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

Recommended Posts

Just now, Hampshire reds said:

back 3 is fine wuth kalas and Mawson. take them out and we look weak. we need cover. moore and Vyner sorry together not good enough. 

To be fair that is 2 youngsters & a midfielder who can play LWB being asked to play completely out of position, against Davis then Olly Watkins, a total mismatch.

  • Like 8
Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally don't think the personnel were at fault...it was the formation.

Fine playing 352 with players that fit that system.

Rowe doesn't fit being part of a 3 in a 352.

I thought Villa showed how easy it is to stretch our formation... especially when playing expansive and cross field balls into the pockets behind the wing backs.

Imo...we should have changed formation to 442 or 433 to tighten up.

Fine to play 352 when playing with players that suit...but Rowe with Eliasson? Never going to work, especially with Palmer strolling around as well.

  • Like 11
Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed Spud, good points. But this is a reserve match tonight and was always going to be interesting to see how we played against a quality side. Some lessons for DH but still very very early in the season.

Thought NE had a lot of chances for a better cross than he delivered but hey ho, we go out of the cup often at this stage so we cant expect a Lee 'Run' that often

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, spudski said:

I personally don't think the personnel were at fault...it was the formation.

Fine playing 352 with players that fit that system.

Rowe doesn't fit being part of a 3 in a 352.

I thought Villa showed how easy it is to stretch our formation... especially when playing expansive and cross field balls into the pockets behind the wing backs.

Imo...we should have changed formation to 442 or 433 to tighten up.

Fine to play 352 when playing with players that suit...but Rowe with Eliasson? Never going to work, especially with Palmer strolling around as well.

100%. 
I mentioned pre-match that I didn’t think the line up was gonna be 3-5-2 as the players simply didn’t fit. 
Alas, it was a 3-5-2 and it struggled. 
Rowe at LCB is always going to be a problem, but to compound that problem by giving him Eliason as the wing back down his side was just asking for trouble. 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, GrahamC said:

To be fair that is 2 youngsters & a midfielder who can play LWB being asked to play completely out of position, against Davis then Olly Watkins, a total mismatch.

Exactly right it was a mis-match, which begs the question, why did we play with that back 3?!

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, mozo said:

Exactly right it was a mis-match, which begs the question, why did we play with that back 3?!

Because after losing Kalas in the last cup game we didn’t want to gamble with Mawson.

With Baker out until November we either completely change formation or go with what we have.

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

Fikayo Tomori would be great on loan for season... Kalas, mawson n him. I look to sell baker when back along with loaning out massengo n Nagy. Sell eliasson, fammy get as much as we can n loan another striker... 
that Davis up front looked tidy

  • Confused 1
  • Hmmm 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, GrahamC said:

Because after losing Kalas in the last cup game we didn’t want to gamble with Mawson.

With Baker out until November we either completely change formation or go with what we have.

Need another CB don’t we.  We cannot go into another minimum of 2 months with 3 CBs when playing 3-5-2.  Will potentially derail us as no cover, if we’ve got Suspension, illness and form concerns.  Unload Nagy, Eliasson, HNM if we can find buyers to fund it.   As for Aden Baldwin pay him off and do a deal as if he’s not close today then he never will be.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Shuffle said:

Need another CB don’t we.  We cannot go into another minimum of 2 months with 3 CBs when playing 3-5-2.  Will potentially derail us as no cover, if we’ve got Suspension, illness and form concerns.  Unload Nagy, Eliasson, HNM if we can find buyers to fund it.   As for Aden Baldwin pay him off and do a deal as if he’s not close today then he never will be.

If we have no confidence Kalas will be back in the next fortnight, yes.

I know this is stating the obvious but having a dozen central midfielders when you only start with 3, yet only 5 centre backs (2 of whom are injured at present) is just a ridiculous imbalance.

Having said that, I think we will find it much harder to shift the 2 or 3 that we need to than many on here think.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, GrahamC said:

Because after losing Kalas in the last cup game we didn’t want to gamble with Mawson.

With Baker out until November we either completely change formation or go with what we have.

Given the distribution of our squad, 532 has never really made any sense.

Not just because we don't have the centre halves, we also don't have the quality wing backs required and it prevents us from playing Elliasson in a sensible position.

Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, spudski said:

I personally don't think the personnel were at fault...it was the formation.

Fine playing 352 with players that fit that system.

Rowe doesn't fit being part of a 3 in a 352.

I thought Villa showed how easy it is to stretch our formation... especially when playing expansive and cross field balls into the pockets behind the wing backs.

Imo...we should have changed formation to 442 or 433 to tighten up.

Fine to play 352 when playing with players that suit...but Rowe with Eliasson? Never going to work, especially with Palmer strolling around as well.

I didn't see the game, and you can't get a proper grasp of what's going on from the 'wireless'. That said, I don't think you needed to see the game to spot the potential weakness. Eliasson at LWB is fine against teams like Northampton where we can dominate the ball. Rowe is ok when we aren't put under pressure, but add the two things with those two players and you can see a problem.

The thing is Holden is obviously pretty wedded to the 3-5-2, and that's fine, I think partly due the the short pre-season he wants to get the system and style well ingrained into the squad, so unlike LJ he won't be switching backwards and forwards. Again I think that's fine, sensible, but with the injuries it makes it difficult. 
I think we will have to ride it out a little, until we get a player in (loan?) or players start to come back. 
I've seen people on Twitter suggesting Flint on loan until Christmas, if it was as bad as it sounded tonight, might be a decent shout.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Flames 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, GrahamC said:

If we have no confidence Kalas will be back in the next fortnight, yes.

I know this is stating the obvious but having a dozen central midfielders when you only start with 3, yet only 5 centre backs (2 of whom are injured at present) is just a ridiculous imbalance.

Having said that, I think we will find it much harder to shift the 2 or 3 that we need to than many on here think.

Back on the grass - albeit not in contact training
Be surprised if he’s not available post Sheff Weds

  • Robin 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Harry said:

100%. 
I mentioned pre-match that I didn’t think the line up was gonna be 3-5-2 as the players simply didn’t fit. 
Alas, it was a 3-5-2 and it struggled. 
Rowe at LCB is always going to be a problem, but to compound that problem by giving him Eliason as the wing back down his side was just asking for trouble. 

⬇️⬇️⬇️

26 minutes ago, mozo said:

Exactly right it was a mis-match, which begs the question, why did we play with that back 3?!


Only two players didn’t suit the formation in reality...Rowe and Eliasson.  But he played 352 Because irrespective of players selected tonight, if any of them need to come into the first team, they’ll need to know what is expected of them in that position.

It’s possible Rowe might need to play at LCB, possibly Eliasson at LWB.  Hopefully not, but better to have them semi-familiar.

Same reason the u23s and u18s are playing it too.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Knighty said:

Fikayo Tomori would be great on loan for season... Kalas, mawson n him. I look to sell baker when back along with loaning out massengo n Nagy. Sell eliasson, fammy get as much as we can n loan another striker... 
that Davis up front looked tidy

Rather unlikely since Everton tried to get him on loan and were turned down. Plus Rudiger looks to be on his way out of Chelsea so Tomori will get some game time.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Sheltons Army said:

Back on the grass - albeit not in contact training
Be surprised if he’s not available post Sheff Weds

Walsh was said to be back on grass a couple of weeks ago, Williams , I believe last week. It's a start, but specially with Kalas , only that. The shoulder wouldn't stop him running, even turning/twisting , but depending what it was and how bad, he could be weeks away from the first team.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Sheltons Army said:

Back on the grass - albeit not in contact training
Be surprised if he’s not available post Sheff Weds

Only two games (Sheff Wed and Forest) to go before the international break, so I think we will know so much more in a week or so’s time.

In a perverse way, no cup game next week may not be the worst thing in the world, and although I’m talking in hindsight after defeat tonight, the outside fringe players didn’t do themselves too many favours tonight, and perhaps no cup game next week might hasten some decision making. And no need to worry about the 3 CBs in a midweek game.

Edited by Davefevs
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, 1960maaan said:

Walsh was said to be back on grass a couple of weeks ago, Williams , I believe last week. It's a start, but specially with Kalas , only that. The shoulder wouldn't stop him running, even turning/twisting , but depending what it was and how bad, he could be weeks away from the first team.

Fair point - they were happy with scan results but first time he goes over on it or has a full blooded collision will be the .test 

 

2 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Only two games (Sheff Wed and Forest) to go before the international break, so I think we will know so much more in a week or so’s time.

In a perverse way, no cup game next week may not be the worst thing in the world, and although I’m talking in hindsight after defeat tonight, the outside fringe players didn’t do themselves too many favours tonight, and perhaps no cup game next week might hasten some decision making.

agree Dave

If nothing else , tonight will have helped DH & the coaches towards some decisions 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Davefevs said:

Only two games (Sheff Wed and Forest) to go before the international break, so I think we will know so much more in a week or so’s time.

In a perverse way, no cup game next week may not be the worst thing in the world, and although I’m talking in hindsight after defeat tonight, the outside fringe players didn’t do themselves too many favours tonight, and perhaps no cup game next week might hasten some decision making.

If I were Holden and/or Ashton I'd be looking to move several on. Maybe take a bit of a hit on Fam, drop expectations on Eliasson, actively look for a club for Palmer and Nagy. Some of those will not play at all, or we risk losing for nothing later.
This manager lark ain't all beer and skittles is it.

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

⬇️⬇️⬇️


Only two players didn’t suit the formation in reality...Rowe and Eliasson.  But he played 352 Because irrespective of players selected tonight, if any of them need to come into the first team, they’ll need to know what is expected of them in that position.

It’s possible Rowe might need to play at LCB, possibly Eliasson at LWB.  Hopefully not, but better to have them semi-familiar.

Same reason the u23s and u18s are playing it too.

Thing is Dave...you can't rigidly play to 352 if being overrun. You have to adapt and have plan b.

Fine playing to a game plan...and getting familiar with it, and I'm all for taking a game to the opposition, and playing to our strengths and system, but we needed to change today imo...if we can't, then teams will work us out too easily. They did with Cotterill.

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, 1960maaan said:

If I were Holden and/or Ashton I'd be looking to move several on. Maybe take a bit of a hit on Fam, drop expectations on Eliasson, actively look for a club for Palmer and Nagy. Some of those will not play at all, or we risk losing for nothing later.
This manager lark ain't all beer and skittles is it.

It is if you manage a licensed skittle ally. :) 

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, spudski said:

Thing is Dave...you can't rigidly play to 352 if being overrun. You have to adapt and have plan b.

Fine playing to a game plan...and getting familiar with it, and I'm all for taking a game to the opposition, and playing to our strengths and system, but we needed to change today imo...if we can't, then teams will work us out too easily. They did with Cotterill.

 

But what would your change have been either pre-game or during have been?  What was the root cause of being overrun?  The system, the personnel, etc, etc?

We decided not to risk Mawson (rightly so tonight with what happened to Kalas) so you take other stuff on the chin.

For me the back 3 (not just blaming them) couldn’t cope with several things, but mainly 1) quick, clever movement and 2) the confidence to communicate and shift across the pitch quickly as the ball got switched.  I think they might also have realised how physical Prem players can be, not just Davis too.  You know what you’re getting with Vokes, but Traore, El-Ghazy?  They were tough tonight.  

It might be a learning experience that if Holden’s options for a league game are 352 with the same 3 CBs, he refers back to tonight and realises it’s fine for Exeter but not for a Championship game.  In which case he has a positive takeaway from tonight.

On an aside I thought Jacob Ramsey looks a talent.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, spudski said:

I personally don't think the personnel were at fault...it was the formation.

Fine playing 352 with players that fit that system.

Rowe doesn't fit being part of a 3 in a 352.

I thought Villa showed how easy it is to stretch our formation... especially when playing expansive and cross field balls into the pockets behind the wing backs.

Imo...we should have changed formation to 442 or 433 to tighten up.

Fine to play 352 when playing with players that suit...but Rowe with Eliasson? Never going to work, especially with Palmer strolling around as well.

They are a mid table PL team and they outplayed us with that extra bit of ability per player and Dean Smith is one classy manager who outsmarted Deano who, let’s face it is in his first managerial role.

Everyone knows that 3-5-2 has its benefits but also its weaknesses and Villa took full advantage of those weaknesses - well done to Dean Smith.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Robin 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GrahamC said:

Because after losing Kalas in the last cup game we didn’t want to gamble with Mawson.

With Baker out until November we either completely change formation or go with what we have.

Or...

50 minutes ago, Shuffle said:

Need another CB don’t we.  We cannot go into another minimum of 2 months with 3 CBs when playing 3-5-2.  Will potentially derail us as no cover, if we’ve got Suspension, illness and form concerns.  Unload Nagy, Eliasson, HNM if we can find buyers to fund it.   As for Aden Baldwin pay him off and do a deal as if he’s not close today then he never will be.

Yeah we need one more imo

42 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

⬇️⬇️⬇️


Only two players didn’t suit the formation in reality...Rowe and Eliasson.  But he played 352 Because irrespective of players selected tonight, if any of them need to come into the first team, they’ll need to know what is expected of them in that position.

It’s possible Rowe might need to play at LCB, possibly Eliasson at LWB.  Hopefully not, but better to have them semi-familiar.

Same reason the u23s and u18s are playing it too.

I think tonight is a reminder though that when you compete against a higher calibre of players, you can't get away with players out of position and a group not familiar with each other. 

If tonight was about giving players minutes and practice in the new system, then it was a success.

If winning was important - with that run to the QF the lure - then we might have underestimated the task at hand.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Think the reactions are a bit OTT. We had a funny 5 min and it cost us 2 goals against a premier league side. After the second we were quite comfortable for a good 45 minutes. We seemed nervous the first 15 but once we played you could see the belief. We should have scored tonight I think and maybe if we do it is a game again. 
 

No Tommy Rowe and Eliasson on the left is not a long term solution. That said I don’t think anyone here thought that. DH gambled using Rowe to keep Mawson fresh and it meant tonight was not great. Get 3 points on the weekend and it might be worth it. 

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

But what would your change have been either pre-game or during have been?  What was the root cause of being overrun?  The system, the personnel, etc, etc?

Any system which meant we didn’t have to play Tommy Rowe as a LCB and Eliasson at LWB against a premier league side would’ve been ideal. Not a dig at Holden as things have gone superbly so far, but as soon as I looked at those lineups I got the sense that we had very little chance.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Aaron-Bcfc said:

Any system which meant we didn’t have to play Tommy Rowe as a LCB and Eliasson at LWB against a premier league side would’ve been ideal. Not a dig at Holden as things have gone superbly so far, but as soon as I looked at those lineups I got the sense that we had very little chance.

How about:

O’Leary

Sessegnon / Vyner / Moore / Rowe

Nagy / Brunt / Palmer / Eliasson

Semenyo / Diedhiou

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

How about:

O’Leary

Sessegnon / Vyner / Moore / Rowe

Nagy / Brunt / Palmer / Eliasson

Semenyo / Diedhiou

Using that same XI I’d probably prefer Semenyo on the wing, Nagy moved into centre midfield and then Palmer playing as a 10 in a 4-4-1-1 just to get players in their more natural positions and bolster the middle of the park a bit. Probably still would’ve lost in any case but do feel as if we set up to fail a bit tonight.
 

Hopefully Holden doesn’t fall into the Cotterill trap of sticking too firmly to his guns if things happen to go sour in the league with the current system, need to have a bit of flexibility in the side.

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...