My school report on Lee Johnson last night

[Red-Robbo]

So, for me, there were pluses and minuses last night. The fact we arrested a horrendous losing streak can only be a good thing. On balance, I think we slightly edged the game and had the better chances. The goals conceded were clownish again, especially the first, but yet again emphasised that you cannot lose concentration when guys like Forestieri and Wallis are lurking - you will get punished. The players gave a really wholehearted performance, which was great to see after the Forest non-event, buoyed no doubt by a very encouraging crowd which was full of happy faces due to the Taylor news. The timing could not have been better.

Anyway, what did the head coach do?

CON: What was he thinking with that initial set-up?! Tomlin as the right midfield cover, but not too wide, leaving the team totally unbalanced and allowing Fox to run the game from his wing.       PRO: After about 20 minutes of embarrassment, he made the change, switching O'Dowda across the pitch. He was quick enough to cover the gaping hole in defence, and get forward for some tidy attacking moves. Tomlin was able to move more centrally and could actually affect the game, leading indirectly to our first goal.

CON: Tammy alone up front for too much of the match was isolated. I felt for the bloke, trying to force his way past three defenders with the rest of the City players about 50 feet behind him.   PRO: Djuric's introduction allowed the ball to be held up field more. The guy looks about as likely to score as I do from the stands, but when we do have two up front it causes the defence headaches they don't get when marking Tammy out of the game.

CON: Whatever he is, Josh Brownhill is not a defensive midfielder. If he was a Country & Western singer his signature tune would be "Stand off your man". Quite what Pack has done to justify his banishment I don't know.   PRO: When O'Neil came on, Brownhill was able to push up and - praise the Lord! - we started getting some crosses in.

CON: O'Dowda had been a creative force on the wing, as well as stopping Fox's runs (see point 1). Why take him off?      PRO: Allowed two up front (see point 2) and it came at a time when Wednesday were flagging.

CON: Tomlin had been our most creative player. Why was he subbed?   PRO: Back from illness and starting to look tired, I think Johnson got this right. GON allowed Brownhill to move up the field to where he could actually participate in the game.

CON: Bobby Reid is more likely to get goals than Jamie Paterson. Reid should have been on the bench.  PRO: It's an irrelevance really, they both were surplus to requirements last night.

CON: There was a brief, horrible few minutes at 2-2 where we reverted to the rabbit-in-headlights, everybody back and standing around the penalty box looking nervous but making no attempt to win the ball.     PRO: It only last 5 minutes this game. With encouragement from the very vocal crowd and the bench, the players snapped out of it and were actually still, you know, actually trying to win the game up to the final whistle!

 

Overall assessment for the head coach last night 6/10. He's still not really grasped his best team, or how to get the best from his players, but he did -on balance - affect the game more positively than negatively.

I still don't think he's the man for the job, but if he uses Taylor and Cotterell wisely, maybe there is a brighter future ahead. He has to convince us. Emphasise has to be given to defensive coaching. We just lose the plot and have moments of madness every game.

 

[We live in hope]

8 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said:

Overall assessment for the head coach last night 6/10. He's still not really grasped his best team, or how to get the best from his players, but he did -on balance - affect the game more positively than negatively.

I still don't think he's the man for the job, but if he uses Taylor and Cotterell wisely, maybe there is a brighter future ahead. He has to convince us. Emphasise has to be given to defensive coaching. We just lose the plot and have moments of madness every game.

 

No I don't he's the man but we got him for the time being. However for the love of the above just pick a regular 11 and let them learn each other.

[spudski]

Here's mine....way too much time on my hands this morning ;-)

 

[Natchfever]

2 minutes ago, spudski said:

Here's mine....way too much time on my hands this morning ;-)

 

That's a B+ for the drawing Spudski ! Not sure about the lipstick on Lee Tomlin mind...

[spudski]

I was going Lowry stylio ;-) BTW...it's tomato sauce off his pie...not lipstick ;-)

[Mad Cyril]

16 minutes ago, spudski said:

Here's mine....way too much time on my hands this morning ;-)

 

Fair do's to Tomlin. If he can convert a penalty while wearing a swimming fin on his right foot, he has even more talent than I realised.

[Robbored]

30 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said:

So, for me, there were pluses and minuses last night. The fact we arrested a horrendous losing streak can only be a good thing. On balance, I think we slightly edged the game and had the better chances. The goals conceded were clownish again, especially the first, but yet again emphasised that you cannot lose concentration when guys like Forestieri and Wallis are lurking - you will get punished. 

Overall assessment for the head coach last night 6/10. He's still not really grasped his best team, or how to get the best from his players, but he did -on balance - affect the game more positively than negatively.

I still don't think he's the man for the job, but if he uses Taylor and Cotterell wisely, maybe there is a brighter future ahead. He has to convince us. Emphasise has to be given to defensive coaching. We just lose the plot and have moments of madness every game.

 

Indeed.

Defending was poor again and there seems to be no leadership at the back. Flint was flat footed for their second and a simple over the top ball allowed them in to create the first. Wednesday had the freedom of our right flank with Little having a mare until LJ changed it to give some protection. We could all see acres of space down their left. Not good at all.

As for LJ - he did okay last night. He got it mostly right apart from the above which he rectified. Question is tho, why did that occur in the first place? 

[BRISTOL86]

Poor show @spudski. The shorts are red!

[Natchfever]

32 minutes ago, spudski said:

I was going Lowry stylio ;-) BTW...it's tomato sauce off his pie...not lipstick ;-)

Harsh waistline interpretation too otherwise a definite A-..

[spudski]

2 minutes ago, Loon plage said:

Harsh waistline interpretation too otherwise a definite A-..

I thought I got LJ just about perfect...must try harder ;-)

[MarcusX]

That stand offish, nervousness as 2-2 is most definitely confidence. We're on a dire run, players dont necessarily set out to defend what theyve got at 2-2 but it will play on their mind that they must not lose the game. Rather than carry on attacking its natural to think "right lets take what weve got" even if only subconsciously.

Get a couple of wins from somewhere and that'll soon turn around.

[Dullmoan Tone]

I mostly agree with this assessment - one of the omissions from the CONS (as highlighted on other thread) does question the constant selection of Aden Flint, not making him captain was a small hint that he's not completely untouchable, but when you look at the goals we have conceded over the last 2 years; we can't blame them all on the other defenders. I appreciate he wins the headers but there's too much getting through.

[Portland Bill]

24 minutes ago, Robbored said:

As for LJ - he did okay last night. He got it mostly right apart from the above which he rectified. Question is tho, why did that occur in the first place? 

It concerns me more and more that the opposition know how LJ sets up the side from the kick off. They see the team sheet and know our shape is wrong. Any opposition manager that sees Tomlin 'not' playing centrally will use that to his advantage.

Is it a case of LJ picking and setting up the team, but then 20 minutes into the game his coaching staff advise him that he needs to change it? 

There has to be a reason why he constantly gets the team shape wrong. 

The positives are, we got a point, also that we have finally signed someone who can finally supply TA with the kind of balls he thrives on. Welcome Dave Cotterill.

 

[Red-Robbo]

10 minutes ago, MarcusX said:

That stand offish, nervousness as 2-2 is most definitely confidence. We're on a dire run, players dont necessarily set out to defend what theyve got at 2-2 but it will play on their mind that they must not lose the game. Rather than carry on attacking its natural to think "right lets take what weve got" even if only subconsciously.

Get a couple of wins from somewhere and that'll soon turn around.

Absolutely Marcus, been saying this for weeks now. It's a confidence thing, fear of yet more losses, and unsurprisingly,  it crept in the longer we have been on our dud run. It also calls into question, Lee's motivational and morale upholding techniques.

Whether it was the lively support last night, or the team gelling better, or the knowledge that for once, we'd had some luck run our way, the squad didn't just remain paralysed last night, but did actually continue to push up, after a very dodgy five minutes.

[Red-Robbo]

14 minutes ago, Dullmoan Tone said:

I mostly agree with this assessment - one of the omissions from the CONS (as highlighted on other thread) does question the constant selection of Aden Flint, not making him captain was a small hint that he's not completely untouchable, but when you look at the goals we have conceded over the last 2 years; we can't blame them all on the other defenders. I appreciate he wins the headers but there's too much getting through.

If we accept that, the problem is who else do you put in his place?

[MarcusX]

1 minute ago, Red-Robbo said:

Absolutely Marcus, been saying this for weeks now. It's a confidence thing, fear of yet more losses, and unsurprisingly,  it crept in the longer we have been on our dud run. It also calls into question, Lee's motivational and morale upholding techniques.

Whether it was the lively support last night, or the team gelling better, or the knowledge that for once, we'd had some luck run our way, the squad didn't just remain paralysed last night, but did actually continue to push up, after a very dodgy five minutes.

Good to hear. Been in those ruts, its a horrible place to be because you know that the best tactic is to keep playing your game but the fear of losing creeps in. I can imagine adding money and more than just a couple of hundred fans into the equation escalates that pressure somewhat!

[MarcusX]

21 minutes ago, Dullmoan Tone said:

I mostly agree with this assessment - one of the omissions from the CONS (as highlighted on other thread) does question the constant selection of Aden Flint, not making him captain was a small hint that he's not completely untouchable, but when you look at the goals we have conceded over the last 2 years; we can't blame them all on the other defenders. I appreciate he wins the headers but there's too much getting through.

Like someone else said on another thread though, when did Flinty last have a settled side around him? He's had 3/4 different keepers just this season. Several variations of back four and midfield in front of him. It takes time to gel with these players, look how good he was in a settled side. THat seems half the problem for us!

[cheshire_red]

I said it before his appointment, much to @cynic's angst, LJ is far from experienced enough to be a Championship Manager / Coach. The point still remains a year later. Has he learnt anything with regard to tactics and formations during the past 12 months? No I don't believe so. 

[Curr Avon]

1 hour ago, Red-Robbo said:

So, for me, there were pluses and minuses last night. The fact we arrested a horrendous losing streak can only be a good thing. On balance, I think we slightly edged the game and had the better chances. The goals conceded were clownish again, especially the first, but yet again emphasised that you cannot lose concentration when guys like Forestieri and Wallis are lurking - you will get punished. The players gave a really wholehearted performance, which was great to see after the Forest non-event, buoyed no doubt by a very encouraging crowd which was full of happy faces due to the Taylor news. The timing could not have been better.

Anyway, what did the head coach do?

CON: What was he thinking with that initial set-up?! Tomlin as the right midfield cover, but not too wide, leaving the team totally unbalanced and allowing Fox to run the game from his wing.       PRO: After about 20 minutes of embarrassment, he made the change, switching O'Dowda across the pitch. He was quick enough to cover the gaping hole in defence, and get forward for some tidy attacking moves. Tomlin was able to move more centrally and could actually affect the game, leading indirectly to our first goal.

CON: Tammy alone up front for too much of the match was isolated. I felt for the bloke, trying to force his way past three defenders with the rest of the City players about 50 feet behind him.   PRO: Djuric's introduction allowed the ball to be held up field more. The guy looks about as likely to score as I do from the stands, but when we do have two up front it causes the defence headaches they don't get when marking Tammy out of the game.

CON: Whatever he is, Josh Brownhill is not a defensive midfielder. If he was a Country & Western singer his signature tune would be "Stand off your man". Quite what Pack has done to justify his banishment I don't know.   PRO: When O'Neil came on, Brownhill was able to push up and - praise the Lord! - we started getting some crosses in.

CON: O'Dowda had been a creative force on the wing, as well as stopping Fox's runs (see point 1). Why take him off?      PRO: Allowed two up front (see point 2) and it came at a time when Wednesday were flagging.

CON: Tomlin had been our most creative player. Why was he subbed?   PRO: Back from illness and starting to look tired, I think Johnson got this right. GON allowed Brownhill to move up the field to where he could actually participate in the game.

CON: Bobby Reid is more likely to get goals than Jamie Paterson. Reid should have been on the bench.  PRO: It's an irrelevance really, they both were surplus to requirements last night.

CON: There was a brief, horrible few minutes at 2-2 where we reverted to the rabbit-in-headlights, everybody back and standing around the penalty box looking nervous but making no attempt to win the ball.     PRO: It only last 5 minutes this game. With encouragement from the very vocal crowd and the bench, the players snapped out of it and were actually still, you know, actually trying to win the game up to the final whistle!

 

Overall assessment for the head coach last night 6/10. He's still not really grasped his best team, or how to get the best from his players, but he did -on balance - affect the game more positively than negatively.

I still don't think he's the man for the job, but if he uses Taylor and Cotterell wisely, maybe there is a brighter future ahead. He has to convince us. Emphasise has to be given to defensive coaching. We just lose the plot and have moments of madness every game.

 

Great summary, RR. It'll be interesting to see how we incorporate Taylor.

If Johnson's plays Taylor and Tammy up top, where does Tomlin fit in?

Would 3-4-1-2 leave us open?

Could Cotterill play in a midfield 3?

Or should the Welshman play as a right midfielder with O'Dowda on the opposite flank in a 4-4-2?

 

[Roger Red Hat]

1 hour ago, spudski said:

Here's mine....way too much time on my hands this morning ;-)

 

That Tomlin, he really is a bit of a rake.....

[Vespa Red]

1 hour ago, spudski said:

Here's mine....way too much time on my hands this morning ;-)

 

Were you influenced by the Lowry school?

[Midred]

1 hour ago, spudski said:

Here's mine....way too much time on my hands this morning ;-)

 

I'm impressed, you've had access to the coaching graphics pack in the new changing rooms!  Tomlin's waistline is spot on.

[Red-Robbo]

Just now, Curr Avon said:

Great summary, RR. It'll be interesting to see how we incorporate Taylor.

If Johnson's plays Taylor and Tammy up top, where does Tomlin fit in?

Would 3-4-1-2 leave us open?

Could Cotterill play in a midfield 3?

Or should the Welshman play as a right midfielder with O'Dowda on the opposite flank in a 4-4-2?

 

The latter suggestion would be my preference, CA. Attack, attack, Torah! Torah! Torah!

Two proven goalscorers waiting to receive crosses from two out-and-out wingers. Tomlin just behind, to pick up the loose balls and thread it through the middle.

We need a decent defensive midfield if we're going to sit that far forward and for me that means Hegeler + either GON or Pack.

[Nomad]

1 hour ago, spudski said:

Here's mine....way too much time on my hands this morning ;-)

 

Looks like LJ is giving a half-hearted Nazi salute.

[Red-Robbo]

7 minutes ago, cheshire_red said:

I said it before his appointment, much to @cynic's angst, LJ is far from experienced enough to be a Championship Manager / Coach. The point still remains a year later. Has he learnt anything with regard to tactics and formations during the past 12 months? No I don't believe so. 

One of the reasons why perhaps a more experienced, semi-retired manager as a sort of unofficial DOF/adviser role might be useful. 

Pembo is a good guy, but at the end of the day, Lee's his superior. There's a limit to what you can do, how forcefully you can make your point. 

A non-contracted adviser - a kind of a consigliere in Mafia terms! - might help Lee find his feet.

[maxjak]

1 hour ago, Red-Robbo said:

So, for me, there were pluses and minuses last night. The fact we arrested a horrendous losing streak can only be a good thing. On balance, I think we slightly edged the game and had the better chances. The goals conceded were clownish again, especially the first, but yet again emphasised that you cannot lose concentration when guys like Forestieri and Wallis are lurking - you will get punished. The players gave a really wholehearted performance, which was great to see after the Forest non-event, buoyed no doubt by a very encouraging crowd which was full of happy faces due to the Taylor news. The timing could not have been better.

Anyway, what did the head coach do?

CON: What was he thinking with that initial set-up?! Tomlin as the right midfield cover, but not too wide, leaving the team totally unbalanced and allowing Fox to run the game from his wing.       PRO: After about 20 minutes of embarrassment, he made the change, switching O'Dowda across the pitch. He was quick enough to cover the gaping hole in defence, and get forward for some tidy attacking moves. Tomlin was able to move more centrally and could actually affect the game, leading indirectly to our first goal.

CON: Tammy alone up front for too much of the match was isolated. I felt for the bloke, trying to force his way past three defenders with the rest of the City players about 50 feet behind him.   PRO: Djuric's introduction allowed the ball to be held up field more. The guy looks about as likely to score as I do from the stands, but when we do have two up front it causes the defence headaches they don't get when marking Tammy out of the game.

CON: Whatever he is, Josh Brownhill is not a defensive midfielder. If he was a Country & Western singer his signature tune would be "Stand off your man". Quite what Pack has done to justify his banishment I don't know.   PRO: When O'Neil came on, Brownhill was able to push up and - praise the Lord! - we started getting some crosses in.

CON: O'Dowda had been a creative force on the wing, as well as stopping Fox's runs (see point 1). Why take him off?      PRO: Allowed two up front (see point 2) and it came at a time when Wednesday were flagging.

CON: Tomlin had been our most creative player. Why was he subbed?   PRO: Back from illness and starting to look tired, I think Johnson got this right. GON allowed Brownhill to move up the field to where he could actually participate in the game.

CON: Bobby Reid is more likely to get goals than Jamie Paterson. Reid should have been on the bench.  PRO: It's an irrelevance really, they both were surplus to requirements last night.

CON: There was a brief, horrible few minutes at 2-2 where we reverted to the rabbit-in-headlights, everybody back and standing around the penalty box looking nervous but making no attempt to win the ball.     PRO: It only last 5 minutes this game. With encouragement from the very vocal crowd and the bench, the players snapped out of it and were actually still, you know, actually trying to win the game up to the final whistle!

 

Overall assessment for the head coach last night 6/10. He's still not really grasped his best team, or how to get the best from his players, but he did -on balance - affect the game more positively than negatively.

I still don't think he's the man for the job, but if he uses Taylor and Cotterell wisely, maybe there is a brighter future ahead. He has to convince us. Emphasise has to be given to defensive coaching. We just lose the plot and have moments of madness every game.

 

Have you considered applying for the assistant managers job?…………you appear to have sufficient insight to improve matters

[Murraysrightplum]

1 hour ago, spudski said:

Here's mine....way too much time on my hands this morning ;-)

 

That's very good!

Extra marks for the big gut and LJ's platform shoes

[Red-Robbo]

1 minute ago, maxjak said:

Have you considered applying for the assistant managers job?…………you appear to have sufficient insight to improve matters

Hehe. Me and 15,000+ others in the crowd.

[Swede]

On Lee Johnson

I was looking for some tangible input from him last night bearing in mind all of the criticism he's [rightly] come in for recently.

There were problems early one with Litts & Tomlin on the right flank which he identified and changed with O'Dowda. Litts was not close enough to their wide player & Tomlin was not helping much.

Later on I would have taken off a visibly tiring Brownhill and brought Pack on to bolster the midfield but that would've been my only criticsm.

I was concerned when they brought a winger on against an increasingly exposed Litts but as their manager inexplicably counteracted that by bringing that lump on earlier he never won anything in the air & as a consequence he wasn't a threat.

Overall I was more than happy to stop the rot with a draw against a good opponent and really pleased for Lee Johnson's positive input  

[Major Isewater]

1 hour ago, Red-Robbo said:

One of the reasons why perhaps a more experienced, semi-retired manager as a sort of unofficial DOF/adviser role might be useful. 

Pembo is a good guy, but at the end of the day, Lee's his superior. There's a limit to what you can do, how forcefully you can make your point. 

A non-contracted adviser - a kind of a consigliere in Mafia terms! - might help Lee find his feet.

His feet aren't that far from his head shouldn't be too difficult find them.