remember the last time we were dominant in a game, maybe Tamworth, way back in early December and before that Truro in September !
As you say SODiron & Deereyme66, we need to, or the management, to know we are not finished.
To get that vital 3rd place, so we have a home semi final, then a trip to Wembley.
Although our home form this year is garbage..1 user thanked author for this post.
Interview before the Solihull game he states that 5 more wins will get us in the playoffs if that’s what he’s targeting he shouldn’t be.
If he’s going to be arrogant be arrogant with positivity, say the playoffs are almost nailed on and my job from now on is to get us back to hitting the winning form we’ve shown previous building into the playoffs.
We’ve shown we’re as good as anyone else bar Rochdale, let teams fear us not the other way round.This is an excellent lead post and mirrors my own sport coaching experience, not at an elite a level as SODIron. For my own part in framing the narrative. I confidently predicted last July on this very Forum that we would comfortably finish 16th with 60 points, without being involved in a relegation battle. For that Mea Culpa! I cannot therefore bring criticism to bear on the board or AB and his management team for setting the same narrative! Although I would agree that in Elite sport that one should be constantly refining and reframing objectives based on the current situation/performance levels and this has not been done. It is a strategic learning point ( rather than a tactical point that Robert’s is better as a right winger than a classical 10) and something the club and the team manager will have to address quickly moving forward.
As Bhuna says, third spot is still achievable so this in itself should be enough motivation.
I don’t think the comings and goings on the squad front has done us any favours. Are EFL loanees coming into a “safe” club under pressure to shine or merely here to give them game time? Then we have players who were part of the rip-roaring start to the season out at other clubs.
I was talking with my mate who is a Chester supporter. Let’s face it, that NLN Playoff Final could just have easily gone their way. It didn’t of course and instead of pushing on again this season they’ve been a very average mid-table side. Manager Callum McIntyre was told mid season that his contract wouldn’t be renewed in the summer. What motivation is there for both team and manager now?
So Butler must remember it’s not just about raising standards, it’s also about maintaining them.
The point about third place being achievable is absolutely valid. In theory, that alone should provide sufficient competitive motivation. The table still offers something tangible. But sport, particularly at this level, doesn’t operate purely on league mathematics. It operates on psychological framing.
Yes, third spot is there. But the key question is whether the environment feels like it is being actively chased.
Performance psychology tells us that perceived goal proximity and meaningfulness drive behavioural intensity. It is not enough for an objective to exist; it must be clearly emphasised, repeatedly reinforced, and emotionally owned by the group. When messaging drifts toward safety or comfort, even subtly, the urgency associated with higher targets weakens.
The squad dynamics you mention are also significant. Introducing EFL loanees into a side publicly described as “safe” changes the internal incentives. Are they arriving into a high-performance environment where standards are non-negotiable and positions must be earned? Or are they entering a lower-pressure setting designed primarily for minutes and development? That distinction matters.
At the same time, moving early-season contributors out on loan alters the psychological continuity of the group. Cohesion, role clarity, and shared narrative are central to sustained performance. Disrupt that ecosystem mid-campaign and you increase variability. Research in team dynamics consistently shows that clarity of purpose and role stability underpin collective output.
The Chester example is instructive. When Callum McIntyre was informed his contract would not be renewed, the implicit long-term objective disappeared. Whether consciously or not, that changes the motivational architecture of a dressing room. If the leadership horizon shortens, so does collective investment. Teams often drift when they sense a transitional phase rather than a building phase.
This is why the issue is not simply “raising standards.” It is about maintaining competitive tension over time. In elite sport, standards decay naturally unless deliberately reinforced. The brain economises effort when it perceives threat has reduced or stakes have softened, this is the coasting effect observed in self-regulation research. Without continual reframing, performance plateaus.
Scunthorpe’s recent results, capable of strong attacking output, yet vulnerable to lapses, are consistent with fluctuating competitive intensity rather than structural incapacity.
Andy Butler’s task, therefore, is not just technical or tactical. It is psychological stewardship. He must ensure that third place is framed as an active pursuit, not a mathematical possibility. Loanees are integrated into a performance-driven environment, not a comfort zone. Squad turnover does not dilute identity or expectation. Standards are not only stated but operationalised, measurable, visible, enforced.
High-performing environments do not maintain themselves. They are continuously recalibrated.
The margin between a strong finish and a drifting one is rarely about effort in its crude sense. It is about focus, edge, and narrative control. Butler must ensure the narrative is one of unfinished business, because in competitive sport, once you feel safe, you stop being sharp.
5 users thanked author for this post.
Butler should take note of SODIron as he has managed at a higher level than Under 11s or a Sunday football pub team, and would keep on friendly terms with the fans unlike Butler and Schofield.
At half time on Saturday the boos were directed toward Butler and i saw Schofield laughing like he did not care so he was reminded of the fact that were were losing.
I think neither have had man management training..One of the most interesting posts on here for some time SOD. Bravo that man.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Terrific thread with many great posts.
Predicted final table:
“Pain heals. Chicks dig scars. Glory… lasts forever.” – The Replacement.
Step up to the plate guys!
1 user thanked author for this post.
Something has changed in the dressing room.
And the final clue was Roberts on the Left for a while. Only 1 person has the pegs for the respective holes. Cannot blame the fans for any part of it and this “I know best” has in 1 month seen the gates drop from over 5000 to now over 4000 – that is a lot of money.
The fans are not being entertained they are being patronized. Yes we are in the play-offs, can it go wrong – Yes it can. Just look what happened to Walsall last season. In and out of the club people have worked to help get the club back on the up, is that going to be thrown away.
It is not defeats that hurt most – it is the nature of how we achieved that latest failure. I have supported the Iron for decades and gone to games against much bigger teams but our players never quit, they still fought for everything.
12 games left they should want to win ALL of them !
6 users thanked author for this post.
This thread is one of the most insightful I have ever seen on this Forum and SODIron must be congratulated for his leadership in this matter. Now it’s up to the club to read and digest these comments which are a constructive criticism of recent events. Ignoring them or dismissing them as an idle rant would be a drastic error.
Does anybody truly think that with the attitude and mannerisms shown by AB that he will in any way, shape or form take on board any sort of constructive criticism aired towards him and his team via this forum? I certainly won’t be holding me breath.
The fans who criticise, Mr Butler clearly said should stay away from Glanford Park, so that is why the crowds are not as big.
I am sorry AB, but when Boston come and totally dominate us, a mid table team, we are not going to sit quietly, having paid over £20..
Butler goes back to the League 1 then championship days, with zero negativity. That is when we had a good team, a great defense, Butler thinks he is better than National League, but i can’t see him lasting in league football..3 users thanked author for this post.
Just to build on the original point about the danger of the “we’re safe” messaging.
The last two games; Yeovil away and Sutton at home, actually highlight the issue quite well.
Starting with Yeovil.
Yes, we won 3-0, and you’ll take that every day away from home. But if we’re being honest, the score line flattered us a bit. Yeovil had plenty of the ball, created some decent moments, and on another day they probably score. The difference was simply that we were clinical when our chances came, whereas they weren’t.
That’s great in terms of efficiency, but it didn’t feel like a performance from a team completely on the front foot. It felt more like a team doing enough and relying on quality in key moments.
Then you look at Sutton at home, and the contrast becomes more obvious.
We looked flatter, slower, and far less intense. The urgency just wasn’t there in the same way. Sutton, who are still fighting for points, looked like the side with more desperation at times.
That’s where the messaging point comes in again.
When a team still has something clear to chase; promotion, playoffs, survival, the intensity is naturally higher. Every tackle matters, every second ball matters, every run matters.
But when the narrative around the club becomes “we’re safe now”, it’s very easy for that extra edge to disappear. Not consciously, players aren’t deliberately relaxing, but subconsciously the urgency just drops a notch.
The Yeovil game showed we still have the quality to win games even when not at our best.
The Sutton game showed what can happen when the intensity isn’t quite there.
And that’s why the messaging around the squad matters. In this league the margins are tiny, and if the collective mindset shifts even slightly from “we need to keep pushing” to “job done”, performances can drift.
Hopefully the Sutton result acts as a bit of a reset, because if we play with the same focus we showed earlier in the season, there’s still plenty left to aim for.
3 users thanked author for this post.
The fans who criticise, Mr Butler clearly said should stay away from Glanford Park, so that is why the crowds are not as big.
I am sorry AB, but when Boston come and totally dominate us, a mid table team, we are not going to sit quietly, having paid over £20..
Butler goes back to the League 1 then championship days, with zero negativity. That is when we had a good team, a great defense, Butler thinks he is better than National League, but i can’t see him lasting in league football..Those may have been successful times, but I actually remember plenty of criticism and negative feedback still sometimes being aired. It wasn’t all happy-clappy.
1 user thanked author for this post.
I’m following up on my original thread because I think the Rochdale game showed exactly why the messaging around a team matters.
After Southend, the club’s wording understandably leaned into achievement. The report talked about Scunthorpe “cementing” a place in the semi-final after a “fantastic team performance”. The Rochdale fixture announcement said we had “progressed” after Southend through an early Cal Roberts goal and “dogged defending”. Then, before Rochdale, the Chair’s message said reaching a play-off semi-final was “no small achievement” and that the players had “earned this right”.
None of that is wrong.
It *was* an achievement, Southend *was* a big win, and the players *had* earned the right to be there.
But the issue is timing.
Before the biggest game of the season, the dominant message cannot drift into “look how well we’ve done to get here”. That might be true, but it can still be psychologically dangerous.
Locke and Latham’s Goal Setting Theory is useful here. Their work argues that goals affect performance by directing attention, increasing effort, improving persistence and shaping the strategies people use. In plain football terms: the way you frame the objective changes the way the group attacks it.
If the frame is “we’ve done well to get here”, the emotional energy starts looking backwards.
If the frame is “the job is not finished”, the energy stays forwards.
That is the difference.
At Rochdale, I thought we looked like a team caught between the two.
I am not saying the players did not care. They clearly did. You could see the effort, the frustration and the disappointment. But caring is not the same as being psychologically primed to go and impose yourself on a knockout semi-final.
That distinction matters.
Jones, Meijen, McCarthy and Sheffield’s Theory of Challenge and Threat States in Athletes makes a similar point. Athletes respond differently depending on how they appraise the situation in front of them. If the game is framed as a challenge to attack, it can sharpen effort, attention and decision-making. If the moment is softened, or framed too much as a reward, the performance state changes.
That is where I think the Southend-to-Rochdale messaging became a problem. The semi-final should not have felt like a reward for a good season, it should have felt like a responsibility.
Before Rochdale, the message needed to be brutally simple:
We have achieved nothing yet.
We have earned an opportunity, not a reward.
We are not going there to admire the journey.
We are going there to win.That is not arrogance. It is competitive clarity.
Bandura’s work on self-efficacy is relevant too. Self-efficacy is not vague positivity. It is task-specific belief: “Can we execute what is required in this moment?” That is the belief a team needs before a semi-final. Not pride, not appreciation, not “whatever happens, we’ve had a good season.” Actual belief that the job is still there to be taken.
That is why “we’ve done well to get here” worries me.
It sounds humble, fair and supportive however, it can quietly lower the emotional temperature.
In knockout football, a few percent matters.
A few percent less aggression.
A few percent less conviction.
A few percent less bravery on the ball.
A few percent less belief when the game turns.That is enough.
This is not about blaming one quote, one interview or one person. It is about the wider performance culture. Earlier in the season, the tone became “we’re safe” and the performances dropped. After Southend, the clubs messaging became “we’ve done well to get here” and we went out at Rochdale.
Different words, same danger. Comfort language before the job is finished. That is the pattern we have to learn from.
Recognise the progress? Absolutely.
Credit the players and staff? Definitely.
Respect the journey back from where this club was? Of course, but progress has to be fuel, not a cushion.The review of Rochdale should not just be tactical. Yes, look at shape, selection, subs, recruitment and squad depth. But also look at the emotional framing.
What did we say before the game?
What did we believe before the game?
Did we frame the semi-final as a reward, or as a responsibility?
Did we go there still chasing, or had we already allowed ourselves to feel proud?For me, that is the lesson.
Next season, the message has to be different.
Not “we’re safe.”
Not “we’ve done well to get here.”
Not “whatever happens, we can be proud.”Those messages have a place, afterwards.
While there is still a game to win, the message has to be simple:
We are Scunthorpe United.
We are not here to make up the numbers.
We are not here to admire the journey.
We are here to win.That may sound harsh, but that is the difference between teams who nearly do it and teams who actually do it.
Nearly all teams talk about progress before the job is finished. Successful teams talk about standards until the job is finished.
Recognise the progress, respect the journey, appreciate the work ,but while there is still a game left to win, the mentality has to be non-negotiable:
We have achieved nothing yet.
I am afraid the club’s approach to leadership and performance management is several levels of sophistication below what you describe. And that is on the playing side, and in the backroom and the boardroom. That’s not to say that we don’t have good, hard working and committed people, but (from owners to manager) they need a different mindset for us to kick on next season.
1 user thanked author for this post.
“That’s not to say that we don’t have good, hard working and committed people, but (from owners to manager) they need a different mindset for us to kick on next season.”
And more money.
1 user thanked author for this post.
without sounding negative towards the great job they have done surely its pretty obvious that the current owners have taken the club as far as they can financially and without new owners or an investor we may well be in the NL for several more years unless it changes to 3 up anytime in the near future.
legit new owners (not full ov wind n piss), new ideas deep pockets and an overhaul hopefully before Butler gets as many years in as Muzzy the bullet dodger has.Interesting times ahead.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.