Jump to content
IGNORED

Better or worse without Pack


Top Robin

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, bearded_red said:

I don't think we missed him that much last night and actually the type of game it was I think we benefited from having three players in midfield with such high energy.

It was always going to be a game in which Fulham had the majority of possession and looked to control the game in midfield through Johansen, McDonald and Cairney and I actually felt that having such mobility in Reid, Brownhill and Smith allowed us to get around the pitch, press, never allow them time on the ball and never become overrun in the middle of the park.

Having said though, although I thought Smith was superb, deservedly man of the match, and made a quite incredible amount of interceptions and tackles there were a few times he did, completely understandably, show the weaknesses in his game compared to Pack. He did a couple of times give the ball away softly or miss a pass that Pack would have made. There was also one instance in the first half that Fielding was looking to take a quick goal kick and whereas Pack would have been coming short to get the ball off the keeper, Smith had absolutely no interest in this and all Fielding was greeted with was the name on the back of his shirt forcing him to kick long.

One thing that I am unfortunately quite resigned to though is that I think we will Pack a hell of a lot on Sunday. Firstly against the 2018 version of Dave Bassett's Wimbledon, simply we are going to miss Pack's size in offering a shield in front of Zohore/Madine when Cardiff (I assume endlessly) play the long ball up to them. We will have a lot more possession of the ball than we did last night and we will miss Pack's ability and composure in keeping the ball and giving good service to our more attacking players who will face the difficult task of breaking down what is, I guess I have to be fair and describe as a solid team.

So I think last night was possibly a good one for us to be without him and I thought the three lads in the middle of the park all put in a tremendous shift and made it very difficult for some very talented players to play their game. I would still say though that for the majority of games Pack would still be one of the first names on the sheet for me, possibly only behind Baker and Bobby.

Great post.  Pros and cons of all 3 of our main CMs well written.

Just one challenge, and I’m after opinion / thoughts really, rather than being cantankerous....

....in our more recent away games, or the ones televised (Sheffield Utd, Derby and Leeds - as they’re the ones I've seen), I've commented post game that I thought we got strung out and became three separate units, and our press became ineffective.  We lost momentum and although 5 points from 3 games looks good, I think it hid our overall performance.

Last night I know we were home, but we had a very mobile 3 (Smith, Brownhill and Reid) and Paterson and Kent wide.  Diedhiou was predominantly supported by Reid and Brownhill, both when we had the ball, but in closing down their back 4, so much so that I think Fulham were very panicked at the back...one of the reasons they didn’t play much in between our lines.

Now if I look at Cardiff, they are much closer in style to the 3 teams I mentioned above in the away games, and I wonder if my Natural thoughts that we’ll miss Pack as the DM / screen and for his aerial ability, might actually be offset by industry of a more mobile midfield? 

Other thoughts:

  • did Diedhiou last 80 mins because he’s getting fitter each game or because of the ‘legs’ of our midfield 5 meant he had to do less running?
  • Did Brownhill get in behind them more from a central starting position than he normally does, including the 1:2 for our goal, despite probably not being as careful with his passing generally?
  • did having Magnússon at LB, e.g. a more disciplined fullback mean that we always had pretty much "4 at home" and therefore Smith had some shackles reduced to gamble on some challenges / interceptions, knowing he had cover?

Really appreciate some thoughts on this. Ta.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, harrys said:

You can pick 3 examples if you like but I cannot believe that anyone thinks we would of played better last night with the rather pedestrian Pack in the team, all about opinions though 

Hard to prove one way or another whether we’d have played better or worse, so it’s a moot argument really. 

All 3 of our CM’s have different qualities and pace is certainly not one of Pack’s, so the high tempo nature of our off the ball defending last night might have been different, but as I pointed out earlier Pack solidifies the middle and we rarely get penetration directly down the centre of the field, but this happened a number of times last night which could have had different outcomes. 

I do think your comments about Pack’s passing qualities are way off the mark though. It’s rather widely acknowledged within football that Pack’s passing range is very good and is certainly the best “ball-player” at the club. So if you don’t rate Pack’s passing ability then you must think the rest of our squad absolutely stink. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Robbored said:

You did and anyone who understands what the purpose of holding midfielder is could see the same - except Harry's of course.

But my point is is that over the 90 minutes against the best footballing team in the division Is that OVERALL Pack wasn’t missed in the slightest but you obviously think differently

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Harry said:

Hard to prove one way or another whether we’d have played better or worse, so it’s a moot argument really. 

All 3 of our CM’s have different qualities and pace is certainly not one of Pack’s, so the high tempo nature of our off the ball defending last night might have been different, but as I pointed out earlier Pack solidifies the middle and we rarely get penetration directly down the centre of the field, but this happened a number of times last night which could have had different outcomes. 

I do think your comments about Pack’s passing qualities are way off the mark though. It’s rather widely acknowledged within football that Pack’s passing range is very good and is certainly the best “ball-player” at the club. So if you don’t rate Pack’s passing ability then you must think the rest of our squad absolutely stink. 

For what it’s worth I think that Pack is the most improved player in the team this season (next to Reid) and is worthy of his place, all I was doing was given my opinion to this post of whether we played better or not without Pack last night and to me we obviously did but in saying that if he as available for selection on Sunday he would go straight back into the team

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, harrys said:

For what it’s worth I think that Pack is the most improved player in the team this season (next to Reid) and is worthy of his place, all I was doing was given my opinion to this post of whether we played better or not without Pack last night and to me we obviously did but in saying that if he as available for selection on Sunday he would go straight back into the team

Back peddling Harrys?      :dunno:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Robbored said:

Back peddling Harrys?      :dunno:

Not at all, i’m Saying 100% that he wasn’t missed in the slightest last night and you are saying that he was missed, no back tracking here, but as I say, it’s all about opinions and I tend to respect others who have a different opinion to mine without resorting to insults

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Worse without him. We may have attacked a bit quicker but it wasn't generally productive. Also lookd a bit more shakey transitioning when they were looking to attack. Get him back in, Brownhill on the right and Ryan Kent off the pitch entirely.

Kent is shit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, harrys said:

Not at all, i’m Saying 100% that he wasn’t missed in the slightest last night and you are saying that he was missed, no back tracking here, but as I say, it’s all about opinions and I tend to respect others who have a different opinion to mine without resorting to insults

If Pack played we wouldn’t of been so open down the middle. Therefore we missed him. 

Is that simple enough for you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fulham deployed a 352 on Wednesday and very effectively I thought, Targett and Christie played so high up the pitch that it was hard for us, Kent and Patto both did a hell of a lot defensively something that seems to have gone unnoticed. 

Was very impressed with Fulham and was interesting to see McDonald for them was their DM pivot, dropping back into CB during the game to allow their wing backs to be so high. 

Think Marlon is in the same mould as McDonald in that he sits in and fills a hole screening the back four. For that reason he’s certainly was missed as we left lots of space in CM and fortunately we’re not punished by the usual quality of Cairney and Johannsen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Harry said:

Personally I thought Brownhill was just about average in CM last night. Lots of times he made poor passes or poor decisions, but his work rate was good and helped to pressure Fulham. 

What was very noticeable with Pack’s absence was the 3 times in the first 25 minutes where they had a player run with the ball right up the centre of the pitch to the edge of our box - that simply doesn’t happen when Pack plays as he fills those holes and forces the opposition back or sideways. You rarely get runners straight down our spine when Pack plays in there. 

Har, you see the same Brownhill as I do. Lots of endeavour, can't fault his engine, but after he has won the ball he runs into brick walls or goes nowhere. His final pass is hopeless. His head goes down and he just tries to smash it into the box and hope. With Pack you get that nice weighted reverse pass between the defenders. He is always probing looking for a little gap. The closest we came to an intricate pass the whole night was not from a midfielder but from a forward, when Diedhiou brought the ball down and reversed it for Bobby Reid. I didn't see that from Paterson, Kent, Brownhill or Smith all night. That was why we couldn't kill off Fulham who were there for the taking. Lots of Chuckle Brother passing around the 18 yard box but nobody capable of the killer pass to Fammy or Bobby. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Robert the bruce said:

           Wright-   Flint-.  Baker

                         Pack

   Pisano-  Smith-.   Brownhill-.  Bryan

                   Reid

                           Fammy

If we could have played this team in the last few months we would still be in automatic position. The loss of Pisano and Famara during this period was obviously significant.

Playing both Kent and Pato will not work. We will need Smith, Pack and Brownhill in the team to get keep us in a play off spot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bs4Red said:

Fulham deployed a 352 on Wednesday and very effectively I thought, Targett and Christie played so high up the pitch that it was hard for us, Kent and Patto both did a hell of a lot defensively something that seems to have gone unnoticed. 

Was very impressed with Fulham and was interesting to see McDonald for them was their DM pivot, dropping back into CB during the game to allow their wing backs to be so high. 

Think Marlon is in the same mould as McDonald in that he sits in and fills a hole screening the back four. For that reason he’s certainly was missed as we left lots of space in CM and fortunately we’re not punished by the usual quality of Cairney and Johannsen

They didn’t play 352, they played 4231.  Yes, McDonald sometimes came back and got the ball off of the keeper or defenders, but that’s no different to Pack or Smith doing it for us.  Then again in a fluid game like football, formations are fairly meaningless except for goalkicks when typically players position themselves in formation. 

What they did have in Odoi was a small-CB who was very comfortable on the ball.  He typically plays RB So not your normal ‘hoofer’.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Robbored said:

You did and anyone who understands what the purpose of holding midfielder is could see the same - except Harry's of course.

You only have to look at the way Fulham played, two sitting midfielders, taking the ball from the CB's and passing through the lines. Its what we've been doing most of the season with Pack in the team and its worked well. That is what we missed and will miss again on Sunday.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Davefevs said:

They didn’t play 352, they played 4231.  Yes, McDonald sometimes came back and got the ball off of the keeper or defenders, but that’s no different to Pack or Smith doing it for us.  Then again in a fluid game like football, formations are fairly meaningless except for goalkicks when typically players position themselves in formation. 

What they did have in Odoi was a small-CB who was very comfortable on the ball.  He typically plays RB So not your normal ‘hoofer’.

Disagree mate, certainly didn’t have 4 at the back at any stage of the game but agree that formations for both sides were fluid, I think McDonald did it in a different way because he actually sat in as a 3rd CB whereas Smith and Pack drop in only to pick the ball up. 

Agree about Odoi thought he was tidy in fairness. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Cheesleysmate said:

Har, you see the same Brownhill as I do. Lots of endeavour, can't fault his engine, but after he has won the ball he runs into brick walls or goes nowhere. His final pass is hopeless. His head goes down and he just tries to smash it into the box and hope. With Pack you get that nice weighted reverse pass between the defenders. He is always probing looking for a little gap. The closest we came to an intricate pass the whole night was not from a midfielder but from a forward, when Diedhiou brought the ball down and reversed it for Bobby Reid. I didn't see that from Paterson, Kent, Brownhill or Smith all night. That was why we couldn't kill off Fulham who were there for the taking. Lots of Chuckle Brother passing around the 18 yard box but nobody capable of the killer pass to Fammy or Bobby. 

Didn't Bobby play the 1-2 with Josh in the box when he scored?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Bs4Red said:

Disagree mate, certainly didn’t have 4 at the back at any stage of the game but agree that formations for both sides were fluid, I think McDonald did it in a different way because he actually sat in as a 3rd CB whereas Smith and Pack drop in only to pick the ball up. 

Agree about Odoi thought he was tidy in fairness. 

I’ve just watched the whole of the first 45 back on BCTV.  McDonald has played as a holding midfielder.  On two occasions Odoi ventured forward and he sat in, just as you’d expect Pack or Smith to do if Flint marauded Forward.  Their fullbacks might’ve had advanced starting position (I’d still call that 4 at the back), like Middlesbrough did, but in no way was McDonald playing as a 3rd CB.  He spent most of the 1st half tracking Reid’s runs and occasionally Brownhill or Paterson if they moved into the no10 role’s position.  We may have to agree to disagree. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I’ve just watched the whole of the first 45 back on BCTV.  McDonald has played as a holding midfielder.  On two occasions Odoi ventured forward and he sat in, just as you’d expect Pack or Smith to do if Flint marauded Forward.  Their fullbacks might’ve had advanced starting position (I’d still call that 4 at the back), like Middlesbrough did, but in no way was McDonald playing as a 3rd CB.  He spent most of the 1st half tracking Reid’s runs and occasionally Brownhill or Paterson if they moved into the no10 role’s position.  We may have to agree to disagree. :P

Haha my point was when the full back bombed on, he just sat in to make it a 3 given them the licence to get forward. The average position of Christie and Targett was inside our half, which is extremely high for fullbacks. Looking back at the game now I’d say it was a 433 inverted into a 352 but at times also a 4231 so possibly were both right. 

Also very interesting to see the average position of Bailey Wright was very high vs Fulham which is surprising seeing as he’s a very limited RB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...