Robbored Posted September 20, 2009 Report Share Posted September 20, 2009 I stand by my original view from yesterday that watching City against Scunny was like watching paint dry. However, on a more reflective note yesterdays performance was very different from what we've seen so far this season and indeed much of the last two seasons. Johnson obviously instructed the team to cut out the low percentage long stuff and balls 'into the channels' and to try and play a more possesion type of football and no-one that was there can deny that when City were in possesion they did play some very neat football. Unfortunately most of the decent passing stuff was in our own half and with Scunny playing deep, didn't do any damage. When the ball eventually (and it was eventually) reached the danger area Scunny tightened up and City didn't have any momentum to break through. But...I applaud Johnson trying to play more attractive football and wouldn't want yesterdays result and subsequent critism to lead back to the old style which wasn't anymore productive or half as pretty to watch as some of the play yesterday. It was the first time we've seen a more measured style and it will obviously take more than one game for it to click into place. Now that City have players like Hartley and Sno who can play in that way, I would urge Johnson to stick with it - but to employ some width and increase the tempo. In summary - good plan to change the style of play but there were a few 'teething problems'. Time to work on that before the visit to Pride Park next Saturday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megansdad Posted September 20, 2009 Report Share Posted September 20, 2009 Doesn't that feel better!! Agree with you - though not your initial sentence - i really enjoyed the game- missed the equaliser as i was en route to heathrow to cacth a flight back to Singapore - real signs of promise for me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dezgimed Posted September 20, 2009 Report Share Posted September 20, 2009 I enjoyed the game. I thought it was good enough to try and watch them play footy with some nice link up play between Sno, Alvaro etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sunningdalered Posted September 20, 2009 Report Share Posted September 20, 2009 Personally, I thought it was an awful game to watch - but accept that it is still way too early to form a solid view on how our new group of players will knit together. Hoping we will see a more cohesive outfit by, say end-November though. If we have genuine promotion ambitions we should always expect to sweep aside a team like Scunny - especially at home. No disrespect to them - but they are in survival or consolidation (at best) mode, and looked like a first division outfit until we gave them reason to believe that they could get something from their visit to AG. City should have given them a reality check after a couple of decent results. So, no major moans from me - your point about trying to increase our possession of the ball is well made, and this was evident yesterday. I might be in a small minority, but I would like to see Gavin Williams playing more of a part - we have enough brute force in the middle, and he can make an impact if given a free role. I would much rather of seen GW given the last 20 mins out wide right yesterday instead of Ivan. Exciting times, with some exciting talent at AG - think we might all be leaving the ground really pleased with what we've just seen in a couple of months time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leedsred Posted September 20, 2009 Report Share Posted September 20, 2009 Personally, I thought it was an awful game to watch - but accept that it is still way too early to form a solid view on how our new group of players will knit together. Hoping we will see a more cohesive outfit by, say end-November though. If we have genuine promotion ambitions we should always expect to sweep aside a team like Scunny - especially at home. No disrespect to them - but they are in survival or consolidation (at best) mode, and looked like a first division outfit until we gave them reason to believe that they could get something from their visit to AG. City should have given them a reality check after a couple of decent results. So, no major moans from me - your point about trying to increase our possession of the ball is well made, and this was evident yesterday. I might be in a small minority, but I would like to see Gavin Williams playing more of a part - we have enough brute force in the middle, and he can make an impact if given a free role. I would much rather of seen GW given the last 20 mins out wide right yesterday instead of Ivan. Exciting times, with some exciting talent at AG - think we might all be leaving the ground really pleased with what we've just seen in a couple of months time. Interesting to hear people didn't enoy the game - i thought it was great watching the neat link-up play and us really trying to play a passing possession style football. I think people need to realise that it's not going to click overnight AND we were missing several players. I agree that Williams would've been a good addition and felt that width was something we were really missing against a team which was set up to hit us on the counter-attack. I also believe Scunny should be given a bit more credit, they are definitely a better team than they were last time in this division.... I thought the lad up front looked good and the centre-back skipper was a cracking "hard as nails" type who organised and ran their defence really well.... Althogether i thought it was a really interesting rather than a "heart-racing" afternoons entertainment..... bodes well once they all get used to each other! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tales From The Front Posted September 20, 2009 Report Share Posted September 20, 2009 My view is, that it was good to see the ball played to feet and more effort to retain posesion, but we only have one (Sno) maybe two (Hartley) that can retain and move the ball on when marked or in limited space. So we need some width to create space. I agree, with two points made, lack of tempo, but this can perhaps be explained by the illness / fitness issues that we are all aware of. And secondly lack of width, when teams ,set up like S****horpe did (and they do deserves some plaudits to be fair), you need to get behind them and provide an out ball, this for me was missing yesterday. Out of the squad we have I think when fit Haynes could fit this bill with his lightning pace. This would I beleive upon up space for the rest of the midfield and we would be more dangerous going forward. But irrespective of all yesterdays pros and cons if you are going to defend like we did for the equilizer yesterday, with a scuffed clearance to the edge of the box, and then not close down, you are having to score at least twice a game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pederho ll Posted September 20, 2009 Report Share Posted September 20, 2009 Interesting to hear people didn't enoy the game - i thought it was great watching the neat link-up play and us really trying to play a passing possession style football. I think people need to realise that it's not going to click overnight AND we were missing several players. I agree that Williams would've been a good addition and felt that width was something we were really missing against a team which was set up to hit us on the counter-attack. I also believe Scunny should be given a bit more credit, they are definitely a better team than they were last time in this division.... I thought the lad up front looked good and the centre-back skipper was a cracking "hard as nails" type who organised and ran their defence really well.... Althogether i thought it was a really interesting rather than a "heart-racing" afternoons entertainment..... bodes well once they all get used to each other! I thought is was all pretty uninspiring stuff, very very narrow......Williams would have made no difference whatsoever. We need to get one if not two out and out wingers in this squad a bit sharpish,......lets let the likes of Sno, Hartley, Elliot boss the middle of the pitch and allow them to spray balls out wide to our wingers who can terrorise the opposition full-backs..........(remember Tinnion and Murray) trust me it works and is definately the way forward! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leedsred Posted September 20, 2009 Report Share Posted September 20, 2009 I thought is was all pretty uninspiring stuff, very very narrow......Williams would have made no difference whatsoever. We need to get one if not two out and out wingers in this squad a bit sharpish,......lets let the likes of Sno, Hartley, Elliot boss the middle of the pitch and allow them to spray balls out wide to our wingers who can terrorise the opposition full-backs..........(remember Tinnion and Murray) trust me it works and is definately the way forward! Well we'll agree to disagree about the entertainment factor! yea very very narrow but that was kind of down to the players available as much as it was the tactics Johnson wants to use. For me the main problem was pace of the midfielders, Johnson I thought was decent enough yesterday as was Hartley, Sno was outstanding.... but faded badly late on and i believe should've been replaced, and Elliot looked lost really. But none had the pace to support the front two enough or make those lung busting runs into the box. I too prefer to see a side play with wingers - Sproule isn't the answer. The guy at best is an impact player and so without Haynes we're struggling, but at least when the illness clears we're going to have more options to switch and change things around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted September 20, 2009 Report Share Posted September 20, 2009 I stand by my original view from yesterday that watching City against Scunny was like watching paint dry. However, on a more reflective note yesterdays performance was very different from what we've seen so far this season and indeed much of the last two seasons. Johnson obviously instructed the team to cut out the low percentage long stuff and balls 'into the channels' and to try and play a more possesion type of football and no-one that was there can deny that when City were in possesion they did play some very neat football. Unfortunately most of the decent passing stuff was in our own half and with Scunny playing deep, didn't do any damage. When the ball eventually (and it was eventually) reached the danger area Scunny tightened up and City didn't have any momentum to break through. But...I applaud Johnson trying to play more attractive football and wouldn't want yesterdays result and subsequent critism to lead back to the old style which wasn't anymore productive or half as pretty to watch as some of the play yesterday. It was the first time we've seen a more measured style and it will obviously take more than one game for it to click into place. Now that City have players like Hartley and Sno who can play in that way, I would urge Johnson to stick with it - but to employ some width and increase the tempo. In summary - good plan to change the style of play but there were a few 'teething problems'. Time to work on that before the visit to Pride Park next Saturday. I really believe that GJ is attempting to put a squad together that can play in several different formations and change during games as and when needed, However I do agree with you about width, But feel the problem lies with the quality of wide men available, I also think Yeates signing for Middlesboro was a blow to his plans for the season, Perhaps the answer lies abroad once more and before anyone mentions Mclindoe I really believe GJ got that one right, He was going stale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miketh2nd Posted September 20, 2009 Report Share Posted September 20, 2009 After sublime start for the first 5 minutes it looked like we'd storm the game. But seems Scunny soon got settled and we didn't really see any decent chances in the first half. With Elliot the most attacking midfielder in the first half. Second half I felt we upped our game scored a goal we were playing okay but then a few of the players were getting leggy and u knew some mistakes could happen. Then the negative substitution bringing off a striker for a midfielder and bringing off Hartely who Ifelt played quite well but maybe needed the rest. either way the subs were too late and I would of personally taken off sno and Johnson just for some fresh legs and brought on clarkson instead of sproule. Skuse made a impact played once he came on yet only had 10 minutes to impress even if really unfit surely could of came on a little earlier? I think overall we dominated play even if our midfield didn't gel there is that positive side. However a massive negative is lack of width and lack of our wingbacks being able to cross! Orr was lucky his cross got a deflection for the goal. I think it was skuse who put in the first decent cross of the game maybe it was orr but it was near the end of the game. Teams are going to suss us out easily a. know we'll try and overload the midfield. Then also there wingers can just happily skip past our narrow midfield. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.