That’s Why We’re Mid-Table

[Silvio Dante]

Before the game, the conversation was around how two wins vs Brentford and Rotherham would really make those points against Norwich and Derby ‘good’ points as opposed to just ticking over.

Today showed why, although we may get points against the top teams, we’re equally likely to drop them against the bottom. On a plain basis, we are just not consistent.

Ian on RB commented that he didn’t know the formation. That wasn’t the problem - the formation was 4-4-1-1, same as recent and same as last season. He also said a problem was playing with one striker - again, we’ve done that playing well and last season.

The issue is that for our 4-4-1-1 with one striker to work well, it requires two things - work rate, and playing well individually. Today, both of those things were lacking in parts - indeed, we looked most dangerous when Webster carried the ball out.

Part of the issue here is that we don’t have players who week in, week out are 8 out of 10 - and that’s okay. If they were, they wouldn’t be playing for us. The second part though is why they don’t look ‘up’ for it - that has to fall in part on LJ. If we’re getting ‘up’ for games against top six sides and not against lower half, how is he motivating them? (And today Brentford didn’t come to sit, so it’s not that).

We are massively inconsistent. However, we are consistent in not turning up against teams which we “should” beat, or hope to beat. That’s why we’re mid-table, and to be honest, that’s where LJ really needs to start making a difference.

[Lrrr]

It really doesn't look 4411 to me, really looks more 451, Pato plays too deep to be considered a CAM in this line up, more a CM who has licence to get forward when possible.

[Silvio Dante]

1 minute ago, hodge said:

It really doesn't look 4411 to me, really looks more 451, Pato plays too deep to be considered a CAM in this line up, more a CM who has licence to get forward when possible.

I think I’d agree generally today, but only in that he dropped deeper when it was clear we were overrun.

Having said that, after Matty came on there was a period where Brentford were around our box and Pato still stood up front, when his role at that point was clearly to work back.

[Lrrr]

1 minute ago, Silvio Dante said:

I think I’d agree generally today, but only in that he dropped deeper when it was clear we were overrun.

Having said that, after Matty came on there was a period where Brentford were around our box and Pato still stood up front, when his role at that point was clearly to work back.

Tbh I've said it about tv games as well when people say we've been playing 4411/4231, think we've played 451 for a while now, the wingers are deeper but look to break where possible, Pato plays deeper in line with at least Brownhill with Pack dropping deeper to the CB's to collect the ball.

[Ska Junkie]

I think it's 4-1-4-1 in all honesty.

My Lansdown might just be in for a shock come renewal time in a couple of months. People might just keep their £££ in their accounts this year rather than pay to watch that dirge we were served up today. 

[Red Army 75]

It’s just so predictable and safe. And if your  average fan can see it . An away side can  certainly exploit it . So boring at home 

[Dullmoan Tone]

3 minutes ago, Red Army 75 said:

It’s just so predictable and safe. And if your  average fan can see it . An away side can  certainly exploit it . So boring at home 

The trouble is, are we good enough to play a more adventurous attacking game and not get torn apart?

I know it’s not pretty (or entertaining) but we aren’t getting as many hammerings as last season.

[Hocca]

We’ve just become very drab. Almost too focused on defensive work that the players have forgot what a bit of movement and runs in behind can do. Rotherham will definitely be either 0-0 1-1 or 1-0.

[Lrrr]

Our defence is as good as last season we're just not scoring as much, being more offensive minded will open us up at the back.

[shelts]

Our manager is scared of winning and what it takes . Thought we’d turned the corner form wise . Interesting hearing LJ say how good Brentford are , ffs really !!

[MC RISK77]

Can’t really argue about our position this season given the outgoings and what appeared from day one as sub standard recruitment Webster and maennpa aside.

i am comfortable with it, 12th right now suggests we are a very competitive championship team who on our day can beat anyone. If we go back to when lee took over we were far from this. Yes he has had more money to spend than any other manager in our history but he has also balanced the books.

as a club in our history we are probably not far off the strongest we have ever been.

[Red Army 75]

6 minutes ago, Dullmoan Tone said:

The trouble is, are we good enough to play a more adventurous attacking game and not get torn apart?

I know it’s not pretty (or entertaining) but we aren’t getting as many hammerings as last season.

That is true. But if that is the way we are going to continue to play at home then I’m out. Bet we attack Huddersfield 

[robin_unreliant]

1 minute ago, shelts said:

Our manager is scared of winning and what it takes . Thought we’d turned the corner form wise . Interesting hearing LJ say how good Brentford are , ffs really !!

At HT we were predicting that LJ would be saying exactly that after the match. He spends too much time focusing on the opposition and their strengths. Way too negative and frankly boring football to watch. It's supposed to be entertainment ffs.

[downendcity]

3 minutes ago, shelts said:

Our manager is scared of winning and what it takes . Thought we’d turned the corner form wise . Interesting hearing LJ say how good Brentford are , ffs really !!

You might be right shelts, but I would suspect that he is more scared of losing - especially at home in front of City fans.

[hoxton casual]

8 minutes ago, shelts said:

Our manager is scared of winning and what it takes . Thought we’d turned the corner form wise . Interesting hearing LJ say how good Brentford are , ffs really !!

completely agree Shelts. Can he motivate a team, or does he just talk indecipherable coaching jargon in the dressing room and they all switch off? 

[INCRED]

16 minutes ago, Dullmoan Tone said:

The trouble is, are we good enough to play a more adventurous attacking game and not get torn apart?

I know it’s not pretty (or entertaining) but we aren’t getting as many hammerings as last season.

No we aren't so we will have to put up with the dull negative 451 formation for a while yet

[aa_bcfc]

Weinman totally ineffective today. Taylor came on and drew 3 or 4 free kicks in attacking positions and his headed pass created the chance for Deideiu. 

With the inconsistent players we have it’s difficult to see how we can improve the team by swapping and changing. To get further up the table we need regular 8/10 performances from the likes of Patterson, brownhill and O’Dowda but frankly their not good enough to provide that level of consistency. Unless we can replace our creative players with players who are more consistent mid table with dour performances is what we have to look forward to with the occasional ‘Norwich type’ performance.  

[JBFC II]

1 minute ago, aa_bcfc said:

Weinman totally ineffective today. Taylor came on and drew 3 or 4 free kicks in attacking positions and his headed pass created the chance for Deideiu. 

With the inconsistent players we have it’s difficult to see how we can improve the team by swapping and changing. To get further up the table we need regular 8/10 performances from the likes of Patterson, brownhill and O’Dowda but frankly their not good enough to provide that level of consistency. Unless we can replace our creative players with players who are more consistent mid table with dour performances is what we have to look forward to with the occasional ‘Norwich type’ performance.  

The problem is, consistently quality championship players either cost more than we are willing to pay or are a lucky find... 

[Dullmoan Tone]

3 minutes ago, JBFC II said:

The problem is, consistently quality championship players either cost more than we are willing to pay or are a lucky find... 

There is a third, perhaps, old fashioned solution - to coach them to get better?

[Red Rag]

What annoys me is when we get the ball out wide and an overlap is on the wide man hangs back rather than look to play the line of the opponents. We should be looking to get behind them rather than the resultant angled cross. 

[aa_bcfc]

27 minutes ago, JBFC II said:

The problem is, consistently quality championship players either cost more than we are willing to pay or are a lucky find... 

That’s absolutely true. Hence it’s not realistic to expect any better than we currently are, either league position or performances.

if we continue to sign the likes of so called ‘established’ £1-2 million pound championship players such as Hunt, Watkins and Weinman we can forget all about progress. None of them in my opinion are any better than the players we already had here. If we’d not signed them we probably would not have missed them.  

The only player signed in the summer as Bristol City players who is good enough to be a regular is Webster. To improve as a team we need to sign players who other clubs actually want to keep (like Webster) and are good enough to be,  and deserve to be, a regular starter week in week out. As you say that’s expensive.  

I would not have thought Wednesday, Norwich and Derby fans are missing Hunt, Watkins and weinman like we miss Bobby, Joe and Flint. I expect they’ve half forgotten they’ve ever had them.  

[shelts]

1 hour ago, downendcity said:

You might be right shelts, but I would suspect that he is more scared of losing - especially at home in front of City fans.

I agree he’s feared up . A poor Brentford . Saturday he will go for it right ?

Two points dropped today . 

[shelts]

1 hour ago, robin_unreliant said:

At HT we were predicting that LJ would be saying exactly that after the match. He spends too much time focusing on the opposition and their strengths. Way too negative and frankly boring football to watch. It's supposed to be entertainment ffs.

It wasn’t great I agree but nowhere as bad as a few of our recent efforts at BS3 

[mossey]

1 hour ago, Ska Junkie said:

I think it's 4-1-4-1 in all honesty.

My Lansdown might just be in for a shock come renewal time in a couple of months. People might just keep their £££ in their accounts this year rather than pay to watch that dirge we were served up today. 

Yes will have to seriously consider spending best part of £600 if that's going to football served up, for the first time for many seasons no so worried about missing games, and have heard so many say same.

[old_eastender]

1 minute ago, mossey said:

Yes will have to seriously consider spending best part of £600 if that's going to football served up, for the first time for many seasons no so worried about missing games, and have heard so many say same.

Absolutely, I know of several lifelong City ST holders who are just not bothering to go now as they are so fed up of the dross football being served up under LJ. Ironically at least one of those was enticed back today on the back of 2 good performances and then LJ serves up another dross performance.

[Davefevs]

I didn’t go today, parents over, and getting hammered by Joe on Xbox NBA 2K19 (I'm shit on these games), but I did listen to the radio commentary.

In fairness in places it sounded just like I expected it, Brentford passing it, creating, not very clinical.  What I expected from City in between times was a bit more radio-action, the odd bit of stained pressure...it never seemed to happen....even though 1-0 up at h-t.

Bit of a shame, a wasted opportunity from 1-0 up.  BBC stats say we had 51% possession...I'm guessing a lot of that was across the back 4.

The radio seemed to mention Brownhill on the ball a lot more than I've seen of late (dies lots of running off the ball normally), but looking on whoscored.com, his heatmap is in the left deep, slightly left of centre....in the same spots as Pack.

Was that what happened?

Sawyers, in contrast, more touches (77 v Pack 74 v Brownhill 62), and heat maps further forward too.

How did O’Dowda play?  Chris Honor suggested he was our most creative player, but the radio commentary didn’t seem to bear that out?  Did their WB keep COD deep, in more in effective positions, but also in positions where he couldn’t roam into space?

Where were the spaces / advantages in our 4141 versus there 343 / 523?

Didnt sound like a great performance, but whilst i’m in mellow mood, I'll take the point (said to my dad I thought they might sneak a winner) and hope we get 3 v Rotherham.

[1960maaan]

53 minutes ago, aa_bcfc said:

Weinman totally ineffective today.  TBF to the guy, he's being asked to do a lot of work. Even ends up regularly playing LB, I thought this was a Joe Bryan problem, but it's obviously coached as Kelly is playing a lot narrower than when he first cam into the team. 

Taylor came on and drew 3 or 4 free kicks in attacking positions and his headed pass created the chance for Deideiu. He was playing up along side Fam and so was given licence to cause the defence trouble. Weinmann plays more like a defensive forward, I'd guess LJ's instruction.

With the inconsistent players we have it’s difficult to see how we can improve the team by swapping and changing. To get further up the table we need regular 8/10 performances from the likes of Patterson, brownhill and O’Dowda but frankly their not good enough to provide that level of consistency. Unless we can replace our creative players with players who are more consistent mid table with dour performances is what we have to look forward to with the occasional ‘Norwich type’ performance.  

I'm starting to think the players raise their game when faced with a "better" side. From what I saw Vs Norwichand Derby we matched them, caused problems, kept the ball well and could have won both games.
Today was back to slow, over elaborate football, getting caught in possession regularly and creating very little. There was virtually no service to Fam what so ever. The thing is today wasn't excusable as the opposition didn't sit in and it wasn't a case of not being able to break them down. My guess at half time was that we had about 30% possession, and through the 90 they created the best chances, tested the keeper more and how Kelly didn't give away a pen when he grabbed the forward by the throat and pulled him to the ground I don't know.  


Personally , I would go 442 , at least until Walsh is fit. TBF to Paterson , he had a pretty good game today, more effective than he has been, but at home I think we need 2 up top to occupy the defence. Weimann works his nuts off, but is not a winger and as I said, ends up at FB when Kelly plays so narrow. Pato came deep, which I don't mind as my preferred system is a central 3, but when we are trying to play 1 up top he has to be getting up to support Fam as Brownhill and Pack can't and the wide men don't.  I feel it will me similar Saturday, maybe worse if Rotherham sit in. @Davefevs have you done your "what can expect" for Rotherham ?

 

[Lrrr]

@Davefevs

Possession - We seemed to go back and try switching play a lot today.

Brownhill - Broke up play well today, then got the ball away to someone else quickly. Seemed more contained in his role rather than breaking forward which was more left to Pato. Sawyers was more their guy they played through originally like Pack starts for us. Sawyers was sat deeper than I usually remember. O'Dowda was alright, still has his problem of running down blind alleys with his head down, appealed for a few fouls when looking to take contact.

Our formation still looked pretty solid, goal conceded was more player mistake rather than formation weakness. We played down the flanks quite well as there was space in behind their wing backs. Think Pisano lacked a bit going forward personally, O'Dowda was getting a lot of help from Kelly by overlapping and being available that Pisano didn't offer Weimann which negated our threat down the right.

[Johnny Musicworks]

On today’s evidence there is very little between us and Brentford. There again there is very little between us and most of the teams in this league. It’s all down to fine margins and for most teams lack of consistency.

Brentford have struggled since losing their manager but drew at WBA earlier in the month so we shouldn’t underestimate them. They looked for me the more likely to win the game today. What they had different to us was a midfielder Sawyers who controlled the game whereas we had too many off their game or ineffective.

Not for the first time this season we allowed a central midfielder the freedom of the park with no real pressing. Our midfield were hassled into countless errors and with the exception of Callum and Josh were largely ineffective.

On the plus side we didn’t lose and for me that is the fine margin of improvement on earlier in the season. We have become harder to beat.

We are still crying out for a dominant midfielder and goal scorer but we all know that. Until that is addressed mid-table will no doubt be where we deserve to be.

[downendcity]

31 minutes ago, shelts said:

I agree he’s feared up . A poor Brentford . Saturday he will go for it right ?

Two points dropped today . 

In a way I can sort of understand that LJ has taken a more "pragmatic" approach this season, and why this is so. 

Over the last 2 season's he has received brickbats for the huge slums in form and results. Especially last season, the slump occurred when, by and large, we were playing well, but kept on losing by the odd goal. There does seem more concentration on the defensive side of our game this season, and to a degree this has been justified by the way we see out games late on without conceding - in precious season's it is likely we would have lost today to a late goal.

However, It does also seem that concentrating on the defensive side to our game has been at the expense of being more progressive going forward. As I think you mentioned, as have I and others, LJ's achilles heel still seems to be his obsession with focussing on oppositions strengths and going out to counter them, rather than looking to focus on our strengths and selecting a team to maximise and play to them. 

Brentford do seem to have to he hoodoo over us in recent seasons, and today was disappointing coming on the back of a good run of results and some decent performances. Fingers crossed the team goes out positively in the next game with a good result and performance.

Bearing in mind that at the beginning the month many fans saw today as the only game we would get anything from out of the last 4, these games have been a bonus, but it also means that today was huge disappointment given those previous games. It does seem that for whatever reason we seem able to raise our game against teams against whom we have the least expectation, but continue to struggle to overcome "lesser" teams.

Most successful teams aren't successful because they win key games against their main rivals ( although it certainly helps) but because they consistently put away teams at the bottom end of the table - something we continue to struggle with.