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

Player Ratings


Recommended Posts

Bentley        6  Couple a decent saves, not sure he could do anything on all 3 goals, distribution poor today.

Hunt            6  Didn't get caught out by diagonal passes, defended ok and got forward, particularly in the second half, got a goal

Vyner          4  Positioning dreadful today, weak in challenging for the ball, lacking consistency in his performances

Kalas           4  Marked down as he's the experienced guy and the captain but showed neither today

Moore         4  As per Vyner

Dasilva       4  Worst game I've seen him play, distribution terrible, positioning dreadful, poor all round display today, I'd have Rowe in next game

Brunt          4 Similar to Kalas, expected more from him but a nothing performance really

Paterson    5  Went into his hiding routine for a lot of the game which isn't acceptable, one extra mark for the assist

O'Dowda   5  Carried the ball well and had a go at them (on his own) but little end product, very weak in challenging, and falls over a lot

Martin       6  Seemed to play on his own - no one picking up on his flicks and clever headers, brilliant shot against the post

Wells         3  Dreadful, shite penalty technique where he misses more than scores (its a pro game, not the school yard mate) and total, utter, lack                       of composure in front of goal

Subs         Can't be arsed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought Bentley done well quite well tbh, could have easily been 5 or 6 without him. Always brave, a few could learn from him about going in where it hurts for the team. 

The central 3 in the back 5 (yes it's definitely a back 5 that we play), were horrific. 

Agree with you about Martin too. Good player. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, bcfc01 said:

Bentley        6  Couple a decent saves, not sure he could do anything on all 3 goals, distribution poor today.

Hunt            6  Didn't get caught out by diagonal passes, defended ok and got forward, particularly in the second half, got a goal

Vyner          4  Positioning dreadful today, weak in challenging for the ball, lacking consistency in his performances

Kalas           4  Marked down as he's the experienced guy and the captain but showed neither today

Moore         4  As per Vyner

Dasilva       4  Worst game I've seen him play, distribution terrible, positioning dreadful, poor all round display today, I'd have Rowe in next game

Brunt          4 Similar to Kalas, expected more from him but a nothing performance really

Paterson    5  Went into his hiding routine for a lot of the game which isn't acceptable, one extra mark for the assist

O'Dowda   5  Carried the ball well and had a go at them (on his own) but little end product, very weak in challenging, and falls over a lot

Martin       6  Seemed to play on his own - no one picking up on his flicks and clever headers, brilliant shot against the post

Wells         3  Dreadful, shite penalty technique where he misses more than scores (its a pro game, not the school yard mate) and total, utter, lack                       of composure in front of goal

Subs         Can't be arsed.

Nowhere near as bad as that. 

Defensively poor but going forward we created a number of good chances.

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

4 for Brunt is modest, I think today was proof that he does not have the legs anymore.

But he does have a mate on the coaching staff, which is the only reason I can see for signing a 36 year old who can't keep up with the pace to add to a squad already stuffed with midfielders.

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Firstyardleftinbed said:

A bit harsh on O'Dowda as I thought he was one of our better players but spot on with the rest.

Pukki exposed how inexperienced Vyner and Moore are.

Paterson isn't quite good enough for everyone else to carry his poor defensive work.

"How inexperienced Vyner and Moore are". They're defenders whose job it is to mark the forwards. If you give forwards so much space you'll get punished. Its not rocket science. Same with Kalas. All 3 seemed overwhelmed by the opposition. Yes Norwich forwards were mobile but they're not Ronaldo and Messi. Bloody frustrating. Keep tight and tackle f....g hard. Grrr! Ha!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, WECANDO said:

"How inexperienced Vyner and Moore are". They're defenders whose job it is to mark the forwards. If you give forwards so much space you'll get punished. Its not rocket science. Same with Kalas. All 3 seemed overwhelmed by the opposition. Yes Norwich forwards were mobile but they're not Ronaldo and Messi. Bloody frustrating. Keep tight and tackle f....g hard. Grrr! Ha!

Vyner and Moore have around 280 EFL, SPL, or french Ligue games between them.

They are not inexperienced at all imo.

Today, both were simply dreadful in that first half - and Kalas was no help to them at all.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Bentley 8

Hunt 6 / Vyner 0 / Kalas 0 / Vyner 0 / Dasilva 6

Paterson 6 / Brunt 4 / O’Dowda 7

Martin 6 / Wells 5

Subs: Bakinson 6 (other two I won’t rate)

Our tram without the ball was awful most of the game.  The back three cost us.  I don’t care what they did afterwards, gifting a 2-0 lead and could’ve been many more had we getting told off by my dad for sending his a text with lots of swear words in it. 😂

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Bentley 8

Hunt 6 / Vyner 0 / Kalas 0 / Vyner 0 / Dasilva 6

Paterson 6 / Brunt 4 / O’Dowda 7

Martin 6 / Wells 5

Subs: Bakinson 6 (other two I won’t rate)

Our tram without the ball was awful most of the game.  The back three cost us.  I don’t care what they did afterwards, gifting a 2-0 lead and could’ve been many more had we getting told off by my dad for sending his a text with lots of swear words in it. 😂

If we're defending from the front there should be a few more 0's there too if you're giving them 0.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am no Tifo football analyst who can look at exactly what went wrong tactically, which is often the biggest explanation for things rather than everyone simply being poor.

But I am sure the back 3 had a problem in Pukki moving around and them not knowing which one should step out to cope with the bodies of Norwich that had wingers coming inside and creating numbers our midfield could not cope with, which meant we tried to play a high line but not able to press them well enough, which gave them the space and time to play those balls through.

And when the wingers did go forwards up against our side centre backs that created problems too.

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

I am no Tifo football analyst who can look at exactly what went wrong tactically, which is often the biggest explanation for things rather than everyone simply being poor.

But I am sure the back 3 had a problem in Pukki moving around and them not knowing which one should step out to cope with the bodies of Norwich that had wingers coming inside and creating numbers our midfield could not cope with, which meant we tried to play a high line but not able to press them well enough, which gave them the space and time to play those balls through.

And when the wingers did go forwards up against our side centre backs that created problems too.

If players didn't know what to do against opponents whose approach is well known that suggests they weren't well prepared. Or of course that they aren't good enough even if well prepared.

Worrying either way.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, redcard said:

If we're defending from the front there should be a few more 0's there too if you're giving them 0.

The three of them didn’t mark / mark tightly enough.

28 minutes ago, JonDolman said:

I am no Tifo football analyst who can look at exactly what went wrong tactically, which is often the biggest explanation for things rather than everyone simply being poor.

But I am sure the back 3 had a problem in Pukki moving around and them not knowing which one should step out to cope with the bodies of Norwich that had wingers coming inside and creating numbers our midfield could not cope with, which meant we tried to play a high line but not able to press them well enough, which gave them the space and time to play those balls through.

And when the wingers did go forwards up against our side centre backs that created problems too.

A few years ago I watched Hogan (Brentford at the time) rip Flint and Magnússon apart....I was gonna be ruder than that.  He had 4/5 one on ones in the first half alone....he missed them all thankfully.  Think it was the game Sawyers scored a late deflected goal.

Without being a Tifo analyst either he wasn’t marked by either player....but because he was clever like Pukki.

Pukki lulls you into thinking you’ve got him half-marked, but you also think your fellow defender has him half-covered too.  He plays on that.  He will make it look as if he’s gonna make a run that will mean your partner will naturally pick him up, so you switch off thinking he’s no longer your man.  But he never makes that run, he knows you’ve switched off, and exploits your channel instead.

He’s quite brilliant at it.  So giving our players a 0 is massively harsh, but I expect our professionals to know this and cope with it.

Hogan was good, but not this good.  I remember Flint and Mags arguing - I thought you had him, no I thought you did, etc etc.

I might suggest you actually go man-to-man (and I mean take one of our players out of the game and just follow him) and make it 10v10....but that’s not my shout, and might throw any game plan out.  But it’s clear our defence (3 v 1) couldn’t cope with him.  That’s not good enough....it also means someone should always be spare too.

I was a broken man at h-t 😜😜😜 I’ve never witnessed such poor defensive play from a City team.

 

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

The three of them didn’t mark / mark tightly enough.

A few years ago I watched Hogan (Brentford at the time) rip Flint and Magnússon apart....I was gonna be ruder than that.  He had 4/5 one on ones in the first half alone....he missed them all thankfully.  Think it was the game Sawyers scored a late deflected goal.

Without being a Tifo analyst either he wasn’t marked by either player....but because he was clever like Pukki.

Pukki lulls you into thinking you’ve got him half-marked, but you also think your fellow defender has him half-covered too.  He plays on that.  He will make it look as if he’s gonna make a run that will mean your partner will naturally pick him up, so you switch off thinking he’s no longer your man.  But he never makes that run, he knows you’ve switched off, and exploits your channel instead.

He’s quite brilliant at it.  So giving our players a 0 is massively harsh, but I expect our professionals to know this and cope with it.

Hogan was good, but not this good.  I remember Flint and Mags arguing - I thought you had him, no I thought you did, etc etc.

I might suggest you actually go man-to-man (and I mean take one of our players out of the game and just follow him) and make it 10v10....but that’s not my shout, and might throw any game plan out.  But it’s clear our defence (3 v 1) couldn’t cope with him.  That’s not good enough....it also means someone should always be spare too.

I was a broken man at h-t 😜😜😜 I’ve never witnessed such poor defensive play from a City team.

 

I also expect our coaches to know about it and prepare the players accordingly. Especially those who have been entrusted with coaching England teams.

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

The three of them didn’t mark / mark tightly enough.

A few years ago I watched Hogan (Brentford at the time) rip Flint and Magnússon apart....I was gonna be ruder than that.  He had 4/5 one on ones in the first half alone....he missed them all thankfully.  Think it was the game Sawyers scored a late deflected goal.

Without being a Tifo analyst either he wasn’t marked by either player....but because he was clever like Pukki.

Pukki lulls you into thinking you’ve got him half-marked, but you also think your fellow defender has him half-covered too.  He plays on that.  He will make it look as if he’s gonna make a run that will mean your partner will naturally pick him up, so you switch off thinking he’s no longer your man.  But he never makes that run, he knows you’ve switched off, and exploits your channel instead.

He’s quite brilliant at it.  So giving our players a 0 is massively harsh, but I expect our professionals to know this and cope with it.

Hogan was good, but not this good.  I remember Flint and Mags arguing - I thought you had him, no I thought you did, etc etc.

I might suggest you actually go man-to-man (and I mean take one of our players out of the game and just follow him) and make it 10v10....but that’s not my shout, and might throw any game plan out.  But it’s clear our defence (3 v 1) couldn’t cope with him.  That’s not good enough....it also means someone should always be spare too.

I was a broken man at h-t 😜😜😜 I’ve never witnessed such poor defensive play from a City team.

 

Problem is though Dave, its bloody hard to cope with Pukki's fantastic movement and pace when the midfielders have time and space to thread it through and we are playing a high line. Only play high up on the front foot if we can press well enough as a team. I like Holden's bravery. But then I also think back to LJ being unrealistically positive at home to Brentford and them thrashing us. Though to be fair we have been positive in all games and never looked this bad defensively, so hoping this is a one off.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, JonDolman said:

Problem is though Dave, its bloody hard to cope with Pukki's fantastic movement and pace when the midfielders have time and space to thread it through and we are playing a high line. Only play high up on the front foot if we can press well enough as a team. I like Holden's bravery. But then I also think back to LJ being unrealistically positive at home to Brentford and them thrashing us. Though to be fair we have been positive in all games and never looked this bad defensively, so hoping this is a one off.

Yep, bar the odd defensive mistake individually I agree, we have been solid.

Yeah, Pukki fantastic.  Press on midfielders not great either.

Gave us a mountain to climb.

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

I hate xG but some people love it.  xG says we should have drawn today.  
 

Would like to hear the xG lovers justify that!! 

I’m Not a lover of it when used by people to justify a result over a sample of 90 minutes.

Even worse when then used to create a league table.

Better used when looking at an individual player over 20-30 games minimum in comparison to another player....or as a team over a similar amount of games to measure ability to score against chances created....but never to justify a result.  Explain a result, maybe, e.g. look how many good chances we created rather than the summation of the individual xG’s.

If you’re going to use 10s of thousand of shots to form a model, then expect huge degrees of variance when used in a sample of 15-30 shots in a single game of very different “chances”.

I’m amazed that a number of very good football analysts go the whole hog on xG in a single match.

you can still like xG by using it properly.

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

Bentley 8

Hunt 6 / Vyner 0 / Kalas 0 / Vyner 0 / Dasilva 6

Paterson 6 / Brunt 4 / O’Dowda 7

Martin 6 / Wells 5

Subs: Bakinson 6 (other two I won’t rate)

Our tram without the ball was awful most of the game.  The back three cost us.  I don’t care what they did afterwards, gifting a 2-0 lead and could’ve been many more had we getting told off by my dad for sending his a text with lots of swear words in it. 😂

Bit harsh on Vyner if he was playing in 2 positions

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bcfc01 said:

Vyner and Moore have around 280 EFL, SPL, or french Ligue games between them.

They are not inexperienced at all imo.

Today, both were simply dreadful in that first half - and Kalas was no help to them at all.

They were poor, but had 3 midfielders in front if them who made little attempt to cut out the through balls that kept coming through. And that continued tactic and selection is down to holden im afraid

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Simon bristol said:

They were poor, but had 3 midfielders in front if them who made little attempt to cut out the through balls that kept coming through. And that continued tactic and selection is down to holden im afraid

Two of their goals came from passes in their own half , from defenders

 
Not sure you can lay the blame on the three in midfield in those instances !

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sheltons Army said:

Two of their goals came from passes in their own half , from defenders

 
Not sure you can lay the blame on the three in midfield in those instances !

Long balls over the top cutting out the midfield.

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...