Jump to content
IGNORED

Bristol City v Nottingham Forest Match Day 1


Recommended Posts

Just got back and so haven’t read whole thread but can’t agree with Redstreet and the doom merchants. Agreed we struggled second half at times but it was extremely hot. In my view, Webster looks the real deal if you want someone who doesn’t just hoof it. Tactical change quite interesting and the set pieces have been Southgated!! We were busy in midfield but playing two wingers was a bit optimistic. Bryan off the pace but otherwise we were ok. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment

That's a good point for us I reckon. Have to bare in mind that's against a team that's truely splashed the cash this summer and have a squad that are very capable of going up automatically. Defensively we were very good today, apart from Murphy's goal we did really well to prevent them to moslty pot shots from distance. Despite the fact we are really going to miss Diedhiou up front for the next 5 games we weren't completely toothless, as we did create a few chances. We were very good at playing out from the back in the first-half but they found us out a bit in the second-half and really put the pressure on, though from the 46th minute onwards we stood firm defensively.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
9 minutes ago, stortfordred said:

Just got back and so haven’t read whole thread but can’t agree with Redstreet and the doom merchants. Agreed we struggled second half at times but it was extremely hot. In my view, Webster looks the real deal if you want someone who doesn’t just hoof it. Tactical change quite interesting and the set pieces have been Southgated!! We were busy in midfield but playing two wingers was a bit optimistic. Bryan off the pace but otherwise we were ok. 

Similar to how I saw it today 

Link to comment
26 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

But but but

we conceded goals last season because of Flint Jon

Didnt you hear

No way Murphy scores if Flint is marking him not Baker

Watched Baker closely today and doesn’t convince me at all not sure what his ‘strengths’ are

Id have Flint over two Nathan Bakers

Awkward on ball gets done in air costing us goals here and there last season and today

Thought Webster was ok and would liked to have had Webster and Flinf together out of Webster , Flint , Wright , Baker

Did you see Millwalls second goal today? ?

Link to comment
9 minutes ago, J D said:

That's a good point for us I reckon. Have to bare in mind that's against a team that's truely splashed the cash this summer and have a squad that are very capable of going up automatically. Defensively we were very good today, apart from Murphy's goal we did really well to prevent them to moslty pot shots from distance. Despite the fact we are really going to miss Diedhiou up front for the next 5 games we weren't completely toothless, as we did create a few chances. We were very good at playing out from the back in the first-half but they found us out a bit in the second-half and really put the pressure on, though from the 46th minute onwards we stood firm defensively.

 

Come on JD,  you can do better than that.

There's nowhere near enough negativity and critical comment in your post, which is pretty poor for the opening day of the season. No only that, but you then made things even worse by including the "Forest spent loads in the summer" excuse.

I know you cannot win anything in November, but you can be relegated after the first game of the season, so come on, pull your socks up and get your act together when you post in future! 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:)
 

 

8 minutes ago, Unan said:

Did you see Millwalls second goal today? ?

Ah, but that's different!

Link to comment
3 hours ago, Esmond Million's Bung said:

Surely Pack's passing is why he should be the more forward player, Smith made 3 timely tackles one was brilliant when they were attacking in our box, Smith is far better at that IMO.

 

If you want a player to drop in and receive, retain, release and repeat,  when the CB's split and full backs push up the receiving central midfield player has to be assured and composed on the a ball that player in City's squad is Pack.

  • Like 4
Link to comment

I thought we did well to get a point today as I fully expect forest to be promoted on that evidence! If we played them in say jan and they were top (which they could be), people would be very pleased with the point.  

Obvously lacked a presence up front and our midfield was dominated but the new signings looked like upgrades and there were lots of positives.

another exciting season to look forward to :)

Link to comment

Just watched the highlights, for their goal the defensive line is all in line, perhaps fraction too deep seeing as Baker couldn't get to Murphy to stop the header, collective responsibility amongst defence for the line. Other thing I picked up is Murphy is free in the box but Pack is stood a few yards in front of him not marking anyone just in front of the defensive line, really he should have been told to pick up Murphy.

  • Confused 1
Link to comment

well for what it's worth for all those that were disappointed that we only drew and were expecting more, I spoke to four forest fans after the game at length and I can tell you now they were very happy to be going back to Nottingham with a point and all said we had a hell of a team and would be surprised if they had a harder game all season, in short other people can see maybe what our own supporters cant that despite many changes we are a team that can do well this season. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
3 hours ago, Leveller said:

Really?  I thought Webster often looked nervous and panicky. And would Forest have scored their goal with Flint there? Probably not.

As for our creativity, we fielded two potentially strong wingers, started well and scored a goal after getting a corner from creating an overload on the left. After that, we seemed not to get the ball to them enough - particularly ODowda. I didn’t think he was poor, but that he didn’t get given the ball in any potentially good situations.

To me, with Eliasson and O’ Dowda there, we need to ensure the full backs combine properly with them. They have the ability to penetrate well if they can get some space out wide. I don’t think we’ll do it through the middle so often.

apparently flint had a mare today and was directly responsible for one of millwalls goals, maybe time to let it go, he was good for us but he wasn't beyond making the odd mistake.

Link to comment
3 hours ago, Redstreet said:

Dreadful today . Pack Brownill and Pack all a shadow of their former selves . We will do well to stay up. Forest equally underwhelming . No attack threat from BCFC . 

really? do well to stay up, sorry but we have just played a team who I think will be up there at the end of the season and the fans of forest that I spoke to were very happy to have left the gate with a point, I will take a wild guess and say your under 25, if you think that was dreadful you should have seen some of what I have had to put up with in the 1980s and beyond, if that's the worse you ever see lucky you.

Link to comment
5 minutes ago, pillred said:

really? do well to stay up, sorry but we have just played a team who I think will be up there at the end of the season and the fans of forest that I spoke to were very happy to have left the gate with a point, I will take a wild guess and say your under 25, if you think that was dreadful you should have seen some of what I have had to put up with in the 1980s and beyond, if that's the worse you ever see lucky you.

Plus in more modern times...year after year when it looked like we wouldn't get out of League One- that time spannd from Pulis to end of Tinnion's reign. Horrible slog that League was, without about 50 away fans a lot of the time or so it felt like. Yes we had the playoffs under Wilson but it felt like a long and futile period...

Set against that or your (before my time) 80's near bankruptcy etc today was nowhere near. I could pick out a load of games worse than today. A load between 1998-now.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
12 hours ago, BS13Red said:

Based on that performance I’d take the £3million Derby offered for Joe Bryan and run. Horrendously average championship left back, “one of our own” when it suits him.

This. 

He didnt look interested at all. 

Although ive seen him play versus Darikwa many times in the past and has never had the beating of him. I said before the game he wouldnt even try to take him on and i was right. 

Cheerio Joe.......?! 

Link to comment

Fair point in the end I think. I don’t think it was terrible but clearly not great either - some of the over reactions just mental on here. Forest will be around the playoffs I think and us in a similar position to last season. 

Started off well and almost 2 up before they improved. They could have gone 2–1 up with a sustained spell of pressure after they scored. But either side could have won it in last ten with chances. 

New keeper looked ok and made one good save. Hunt looks weak defensively and they targeted him a lot - a potential concern. Webster ok - a little bit over confident at times. Weimann - nice goal but I didn’t think too great otherwise. Eliasson looked bright and will set up a few goals this season. 

We badly missed Fammy up to and Paterson carried on last seasons form sadly. I’m no Taylor fan but he’s a better option than Pato right now.

O’Dowda looks unfit and we need Korey in there - should be first choice. 

Overall we continue to lack consistency - a good ten mins here and there won’t take us to the top 6. Plenty to work on but certainly nothing to worry about...yet.

Link to comment

Playing Forest before they'd chance to gel and taking a point were positives, as were a few performances of note. We were ultimately undone by a series of basic truths that one could cut and paste from any of my comments last season (particular last half) or from those few brave souls hereabouts who  resist the BS3 mentally of everything having to be rose-tinted at risk one is called a traitor.

First up to ask the question (again) why does WeeLee set up to defend so narrow? Yesterday, like last season, at times the back 4 were within the width of the 6 yard box. Note to WeeLee, it may limit the direct 'run-through' but doesn't really stop the 'cut-in' and gives savannah space for quality ball into the box (see their goal.) Countering with a more combative and mobile midfield is a far better option.

Secondly, playing out from the back is fantastic but only if you've access to creative, mobile midfielders. Pack's our only creative and despite another decent performance yesterday he showed even more how limiting his first 5 yards of pace are at Championship standard. His never say die attitude and the way in which he works to recover the ball is exemplar such we notice the recovery but often neglect it was he who failed to get to the ball in the first place. We can't simply rely on Pack to dictate how well we'll do.  We knock it around, take increasingly dangerous levels of risk in doing so only to knock the thing long. Time to stick or bust methinks. If the objective is to play through to feet and pace then it ain't working. If not we need a lump upfront able to stay on the pitch longer than The Gas remain competitive each season.

Thirdly, WeeLee's pre and post match press conferences always include reference to what they been working on in training - the 'inches'. So here's a free hint boss - practice the basics like being able to trap the ball or running with it inches, not yards, from one's foot. Stamp out the superfluous 'trickery', particularly when it's in dangerous positions on the park. The number of reckless and unenforced errors yesterday was worrying and we'll get punished big-time if they're not eliminated.

Of the performances: I loved the apparent change in attitude from Eliasson who at last looked positive and as though he has the training pitch talent we've heard of but never seen. Webster did just fine at Centre Back and the keeper, in truth, didn't have much to do. I see others are rating his improved distribution but I could have rolled and knocked the short balls he did yesterday. Hunt - like the attitude but he had several shaky touches and I'm not keen on his gung-ho approach in getting so far forward without support. Every time he lost possession we were very exposed to the break. Yesterday he got up frequently and with gusto (good) but was somewhat slower on the return journey (bad.) He needs to learn to pick and choose his moments. Bryan's few positive contributions came from when he was high up the pitch, not surprising given he's always been a defensive liability. Maybe I read too much into his body language but either his motivation was knowing he's out the door this week (if not for the hyped deal he and his agent had hoped,) else he's gone Basso, realised his golden chance has passed and is in a period of sulk. Either way play him high up or not at all. Weimann did OK first half with a very well taken goal, let's hope it doesn't prove to be a 'quarter' given his historic, annual tally. 

And that leaves the annual who's going to be the Ashton Gate whipping boy (for we always like one?) Good news is this term it's self-selecting, though was strongly hinted at last year. Some say Patterson can't help his body language and that it's not symptomatic of his attitude or ability. They're wrong. From his slouched shoulders, obsession with looking at the turf, pointing at everybody other than himself and wanting the ball less than Dracula wants daylight, he's an utter waste of space. His sole talent is his spatial ability to hide in plain site. The way he tucks himself between the opposition, creates the angles, such not even Messi in a City shirt could find him.  If Hide & Seek were a professional  sport he'd be World Champion. He ceded possession, uncontested, 6 or more times yesterday mostly in dangerous positions. That he did so being unable to control the ball is scandalous. WeeLee loves him but if he sticks with him much longer it'll end up with the boss paying the price.

So in that respect it's same old, same old. I doubt we'll be troubling the top of the table, I hope we won't trouble the bottom.

 

Link to comment
36 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

Playing Forest before they'd chance to gel and taking a point were positives, as were a few performances of note. We were ultimately undone by a series of basic truths that one could cut and paste from any of my comments last season (particular last half) or from those few brave souls hereabouts who  resist the BS3 mentally of everything having to be rose-tinted at risk one is called a traitor.

First up to ask the question (again) why does WeeLee set up to defend so narrow? Yesterday, like last season, at times the back 4 were within the width of the 6 yard box. Note to WeeLee, it may limit the direct 'run-through' but doesn't really stop the 'cut-in' and gives savannah space for quality ball into the box (see their goal.) Countering with a more combative and mobile midfield is a far better option.

Secondly, playing out from the back is fantastic but only if you've access to creative, mobile midfielders. Pack's our only creative and despite another decent performance yesterday he showed even more how limiting his first 5 yards of pace are at Championship standard. His never say die attitude and the way in which he works to recover the ball is exemplar such we notice the recovery but often neglect it was he who failed to get to the ball in the first place. We can't simply rely on Pack to dictate how well we'll do.  We knock it around, take increasingly dangerous levels of risk in doing so only to knock the thing long. Time to stick or bust methinks. If the objective is to play through to feet and pace then it ain't working. If not we need a lump upfront able to stay on the pitch longer than The Gas remain competitive each season.

Thirdly, WeeLee's pre and post match press conferences always include reference to what they been working on in training - the 'inches'. So here's a free hint boss - practice the basics like being able to trap the ball or running with it inches, not yards, from one's foot. Stamp out the superfluous 'trickery', particularly when it's in dangerous positions on the park. The number of reckless and unenforced errors yesterday was worrying and we'll get punished big-time if they're not eliminated.

Of the performances: I loved the apparent change in attitude from Eliasson who at last looked positive and as though he has the training pitch talent we've heard of but never seen. Webster did just fine at Centre Back and the keeper, in truth, didn't have much to do. I see others are rating his improved distribution but I could have rolled and knocked the short balls he did yesterday. Hunt - like the attitude but he had several shaky touches and I'm not keen on his gung-ho approach in getting so far forward without support. Every time he lost possession we were very exposed to the break. Yesterday he got up frequently and with gusto (good) but was somewhat slower on the return journey (bad.) He needs to learn to pick and choose his moments. Bryan's few positive contributions came from when he was high up the pitch, not surprising given he's always been a defensive liability. Maybe I read too much into his body language but either his motivation was knowing he's out the door this week (if not for the hyped deal he and his agent had hoped,) else he's gone Basso, realised his golden chance has passed and is in a period of sulk. Either way play him high up or not at all. Weimann did OK first half with a very well taken goal, let's hope it doesn't prove to be a 'quarter' given his historic, annual tally. 

And that leaves the annual who's going to be the Ashton Gate whipping boy (for we always like one?) Good news is this term it's self-selecting, though was strongly hinted at last year. Some say Patterson can't help his body language and that it's not symptomatic of his attitude or ability. They're wrong. From his slouched shoulders, obsession with looking at the turf, pointing at everybody other than himself and wanting the ball less than Dracula wants daylight, he's an utter waste of space. His sole talent is his spatial ability to hide in plain site. The way he tucks himself between the opposition, creates the angles, such not even Messi in a City shirt could find him.  If Hide & Seek were a professional  sport he'd be World Champion. He ceded possession, uncontested, 6 or more times yesterday mostly in dangerous positions. That he did so being unable to control the ball is scandalous. WeeLee loves him but if he sticks with him much longer it'll end up with the boss paying the price.

So in that respect it's same old, same old. I doubt we'll be troubling the top of the table, I hope we won't trouble the bottom.

 

That's why you play 3 in midfield. Especially v good sides on hot days.

You refer to the new keeper, and the distribution thing- truth is that is how you play out from the back..short passing is how it's done.

Through the lines, between the lines that's how it is done- keeper short to Webster (or the full backs, depends on the circs). Webster to Pack (Brownhill decent technically IMO).

Last year, a pair of Flint and Baker...not so capable IMO in that regard. Best of the 3 would have been retain Flint, buy Webster but obviously that's all hypothetical isn't it. Fielding could distribute it well at short range I'm sure- vary it yeah, a few long passes out fine or a quick roll out for a break, but with Webster now we can play the shorter passing game more readily again I think.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
51 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

That's why you play 3 in midfield. Especially v good sides on hot days.

You refer to the new keeper, and the distribution thing- truth is that is how you play out from the back..short passing is how it's done.

Through the lines, between the lines that's how it is done- keeper short to Webster (or the full backs, depends on the circs). Webster to Pack (Brownhill decent technically IMO).

Last year, a pair of Flint and Baker...not so capable IMO in that regard. Best of the 3 would have been retain Flint, buy Webster but obviously that's all hypothetical isn't it. Fielding could distribute it well at short range I'm sure- vary it yeah, a few long passes out fine or a quick roll out for a break, but with Webster now we can play the shorter passing game more readily again I think.

Good post- I’m amazed it took so long for Forest to catch on (Pre Game Analysis ?) To press on Webster and Pack and make us pass short to Baker

If we are going to pursue the ethos and improve we need another footballing centre half 

 

 

( Isnt it F*****G great that the footballs back though , giving us so much more to ‘debate’ :thumbsup::clapping:)

 

Edited by BobBobSuperBob
Link to comment
1 hour ago, BTRFTG said:

Playing Forest before they'd chance to gel and taking a point were positives, as were a few performances of note. We were ultimately undone by a series of basic truths that one could cut and paste from any of my comments last season (particular last half) or from those few brave souls hereabouts who  resist the BS3 mentally of everything having to be rose-tinted at risk one is called a traitor.

First up to ask the question (again) why does WeeLee set up to defend so narrow? Yesterday, like last season, at times the back 4 were within the width of the 6 yard box. Note to WeeLee, it may limit the direct 'run-through' but doesn't really stop the 'cut-in' and gives savannah space for quality ball into the box (see their goal.) Countering with a more combative and mobile midfield is a far better option.

Secondly, playing out from the back is fantastic but only if you've access to creative, mobile midfielders. Pack's our only creative and despite another decent performance yesterday he showed even more how limiting his first 5 yards of pace are at Championship standard. His never say die attitude and the way in which he works to recover the ball is exemplar such we notice the recovery but often neglect it was he who failed to get to the ball in the first place. We can't simply rely on Pack to dictate how well we'll do.  We knock it around, take increasingly dangerous levels of risk in doing so only to knock the thing long. Time to stick or bust methinks. If the objective is to play through to feet and pace then it ain't working. If not we need a lump upfront able to stay on the pitch longer than The Gas remain competitive each season.

Thirdly, WeeLee's pre and post match press conferences always include reference to what they been working on in training - the 'inches'. So here's a free hint boss - practice the basics like being able to trap the ball or running with it inches, not yards, from one's foot. Stamp out the superfluous 'trickery', particularly when it's in dangerous positions on the park. The number of reckless and unenforced errors yesterday was worrying and we'll get punished big-time if they're not eliminated.

Of the performances: I loved the apparent change in attitude from Eliasson who at last looked positive and as though he has the training pitch talent we've heard of but never seen. Webster did just fine at Centre Back and the keeper, in truth, didn't have much to do. I see others are rating his improved distribution but I could have rolled and knocked the short balls he did yesterday. Hunt - like the attitude but he had several shaky touches and I'm not keen on his gung-ho approach in getting so far forward without support. Every time he lost possession we were very exposed to the break. Yesterday he got up frequently and with gusto (good) but was somewhat slower on the return journey (bad.) He needs to learn to pick and choose his moments. Bryan's few positive contributions came from when he was high up the pitch, not surprising given he's always been a defensive liability. Maybe I read too much into his body language but either his motivation was knowing he's out the door this week (if not for the hyped deal he and his agent had hoped,) else he's gone Basso, realised his golden chance has passed and is in a period of sulk. Either way play him high up or not at all. Weimann did OK first half with a very well taken goal, let's hope it doesn't prove to be a 'quarter' given his historic, annual tally. 

And that leaves the annual who's going to be the Ashton Gate whipping boy (for we always like one?) Good news is this term it's self-selecting, though was strongly hinted at last year. Some say Patterson can't help his body language and that it's not symptomatic of his attitude or ability. They're wrong. From his slouched shoulders, obsession with looking at the turf, pointing at everybody other than himself and wanting the ball less than Dracula wants daylight, he's an utter waste of space. His sole talent is his spatial ability to hide in plain site. The way he tucks himself between the opposition, creates the angles, such not even Messi in a City shirt could find him.  If Hide & Seek were a professional  sport he'd be World Champion. He ceded possession, uncontested, 6 or more times yesterday mostly in dangerous positions. That he did so being unable to control the ball is scandalous. WeeLee loves him but if he sticks with him much longer it'll end up with the boss paying the price.

So in that respect it's same old, same old. I doubt we'll be troubling the top of the table, I hope we won't trouble the bottom.

 

That's a mammoth post.

Defending. Defending narrow makes sense. It makes sense with the players the team has and the way the team plays (at times). When full backs push up and it is lost, get compact, delay and look for depth its logical. You are posting about having a more combative midfield = A lot of change. 

Playing out -  You want, or appear to want creative mobile midfield players. Its not necessary for Pack to be highly mobile at all to receive, retain, release and repeat as I put it in another post to keep possession but also be able to make penetrative passes, he can and does this. To play out a team will take risks. It requires being bold and brave. Risk and reward it will  go wrong and at times the ball will get lamped. 

Inches … Yes improvement can be inches because Bristol City cannot buy the best in each specific role. City have to improve by inches. 

Hunt? Ball playing improvement? Maybe. Webster? Yes. Keeper? Yes, not hard. That is possibly marginal gain. Pragmatic and practical v budget.

I would agree with stick or bust. Play out and be bold and brave, recruit and develop towards that approach. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment

As I wrote, I've no argument about playing out from the back save in our case it takes very little to stop us doing so, given we've few to play through. Cycle through the games and save against poor sides it invariably breaks down and we end up with misplaced long balls. To play from the back we need creative mids and we don't have them so rather negates the point in trying to do so. Moreover, when it doesn't work we've no effective Plan B.

Similarly, the point I made about defending narrow makes no sense from those responding. Again yesterday we dropped back in ample time such we've at least 4 in a line and with good shape save they were ultra narrow - there was at least 10 yards or more in which to work the flanks. For their goal Eliasson did exactly what he was supposed to, dropped back, held his man, but with nobody tracking back it's a simple lay off  to their overlap in space and guaranteed quality delivery into the box. If you argue that like last year we've no pace amongst the Centre Halfs and we can't afford to have them separated then you might have a point but I'm not sure that's true and seems lesser of two evils to me than uncontested balls into the box, against which we continue to struggle.

Edited by BTRFTG
  • Like 1
Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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