Team selection...

[Colemanballs]

8 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

Personally I thought his effort and attitude today was outstanding  , but as  you say could have done with taming it down to preserve himself

Having said that he was covering a large area of the pitch alone in second half and Weimann kept demanding he pressed as well

He's some player if we can use him right  

Interesting. Totally agree about attitude and effort. I thought he was comfortably motm first half both offensively and defensively. Massive effort. One chase back and perfectly timed sliding tackle was sublime. He noticeably declined second half. Is it better to have a less awesome player who can last the full 90 or one who can be as good as he was for 45 but need replacing early second half? For sure though, he is putting in maximum effort whilst he is on the pitch.

[spudski]

3 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I think it’s fine to see a line-up pre-game and think you’d pick something different.  I also think it’s not difficult to see a team sheet, think it’s gonna be 442 and with the personnel, expect an open game.  Perhaps LJ thought that was the best approach.  

@spudski I disagree with lack of effort....I think that’s too easy a brush to tar Palmer with.  Positional sense, etc, maybe.  The overall team shape too.  Palmer slowing down possession is not lack of effort....it might’ve been the wrong choice on the ball, but don’t forget, Boro moved us around really well.  You could argue Brownhill and Massengo were as guilty for not tracking McNair and Wing when they ran beyond them centrally.

I think - having reflected on what I saw today - that it proves 442 is often our worst formation, when up against anything other than an opposing 442....unless it is a defensive 442., e.g. Brownhill / Smith / Pack / Bryan.

I haven’t heard any post-match analysis or interviews as a I’ve been out, so not sure what else has been said.  Tough team selection for LJ today.  Another week, and I think Williams would’ve started and he’d have kept his 5212.

 

Slowing down possession was probably the last thing we needed to do Dave imo. It set the pace from the start of the second half...it was very noticeable when Palmer did that, that it effected the rest of the team. We became less energetic, both physically and mentally. We switched off and let Boro come at us more. They grew in confidence and found more space and showed more energy. You could see the goal coming.

We only got going again after conceding.

That slowing down by Palmer really effected us. We should have still been taking the game to them. 

Playing offensively is far less exhausting mentally and physically than trying to soak up pressure.

Our shape went out the window...way too open. A better team would have beaten us imo.

I think we had to be responsible today, to guard against more injuries. Providing more cover to Messengo. Way, way too open and lack of organisation.

Where was Brownhill being leader as Captain. He was anonymous for most parts.

Offensively we gave it a go.

The rest needs work imo mate.

[Simon79]

4 hours ago, TBW said:

Keeps Eliasson out, people moan.

Puts Eliasson in, people moan. 

What's the guy to do?...

Shake him all about? COYR 

[bcfc01]

2 hours ago, marcofisher said:

Just for comparison today, here are the defensive stats:

Eliasson with 6 tackles, yet HNM committed 2 fouls and did not make a single tackle, interception or clearance in the whole time he was on. 

Working your socks off doesn't necessarily equate to a good performance, and HNM's performance today is part of the reason why it seemed so open, he did win a lot of fouls but in reality that's all he really did today. I can't really understand why Brownhill is the one singled out today. 

I would prefer to see Nagy next to Brownhill next match, would add a bit more steel to that midfield. HNM, despite being our most talented player, still needs some time to find his feet at this level. 

So Baker scores higher for deliberately passing the ball into touch under no pressure than Moore who tried to play a bit of football ?

Those stats are total bobbins.

They mean nothing when a bit of context is added.

[Colemanballs]

9 minutes ago, spudski said:

Slowing down possession was probably the last thing we needed to do Dave imo. It set the pace from the start of the second half...it was very noticeable when Palmer did that, that it effected the rest of the team. We became less energetic, both physically and mentally. We switched off and let Boro come at us more. They grew in confidence and found more space and showed more energy. You could see the goal coming.

We only got going again after conceding.

That slowing down by Palmer really effected us. We should have still been taking the game to them. 

Playing offensively is far less exhausting mentally and physically than trying to soak up pressure.

Our shape went out the window...way too open. A better team would have beaten us imo.

I think we had to be responsible today, to guard against more injuries. Providing more cover to Messengo. Way, way too open and lack of organisation.

Where was Brownhill being leader as Captain. He was anonymous for most parts.

Offensively we gave it a go.

The rest needs work imo mate.

Palmer slowed it down precisely because he had put so much effort in. He was noticeably tiring. If there was an issue, it wasn't with the initial team selection but the failure to address the draining energy levels. Personally, I'd have substituted Palmer sooner because he was clearly running out of steam and also because he was already on a yellow card. I can understand LJ's reasons for not doing so though because Palmer is one of our more potent attacking threats.

[marcofisher]

2 minutes ago, bcfc01 said:

So Baker scores higher for deliberately passing the ball into touch under no pressure than Moore who tried to play a bit of football ?

Those stats are total bobbins.

They mean nothing when a bit of context is added.

I wasn't looking at the rating, which should be taken with a pinch of salt and is never representative. 

However my point here regarding HNM and us being completely open is completely valid regarding tackles/interceptions/clearances I don't see how you could regard that as bobbins. 

[Davefevs]

14 minutes ago, spudski said:

Slowing down possession was probably the last thing we needed to do Dave imo. It set the pace from the start of the second half...it was very noticeable when Palmer did that, that it effected the rest of the team. We became less energetic, both physically and mentally. We switched off and let Boro come at us more. They grew in confidence and found more space and showed more energy. You could see the goal coming.

We only got going again after conceding.

That slowing down by Palmer really effected us. We should have still been taking the game to them. 

Playing offensively is far less exhausting mentally and physically than trying to soak up pressure.

Our shape went out the window...way too open. A better team would have beaten us imo.

I think we had to be responsible today, to guard against more injuries. Providing more cover to Messengo. Way, way too open and lack of organisation.

Where was Brownhill being leader as Captain. He was anonymous for most parts.

Offensively we gave it a go.

The rest needs work imo mate.

Aye, it had lots of areas to improve as a team.  Just not a game to pick out individuals imho.  He had some excellent moments today.  All of our players had good moments, but it was definitely not a cohesive team performance.

[bcfc01]

1 minute ago, marcofisher said:

I wasn't looking at the rating, which should be taken with a pinch of salt and is never representative. 

However my point here regarding HNM and us being completely open is completely valid regarding tackles/interceptions/clearances I don't see how you could regard that as bobbins. 

Because I have eyes in my head.

[bcfc01]

2 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Aye, it had lots of areas to improve as a team.  Just not a game to pick out individuals imho.  He had some excellent moments today.  All of our players had good moments, but it was definitely not a cohesive team performance.

That about sums it up for me.

Don't need stats to back that up.

[marcofisher]

1 minute ago, bcfc01 said:

Because I have eyes in my head.

So do I, and I saw a player who was incredibly talented but offered very little defensively in the midfield 

[Cowshed]

1 hour ago, Colemanballs said:

The first sentence makes a certain sense. The second sentence starts with a capital letter and ends with a full stop, but I'm jiggered if I can make any sense of it.

In possession a principle of attack is to make the pitch big by opening out as a team.

A principle of defending is getting compact to defend and narrowing down . Another means is pressing which does not necessarily mean getting compact.

With the team selected it could be expected that they would not be of a high standard at either.

[spudski]

11 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Aye, it had lots of areas to improve as a team.  Just not a game to pick out individuals imho.  He had some excellent moments today.  All of our players had good moments, but it was definitely not a cohesive team performance.

 

13 minutes ago, Colemanballs said:

Palmer slowed it down precisely because he had put so much effort in. He was noticeably tiring. If there was an issue, it wasn't with the initial team selection but the failure to address the draining energy levels. Personally, I'd have substituted Palmer sooner because he was clearly running out of steam and also because he was already on a yellow card. I can understand LJ's reasons for not doing so though because Palmer is one of our more potent attacking threats.

Like I said in my OP chaps..I don't blame the players perse...I find fault in both of them starting.

Palmer gets caught out of position defensively, hence why he's often having to chase back and dive in. It's no coincidence he's on so many cards.

He's knackering himself out because of lack of positional understanding when defending.

His offensive attributes are fantastic.

[TonyTonyTony]

First half could have easily been 3-3. We should have taken the oportunity when one nil up to push on but we seemed to lose momentum. Palmer (as an example) seemed to set the tone and looked a bit apathetic when we were ahead. 

In the end a draw was about right but we need to learn to go for the jugular - particularly at home. 

Boro aren’t a bad side and will be in the mix for top six. All things considered we have had a good start.

[BobBobSuperBob]

11 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

In possession a principle of attack is to make the pitch big by opening out as a team.

A principle of defending is getting compact to defend and narrowing down . Another means is pressing which does not necessarily mean getting compact.

With the team selected it could be expected that they would not be of a high standard at either.

I’m not sure he could have picked a side from those available that would have been 

 

[BobBobSuperBob]

Just worth considering

The average age of our midfield four today  was (just over) 22 

With the eldest 23 !

[Colemanballs]

1 minute ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

I’m not sure he could have picked a side from those available that would have been

 

This. ^Eliasson and Palmer gave us a goal threat (and an actual goal) which is probably better than the alternatives given the personnel available.

[bcfc01]

6 minutes ago, Colemanballs said:

This. ^Eliasson and Palmer gave us a goal threat (and an actual goal) which is probably better than the alternatives given the personnel available.

Indeed.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing though, perhaps people should state their misgivings and wise words on here before the game rather than after.

Maybe, just maybe, people wait to see how things turn out before weighing in with their insight after the game.

Normal to comment after the game how they saw things, but some seem to want to say they knew exactly how it would turn out before the bloody game.

 

[Fordy62]

4 hours ago, David Brent said:

Ooh I’d have picked a different team. Love me..pathetic

My favourite post in months... perfect Brent voice in my head! Take a bow. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

4 hours ago, spudski said:

_______________Bentley______________

Hunt_____Moore_______Baker____Rowe

______________Messengo____________

_____Brownhill___________Odowda____

_______________Palmer______________

_________Weimann____Afobe_________

 

Could've been quite interesting that.

O'Dowda can play centrally, come inside- help numerically, compact shape wise- Palmer can though his defence isn't his strong suit but improving.

Brownhill, O'Dowda and Weimann can all help cover flanks too- help to mitigate against a 2 v 1, Rowe can come inside- thought Middlesbrough had top much joy centrally at times, pulled us about too much.

Part of that would be a combination of mindset x formation but of course the absentees played an important part!

His midweek performance notwithstanding which seemingly wasn't great, personally I'd still have considered Walsh centrally though a perfect fit it wouldn't have been.

[spudski]

7 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Could've been quite interesting that.

O'Dowda can play centrally, come inside- help numerically, compact shape wise- Palmer can though his defence isn't his strong suit but improving.

Brownhill, O'Dowda and Weimann can all help cover flanks too- help to mitigate against a 2 v 1, Rowe can come inside- thought Middlesbrough had top much joy centrally at times, pulled us about too much.

Part of that would be a combination of mindset x formation but of course the absentees played an important part!

His midweek performance notwithstanding which seemingly wasn't great, personally I'd still have considered Walsh centrally though a perfect fit it wouldn't have been.

That's how I saw it too.

No problem with either Palmer or Eliasson...but in the same starting line up?

Then LJ said he was disappointed that it was so open.

There was no hindsight on my part, as soon as I saw the line up, it led to a conversation amongst friends that it would lead to the type of game we witnessed. We actually sat there chuckling to what we predicted...it was like tennis at times.

You know what you get with Palmer and Eliasson, so I'm surprised LJ was disappointed, as you get what's on the Tin. Perhaps he sees them produce better positional play off the ball in training and expected more.

However...from what we see during a game, both Palmer and Eliasson produced what we normally see of them.

Both fine offensively, but both lack Defensive skills and positional understanding. With both playing, it will lead to an open game which we saw.

Hence my OP...and the question...' what was LJs thinking?'

If it wasn't for Bentley and our fine defensive players against a better side, we would have lost imo.

Either way...just a blip... we've had a cracking start to the season considering the injuries.

[Cowshed]

11 hours ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

I’m not sure he could have picked a side from those available that would have been 

 

But it could be possible to find players who arc runs, get side on when pressing or get narrower. Both the players Spudski mentions have glitches here.  Palmer does some odd things when pressing and screening one is his foot patterns when decelerating and being flat and his proximity to the ball where he creates little pressure to block options - He looks confused when to press, when to screen and how. 

[1960maaan]

14 hours ago, marcofisher said:

Working your socks off doesn't necessarily equate to a good performance, and HNM's performance today is part of the reason why it seemed so open, he did win a lot of fouls but in reality that's all he really did today.

What he does a lot of, which doesn't get a stat for, is closing. If he doesn't chase, harry and close down (whether he gets a tackle in or not) we are even more open.

@spudski, I think even with the length of time he's been trying, LJ is still looking for a system and formation that works at home . Previously we dominated sides at home and struggled to break them down, which changed to some turgid football last year where we struggled full stop . The change in away form is remarkable , 2 wins and a draw from 3 this year and we were 2nd or 3rd best on the road last year. If our home form had been mid table we would have made the Playoffs last year . I think LJ is still trying to find a balance where we carry a threat, but remain solid. Having 2 CMF's and 2 CB's out along with a first choice FB , must impact on that balance. My main concern is MF, he obviously doesn't trust Walsh and Bakinson , and ODowda isn't a genuine MF, though he can do a job there. 
I do think we dropped off in tempo for a while, also think we were a little unlucky with the offside and an own goal, though a draw was fair IMO.

[Wrongagain]

15 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

That's not true tbh.

Leeds attacked. QPR had reasonable chunk of the game albeit not so many clear cut  chances.

Last season was a mixed bag.

Can’t include Leeds in the comparison - selection and tactics were really poor - LJ got that one totally wrong!

[spudski]

6 minutes ago, 1960maaan said:

What he does a lot of, which doesn't get a stat for, is closing. If he doesn't chase, harry and close down (whether he gets a tackle in or not) we are even more open.

@spudski, I think even with the length of time he's been trying, LJ is still looking for a system and formation that works at home . Previously we dominated sides at home and struggled to break them down, which changed to some turgid football last year where we struggled full stop . The change in away form is remarkable , 2 wins and a draw from 3 this year and we were 2nd or 3rd best on the road last year. If our home form had been mid table we would have made the Playoffs last year . I think LJ is still trying to find a balance where we carry a threat, but remain solid. Having 2 CMF's and 2 CB's out along with a first choice FB , must impact on that balance. My main concern is MF, he obviously doesn't trust Walsh and Bakinson , and ODowda isn't a genuine MF, though he can do a job there. 
I do think we dropped off in tempo for a while, also think we were a little unlucky with the offside and an own goal, though a draw was fair IMO.

To a degree...I agree mate.

However...he has been hamstrung with injuries this season.

With a fit DaSilva, Kalas etc, I should imagine our team and shape would look different again.

Statistically Tommy Rowe has been our most consistent player this season. Would he be a starter with a fit DaSilva?

We do have a lot of options when the team is fully fit.

Keeping them all happy right now is not going to be easy.

 

[mozo]

I personally thought we should have scored 2/3 in that first half because at times we were electric going forward but just lacking the final touches.

Second half almost seemed fatigued. You really have to observe this game as two separate halves because they were so contrasting. I also thought Boro were getting all the run of the play and lucky bounces in the second half. Both their goals were evidence of that and countless other moments things just didn't fall for us and two injuries are exemplary.

Overall, considering how makeshift our team was, I'm fairly happy with a/ great entertainment and b/ good to effort rewarded with a point. So no gripe with Johnson from me.

[marcofisher]

39 minutes ago, 1960maaan said:

What he does a lot of, which doesn't get a stat for, is closing. If he doesn't chase, harry and close down (whether he gets a tackle in or not) we are even more open.

I find this interesting because I thought in a lot of matches he has run around a bit headless and left gaps through our midfield where he might have been better off holding the position and closing gaps. 

[1960maaan]

52 minutes ago, marcofisher said:

I find this interesting because I thought in a lot of matches he has run around a bit headless and left gaps through our midfield where he might have been better off holding the position and closing gaps. 

Going to be interesting when we have a fully fit MF, I'd like to see Nagy playing the anchor with Brownhill and Massengo playing further forward, and that is not including Korey , who will add a little experience. All depends on what LJ sees as his preferred formation, it may be 2 from 4 , great options though

[chinapig]

15 hours ago, spudski said:

Funnily listening to LJs post match interview, it reflects pretty much what I've said...good going forward, but way too open, and lacked organisation in defence. He's disappointed too.

I don't think LJ was saying he agreed with you that he got the team selection wrong! More that the players did not do their jobs properly, though he mitigated that with the fact that there were a number of young players playing, more than was ideal.

He went on to say that they would have a break then have double or triple sessions. Fair enough with so many new players and injuries.

[Davefevs]

13 minutes ago, 1960maaan said:

Going to be interesting when we have a fully fit MF, I'd like to see Nagy playing the anchor with Brownhill and Massengo playing further forward, and that is not including Korey , who will add a little experience. All depends on what LJ sees as his preferred formation, it may be 2 from 4 , great options though

LJ needs a bit of time on the training ground to either ingrain the 5212....which I really like, or I think he has the option of a 4312 with a front 6 of:

Brownhill | Nagy | Massengo

Palmer

Weimann | Afobe

If the front 3 can work better together off the ball (they’ve proved already they can do it with the ball), yesterday they was energy wasted pressing inefficiently, then the fluidity of the 3 behind them could be something special.

Those 6 players on the pitch with an eventual back 4 of:

Hunt / Pereira | Kalas | Baker | Dasilva

with Moore and Wright As back up looks good.  Will also free Rowe to rotate the midfield, and after Xmas, Korey too.

[Robbored]

2 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

LJ needs a bit of time on the training ground to either ingrain the 5212....which I really like, or I think he has the option of a 4312 with a front 6 of:

Brownhill | Nagy | Massengo

Palmer

Weimann | Afobe

If the front 3 can work better together off the ball (they’ve proved already they can do it with the ball), yesterday they was energy wasted pressing inefficiently, then the fluidity of the 3 behind them could be something special.

Those 6 players on the pitch with an eventual back 4 of:

Hunt / Pereira | Kalas | Baker | Dasilva

with Moore and Wright As back up looks good.  Will also free Rowe to rotate the midfield, and after Xmas, Korey too.

You make look so simple Dave!

Whatever happened to 4-4-2?