Jump to content

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums, like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community, but don't worry this is a simple free process that requires minimal information for you to signup. Be a part of One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums by signing in or creating an account.

  • Start new topics and reply to others
  • Full access to all forums (not all viewable as guest)
  • Subscribe to topics and forums to get email updates
  • Get your own profile page and make new friends
  • Send personal messages to other members.
  • Support OTIB with a premium membership

IGNORED

LJ Subs - Explanation


Recommended Posts

What's your assessment of that Lee? A good point?

From 1-0 down, a losing position, that’s a really great point. A really tough game.

I like Brentford. I think they’re a good side, buoyed by a great win at Barnsley where they were really dominant and we knew it would be tough. I didn’t think we started aggressively enough in terms of our press. With them having one up front and us having three at the back then we were often underloaded when we got the ball and we had the spare man where we didn’t want him. You saw the tactical change at half-time to try and get a foothold.

Were the two changes tactical? No knocks?

Nah. I just felt that - nothing against the lads that played - but I just felt that we needed that bit more physicality. And rather than the three versus one that we had at the back effectively with Watkins upfront and that three we didn't need that overload. so either I pushed one of our centre-halfs into midfield, which I didn't want to do, or we saw it out to half-time and we make those changes.

But I did say to the boys that I'm seeing this as almost two team selections because the games are in such close proximity.


It’s not a surprise that 3 CBs would be one too many against Watkins.  But having made the changes, I felt we played even less in the second half.  Without the ball in the first half Taylor Moore was often at RB, and Hunt RM.  I don’t think it needed a double sub.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

What's your assessment of that Lee? A good point?

From 1-0 down, a losing position, that’s a really great point. A really tough game.

I like Brentford. I think they’re a good side, buoyed by a great win at Barnsley where they were really dominant and we knew it would be tough. I didn’t think we started aggressively enough in terms of our press. With them having one up front and us having three at the back then we were often underloaded when we got the ball and we had the spare man where we didn’t want him. You saw the tactical change at half-time to try and get a foothold.

Were the two changes tactical? No knocks?

Nah. I just felt that - nothing against the lads that played - but I just felt that we needed that bit more physicality. And rather than the three versus one that we had at the back effectively with Watkins upfront and that three we didn't need that overload. so either I pushed one of our centre-halfs into midfield, which I didn't want to do, or we saw it out to half-time and we make those changes.

But I did say to the boys that I'm seeing this as almost two team selections because the games are in such close proximity.


It’s not a surprise that 3 CBs would be one too many against Watkins.  But having made the changes, I felt we played even less in the second half.  Without the ball in the first half Taylor Moore was often at RB, and Hunt RM.  I don’t think it needed a double sub.

LJ  is a football romantic, he believes in Roy of the Rovers stories and when his unusual team selections or formations work he looks like City’s Gardiola .He is less impulsive than he used to be , going balls out for a win when a point would have been a good result .

However sometimes he leaves not only the opposition scratching their heads but his players and us too.

He is , I believe, guilty of over complicating things .

There’s a good spirit at the club for which he’s largely responsible and he is growing in stature .

Keep it up LJ.

 

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Major Isewater said:

LJ  is a football romantic, he believes in Roy of the Rovers stories and when his unusual team selections or formations work he looks like City’s Gardiola .He is less impulsive than he used to be , going balls out for a win when a point would have been a good result .

However sometimes he leaves not only the opposition scratching their heads but his players and us too.

He is , I believe, guilty of over complicating things .

There’s a good spirit at the club for which he’s largely responsible and he is growing in stature .

Keep it up LJ.

 

Indeed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

What's your assessment of that Lee? A good point?

From 1-0 down, a losing position, that’s a really great point. A really tough game.

I like Brentford. I think they’re a good side, buoyed by a great win at Barnsley where they were really dominant and we knew it would be tough. I didn’t think we started aggressively enough in terms of our press. With them having one up front and us having three at the back then we were often underloaded when we got the ball and we had the spare man where we didn’t want him. You saw the tactical change at half-time to try and get a foothold.

Were the two changes tactical? No knocks?

Nah. I just felt that - nothing against the lads that played - but I just felt that we needed that bit more physicality. And rather than the three versus one that we had at the back effectively with Watkins upfront and that three we didn't need that overload. so either I pushed one of our centre-halfs into midfield, which I didn't want to do, or we saw it out to half-time and we make those changes.

But I did say to the boys that I'm seeing this as almost two team selections because the games are in such close proximity.


It’s not a surprise that 3 CBs would be one too many against Watkins.  But having made the changes, I felt we played even less in the second half.  Without the ball in the first half Taylor Moore was often at RB, and Hunt RM.  I don’t think it needed a double sub.

Bit bemused by his explanation. Plenty of times we, and other teams, have played 5-3-2 against a 4-3-3 and technically on paper it’s been three centre backs against one striker.  In practice of course, subtle changes to tactics in those formations shouldn’t mean that is the case and we should exploit the advantages. I.e it should be easier to play out from the back and double up on their full backs when attacking. 

I find it very interesting though that there is such a difference of opinion from fans that were there and fans that weren’t as to our second half display. That is unusual 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thought we looked very comfortable first half defensively, a threat on the break. Second half we were all over the place.

Not entirely happy with the first half but far better than second half that we should have lost.

Baker had a very good game defensively but offers nothing coming out of defence.

We then have the problem of Rowe not getting forward much. Not really offering anything other than a fairly safe backwards pass. He has improved defensively, but we have very little threat down our left. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought that in the first half, we were the better team - on top and had by far the best chance to score (Palmer). The halftime substitutions had the effect of handing the initiative to Brentford. We came under far more pressure with one less defender on the pitch. Whereas in the first half, we'd relied upon playing the ball forward through the thirds and breaking away, bringing on Fam caused us to hit the ball long to him which he was either unable to win nor hold up resulting in us giving away possession and coming under even more defensive pressure.

I disagreed with the halftime substitutions. I felt that Lee was hasty in making them and failed to show Brentford sufficient respect. We were playing away at one of the better teams in the division and he should have expected them to put us under greater pressure yet he compromised our defensive strength for no perceivable attacking benefit. It almost resulted in a defeat.

  • Like 3
  • Hmmm 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m not that gutted at a point v Brentford.  I do wonder if the injuries, no real left back, youngsters being played more than we probably planned for and tiredness is catching up with us though.  I think the points to date with the players available has been brilliant but loosing Kalas, Nagy, Afobe and Dasilva would catch most teams out in the end. The number of draws creeping into our results is cause for concern.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Me too @RedDave.  I don’t want to sound critical of LJ, but we should’ve been able to either push Hunt and Rowe on and push Benrhama and Canos back or build out from the back via Moore and Baker.  Perhaps we just didn’t execute the plan?

If I was Rowe, I'd be cautious in going forward so much with Semenyo and Palmer in front of me.

Both are wayward defensively... especially Semenyo. He comes alive with the ball at his feet, but off the ball he's got masses to improve on. Looks lost often and too lethargic in either pressing, moving into space and awareness of the opposition.

The fact that Brentford are also a great counter attacking side...I understand Rowe's caution.

Guess we haven't got many great options with so many out.

Hopefully Nagy will be back soon...when he played Rowe got forward more.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ultimately the teams cancelled each other out first half and I can understand why we made the substitutions. But bottom line is it was a gamble that did not pay off. Quite content with a point at Brentford but it was not a great performance, especially in the second half.

I agree we could have changed shape without the double sub. Nothing wrong with trying things but it definitely didn't work. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Wants more physicality & brings on the most lightweight player we have in Eliasson haha. 

Subs made us worse yesterday. Their full back quickly worked out Eliasson was going to cut back every time & Diedhiou just couldn't get involved in the play. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought the key to the first half going Brentford's way was that they pressed with more intensity, forced more errors and were more composed in possession. 

City have a habit of defending like our lives depend on it, then when we get possession we try to transition into attack too quickly meaning that we rush a long ball or through ball, when maybe we need a little spell of passing to turn tide. 

Every time we tried to get our passing game going it seemed like Brentford were swarming all over us. Then when we found ourselves getting into the final third we got a rush of blood to the head, often with Palmer or Weimann musjudging the final pass or shot.

I thought we did the gegenpress against Preston quite nicely but not at all last night.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Davefevs said:

What's your assessment of that Lee? A good point?

From 1-0 down, a losing position, that’s a really great point. A really tough game.

I like Brentford. I think they’re a good side, buoyed by a great win at Barnsley where they were really dominant and we knew it would be tough. I didn’t think we started aggressively enough in terms of our press. With them having one up front and us having three at the back then we were often underloaded when we got the ball and we had the spare man where we didn’t want him. You saw the tactical change at half-time to try and get a foothold.

Were the two changes tactical? No knocks?

Nah. I just felt that - nothing against the lads that played - but I just felt that we needed that bit more physicality. And rather than the three versus one that we had at the back effectively with Watkins upfront and that three we didn't need that overload. so either I pushed one of our centre-halfs into midfield, which I didn't want to do, or we saw it out to half-time and we make those changes.

But I did say to the boys that I'm seeing this as almost two team selections because the games are in such close proximity.


It’s not a surprise that 3 CBs would be one too many against Watkins.  But having made the changes, I felt we played even less in the second half.  Without the ball in the first half Taylor Moore was often at RB, and Hunt RM.  I don’t think it needed a double sub.

...when the seagulls follow the trawler then?

:) 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Think he’s deflecting that he got it wrong IMO. From 50 minutes onwards, was clear and obvious the subs and change in formation hindered us. Were really overrun in midfield, one pass was cutting through us, and Han-Noah at left mid....?! If you wanna do that, just roll all the dice and bring COD on at HT too. 

My only worry with bringing Eliasson on too, is that we become quite one dimensional. Incredible skill and crossing, but every time we get the ball we just go down his side and wait for him to put the ball in the box. They doubled up on him and gave him no space, and when that happens his strength isn’t exactly chasing the ball and winning it back with strength like a COD or even a Watkins. 

Great point in the end but I do think we don’t give ourself the best chance some times. Play your players in their best positions & football can be a much easier game. Palmer left wing against Boro, Han-Noah used as left wing against Brentford, potentially lucky to get a point against each.  

Think our best formation is still 352, but you can’t fit Eliasson into that who’s easily our best delivery of the ball, which Fam and/or Semenyo need. Tricky one for LJ to try and carve out. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TuxHarry said:

Taylor Moore has been rather unfortunate with some of the time’s he’s been hauled off hasn’t he? I think I’d rather see him in than Williams, as good as he’s been thus far.

I’d rather see our best players on the pitch and currently Williams has looked more assured and looked a higher level of defender than Taylor Moore. 

Moores time will come but if we were to go to a back four (with Kalas still out) I’d have Williams over him currently

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, JBFC II said:

I’d rather see our best players on the pitch and currently Williams has looked more assured and looked a higher level of defender than Taylor Moore. 

Moores time will come but if we were to go to a back four (with Kalas still out) I’d have Williams over him currently

What Moore has done is drag himself into contention.  LJ can no longer say “I’m not sure how he’ll do”, because he’s come in and shown he can cope.  Well done Taylor.  Who Lee now picks is a tough decision.  That’s all you can ask.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

What Moore has done is drag himself into contention.  LJ can no longer say “I’m not sure how he’ll do”, because he’s come in and shown he can cope.  Well done Taylor.  Who Lee now picks is a tough decision.  That’s all you can ask.

Totally, I just think he’s still currently behind Williams. 

Ive got to be honest, when Webster went and it looked like we were going to have a back 3 of Moore, Kalas (now Williams) and baker I feared the worst. Taylor has improved immeasurably since I last saw him play for us a couple of seasons back and I’m sure he’ll continue to do so. 

Williams is just of a slightly higher quality atm, and his experience will be massive in what is a relatively inexperienced side

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, JBFC II said:

Totally, I just think he’s still currently behind Williams. 

Ive got to be honest, when Webster went and it looked like we were going to have a back 3 of Moore, Kalas (now Williams) and baker I feared the worst. Taylor has improved immeasurably since I last saw him play for us a couple of seasons back and I’m sure he’ll continue to do so. 

Williams is just of a slightly higher quality atm, and his experience will be massive in what is a relatively inexperienced side

Williams is quality.  The carrot of football to get into Wales squad was one LJ used to our advantage.  He doesn’t look like a 35 year playing out his last contract.  Been well impressed.  And with Moore too!!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

What Moore has done is drag himself into contention.  LJ can no longer say “I’m not sure how he’ll do”, because he’s come in and shown he can cope.  Well done Taylor.  Who Lee now picks is a tough decision.  That’s all you can ask.

I think Williams, Kalas, Baker on current form/ability is as good a back 3 as you could get at this level.

To have Moore as the back up is great for us and more than he was expecting this season too.

Given Williams' miles in the clock, and Baker's injury history, Moore is bound to get more games before long. We're blessed in central defence.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Williams is quality.  The carrot of football to get into Wales squad was one LJ used to our advantage.  He doesn’t look like a 35 year playing out his last contract.  Been well impressed.  And with Moore too!!

LJ has always valued experience in his teams. We all remember GoN but in the case of Williams it was a case of needs must given the desperate injury crisis at City.

At 35+ William's nous and experience makes up for his loss of pace - and he’s been recalled back into the Wales squad.

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, bristolcitysweden said:

He is thinking to much but should go for intuition. Each single sub got an impact - mostly positive due to fresh legs.

I don’t think it’s Lee Johnson who’s overthinking, I think it’s people on this forum.  Look, we were level at half time but not playing particularly well and we’d only created one clear chance, which Palmer fluffed.  There was little or nothing to suggest that we were going to go on and win the game.  So Lee makes changes and tried something different.  Why not?  It’s a squad game, and he used the squad.  We ended up with a creditable draw.  You don’t really think we’re going to win every game do you?  Lee makes the call, makes the changes, and stands by them.  Good enough for me.  A decent point.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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...