Guest Posted October 25, 2017 Report Share Posted October 25, 2017 2 hours ago, Robbored said: Why on earth do you suppose that she's elderly? At a guess I'd say she's in her early 40s. Is she peng? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tears in rain Posted October 25, 2017 Report Share Posted October 25, 2017 2 hours ago, lenred said: I thought until we scored we were being overrun in midfield or at least it looked that way to me and it was a bit of a talking point around us that we were struggling to get a hold of the ball and everything was mostly bypassing the middle. Once we equalised though it was completely different, their heads dropped and we bossed the midfield and all other areas completely. Thought last night really showed again how confidence has such a massive effect on a game. We looked a different team once we scored having not done so for a couple of games, and they obviously capitulated once we did. We were being over run definitely agree. The reason we conceded is the lack of protection and the amount of space Sako kept having to run into. LJ and Co must have had a word as Pack brownhill and cod started slotting back in and plugging the gaps. Suddenly the team could press as a unit and stop the through balls being slipped in. Then we looked solid! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted October 25, 2017 Report Share Posted October 25, 2017 2 hours ago, spudski said: ....we play so much better when we don't play 'out and out wingers'. So much more solid in midfield last night. Still had width and an outlet to stretch the opposition...but no gaping holes. On a side note...what solid performances from Pisano, Đurić and Magners. You would have thought from their performances that they'd been starting every week. What a beast of a player Sako is too....wouldn't mind him in our midfield. What I noticed was for the first 25 minutes, we were overrun in midfield, their midfield and especially Sako tore our midfield to shreds and again central midfield was the problem, Pack was caught out of position for their goal and was never going to get back. However after their goal, we seemed to tighten up in midfield and Pack and Brownhill to their eternal credit gradually took control and for the next hour we controlled the midfield area which was the platform for a great performance and result, Brownhill had a terrific game and was my MOM for the 2nd game running, he is improving all of the time, as long as Pack does not venture too far forward and sticks to what he is best at, tackling and giving mainly simple passes IMHO he is then a far better player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Isewater Posted October 25, 2017 Report Share Posted October 25, 2017 2 hours ago, Robbored said: Why on earth do you suppose that she's elderly? At a guess I'd say she's in her early 40s. She has a daughter of 19 and a son of 17. That's elderly for some of the young'uns on OTIB . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedLionLad Posted October 25, 2017 Report Share Posted October 25, 2017 1 hour ago, BigAlToby&Liam said: And tell me. What’s wrong with gobbling a juicy worm? Looks like even the old ‘uns do it sometimes And tell me..... .....what's right with gobbling a juicy worm? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbored Posted October 25, 2017 Report Share Posted October 25, 2017 18 minutes ago, Major Isewater said: That's elderly for some of the young'uns on OTIB . That makes me decidedly ancient then............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lrrr Posted October 25, 2017 Report Share Posted October 25, 2017 1 hour ago, Red-Robbo said: We started with a back 3 Joe. I think Lee deserves much credit for seeing we were getting overrun and Magnússon, in particular, was struggling. After Pisano was asked to drop back, we had the width to cut out the relentless passes to Sako. Thought we started 442, Joe was certainly further forward then a wing back would be and the guys warmed up as a back 4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Red Hat Posted October 25, 2017 Report Share Posted October 25, 2017 1 hour ago, Red-Robbo said: We started with a back 3 Joe. I think Lee deserves much credit for seeing we were getting overrun and Magnússon, in particular, was struggling. After Pisano was asked to drop back, we had the width to cut out the relentless passes to Sako. I don't agree we started with a back 3! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lrrr Posted October 25, 2017 Report Share Posted October 25, 2017 1 minute ago, Roger Red Hat said: I don't agree we started with a back 3! Yeah quite, it seemed like we started with a back 2 for the first 30 mins Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UREDS_91 Posted October 25, 2017 Report Share Posted October 25, 2017 2 minutes ago, Roger Red Hat said: I don't agree we started with a back 3! Definitely lined up as a 4-4-2. I initially thought on paper is could have been a 5-3-2 but when the game kicked off, Bryan went to LM and Hörður to LB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinman85 Posted October 25, 2017 Report Share Posted October 25, 2017 3 hours ago, The Dolman Pragmatist said: Agree about Sako - amazed he doesn't get more game time at Palace. I thought that Milan was superb, but Pisano took a long time to find his feet again and Magnússon wasn't without his dodgy moments. Sako would be a great signing for us. But he can't handle the Prem. Shows the gap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon79 Posted October 25, 2017 Report Share Posted October 25, 2017 4 hours ago, spudski said: ....we play so much better when we don't play 'out and out wingers'. So much more solid in midfield last night. Still had width and an outlet to stretch the opposition...but no gaping holes. On a side note...what solid performances from Pisano, Đurić and Magners. You would have thought from their performances that they'd been starting every week. What a beast of a player Sako is too....wouldn't mind him in our midfield. Totally agree. Which imo was a major factor against Leeds. We get over run & out numbered in the middle. I also feel the movement stagnates from this, Patterson drifts into little pockets of space & causes the opposition problems. Wingers tend to naturally hug the touch line, which then leaves bigger space between the lines on turn over. Plus allows the overlap for Bryan etc when they drift in. Much more compact playing like this. COYR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted October 25, 2017 Report Share Posted October 25, 2017 51 minutes ago, Roger Red Hat said: I don't agree we started with a back 3! Regardless of the intention, that was how we played for about half an hour. At that stage, during a break in play, Johnson had a word with Pisano who then relayed instructions to Wright and things went a much more orthodox flat back 4 from then on. Which is why we started to deal with the threat of Sako better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted October 25, 2017 Report Share Posted October 25, 2017 1 hour ago, hodge said: Thought we started 442, Joe was certainly further forward then a wing back would be and the guys warmed up as a back 4. I think we were a bit lopsided so perhaps not a true 442 or 352. Whether Mags was LB or LCB and Bryan LWB or LW is not easy to call, but Pisano starting position was way in advance of a normal RB, definitely more RWB. O’Dowda tucked in to join JBhill and Marlon rather than us going 442. Pisano didn’t really change. At the end if the Day formations become too fluid during a match to be able to say for sure how we lined up. I must watch their goal again tonight. Wright was fouled and we got caught as a result. Bailey ended up attacking balls in the air in Mags’s zone which I don’t think helped. Easy to say Mags out of position, but Wright wanted to come for every header, no matter where it was. He did it well, but Good opponents notice the space it leaves!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steviestevieneville Posted October 25, 2017 Report Share Posted October 25, 2017 5 hours ago, spudski said: ....we play so much better when we don't play 'out and out wingers'. So much more solid in midfield last night. Still had width and an outlet to stretch the opposition...but no gaping holes. On a side note...what solid performances from Pisano, Đurić and Magners. You would have thought from their performances that they'd been starting every week. What a beast of a player Sako is too....wouldn't mind him in our midfield. Thought Loftus -cheek caused us problems getting getting in behind pack and pulling our defenders out of shape imo. After we scored it seemed we had a better shape but we had them on the back foot and he wasn’t as influential after that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steviestevieneville Posted October 25, 2017 Report Share Posted October 25, 2017 1 hour ago, Roger Red Hat said: I don't agree we started with a back 3! Bloke behind me said it was 3-5-2 but I didn’t see it like that. Pisano and mags were playing fullbacks. If we were playing 3 in midfield then it didn’t work wth the amount of space Loftus-cheek and puncheon we’re getting first 20 minutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curr Avon Posted October 25, 2017 Report Share Posted October 25, 2017 5 hours ago, Robbored said: She reckons he goes awol after an hour. That's probably why he not a regular in the Palace first 11. No wonder they couldn't find him in the second half! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Bard Posted October 25, 2017 Report Share Posted October 25, 2017 Rarely seen a goal affect a game so much. We were chasing shadows and they looked hugely confident. They gift us a goal and then shrink back into themselves whilst we grow as much as they shrunk. They look absolutely nailed on to go down if that is what they have in reserve. Would be seriously impressed if Woy keeps them up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted October 25, 2017 Report Share Posted October 25, 2017 It's a nice problem to have. That aside, I tend to agree with the OP. Out and out wingers in a 4-4-2 up v a 4-3-3 and a similar placed side as v Leeds Saturday- that was...brave! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pillred Posted October 26, 2017 Report Share Posted October 26, 2017 14 hours ago, 1bristolcity said: Actually thought we were all over the shop in the first half hour, we found it hard to cope with Palace, if it were not for them letting us back in as they did a better defensive outfit would have beaten us well. So there is still some work to do, a lot, Maggers looked out of his depth at times, plus the usual slip and fall, we gave the ball away for fun too, second half was a lot better, but this result was great albeit we should not be thinking we are the finished article, just yet.. to be fair not many on here think we are the finished article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Up The City! Posted October 26, 2017 Report Share Posted October 26, 2017 I put the 1st 20 mins or so down to none of us having a clue which players palace would select and what system they would play. It must have made doing our home work extremely difficult. As the game went on tho we soon learned about them. There maybe was a little bit of luck in our goal but we made that luck by asking questions of their defense. Mistake aside tho that finish by Taylor was a sublime finish, if you watch the replay carefully Matty had his back to goal and his eyes were firmly on the ball and on Van Aaanholt, he didn't have eyes on the goal until he had shot and for me that makes it such a great goal. To instinctively know where the goal is really is a gift. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.