Match Report: "It's good but it's not right"

[Olé]

The slow, depressing but sadly predictable collapse of Lee Johnson's City over the last two months took a day off today, replaced by a briefly plucky, energetic yet ultimately equally flawed attempt to turn form around.

High flying Leeds actually did very little with an abundance of possession and City were good value for their flashes of intent on the break, albeit without much more than a Pato twist and turn or debutant Adelakun touch.

Solid at the back, City looked worth at least a point for an hour, but Brownhill's red was a disadvantage too many. The decisive yellow was right but the Sky Sports Leeds ref was too in awe to apply those rules consistently. 

That's not to say City should feel hard done by. Despite looking compact and more solid at the back as well as quick to move the ball out to the wings, it still looked like a cobbled together side, unsure of best route to goal.

For all the occasional close control and head up play of Paterson and then later Famara - both recently heavily out of form - City really only shaded periods of a poor encounter, at most a brief respite from an ongoing decline.  

City, so often now cycling through possible line ups, setup in a compact 4-5-1 geared to to stay solid and break at speed, with a first debut for Adelakun, and Eliasson and Pato back in the side, Weimann back up front.

It took nearly 20 minutes for either side to fashion a chance, Leeds attacking down the right, Webster drawn way out of his position leaving the hosts able to slide the ball across the box, Maenappa tipping the shot over.

City responded midway through the half as good work on the ball by Adelakun and then Paterson released Weimann in the left, but there was no one else in the box for his low cross which the home keeper claimed easily.

Nonetheless City were starting to look more dangerous, winning a series of set pieces. Free kicks from either wing - one after TWO players were cut down from behind - and far post headers from two well earned corners.

City looked most likely to score before the break and from another free kick, the keeper punched and it fell to Paterson on the edge of the box, who met it first time but spooned wildly over. On top in a game of few chances.

It looked like a mistake would win it and first City gave the ball away in their own half, the home side charging forward out of midfield and slipping it into Roofe on the left, to lift   the ball past Maenappa, wide off the post.

Then Adelakun seized on a similar loose ball in the Leeds half but his early 35 yard shot low to the keepers right was easily saved. It was good competitive stuff but it all turned decisively inside an hour on the sending off.

In the first half Brownhill was rightly carded for "taking one for the team" as Leeds broke, and this time he steamed into an innocuous midfield ball, arriving late and in slow motion upending the player. The ref had no option.

Paterson actually got the first opportunity as ten men, City breaking with three across the front running at Leeds with pace, but Pato's attempt to play in one of his teammates was weak and easily intercepted by the defender.

Leeds responded from the break, playing the forward into the right of the box, slamming a shot past Maenappa but also beyond the far post. Minutes later a 25 yard shot was easily held by City's keeper as pressure mounted.

By the midway point in the second half City were pinned back, the impressive Kelly had to spread to block as a Leeds player found himself wide open to finish at the far post. From the rebound the shot deflected wide.

This started a succession of corners as the hosts turned the screw. From the first their full back hit an out swinging 25 yard curler from deep that was desperately tipped wide by Maenappa. Three more corners followed.

From the fourth in succession Leeds went in front. Hernandez collecting the ball into the box and firing goalbound through a crowded area, Roofe applying the finish to turn home.   

City had earlier thrown on Diedhiou and Liam Walsh, and the latter, unlucky to lose his place, was involved immediately as he broke from midfield and fed Paterson to race into the box from the left, his cross forcing a corner.

The visitors added Eisa up front but it was at the other end that City had to act, their own free kick breaking down and in a dangerous 3 on 2 from Leeds, Jack Hunt stuck a foot in to make a fantastic goal saving challenge.

Again Walsh galvanised City out of midfield and from a sudden break, the midfielder got  forward in the Leeds half before spreading the ball right to the hard working Weimann, his run and cross was cut out for a corner.

But at the other end Walsh's all action play was wasted, a brilliant edge of the box tackle intercepting the ball with 5 minutes left, but Fam ignored the loose ball and Leeds quickly lifted it into Hernandez to steer a header home.

That was it for City, and while Leeds had the clearer chances, the scoreline flattered them in a match Lee Johnson's recently awful side at least kept competitive - staying compact and playing with rare purpose on the break.  

Unfortunately, like much of the past month, City lack a decisive style of play nor a target man to lead the line, and it's a sign of recent dearth of form that losing 2-0 to a distinctly average Leeds is seen as positive response.

 

Maenappa 6 Some camera saves and some poor distribution

Hunt 6 A couple of fantastic challenges and generally solid

Kelly 7 Probably our best player over 90 minutes, rarely beaten and comfortable in both phases

Webster 7 Continues to be quietly efficient, a rock at the back, close from a corner in the first half and was certain he had a penalty shout at the end when pushed from a Walsh free kick

Kalas 6 Also solid but unspectacular

Pack 5 Continues to be out of form and less influential than he was when things were going well. Looked better with Walsh on too to take responsibility for playing forward

Brownhill 5 Didn't really get into the game and while the first yellow was for the team, the second was killer

Adekalun 7 Busy player and not disgraced for a debut

Eliasson 5 Didn't really get into the game so only takes credit for his threat from set pieces

Paterson 6 Surprised to see him start and in his defence created some attacks just from his willingness to control, turn and run with the ball. Unfortunately also poor passing and weak against defenders.

Weimann 6 Ran his proverbials off but you can't escape the fact he is running off people looking to create chances rather than leading the line looking to finish them. Not his fault but hard to say he was effective.

 

Diedhiou 6 His close control and movement was far better than it has been, he executed some nice moves... but as often stated, he is not a target man either, repeat, he is not a target man. So who are we getting the ball to?

Walsh 7 Best midfielder by far in the time he had on the pitch, why does he keep getting dropped. Answers on a post card to the usual address

Eisa 5 Don't think he had a touch

[Will Rollason]

Thanks Ole... always worth a read...the rest of the forum is too dog whistle for me atm...

[hoxton casual]

Great report Ole from not the easiest of vantage points.

[italian dave]

Thanks @Olé , much as I saw it, only much better written that I would! The only thing I'd take issue with is that I didn't feel Leeds were that poor, and I really quite enjoyed the game. Yes they had a lot of injuries, but tell us about that! They've got a decent squad, and playing there, in front of a full house, is a tough gig. And, they're third. 

That aside, wouldn't argue with any of your excellent summary. It was better, we played OK, had it stayed eleven v eleven who knows, Diedhiou looked a lot hungrier, though it helped that we were playing the ball to his feet and to his strength. 

A win on Wednesday, and I'm by no means taking that for granted, andthings might be looking up. We're still mid table, just! @Will Rollason agree with your comments about the forum tonight 100%. 

[Hampshire Red]

How nice to read something about the football from someone who has been to watch football rather than extremely tiresome rubbish written on just about every other thread. Thanks Ole and see you at Ipswich. 2 wins  by Sunday and mid table looks assured. Two defeats and the mood changes. HR

[BTRFTG]

I simply couldn't be **sed today but interesting Ole to know if you think WeeLee set up for a point? McInally for Sky (usually a pretty fair judge,) described it as a dire affair suggesting Leeds were very poor offensively,  not good enough for the promotion spots was his take. He suggested the first yellow was probably right, though a tad harsh in the context of other decisions, but the second was reckless given Brownhill's position. Highlights appear to bear this out.

Point for asking is again we had one shot on target (Adelakun's easy effort from your description that didn't make the highlights,) and we created no clear cut chances. If that's the case any talk of us trying to be more offensive and creative clearly didn't work despite it being an improvement over recent weeks. That's unsurprising as we do not have the personnel. For all the talk of a more solid defensive show we're still a soft touch, a poor Leeds still scored twice. Biggest concern has to be the last few months we're shipping goals despite having plenty of players in our box.

Seems to me, at present, we have neither an offensive or defensive gameplan that's any chance of working. So where to go from here?

[Maesknoll Red]

Interesting, maybe it looked a little more entertaining and proficient from the stands, the perception I took from the match watching Leeds TV via a link was it was a fairly dour affair until the sending off.  I felt City had little attacking threat, both teams seemed lacklustre  - really, after a long break - there was a lot of ‘clumsy’ football on display.  At one time the old dog eared saying “couldn’t trap a bag of sand” was a apt for a few players on either side, as receiving a ball and keeping close control seemed to be a skill that had been lost for the day.

Leeds inevitability cranked up the pressure with a lift from the sending off, I commented  in the match thread that I wasn’t convinced we’d have managed to do the same and am still not.  There seems to be a lack of direction, leadership and that seems to knock any flair from the team - or maybe I’m wrong and the gameplay is rigid and stifling creativity, whichever, we didn’t press a young and probably nervy keeper, you can credit Leeds for protecting him, but I would have expected a handful of shots on target at least.

[REDOXO]

We looked compact at the cost of any threat and competent until the inevitable giving the ball away soft booking and failure to clear the ball  

We are an accident waiting to happen  which it inevitably will four times a game. I wish I could shares the more upbeat assessment, but I fear it was just a case of not being completely pony everywhere and now we are just semi competent relegation fodder!

An Upgrade!

 

[JBFC II]

Pretty much agree bar the 7 for adelakun, when he rarely got on the ball he gave it away, looked like a league 2 player I'm afraid

[LOYAL CITY]

Very fair and accurate report from where I sat. Thought we looked solid across the back and in no real trouble until the sending off. Without Smith we have missed some bite in the middle which Josh Brownhill was trying to give, it's a fine line or timing between putting a foot in to make a tackle and being a split second late. For me it was unnecessary to lunge in to a tackle in that part of the pitch especially when already on a yellow.

Attacking and creatively we were very blunt and offered little quality, but this has been our issue all season, Although improved slightly when Liam Walsh came on. 

Still the biggest concern is players still being off form. I've always liked Pack especially defensively but just think this season his pass forward needs to be quicker and in behind defenders to hurt teams more also and movement and mobility is laboured. 

Agree Leeds were not at their best today but we should have made it difficult for their debutant Centre Back & Keeper as they would both be pleased with having a relatively easy game. Maybe Taylor would have been more of a handful.

[Olé]

1 hour ago, BTRFTG said:

but interesting Ole to know if you think WeeLee set up for a point?

To this and all the other points you raise the answer is simply yes, you've nailed it.

There's no question we setup for a point, a 4-5-1 with 3 attacking forwards out of midfield has the potential to change to a far more attacking shape but the reality is this was a compact defence and then try to spread them on the break strategy, which bore little fruit since we played (as always) from deep and had no one worth crossing to if Pato/Habs/Andi/Eliasson ever made a solo run to the byline.

As you say Habs 35 yarder for our one shot on target was utterly trivial, for all our attacking willingness before the sending off, we really just pressed their full backs back and occupied the midfield, we really did not have any pattern of play that was likely to open them up, in fact it was Fam's footwork after coming on (something we have all ridiculed for weeks) that actually looked like the most legitimate threat to create an advantage.

The red was right. As for the rest, I think what you are really asking is did we sell out on the ability to score to simply look purposeful on the break and stay solid at the back: like most clumsy trade offs, by underfunding the positive outcome you avoid the negative outcome. And sadly but well spotted from afar, the answer is yes.

[GoodridgeandGoater]

Nicely captured. Thought Leeds were better than you made out - decent on break, moved ball quickly and had a threat up front. Saiz helped them when he came on. And of course Brownhill’s mad moment. Not at their best but had more than enough for us.  Being a Leeds fan at the moment looks like fun.

City - competent and tidy but never really looked dangerous. How are we going to score goals? Even at set pieces we look blunt (and painfully missing Flint). Players looked bleak on the way off. 

[BTRFTG]

8 hours ago, Olé said:

the answer is yes

Thanks Ole and for me that's the most worrying of all answers. Without bringing in 3 or 4 quality players in January I fear we're in endless decline. No point in a direct Keeganesque 'go for it approach' as the end pieces aren't there; no point sitting back as we appear unable to prevent the inevitable lapse. Until Watkins (remember him?) did for Kalas we had 3 or 4 games when we looked really solid. Can it be as simple as Kalas losing his nerve or talking less?

It doesn't take much in this league to change things. I asked my colleague at work who's a Norwich fan what's transformed their season so dramatically and was surprised by his answer. "We've got Rhodes and Oliveira. Franke stopped paying his trademark neat passing triangles that looked fancy but got us nowhere and we went direct, like Cardiff last year.'

WeeLee take note.

 

[CityCiderEd]

7 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

Thanks Ole and for me that's the most worrying of all answers. Without bringing in 3 or 4 quality players in January I fear we're in endless decline. No point in a direct Keeganesque 'go for it approach' as the end pieces aren't there; no point sitting back as we appear unable to prevent the inevitable lapse. Until Watkins (remember him?) did for Kalas we had 3 or 4 games when we looked really solid. Can it be as simple as Kalas losing his nerve or talking less?

It doesn't take much in this league to change things. I asked my colleague at work who's a Norwich fan what's transformed their season so dramatically and was surprised by his answer. "We've got Rhodes and Oliveira. Franke stopped paying his trademark neat passing triangles that looked fancy but got us nowhere and we went direct, like Cardiff last year.'

WeeLee take note.

 

That for me is also the biggest worry. We are simply not geared up to play for a draw and I just don't know where the goals are going to come from.There isn't a player in our squad currently that I feel is going to get into double figures this season which again is a massive problem.I watched the game on the live feed yesterday and the best we could realistically hope for was a 0-0 draw because we never looked like scoring.

 

[aa_bcfc]

I wish I could feel differently but having watched the game on a Leeds stream I thought we were very average up until the sending off and worryingly poor after the sending off. Throughout the game we lacked an attacking invention or cutting edge and the one shot on target not much more than a pass back. We showed little or no threat from set pieces and frankly that’s been the case since Flint left, it’s hard to see where his 9 league goals last season are going to come from.

I’m repeating what I said in another thread. After the sending off we showed no composure, organisation or leadership. Going down to 10 men doesn’t necessarily have to result in the inevitable collapse we displayed. How many times have we played a team which have gone down to 10 and struggled to take advantage or even look like we’ve got the addition man?

My biggest concern is that with no obvious leaders in this team the display directly after the sending off demonstrated that if this team get into a relegation scrap it would very likely end in a return to league one football.  

[italian dave]

9 hours ago, Olé said:

To this and all the other points you raise the answer is simply yes, you've nailed it.

There's no question we setup for a point, a 4-5-1 with 3 attacking forwards out of midfield has the potential to change to a far more attacking shape but the reality is this was a compact defence and then try to spread them on the break strategy, which bore little fruit since we played (as always) from deep and had no one worth crossing to if Pato/Habs/Andi/Eliasson ever made a solo run to the byline.

As you say Habs 35 yarder for our one shot on target was utterly trivial, for all our attacking willingness before the sending off, we really just pressed their full backs back and occupied the midfield, we really did not have any pattern of play that was likely to open them up, in fact it was Fam's footwork after coming on (something we have all ridiculed for weeks) that actually looked like the most legitimate threat to create an advantage.

The red was right. As for the rest, I think what you are really asking is did we sell out on the ability to score to simply look purposeful on the break and stay solid at the back: like most clumsy trade offs, by underfunding the positive outcome you avoid the negative outcome. And sadly but well spotted from afar, the answer is yes.

I think you're right, but at the same time I wouldn't criticise him for that. A 0-0 would have been a good result. And we were on course for that until the sending off. 

I felt each of the yellows was right, in themselves. But many refs would have settled for stern lecture rather than a second yellow. 

Despite Fammy's improved performance, and I agree he looked like a threat, just that we were being forced so deep by then that he was always too far from goal, we just don't have goals in us this season. We were shipping too many last year, and I think we focussed on the defensive side of our game over the summer, and as very often happens that has meant we have lost out offensively. It's mostly 1-0s this season, wins and defeats, instead of the 3-2s of the last couple! 

[Jerseybean]

19 minutes ago, aa_bcfc said:

I wish I could feel differently but having watched the game on a Leeds stream I thought we were very average up until the sending off and worryingly poor after the sending off. Throughout the game we lacked an attacking invention or cutting edge and the one shot on target not much more than a pass back. We showed little or no threat from set pieces and frankly that’s been the case since Flint left, it’s hard to see where his 9 league goals last season are going to come from.

I’m repeating what I said in another thread. After the sending off we showed no composure, organisation or leadership. Going down to 10 men doesn’t necessarily have to result in the inevitable collapse we displayed. How many times have we played a team which have gone down to 10 and struggled to take advantage or even look like we’ve got the addition man?

My biggest concern is that with no obvious leaders in this team the display directly after the sending off demonstrated that if this team get into a relegation scrap it would very likely end in a return to league one football.  

I too am concerned about this, however, my biggest concern is our lack of identity/ playing style. Understandably we approach every game with a unique game plan but it seems to me that in so doing we (1) have no consistent style (2) have no consistent team selection and therefore (3) never know what is going to happen!

So in short can we have a settled team and an approach / style of play which is built upon the individual and combined strengths of that team.

[Olé]

31 minutes ago, italian dave said:

Despite Fammy's improved performance, and I agree he looked like a threat, just that we were being forced so deep by then that he was always too far from goal, we just don't have goals in us this season.

The club simply don't have a target man. That's not a qualitative statement about the players we have, it's worse than that, we simply literally don't have a player of that type whatsoever. We were saying on the train last night what we'd do for a younger Aaron Wilbraham. Even for 20 minutes.

I've said it a million times on here but despite his size and occasional poachers header, Fam's a player who wants ball to feet running from deep with things in front of him, that's how he played in France. That's also the game Weimann has always played. And it's Matty Taylor's game as well.

I suppose it gets you in LJ's busy bee club, but as we saw yesterday, any time one of them (and you can add Pato to the list as well) gets on the ball and gets inside a defender to the byline, there is NO ONE in the box (i.e. target man) to cross to, so you just whip a hopeful ball across the keeper.

Eisa is the X factor, however I'm pretty sure he will be the poacher in the vein of Tammy Abraham (i.e. hanging off a defender and drifting off them into space for the finish) which doesn't make him a physical target either - don't forget Tammy played quite a bit with Wilbraham alongside him.

How have we got to a position with all the money we've spent and players we've brought in, that we don't see the need for a legitimate target? If you ask me LJ was spoiled by the role Bobby Reid played last season and thinks he can get away with a collective of busy little forwards and wingers.

Perhaps the best thing that can happen to us this season is we write off £xm of the Bobby deal and bring him back on loan, because I can't see LJ buying a target man, and our central midfielders, who in this sort of shape need to be bombing into the box for the return ball, go missing too easily.

Pack has been awful for two months now, and neither he nor (surprisingly) Brownhill look like box to box players anymore. They're terrified to get forward without Korey Smith's push. Walsh at least drives at opponents but little to suggest he can overlap our wingers/forwards and become a target.

So who the hell are we crossing to? All these wingers and busy forwards and for what? It got to the point yesterday where our FIRST and ONLY plan at the byline was to win corners as it was the only way we'd actually put people in the box. And then you don't have a proven target (or Flint) either. 

 I think this would all be a lot less stressful if the problems weren't so obvious.

[glen humphries]

16 minutes ago, Badger08 said:

And this is what I fight in my head with. Generally our play is good, however, it's just that final 3rd. It's blatantly obvious, but if we can see it, why can't LJ? But this is it, maybe he can, but what can we do about it until January. If we had a young Peter Crouch, we'd be laughing, or like you said "a young AW"

Generally our play is good, we must be watching different games , we’ve slow ponderous, sideways passes, we have no nouse in midfield, zero creativity, and a forward line that lacks any threat, if that’s generally good then we’re in massive trouble,     Johnson out.

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 hours ago, BTRFTG said:

Thanks Ole and for me that's the most worrying of all answers. Without bringing in 3 or 4 quality players in January I fear we're in endless decline. No point in a direct Keeganesque 'go for it approach' as the end pieces aren't there; no point sitting back as we appear unable to prevent the inevitable lapse. Until Watkins (remember him?) did for Kalas we had 3 or 4 games when we looked really solid. Can it be as simple as Kalas losing his nerve or talking less?

It doesn't take much in this league to change things. I asked my colleague at work who's a Norwich fan what's transformed their season so dramatically and was surprised by his answer. "We've got Rhodes and Oliveira. Franke stopped paying his trademark neat passing triangles that looked fancy but got us nowhere and we went direct, like Cardiff last year.'

WeeLee take note.

 

Odd tbh, because your take on Norwich? Oliveira hasn't played for them in the League this season.

Your name  for him "Wee Lee"- far from an honest broker :laugh:.

[BTRFTG]

55 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Odd tbh, because your take on Norwich? Oliveira hasn't played for them in the League this season

Apologies. To put it in context Rhodes aside my point to him was I'd struggle to name any other outfielder in their setup. He explained quite a few were via the German 2nd tier. The guy I was thinking of was the ex Celtic winger who they're now deploying in a Reid type role alongside Rhodes. Apparently he's now central just behind Rhodes (the target,) and whereas start of the season they were playing neat stuff from the back with no cutting edge in the final third they're now getting it forward immediately (the exact opposite to us,) and opposition find it hard to cope. Not as good looking but far, far more effective.

[Maesknoll Red]

2 hours ago, Badger08 said:

I agree Ole.  My take on the game, for what it's worth, was that we actually played some really nice football in spells.  I thought we created and dominated possession up until the final third. To this end, is the issue I feel we have. 

We are toothless in the final 3rd of the pitch. Only 40.2% of passes in that area of the pitch were completed, and considering over 56% of our goals come within the 18 yard box, that is worrying.

A lot of fans will see what they want to see and almost become blinkered by their agenda, which is ultimately to remove LJ. 

I'm by no means saying everything is sunshine and rainbows, but  it's also far from awful or near relegation performances. 

I'm not sure what a David Moyes or anyone else for that matter would add? On the whole we generally (bar a few games) compete and play decent football, but we're just lacking that something up top as Fammy isn't what everyone makes him out to be. 

I have no agenda to remove LJ, indeed I wish he had the team 6 points clear at the top, but to say we are playing some really nice football and then say we are toothless in the final third is surely a contradiction at best.  If we retain possession in our defence area and the centre ground, have 95% of it say, complete 95% of passes and then it all falls down in the final third, that doesn't for me make it nice football.

I'm probably not a purist, I've done no badges, I'm not particularly fond of European tippy tappy football, as tactically brilliant as it might be, I like a solid defence, a quick and incisive midfield, hopefully with fast wingers who can pass/cross a ball well and strikers who make themselves space, have a knack for being in the right place at the right time.  I like my football to excite, get me off my seat, get me vocalised, to whip up the crowd.  Now I appreciate that doesn't suit everyone, those who think it more like a game of chess, but if I wanted to watch chess, I could, I want a bit of blood and guts desire, flair and taking a few chances.  Maybe modern football isn't for me, but then again, I watch Man City on the box and they are technically proficient, tactically aware, yet still play in a style that excites, they are, I appreciate an exceptional team, but watching yesterday, we had nothing to excite, nothing to endear a neutral, a first timer or anyone wavering on still coming along.

Something needs to change, how long will fans be content at a mid table finish, its a perpetual treadmill if we sell our best players every year and don't replace like with like (and I have commented before, that if players want to leave, then they have to go, so I am not saying we are a selling club for necessity, just that we aren't meeting the aspirations of our top players, year on year).  Maybe some fans are content with a middle of the road team, an occasional foray into the 4th or 5th round of a cup, but that's not the message that the club has put out, but unless we have a very lucky year and get an academy year like Man U had once and we get a Class of 20XX then where is the improvement coming from.

There are no doubt issues of FFP, clubs with parachute payments, SL's willingness to push the boundaries of the rules and regs - maybe having a financial man in charge make it more unlikely he'd bend financial rules, like plenty of others have done to achieve results.

[maxjak]

Just watched the 8 minutes of lowlights on main site, impossible to judge our display from it, but.............Brownhills second booking was harsh, and for Leeds second goal DiedhIou was a lazy git .....IMHO.

[exAtyeoMax]

10 minutes ago, maxjak said:

Just watched the 8 minutes of lowlights on main site, impossible to judge our display from it, but.............Brownhills second booking was harsh, and for Leeds second goal DiedhIou was a lazy git .....IMHO.

so good was our 'shot', they showed it twice…

[maxjak]

1 hour ago, exAtyeoMax said:

so good was our 'shot', they showed it twice…

Yeah...........what a screamer!  Luckily for the rookie keeper it was off target

[JoeAman08]

Nice write up. Thought we were nailed on for a point. We were very solid and seemed a defensive performance from when Kalas first showed up. That said we have lost any and all confidence in the final third and that has to be affecting others. We had a few good positions but no one took responsibility. Weimann the main one. Had a few balls down channels he got on but instead of driving at defenders in their box and having a go, his first touch was out of the box and back.

Our forwards and their poor form is imo the main reason for our poor performances. The midfield and defense are getting little movement ahead of them. Paterson tried to link it together and had some good moments but then would show his current form and his final ball was poor. Adelakun and Eliasson too wide when they got the ball and generally quiet. Asks a lot of our defense when our moves end in bad areas where we can be countered. Our midfield and defense not been in the best form themselves but after weeks of watching that in front of them and getting hit time and time again on the counter think anyone would lose form. 

[Guest]

18 hours ago, LOYAL CITY said:

Very fair and accurate report from where I sat. Thought we looked solid across the back and in no real trouble until the sending off. Without Smith we have missed some bite in the middle which Josh Brownhill was trying to give, it's a fine line or timing between putting a foot in to make a tackle and being a split second late. For me it was unnecessary to lunge in to a tackle in that part of the pitch especially when already on a yellow.

Attacking and creatively we were very blunt and offered little quality, but this has been our issue all season, Although improved slightly when Liam Walsh came on. 

Still the biggest concern is players still being off form. I've always liked Pack especially defensively but just think this season his pass forward needs to be quicker and in behind defenders to hurt teams more also and movement and mobility is laboured. 

Agree Leeds were not at their best today but we should have made it difficult for their debutant Centre Back & Keeper as they would both be pleased with having a relatively easy game. Maybe Taylor would have been more of a handful.

confused now was LJ at a different game because he said "the players are back to their best"  and "we were looking like the side to go on and win it" (does he know we would have to score to do that?)

[SR1]

17 hours ago, GoodridgeandGoater said:

Nicely captured. Thought Leeds were better than you made out - decent on break, moved ball quickly and had a threat up front. Saiz helped them when he came on. And of course Brownhill’s mad moment. Not at their best but had more than enough for us.  Being a Leeds fan at the moment looks like fun.

City - competent and tidy but never really looked dangerous. How are we going to score goals? Even at set pieces we look blunt (and painfully missing Flint). Players looked bleak on the way off. 

It can be, but we do seem to want to walk the ball into the net. We play with a certain DNA and the lack of players who made us so powerful has disrupted us greatly.

At the end of the first half I just thought 'anti-football', and although the sending off helped we've scored in every game bar one this season, so it was always likely that we'd get one somehow.

I wish I could offer crumbs of comfort, but every team that's visited this season has, at some stage, had a dangerous period of 10-15 minutes, often at the beginning of the game. At no stage yesterday did we feel that we were going to concede, even allowing for Huffer and Halme's debuts.

Talking about DNA, it wasn't clear what your style of play was, or how you were set up to win the game. Colourless and joyless.

[Mr Popodopolous]

6 hours ago, BTRFTG said:

Apologies. To put it in context Rhodes aside my point to him was I'd struggle to name any other outfielder in their setup. He explained quite a few were via the German 2nd tier. The guy I was thinking of was the ex Celtic winger who they're now deploying in a Reid type role alongside Rhodes. Apparently he's now central just behind Rhodes (the target,) and whereas start of the season they were playing neat stuff from the back with no cutting edge in the final third they're now getting it forward immediately (the exact opposite to us,) and opposition find it hard to cope. Not as good looking but far, far more effective.

Apologies also- I take this board a bit too seriously at times.

Norwich, well I'll take your colleagues word for it bit they still play good football I reckon-would be surprised if they've gone full Warnock ball- I haven't got stats to hand (for once)! but if their possession has dropped to average of mid 40's, well it'd surprise me.

Agree though about us, we have at  varied times been too ponderous in possession and top slow to shoot last 2 games especially.

[cidered abroad]

4 hours ago, exAtyeoMax said:

so good was our 'shot', they showed it twice…

Poor editing. Inserted the same clip twice!