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

Stick or Twist


Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

 

And the stats support this more moderate view. We might have been open at the back yesterday, but Norwich weren't defensively watertight either. Although we've lost two in a row we've done ok offensively.

For me the biggest concern is that you could pull up the key stats (shots for, against, passing, tackles, possession, xG etc) from the first 9 this season and the first 9 last season and I'd challenge anyone to tell me which was which. To me that suggests that we're in much the same place as we perhaps were last season.

My point is we probably are in a very similar place as we were this time last season but we are trying to go about it a different way. There were times watching Johnson football when I lost the will to live, 90 minutes of pure boredom on many occasions. I would be surprised if we are at the bottom of the xG table as we were all of last season but I could be wrong.

Personally I can’t see what we have done this season to turn us from a mid table outfit to a top 6 one. If we are going to finish mid table I will take a manager who tries to attack teams and gets his pants pulled down on occasion over one who grinds out results with turgid football and achieves the same result.

Regardless of what the circus upstairs sets as a target for the season you have to use your own eyes and I would be interested to know how the group of players we have is anything other than a mid-table group. If Chris Hughton had come in he would have wanted about eight new players in my view.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

My point is we probably are in a very similar place as we were this time last season but we are trying to go about it a different way. There were times watching Johnson football when I lost the will to live, 90 minutes of pure boredom on many occasions. I would be surprised if we are at the bottom of the xG table as we were all of last season but I could be wrong.

Personally I can’t see what we have done this season to turn us from a mid table outfit to a top 6 one. If we are going to finish mid table I will take a manager who tries to attack teams and gets his pants pulled down on occasion over one who grinds out results with turgid football and achieves the same result.

Regardless of what the circus upstairs sets as a target for the season you have to use your own eyes and I would be interested to know how the group of players we have is anything other than a mid-table group. If Chris Hughton had come in he would have wanted about eight new players in my view.

We're mid-table for xG. Two penalties help that but you're correct its not what it was last season.

I think we're agreeing that generally we are better to watch than under LJ season 4. However if you look at the stats then the product is much the same.

It's a weird one as I think in a few ways we're better than last year, some ways we're worse, and some things are much the same. 

I'm planning on doing a proper look at the stats during the international break, but my cursory view atm is that to expect a play-off finish is optimistic at best.

Edited by ExiledAjax
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

My point is we probably are in a very similar place as we were this time last season but we are trying to go about it a different way. There were times watching Johnson football when I lost the will to live, 90 minutes of pure boredom on many occasions. I would be surprised if we are at the bottom of the xG table as we were all of last season but I could be wrong.

Personally I can’t see what we have done this season to turn us from a mid table outfit to a top 6 one. If we are going to finish mid table I will take a manager who tries to attack teams and gets his pants pulled down on occasion over one who grinds out results with turgid football and achieves the same result.

Regardless of what the circus upstairs sets as a target for the season you have to use your own eyes and I would be interested to know how the group of players we have is anything other than a mid-table group. If Chris Hughton had come in he would have wanted about eight new players in my view.

I think some of my optimism comes from the fact that we are in a group of 6/8/10 mid-table teams that are in with a chance of the last 2 playoff places....I don’t think we are any better or worse than other sides, but that consistency of approach, becoming well-drilled etc, will give us a chance of being at the top end of that pile of teams.

Thats why I say my expectation is for a playoff challenge.

In terms of stats, there are some noticeable differences:

  • more passes made by a helluva lot (not just across the back!!!)
  • Better passing accuracy across all types (long, medium, short) and things like passes in final third
  • more shots / more on target

Tgere are other things that show our build-up creates loads more chances than under LJ, and that LJ’s counter-attacking was less successful than Holden, even though that isn’t Holden’s approach.

There are things like pressing that haven’t improved.

I know it’s only 2 games, but I think the next two will tell us a bit more.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Numero Uno said:

Is it the same shit though? Krul made one very good save and one worldly from Martin. We scored, missed a penalty and created other dangerous situations. Same in the first half at Bournemouth. I really don’t remember us losing games having created numerous chances under Johnson. There were loads of games where I felt I could have kept a clean sheet whereas if Norwich gave me a game between the sticks yesterday I wouldn’t have been getting another one next week😂. It was turgid, grind out stuff for the most part under LJ I remember correctly.

You may feel the results are currently same shit, different manager and that is a fair point but I’m not seeing the same approach. If anything we are too open in the pursuit of goals, the balance isn’t there yet.

To be fair the results are about where I expected, little change from previous seasons, and I agree the broad approach has changed. What concerns me is the same that concerned me last season and under Johnson. 

Holden to me does not have the tactical nouse in the exact same way that Johnson didn't. We all enjoyed the first 4 games, but surely everyone could see that the 1 man midfield was going to be a massive issue the second we played a team with a decent midfield (Stoke had only just put theirs together and seems to have taken time to get going) we were absolutely battered by cov for long periods, and in all the games there were periods where we completely lost control of the midfield. 

Now I'm not saying that he needed do do what he did on the weekend (again another concerning Johnson trait, he cannot tweak the system only bin it) but a little tweak here and there, bring in an extra central midfielder to replace one of the 2 number 10s you have in there to gain a bit more control and allow the number 10 you have left to play a more advanced role. 

I am not overly concerned about the results, they are about what I expected and to an extent the performances haven't been awful either. 

But i see too many traits that Holden seems to have lifted straight from the Lee Johnson manual that are concerning me and they are the same things I saw last season and why u though he was a poor choice for the job. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Spud55 said:

To be fair the results are about where I expected, little change from previous seasons, and I agree the broad approach has changed. What concerns me is the same that concerned me last season and under Johnson. 

Holden to me does not have the tactical nouse in the exact same way that Johnson didn't. We all enjoyed the first 4 games, but surely everyone could see that the 1 man midfield was going to be a massive issue the second we played a team with a decent midfield (Stoke had only just put theirs together and seems to have taken time to get going) we were absolutely battered by cov for long periods, and in all the games there were periods where we completely lost control of the midfield. 

Now I'm not saying that he needed do do what he did on the weekend (again another concerning Johnson trait, he cannot tweak the system only bin it) but a little tweak here and there, bring in an extra central midfielder to replace one of the 2 number 10s you have in there to gain a bit more control and allow the number 10 you have left to play a more advanced role. 

I am not overly concerned about the results, they are about what I expected and to an extent the performances haven't been awful either. 

But i see too many traits that Holden seems to have lifted straight from the Lee Johnson manual that are concerning me and they are the same things I saw last season and why u though he was a poor choice for the job. 

I agree that Holden has to look at the recent matches and see that an any two from three combination of "Weimann, Paterson and O'Dowda" in our midfield is too lightweight and will get exposed by decent sides at this level. I agree with many who think it should be any one from three. I would hope that he does add a bit of solidity moving forward and that we see either Nagy or Massengo tomorrow (assuming Walsh and Williams are not available and even if they are presumably not match fit).

With Johnson I thought he confused everyone in the stadium including the players and himself with what he was trying to do. I think Holden knows what he is trying to do but despite the early wins hasn't found the balance to make it work properly. He may well argue that when Walsh and Williams are back he then has the players to make his system work better. If we are to persist with the three at the back then he also has to sign one of the free agent centre-halves who are available because we are so obviously lightweight in that department due to the Mawson injury. I understand that young players have to learn but there comes a point when individual errors and lapses of concentration are costing too many points, cannot be tolerated any longer and simply have to be addressed. Vyner and Moore need to come of age in football terms..........and quickly. Moore is the one who concerns me more tbh.

  • Flames 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Numero Uno said:

My point is we probably are in a very similar place as we were this time last season but we are trying to go about it a different way. There were times watching Johnson football when I lost the will to live, 90 minutes of pure boredom on many occasions. I would be surprised if we are at the bottom of the xG table as we were all of last season but I could be wrong.

Personally I can’t see what we have done this season to turn us from a mid table outfit to a top 6 one. If we are going to finish mid table I will take a manager who tries to attack teams and gets his pants pulled down on occasion over one who grinds out results with turgid football and achieves the same result.

Regardless of what the circus upstairs sets as a target for the season you have to use your own eyes and I would be interested to know how the group of players we have is anything other than a mid-table group. If Chris Hughton had come in he would have wanted about eight new players in my view.

Good post

In summary some positives

Holden has at least made decisive decisions in terms of squad whether we as individuals agree with them 

He at least had his plan and has stuck with it (Definitely needs consideration and has to be careful his persistence doesn’t become a negative)

The attacking intent is there and certainly entertainment (Yet again there’s a downside and entertainment is fine until any point the entertainment is almost completely from the opposition , this isn’t the case yet)

 

All three things above can be seen as a positive , or a negative , I guess depending on your mindset

 

Is Dean about to gatecrash the Premier League ..... no

But

At least it’s interesting , 

 

  • Robin 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

I agree that Holden has to look at the recent matches and see that an any two from three combination of "Weimann, Paterson and O'Dowda" in our midfield is too lightweight and will get exposed by decent sides at this level. I agree with many who think it should be any one from three. I would hope that he does add a bit of solidity moving forward and that we see either Nagy or Massengo tomorrow (assuming Walsh and Williams are not available and even if they are presumably not match fit).

With Johnson I thought he confused everyone in the stadium including the players and himself with what he was trying to do. I think Holden knows what he is trying to do but despite the early wins hasn't found the balance to make it work properly. He may well argue that when Walsh and Williams are back he then has the players to make his system work better. If we are to persist with the three at the back then he also has to sign one of the free agent centre-halves who are available because we are so obviously lightweight in that department due to the Mawson injury. I understand that young players have to learn but there comes a point when individual errors and lapses of concentration are costing too many points, cannot be tolerated any longer and simply have to be addressed. Vyner and Moore need to come of age in football terms..........and quickly. Moore is the one who concerns me more tbh.

Good post.  The clues for me will be how quickly Dean learns from the good bits and the bad bits.

The shouts of “same as under LJ” are unfair and wrong imho.  Results (P9 W4 D2 L3) are better (just) and we’ve had a mix of top and bottom clubs...we’ve not played the middling clubs yet.  That’s a good barometer of whether you’re top of that pile, in the midfield or at the bottom.

The football is very different though.

I don’t think a formation change per se is required, but tweaks within it (as you say).  He might decide to change it, but I think doing that this week might be poor timing....use the break to re-drill if so.

I don’t think it’s a case of getting your best players on the pitch, because I think several are of similar ability.  So it’s about getting bonds between players correct, just two people hitting it off can make a difference.  For all the people saying Brunt’s legs have gone, following Swansea last week most of them were saying we need to play Brunt and Bakinson.  We are too “one-game / one-result reactionary”....that’s the nature of forums I guess.

I’d pick a different team than started Saturday, Wednesday or last Saturday, but it’s only one or two players whilst being cognisant of rest / rotation.

Roll on tomorrow night.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Numero Uno said:

I agree that Holden has to look at the recent matches and see that an any two from three combination of "Weimann, Paterson and O'Dowda" in our midfield is too lightweight and will get exposed by decent sides at this level. I agree with many who think it should be any one from three. I would hope that he does add a bit of solidity moving forward and that we see either Nagy or Massengo tomorrow (assuming Walsh and Williams are not available and even if they are presumably not match fit).

With Johnson I thought he confused everyone in the stadium including the players and himself with what he was trying to do. I think Holden knows what he is trying to do but despite the early wins hasn't found the balance to make it work properly. He may well argue that when Walsh and Williams are back he then has the players to make his system work better. If we are to persist with the three at the back then he also has to sign one of the free agent centre-halves who are available because we are so obviously lightweight in that department due to the Mawson injury. I understand that young players have to learn but there comes a point when individual errors and lapses of concentration are costing too many points, cannot be tolerated any longer and simply have to be addressed. Vyner and Moore need to come of age in football terms..........and quickly. Moore is the one who concerns me more tbh.

You know what, if our forwards were lethal in front of goal, this 2 attacking 8s thing might work. We'd be susceptible to the break, but we'd try to outscore opponents. 

The problem is Martin isn't a goalscorer as such, Wells is struggling, O'Dowda unlikely to chip in many and Paterson has a great finish on him when he's in the zone, but he too easily slips into a very different zone.

If just three of those four were terrorising defences it would be worth the risk, but they're not, and we're creating the same amount of chances as the opposition but being outgunned.

I don't think Holden putting less attack minded players in the midfield is in any way admitting he was wrong. It's just that the circumstances dictate that he has to be flexible with his philosophy. 

I hate to extol the virtues of Warnock, but when his Boro team face tough opponent, like us when we were flying, they are pragmatic. They might then show more intent in less challenging circumstances. 

You can only go into games with the attack is the best form of defense strategy when your attack is fully loaded and your defence has a strong backbone. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Numero Uno said:

I agree that Holden has to look at the recent matches and see that an any two from three combination of "Weimann, Paterson and O'Dowda" in our midfield is too lightweight and will get exposed by decent sides at this level. I agree with many who think it should be any one from three. I would hope that he does add a bit of solidity moving forward and that we see either Nagy or Massengo tomorrow (assuming Walsh and Williams are not available and even if they are presumably not match fit).

With Johnson I thought he confused everyone in the stadium including the players and himself with what he was trying to do. I think Holden knows what he is trying to do but despite the early wins hasn't found the balance to make it work properly. He may well argue that when Walsh and Williams are back he then has the players to make his system work better. If we are to persist with the three at the back then he also has to sign one of the free agent centre-halves who are available because we are so obviously lightweight in that department due to the Mawson injury. I understand that young players have to learn but there comes a point when individual errors and lapses of concentration are costing too many points, cannot be tolerated any longer and simply have to be addressed. Vyner and Moore need to come of age in football terms..........and quickly. Moore is the one who concerns me more tbh.

For me, the major thing Holden needs to learn is to find the pragmatism between "what you want to do in an ideal world" and "what you are able to do with the resources available".

I actually think, for the long haul, 3-5-2 is the right way to go and the best way to get the best out of players and I don't think the formation is to blame when we're missing one first choice centre-back, another centre back who was key last season one rotation right wing back and three key central midfielders. Clearly injuries and a lack of options to mix it up within the formation are the key problems at the moment.

BUT the reality is those players are missing and we are losing games and I think Holden needs to move away from the question of how he wants us to play in the long term and focus on what is the best team we can get on the pitch at this moment in time.

I think that has to mean temporarily moving to a back four, simply because we're just exhausting the wing-backs - who need to be at key fitness to make the formation work - and it means that Vyner can act as right back rotation/cover. 

I'm not necessarily usually a fan of a narrow 4 in midfield but we don't have the right combination for a 3 at the moment so I think we have to consider Bakinson or Brunt behind a midfield 3 with O'Dowda and Paterson pushing forward and drifting wide as needed. 

I'm not saying this is how I want us to play in the long-term but I think the issue at the moment is that Holden isn't adapting his thinking process to suit the players available and that pragmatism needs to kick in at some point. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, LondonBristolian said:

For me, the major thing Holden needs to learn is to find the pragmatism between "what you want to do in an ideal world" and "what you are able to do with the resources available".

Agree, and also consideration of the opposition.  You can still want to impose your game on the opposition but also consider the, too.  In fact I’d argue that it’s just a case of getting the balance between not paying too much attention to them and not paying enough.

I actually think, for the long haul, 3-5-2 is the right way to go and the best way to get the best out of players and I don't think the formation is to blame when we're missing one first choice centre-back, another centre back who was key last season one rotation right wing back and three key central midfielders. Clearly injuries and a lack of options to mix it up within the formation are the key problems at the moment.

BUT the reality is those players are missing and we are losing games and I think Holden needs to move away from the question of how he wants us to play in the long term and focus on what is the best team we can get on the pitch at this moment in time.

That “best team” can still be 352.

I think that has to mean temporarily moving to a back four, simply because we're just exhausting the wing-backs - who need to be at key fitness to make the formation work - and it means that Vyner can act as right back rotation/cover.

we aren’t exhausting Dasilva and Rowe are we?  We could be about to exhaust Hunt, but you might argue, get through this game and take it from there....because after Friday he gets a 15 day break.

I'm not necessarily usually a fan of a narrow 4 in midfield but we don't have the right combination for a 3 at the moment so I think we have to consider Bakinson or Brunt behind a midfield 3 with O'Dowda and Paterson pushing forward and drifting wide as needed.

I think most of us thing 4 across the midfield, e.g. 2 wingers 2 CMs is the wrong this, but as you say there are several ways to play a midfield 4 without going old-skool.

I'm not saying this is how I want us to play in the long-term but I think the issue at the moment is that Holden isn't adapting his thinking process to suit the players available and that pragmatism needs to kick in at some point.

I agree, there are many ways to skin the (midfield 3) cat that don’t result in an answer that comes up with Brunt, Paterson and O’Dowda.  And until Saturday our defence, bar a couple of individual errors / costly errors over the past few weeks, has generally looked ok.  Both defensive and midfield units were pretty shocking without the ball on Saturday.  That must be addressed.  I don’t think this week is the time to rip it up, there’s literally no training time this week to drill a new system.  But we’ll see.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

For me pointing out we're creating a load of chances is a bit of a moot point. Is it a function of Holden, or just how many attack minded players he's shoving onto the pitch?

It's all very well saying we look good going forward, we could have scored 5 etc. but when you have 2 forwards, O'Dowda, Pato, Hunt and Dasilva who are on balance more attack minded, Bakinson even in the last few games has been looking further and further up the pitch, and you could even argue 2 ball carrying (or at least quite forward thinking) centre backs on the pitch is that really a surprise?

For me creating a wealth of chances (even ignoring that we're not actually scoring them) at such detriment to your own defence isn't a positive at all, it's approaching naivety.

I think it can only work built upon a solid foundation, which we don't currently have and that's what concerns me. Ending a game with 4 forwards on the pitch and saying we created chances doesn't mean much in my opinion.

My concern is that Holden has picked his formation, how he wants us to play, and embedded it with a surplus of attacking players. What's now going to happen is we have to reign that in a bit, with either a formation or big mindset change. What will happen if we put radically different players into this system I have no idea - maybe it'll just work!

It's a shame though that I think swapping players likely means to also have to change how we play, but I can't see how it wont with the way he's selected his team(s) so far.

Edited by IAmNick
Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

The shouts of “same as under LJ” are unfair and wrong imho.  

Exactly. Lots of good comments from @Sheltons Army, @Spud55, @mozo and @LondonBristolian too. I think it is very lazy to say nothing has changed even if results are close to being the same at the moment. As a number of people have suggested, once the raw emotion of losing a game has died down, should it be any real surprise that results aren't dramatically changing even if the way we go about getting them is? If you cannot see that the style of play is going down a different route from that adopted by LJ then, honestly, what are you watching?

A (too) large minority are saying "Steve/Mark wants play-offs so play-offs is the minimum it should be".....................I'm sorry but if that is what Steve/Mark wants then they are going to have to carry on wanting for the moment given the strength of squad available to an inexperienced manager. There are many of us who don't need Steve/Mark to tell us what is achievable and then use it as a stick to beat the Manager with because, let's be brutally honest, how many times over the years have these people got things right on the purely football front? To those people I say have a look with your own eyes, use the knowledge of football you have built up over the years, look at the squads that other teams have at their disposal in comparison to ours (honestly, not with rose tinted's on), look how long we have key players missing for and work out what's realistic yourself.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Some varied different points but DH has lost the spine of the team in players who would be starters. No Baker, No Mawson, No Weimann, No Williams, No Walsh (some say correctly unproven championship but DH stated start of season very much in plans) loss of Kalas for more than a few games, and so on. While injuries are  part and parcel we seem to have more than our fair share. Particularly long term ones. 
After the break I suspect we will see a different  City. Don’t forget Williams was our major summer signing, a huge upgrade on Korey....  I am still the eternal optimist 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I keep thinking back to one of the players mentioning (I think) that they had a target of 90 goals this season, so 2 per game.

It's an admirable goal, but if they seriously think it's achievable you pretty much either need to:

  •  Win the league at a canter
  • Concede a hell of a lot of a goals - because if you didn't, you'd have won the league at a canter

There are of course a few examples of teams approaching it and ending on +35 or something but that's pretty unusual unless they're in the top 2 or maybe 3. Even Brentford only got to 80 last season, and ended on +42.

It's fairly safe to assume that the first option isn't that realistic this season and probably never was, so perhaps this is just how Holden wants to play? Otherwise what's the point of saying that, beyond setting some ridiculously unattainable goal?

Maybe he just wants a season of 2-2s rather than 1-0s and we're going to keep on doing what we are... again ignoring that we're not actually scoring much lately?

Edited by IAmNick
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I think some of my optimism comes from the fact that we are in a group of 6/8/10 mid-table teams that are in with a chance of the last 2 playoff places....I don’t think we are any better or worse than other sides, but that consistency of approach, becoming well-drilled etc, will give us a chance of being at the top end of that pile of teams.

Thats why I say my expectation is for a playoff challenge.

In terms of stats, there are some noticeable differences:

  • more passes made by a helluva lot (not just across the back!!!)
  • Better passing accuracy across all types (long, medium, short) and things like passes in final third
  • more shots / more on target

Tgere are other things that show our build-up creates loads more chances than under LJ, and that LJ’s counter-attacking was less successful than Holden, even though that isn’t Holden’s approach.

There are things like pressing that haven’t improved.

I know it’s only 2 games, but I think the next two will tell us a bit more.

There is nothing wrong in hoping for a top 6 challenge (not the same as a top 6 finish). However, I think to achieve 5th/6th place we would need everything to align in our favour. At the moment we are half filling one of those Nightingale Hospitals with our more experienced players, we have a number of young players who are learning on the job and aren't quite there yet, a midfield balance that has yet to be found and our Centre Forward is not quite at it. There's still 37 games to get this sorted though!!

Edited by Numero Uno
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, DT The Optimist said:

Some varied different points but DH has lost the spine of the team in players who would be starters. No Baker, No Mawson, No Weimann, No Williams, No Walsh (some say correctly unproven championship but DH stated start of season very much in plans) loss of Kalas for more than a few games, and so on. While injuries are  part and parcel we seem to have more than our fair share. Particularly long term ones. 
After the break I suspect we will see a different  City. Don’t forget Williams was our major summer signing, a huge upgrade on Korey....  I am still the eternal optimist 

They say fortune favours the brave and I think Holden was brave to go with this attacking strategy. I think he was a little fortunate to come away with 4 straight wins in the league, but he deserves the credit.

As you say, he's had some horrible luck with injuries to key players and we have to appreciate that.

But we also have to judge Holden on how he works with what he's got, and after 5 games without a win it's only fair that we scrutinise his decision making, particularly when most of us have been surprised by some of the choices of personnel. 

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

They say fortune favours the brave and I think Holden was brave to go with this attacking strategy. I think he was a little fortunate to come away with 4 straight wins in the league, but he deserves the credit.

As you say, he's had some horrible luck with injuries to key players and we have to appreciate that.

But we also have to judge Holden on how he works with what he's got, and after 5 games without a win it's only fair that we scrutinise his decision making, particularly when most of us have been surprised by some of the choices of personnel. 

I think most posters on here see what he’s doing with the 352, but expected at some point, even with injuries, to see Bakinson plus Brunt (or Nagy or Massengo) starting together at some point.  The fact that we haven’t surprises me.  And I think it’s perfectly acceptable to be critical of that, and until we see that it’s really difficult to know whether that might make the difference or not.  The game on Saturday was too end to end.  For those who watch basketball there’s logic that says the higher scoring the sport, the more often the better team wins.  It’s why you don’t get as many shocks in basketball as you do in low scoring sports in football.  It’s why as fans we really dislike those “boring” teams who set up for a 0-0 and then sneak a 1-0.  At 0-0 you’re always in the game, no matter how bad you are.  It’s why at 2-0 down in 13 minutes, Norwich were quite happy for it to be open (some teams might close up shop) because they thought they’d score more than us.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem I see at the moment...is DaSilva isn't a wing back imo, and Hunt doesn't have the stamina to last 90 mins at the required level and pace.

Add to the fact, we are playing Vyner and Moore together in a back 3 because of injury...then mistakes will be made...and too much space and time given. We saw that against Norwich.

I also liked Fevs comment about passive defending. When when trying to close down...do it with conviction, otherwise it's just a wasted move and doesn't bother anyone.

  • Thanks 1
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...