Bournemouth v Bristol City Match Day 8

[LoyalRed]

Anyone else getting bored of excuses as to what we did wrong, why we lost etc etc.... it’s been a lockdown of excuses from LJ and now DH

[Phileas Fogg]

Just now, LoyalRed said:

Anyone else getting bored of excuses as to what we did wrong, why we lost etc etc.... it’s been a lockdown of excuses from LJ and now DH

What's he supposed to say? He gave his view on the match. He had quite a different demeanor last night but I didn't feel he was making excuses. 

[LoyalRed]

2 minutes ago, Phileas Fogg said:

What's he supposed to say? He gave his view on the match. He had quite a different demeanor last night but I didn't feel he was making excuses. 

He’s supposed to win, that’s why we appointed him isn’t it 

[The Bard]

10 hours ago, Sheltons Army said:

You don’t think that a point at Bournemouth with circumstances and all things considered would have been a very decent credible point ?

Of course a 0-0 draw was a good result.  The mistake was thinking that a negative sub would make it more likely. It had the opposite effect unfortunately.  He's made a similar change 2 away games in a row now and conceded late in both games.  Hopefully we'll keep the shape and just replace like for like.  I did not get why Massengo didn't come on for Paterson for example.  or Wells on for Semenyo.  Changing from 3 5 2 to 5 4 1 involves a lot more positional tweaks than you would think.  That's what cost us. 

[Phileas Fogg]

48 minutes ago, LoyalRed said:

He’s supposed to win, that’s why we appointed him isn’t it 

Well yeah, however in reality he isn't going to win every game.

Very early into the season to read into form too much as it's still leveling out. That's before factoring in all our injuries. 

It'll be 10 games soon which is a fairly decent yardstick although because this is a strange season we might not know our true position until early December.

[The Bard]

10 hours ago, Sheltons Army said:

That seems to have flown out the window when we conceded 

I’ve seen dozens and dozens far worse City teams and performances than that and the first half was very decent with some real positives

They stepped up second half , we payed for our first half work as energy levels dropped, get sloppy give the ball away , have to chase more etc etc

A moment of quality opens us up once to pinch the points

You can quibble in hindsight about substitutions but perspective needed indeed.

 

Some of us didn't like the sub at the time and are perfectly capable of looking at things with perspective.  

[Sheltons Army]

8 minutes ago, The Bard said:

Of course a 0-0 draw was a good result.  The mistake was thinking that a negative sub would make it more likely. It had the opposite effect unfortunately.  He's made a similar change 2 away games in a row now and conceded late in both games.  Hopefully we'll keep the shape and just replace like for like.  I did not get why Massengo didn't come on for Paterson for example.  or Wells on for Semenyo.  Changing from 3 5 2 to 5 4 1 involves a lot more positional tweaks than you would think.  That's what cost us. 

He brought on Brunt to try and give us a grip / control on the game as we were under the cosh and had been for some period

Yes the other option would have been to gamble and counterpunch with attacking substitutions and try and gain momentum that way (Personally would have brought Martin on for Famara after 65-70) but I can understand what he did and why he did it 

Because we conceded , in hindsight it looks a questionable decision but as I say I can completely see his thinking whereas under LJ I was regularly bemused by changes

Get that control and see out a point or pinch a winner and it looks a brilliant decision , unfortunately we concede almost immediately which derails the plan

[The Bard]

2 minutes ago, Sheltons Army said:

He brought on Brunt to try and give us a grip / control on the game as we were under the cosh and had been for some period

Yes the other option would have been to gamble and counterpunch with attacking substitutions and try and gain momentum that way (Personally would have brought Martin on for Famara after 65-70) but I can understand what he did and why he did it 

Because we conceded , in hindsight it looks a questionable decision but as I say I can completely see his thinking whereas under LJ I was regularly bemused by changes

Get that control and see out a point or pinch a winner and it looks a brilliant decision 

I thought at the time that's a bad sub.  Sends a negative message and means virtually the whole side have to shuffle around when we are under the cosh and tired.  The problems we had weren't structural they were around personnel being either tired or out of form (or both) and struggling in their one on one battles (eg Hunt v Adam Smith). 

[Sheltons Army]

Just now, The Bard said:

I thought at the time that's a bad sub.  Sends a negative message and means virtually the whole side have to shuffle around when we are under the cosh and tired.  The problems we had weren't structural they were around personnel being either tired or out of form (or both) and struggling in their one on one battles (eg Hunt v Adam Smith). 

So what would you have done ?

[The Bard]

2 minutes ago, Sheltons Army said:

So what would you have done ?

Changed it up front - Wells on for Semenyo.  Got one of Massengo or Nagy on for Paterson who disappeared.  Stay in our shape and try to wrestle back control with more energy on and off the ball. 

Hunt is a difficult one.  He could be asked to play 90 minutes every 3 days at wing back which is going to result in him being knackered or picking up an injury.  Is COD a realistic alternative?

[Sheltons Army]

7 minutes ago, The Bard said:

Changed it up front - Wells on for Semenyo.  Got one of Massengo or Nagy on for Paterson who disappeared.  Stay in our shape and try to wrestle back control with more energy on and off the ball. 

Hunt is a difficult one.  He could be asked to play 90 minutes every 3 days at wing back which is going to result in him being knackered or picking up an injury.  Is COD a realistic alternative?

Wouldn’t have argued with Fresh legs for Pato but not convinced that Wells would have helped

Might pinch you a goal (if you Create ) but does little to hold the ball up or get us up the pitch / gain some control on the game

IMHO We needed to put a brake on , and get some control,  and that was either look to get service into someone who can make it stick (Martin ?)and let us move up the pitch or regain a foothold in midfield. 

[EstoniaTallinnRed]

14 hours ago, Banjo Red said:

We have got to be more clinical and finish teams when on top.

That's been the problem for a very long time!

[Davefevs]

8 hours ago, The Bard said:

Of course a 0-0 draw was a good result.  The mistake was thinking that a negative sub would make it more likely. It had the opposite effect unfortunately.  He's made a similar change 2 away games in a row now and conceded late in both games.  Hopefully we'll keep the shape and just replace like for like.  I did not get why Massengo didn't come on for Paterson for example.  or Wells on for Semenyo.  Changing from 3 5 2 to 5 4 1 involves a lot more positional tweaks than you would think.  That's what cost us. 

For the few minutes between Brunt coming on for Semenyo (who was knackered and no longer able to do his leg-work) and the two strikers coming on, Pato looked like he went up alongside Diedhiou....so perhaps a 3511.

I don’t think it was a defensive sub per se, but a reaction to some of our players no longer having anything left in the tank.

[mozo]

Just now, Davefevs said:

For the few minutes between Brunt coming on for Semenyo (who was knackered and no longer able to do his leg-work) and the two strikers coming on, Pato looked like he went up alongside Diedhiou....so perhaps a 3511.

I don’t think it was a defensive sub per se, but a reaction to some of our players no longer having anything left in the tank.

Yeah Paterson was pushed forward to see out the game as a pressing attacker but that plan soon had to change.

[Major Isewater]

On 28/10/2020 at 23:11, bristolcitysweden said:

For once you don't seems to be dement Major

Coming from you ,my dear Tommy , I accept that as a compliment.

[Major Isewater]

19 hours ago, EstoniaTallinnRed said:

That's been the problem for a very long time!

It’s the problem for 99% of football teams. 
Not everyone can have a Harry Kane or Vardy in their squad.