spudski

I agree with that summary Dave. Funny how we are good at counter attacking, but it's one of our biggest weaknesses when defending. There was a moment first half where swans countered from their own box in numbers...we were so behind in being aware of it.

Quoted post match by NP to Bristol live. We went 4-3-3 (in the second half). It was to give us more width and more threat at their defence. We still had the same formation in midfield it just allowed us to put more pressure on their full-backs and be a bit more aggressive going forward and we did that. "To be fair the players' efforts in both halves, I've got no complaints. Second half we played much better and looked like we were going to go on to win it once we got the equaliser. It wasn't about being braver. In the first half our wing-backs didn't really get forward enough and I understand why they didn't. They were fearful of going to press the full-back. "They got their timings wrong. They didn't go early enough both Pring and Tanner in the first half couldn't release themselves early enough to put pressure on the ball so consequently, as they were getting to their man, the ball was going past them." With City lining up as a back four in the second period, they were able to pin Swansea back which allowed Weimann to have a greater influence on proceedings. Asked whether that performance would give Pearson food for thought to change shape for the visit of Birmingham next weekend, he added: "Yeah possibly, but I’ve played 4-3-3 plenty of times here before. "It’s really about who’s available, you know the reasons we’ve played with a back three for probably a year now. You’ve written enough about that, but it was a good response in the second half, I think we needed to change it at half-time just to give ourselves a chance of not conceding as much possession. The players know how to play 4-3-3 because we’ve done it plenty of times, so they were able to get into that routine pretty quickly, I think they did it well." He also mentioned that both Conway and Weimann were possible Hamstrings.

I totally agree. And the execution of passing, distribution and throw ins has increasingly become lazy imo. Balls very rarely passed crisply to feet and to the correct side to receive. It's often having to be controlled like a hot potato being lobbed at you. We did in the past...it's become very noticeable of late.

True... However, like I implied, he was last man and being closed down fast. Make that error in midfield, which happens often, as in closed down and misplaced pass, and it often goes unnoticed, is seen as part of the game, and often goes unpunished. And no one mentions it. The onus was on Max imo. He gave him the ball, knowing he had his back to play, and couldn't see he was being closed down. Everyone will blame Atkinson...if there is blame it's more pointed towards Max and whoever decided to tell them to play that way against Swansea... of all sides ?

Should get this countdown clock on the screens during the games, and I'm sure someone could get a song going about it ??

They forced the error. They pressed Atkinson. Their player had already started to close down Atkinson when Max chose to pass to him. He had his back to the player as well. A poor decision by Max and under pressure, a poor execution by Atkinson. I don't put all the blame if any on Atkinson. They were obviously asked to play this way against a Swansea team that excell at controlling the game in the opposition's half. That imo was a poor tactic by the management. We changed that idea. And performed better for it

Hopefully people noticed that playing 433, doesn't stop us playing with width. Both Pring and Sykes got wide and forward. It doesn't stop that threat. It just means adjusting who drops, covers etc

How much better were we, when we went 433 after Sykes and Williams came on. Changed formation...still played with width, and took control. Been saying it for months we have the ability to play this formation.

As you know, football is an ever changing scenario. Imo NP wants to keep hold of our best players, maybe one of the ' big ones' going....and free up by releasing fringe players. A great deal depends on other teams imo, regardless of how quick we'd like to do business. What I hope doesn't happen, is a team comes in late in the window with a silly offer for someone and we sell them without any cover.

I'm thinking we'll be freeing up wages on fringe players. Massengo, talk of Towler, maybe DaSilva, a few others. If anyone is sold I think it might be Semenyo. Money used on a CB and a couple loans. That's my feeling. I'll probably get proved wrong now though :laugh:

I've got a gut feeling Scott won't be going anywhere this window. Fingers crossed.

I guess it all depends on whether they bring in another striker. If so...they may let him out on loan, or may not. I agree re Khedra.

Who knows...?

Someone reporting Brighton are now interested. If a deal can be met, maybe include Khedra and get Evan Ferguson on loan.

Maybe ...it makes more sense to

There are so many different conundrums, damned if you do, damned if you don't scenario. Look at the cases of signing Kalas, Palmer and DaSilva. The money we paid and the wages we paid/pay them. On paper at the time it seemed worthwhile. Now look at them and compare them with players we have in the team now, who will probably never earn wages they've been on...but imo just as good if not better. The messages that sends out to a squad is confusing and frustrating. Both for players, managers, CEOs and Agents. The transitional period we are in now with wages etc etc is going to to take a lot of getting used to. As soon as I started seeing Ferraris in the players car park, and compared it to the average performances on the pitch, I knew we were in trouble.

Agreed... however the conundrum I stated still exists. We just don't keep our best players long enough to develop with the others coming through. If we did...they would become the experienced players, used to the club and it's playing philosophy. And they would be playing with the starlets coming up from the Academy. Imagine having Semenyo, Scott, Conway, Atkinson, Pring all developing longer here, getting even better and having the likes of Bell, Benorous, Towler all coming through and developing at the same pace, and combining together. It needs more time than we have now. I guess he can only have the final day on what he's offered.

He's got a worse problem at Hibs...the owners son is also head of recruitment with no experience. Worth a read... https://www.footballscotland.co.uk/spfl/scottish-premiership/ian-gordons-hibs-recruitment-savaged-24883646

And here in lies the problem for any manager running this Club. Any young players doing well, they catch the eye of bigger teams that are either in a higher division or can pay more. We either cash in on them, or the players wants to move. Even if they are tied into a contract, how do you motivate a player when they know interest is elsewhere. It's natural to start thinking about possibilities elsewhere to ' better' themselves. Getting them to be 100% commited and focussed is nigh on impossible. So we get left with young hungry players with little experience, joined by older pros towards the end of their careers. Mixed with academy products. The only way imo, that we will progress, is if we were to keep those promising better young players, keep developing them over more than two years. Great in a perfect world...but it isn't...those players will want to move to better themselves, regardless of how hard we try to convince them otherwise. The older pros are happy to be professional and pass on their experience and take a decent wage that is often one of their last contracts. They also have found their level. They know they've peaked and know how to give just enough to tread water. Does anyone really believe we will ever get promoted unless it's a freak season? Seriously? It's nigh on impossible. Academy products with no experience. Older pros at the end of their careers. Young players from leagues below, with no experience at this level. Signed and designed to develop. If any are decent...after two to three seasons they get sold. All we can hope for imo, under this structure is a team that will be mid table championship level at most on average.

Yes I agree...mistake on my part when I wrote too fast. Prefer Atkinson central. ?

Yes I've seen that as well. I do agree...LJ is probably one of the worst for using coaching talk when addressing the press. He needs to talk more in layman's terms when addressing the public. It would help his public image. When he was here, he spoke that way, and it grated with many. Combine that with Ashton's corporate talk,cand it became a nauseating combination. I enjoyed LJs comprehensive detail and passion, but on occasion it needed to be toned down.

Thanks ? it's hard to describe on here, but you'd have 5 behind the ball...and if you lose possession you track back accordingly.

It's a mixture between a 433 and 352....like I implied, it's getting players drilled into certain scenarios. Fortunately we have 3 forwards in Wells, Conway and Weimann who can all play across the front and either be affective at scoring or delivering into the box. Add that to Prings delivery. And a Khadra influential both centrally and wide...you have a formidable front line when offensive.

Some teams do when they set up 433. With a flying full back. They then become 424 when offensive. You become expansive in the build up. One wide, 4 across box when in final third.

It all depends on how you ask the players to drop or attack etc. You can play as you say, with both wing backs forward. Or you can let one drop and allow the two AMs, the two strikers and the one wing back to be the five forward. Allowing 3cbs and a wing back and DM to be behind. Hope that makes sense.