Just back: players showed heart but LJ effect still negative

[Olé]

We've lost to a truly terrible team, thanks in main to LJ's negative instructions that has players not trusting instincts and going backwards before giving the ball away.

Playing 4-4-2 finally (thanks LJ) our shape was much better, we had players pushing up in their half supporting Tammy and we looked brighter and smarter in midfield. 

It was a much better performance and the self belief of a functioning formation was very obvious. Our full backs looked more useful going forward (more on that later).

Their opener came after two handballs on halfway as players tried to win a second ball that we had cleared from a corner, It broke  and they reacted fastest to cross.

We deserved our equaliser and looked far sharper playing out of midfield looking for a winner. Brownhill in particular worked his proverbials off and was our best player.

But we had 2 things still dragging us down.

First LJ swapped both full backs - odd as they were much better than Monday, and it cost us badly when Magnusson got injured and we had to setup a makeshift 3-5-2.

Then as we should have been pushing for a winner, we increasingly reverted to our  LJ indoctrinated football of passing back, not making early runs and pontificating.

This culminated on 86min in us having the ball on the halfway line with players able to push on if they were quick - but chose to pass sideways, then back and back again.

Eventually this "possession" obsession resulted in a Flint punt forward for a 50-50 header, which we lose and they break and score. How is this possession football?

If LJ football passes up the quick attack to keep possession, if all you're going to do is setup a  punt at two lines of opposition, what's the point. Today it setup the winner.

The players have worked hard today to a man, and in a much better formation, but they have been throttled out of attacking instincts by our managers instructions.

Watching players not making runs and checking back is soul destroying when you are playing a poor team. Bryan actually did well when on, but O'Dowda was feeble.

Final word for Tomlin who was on the left wing and had one good run early on but on the whole is just a liability who may create magic but generally just gives the ball away.

In summary much more heart from players and 4-4-2 (denied by LJ for so long) gave much more self-belief, but can't help but feel LJ other tactics still dragging us down.

Ipswich were abysmal - if they don't go down there are some really bad teams in this division - but we lost and people need to start taking a relegation battle seriously.

Fielding 6 - didn't hold a lot of shots but saved what he had to

Little 6 - played with more energy and determination than Matthews, not sure where he was for  first and one misplaced pass in attack but was amazed he was pulled off

Goldbourne 6 - did nothing wrong and was stronger at the back than Bryan has been 

Flint 6 - tried to win everything but like on Monday overrun by the balls into the box and in the end marshalling Moore and Bryan as centre backs

Magnusson 6 - ditto but a few poor balls upfield and the injury has given us a world of problems in January, as no matter what some say, he's about the best player this season

Pack 7 - a better performance than recent looked for passing opportunities and won the ball several times, but too often under LJ instruction to slow down and reverse

Brownhill 8 - bags of energy, got about, put himself everywhere, looked to be positive, more of players like this please!

Freeman 6 - tries to get behind defence and plays with purpose, thought he did okay but tame with two shots and didn't ever create clear openings

Tomlin 5 - our worst player, one or two nice runs but out on the left wing and did not link up well with anyone else and gave it away too easily, albeit didn't drift, much

Wilbraham 5 - poor by his standards as didn't win much or get on the ball but just by being there and occupying defenders he made such a difference to Tammy and our ability to push players forward

Abraham 6 - moved and got the ball down at his feet more effectively with a foil up front alongside him, took his goal well and had another snap shot, although took ages to get back onside from a later chance so question if he still has the energy

Bryan (sub) 7 - best performance for weeks, pressure was off so attacked with confidence and deservedly setup goal 

Moore 6 - pressed into a different role and was solid enough but didn't see what he could do going forward and no idea why LJ favoured over Little

O'Dowda 4 - can see why he's not starting, lightweight, doesn't see or make runs, easily beaten by opposition 

Final thought: watching with someone who has watched City home and away for over 40 years and goes to every single game and he said he's considering giving up on away games, he was so soul destroyed by how we're performing against poor teams. It's easy to characterise the anti-LJ views as personal and extreme but rational and patient people have had enough. There is an unprecedented anger that I believe is a result of LJ tactics and LJ tactics alone.

[Shtanley]

Abraham?

[Londoner]

Excellent post

[Olé]

Just realised my post to the match thread live from the away end is a simpler summary of what is going wrong 

[chinapig]

10 minutes ago, Olé said:

We've lost to a truly terrible team, thanks in main to LJ's negative instructions that has players not trusting instincts and going backwards before giving the ball away.

Playing 4-4-2 finally (thanks LJ) our shape was much better, we had players pushing up in their half supporting Tammy and we looked brighter and smarter in midfield. 

It was a much better performance and the self belief of a functioning formation was very obvious. Our full backs looked more useful going forward (more on that later).

Their opener came after two handballs on halfway as players tried to win a second ball that we had cleared from a corner, It broke  and they reacted fastest to cross.

We deserved our equaliser and looked far sharper playing out of midfield looking for a winner. Brownhill in particular worked his proverbials off and was our best player.

But we had 2 things still dragging us down.

First LJ swapped both full backs - odd as they were much better than Monday, and it cost us badly when Magnusson got injured and we had to setup a makeshift 3-5-2.

Then as we should have been pushing for a winner, we increasingly reverted to our  LJ indoctrinated football of passing back, not making early runs and pontificating.

This culminated on 86min in us having the ball on the halfway line with players able to push on if they were quick - but chose to pass sideways, then back and back again.

Eventually this "possession" obsession resulted in a Flint punt forward for a 50-50 header, which we lose and they break and score. How is this possession football?

If LJ football passes up the quick attack to keep possession, if all you're going to do is setup a  punt at two lines of opposition, what's the point. Today it setup the winner.

The players have worked hard today to a man, and in a much better formation, but they have been throttled out of attacking instincts by our managers instructions.

Watching players not making runs and checking back is soul destroying when you are playing a poor team. Bryan actually did well when on, but O'Dowda was feeble.

Final word for Tomlin who was on the left wing and had one good run early on but on the whole is just a liability who may create magic but generally just gives the ball away.

In summary much more heart from players and 4-4-2 (denied by LJ for so long) gave much more self-belief, but can't help but feel LJ other tactics still dragging us down.

Ipswich were abysmal - if they don't go down there are some really bad teams in this division - but we lost and people need to start taking a relegation battle seriously.

Fielding 6 - didn't hold a lot of shots but saved what he had to

Little 6 - played with more energy and determination than Matthews, not sure where he was for  first and one misplaced pass in attack but was amazed he was pulled off

Goldbourne 6 - did nothing wrong and was stronger at the back than Bryan has been 

Flint 6 - tried to win everything but like on Monday overrun by the balls into the box and in the end marshalling Moore and Bryan as centre backs

Magnusson 6 - ditto but a few poor balls upfield and the injury has given us a world of problems in January, as no matter what some say, he's about the best player this season

Pack 7 - a better performance than recent looked for passing opportunities and won the ball several times, but too often under LJ instruction to slow down and reverse

Brownhill 8 - bags of energy, got about, put himself everywhere, looked to be positive, more of players like this please!

Freeman 6 - tries to get behind defence and plays with purpose, thought he did okay but tame with two shots and didn't ever create clear openings

Tomlin 5 - our worst player, one or two nice runs but out on the left wing and did not link up well with anyone else and gave it away too easily, albeit didn't drift, much

Wilbraham 5 - poor by his standards as didn't win much or get on the ball but just by being there and occupying defenders he made such a difference to Tammy and our ability to push players forward

Bryan (sub) 7 - best performance for weeks, pressure was off so attacked with confidence and deservedly setup goal 

Moore 6 - pressed into a different role and was solid enough but didn't see what he could do going forward and no idea why LJ favoured over Little

O'Dowda 4 - can see why he's not starting, lightweight, doesn't see or make runs, easily beaten by opposition 

Final thought: watching with someone who has watched City home and away for over 40 years and goes to every single game and he said he's considering giving up on away games, he was so soul destroyed by how we're performing against poor teams. It's easy to characterise the anti-LJ views as personal and extreme but rational and patient people have had enough. There is an unprecedented anger that I believe is a result of LJ tactics and LJ tactics alone.

Did I imagine it or did Lee say a while back that we would play a high pressing, quick passing game? The tactics mystify me.

[Olé]

One extra takeaway thought the referee was fantastic today, actually stood out to a lot of us, tried to play possession where he could, promoted playing on but even handed too, best I've seen in a few years, best "person" on the pitch today.

[Olé]

22 minutes ago, Shtanley said:

Abraham?

Fixed! Sorry. His lookalike brother was in the crowd today. I think Tammy is getting sick of running around for such a slow and negative team, Joe B's run and cross excluded.

[MarkRed!]

Sorry but we were dire... It was not an improved display. We played long balls constantly and could not pass the ball. We improved slightly going to 352 but taking off the full backs was odd indeed. The pleasing style of football we played under SC is now a distant memory. There was no movement and a lack of pace. My thoughts 

1. Freeman has been a good player for us but he is not a winger at this level and has no pace. Time for him to be dropped and moved on. He also looks too heavy....

2. Tomlin either plays alongside Tammy or in the hole behind him. 

3. Patterson and Odowda should be on the flanks. 

4. We cant play 442 and are too easily picked off. Ipswich could have beaten us by 3 or 4.

Time to get behind the team. Sacking the manager is not an answer as we should have learned by now. Are we better for having sacked SC - no.

 

[Taz]

16 minutes ago, MarkRed! said:

Sorry but we were dire... It was not an improved display. We played long balls constantly and could not pass the ball. We improved slightly going to 352 but taking off the full backs was odd indeed. The pleasing style of football we played under SC is now a distant memory. There was no movement and a lack of pace. My thoughts 

1. Freeman has been a good player for us but he is not a winger at this level and has no pace. Time for him to be dropped and moved on. He also looks too heavy....

2. Tomlin either plays alongside Tammy or in the hole behind him. 

3. Patterson and Odowda should be on the flanks. 

4. We cant play 442 and are too easily picked off. Ipswich could have beaten us by 3 or 4.

Time to get behind the team. Sacking the manager is not an answer as we should have learned by now. Are we better for having sacked SC - no.

 

Agree with number 3 completely. Also thought Brownhill looked ok, although nobody really stood out. Tammy looks so much better up front in a two though.

Also watched Wilbraham quite a bit last night, oh how I wish he was 3 or 4 years younger!!! Quite often Ipswich had 2 on him, and took a bit of a battering at times. 

[Olé]

11 minutes ago, MarkRed! said:

Sorry but we were dire... It was not an improved display.

Perhaps I wanted desperately to be more complimentary because we finally got 2 up top. What I will say (and I can't believe we have got to a point where we have to debate shades of s**t), is we were at least less dire than we were at Wolves. I actually counted more than 1 City player in the opposition half, and when we got the ball, sometimes even 4 or 5!! Tammy finally had a little space and was not entirely marked out of the game.

I agree all the usual frailties and hopeless instructions were there, but if you're looking for green shoots, actually having other players within 25 yards of Tammy was a revelation, even if we still reverted to long balls. On that you are spot on, as I said last night several times, their winner comes from precisely what is wrong with LJ football - supposed possession that turns into going backwards only to then punt upfield, losing the ball.

I make you 100% right on lack of movement and pace, on at least one of these (movement) it is now impossible to believe it is anything other than manager instructions. Even when there are instinctive runs or passes to be made, the players appear unnaturally drilled not to make them. It doesn't matter where we play Tomlin, it's just not working for him, lack of movement and his own positioning have made him very average (and wasteful) indeed.

Sadly you're right about Freeman too but I want to like him because he at least keeps trying to attack, probably the only one that does. I have literally no idea what we bought O'Dowda and Paterson for. Based on LJ's post match comments they don't appear to fulfil the qualities he says we need yet that we were told they were signed for. O'Dowda looked lightweight and anything but fast or direct when he came on. And that foul throw.... FFS.... 

[MarkRed!]

On last night's showing we are relegation fodder.....The team has collapsed (morale, composure, confidence) and this is epitomised by Tomlin...can't get him into the games and if our style is now to be long ball merchants then he is ill suited to this... all in all very disappointing. We need a settled team and LJ chopping and changing does not help... The best team is the one that played at Fulham.....

 

[Major Isewater]

2 hours ago, MarkRed! said:

Sorry but we were dire... It was not an improved display. We played long balls constantly and could not pass the ball. We improved slightly going to 352 but taking off the full backs was odd indeed. The pleasing style of football we played under SC is now a distant memory. There was no movement and a lack of pace. My thoughts 

1. Freeman has been a good player for us but he is not a winger at this level and has no pace. Time for him to be dropped and moved on. He also looks too heavy....

2. Tomlin either plays alongside Tammy or in the hole behind him. 

3. Patterson and Odowda should be on the flanks. 

4. We cant play 442 and are too easily picked off. Ipswich could have beaten us by 3 or 4.

Time to get behind the team. Sacking the manager is not an answer as we should have learned by now. Are we better for having sacked SC - no.

 

We would probably saying much the same things after a loss to Bury if we had n't parted company with Cotts.

[bearded_red]

The lack of a counter attack in our play is pathetic. I first noticed it first half at Reading when the few times we managed to get the ball of them we had no way of looking to hurt them. For a team as young as ours it is incredible how ponderous the play is.

The amount of times last night that we won the ball, had the option to counter and yet turned it down in order to retain some safe possession was incredible. Now fine I will always defend a team that wants to try and control a game through possession and I despair at times when sideways or backwards passes are met with groans. However when you have an opportunity to counter and acres of space to run into to opt out of it in order to just keep the ball is absurd. Fair enough if this ends up in some glorious tiki taka, but when in actual fact all that's going to happen is we'll knock the ball about between the defenders for a bit and then launch one at Wilbraham you wonder what on earth is going on. The amount of times last night we slowly passed the ball along the back line with 10 Ipswich outfield players between the ball and their goal and losing the plot I would repeat over and over that this move started as a counter attack.

Ipswich are terrible and were terrible and yet even they second half looked dangerous because when they won the ball their first thought was, can we get forward and be dangerous. 

My favourite goal this season was our first at Fulham. Reid presses their midfielder into a mistake, Pack takes up the loose ball and first touch passes it forward, Paterson drives to the byline and plays it across for a Tammy tap in. Brilliant football played at pace. We wouldn't ever score that goal now.

[reddogkev]

Cheers for the comprehensive details on this thread, I've only seen what was aired on SSN.  Have to say the first goal was quite possibly the worst defending I have ever seen.

How much time did their right winger have?  And not one person tracked their midfield runner, who had far too much room in front of our goal to pick his spot.

 

[Olé]

10 minutes ago, bearded_red said:

The lack of a counter attack in our play is pathetic. I first noticed it first half at Reading when the few times we managed to get the ball of them we had no way of looking to hurt them. For a team as young as ours it is incredible how ponderous the play is.

The amount of times last night that we won the ball, had the option to counter and yet turned it down in order to retain some safe possession was incredible. Now fine I will always defend a team that wants to try and control a game through possession and I despair at times when sideways or backwards passes are met with groans. However when you have an opportunity to counter and acres to space to run into to opt out of it in order to just keep the ball is absurd. Fair enough if this ends up in some glorious tiki taka, but when in actual fact all that's going to happen is we'll knock the ball about between the defenders for a bit and then launch one at Wilbraham you wonder what on earth is going on. The amount of times last night we slowly passed the ball along the back line with 10 Ipswich outfield players between the ball and their goal and losing the plot and I would repeat over and over that this move started as a counter attack.

Ipswich are terrible and were terrible and yet even they second half looked dangerous because when they won the ball their first thought was, can we get forward and be dangerous. 

My favourite goal this season was our first at Fulham. Reid presses their midfielder into a mistake, Pack takes up the loose ball and first touch passes it forward, Paterson drives to the byline and plays it across for a Tammy tap in. Brilliant football played at pace. We wouldn't ever score that goal now.

Totally as I saw it @bearded_red. Would give more likes if I could, you've nailed it.

I watched that first Fulham goal again on Thursday when trying to understand the difference in our shape and the same had occurred to me. Chalk and cheese. Your description of us avoiding any counter attacking, only to go backwards and then eventually launch it, is spot on and makes the point more succinctly than I have. It's everything that is wrong with our dreadful tactics. Am sure confidence plays a part, but it has to be 90% instruction/drills.

Infuriatingly, as you've described it in your second paragraph could simply be a verbatim commentary of the period of play that led to their winner.

[boss hogg]

12 hours ago, Olé said:

We've lost to a truly terrible team, thanks in main to LJ's negative instructions that has players not trusting instincts and going backwards before giving the ball away.

Playing 4-4-2 finally (thanks LJ) our shape was much better, we had players pushing up in their half supporting Tammy and we looked brighter and smarter in midfield. 

It was a much better performance and the self belief of a functioning formation was very obvious. Our full backs looked more useful going forward (more on that later).

Their opener came after two handballs on halfway as players tried to win a second ball that we had cleared from a corner, It broke  and they reacted fastest to cross.

We deserved our equaliser and looked far sharper playing out of midfield looking for a winner. Brownhill in particular worked his proverbials off and was our best player.

But we had 2 things still dragging us down.

First LJ swapped both full backs - odd as they were much better than Monday, and it cost us badly when Magnusson got injured and we had to setup a makeshift 3-5-2.

Then as we should have been pushing for a winner, we increasingly reverted to our  LJ indoctrinated football of passing back, not making early runs and pontificating.

This culminated on 86min in us having the ball on the halfway line with players able to push on if they were quick - but chose to pass sideways, then back and back again.

Eventually this "possession" obsession resulted in a Flint punt forward for a 50-50 header, which we lose and they break and score. How is this possession football?

If LJ football passes up the quick attack to keep possession, if all you're going to do is setup a  punt at two lines of opposition, what's the point. Today it setup the winner.

The players have worked hard today to a man, and in a much better formation, but they have been throttled out of attacking instincts by our managers instructions.

Watching players not making runs and checking back is soul destroying when you are playing a poor team. Bryan actually did well when on, but O'Dowda was feeble.

Final word for Tomlin who was on the left wing and had one good run early on but on the whole is just a liability who may create magic but generally just gives the ball away.

In summary much more heart from players and 4-4-2 (denied by LJ for so long) gave much more self-belief, but can't help but feel LJ other tactics still dragging us down.

Ipswich were abysmal - if they don't go down there are some really bad teams in this division - but we lost and people need to start taking a relegation battle seriously.

Fielding 6 - didn't hold a lot of shots but saved what he had to

Little 6 - played with more energy and determination than Matthews, not sure where he was for  first and one misplaced pass in attack but was amazed he was pulled off

Goldbourne 6 - did nothing wrong and was stronger at the back than Bryan has been 

Flint 6 - tried to win everything but like on Monday overrun by the balls into the box and in the end marshalling Moore and Bryan as centre backs

Magnusson 6 - ditto but a few poor balls upfield and the injury has given us a world of problems in January, as no matter what some say, he's about the best player this season

Pack 7 - a better performance than recent looked for passing opportunities and won the ball several times, but too often under LJ instruction to slow down and reverse

Brownhill 8 - bags of energy, got about, put himself everywhere, looked to be positive, more of players like this please!

Freeman 6 - tries to get behind defence and plays with purpose, thought he did okay but tame with two shots and didn't ever create clear openings

Tomlin 5 - our worst player, one or two nice runs but out on the left wing and did not link up well with anyone else and gave it away too easily, albeit didn't drift, much

Wilbraham 5 - poor by his standards as didn't win much or get on the ball but just by being there and occupying defenders he made such a difference to Tammy and our ability to push players forward

Abraham 6 - moved and got the ball down at his feet more effectively with a foil up front alongside him, took his goal well and had another snap shot, although took ages to get back onside from a later chance so question if he still has the energy

Bryan (sub) 7 - best performance for weeks, pressure was off so attacked with confidence and deservedly setup goal 

Moore 6 - pressed into a different role and was solid enough but didn't see what he could do going forward and no idea why LJ favoured over Little

O'Dowda 4 - can see why he's not starting, lightweight, doesn't see or make runs, easily beaten by opposition 

Final thought: watching with someone who has watched City home and away for over 40 years and goes to every single game and he said he's considering giving up on away games, he was so soul destroyed by how we're performing against poor teams. It's easy to characterise the anti-LJ views as personal and extreme but rational and patient people have had enough. There is an unprecedented anger that I believe is a result of LJ tactics and LJ tactics alone.

total respect to you for going.

[MarkRed!]

Our play was too slow, we lost ball too easily, we reverted to lumping the ball... This seems to be our pattern. There was no penetration until we scored and then we reverted back to type. Rubbish football. We also lacked impetus.....hugely frustrating as we are doing this against teams who are poor.....

[BobBobSuperBob]

And yet despite the eye witness reports LJs main concern post match RB was we gave the ball away and didn't 'get the ball down and play ' at times / periods

Doesnt bode well if , as it looks at moment we are heading for / already in ,  a dogfight 

[MarkRed!]

I thought we played some good stuff under Cotts. We were unlucky in games. Example I went to Ipswich last year and we should have had 3 or 4. We end up drawing. We battered Rotherham, Charlton and Milton Keynes and drew those games at home. SC did a good job with what he had. If we had won those 4 games SC would not have been sacked. The margins are so fine.... For me SC was not sacked for footballing reasons and one day I hope the truth will come out. McInnes revealed the shambles behind the scenes and I am afraid this is the real issue.

[GrahamC]

50 minutes ago, Major Isewater said:

We would probably saying much the same things after a loss to Bury if we had n't parted company with Cotts.

What on earth is that supposed to mean?

It is so much easier to argue that Pemberton had already started our revival with his time in charge than nonsense like this.

[pongo88]

Sadly I've got to agree with the comments made. As Lance Corporal Jack Jones used to say in Dad's Army, "They don't like it up em". In football terms, this means defenders don't like pacy opposition players running at them. Unfortunately, this is the exact opposite of City's style of play. By the time City get the ball anywhere near the opposition penalty are, it's taken so long the defenders have all had time to saunter back into position. That is, of course, if the ball hasn't been lost in midfield by an aimless sideway / backwards pass. 

Fleetwood could be the final straw

[curbyi]

Silly as it sounds when you go to my barbers you get pretty good gossip which must come from within the club as it in a lot of cases turns out to be bang on.

Two weeks ago went for the number 3 cut all over and word was  LJ had lost the dressing room and three senior players had gone upstairs to say as much.

Now I look at the results and the manner of them and it rings true.

Anyway maybe you all heard that and it's old news anyway.

Happy New Year everyone and remember its a funny league and half a dozen wins could shoot us out the shit.

[MarkRed!]

We are just too predictable and I have not seen us try to pass the ball with any real intent for a long time now... direct crappy football has been on the menu..... We allowed ipswich time and space the whole game and allowed them to reorganise when we got the ball. There were no runners in behind until we scored! Confidence has clearly gone and I am not sure if LJ can turn it around....he is trying by chopping and changing the team but this is counter productive and just saps the confidence. A vicious circle.....

[Jack Dawe]

29 minutes ago, bearded_red said:

The lack of a counter attack in our play is pathetic. I first noticed it first half at Reading when the few times we managed to get the ball of them we had no way of looking to hurt them. For a team as young as ours it is incredible how ponderous the play is.

The amount of times last night that we won the ball, had the option to counter and yet turned it down in order to retain some safe possession was incredible. Now fine I will always defend a team that wants to try and control a game through possession and I despair at times when sideways or backwards passes are met with groans. However when you have an opportunity to counter and acres to space to run into to opt out of it in order to just keep the ball is absurd. Fair enough if this ends up in some glorious tiki taka, but when in actual fact all that's going to happen is we'll knock the ball about between the defenders for a bit and then launch one at Wilbraham you wonder what on earth is going on. The amount of times last night we slowly passed the ball along the back line with 10 Ipswich outfield players between the ball and their goal and losing the plot and I would repeat over and over that this move started as a counter attack.

Ipswich are terrible and were terrible and yet even they second half looked dangerous because when they won the ball their first thought was, can we get forward and be dangerous. 

My favourite goal this season was our first at Fulham. Reid presses their midfielder into a mistake, Pack takes up the loose ball and first touch passes it forward, Paterson drives to the byline and plays it across for a Tammy tap in. Brilliant football played at pace. We wouldn't ever score that goal now.

 

17 minutes ago, Olé said:

Totally as I saw it @bearded_red. Would give more likes if I could, you've nailed it.

I watched that first Fulham goal again on Thursday when trying to understand the difference in our shape and the same had occurred to me. Chalk and cheese. Your description of us avoiding any counter attacking, only to go backwards and then eventually launch it, is spot on and makes the point more succinctly than I have. It's everything that is wrong with our dreadful tactics. Am sure confidence plays a part, but it has to be 90% instruction/drills.

Infuriatingly, as you've described it in your second paragraph could simply be a verbatim commentary of the period of play that led to their winner.

Rapid, counter attacking football is what Leicester excelled at last season. Minimum touches and fuss, wham bam: shot on goal. Opponents were frequently most vulnerable against Leicester when winning corners against them (it's worth noting that opponents are wise to this now. Well, most. Not Pep the other week).

This - and Leicester - is/are the antithesis of "intelligent" football, the post-Barca football of tiki taka wannabees. It's like Arsenal only seemingly interested in scoring after a sufficient amount of passes has been put together. Leicester are or were, to the football intelligentsia (like our very own spud) a slightly embarrassing throw-back to the worst of British up and at 'em football, 

It seems to me that LJ is wedded to, slavishly following, his "philosophy" first and foremost. Unlike say Grayson at PNE, who is pragmatic, and will do what he can to get results first and foremost. Preston began last season as poorly as us, but Grayson, unlike Cotts, made changes to his initial plans for that season (according to Preston fans).

The slow play and refusal to exploit space and play at pace when opportunity arises plays a big part in the lifeless, sterile atmosphere at AG. Is it not possible to combine the two approaches? 

[BobBobSuperBob]

5 minutes ago, Jack Dawe said:

 

Rapid, counter attacking football is what Leicester excelled at last season. Minimum touches and fuss, wham bam: shot on goal. Opponents were frequently most vulnerable against Leicester when winning corners against them (it's worth noting that opponents are wise to this now. Well, most. Not Pep the other week).

This - and Leicester - is/are the antithesis of "intelligent" football, the post-Barca football of tiki taka wannabees. It's like Arsenal only seemingly interested in scoring after a sufficient amount of passes has been put together. Leicester are or were, to the football intelligentsia (like our very own spud) a slightly embarrassing throw-back to the worst of British up and at 'em football, 

It seems to me that LJ is wedded to, slavishly following, his "philosophy" first and foremost. Unlike say Grayson at PNE, who is pragmatic, and will do what he can to get results first and foremost. Preston began last season as poorly as us, but Grayson, unlike Cotts, made changes to his initial plans for that season (according to Preston fans).

The slow play and refusal to exploit space and play at pace when opportunity arises plays a big part in the lifeless, sterile atmosphere at AG. Is it not possible to combine the two approaches? 

Truly excellent post

[Jack Dawe]

6 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

Truly excellent post

Thanks Bob!

[stogursey red]

my belated thoughts on the game as the forum was down when i got back yesterday,

i was happy to see the change to 442 i thought the team played better for the most part then in recent games,

having said that i thought we should have played Tomlin up front as he was wasted for a lot of the game out wide,

been no fan of Little but thought he had a good game and was surprised he was took off and more disappoint that Scot was also took off as he was much more solid on the left with him,

Brownhill was MOTM for us for the 2nd game running i think and was nice the he is starting to form a good relationship with Pack which is helping to improve his game,

i agree with that Ole says about the pace of play so no need to go into that,

i find it really frustrating at the moment as we are not far off from being an ok team, and i think we really should have won last night

[Donkeeebles]

I don't know what was worse yesterday, our performance or my complete abandonment of my principals against paying that amount to watch an away game (my little girl begging me to take her put paid to that) 

Without going into too much detail I didn't think 4-4-2 worked at all, I thought we looked disjointed and the midfield offered very little support to the front 2, this was evident to me when our insistence on knocking long balls to Wilbs was completely ineffective when we didn't pick up any knock downs/2nd balls. Haven't seen the goals since but it looked like we were unlucky on their first when our clearance hit our own player falling nicely for their winger (may be wrong) 

The 5 mins before and 10 mins after half time were the only times we really played any football and took the game too them. The injury and subsequent personnel change put paid to that and we never regained that momentum. It's irrelevant but I was surprised LJ didn't put Pack into the back 3 like at Reading and leave Bryan at wingback, mainly because Bryan looked dangerous and actually put their defence on the back foot (our goal being a good example of this) 

I could go on all day about negatives, Tomlin,O'Dowda,no cutting edge but it's all been said above. There were very few positives, Brownhill did well and was my Man of the match (for city anyway) and the journey home was a dam site better than the one up were my main 2 

 

[GodEmperor Palpatine]

1 hour ago, GrahamC said:

What on earth is that supposed to mean?

It is so much easier to argue that Pemberton had already started our revival with his time in charge than nonsense like this.

It means we'd be in L1 if SC was still in charge

Pemberton started the revival and LJ continued it... hardly nonsense

[phantom]

1 hour ago, curbyi said:

Silly as it sounds when you go to my barbers you get pretty good gossip which must come from within the club as it in a lot of cases turns out to be bang on.

Two weeks ago went for the number 3 cut all over and word was  LJ had lost the dressing room and three senior players had gone upstairs to say as much.

Now I look at the results and the manner of them and it rings true.

Anyway maybe you all heard that and it's old news anyway.

Happy New Year everyone and remember its a funny league and half a dozen wins could shoot us out the shit.

Close, but was more than 3