Big Rob

[marcofisher]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

I actually think it was his and Zak’s start to the second half that forced the change…because we we well on top, creating situations if not chances…mainly down our right side.  Some good link up with Andi and Antoine.

We did create the best chances after that, but they weren’t from our right side as Millwall blocked it up with Styles.

Agree.

(Some managers might’ve been worse…)

Been really impressed with Tanner recently. He’s got a bit of Naismith about him to me and probably slightly better defensively. Both technical defenders who both want to set the tempo and look to play aggressively and on the front foot.

 

There was one really well weighted pass through to Weimann I think, where it had a bit of backspin or something on it which allowed it to stop just short of the byeline so it could be collected by the attacker and fizzed across. I couldn’t think of any other defender bar Naismith who has that nouse and technical ability.

Edited December 30, 2022 by marcofisher

[Olé]

4 hours ago, Davefevs said:

and as per Nige’s selection policy, King had a dodgy game and a bit, Rob improved in training and he comes back in.

Amen. It's weird, under LJ everyone used to tear their hair out that he basically rolled the dice and rearranged the team every week looking for something that would work. It was a feature of those long losing runs. NP doesn't do knee jerk and gives players a run of games to establish themselves or not (King kept a clean sheet vs Watford, played in the win at Rotherham, had a mare versus Stoke, and was not automatically dropped and got one more game before the change was made). I have a feeling players appreciate their opportunity better by being given a small run without chopping and changing, and the stability it affords the team.

It might be why you only ever hear glowing endorsements from players who have played for NP.

[Davefevs]

1 minute ago, Olé said:

Amen. It's weird, under LJ everyone used to tear their hair out that he basically rolled the dice and rearranged the team every week looking for something that would work. It was a feature of those long losing runs. NP doesn't do knee jerk and gives players a run of games to establish themselves or not (King kept a clean sheet vs Watford, played in the win at Rotherham, had a mare versus Stoke, and was not automatically dropped and got one more game before the change was made). I have a feeling players appreciate their opportunity better by being given a small run without chopping and changing, and the stability it affords the team.

It might be why you only ever hear glowing endorsements from players who have played for NP.

Amen back at you Brother Rob.

[Numero Uno]

14 hours ago, RedNachos said:

Don’t see how Nige gets any credit - dropped him due to a personal vendetta. Then through popular demand  recalls him and he peforms.

Managers who hold grudges and get involved in personal vendettas lose a dressing room quicker than they can wipe their arse. Anyone on here who has played anything resembling a decent level of football has seen it and done it tbh. The reason being that players “talk” to each other and the conversation goes “if he’ll do that to him he’ll do it to the rest of us”.

Whatever your view on results Pearson come across as a Manager who puts you on the naughty step but gives you a second chance to do whatever it is you weren’t doing. Pring being an obvious example. To me that’s straightforward management at pro football level and if you want to beat him with a stick you are choosing the wrong one in that instance.

The majority of pro’s and ex-pro’s I’ve met are surprisingly self critical, the first to admit they’ve had a shocker, and as long as they see treatment as fair they’ll take it on the chin.

[Merrick's Marvels]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

And yet I thought he was ok, and spent most of the first half covering for Dylan Kadji who was miles off the standard required.

A debate for another day

When I've stopped seething about the performance!

[Gimme Shelton]

16 minutes ago, Percy Pig said:

Excellent post. The analysis of the tactical decision is spot on. 

The only downside for me is I did very much like Naismith central, playing as the deep pivot and Rob overlapping down the left with his pace and power. I think the make up of that back three should be influenced by opposition style as much as anything. 

I don't think him playing centrally should preclude him going on a run if the space and opportunities are there,him, Naismith and Zac are all capable of doing that.

[Davefevs]

2 hours ago, Merrick's Marvels said:

A debate for another day

When I've stopped seething about the performance!

Another year?

45 minutes ago, Percy Pig said:

Excellent post. The analysis of the tactical decision is spot on. 

The only downside for me is I did very much like Naismith central, playing as the deep pivot and Rob overlapping down the left with his pace and power. I think the make up of that back three should be influenced by opposition style as much as anything. 

Ta. Yes, so did I also.  Think it was definitely a horses for courses selection last night, and we will have to wait and see if it’s the “new norm”.

Very interesting how Voglslammer sat in Naismith’s space, and we therefore went right side in the main to build attacks from deep.

Naismith mainly forced inside by Voglslammer so he couldn’t use Pring, but also meant some raking passes to Tanner.  One delicious one early on, led to Tanner crossing to Semenyo to head over / wide.  Circled in red below.

very little “dialogue” with Pring (5 passes between them)

Vyner - lots of “dialogue” with Tanner (18 passes between them).

26 minutes ago, Gimme Shelton said:

I don't think him playing centrally should preclude him going on a run if the space and opportunities are there,him, Naismith and Zac are all capable of doing that.

hopefully not, we have 3 CBs all capable of moving forward with the ball…gives us versatility.

[Davefevs]

32 minutes ago, Percy Pig said:

Not preclude, no, but the central player has significantly less licence to maraud than the wide CB's. Can't remember Rob doing it once last night, whereas when we were in our best form the beginning of the season it was a constant part of our attacking game plan. 

I'm a massive fan of pivots, I believe they add balance and passing options to retain the ball and manoeuvre overloads in the wide areas whilst also widening the "half spaces" for the likes of AW and Scott.

 

 

I recall him shaping to make one 2nd half and then quickly checked-out, and passed to Zak.