Match Report: Second half City scrape satisfying point

[Olé]

By virtue of 2 poor teams and very little end product at either end of the pitch this will be a spectacularly short match report - for an occasion where City spent a half reprising an anonymous performance last time away at Sheffield United, easily opened up behind our wing backs in a one sided 45, offering nothing ourselves from Zak Vyner long balls.

Nigel Pearson seemed to convince his side to get the ball down to keep possession for a bit longer in the second half and City stole a just about deserved equaliser via Antoine Semenyo's second stab goalwards from a corner - only for Hull to again capitalse on poor wide defending for influential George Honeyman to put the hosts back in front.

But despite offering little in a game short on end product, City at least provided their tiny away following a moment of excitement at the death as Matty James steered in what by then was a deserved equaliser but only in so far as Pearson's men had demonstrated that they were at least no worse than their briefly confident but ultimately limited hosts.

When I say City didn't turn up in the first half this isn't me being flippant: we literally didn't in fact we didn't control the ball for over 20 minutes as like Brammal Lane before it, we watched in form Hull probe. In that time they  inevitably roared into a deserved lead early on as with almost their first attack Longman curled past stand off City into the far corner.

The first time we even shot was midway into the first half - from a short corner O'Dowda decided to launch it into space. It was the half hour before City's move of the match, Semenyo weaving along the edge of the box, James laying it back to Alex Scott out wide whose deep cross was headed back by O'Dowda for Martin's shot to be blocked.

Wing back George Tanner entered early for an injured Scott but yet again Longman was allowed to cut in from the left and curl over. Five minutes later Bentley fumbled a cross and Malik Wilks almost tapped in. A brief response saw Martin go clear on the right but not for the first time misplace his cross with players closing in the box for the finish.

City had been abysmal in the first half - lots of aimless Vyner long balls - but the restart at least seemed to bring a few more passes before that inevitable launch. On 50 minutes  Andi Weimann got room to skirt the edge of box before a square short ball to returning Matty James who stretching to connect with the ball could only angle his clear shot wide.

Happily a reminder that as poor as City had been Hull were not much better - a point that was proved as the hosts failed to clear their lines from a 54th minute corner from which Semenyo stabbed goalwards and hit the post but reacted quickest to collect the rebound and drive home an equaliser that City scarcely deserved - at the away end.

In increasingly cold and now rainy weather the match degenerated and it took nearly a further 15 minutes - approaching 70 - for a rare but now building spell of City pressure to see a Kalas throw in from the left cause panic and when Semenyo recycled from the right to break the lines he slipped it inside and Wells turned and shot at the keeper.

A poor match low on quality had only one predictable twist and it was Hull exploiting yet another loose defensive shape against a side that seemed to be finally getting a hold on the match, taking advantage of Tanner and Vyner from the right to cross for Lewis-Potter to sting Bentley's hands only for City to be flat footed and Honeyman slam home.

This seemed the perfect way to complete a largely anonymous City display in a season of underwhelming football - but it wasn't over - Benarous for Atkinson signaled intent and in injury time Kalas recycled a corner and James hooked the ball goalwards and somehow it spun into the same corner Josh Brownhill's winner found five years earlier.

Nonsensical pandemonium in the away end for fans who had been scolding their team for such a shapeless, disorganized display all afternoon but were now suddenly giving home fans both barrels. City were awful for 45 but they earned this draw against poor opposition - exactly what you love to see in an away end, and sparing City a booing off.

 

Bentley 6

Kalas 6

Atkinson 6

Vyner 4

Scott 5

O'Dowda 5

James 6

Massengo 4

Weimann 5

Semenyo 6

Martin 5

 

Tanner 5

Wells 5

Benarous 6

[CiderJar]

A "spectaculary short" 800 word report from @Olé, thanks.

[maxjak]

Four  use's of the word "Poor" seem to sum it up?

[old_eastender]

Don't often disagree with Ole's match report, but I do with this one. 

We had two good chances within the opening 2 mins, firstly COD miscontrolled an admittingly difficult ball when he would otherwise have been in on goal, then Semenyo poorly hit over instead of passing to other City players well placed in the box. They then score with their first attack and for 10 mins after dominated, but there in we were the better side in the first half, just lacking quality in the final 3rd. Even then Semenyo passed up a golden chance to level when inexplicably turning inside with the goal gaping for a first time shot. 

2nd half we continued to be the better side and their 2nd goal was well against the run of play. 

So, for me, a well deserved point that with better quality in the final 3rd could have been 3 pts and Hull were top of the form league. This was miles better then the dross we had to endure at Sheff Utd.

Edited December 12, 2021 by old_eastender

[redseptember]

I would beg to differ on a couple of the markings.  Massengo didn’t have a great game but deserved a higher mark than Vyner.  (After every Vyner error, and there were a few, the guy in front of me would spit out his name with real venom VYNER.). And thought Tanner did better in the same position as Scott.  On a minor nit-picking point, think the second Longman chance which landed on the roof of the net was while Scott was still on the pitch (may be wrong, it’s been known).

Also, just wondering if our players are not getting high marks just because they’re not very good.  Most may well be playing to the level of their abilities, it’s just that the level is not very high.  The effort was certainly there yesterday if not the execution.

Worth the 500 mile round trip for that second equaliser though.  Was right in line with Matty James’ effort and saw the gap he had to aim through.  And my feet have finally thawed out now.

[johnbytheriver]

O'Dowda 5!? Do me a favour along with James he was our best player!!

[old_eastender]

10 minutes ago, JonDolman said:

I thought our worst players were Martin and Weimann. 

Martin was not winning anything in the air. But was also so sloppy at times with a heavy chest down or a couple of really poor crosses, or the awful through ball attempt. Looked like a completely different player to that who caused Derby's defence so many problems.

I don't think Martin's place will be under threat as Wells does not seem to suit how we play. I think a new striker will be competing with him though and probably means he goes to the bench.

Weimann playing quite poorly again. Not yet looked the player he did under Holden in midfield.

There are other options in that position now. Massengo could move further forward and either Bakinson or soon Andy King could play more alongside James.

Massengo's best performance this season has been in that attacking role of the 3 away at QPR.

Or with Tanner back, Alex Scott could move into attacking midfield.

Or even Benarous. All 3 are technically very good and would offer themselves for a pass in tight spaces and have the ability to look after the ball.

Yes so many better options than Weimann in midfield, obviously when either Williams or King fit, but as you say Alex Scott with Tanner playing RWB or Benerous. Weimann like Martin seems to have become automatic picks although neither's play justifies that (I know they are our 2 top scorers)

[Guest]

When I say City didn't turn up in the first half this isn't me being flippant: we literally didn't

 

We literally did though. Otherwise the game would have been called off... 

[Alessandro]

Well I'd say that was a little harsh - think we competed well in the game for decent periods of both halves.

I watched the highlights this morning and they seemed to miss a couple of good moments from us in the first half, notably Semenyo's 'not shooting' chance.

Agree both teams lacked quality - but that was a hard fought draw away from home against a team unbeaten in 6 - including the energy and drive to keep pushing to the end and nick a late equaliser. 

I said it in the match day thread, if we had a bit more quality up top (i.e an inform finisher!) I feel like we'd have put 4 past Derby, won at Hull and we'd being looking up the table for once.

 

Edited December 12, 2021 by Alessandro

[weepywall]

1 hour ago, redseptember said:

I would beg to differ on a couple of the markings.  Massengo didn’t have a great game but deserved a higher mark than Vyner.  (After every Vyner error, and there were a few, the guy in front of me would spit out his name with real venom VYNER.). And thought Tanner did better in the same position as Scott.  On a minor nit-picking point, think the second Longman chance which landed on the roof of the net was while Scott was still on the pitch (may be wrong, it’s been known).

Also, just wondering if our players are not getting high marks just because they’re not very good.  Most may well be playing to the level of their abilities, it’s just that the level is not very high.  The effort was certainly there yesterday if not the execution.

Worth the 500 mile round trip for that second equaliser though.  Was right in line with Matty James’ effort and saw the gap he had to aim through.  And my feet have finally thawed out now.

Fair play for making that journey, how many City were there ?

[maxjak]

1 hour ago, redseptember said:

I would beg to differ on a couple of the markings.  Massengo didn’t have a great game but deserved a higher mark than Vyner.  (After every Vyner error, and there were a few, the guy in front of me would spit out his name with real venom VYNER.). And thought Tanner did better in the same position as Scott.  On a minor nit-picking point, think the second Longman chance which landed on the roof of the net was while Scott was still on the pitch (may be wrong, it’s been known).

Also, just wondering if our players are not getting high marks just because they’re not very good.  Most may well be playing to the level of their abilities, it’s just that the level is not very high.  The effort was certainly there yesterday if not the execution.

Worth the 500 mile round trip for that second equaliser though.  Was right in line with Matty James’ effort and saw the gap he had to aim through.  And my feet have finally thawed out now.

Now Tanner is back........can we please start playing Scott in his proper position, namely where he play's for ENGLAND U19's .....we are desperate for creativity, so please give the kid a chance to play in his correct role? 

[Davefevs]

2 hours ago, JonDolman said:

I thought our worst players were Martin and Weimann. 

Martin was not winning anything in the air. But was also so sloppy at times with a heavy chest down or a couple of really poor crosses, or the awful through ball attempt. Looked like a completely different player to that who caused Derby's defence so many problems.

I don't think Martin's place will be under threat as Wells does not seem to suit how we play. I think a new striker will be competing with him though and probably means he goes to the bench.

Weimann playing quite poorly again. Not yet looked the player he did under Holden in midfield.

There are other options in that position now. Massengo could move further forward and either Bakinson or soon Andy King could play more alongside James.

Massengo's best performance this season has been in that attacking role of the 3 away at QPR.

Or with Tanner back, Alex Scott could move into attacking midfield.

Or even Benarous. All 3 are technically very good and would offer themselves for a pass in tight spaces and have the ability to look after the ball.

Agree with most of that.  Martin a bit sloppy with his all-round play and didn’t win anywhere near his share of headers.

Weimann never got in the game with the ball, and I thought our best spell of the game was when he dropped in alongside James and Massengo and Hull really struggled to get our of their half…crowd getting in their backs.  As usual he got through a lot of work, but I’d question playing him as a no10, especially against an opposition WB system where in inevitably means they are gonna move the ball wide and away from where Weimann is stationed.

Other posters comments re Vyner on the first goal.  I think you’ve got to give credit to how quickly Longman has shifted it back onto his right foot and got the shot off.  I suspect some if the critics had a go at Vyner against Boro when he showed Jones down the line….cake and eat it?  If Longman isn’t as quick to shoot, then a combo of Vyner and Massengo get the pressure on him.  Ideally we don’t lose defensive shape like we did in the 3rd minute of a game!  Vyner does need to improve his 1-on-1 play though.  Not sure people questioning his distribution watched the game yesterday in any real clarity.

He also got good, low passes into Semenyo and Martin (who didn’t always control it).

I think Vyner had a decent game yesterday.

Back to Weimann, I’d quite like to see James with Scott and either Massengo or Bakinson in a three now that Tanner is back.  Think it would bring some craft in there, that little bit less frenetic too.

[Red-Robbo]

3 hours ago, Loïs said:

When I say City didn't turn up in the first half this isn't me being flippant: we literally didn't

 

We literally did though. Otherwise the game would have been called off... 

 

When I used to play amateur football my side literally didn't turn up once.

The manager/captain/minibus driver had misread the fixture list and drove us to the wrong game in a different part of London. I knew who we were meant to be playing, but thought he was just taking an unusual route to get to the ground.   

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, JonDolman said:

Would love to be able to see back to what made him so good under Holden in that role. Or was I overrating it slightly. It did help how well the team started last season.

I think we need the ball to stick more in the final third. Semenyo brings that. Scott picking up little pockets of space between the lines might be another way we can improve in that area.

At a really, really simplistic level…territory / controlled possession higher up the pitch.  The ability to make runs off of Martin, being further up the pitch to pinch possession and counter etc.

I know Weimann wasn’t playing as an “eight” v Cardiff, but look how he bends and times his runs when we have controlled possession (1st goal).  That was kinda what we got last season, e.g. Forest (a).

1 hour ago, JonDolman said:

A fantastic bit of skill yesterday to go past Honeyman before Eaves brought him down, and Eaves still didn't get a yellow did he even after just swinging an arm in Kalas face!

 

Nor when he took Kalas from behind as he passed / cleared out of defence.  Ref waved play-on because he knew he’d have to second yellow him.

1 hour ago, JonDolman said:

Still frustrating to see Massengo make bad decisions though. But it can be more of a problem when he's deeper. Derby 2nd half he kept giving it away through bad choices.

Massengo can be a frantic player, but the calmer those around him are, the more we will see from him.  All very basic stuff, but his weight and placement of passing to Vyner in particular enabled us to get into their half with momentum and purpose.  Those passes in-front of Vyner were very like how Mawson got us going forward last season and partly answers your Q about why Weimann was more effective.

Banging a ball into Martin on the h-w line is a much poorer option than banging a ball into Martin inside their final 25 yards.  You can only do that if you get established possession.  Yesterday we did that, we didn’t execute into the front men that well when trying to create the killer pass, but we got the ball into Antoine’s feet pretty well, and Antoine didn’t give up possession either, nor did he over-do it.  Promising signs.

[SouthS22]

Thanks once again for the match report, always enjoy reading these and usually agree with the vast majority of the commentary. 

That first 20 minutes was worrying.  Obviously the goal was disappointing, but it was very well taken.  It was our response that was most concerning - its supposed to be the team who has just gone down in the match that gets hold of the ball and applies the pressure but we could neither get it back not retain it on the few occasions when we did.   Once again, too many poor decisions and hopeful hoofs . Fortunately Pearson was on the touchline this time and Matty James was in the middle and between them they somehow got some sort of sense of order back and we grew into the game. 

I thought Semenyo had a decent game and alongside Matty James was man of the match.  It wasn't perfect and some more instinctive play might have seen him get a few more goals, but he brought strength on the ball, retention of possession, ability to beat a player or two and to create chances and make things happen.  He was our best attacking threat by a distance.  Its early for him back from injury, but promising signs, espeically if he can get some confidence from that goal. 

I admire the work rate of Weimann and Martin up front, but they brought very little quality yesterday and I would really like to see alternative options being tried.  A Semenyo / Wells combination might be worth a look, with Scott or Benarous playing in the advanced creative midfield role behind them. 

The rating for Massengo was perhaps a bit harsh.  Definitely for the first half, but clearly words were said at half time and he looked much better second half - getting the ball down, looking for passing options, making himself available alongside James, and then providing the energy when Matty clearly ran out of it towards the end of the game.   

Their second goal was typical City.  The left side disappeared, getting completely out of position and we practically invited them to score.  Real shame, because we were the better team up to that point, and it felt like we shoudl have gone on and won it.  Its progress though that we pushed for the equaliser rather than surrendering, and we got what I thought was a deserved point out of the game.  

 

[REDOXO]

7 hours ago, old_eastender said:

Don't often disagree with Ole's match report, but I do with this one. 

We had two good chances within the opening 2 mins, firstly COD miscontrolled an admittingly difficult ball when he would otherwise have been in on goal, then Semenyo poorly hit over instead of passing to other City players well placed in the box. They then score with their first attack and for 10 mins after dominated, but there in we were the better side in the first half, just lacking quality in the final 3rd. Even then Semenyo passed up a golden chance to level when inexplicably turning inside with the goal gaping for a first time shot. 

2nd half we continued to be the better side and their 2nd goal was well against the run of play. 

So, for me, a well deserved point that with better quality in the final 3rd could have been 3 pts and Hull were top of the form league. This was miles better then the dross we had to endure at Sheff Utd.

I agree. I am increasingly disagreeing with Ole, but still appreciate the effort and perspective. 

6 hours ago, johnbytheriver said:

O'Dowda 5!? Do me a favour along with James he was our best player!!

He played well. And has done increasingly as he has been unshackled s little to attack defenders. 5 is simply not reflective of the performance

5 hours ago, Loïs said:

When I say City didn't turn up in the first half this isn't me being flippant: we literally didn't

 

We literally did though. Otherwise the game would have been called off... 

Yeah. I was a bit taken by the literally not turn up. Someone literally did as I watched it. 
 

For my tuppence. We did well in a lot of areas. Semenyo got a goal although Pearson was steaming about Semenyo not taking on that shot first time in the first half. 
 

Comedy defending for both goals. HNM does his usual and lose the ball in a bad area. Our full back is under pressure as our mop locked hero didn’t make a full effort to get back and the guy took a chance with a good hit

Second goal. WTF I’ve seen better defending at at U9s level. Also leaving Pearson steaming. 
 

HOWEVER. We now have an attacking threat and if we cut out many of the errors we could worry the top half in the coming weeks!