Jump to content
IGNORED

Why can’t we play in the second half?


pl00peh91

Recommended Posts

The key to our poor start so far has been a significant drop off in performance levels in the second half, it’s been a consistent theme so far in all three of our league games. Just wondered what your views are on why we can’t play our game for 90 minutes, is it lack of fitness, lack of ability or something else? We do seem to play a fairly high tempo passing style in the first half so maybe we just can’t keep that intensity for a whole game, but the sheer scale of the drop off in each game has been alarming, to say the least.

Edited by pl00peh91
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We seem to be pretty rigid, and not very adaptable.

Essentially we've recruited for an attacking and passing 352, and we've played that in pre-season. That's what we do. We're able enough to put it to good effect in the first 30 minutes or so of a game.

Then the opposition figure us out, we lose out on a few refereeing decisions, miss a few chances, take a few tough tackles. Whatever it might be, we get shaken up and lose that ability to execute our plan.

And that's it. That's the plan. 

We don't change it up, and we don't adapt to nullify whatever it is that's shaken us.

We're still playing well at times, but the inability to put Plan B into play is hurting us.

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fear?

I think we lack a midfield destroyer, fighter, calm downer, bloody leader. Guess what we haven’t had that character for years. 

Our midfield seem to invite pressure. Yes we make crap mistakes in defence but it’s always inevitable as our midfield drop so deep so almost inevitable so many balls into our box we’re going to concede.

We have no real outlet up front without AS in the team. So when we aimlessly panic and hoof the ball anywhere upfield we just lose possession as there’s no one to press the opposition effectively, physically unless AS plays.

We need a solid organising midfielder, and a fast, pressing physical forward to fill in for when AS doesn’t play. Or we play 2 upfront and add an extra body for protection in midfield. We just get overrun in the second half.

I think big efforts from Mr Lansdown to get in that investment. He was right about one thing that’s for certain - we need some fresh ideas and enthusiasm invested in our club as well as money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It can only be one of two things :

1) Fitness. Mr Rennie has been much lauded but has he got this squad as fit as possible? 
Don’t know. 

 

2) Half time adjustments. Other managers react and slightly alter their tactics or strategies. Perhaps Mr Pearson doesn’t react? Don’t know. 
 

Could be either, could be both, could be none. But whatever it is, it’s not looking pretty 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

We seem to be pretty rigid, and not very adaptable.

Essentially we've recruited for an attacking and passing 352, and we've played that in pre-season. That's what we do. We're able enough to put it to good effect in the first 30 minutes or so of a game.

Then the opposition figure us out, we lose out on a few refereeing decisions, miss a few chances, take a few tough tackles. Whatever it might be, we get shaken up and lose that ability to execute our plan.

And that's it. That's the plan. 

We don't change it up, and we don't adapt to nullify whatever it is that's shaken us.

We're still playing well at times, but the inability to put Plan B into play is hurting us.

Can’t disagree with any of this. Good assessment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Red DNA said:

Exactly that. 

No, I don't think it is that simple. 

I don't think Wigan really figured us out today. Today I thought we got frustrated with the ref, and with Wigans hard tackles. I think the Bennett lash out being a yellow not a red really got into our heads. We lost the precision, began overthinking, and Wigan grew into it.

Sunderland figured us out, changed their game, got the goals they needed, and then reverted to type.

From what I've seen there have been different reasons for our mid/late game failures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We spent 15 minutes at the start of the second half, controlling possession, making them chase us…albeit we didn’t do much with it.  So you can’t just say “we didn’t play second half” because we tried to take the sting out of any immediate onslaught they might’ve tried….and we did. Game looked life drifting, but that little passage of play, Atkinson yellow, then injured, subbed etc seemed to shift the balance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

We spent 15 minutes at the start of the second half, controlling possession, making them chase us…albeit we didn’t do much with it.  So you can’t just say “we didn’t play second half” because we tried to take the sting out of any immediate onslaught they might’ve tried….and we did. Game looked life drifting, but that little passage of play, Atkinson yellow, then injured, subbed etc seemed to shift the balance.

Even allowing for that the keeper shouldn’t be punching fresh air at an in swinging corner??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Game looked life drifting, but that little passage of play, Atkinson yellow, then injured, subbed etc seemed to shift the balance.

Is it concerning that we don't seem to able to absorb something like that? If all it takes for us to be shocked out of a good performance is an injury then should that be looked at? If it is concerning then should we a) be surprised and b) worried for the long term?

I've asked three questions there and for me the answers are yes, no, and no.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

Is it concerning that we don't seem to able to absorb something like that? If all it takes for us to be shocked out of a good performance is an injury then should that be looked at? If it is concerning then should we a) be surprised and b) worried for the long term?

I've asked three questions there and for me the answers are yes, no, and no.

We should be able to, but you could argue at least this week we stayed on it to get a point.  Small positives.

I guess I’m quoting correlation not causation too!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...