Taylor-moore

[BRISTOL86]

2 hours ago, marcofisher said:

5 goals, 2 assists and 1.3 Key passes a game compared to HNM and Smith's measly 0.3 would suggest otherwise. 

In 5 months is that particularly impressive? Agree that we have nothing since we left but we were hardly spoilt with glorious football before either. It’s the coaching that’s the problem. 

[Dr Balls]

Bottom line is that if we were really about developing our own younger players here, he would never have gone out on loan. He’s more than capable at Championship level, and crucially has “the right stuff” about him, which you cannot coach into a player.

If anything, his somewhat shabby treatment by LJ, speaks volumes about why we should be getting rid of the coach, and bringing in someone who can really improve our players. Buying prospects and loaning them out doesn’t require a decent coach. In fact, it’s passing all the work on to someone else. On that basis, given the work he has done with Walsh, Robins would be a far better coach for Taylor Moore than LJ.

[BS4 on Tour...]

6 hours ago, marcofisher said:

5 goals, 2 assists and 1.3 Key passes a game compared to HNM and Smith's measly 0.3 would suggest otherwise. 

Is it just me, but 1.3 key passes a game is stealing a living ... good grief, it’s their job ... less than 2 meaningful kicks of the ball in 90 minutes?! Blinking blimey ....

[eardun]

5 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I thought it was an awful decision.

At worst, TM was behind Kalas, Baker and Williams, depending on your view.  So, Benkovic didn’t just have to better than Moore, he had to be better than 2 of the others (assuming back 4) to get game time.  There were no guarantees of this

There really was no guarantee that Benkovic would be better than we had, Celtic on loan is not a good comparison.

So, what was the point?

We now have an expensive loanee filling the bench.

Personally I don’t think Benkovic is that bad, but he’s no better (for sure).  But the logic of Benkovic in / Moore out doesn’t stack up.  One in / one out, doesn’t correlate wage wise either, they will be on hugely different wages.

What does correlate with me in Vyner back / Moore out.  Even then, if that was a reason, it was wrong.

Taylor Moore did ok this season.  Imho he wasn’t as good as many OTIBers believe, but he was still decent enough....AND he was getting better....AND he gave us something different with the starting attacks.

If he wasn’t such a nice guy and good pro, he should had it out with LJ / MA.  They’ve treated him like shit imho.

Still a crap decision.

Agree. I think Benkovic was really signed because of his height - no I’m not joking! - because I recall LJ made a big point of this when he signed him and Henriksen (he said we were lacking that in the squad). Both signings haven’t worked out well and it would have been better to stick with Moore and continue to build his confidence (which was needed given what Moore said in that interview the other day). 

[Davefevs]

5 minutes ago, eardun said:

Agree. I think Benkovic was really signed because of his height - no I’m not joking! - because I recall LJ made a big point of this when he signed him and Henriksen (he said we were lacking that in the squad). Both signings haven’t worked out well and it would have been better to stick with Moore and continue to build his confidence (which was needed given what Moore said in that interview the other day). 

Drifting off subject, but to Henriksen.

I do think he got a raw deal here.

Debut for Derby, bearing in mind he hadn’t played all season, bar some internationals a few months before, he was really good (got sponsors MOTM) and most people saw him as just what we needed.  He wasn’t brilliant, but he brought that bit of steel, calmness, etc.  That was a Tuesday night game, which you could tell he for the final 25 minutes he got through on adrenaline.

Next game was Leeds (a).  I remember thinking at the time, he’s gonna really struggle to play 2 games in four days, especially against Leeds, even more so following Derby, where we’d chased the ball a lot.  Smith was out, Diedhiou out puking, Weimann puking on the pitch.  He played another 90 minutes.  Perhaps he had no choice but to play.  As a team we were shit, he wasn’t shitter than anyone else.

We did have a week before the next game v West Brom (h), but Henriksen had his 3rd CM partner, this time Nagy (Smith on debut, Massengo v Leeds).  Another 90 minutes.  I honestly don’t remember him being good or bad.

Into the Tuesday v Huddersfield, a different formation, this time with Rowe in CM.  He had a poor game, Benkovic too (who did his calf in the 1st half).  In fact so did everyone.  He was no better or worse than anyone else.  Taken off at h-t, I suspect he launched a few verbals.  LJ hasn’t picked him since.  LJ said he expected more.

Perhaps he was knackered, 4 games in 13 days having not played.  A case for being mis-managed.

From that Derby game I saw a player of a type we’ve missed in a long while (different to Pack who we’ve missed too).  I think had we been more careful with him, he’d make a decent impression on this team.

Interesting that LJ keeps calling out Wells, been 3 or 4 occasions since arrival.  I really do think LJ has pissed off plenty of players.  It doesn’t mean losing the dressing room (I dislike that term), but I don’t see players running through brick walls for him, lack of urgency yesterday....this most of all tells me it’s time for a change.

[eardun]

13 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Drifting off subject, but to Henriksen.

I do think he got a raw deal here.

Debut for Derby, bearing in mind he hadn’t played all season, bar some internationals a few months before, he was really good (got sponsors MOTM) and most people saw him as just what we needed.  He wasn’t brilliant, but he brought that bit of steel, calmness, etc.  That was a Tuesday night game, which you could tell he for the final 25 minutes he got through on adrenaline.

Next game was Leeds (a).  I remember thinking at the time, he’s gonna really struggle to play 2 games in four days, especially against Leeds, even more so following Derby, where we’d chased the ball a lot.  Smith was out, Diedhiou out puking, Weimann puking on the pitch.  He played another 90 minutes.  Perhaps he had no choice but to play.  As a team we were shit, he wasn’t shitter than anyone else.

We did have a week before the next game v West Brom (h), but Henriksen had his 3rd CM partner, this time Nagy (Smith on debut, Massengo v Leeds).  Another 90 minutes.  I honestly don’t remember him being good or bad.

Into the Tuesday v Huddersfield, a different formation, this time with Rowe in CM.  He had a poor game, Benkovic too (who did his calf in the 1st half).  In fact so did everyone.  He was no better or worse than anyone else.  Taken off at h-t, I suspect he launched a few verbals.  LJ hasn’t picked him since.  LJ said he expected more.

Perhaps he was knackered, 4 games in 13 days having not played.  A case for being mis-managed.

From that Derby game I saw a player of a type we’ve missed in a long while (different to Pack who we’ve missed too).  I think had we been more careful with him, he’d make a decent impression on this team.

Interesting that LJ keeps calling out Wells, been 3 or 4 occasions since arrival.  I really do think LJ has pissed off plenty of players.  It doesn’t mean losing the dressing room (I dislike that term), but I don’t see players running through brick walls for him, lack of urgency yesterday....this most of all tells me it’s time for a change.

Perhaps. Certainly Henriksen was great v Derby. I think one issue is that LJ seems to bomb out some players after one poor performance. Others - e.g. O’Dowda - seem to hold their place. Plus you need consistency of formation/style  - when you have a squad of our size, you shouldn’t need to change formation when you drop a player; just change the player. 

[marcofisher]

1 hour ago, BS4 on Tour... said:

Is it just me, but 1.3 key passes a game is stealing a living ... good grief, it’s their job ... less than 2 meaningful kicks of the ball in 90 minutes?! Blinking blimey ....

It's just you, it would put him in the top 50 of all players in the Championship. Thats also including positions such as wingers and number 10s, who are always going to have more key passes. 

Would you not be more concerned about our current midfielders currently averaging a "meaningful kick" once every 4 games?

[Mr Popodopolous]

37 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Drifting off subject, but to Henriksen.

I do think he got a raw deal here.

Debut for Derby, bearing in mind he hadn’t played all season, bar some internationals a few months before, he was really good (got sponsors MOTM) and most people saw him as just what we needed.  He wasn’t brilliant, but he brought that bit of steel, calmness, etc.  That was a Tuesday night game, which you could tell he for the final 25 minutes he got through on adrenaline.

Next game was Leeds (a).  I remember thinking at the time, he’s gonna really struggle to play 2 games in four days, especially against Leeds, even more so following Derby, where we’d chased the ball a lot.  Smith was out, Diedhiou out puking, Weimann puking on the pitch.  He played another 90 minutes.  Perhaps he had no choice but to play.  As a team we were shit, he wasn’t shitter than anyone else.

We did have a week before the next game v West Brom (h), but Henriksen had his 3rd CM partner, this time Nagy (Smith on debut, Massengo v Leeds).  Another 90 minutes.  I honestly don’t remember him being good or bad.

Into the Tuesday v Huddersfield, a different formation, this time with Rowe in CM.  He had a poor game, Benkovic too (who did his calf in the 1st half).  In fact so did everyone.  He was no better or worse than anyone else.  Taken off at h-t, I suspect he launched a few verbals.  LJ hasn’t picked him since.  LJ said he expected more.

Perhaps he was knackered, 4 games in 13 days having not played.  A case for being mis-managed.

From that Derby game I saw a player of a type we’ve missed in a long while (different to Pack who we’ve missed too).  I think had we been more careful with him, he’d make a decent impression on this team.

Interesting that LJ keeps calling out Wells, been 3 or 4 occasions since arrival.  I really do think LJ has pissed off plenty of players.  It doesn’t mean losing the dressing room (I dislike that term), but I don’t see players running through brick walls for him, lack of urgency yesterday....this most of all tells me it’s time for a change.

Was a Wednesday IIRC, the Derby game. Even less recovery time! Don't disagree with your post though. 

I looked up Henriksen at least briefly. Hobby horse though it is of mine, he played in...at Hull from yes a brief look, and happy to look further, yes a central 3. Happy to look at how the opposition setup v us too, in all games he played. 

The problem is LJ. We were shit but Leeds, outpassed us outnumbered us and outran us. Then again it's not exactly uncommon experience for opposition sides vs Leeds last two years...  

Given how much chasing of the ball at home to Derby, Leeds away would always be worse.

Benkovic I maintain is a ball-playing CB,  or has the attributes at least but how we set up doesn't encourage us to keep, move, take care of, value the ball.

Keeps us penned back in defence or midfield often, we lose it cheaply and have a lack of options in front of the defence.

Two good loans, on paper...yet two wasted loans due to our setup/mindset!

[Dr Balls]

38 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Drifting off subject, but to Henriksen.

I do think he got a raw deal here.

Debut for Derby, bearing in mind he hadn’t played all season, bar some internationals a few months before, he was really good (got sponsors MOTM) and most people saw him as just what we needed.  He wasn’t brilliant, but he brought that bit of steel, calmness, etc.  That was a Tuesday night game, which you could tell he for the final 25 minutes he got through on adrenaline.

Next game was Leeds (a).  I remember thinking at the time, he’s gonna really struggle to play 2 games in four days, especially against Leeds, even more so following Derby, where we’d chased the ball a lot.  Smith was out, Diedhiou out puking, Weimann puking on the pitch.  He played another 90 minutes.  Perhaps he had no choice but to play.  As a team we were shit, he wasn’t shitter than anyone else.

We did have a week before the next game v West Brom (h), but Henriksen had his 3rd CM partner, this time Nagy (Smith on debut, Massengo v Leeds).  Another 90 minutes.  I honestly don’t remember him being good or bad.

Into the Tuesday v Huddersfield, a different formation, this time with Rowe in CM.  He had a poor game, Benkovic too (who did his calf in the 1st half).  In fact so did everyone.  He was no better or worse than anyone else.  Taken off at h-t, I suspect he launched a few verbals.  LJ hasn’t picked him since.  LJ said he expected more.

Perhaps he was knackered, 4 games in 13 days having not played.  A case for being mis-managed.

From that Derby game I saw a player of a type we’ve missed in a long while (different to Pack who we’ve missed too).  I think had we been more careful with him, he’d make a decent impression on this team.

Interesting that LJ keeps calling out Wells, been 3 or 4 occasions since arrival.  I really do think LJ has pissed off plenty of players.  It doesn’t mean losing the dressing room (I dislike that term), but I don’t see players running through brick walls for him, lack of urgency yesterday....this most of all tells me it’s time for a change.

It all smacks of terrible man management. No games in months then 4 in 13 days, all with a different partner in a midfield pair. Typical LJ chop and change, which unsurprisingly doesn’t work.

Henriksen is well out of it to be honest. I am sure he will have had an opinion and no one would be surprised if  LJ couldn’t handle it. It fits with the pattern of picking out players for public criticism, which I have never known any manager do as much as LJ.  It hardly creates a bond of trust, more the impression of always passing the buck. LJ wants all the glory when we win and none of the blame when we lose. That’s not the kind of leadership anyone needs, least of all elite sports professionals.

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 minutes ago, marcofisher said:

It's just you, it would put him in the top 50 of all players in the Championship. Thats also including positions such as wingers and number 10s, who are always going to have more key passes. 

Would you not be more concerned about our current midfielders currently averaging a "meaningful kick" once every 4 games?

It's just modern football isn't it. Much more of a team game often, passing, possession- 1.3 key passes sounds about par. 

Worth noting though that Brownhill and Pack played vs Leeds opening day. We weren't great, nor necessarily terrible but they didn't pull the strings in any great way.

Leeds are excellent but watch the game back, I don't remember anything fantastic by them.

[Lrrr]

1 hour ago, BS4 on Tour... said:

Is it just me, but 1.3 key passes a game is stealing a living ... good grief, it’s their job ... less than 2 meaningful kicks of the ball in 90 minutes?! Blinking blimey ....

Klich has a key passes per 90 of 0.59 over the season, Cairney 0.48  and Dasilva (Brentford) 0.43

[Mr Popodopolous]

34 minutes ago, eardun said:

Perhaps. Certainly Henriksen was great v Derby. I think one issue is that LJ seems to bomb out some players after one poor performance. Others - e.g. O’Dowda - seem to hold their place. Plus you need consistency of formation/style  - when you have a squad of our size, you shouldn’t need to change formation when you drop a player; just change the player. 

Agree in principle but depends who you put in as well. For example of we put in Palmer for one of the CMs then that might necessitate a shift IMO. (Not that I consider O'Dowda to be a Cm even in a 3 anyway, but that's a different issue).

[eardun]

16 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Agree in principle but depends who you put in as well. For example of we put in Palmer for one of the CMs then that might necessitate a shift IMO. (Not that I consider O'Dowda to be a Cm even in a 3 anyway, but that's a different issue).

I’m talking about our main starting shape for each match - I’d be buying players to suit that system. I think Palmer and Paterson are best in the old central attacking Freeman role (not as wingers). (Even COD and NE could probably play that role, although that already shows you we have too many players of that ilk.). So if Paterson goes off form he is dropped and Palmer comes in and vice versa - means you don’t have to upset the rest of the team. If one of your three centre backs goes off form, you change the personnel not the shape. You play two strikers - by all means change around those two strikers from time to time - but don’t suddenly switch to 3 up top in the hope that it will be ‘interesting’. Yes if a match is not going well, or you are hanging onto a lead, you might change formation to go even more attacking or defensive during a match but that ought to be the exception to the main style. But certainly don’t buy Palmer if you don’t want to to play a system that will accommodate him; what’s the point?

Cotts got criticised for sticking to his system when he got promoted to the Championship. On reflection, perhaps it wasn’t the system that was wrong - perhaps some of the personnel needed to be upgraded (or moved to a different role from the role they played in league one; Ayling a good example of this - league one he played back 3, but better at wing back in championship)

[marcofisher]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

Drifting off subject, but to Henriksen.

I do think he got a raw deal here.

Debut for Derby, bearing in mind he hadn’t played all season, bar some internationals a few months before, he was really good (got sponsors MOTM) and most people saw him as just what we needed.  He wasn’t brilliant, but he brought that bit of steel, calmness, etc.  That was a Tuesday night game, which you could tell he for the final 25 minutes he got through on adrenaline.

Next game was Leeds (a).  I remember thinking at the time, he’s gonna really struggle to play 2 games in four days, especially against Leeds, even more so following Derby, where we’d chased the ball a lot.  Smith was out, Diedhiou out puking, Weimann puking on the pitch.  He played another 90 minutes.  Perhaps he had no choice but to play.  As a team we were shit, he wasn’t shitter than anyone else.

We did have a week before the next game v West Brom (h), but Henriksen had his 3rd CM partner, this time Nagy (Smith on debut, Massengo v Leeds).  Another 90 minutes.  I honestly don’t remember him being good or bad.

Into the Tuesday v Huddersfield, a different formation, this time with Rowe in CM.  He had a poor game, Benkovic too (who did his calf in the 1st half).  In fact so did everyone.  He was no better or worse than anyone else.  Taken off at h-t, I suspect he launched a few verbals.  LJ hasn’t picked him since.  LJ said he expected more.

Perhaps he was knackered, 4 games in 13 days having not played.  A case for being mis-managed.

From that Derby game I saw a player of a type we’ve missed in a long while (different to Pack who we’ve missed too).  I think had we been more careful with him, he’d make a decent impression on this team.

Interesting that LJ keeps calling out Wells, been 3 or 4 occasions since arrival.  I really do think LJ has pissed off plenty of players.  It doesn’t mean losing the dressing room (I dislike that term), but I don’t see players running through brick walls for him, lack of urgency yesterday....this most of all tells me it’s time for a change.

Was running OOC as well. If he had actually come good after a run of games we could have had an absolute bargain.

 

Watch him play excellent for another Champ club now with a full preseason under his belt.

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 minutes ago, eardun said:

I’m talking about our main starting shape for each match - I’d be buying players to suit that system. I think Palmer and Paterson are best in the old central attacking Freeman role (not as wingers). (Even COD and NE could probably play that role, although that already shows you we have too many players of that ilk.). So if Paterson goes off form he is dropped and Palmer comes in and vice versa - means you don’t have to upset the rest of the team. If one of your three centre backs goes off form, you change the personnel not the shape. You play two strikers - by all means change around those two strikers from time to time - but don’t suddenly switch to 3 up top in the hope that it will be ‘interesting’. Yes if a match is not going well, or you are hanging onto a lead, you might change formation to go even more attacking or defensive during a match but that ought to be the exception to the main style. But certainly don’t buy Palmer if you don’t want to to play a system that will accommodate him; what’s the point?

Cotts got criticised for sticking to his system when he got promoted to the Championship. On reflection, perhaps it wasn’t the system that was wrong - perhaps some of the personnel needed to be upgraded (or moved to a different role from the role they played in league one; Ayling a good example of this - league one he played back 3, but better at wing back in championship)

I don't disagree- Palmer should be and only be a number 10, and Paterson yeah I've always thought use him as a 10 or not at all. I see what you mean though- I wouldn't play Palmer in CM either, as a 10 yes, CM not for me. Or Paterson, or O'Dowda for that matter. O'Dowda wide or wing, Paterson maybe narrow wide midfielder in some circs but mostly a 10, Palmer a 10 and a 10 only. Agree though, in principle though, pick a shape, stick to it, work on it and buy to suit it. Other than chasing/defending a game as you say. 

I personally, think that LJ's starting shpe is the issue, by and large with a lot of our players. He wants x but won't achieve it in this League- I fear his approach is flawed and complex yet unsuited at the same time- outdated maybe. Possibly flawed to fatally flawed.

Cotts stuck to- again I look at that side of Sheffield United, man for man and I'm not saying we go up to the PL again but were we in summer 2015 really so inferior to Sheffield United of summer 2017? Ayling RB, RWB, RCB...very versatile, good technically too. Different role is a goopd shout too- Ayling like you say, Williams is a solid enough option at LB (when fit) in a decent Blackburn side. Bryan at wing back was exposable of course, had we kept Cunningham he might have been a good option in certain games- bit more experienced, bit more knowhow, possibly a bit better defensively. We'll never know of course!

[marcofisher]

4 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I don't disagree- Palmer should be and only be a number 10, and Paterson yeah I've always thought use him as a 10 or not at all. I see what you mean though- I wouldn't play Palmer in CM either, as a 10 yes, CM not for me. Or Paterson, or O'Dowda for that matter. O'Dowda wide or wing, Paterson maybe narrow wide midfielder in some circs but mostly a 10, Palmer a 10 and a 10 only. Agree though, in principle though, pick a shape, stick to it, work on it and buy to suit it. Other than chasing/defending a game as you say. 

I personally, think that LJ's starting shpe is the issue, by and large with a lot of our players. He wants x but won't achieve it in this League- I fear his approach is flawed and complex yet unsuited at the same time- outdated maybe. Possibly flawed to fatally flawed.

Cotts stuck to- again I look at that side of Sheffield United, man for man and I'm not saying we go up to the PL again but were we in summer 2015 really so inferior to Sheffield United of summer 2017? Ayling RB, RWB, RCB...very versatile, good technically too. Different role is a goopd shout too- Ayling like you say, Williams is a solid enough option at LB (when fit) in a decent Blackburn side. Bryan at wing back was exposable of course, had we kept Cunningham he might have been a good option in certain games- bit more experienced, bit more knowhow, possibly a bit better defensively. We'll never know of course!

Bryan at wing back in a back 5 was outstanding, Fitted him far better and a lot less vulnerable defensively than playing at full back.

[Harry]

6 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Correct.  2-0 up too.  Under the guiding wing of Ashley Williams, he was developing nicely.

 

2 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Drifting off subject, but to Henriksen.

I do think he got a raw deal here.

Debut for Derby, bearing in mind he hadn’t played all season, bar some internationals a few months before, he was really good (got sponsors MOTM) and most people saw him as just what we needed.  He wasn’t brilliant, but he brought that bit of steel, calmness, etc.  That was a Tuesday night game, which you could tell he for the final 25 minutes he got through on adrenaline.

Next game was Leeds (a).  I remember thinking at the time, he’s gonna really struggle to play 2 games in four days, especially against Leeds, even more so following Derby, where we’d chased the ball a lot.  Smith was out, Diedhiou out puking, Weimann puking on the pitch.  He played another 90 minutes.  Perhaps he had no choice but to play.  As a team we were shit, he wasn’t shitter than anyone else.

We did have a week before the next game v West Brom (h), but Henriksen had his 3rd CM partner, this time Nagy (Smith on debut, Massengo v Leeds).  Another 90 minutes.  I honestly don’t remember him being good or bad.

Into the Tuesday v Huddersfield, a different formation, this time with Rowe in CM.  He had a poor game, Benkovic too (who did his calf in the 1st half).  In fact so did everyone.  He was no better or worse than anyone else.  Taken off at h-t, I suspect he launched a few verbals.  LJ hasn’t picked him since.  LJ said he expected more.

Perhaps he was knackered, 4 games in 13 days having not played.  A case for being mis-managed.

From that Derby game I saw a player of a type we’ve missed in a long while (different to Pack who we’ve missed too).  I think had we been more careful with him, he’d make a decent impression on this team.

Interesting that LJ keeps calling out Wells, been 3 or 4 occasions since arrival.  I really do think LJ has pissed off plenty of players.  It doesn’t mean losing the dressing room (I dislike that term), but I don’t see players running through brick walls for him, lack of urgency yesterday....this most of all tells me it’s time for a change.

That Barnsley capitulation was awful. And you’re right. We went 2 up, Moore went off, someone else went off, Semenyo came on and couldn’t defend the near post properly, and they scored from a corner.  
 

Re your thoughts on Henriksen. The one thing I’d comment is the Huddersfield game. I was up there and remember reading next day when I got home that he’d had a shocker. Well, I came on here and defended him as my impression of the first half up there was that Henriksen was hung out to dry. He made 2 errors if I recall and otherwise had been ok, but every time he got the ball you could see he was exasperated, as he had nothing on. He was isolated every time, no one to pass to, no one wanting a 5-10 yard pass off him. He was lost, because he had no one around him to help him out. He got blamed and was never seen again, whereas the real culprits (those alongside him) got away with it. 
 

As for the thread subject matter. What we’ve lacked this year is a consistent spine. Every successful team has it, and we haven’t. We should have stuck with Moore, helped him through his inevitable errors, and partnered him with one or two of Kalas/Baker, with Williams as the back up. 
Then he should’ve kept hold of Walsh and put him and Brownhill in the middle, with Diedhiou up top. 

Should’ve simply kept a consistent spine of those 5 players. No chopping and changing. No carting them off if they make errors or had a poor game. Keep the spine. It’s the most crucial thing to have. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 minutes ago, marcofisher said:

Bryan at wing back in a back 5 was outstanding, Fitted him far better and a lot less vulnerable defensively than playing at full back.

At this level or League One? I thought he showed a good purple patch on the left in that 4-4-1-1 with all the injuries...prefer him at WB to FB but we shipped an awful lot in that half season or so under Cotts.

[Mr Popodopolous]

14 minutes ago, Harry said:

 

That Barnsley capitulation was awful. And you’re right. We went 2 up, Moore went off, someone else went off, Semenyo came on and couldn’t defend the near post properly, and they scored from a corner.  
 

Re your thoughts on Henriksen. The one thing I’d comment is the Huddersfield game. I was up there and remember reading next day when I got home that he’d had a shocker. Well, I came on here and defended him as my impression of the first half up there was that Henriksen was hung out to dry. He made 2 errors if I recall and otherwise had been ok, but every time he got the ball you could see he was exasperated, as he had nothing on. He was isolated every time, no one to pass to, no one wanting a 5-10 yard pass off him. He was lost, because he had no one around him to help him out. He got blamed and was never seen again, whereas the real culprits (those alongside him) got away with it. 
 

As for the thread subject matter. What we’ve lacked this year is a consistent spine. Every successful team has it, and we haven’t. We should have stuck with Moore, helped him through his inevitable errors, and partnered him with one or two of Kalas/Baker, with Williams as the back up. 
Then he should’ve kept hold of Walsh and put him and Brownhill in the middle, with Diedhiou up top. 

Should’ve simply kept a consistent spine of those 5 players. No chopping and changing. No carting them off if they make errors or had a poor game. Keep the spine. It’s the most crucial thing to have. 

The midfield that night.

Henriksen and Rowe in a pair. We were playing 3-5-2, not bad on paper- Paterson, Wells, Diedhiou- just checked the teams now.  Looked at respective setups, was hooked at halftime according to that- those passing lanes seem easy to cut off and isolate.

I'm just looking at the teams now and it strikes me as easy for Huddersfield to cut off and isolate, to beat us in duels I'd say. Not easy, easy but eminently achievable.

[marcofisher]

12 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

At this level or League One? I thought he showed a good purple patch on the left in that 4-4-1-1 with all the injuries...prefer him at WB to FB but we shipped an awful lot in that half season or so under Cotts.

In League One admittedly. The wing backs played so high up the pitch in our L1 season it is no wonder we shipped a fair few after promotion. I can’t say I saw a lot that first Champ season, it was my first in University.

 

[Harry]

4 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

The midfield that night.

Henriksen and Rowe in a pair. We were playing 3-5-2, not bad on paper- Paterson, Wells, Diedhiou- just checked the teams now.  Looked at respective setups, was hooked at halftime according to that- those passing lanes seem easy to cut off and isolate.

I'm just looking at the teams now and it strikes me as easy for Huddersfield to cut off and isolate, to beat us in duels I'd say. Not easy, easy but eminently achievable.

From memory I think they played 3 in CM vs our 2. They had Hogg, O’Brien and Smith-Rowe I think. I remember thinking what an amazing 3 they made, and how brilliant O’Brien in particular was. And Smith-Rowe made the game look easy. 
 

It was the furthest cry from our midfield I’d seen all season. They absolutely dominated us. And poor Henriksen was basically on his own trying to combat this highly organised 3.  

[Mr Popodopolous]

19 minutes ago, Harry said:

From memory I think they played 3 in CM vs our 2. They had Hogg, O’Brien and Smith-Rowe I think. I remember thinking what an amazing 3 they made, and how brilliant O’Brien in particular was. And Smith-Rowe made the game look easy. 
 

It was the furthest cry from our midfield I’d seen all season. They absolutely dominated us. And poor Henriksen was basically on his own trying to combat this highly organised 3.  

Yep, what chance did he have. I'm just looking at the side now and it does look good on paper, that midfield 3 especially. Especially if you're Huddersfield and you let Baker have the ball a bit as he won't necessarily pose a danger stepping up, Rowe is not bad but has his limitations and up vs that 3 you'll have a big problem.

Sounds like they dominated our two and with that 3 you can also negate Paterson and Rowe, their wider midfield/forwards can combine with the full backs to stifle the width and the CB's can duel with the strikers- not that they'd have a huge chance with such a cut supply line. Sounds like he was scapegoated a bit? Could be some aspect I'm missing!

[Oh Louie louie]

That about making him captain, and then moving him on, just sums it up.

That would upset any player i imagine.

Guys dont want to go off course here, but Tinnion was very vocal at the start of the season about morrels loan.

Just saw he got player of the season there,All ifs and buts, i know, but i reckon Tins was right, he could have made a diffrence.

[Major Isewater]

8 hours ago, eardun said:

Perhaps. Certainly Henriksen was great v Derby. I think one issue is that LJ seems to bomb out some players after one poor performance. Others - e.g. O’Dowda - seem to hold their place. Plus you need consistency of formation/style  - when you have a squad of our size, you shouldn’t need to change formation when you drop a player; just change the player. 

It’s because COD is ‘ a wonderful human being ‘ which I read as ‘ not rocking the good ship  LJ’s Ego ‘. 

[formerly known as ivan]

Taylor Moore is comfortable on the ball and likes to put in a challenge. To me he could have been pushed up in front the back four as a holding midfielder. Added that bit of nastiness we seem to lack.

[RobintheRed Red]

18 hours ago, havanatopia said:

Yep, yet another move I could not fathom. I thought the guy stepped into Websters shoes almost as flawlessly as you could possibly wish for. He seemed pumped, strong and hugely improved even though he showed great promise a year earlier.... all brilliant stuff... then he was bombed out on loan... seriously fellow City fans, if this is not a bonkers decision then please enlighten what is. And talk about cruelly smashing his confidence in the process. 

He probably looked the wrong way.

[Davefevs]

9 hours ago, Harry said:

 

That Barnsley capitulation was awful. And you’re right. We went 2 up, Moore went off, someone else went off, Semenyo came on and couldn’t defend the near post properly, and they scored from a corner.

I’m a great believer that you don’t make defensive subs to hold on to a game, not when you’re 2-0 up.  The players on the pitch are up to speed, and have spent 70 minutes getting accustomed to their opposite number.  By all means take a striker off but don’t change a CB like for like.  Smacks of the games won....naive.
 

Re your thoughts on Henriksen. The one thing I’d comment is the Huddersfield game. I was up there and remember reading next day when I got home that he’d had a shocker. Well, I came on here and defended him as my impression of the first half up there was that Henriksen was hung out to dry. He made 2 errors if I recall and otherwise had been ok, but every time he got the ball you could see he was exasperated, as he had nothing on. He was isolated every time, no one to pass to, no one wanting a 5-10 yard pass off him. He was lost, because he had no one around him to help him out. He got blamed and was never seen again, whereas the real culprits (those alongside him) got away with it.

Ta, I watched on a crappy stream, so wasn’t one to be able to evaluate properly.  He wasn’t perfect, but imho, he’s exactly what we’d been missing.  Imposing, comfortable, etc.  Different to Pack, but someone you could build a midfield around.
 

As for the thread subject matter. What we’ve lacked this year is a consistent spine. Every successful team has it, and we haven’t. We should have stuck with Moore, helped him through his inevitable errors, and partnered him with one or two of Kalas/Baker, with Williams as the back up.

No arguments here with that.  It’s criminal we haven’t.
Then he should’ve kept hold of Walsh and put him and Brownhill in the middle, with Diedhiou up top.

Him or Morrell should’ve stayed.

Should’ve simply kept a consistent spine of those 5 players. No chopping and changing. No carting them off if they make errors or had a poor game. Keep the spine. It’s the most crucial thing to have. 

 

[CyderInACan]

10 hours ago, Harry said:

Should’ve simply kept a consistent spine of those 5 players. No chopping and changing. No carting them off if they make errors or had a poor game. Keep the spine. It’s the most crucial thing to have.

Ironically the team is a mirror image of the gaffer - spineless. 

[BS4 on Tour...]

15 hours ago, hodge said:

Klich has a key passes per 90 of 0.59 over the season, Cairney 0.48  and Dasilva (Brentford) 0.43

Fair play - less than one a half key passes in 90+ minutes just seems a paltry amount to me and those figures you’ve quoted above, and others on here, even more so. Surely we’d expect a midfield player to play more than one key pass in a game? Are we meant to be impressed by these figures? 

[BS4 on Tour...]

16 hours ago, marcofisher said:

It's just you, it would put him in the top 50 of all players in the Championship. Thats also including positions such as wingers and number 10s, who are always going to have more key passes. 

Would you not be more concerned about our current midfielders currently averaging a "meaningful kick" once every 4 games?

It’s just me? Wow, I really didn’t think I’d be the only person who expected a midfield player to play more than one key pass in 90+ minutes - it seems my expectations are way too high...