Playing To Our Strengths

[Silvio Dante]

Well. That was an odd old game.

First things first - three points against Boro is an undoubted good result. However, there is a large part of me that sees it as achieved in spite of what we were doing as opposed to what we were doing.

That first 35 minutes were as bored as I’ve been at Ashton Gate for years - I’m talking Osman era bored. I have no objection to, and am more than happy to, play out from the back. But that wasn’t that. It was safe, 90-10 risk balls across the back line (and even then we got caught a couple of times). Two incidents epitomised that period - when TGH turned and played backwards and was roundly booed, and when Sykes, on the right and looking for a pass, threw his arms up in exasperation as there were no options. Literally, our only out option appeared to be a Dickie carry, and it was awful with no penetration even in the middle let alone the final third.
Tactically, I’m not sure that a plan is for your CM to hit a 30 yard worldie every game, but post that it was positive because we played front foot pressing for the last 10 - and were a better side because of it.

Half time in the ground the consensus was that we were lucky. And when the two goals came in quick succession (again by some bad playing out from the back) there was another muted shout against Lansdown.

The base issue is this. We have a side and squad built for a high tempo pressing game. When we do that - and when we did that today - we can be very good. However, we tried to play a passive, stand off game which is nowhere near our strength- and other sides are better than us at it. Boro waited first half and just picked off the errors as we played far too slow.

In the end, sheer bloody mindedness got us through (and a quality Sykes finish). But it wasn’t great. Safe for the bits we did what we’re good at.
 

Liam is getting used to the team and the club. The club historically have never accepted negative football which is what that was to start with and against QPR - so hopefully he’s learnt that. More pertinently, hopefully he’s learnt that as a coach you may have a philosophy but if other teams have the same philosophy- and players more versed in executing that - you end up with that 35 minutes. However, if you play to the squad strengths, there is a real chance of success.

 

[steviestevieneville]

17 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

Well. That was an odd old game.

First things first - three points against Boro is an undoubted good result. However, there is a large part of me that sees it as achieved in spite of what we were doing as opposed to what we were doing.

That first 35 minutes were as bored as I’ve been at Ashton Gate for years - I’m talking Osman era bored. I have no objection to, and am more than happy to, play out from the back. But that wasn’t that. It was safe, 90-10 risk balls across the back line (and even then we got caught a couple of times). Two incidents epitomised that period - when TGH turned and played backwards and was roundly booed, and when Sykes, on the right and looking for a pass, threw his arms up in exasperation as there were no options. Literally, our only out option appeared to be a Dickie carry, and it was awful with no penetration even in the middle let alone the final third.
Tactically, I’m not sure that a plan is for your CM to hit a 30 yard worldie every game, but post that it was positive because we played front foot pressing for the last 10 - and were a better side because of it.

Half time in the ground the consensus was that we were lucky. And when the two goals came in quick succession (again by some bad playing out from the back) there was another muted shout against Lansdown.

The base issue is this. We have a side and squad built for a high tempo pressing game. When we do that - and when we did that today - we can be very good. However, we tried to play a passive, stand off game which is nowhere near our strength- and other sides are better than us at it. Boro waited first half and just picked off the errors as we played far too slow.

In the end, sheer bloody mindedness got us through (and a quality Sykes finish). But it wasn’t great. Safe for the bits we did what we’re good at.
 

Liam is getting used to the team and the club. The club historically have never accepted negative football which is what that was to start with and against QPR - so hopefully he’s learnt that. More pertinently, hopefully he’s learnt that as a coach you may have a philosophy but if other teams have the same philosophy- and players more versed in executing that - you end up with that 35 minutes. However, if you play to the squad strengths, there is a real chance of success.

 

He’s had two proper weeks to be fair. It won’t come all at once . I agree it was slow & safe to start with but you have to look at how boro set up as well . A couple of things I noticed. There’s no pass on  forward so I’ll just hit the channel . We didn’t do that . Passing lanes cut off so we kept the ball rather than give away possession . Also without the ball we seemed to squeeze quick & play a slightly higher line 424 out of possession at times.

One thing that fans will have to get used to is us being more possession based & it’s definitely more patient . I know Nige was transitioning us into that as well but one bloke in front of me shouted . Just bloody get it forward . Then a minute or so later a aimless ball was played into the channel & he shouted . Keep the bloody ball

Edited November 25, 2023 by steviestevieneville

[red panda]

2 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

Well. That was an odd old game.

First things first - three points against Boro is an undoubted good result. However, there is a large part of me that sees it as achieved in spite of what we were doing as opposed to what we were doing.

That first 35 minutes were as bored as I’ve been at Ashton Gate for years - I’m talking Osman era bored. I have no objection to, and am more than happy to, play out from the back. But that wasn’t that. It was safe, 90-10 risk balls across the back line (and even then we got caught a couple of times). Two incidents epitomised that period - when TGH turned and played backwards and was roundly booed, and when Sykes, on the right and looking for a pass, threw his arms up in exasperation as there were no options. Literally, our only out option appeared to be a Dickie carry, and it was awful with no penetration even in the middle let alone the final third.
Tactically, I’m not sure that a plan is for your CM to hit a 30 yard worldie every game, but post that it was positive because we played front foot pressing for the last 10 - and were a better side because of it.

Half time in the ground the consensus was that we were lucky. And when the two goals came in quick succession (again by some bad playing out from the back) there was another muted shout against Lansdown.

The base issue is this. We have a side and squad built for a high tempo pressing game. When we do that - and when we did that today - we can be very good. However, we tried to play a passive, stand off game which is nowhere near our strength- and other sides are better than us at it. Boro waited first half and just picked off the errors as we played far too slow.

In the end, sheer bloody mindedness got us through (and a quality Sykes finish). But it wasn’t great. Safe for the bits we did what we’re good at.
 

Liam is getting used to the team and the club. The club historically have never accepted negative football which is what that was to start with and against QPR - so hopefully he’s learnt that. More pertinently, hopefully he’s learnt that as a coach you may have a philosophy but if other teams have the same philosophy- and players more versed in executing that - you end up with that 35 minutes. However, if you play to the squad strengths, there is a real chance of success.

 

I'm not sure we played a stand off game - when we didn't have the ball I thought we were pressing.  The big difference is what we do when we have the ball - more emphasis on keeping possession rather than hoofing in the general direction of Bell or Sykes.  It will take time for us to get better at attacking under this new approach.  Hopefully we'll get there, and it's probably a better basis for us to progress long term (it's pretty risky to rely on counterattacking when you're playing against decent teams)

[CityCiderEd]

I think one of our biggest problems is  our passing ability. The number of times we gave away possession was criminal, especially when trying to get forward on the break. 

[Rossi the Robin]

Looks like they have possibly been concentrating on shooting 10 shots on target out of 11, one blocked 

Edited November 25, 2023 by Rossi the Robin

[Jose]

We’ve got to start somewhere right? He is changing the way we play. It’s going to take time to click. I’d much rather keep the ball than hit a hopeful ball up to Conway wishing for the best. 
 

Add in Boro are a decent team, that we actually gifted them their goals I feel like there are things to be positive about. 
 

Strange place OTIB atm.

[sglosbcfc]

4 minutes ago, Rossi the Robin said:

Looks like they have possibly been concentrating on shooting 11 shots on target out of 10, one blocked 

11 shots on target out of 10!!! Also 110% effort

[sglosbcfc]

1 minute ago, Jose said:

We’ve got to start somewhere right? He is changing the way we play. It’s going to take time to click. I’d much rather keep the ball than hit a hopeful ball up to Conway wishing for the best. 
 

Add in Boro are a decent team, that we actually gifted them their goals I feel like there are things to be positive about. 
 

Strange place OTIB atm.

It is about being realistic not being negative. We were moving in the right direction under Nige and now that has all been ripped up. Today we were really poor for large spells of the game. We have won and I am delighted, but we'll have to be much, much better on Wednesday. I will be there cheering the boys on and I really hope I'm eating a large dish of humble pie at the end of the season, but I have concerns for our short term progress.

[W-S-M Seagull]

10 minutes ago, steviestevieneville said:

He’s had two proper weeks to be fair. It won’t come all at once . I agree it was slow & safe to start with but you have to look at how boro set up as well . A couple of things I noticed. There’s no pass on  forward so I’ll just hit the channel . We didn’t do that . Passing lanes cut off so we kept the ball rather than give away possession . Also without the ball we seemed to squeeze quick & play a slightly higher line 424 out of possession at times.

One thing that fans will have to get used to is us being more possession based & it’s definitely more patient . I know Nige was transitioning us into that as well but one bloke in front of me shouted . Just bloody get it forward . Then a minute or so later a aimless ball was played into the channel & he shouted . Keep the bloody ball

Considering your opinions on RB can go from one extreme to the next, are you sure that bloke wasn't you Tone? 

[steviestevieneville]

12 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

Considering your opinions on RB can go from one extreme to the next, are you sure that bloke wasn't you Tone? 

Hello Terry . Just to let you know I’m going to enjoy the win tonight and after this not respond to your utter bollocks . It’s lovely to see I’m living rent free in your head & yes there’s plenty still laughing at you .  Have a lovely evening . 

[W-S-M Seagull]

1 minute ago, steviestevieneville said:

Hello Terry . Just to let you know I’m going to enjoy the win tonight and after this not respond to your utter bollocks . It’s lovely to see I’m living rent free in your head & yes there’s plenty still laughing at you .  Have a lovely evening . 

Stop acting like a child Tone and making things up. It does nothing for your limited credibility. 

[steviestevieneville]

Just now, W-S-M Seagull said:

Stop acting like a child Tone and making things up. It does nothing for your limited credibility. 

You’re again making a fool of yourself & im making nothing up . There’s a reason I contradict that ***** Tony , try & work it out for yourself. Rent free 

[W-S-M Seagull]

Just now, steviestevieneville said:

You’re again making a fool of yourself & im making nothing up . There’s a reason I contradict that ***** Tony , try & work it out for yourself. Rent free 

Have a nice evening Tone  

[steviestevieneville]

1 minute ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

Have a nice evening Tone  

Thanks Terry , you too love 

[bcfc01]

I thought the first half was very good with the teams cancelling each out to an extent, but we certainly did enough for the lead.

Dickie bringing the ball out from the back and getting passes through the lines was a big improvement. Definitely playing to his strengths and surprised some didn't see it. Also giving TGH the role he played showed what a very good player he is at 21. Two examples of playing to the players strengths which I hadn't seen till now.

Very pleased with that first half.

Chaotic start to the second half, but dragged ouselves back into the game and got the winner, followed by some excellent defending against an inevitable Boro response.

And what a good subs appearances by Cornick and Mehmeti, he seemed to have a lot more confidence today.

Great performance and great result against a very good in-form team - didn't expect that tbh.

[BCFC Rich]

3 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

Have a nice evening Tone  

 

2 minutes ago, steviestevieneville said:

Thanks Terry , you too love 

Get a room!!

[Rossi the Robin]

35 minutes ago, sglosbcfc said:

11 shots on target out of 10!!! Also 110% effort

beat me to the edit 

[HappyClapper]

5 minutes ago, BCFC Rich said:

 

Get a room!!

Just not together.

[Abingdon Red]

First half was quite interesting in a sense as we were playing a different short safe plassing style of football to what we've seen before.  It'll take a bit of getting used to and needs a lot more movement off the ball up the pitch to really be effective.  Apparently Oxford played a similar system with the aim of launching sudden/surprise attacks when gaps appear.  It was quite nice to see the ball on the floor a lot more than usual and less balls being hoofed aimlessly down the channels.

 

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, Silvio Dante said:

Well. That was an odd old game.

First things first - three points against Boro is an undoubted good result. However, there is a large part of me that sees it as achieved in spite of what we were doing as opposed to what we were doing.

That first 35 minutes were as bored as I’ve been at Ashton Gate for years - I’m talking Osman era bored. I have no objection to, and am more than happy to, play out from the back. But that wasn’t that. It was safe, 90-10 risk balls across the back line (and even then we got caught a couple of times). Two incidents epitomised that period - when TGH turned and played backwards and was roundly booed, and when Sykes, on the right and looking for a pass, threw his arms up in exasperation as there were no options. Literally, our only out option appeared to be a Dickie carry, and it was awful with no penetration even in the middle let alone the final third.
Tactically, I’m not sure that a plan is for your CM to hit a 30 yard worldie every game, but post that it was positive because we played front foot pressing for the last 10 - and were a better side because of it.

Half time in the ground the consensus was that we were lucky. And when the two goals came in quick succession (again by some bad playing out from the back) there was another muted shout against Lansdown.

The base issue is this. We have a side and squad built for a high tempo pressing game. When we do that - and when we did that today - we can be very good. However, we tried to play a passive, stand off game which is nowhere near our strength- and other sides are better than us at it. Boro waited first half and just picked off the errors as we played far too slow.

In the end, sheer bloody mindedness got us through (and a quality Sykes finish). But it wasn’t great. Safe for the bits we did what we’re good at.
 

Liam is getting used to the team and the club. The club historically have never accepted negative football which is what that was to start with and against QPR - so hopefully he’s learnt that. More pertinently, hopefully he’s learnt that as a coach you may have a philosophy but if other teams have the same philosophy- and players more versed in executing that - you end up with that 35 minutes. However, if you play to the squad strengths, there is a real chance of success.

 

I said before the game there is no reason to go into today’s game expecting defeat.  We are a competitive side, we are usually / always in the game.  Goals decide games.

I enjoyed the first half hour, because I got a chance to see what was going on.  Boro were hardly expansive either, and it takes two to tango!

In some respects it was a bit like QPR - Boro contesting the middle, forcing us around the outside.

But the one noticeable difference for me (because I criticise him for not doing this every week!) was Bell coming inside to get the ball, or inside and deep to get the ball.  Manning talked about Boro’s rotations, this was City’s version.  Doesn’t necessarily lead to anything but keeps the ball, moves players around, might make an opponent switch-off.  It created a channel for Pring.  The battle between him and Isaiah Jones was a fantastic watch.

It also meant that it allowed us to mix up when Dickie came forward too.

What keeping possession meant was (simplified) we weren’t chasing after the ball…and I think in the 5 mins before TGH’s goal, Boro had started to get a bit sloppy with the ball because they’d been chasing us a bit.  We pinched a couple of balls and started to threaten on the counter.

Why was the h-t consensus that we were lucky?  In what respect?  I thought it was an even first half, although that ten mins before half-time was the best ten mins of either side.

Second half frustrated me…before the own goal, I said to Joe and guy next to me, we are over-playing in our defensive third, making an extra pass or two rather than clipping one in the channel.  We invited Boro forward / we invited their press.  The equaliser epitomised what we’d done in those early second half minutes.  It reminded me of West Brom (home 0-0), where our over-playing lead to them believing in themselves.

But fair play, we dug-in, got the goal - another goal from our much-maligned set-pieces which are actually one of the most successful in the Champ!!  And then we dug-in some more.

Re the press, we haven’t high pressed hugely all season, mainly blocking passing lanes.  Today felt like a bit more of the same.  Crooks caused Dickie, Pring and Bell a real problem, especially as Pring had Jones to worry about too.  Glad he went off.

I also liked that Knight started to flex his position in-possession to not just right side, but left side too, and we started to get some joy in that channel….the TGH goal the icing on the cake….after a good press, Dickie header, Knight layoff…boom.

But I don’t think we have looked like a real high-pressing side all season.

Like your final summing up, our fabs are gonna have to get used to a bit of “slowly, slowly, catchy monkey”.  I think LM might call this “cat and mouse”.

But I was happy we didn’t rush our attacks today…bar one Dickie pass which Conway was never in the race for.

 

[1team]

I thought Knight had a really good game. Involved in so much offensively and defensively, was a pain in the arse for Boro all game. We have signed a goodun there.

[Silvio Dante]

10 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I said before the game there is no reason to go into today’s game expecting defeat.  We are a competitive side, we are usually / always in the game.  Goals decide games.

I enjoyed the first half hour, because I got a chance to see what was going on.  Boro were hardly expansive either, and it takes two to tango!

In some respects it was a bit like QPR - Boro contesting the middle, forcing us around the outside.

But the one noticeable difference for me (because I criticise him for not doing this every week!) was Bell coming inside to get the ball, or inside and deep to get the ball.  Manning talked about Boro’s rotations, this was City’s version.  Doesn’t necessarily lead to anything but keeps the ball, moves players around, might make an opponent switch-off.  It created a channel for Pring.  The battle between him and Isaiah Jones was a fantastic watch.

It also meant that it allowed us to mix up when Dickie came forward too.

What keeping possession meant was (simplified) we weren’t chasing after the ball…and I think in the 5 mins before TGH’s goal, Boro had started to get a bit sloppy with the ball because they’d been chasing us a bit.  We pinched a couple of balls and started to threaten on the counter.

Why was the h-t consensus that we were lucky?  In what respect?  I thought it was an even first half, although that ten mins before half-time was the best ten mins of either side.

Second half frustrated me…before the own goal, I said to Joe and guy next to me, we are over-playing in our defensive third, making an extra pass or two rather than clipping one in the channel.  We invited Boro forward / we invited their press.  The equaliser epitomised what we’d done in those early second half minutes.  It reminded me of West Brom (home 0-0), where our over-playing lead to them believing in themselves.

But fair play, we dug-in, got the goal - another goal from our much-maligned set-pieces which are actually one of the most successful in the Champ!!  And then we dug-in some more.

Re the press, we haven’t high pressed hugely all season, mainly blocking passing lanes.  Today felt like a bit more of the same.  Crooks caused Dickie, Pring and Bell a real problem, especially as Pring had Jones to worry about too.  Glad he went off.

I also liked that Knight started to flex his position in-possession to not just right side, but left side too, and we started to get some joy in that channel….the TGH goal the icing on the cake….after a good press, Dickie header, Knight layoff…boom.

But I don’t think we have looked like a real high-pressing side all season.

Like your final summing up, our fabs are gonna have to get used to a bit of “slowly, slowly, catchy monkey”.  I think LM might call this “cat and mouse”.

But I was happy we didn’t rush our attacks today…bar one Dickie pass which Conway was never in the race for.

 

First half hour was really two sides playing the same game. Hold off, play it around the back, look for an opening. Boro did it better than us though, for a couple of reasons - we weren’t as comfortable/used to it, and their pressing was better. Again, no issues with playing from the back but it wasn’t playing from the back - it was frequent short passes to Vyner and Dickie, both of whom got caught more than once. I’m not someone who thinks we need to launch it (and we don’t have the players for that), but what did need to happen was to play with more pace - and that’s when that ten minutes arose. The overplaying you mention happened in the first half as well, we just weren’t punished (and Manning mentioned post match that they expected Boro to be higher in their press half two). 
 

(NB half time in the concourse heard multiple conversations to that effect, also reflected in forum thread from a glance)
 

The issue there inherently is you can have a gameplan, but so do the other side. I think it’s a stretch to suggest the TGH goal came from anything other than a moment of individual genius - it wasn’t really a worked opening and xG would be on the floor for it.

No issue on patience but it has to come with penetration. That was lacking for long periods today and although I can appreciate that first half tactically, it is a very risky tactic - had Boro capitalised on one of the robs from Zak or Rob, we’d be having a very different debate tonight. Thats why for me today probably raised more questions than answers - I saw play being enforced on a team who didn’t look fully comfortable with it. And they may do with time. But today, I think a spirited second half and some quality at the end of half one has somewhat shielded what for a long part - even though appreciative tactically - was a meh performance at best.

[W-S-M Seagull]

34 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I said before the game there is no reason to go into today’s game expecting defeat.  We are a competitive side, we are usually / always in the game.  Goals decide games.

I enjoyed the first half hour, because I got a chance to see what was going on.  Boro were hardly expansive either, and it takes two to tango!

In some respects it was a bit like QPR - Boro contesting the middle, forcing us around the outside.

But the one noticeable difference for me (because I criticise him for not doing this every week!) was Bell coming inside to get the ball, or inside and deep to get the ball.  Manning talked about Boro’s rotations, this was City’s version.  Doesn’t necessarily lead to anything but keeps the ball, moves players around, might make an opponent switch-off.  It created a channel for Pring.  The battle between him and Isaiah Jones was a fantastic watch.

It also meant that it allowed us to mix up when Dickie came forward too.

What keeping possession meant was (simplified) we weren’t chasing after the ball…and I think in the 5 mins before TGH’s goal, Boro had started to get a bit sloppy with the ball because they’d been chasing us a bit.  We pinched a couple of balls and started to threaten on the counter.

Why was the h-t consensus that we were lucky?  In what respect?  I thought it was an even first half, although that ten mins before half-time was the best ten mins of either side.

Second half frustrated me…before the own goal, I said to Joe and guy next to me, we are over-playing in our defensive third, making an extra pass or two rather than clipping one in the channel.  We invited Boro forward / we invited their press.  The equaliser epitomised what we’d done in those early second half minutes.  It reminded me of West Brom (home 0-0), where our over-playing lead to them believing in themselves.

But fair play, we dug-in, got the goal - another goal from our much-maligned set-pieces which are actually one of the most successful in the Champ!!  And then we dug-in some more.

Re the press, we haven’t high pressed hugely all season, mainly blocking passing lanes.  Today felt like a bit more of the same.  Crooks caused Dickie, Pring and Bell a real problem, especially as Pring had Jones to worry about too.  Glad he went off.

I also liked that Knight started to flex his position in-possession to not just right side, but left side too, and we started to get some joy in that channel….the TGH goal the icing on the cake….after a good press, Dickie header, Knight layoff…boom.

But I don’t think we have looked like a real high-pressing side all season.

Like your final summing up, our fabs are gonna have to get used to a bit of “slowly, slowly, catchy monkey”.  I think LM might call this “cat and mouse”.

But I was happy we didn’t rush our attacks today…bar one Dickie pass which Conway was never in the race for.

 

I might have to consider staying in the sports bar until about 40 mins in future

[shelts]

2 hours ago, Silvio Dante said:

That first 35 minutes were as bored as I’ve been at Ashton Gate for years - I’m talking Osman era bored

Not sure if you’ve been watching our football under Nige!!

[Davefevs]

31 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

First half hour was really two sides playing the same game. Hold off, play it around the back, look for an opening. Boro did it better than us though, for a couple of reasons - we weren’t as comfortable/used to it, and their pressing was better. Again, no issues with playing from the back but it wasn’t playing from the back - it was frequent short passes to Vyner and Dickie, both of whom got caught more than once. I’m not someone who thinks we need to launch it (and we don’t have the players for that), but what did need to happen was to play with more pace - and that’s when that ten minutes arose. The overplaying you mention happened in the first half as well, we just weren’t punished (and Manning mentioned post match that they expected Boro to be higher in their press half two). 
 

(NB half time in the concourse heard multiple conversations to that effect, also reflected in forum thread from a glance)
 

The issue there inherently is you can have a gameplan, but so do the other side. I think it’s a stretch to suggest the TGH goal came from anything other than a moment of individual genius - it wasn’t really a worked opening and xG would be on the floor for it.

No issue on patience but it has to come with penetration. That was lacking for long periods today and although I can appreciate that first half tactically, it is a very risky tactic - had Boro capitalised on one of the robs from Zak or Rob, we’d be having a very different debate tonight. Thats why for me today probably raised more questions than answers - I saw play being enforced on a team who didn’t look fully comfortable with it. And they may do with time. But today, I think a spirited second half and some quality at the end of half one has somewhat shielded what for a long part - even though appreciative tactically - was a meh performance at best.

First bold bit - I think first half we did that 30 yards from our goal (and that is ok for me).  Second half it was being knocked back to Vyner who was deeper than his 18 yard box.  In LM expecting that to happen in the second half, why didn’t we react, or did we ignore instruction?

Second bold but - I wasn’t suggesting that.  Just saying it came from a moment we got our press working effectively, won the ball and “reacted” from there.  Certainly not a planned pattern, just a bit of the case that you can get opportunities to create from doing the right things often.

Third bold bit - Yeah, I think that’s why I didn’t think it was a huge divergence in how Nige had us playing.  At worst you could call it Emporers New Clothes.  It wasn’t a tactical masterclass by any stretch.  It was a continuation of a team with a good work ethic clicking at key moments.  I’m happy if it’s not too different.  I don’t think there was tonnes wrong, just results suffered through injury.

[Silvio Dante]

2 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

First bold bit - I think first half we did that 30 yards from our goal (and that is ok for me).  Second half it was being knocked back to Vyner who was deeper than his 18 yard box.  In LM expecting that to happen in the second half, why didn’t we react, or did we ignore instruction?

Second bold but - I wasn’t suggesting that.  Just saying it came from a moment we got our press working effectively, won the ball and “reacted” from there.  Certainly not a planned pattern, just a bit of the case that you can get opportunities to create from doing the right things often.

Third bold bit - Yeah, I think that’s why I didn’t think it was a huge divergence in how Nige had us playing.  At worst you could call it Emporers New Clothes.  It wasn’t a tactical masterclass by any stretch.  It was a continuation of a team with a good work ethic clicking at key moments.  I’m happy if it’s not too different.  I don’t think there was tonnes wrong, just results suffered through injury.

First Vyner steal I remember first half was on the edge of 18 (think it’s on the Sky highlights as first item) so I’d have to disagree there. What I think it does do - if we’re going to play this way (and I agree with @The turtle on another thread that I think it may not be accepted based on the clubs DNA) is bring Max further into focus. His distribution remained poor today - notably one where there was an easy Tanner ball but he played a dodgy ball to Dickie, and the “floaty” distribution remained. If we’re playing it around more and out from the back then his weakest suit becomes all the more apparent and I wouldn’t be shocked to see Beadle about in January.

You do raise a very important question though - if Manning did expect the higher press to happen, the players didn’t follow instructions. That may be again because they’re being asked to do something that (as yet) they’re not comfy with.

 

[Ian M]

12 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

First Vyner steal I remember first half was on the edge of 18 (think it’s on the Sky highlights as first item) so I’d have to disagree there. What I think it does do - if we’re going to play this way (and I agree with @The turtle on another thread that I think it may not be accepted based on the clubs DNA) is bring Max further into focus. His distribution remained poor today - notably one where there was an easy Tanner ball but he played a dodgy ball to Dickie, and the “floaty” distribution remained. If we’re playing it around more and out from the back then his weakest suit becomes all the more apparent and I wouldn’t be shocked to see Beadle about in January.

You do raise a very important question though - if Manning did expect the higher press to happen, the players didn’t follow instructions. That may be again because they’re being asked to do something that (as yet) they’re not comfy with.

 

Wasn't that more a case of Zak's touch being heavy when intercepting rather than overplaying?

[bcfc01]

15 minutes ago, Ian M said:

Wasn't that more a case of Zak's touch being heavy when intercepting rather than overplaying?

100%.

Great bit of defending followed by a heavy touch.

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, Silvio Dante said:

First Vyner steal I remember first half was on the edge of 18 (think it’s on the Sky highlights as first item) so I’d have to disagree there. What I think it does do - if we’re going to play this way (and I agree with @The turtle on another thread that I think it may not be accepted based on the clubs DNA) is bring Max further into focus. His distribution remained poor today - notably one where there was an easy Tanner ball but he played a dodgy ball to Dickie, and the “floaty” distribution remained. If we’re playing it around more and out from the back then his weakest suit becomes all the more apparent and I wouldn’t be shocked to see Beadle about in January.

You do raise a very important question though - if Manning did expect the higher press to happen, the players didn’t follow instructions. That may be again because they’re being asked to do something that (as yet) they’re not comfy with.

 

That was him running back to a pass forward from Boro…not us passing amongst ourselves and getting deeper, which was the case start of second half.

I think Max’s biggest issue for me is the time it takes to decide…he seems to take that smidge longer and then telegraphs the pass and either opens it for interception, or not enough time for the receiver to get it down without being under pressure.

[Dr Balls]

The first 30 mins was like 2 teams playing football chess and cancelling each other out and about as exciting as watching chess. All the play was 20 yards either side of the halfway line. Thank goodness for TGH taking the initiative and scoring one of the best goals from outside the box by a City player in quite some time.

Also thought we were really lethargic at the beginning of the second half and their 2 goals were no surprise. The problem playing Conway up front on his own is that Max won’t kick it long, and we got ourselves into trouble. Tommy needs someone to play off up front. Without that we won’t see the best of him.

Cornick came on and caused their centre halves more problems, plus provided a better outlet. It’s a conundrum, because Tommy is the better striker and likely to score more goals, but Cornick is better as a lone forward.