Jump to content
IGNORED

I enjoyed that, but…..


Harry

Recommended Posts

Can't disagree more.

He packed the midfield and defense in separate blocks of subs to break up the game and slow it down. Yes he didn't use a RB but I'm guessing he expected Luton to see more of the ball and wanted Vyner on the field for height and defensive capability. We were always going to be up against it due to playing with 10. More chances, corners ect. We defended those important corners with the addition of Klose, Martin and the remaining players.

I sometimes don't agree but Nigels subs but today he got it spot on. The players showed great character aswell.

  • Like 13
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Harry said:

I did enjoy it. I really enjoyed it. Up to the point where Sykes lost his head and we needlessly gave the advantage to an awful team who we should’ve buried. 
As you say, 2-0 flattered Luton. A better team comes back and draws that tonight l. We got lucky that they were so poor 

Luton manager said we outfought them in every aspect of the game. I think that tells you something. We could easily say Hull were lucky and Sunderland were fortunate we gifted them 2 goals. We dominated an entire game of football and controlled it even with 10 men. Its all positive tonight.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, ChippenhamRed said:

So you give us zero credit for seeing the game out relatively comfortably and maintaining a clean sheet despite playing 25 minutes a man down?

Weird opinion, and a weird thing to focus on after one of the most spirited performances and enjoyable games in a very long time.

I give the players full credit for seeing it out. I just think the manager went about it in a very odd way. And if it wasn’t the fact that the opposition were clueless it might have been a different story. 

34 minutes ago, steviestevieneville said:

We brought one of the best hold up men in the league to get us up the pitch . It was 20 minutes not 30 once we were  down to ten men we can’t press , so you want one man to run in behind . To get up the pitch you have to do it as a unit . Would you keep wells or Conway on just run around like a headless chicken. What you’re advocating is lumping it behind their back four which just surrenders possession anyway . When we did get up the pitch we played our way up. We didn’t need to carry a threat we needed a solid shape which is exactly what happened. 

It was not 20 minutes. It was 28 with the added time. 
And yes, having Martin on meant we were able to get it up to the half way line but we had nothing to turn their defence and to try to establish some possession or territory in their half. I’m not advocating lumping it, I’m saying that the one threat we had was removed - players able to turn their defence. 
The moves we made just ensured that we had to defend constantly for 28 minutes. And it didn’t have to be that way. ie, we surrendered 

Edited by Harry
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly if you really need to find something to moan about tonight maybe question Sykes decision making in lunging on Freeman after getting frustrated seconds before. And even then and to be fair to Sykes how was he to know the ref even had a whistle in his pocket let alone a red card! We were well on top at that stage due to our pressing system and there is no way you can press effectively with only 10 on the pitch. Seriously Pearson made the right calls and is fully vindicated by the result, and the result alone.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wrong nite for a ‘but’ I’d say. One of the best performances we’ve put in for some time. Strong performances from starting 11 and subs. 
Tonight  gives us real hope.

thought we put in a fantastic display and commitment as a team . We were dominant until the sending off and disciplined afterwards .  

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, hantsred said:

Honestly if you really need to find something to moan about tonight maybe question Sykes decision making in lunging on Freeman after getting frustrated seconds before. And even then and to be fair to Sykes how was he to know the ref even had a whistle in his pocket let alone a red card! We were well on top at that stage due to our pressing system and there is no way you can press effectively with only 10 on the pitch. Seriously Pearson made the right calls and is fully vindicated by the result, and the result alone.

Yep. Sykes was a dick and his rash tackle could very easily have cost us this victory. 
I’m taking huge positives out of our performance for 65 minutes. It was excellent. 
Then Sykes acted like a dick and I didn’t agree with how we managed the rest of the game and against a better side we might not be so happy tonight 

Edited by Harry
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Harry said:

Wasn’t sure whether to stick this on the Pearson thread or the match thread but I thought I’d add a new one with a focus purely on the tactical substitutions after the red card. 
It was the most baffling set of substitutes I think I’ve ever witnessed. 
In the end; we got the win, but it was more because Luton were absolute dog-mess rather than our post-red card performance. 
 

2 main points. 
1) We have 2 specialist right backs sat on the bench. 
2) Luton’s back like were all over the place due to the fantastic runs and movement of Wells and Conway. 
 

After the red, the first thing we did was stick Scott to right wing back. That immediately surrendered the midfield. 
5 minutes later, Pearson realised this and changed it, putting Scott back in the middle and bringing Weimann to right wing back. 
 

So that was 2 changes, before any sub was made, meanwhile you still have 2 specialist right backs sat on the bench. 
 

Now the subs begin. Martin & Williams. For Wells & Conway. 
Still no sign of any of the 2 specialist right backs. We decide to take our front 3, who had been dangerous all night and had Luton soiling their pants, and we remove 2 of them from the pitch, stick the 3rd one at right back and bring on Martin. 
 

This surrendered the whole game. Our threat all night was the movement up front and getting their defence turned. What the game didn’t need was a target man. If we were to be conceding more possession and territory due to the numerical disadvantage then the one thing that would keep their defence on their toes would be the continued threat of a striker making runs behind them. They were scared all night. As soon as Martin came on their eyes lit up. Bradley knew that was much more his game, and he needn’t worry about running toward his own goal again all night. 
All it would take was a ball forward into the channel, one of Wells/Conway/Weimann to pressure the corner, win throws/corners/free kicks in the opposition half to relieve the pressure of the numerical disadvantage. 
We didn’t have anything going forward for the rest of the match. 
 

Next, another sub. Klose in, Scott off. 
Still no sign of either of the specialist right backs sat on the bench. And now, he sticks Vyner out there instead and puts Weimann back into midfield! 

Finally King comes on for Weimann. 
 

We went from threatening their back line with pace, movement, passing, with 3 willing runners up front and 2 youngsters with energy, legs and passing ability in the midfield, to a central 3 of Martin, Williams & King. Poor old Williams - we were supposed to be resting him in midweek games. He finds himself as the one expected to chase and press in the midfield, having to make a number of lengthy sprints, and at one point I thought he’d injured himself again. 
 

We took away the one thing that was threatening them all night and gave their defence an easy ride in the last half hour. We didn’t need to surrender the game like that. We could have kept at least 1 of Wells, Conway or Weimann up top to keep them on their toes and still pose a threat in behind. 
Yes it’s hard with 10. Instinct is to defend. But we didn’t need to do that. Luton were terrible. A better team comes back and draws that game tonight. 

If I’m Tanner or Wilson I’d be majorly pissed. We played 3 different right backs and used all of the subs bar those 2. The right back was sent off and we had 2 on the bench, yet somehow played 3 other players in that position within 20 minutes! 
 

I was really really enjoying that game up until the red. And then I was incredibly pissed off. First at Sykes for being an absolute dick and losing his head, and then for how we contrived to offer the game up to them with the odd substitutions. 

I’m glad Luton were so poor. And I hope they go down. A better team comes back tonight after that red. 

Good post was hoping to see callum pring given a chance for dasilva but maybe hes still in the naughty book .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By contrast I thought all subs made sense. Wells, Conway Weimann, Scott all ran themselves into the ground. We had to keep some energy in the middle to help Martin out on the top (HNM) and after that we needed to have more defensive players on the pitch to withstand the inevitable. 
 

And don’t forget we have to go again on the weekend. I don’t think he could have done much else other than bring Wilson on but then who goes in the middle that wasn’t gassed or not the fastest over 30m?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Harry said:

Wasn’t sure whether to stick this on the Pearson thread or the match thread but I thought I’d add a new one with a focus purely on the tactical substitutions after the red card. 
It was the most baffling set of substitutes I think I’ve ever witnessed. 
In the end; we got the win, but it was more because Luton were absolute dog-mess rather than our post-red card performance. 
 

2 main points. 
1) We have 2 specialist right backs sat on the bench. 
2) Luton’s back like were all over the place due to the fantastic runs and movement of Wells and Conway. 
 

After the red, the first thing we did was stick Scott to right wing back. That immediately surrendered the midfield. 
5 minutes later, Pearson realised this and changed it, putting Scott back in the middle and bringing Weimann to right wing back. 
 

So that was 2 changes, before any sub was made, meanwhile you still have 2 specialist right backs sat on the bench. 
 

Now the subs begin. Martin & Williams. For Wells & Conway. 
Still no sign of any of the 2 specialist right backs. We decide to take our front 3, who had been dangerous all night and had Luton soiling their pants, and we remove 2 of them from the pitch, stick the 3rd one at right back and bring on Martin. 
 

This surrendered the whole game. Our threat all night was the movement up front and getting their defence turned. What the game didn’t need was a target man. If we were to be conceding more possession and territory due to the numerical disadvantage then the one thing that would keep their defence on their toes would be the continued threat of a striker making runs behind them. They were scared all night. As soon as Martin came on their eyes lit up. Bradley knew that was much more his game, and he needn’t worry about running toward his own goal again all night. 
All it would take was a ball forward into the channel, one of Wells/Conway/Weimann to pressure the corner, win throws/corners/free kicks in the opposition half to relieve the pressure of the numerical disadvantage. 
We didn’t have anything going forward for the rest of the match. 
 

Next, another sub. Klose in, Scott off. 
Still no sign of either of the specialist right backs sat on the bench. And now, he sticks Vyner out there instead and puts Weimann back into midfield! 

Finally King comes on for Weimann. 
 

We went from threatening their back line with pace, movement, passing, with 3 willing runners up front and 2 youngsters with energy, legs and passing ability in the midfield, to a central 3 of Martin, Williams & King. Poor old Williams - we were supposed to be resting him in midweek games. He finds himself as the one expected to chase and press in the midfield, having to make a number of lengthy sprints, and at one point I thought he’d injured himself again. 
 

We took away the one thing that was threatening them all night and gave their defence an easy ride in the last half hour. We didn’t need to surrender the game like that. We could have kept at least 1 of Wells, Conway or Weimann up top to keep them on their toes and still pose a threat in behind. 
Yes it’s hard with 10. Instinct is to defend. But we didn’t need to do that. Luton were terrible. A better team comes back and draws that game tonight. 

If I’m Tanner or Wilson I’d be majorly pissed. We played 3 different right backs and used all of the subs bar those 2. The right back was sent off and we had 2 on the bench, yet somehow played 3 other players in that position within 20 minutes! 
 

I was really really enjoying that game up until the red. And then I was incredibly pissed off. First at Sykes for being an absolute dick and losing his head, and then for how we contrived to offer the game up to them with the odd substitutions. 

I’m glad Luton were so poor. And I hope they go down. A better team comes back tonight after that red. 

Yes we thought the same.

we were lucky they didn’t score

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought bringing on older heads to manage the game was the sensible option. Martin holds the ball well, Williams adds more  bite in the middle and Klose steadied the defence. As for the 2 right back/wingbacks on the bench, they aren't all that experienced at  this level and coming on when we were down to 10 men could have heaped too much pressure on them. Ultimately  NP made the right choices as we won without conceding. Yes perhaps a better team may have punished us, but we weren't playing a better team, if we were would Pearson have made those substitutions? Who knows.

All I know is I enjoyed the game and our performance for much of it what more could I want.

  • Like 1
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My 2p Harry:

Initial changes pre-sub, Scott to RWB rather than immediate sub….keep your players on who are adjusted to the pace tempo of the game.

As for the ones after.  I get your points, but my own slant on it is:

we are 2-0 up, coasting and a bomb has gone off.  With our recent “ability” to squander leads, this situation with 20 minutes to go is a really good opportunity for Luton to snatch something.  We all felt, here we go, totally in control, we’re gonna stuff this up.  On that basis I wonder if he wanted to protect his youngsters Wilson and Tanner from being on the pitch if that happened and therefore really scarring them.

That’s my kinda thinking.  Would love to ask Nige!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought the game was crying out for Wilson or Tanner after Sykes’ moment of madness but, as @Davefevs pointed out, I could only think Nige was trying to protect those two. I assume one of them will have to start on Sunday, mind, so he can’t protect them forever. 

I was surprised at how poor Luton were, but Nige got his starting XI spot on both and the desire and application from the players was superb to see. Nobody can question they’re not playing for the manager after that sort of performance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Davefevs said:

My 2p Harry:

Initial changes pre-sub, Scott to RWB rather than immediate sub….keep your players on who are adjusted to the pace tempo of the game.

As for the ones after.  I get your points, but my own slant on it is:

we are 2-0 up, coasting and a bomb has gone off.  With our recent “ability” to squander leads, this situation with 20 minutes to go is a really good opportunity for Luton to snatch something.  We all felt, here we go, totally in control, we’re gonna stuff this up.  On that basis I wonder if he wanted to protect his youngsters Wilson and Tanner from being on the pitch if that happened and therefore really scarring them.

That’s my kinda thinking.  Would love to ask Nige!

There could be a protective element but, I could see alternative arguments for every single move, and I thought the coaching team were excellent.

First move was a natural one and not really defensive at all. Scott has played the majority of his games with us a right wing back and Wiemann can be equally effective playing from a deeper position and we continued to look dangerous on the break meaning that Luton couldn't immediately go flat out on the attack from the restart.

The next move to bring Scott into the middle, well, I think this was a clever timewasting move because they knew they were going to bring him off and he would have further to go from the centre of the pitch. :)

Conway was clearly and understandably blowing, and we needed to get Martin on both to hold the ball up and for his defensive duties.

After that I liked the way we gradually became more defensive, just strangling Luton as they became more and more desperate and apart from a wicked deflection they couldn't generate a genuine chance.

Edited by Port Said Red
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you look at the substitutions there are 2 common themes. Experience and height, both of which were needed when we went down to 10 men. Martin holds up the ball so more possession further away from the goal plus is an asset at defending corners. Williams added more bite in midfield. Klose is taller and more experienced than a tiring Vyner who can move to RWB, just what was needed against Cameron Jerome who Luton had brought on. Finally King slots in as more defensive cover in midfield and is also 6ft tall.

My only frustration at the time was how long it took the coaching team to make that initial substitution, when we were rocking a bit in that first 5 minutes after the sending off.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I must admit in the last 10 minutes I was thinking we’d be in trouble against a decent team.

As it was Luton were pretty bad, some of their shots didn’t even land in the same postcode.

Take nothing away from any of our players though, it was the most I’ve enjoyed a game up to the sending off for ages.

Williams has been struggling for form and made a couple of stray passes when he came on but then also made some good runs and passes after, hopefully we’ll see the the best side of him more regularly from now on.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Harry said:

Wasn’t sure whether to stick this on the Pearson thread or the match thread but I thought I’d add a new one with a focus purely on the tactical substitutions after the red card. 
It was the most baffling set of substitutes I think I’ve ever witnessed. 
In the end; we got the win, but it was more because Luton were absolute dog-mess rather than our post-red card performance. 
 

2 main points. 
1) We have 2 specialist right backs sat on the bench. 
2) Luton’s back like were all over the place due to the fantastic runs and movement of Wells and Conway. 
 

After the red, the first thing we did was stick Scott to right wing back. That immediately surrendered the midfield. 
5 minutes later, Pearson realised this and changed it, putting Scott back in the middle and bringing Weimann to right wing back. 
 

So that was 2 changes, before any sub was made, meanwhile you still have 2 specialist right backs sat on the bench. 
 

Now the subs begin. Martin & Williams. For Wells & Conway. 
Still no sign of any of the 2 specialist right backs. We decide to take our front 3, who had been dangerous all night and had Luton soiling their pants, and we remove 2 of them from the pitch, stick the 3rd one at right back and bring on Martin. 
 

This surrendered the whole game. Our threat all night was the movement up front and getting their defence turned. What the game didn’t need was a target man. If we were to be conceding more possession and territory due to the numerical disadvantage then the one thing that would keep their defence on their toes would be the continued threat of a striker making runs behind them. They were scared all night. As soon as Martin came on their eyes lit up. Bradley knew that was much more his game, and he needn’t worry about running toward his own goal again all night. 
All it would take was a ball forward into the channel, one of Wells/Conway/Weimann to pressure the corner, win throws/corners/free kicks in the opposition half to relieve the pressure of the numerical disadvantage. 
We didn’t have anything going forward for the rest of the match. 
 

Next, another sub. Klose in, Scott off. 
Still no sign of either of the specialist right backs sat on the bench. And now, he sticks Vyner out there instead and puts Weimann back into midfield! 

Finally King comes on for Weimann. 
 

We went from threatening their back line with pace, movement, passing, with 3 willing runners up front and 2 youngsters with energy, legs and passing ability in the midfield, to a central 3 of Martin, Williams & King. Poor old Williams - we were supposed to be resting him in midweek games. He finds himself as the one expected to chase and press in the midfield, having to make a number of lengthy sprints, and at one point I thought he’d injured himself again. 
 

We took away the one thing that was threatening them all night and gave their defence an easy ride in the last half hour. We didn’t need to surrender the game like that. We could have kept at least 1 of Wells, Conway or Weimann up top to keep them on their toes and still pose a threat in behind. 
Yes it’s hard with 10. Instinct is to defend. But we didn’t need to do that. Luton were terrible. A better team comes back and draws that game tonight. 

If I’m Tanner or Wilson I’d be majorly pissed. We played 3 different right backs and used all of the subs bar those 2. The right back was sent off and we had 2 on the bench, yet somehow played 3 other players in that position within 20 minutes! 
 

I was really really enjoying that game up until the red. And then I was incredibly pissed off. First at Sykes for being an absolute dick and losing his head, and then for how we contrived to offer the game up to them with the odd substitutions. 

I’m glad Luton were so poor. And I hope they go down. A better team comes back tonight after that red. 

I didn't get moving Scott wide initially but as you say he corrected that quickly.  I was saying to @hunstile red  that we'd take both Wells and Conway off because a.  They've put in a hell of a shift and b. we need more aerial presence as we would in all likeliness face a lot of balls into our box.  

The one that got me was when Klose came on and we moved Vyner to wing back.  I thought 2 banks of 4 with Vyner and Naismith at FB.  But we kept the same shape. So over the whole game 4 different players played at RWB none of whom are actually RWBs..

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Harry said:

I give the players full credit for seeing it out. I just think the manager went about it in a very odd way. And if it wasn’t the fact that the opposition were clueless it might have been a different story. 

It was not 20 minutes. It was 28 with the added time. 
And yes, having Martin on meant we were able to get it up to the half way line but we had nothing to turn their defence and to try to establish some possession or territory in their half. I’m not advocating lumping it, I’m saying that the one threat we had was removed - players able to turn their defence. 
The moves we made just ensured that we had to defend constantly for 28 minutes. And it didn’t have to be that way. ie, we surrendered 

I think the highlighted bit is where the argument falters slightly.  The fact is that the opposition was clueless and Nige had been watching this clueless opponent for 70 minutes.  They were always going to be lumping the high ball into the box after the red card and the subs reflected both that and the desire to stifle any momentum Luton may have built up before they had a chance.  The likelihood is that if we were playing against a better team then the changes will have been different.  I agree on the periphery it seems odd to lose your RWB and not replace him with 1 of 2 RWB's on the bench, but I genuinely believe that the changes were sensible because of the opposition, not in spite of it.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Imagine after the first game in probably 5 seasons we played well for 80+ minutes of the game, defended excellently against a team who finished in the play-offs last year, limiting to their best chance was a deflected shot where the goalie pulls of a worldie and the defender is awake enough and determined enough to follow in to clear and easy tap in for the attacker and claim it was a lucky win and only because Luton were so bad.

Not that we were so good.

Crazy.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, grifty said:

Imagine after the first game in probably 5 seasons we played well for 80+ minutes of the game, defended excellently against a team who finished in the play-offs last year, limiting to their best chance was a deflected shot where the goalie pulls of a worldie and the defender is awake enough and determined enough to follow in to clear and easy tap in for the attacker and claim it was a lucky win and only because Luton were so bad.

Not that we were so good.

Crazy.

But that’s not what I’ve said is it. 
I’ve said quite clearly (in fact so clearly that it’s in the thread title) that I really enjoyed the performance. 
I’ve not said that it was a lucky win. We completely outplayed Luton for 65 minutes and we thoroughly deserved the win and we played excellent football. 
I’m talking specifically after the red card and how I didn’t agree with how the management handled that. Not the players - the players handled it brilliantly. Just the management and how they reacted tactically, and that if we’d have done the same against a better opponent we wouldn’t necessarily have come out of that last half hour with 3 points. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Harry said:

I give the players full credit for seeing it out. I just think the manager went about it in a very odd way. And if it wasn’t the fact that the opposition were clueless it might have been a different story. 

It was not 20 minutes. It was 28 with the added time. 
And yes, having Martin on meant we were able to get it up to the half way line but we had nothing to turn their defence and to try to establish some possession or territory in their half. I’m not advocating lumping it, I’m saying that the one threat we had was removed - players able to turn their defence. 
The moves we made just ensured that we had to defend constantly for 28 minutes. And it didn’t have to be that way. ie, we surrendered 

Completely disagree. If we say kept Conway up on his own. Tried to play into him he would of had at least two or three defenders around him . We would of surrendered possession constantly . We couldn’t afford to commit more bodies as we would of been picked off. By doing what we did we stopped them passing through . They created no real clear cut chances. The only save bents had to make all game was a wayward shot that defected. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Harry said:

Wasn’t sure whether to stick this on the Pearson thread or the match thread but I thought I’d add a new one with a focus purely on the tactical substitutions after the red card. 
It was the most baffling set of substitutes I think I’ve ever witnessed. 
In the end; we got the win, but it was more because Luton were absolute dog-mess rather than our post-red card performance. 
 

2 main points. 
1) We have 2 specialist right backs sat on the bench. 
2) Luton’s back like were all over the place due to the fantastic runs and movement of Wells and Conway. 
 

After the red, the first thing we did was stick Scott to right wing back. That immediately surrendered the midfield. 
5 minutes later, Pearson realised this and changed it, putting Scott back in the middle and bringing Weimann to right wing back. 
 

So that was 2 changes, before any sub was made, meanwhile you still have 2 specialist right backs sat on the bench. 
 

Now the subs begin. Martin & Williams. For Wells & Conway. 
Still no sign of any of the 2 specialist right backs. We decide to take our front 3, who had been dangerous all night and had Luton soiling their pants, and we remove 2 of them from the pitch, stick the 3rd one at right back and bring on Martin. 
 

This surrendered the whole game. Our threat all night was the movement up front and getting their defence turned. What the game didn’t need was a target man. If we were to be conceding more possession and territory due to the numerical disadvantage then the one thing that would keep their defence on their toes would be the continued threat of a striker making runs behind them. They were scared all night. As soon as Martin came on their eyes lit up. Bradley knew that was much more his game, and he needn’t worry about running toward his own goal again all night. 
All it would take was a ball forward into the channel, one of Wells/Conway/Weimann to pressure the corner, win throws/corners/free kicks in the opposition half to relieve the pressure of the numerical disadvantage. 
We didn’t have anything going forward for the rest of the match. 
 

Next, another sub. Klose in, Scott off. 
Still no sign of either of the specialist right backs sat on the bench. And now, he sticks Vyner out there instead and puts Weimann back into midfield! 

Finally King comes on for Weimann. 
 

We went from threatening their back line with pace, movement, passing, with 3 willing runners up front and 2 youngsters with energy, legs and passing ability in the midfield, to a central 3 of Martin, Williams & King. Poor old Williams - we were supposed to be resting him in midweek games. He finds himself as the one expected to chase and press in the midfield, having to make a number of lengthy sprints, and at one point I thought he’d injured himself again. 
 

We took away the one thing that was threatening them all night and gave their defence an easy ride in the last half hour. We didn’t need to surrender the game like that. We could have kept at least 1 of Wells, Conway or Weimann up top to keep them on their toes and still pose a threat in behind. 
Yes it’s hard with 10. Instinct is to defend. But we didn’t need to do that. Luton were terrible. A better team comes back and draws that game tonight. 

If I’m Tanner or Wilson I’d be majorly pissed. We played 3 different right backs and used all of the subs bar those 2. The right back was sent off and we had 2 on the bench, yet somehow played 3 other players in that position within 20 minutes! 
 

I was really really enjoying that game up until the red. And then I was incredibly pissed off. First at Sykes for being an absolute dick and losing his head, and then for how we contrived to offer the game up to them with the odd substitutions. 

I’m glad Luton were so poor. And I hope they go down. A better team comes back tonight after that red. 

Still more exciting than a Johnson substitution...oh we won 2-0.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, steviestevieneville said:

Completely disagree. If we say kept Conway up on his own. Tried to play into him he would of had at least two or three defenders around him . We would of surrendered possession constantly . We couldn’t afford to commit more bodies as we would of been picked off. By doing what we did we stopped them passing through . They created no real clear cut chances. The only save bents had to make all game was a wayward shot that defected. 

You’re coming from the school of thought that says “you must defend for 28 minutes after you’re down to 10”. 
I’m coming from the school of thought that says “we’re dominating against a very fragile defence, keep them under pressure by doing the same thing that’s scared them all game”. 
By starting to play in to the feet/head of a target man just played into their hands and allowed them to win the ball back quickly and prevented us from establishing any possession or territory. 

Edited by Harry
Link to comment
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...