Eliasson

[ExiledAjax]

12 minutes ago, Leveller said:

But to be fair, with the first half shape, he was about our only threat, on a regular basis.

Such a weak, easily defended threat though. He's a good player but I'm happy with how he's being used at the moment - situationally at specific times.

[Xiled]

13 hours ago, BCFC OF SWEDEN said:

Only luck, our manager is not that good! 

Ok 3 points is 3 points but i think we would have got them with Eliasson on the pitch aswell and maybe COD should have been  substituted instead!

There was a lot of luck involved although that's a big part of football. However the win came about, we have to be happy.

Eliasson had just made one of the best crosses of the game when he was substituted. Unfortunate timing as it looked like the wrong decision. I've never heard the Ashton Gate crowd so unhappy about a player leaving the pitch so that says everything about how people viewed his contribution to the game up to that point.

O'Dowda still didn't convince me at all even though he played better in the second half. In the end, we'll never know what would have happened if Eliasson had stayed on but the win was priceless so I'll give LJ and the whole team credit for sending us home happy. Palmer and Brownhill produced the best piece of footballing quality I've seen for many years.

Eliasson is a great prospect and he's getting better. He's an intelligent lad and hopefully accepts that he'll be in and out of the team depending on LJ's tactics. Only three or four players are probably certain of starting every game (when they are fit). I hope he's happy at the club because we definitely need him in the squad.

[Leveller]

56 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

Such a weak, easily defended threat though. He's a good player but I'm happy with how he's being used at the moment - situationally at specific times.

Disagree. Charlton couldnt stop him putting several crosses into the heart of the box. That they led to nothing could be lack of accuracy or lack of movement by others.

[Mr Popodopolous]

This stat speaks for itself.

Quote

Until Eliasson left the field, City had just 51.5% possession but the switch to the diamond saw that jump to 66.2% for the remaining 36 minutes plus injury time, and their pass completed rate leapt from 75% to 82%.

Not saying that possession is the be all and end all- it isn't-- but we clearly needed that extra body centrally, because how it was going was we were dominating certain aspects but crosses into a packed, condensed box...can be a challenge! As the first half showed. That extra man Charlton had centrally too also made them look better in possession than they were IMO.

Oh yeah, the other knock on effect of this is that when you try hard to focus on the wings vs a central area and you are 4-4-2, which of course was the case with Eliasson on the pitch, means that the opposition can more easily break on you at speed through the middle if they have a fairly packed centre and a half decent counterattacking threat with pace- which of course Charlton did and you'll be exposed!

Dunno if it's a good or bad thing but modern football is increasingly like chess, the higher you go.

[marcofisher]

LJ had a long word in Niclas' ear when he was substituted off, I imagine explaining that he had played a good game and that it was purely tactical. 

Niclas seems like a switched on lad and I'm sure after seeing us win will fully understand the decision! 

[Guest]

24 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

This stat speaks for itself.

Not saying that possession is the be all and end all- it isn't-- but we clearly needed that extra body centrally, because how it was going was we were dominating certain aspects but crosses into a packed, condensed box...can be a challenge! As the first half showed. That extra man Charlton had centrally too also made them look better in possession than they were IMO.

Oh yeah, the other knock on effect of this is that when you try hard to focus on the wings vs a central area and you are 4-4-2, which of course was the case with Eliasson on the pitch, means that the opposition can more easily break on you at speed through the middle if they have a fairly packed centre and a half decent counterattacking threat with pace- which of course Charlton did and you'll be exposed!

Dunno if it's a good or bad thing but modern football is increasingly like chess, the higher you go.

I'll have to watch the whole game back but it seemed when we went to 433/451, we looked much more in control. Eliasson was much more advanced and often easier to pass to. O'Dowda had moved central left of the 3 and was much more involved and comfortable in what I feel is his better position. 

And im surprised that Semenyo looked far better on his own up against the centre backs. He is getting stick, but he was so much better second half.

It was strange at the time that LJ then changed it completely when I thought we looked comfortable and were keeping the ball well. He obviously felt we didn't have enough of a threat in the box. It was a huge gamble but it paid off.

Interesting what LJ said about how he could have kept Eliasson on as a number 10. I wonder if he is too lightweight to be in that position, but then if he's slightly off of a striker then that is a bit different to being main striker.

I feel LJ needs to work on Eliasson being more than just a brilliant attacking winger who can get great balls in. He needs to learn roles that means he plays every game even in narrower systems like diamond or 352.

Whether that's as a second striker, attacking central playmaker, or even attacking full back/wing back. I feel he has a lot more to give than just his brilliant crossing.

[Mr Popodopolous]

5 minutes ago, JonDolman said:

I'll have to watch the whole game back but it seemed when we went to 433/451, we looked much more in control. Eliasson was much more advanced and often easier to pass to. O'Dowda had moved central left of the 3 and was much more involved and comfortable in what I feel is his better position. 

And im surprised that Semenyo looked far better on his own up against the centre backs. He is getting stick, but he was so much better second half.

It was strange at the time that LJ then changed it completely when I thought we looked comfortable and were keeping the ball well. He obviously felt we didn't have enough of a threat in the box. It was a huge gamble but it paid off.

Interesting what LJ said about how he could have kept Eliasson on as a number 10. I wonder if he is too lightweight to be in that position, but then if he's slightly off of a striker then that is a bit different to being main striker.

I feel LJ needs to work on Eliasson being more than just a brilliant attacking winger who can get great balls in. He needs to learn roles that means he plays every game even in narrower systems like diamond or 352.

Whether that's as a second striker, attacking central playmaker, or even attacking full back/wing back. I feel he has a lot more to give than just his brilliant crossing.

4-3-3/4-5-1 will always give you more control, more dominance in a variety of areas than 4-4-2 with wingers.

Has actually been my favoured setup for about, oh 2 years! O'Dowda central in a 3 could be a real go...would be interested to see something when people fit again, something like:

               Bentley

Hunt Kalas Moore Dasilva

  Brownhill Nagy O'Dowda

              Palmer

       Weimann Rodri

This is if we feel that Massengo might need a rest. Both Brownhill and O'Dowda can pull wider as and when, either to support the full back defensively, offensively or let- well more the O'Dowda Dasilva one, Dasilva come inside a bit.

So many options though. Switch Hunt and Periera, and you can get 

Fully agree on Eliasson too- needs to have another string to his bow, as coming inside is not his strong suit!

Oh yeah, alternatively given injuries etc:

              Bentley

Pereira Moore Williams Rowe

Brownhill Massengo O'Dowda

              Palmer

       Weimann Rodri

Could be useful too. Feel we definitely need 3 central midfielders though, to get the optimum out of our squad.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

4-3-3/4-5-1 will always give you more control, more dominance in a variety of areas than 4-4-2 with wingers.

Has actually been my favoured setup for about, oh 2 years! O'Dowda central in a 3 could be a real go...would be interested to see something when people fit again, something like:

               Bentley

Hunt Kalas Moore Dasilva

  Brownhill Nagy O'Dowda

              Palmer

       Weimann Rodri

This is if we feel that Massengo might need a rest. Both Brownhill and O'Dowda can pull wider as and when, either to support the full back defensively, offensively or let- well more the O'Dowda Dasilva one, Dasilva come inside a bit.

So many options though. Switch Hunt and Periera, and you can get 

Fully agree on Eliasson too- needs to have another string to his bow, as coming inside is not his strong suit!

Oh yeah, alternatively given injuries etc:

              Bentley

Pereira Moore Williams Rowe

Brownhill Massengo O'Dowda

              Palmer

       Weimann Rodri

Could be useful too. Feel we definitely need 3 central midfielders though, to get the optimum out of our squad.

Generally it does seem LJ teams usually work best when we have a more condensed midfield. The 442 with Pato and Reid up top was very narrow midfield, with the 2 forwards dropping deep and really having numbers in there.

And last season our best form was with the 4141, triangle of midfielders with Pack sitting. Never really looked great to watch but got us results away from home.

Eliasson is like the odd one out where he really wants to be hugging the touchline. Could argue that's Semenyo's best position too but he will at least be a striker with more experience. Not like he lacks the physique. I guess maybe Adelakun and Watkins more wingers than anything else, but not sure if they'll be in LJs plans.

I like the idea of attacking full backs providing width along with others from midfield or forward positions joining in to help in wide areas. Rather than wingers hugging the touchline.

[Mr Popodopolous]

11 minutes ago, JonDolman said:

Generally it does seem LJ teams usually work best when we have a more condensed midfield. The 442 with Pato and Reid up top was very narrow midfield, with the 2 forwards dropping deep and really having numbers in there.

And last season our best form was with the 4141, triangle of midfielders with Pack sitting. Never really looked great to watch but got us results away from home.

Eliasson is like the odd one out where he really wants to be hugging the touchline. Could argue that's Semenyo's best position too but he will at least be a striker with more experience. Not like he lacks the physique. I guess maybe Adelakun and Watkins more wingers than anything else, but not sure if they'll be in LJs plans.

I like the idea of attacking full backs providing width along with others from midfield or forward positions joining in to help in wide areas. Rather than wingers hugging the touchline.

Think it's not just LJ sides tbh, but how the modern game has developed tactically. Straight 4-4-2 unless you're prepared to be reactive or counterattacking or what not, is not a good fit with possession, attacking. 

Agreed- Paterson behind Reid- saw that as more of a 4-4-2-0 possibly, or a 4-3-3-0 personally- even in phases a 4-3-3, a 4-6-0 and probably had more potential shapes still, but we were great to watch with it.

Agreed- thought it broke down a bit though because Paterson as one of the 2...not really for me, fluency wise- as a '10' or at a push side left in certain setups, but as a CM in a 4-1-4-1, not really my favoured setup- certainly worked on the road.

Think wingers can still work, perhaps even in a 4-3-3/4-5-1, but the third man in there is crucial for me.

Agreed on this. Attacking full backs increasingly important and have been for a while. Hugging the touchline and crossing models are a bit of a % game aren't they, vs compact, well drilled and fairly narrow sides.

[RobintheRed Red]

18 hours ago, RedLionLad said:

Can you believe we won the game after he went off?

Yes lucky as f.....k

[RobintheRed Red]

17 hours ago, ExiledAjax said:

Do you honestly expect him to get the perfect starting XI, in the perfect set-up, every game and never need to make a substitution to affect a game?

If everybody would have picked that team semenyo over the likes of do do or Rodri and odowdont with his current form  you would have fell down laughing having said that i was at preston and watkins appeared no one knew who it was warming up .

[MC RISK77]

21 hours ago, BCFC OF SWEDEN said:

Only luck, our manager is not that good! 

Ok 3 points is 3 points but i think we would have got them with Eliasson on the pitch aswell and maybe COD should have been  substituted instead!

Our manager is not that good??? Utter rubbish

[Davefevs]

13 hours ago, iamalagerdrinker said:

I think it was so we could keep our shape and not have O'Dowda and Wienman swapping over like he did with Eliasson and just stick to a structured 4-4-2. I'm a massive Eliasson fan but I 100% think it was the correct move last night we arguably played the best football this season when he came off

Eliasson was pretty quiet last night, flashes that was all.

5 hours ago, JonDolman said:

I'll have to watch the whole game back but it seemed when we went to 433/451, we looked much more in control. Eliasson was much more advanced and often easier to pass to. O'Dowda had moved central left of the 3 and was much more involved and comfortable in what I feel is his better position. 

And im surprised that Semenyo looked far better on his own up against the centre backs. He is getting stick, but he was so much better second half.

It was strange at the time that LJ then changed it completely when I thought we looked comfortable and were keeping the ball well. He obviously felt we didn't have enough of a threat in the box. It was a huge gamble but it paid off.

Interesting what LJ said about how he could have kept Eliasson on as a number 10. I wonder if he is too lightweight to be in that position, but then if he's slightly off of a striker then that is a bit different to being main striker.

I feel LJ needs to work on Eliasson being more than just a brilliant attacking winger who can get great balls in. He needs to learn roles that means he plays every game even in narrower systems like diamond or 352.

Whether that's as a second striker, attacking central playmaker, or even attacking full back/wing back. I feel he has a lot more to give than just his brilliant crossing.

I didn’t pick up any tactical change at start of second half (not saying there wasn’t), but Charlton started the period strongly, before we transitioned twice on them, involving Semenyo, and it got the crowd going.  So I didn’t get to check our shape....until 5 if so minutes after the subs.

In the first half I said to the guy next to me....this is a bit like playing Fulham....a side who pass and move in a diamond totally pissing on a standard 442.

From passages of play we never built rhythm nor territory....our best chances were in transition where we looked threatening.

What a throw from Bentley to Massengo!!.

 

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Eliasson was pretty quiet last night, flashes that was all.

I didn’t pick up any tactical change at start of second half (not saying there wasn’t), but Charlton started the period strongly, before we transitioned twice on them, involving Semenyo, and it got the crowd going.  So I didn’t get to check our shape....until 5 if so minutes after the subs.

In the first half I said to the guy next to me....this is a bit like playing Fulham....a side who pass and move in a diamond totally pissing on a standard 442.

From passages of play we never built rhythm nor territory....our best chances were in transition where we looked threatening.

What a throw from Bentley to Massengo!!.

 

It is sometimes hard to tell as players move around. LJ changes things a lot mid game.

It appeared to me Semenyo was more on his own and Weimann was mainly left and Eliasson right. It looked a lot more solid I thought and it seemed to look more of an easier role for Semenyo to understand. 

[RedLionLad]

4 hours ago, RobintheRed Red said:

Yes lucky as f.....k

Sometimes that bit of luck helps get you over the line at the end of the season. If we were to get promoted by finishing 1 or 2 points above the team below us, who cares about how lucky that result was?

 

Let's hope we get another 'lucky' result on Sunday eh?

[Brooko]

I'm a huge fan of Eliasson. He's so attack minded and exciting when on the ball. There is no other player that can whip the ball into the danger area as good as he can. However, there is little point in all these balls being fired in when there is no-one on the end of it - which was the case against Charlton. 
Nicklas is also not the best defensively. He positions himself so wide that he is also rarely in the build up phases. Tracking back is also something that doesn't seem to come naturally to him. I get why LJ brought him off the other night. 

[Davefevs]

3 minutes ago, Brooko said:

I'm a huge fan of Eliasson. He's so attack minded and exciting when on the ball. There is no other player that can whip the ball into the danger area as good as he can. However, there is little point in all these balls being fired in when there is no-one on the end of it - which was the case against Charlton. 
Nicklas is also not the best defensively. He positions himself so wide that he is also rarely in the build up phases. Tracking back is also something that doesn't seem to come naturally to him. I get why LJ brought him off the other night. 

....and that is the problem with the way we play 442!  It’s rigid.

[Red-Robbo]

5 minutes ago, Brooko said:

I'm a huge fan of Eliasson. He's so attack minded and exciting when on the ball. There is no other player that can whip the ball into the danger area as good as he can. However, there is little point in all these balls being fired in when there is no-one on the end of it - which was the case against Charlton. 
Nicklas is also not the best defensively. He positions himself so wide that he is also rarely in the build up phases. Tracking back is also something that doesn't seem to come naturally to him. I get why LJ brought him off the other night. 

The man who would be on the end of those crosses wasn't on the pitch at the same time as NE on Wednesday, hence the booing/groaning when Johnson made that sub.

With whatever combination of Rodri/Semenyo and Weimann up front for the next few games, I'm not sure we need to have out-and-out wingers.

[Robbored]

3 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

....and that is the problem with the way we play 442!  It’s rigid.

Dave, I’ve posted many times that 4-4-2 is a template. Teams may set up in it but because of its liquidity.. Move one player and you have pretty much every other formation and that’s why we see it so often.

We’ve all seen City line up as 4-4-2 but I can’t remember the last I saw City stick with with it for an entire game. The diamond that LJ likes stems from simply changing the two midfielders  forward or back. 

4-4-2 is rigid only if a team stick with it for the entire match,

[BCFC OF SWEDEN]

Assist for the last 3 goals and now top of the Championship in assists.

 

But starting for Bristol City, a big no from Lee, maybe set pieces and crosses are not so important in the first half 

[AppyDAZE]

On 25/10/2019 at 14:22, Davefevs said:

....and that is the problem with the way we play 442!  It’s rigid.

Then maybe it has to change. just saying. Well done Niklas AGAIN. Not even a mention of the crosses tonight on Sky, only the headers. Well there you go. No credit Nik maybe we should call him

[Lez]

20 minutes ago, AppyDAZE said:

Then maybe it has to change. just saying. Well done Niklas AGAIN. Not even a mention of the crosses tonight on Sky, only the headers. Well there you go. No credit Nik maybe we should call him

Should be first name on the team sheet

[Guest]

Looked great at wing back. I felt we needed more like him to control the ball and show composure when leading. Actually made some headers and some interceptions too.

[AppyDAZE]

4 minutes ago, Lez said:

Should be first name on the team sheet

Him and Weimann. Weimann's attitude and work rate is something else. AND he;s getting better with it.

[Shtanley]

2 great set pieces but his link up play was pretty terrible. 

[AppyDAZE]

3 minutes ago, Shtanley said:

2 great set pieces but his link up play was pretty terrible. 

any more than anyone else tonight?      No

 

Or to put it another way.. supplies all our goals but what else has NE ever done for BCFC?

[Shtanley]

1 minute ago, AppyDAZE said:

any more than anyone else tonight?      No

 

Or to put it another way.. supplies all our goals but what elsechas NE ever done for BCFC?

He wouldn't be the only one getting told that no.

Massengo I thought was poor tonight too. Not playing it quick enough.

Rowe struggled too imo.

[AppyDAZE]

Just now, Shtanley said:

He wouldn't be the only one getting told that no.

Massengo I thought was poor tonight too. Not playing it quick enough.

Rowe struggled too imo.

So why always this implication that NE doesn't pull his weight in some way or other? He is an attacker and he does his job time after time... play him or lose him is what I say

[Shtanley]

1 minute ago, AppyDAZE said:

So why always this implication that NE doesn't pull his weight in some way or other? He is an attacker and he does his job time after time... play him or lose him is what I say

I think he's great at crossing and set pieces but not very good at other things on a regular basis.

Perhaps we should change the formation to suit him better?

433 with Weiman and Diedhiou?

Who knows, frankly who cares I can't be bothered to think about City for several days.

[marcofisher]

10 minutes ago, Shtanley said:

2 great set pieces but his link up play was pretty terrible. 

Playing at left wing back, thought he coped pretty well given the circumstances. Needs to play in a more advanced position no doubt and said link up play would undoubtedly improve.