Jump to content
IGNORED

We've got Taylor Moore


Big Nose

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Big Nose said:

£8m Kalas at fault for first goal .....

 

2 hours ago, Big Nose said:

No, given space. Kalas didn't close down quick enough

CDM should be in that pocket blocking those shots. Pack nowhere to be seen today and had no chance in a midfield 2 with the intensity of Leeds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He played well, he seemed to have bulked up which is good. He saw the ball out on a number of occasions and didn’t seem at all out of his depth. Will forgive the second goal but he let himself down on the third if you are gonna loose the ball that far down the field you make damn sure you bust your balls trying to get back. The only difference between the two teams today was an ability to do something with the ball in the opposition penalty area. We need someone dangerous up front

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Partly at fault 2nd goal, completely at fault 3rd goal, although I liked that he was attempting to bring the ball out of defence but his pass was poor and was easily intercepted leaving him stranded and slow to get back. Not sure that he can replace AW or AF. I don’t feel he’ll get to many more opportunities. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought he did very well.

The lack of pace issue I think is down to the players not being match fit - he was blowing out of his arse after 70 minutes like a lot of our players.

They weren't properly prepared for the game imo.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Red white and red said:

Umm... I genuinely thought he looked out of his depth. Bamford battered him all game.

What ? He was out of position for the Leeds header but the whole team was battered. 

I thought he looked very confident. I’d give him a rub in the team based in that performance

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has he just turned 22? Well Webster wasnt the player he became at 22.

Give it 2 years, who knows how good he could be. I don't think he will be good enough yet to be regular alongside Kalas if we want to go up. 

I hope he proves me wrong. But in the future he could be real top quality as he gets stronger. I'd still bring in someone like Hector and maybe have Moore as first back up. Having Wright and Vyner as well means we could sell Baker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Prinny said:

I would definitely not say passed the test. He did ok. 5 out of 10 performance. Not great in possession, not great vs Bamford, very poor on the third goal.

He wasn't worse than Kalas. I wouldn't say that's a great measuring stick on todays showing though.

Edit - I'm happy with him playing, don't think the others are much better. Passing the test is looking like a high quality central defender at this level. He like the rest of them looked average IMO

I thought the only criticism that could be levelled at him was his position and awareness for their second goal - the Bamford header ... but otherwise, he looked very fine ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ohbasso said:

He looked ok to me and good enough to be a squad player, lack of pace is my biggest concern, looking comfortable on the left was a positive though.

We 100% need another cb to come in as first choice though.

If we do get another I wouldn’t be against selling Wright and Baker and having Moore and Vyner as 3rd and 4th choice.

He is quick isn't he? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, redapple said:

Partly at fault 2nd goal, completely at fault 3rd goal, although I liked that he was attempting to bring the ball out of defence but his pass was poor and was easily intercepted leaving him stranded and slow to get back. Not sure that he can replace AW or AF. I don’t feel he’ll get to many more opportunities. 

Harsh assessment.

2nd goal was almost completely COD's fault, he should never be letting the cross come in. It was excellent movement from Bamford.

3rd goal, Moore made a good run, yes his attempted pass to DaSilva was telegraphed and hence cut out, BUT having seen him go on a forward run either Pack or Brownhill should have dropped in behind, in case the move broke down, neither did leaving Leeds a free run at us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, marcofisher said:

 

CDM should be in that pocket blocking those shots. Pack nowhere to be seen today and had no chance in a midfield 2 with the intensity of Leeds.

So, on the first goal, Pack had tracked the run of Klich, then closed down Forshaw, and you also want him to be marking a bloke who’s just ran from behind the centre backs, 15 yards behind him. 

I know he’s got his critics but I don’t think anyone can dream that Pack should’ve been the one closing Hernandez down on this goal. 

Yes, it was the CDM position, but look at how the play develops. Easy target is Mr Pack - he’s in for a long season on this forum! 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Ohbasso said:

A few times he looked a bit sluggish to me, Leeds do have lots of quick players though which might’ve made him look slower than he actually is.

I think he is quick for a centre back. Kalas maybe a little bit quicker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, chipdawg said:

He was our best defender, but it was not a great team performance defensively. I actually think he played pretty well, but he's not quick and I worry that could be exposed. But there was definitely enough there for him to get a run in the side

I thought he did well. Though I thought Kalas made some outstanding blocks. Though he was at fault for their first goal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Harry said:

So, on the first goal, Pack had tracked the run of Klich, then closed down Forshaw, and you also want him to be marking a bloke who’s just ran from behind the centre backs, 15 yards behind him. 

I know he’s got his critics but I don’t think anyone can dream that Pack should’ve been the one closing Hernandez down on this goal. 

Yes, it was the CDM position, but look at how the play develops. Easy target is Mr Pack - he’s in for a long season on this forum! 

 

My point is that he should be holding and plugging the space whilst having other players pressing around him. 

Im not blaming Pack who is a very good player at this level when used correctly, I am blaming the tactics. It has never worked with him in a 2 against high intensity teams. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Alex_BCFC said:

Not a chance did it flatter Leeds. They could have easily scored more. 

 

1 hour ago, Curr Avon said:

You must have been a different game, because only some excellent last ditch defending stopped a rout. Leeds cruised to 3 points.

Must just be me then, joys of football with different opinions and all that. I saw nothing from Leeds to feel that they’ll be top 2 material at the end of the season. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, marcofisher said:

My point is that he should be holding and plugging the space whilst having other players pressing around him. 

Im not blaming Pack who is a very good player at this level when used correctly, I am blaming the tactics. It has never worked with him in a 2 against high intensity teams. 

His role isn’t to just sit 5 yds in front of Cb’s and watch play develop around him. He does have a role to close down the opposing CM’s if they are near our box. 

Okay, in your world, Pack doesn’t run back with Klich, and doesn’t close down Forshaw. Who’s doing those bits then? And does Pack get slated for not going with his runner and not closing down the CM. I’ll bet he does. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Harry said:

His role isn’t to just sit 5 yds in front of Cb’s and watch play develop around him. He does have a role to close down the opposing CM’s if they are near our box. 

Okay, in your world, Pack doesn’t run back with Klich, and doesn’t close down Forshaw. Who’s doing those bits then? And does Pack get slated for not going with his runner and not closing down the CM. I’ll bet he does. 

I’m saying that you would play a midfield 3 against a team like Leeds to avoid situations like this. The two other midfielders would be the initial pressers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, marcofisher said:

I’m saying that you would play a midfield 3 against a team like Leeds to avoid situations like this. The two other midfielders would be the initial pressers.

I’d agree with that. 

But even given that scenario, Hernandez comes from behind Kalas, into a space which would still likely have been behind a DM in a three. This is still the CB’s responsibility - Kalas was poor here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Harry said:

I’d agree with that. 

But even given that scenario, Hernandez comes from behind Kalas, into a space which would still likely have been behind a DM in a three. This is still the CB’s responsibility - Kalas was poor here. 

Agreed but that is the quality Hernandez has, Kalas obviously thought it was more important to hold position and not give anyone the space to run into. If there were a three hernandez would still have got it but would have had more pressure on him and less space and time, much harder to pick out the top bins like that.

Hell of a finish though. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, BS4 on Tour... said:

I thought the only criticism that could be levelled at him was his position and awareness for their second goal - the Bamford header ... but otherwise, he looked very fine ...

Do you think he was very fine for the third goal?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Big Nose said:

Passed the test today, well done son

Really?

First two touches were woeful.

Composed himself and had a decent 30 minute spell, much to his credit.

For their 2nd kid looked like he didn't know if his **** was bored or punched, in no-man's-land looking desperately for where he should be and who he should be covering? Answer he came up with was space and nothing, much as Kalas concluded for their 1st.

For their 3rd when we were chasing the game one might have given him the benefit of the doubt but such a high-risk, poorly executed pass when DaSilva was in that position was lower league foolhardy and it cost us. Check the speed of his recovery in getting back.

But to get one thing clear - he wasn't to blame and today's loss is not his fault. As in my discussion with a Southend ST holder the other day he simply isn't that good, isn't Championship standard and WeeLee should have known it. Then again, T-M isn't alone in that failing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Genghis Khan's pants said:

Definitely this - I think on one or two occasions Hunt was trying to defend against 3 players!

That was because Leeds played to overload our righthand side constantly.

Hunt often had 3 players to deal with which meant one of our CB's had to pull out of position to cover. That in turn left space in the middle for Hernandez to exploit which he did constantly.

TM basically had to play left and right CB at all times as Kalas as our righthand CB was getting pulled across to the right to cover for JH.

I'm not slagging Hunt off at all as he was getting swamped on that side and was on a hiding to nothing.

It was a tactical masterstroke by Bielsa and we couldn't deal with it. LJ had no answer to it without getting either Pack (who is not really suited to covering out wide) or Brownhill playing wide right to cover the overload which would've given Hernandez even more space through the middle. 

As much as it was painful to watch as a City fan, I couldnt help but be impressed. The three on the right would get so much space, wait until either the CM or CB was pulled out wide and then play it centrally so Hernandez could exploit the space.

Forget the fact that we need a striker, a new CB or whatever anyone thinks we need. We were beaten today by great tactics from a coach who sees things differently to the rest and creates situations that our players and LJ have never had to deal with before.

I still think Leeds will burn out again before the season ends though as most Bielsa sides have always done. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a strange thing, differing opinions on players.  I thought TM did well today, yet two guys near me were moaning about him all match, seemingly everything he did had a negative.

Always had a view this lad could do well and what I saw today reinforced that.

Just need him to be consistent and someone to be "on fire" to resurrect the song.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Lez said:

Looked better than previous but still got bullied by Bamford

 

5 hours ago, petehinton said:

Thought he was bullied personally & caught out massively for the second and third goals 

 

5 hours ago, Lez said:

Early days or not while an improvement he was bullied by a player who is known for not bullying anyone. 

 

Good driving forward but the idea he has past some sort of test based on today Is delusional.

 

5 hours ago, MC RISK77 said:

Absolutely, did look comfortable playing out of defence but for me he is not the answer and Bamford who isn’t the best at this level pulled him about and out muscles him in the second half 

Sorry, haven’t read the whole thread.  I can see why some posters will have liked what they saw today, but the posts I've quoted above reflect more my own view.

Tactically, Bielsa got it spot on.  Play your striker against there weaker CB - Moore.  Bamford rarely went near to Kalas when Leeds had the ball.

I thought Taylor looked decent enough on the ball, but just like I’ve been saying all week that Webster is a lovely ball-playing CB, I also add that he is a very decent defender too, making him a great partner for Kalas.  Moore didn’t cut it for me defensively today.

Too often when City did get a press semi-right, forcing a more hopeful ball forward, Bamford, not only got there first, he invariably got it under or laid it off to a Leeds player.  Bamford is not strong back to goal, but he knew he was never gonna get hit, so trusted his touch....and provided the forward presence we lacked ourselves from Diedhiou.

Re the goals.

G1.  People will say Kalas stood off Hernandez, but look where his fun came from?  Moore marking Bamford, Dasilva marking Hernandez.  Hernandez gets between TM and JD, and runs round the back of Moore who either hasn’t spotted it, or has not been made aware by Dasilva that Moore now has two men.  Hernandez basically becomes free, and because Moore isn’t aware, he can’t warn Kalas who then looks at fault.  Great movement from Hernandez, but poor comma from JD and TM.  First time Moore will have played a competitive game with TK and JD, and that showed in the goal.  Not saying it’s his fault, just trying to explain why it came about, and why Kalas was hard done by.

G2 - just a typical striker on the move across a CB trying to mark the space for either ball across or pull-back.  You just hope you get lucky...we didn’t.

G3 - the fine margins.  Lovely run forward, slide rule pass intercepted, caught on the break, Moore treading water trying to get back.  Shit happens when you’re chasing the game.

Not saying Moore was awful today, just saying he’s got a lot to do to become established at this level.  At some point he’s gonna need to clatter the player he’s marking.

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...