The Twine Setup

[Silvio Dante]

Well. That wasn’t a particularly enjoyable game to travel 250 miles round for today.

But, Scott Twine today. Not talking attitude in this thread (stank), but how we set him up and how it impacted on the whole.

The starting lineup, other than Naismith, was as last week - where we played very well first half but ST was very quiet. Today, he was far more involved and set up a couple of good chances early on.

But the reason he was more involved, was because his position was markedly infield - and that did a few things:

- Bird was poorer as he had less space as Twine was in his “area”

- Every time Pring went forward, he had no options ahead and had to check back. Playing inside meant he was playing into a conjested area, so it was back to Naismith

- Most key, it made us massively lopsided. We were playing 4-2-1-2-1 with one left side and two right. We were playing in 2/3 of the pitch and Derby saw that and compressed and attacked space accordingly.

The lopsided nature was obvious all first half, and LM even commented that we’d gone too central - but that was caused by Scott’s positioning.

So, was it Twine going off piste and moving too much infield, or was it Liam setting us up badly? Either way, the change was obvious at HT - we should have sacrificed Bird as he was less effective than Twine, and then put more natural width in.

But either way, our problems today emerged in large part exactly by the way we deployed the player. And that could - and should - have been changed a long time before he was taken off.

[redkev]

5 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

Well. That wasn’t a particularly enjoyable game to travel 250 miles round for today.

But, Scott Twine today. Not talking attitude in this thread (stank), but how we set him up and how it impacted on the whole.

The starting lineup, other than Naismith, was as last week - where we played very well first half but ST was very quiet. Today, he was far more involved and set up a couple of good chances early on.

But the reason he was more involved, was because his position was markedly infield - and that did a few things:

- Bird was poorer as he had less space as Twine was in his “area”

- Every time Pring went forward, he had no options ahead and had to check back. Playing inside meant he was playing into a conjested area, so it was back to Naismith

- Most key, it made us massively lopsided. We were playing 4-2-1-2-1 with one left side and two right. We were playing in 2/3 of the pitch and Derby saw that and compressed and attacked space accordingly.

The lopsided nature was obvious all first half, and LM even commented that we’d gone too central - but that was caused by Scott’s positioning.

So, was it Twine going off piste and moving too much infield, or was it Liam setting us up badly? Either way, the change was obvious at HT - we should have sacrificed Bird as he was less effective than Twine, and then put more natural width in.

But either way, our problems today emerged in large part exactly by the way we deployed the player. And that could - and should - have been changed a long time before he was taken off.

It’s worrying that fans are seeing tactical situations arising and talking about them in the stands after 5 pints and saying what he needs to do before our coach is seeing them , I keep saying it , he’s from the same camp as Southgate reactive to every situation rather than proactive , in this league your coach and his tactics are as important as the players abilities 

[petehinton]

I really hope today is the last we see of him deployed there.  It absolutely killed us, and Pring in particular.  He was so exposed it was unreal, all they had to do was ping diags on counter attacks and they were away. They even had a load of joy down that side at the start of the second half, where Pring had to concede a corner and straight after screamed at him for being so out of position. 
 

Games like today & Cov is exactly why, even after Millwall, I am very comfy in saying paying £3.7m for him was mental. 

Edited August 31 by petehinton

[Silvio Dante]

7 minutes ago, redkev said:

It’s worrying that fans are seeing tactical situations arising and talking about them in the stands after 5 pints and saying what he needs to do before our coach is seeing them , I keep saying it , he’s from the same camp as Southgate reactive to every situation rather than proactive , in this league your coach and his tactics are as important as the players abilities 

Jesus mate I was driving. I wish I’d had five pints, it might have made it bearable (although it was Madri on draught in the concourse so that would have been equally as torturous)

Edited August 31 by Silvio Dante

[Mr Popodopolous]

7 minutes ago, petehinton said:

I really hope today is the last we see of him deployed there.  It absolutely killed us, and Pring in particular.  He was so exposed it was unreal, all they had to do was ping diags on counter attacks and they were away. They even had a load of joy down that side at the start of the second half, where Pring had to concede a corner and straight after screamed at him for being so out of position. 
 

Games like today & Cov is exactly why, even after Millwall, I am very comfy in saying paying £3.7m for him was mental. 

In fairness it may have been £3.25m.

There was a report of 3.7mish but this seems to have been in Euros on Transfermarkt.

[Shuffle]

14 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

Well. That wasn’t a particularly enjoyable game to travel 250 miles round for today.

But, Scott Twine today. Not talking attitude in this thread (stank), but how we set him up and how it impacted on the whole.

The starting lineup, other than Naismith, was as last week - where we played very well first half but ST was very quiet. Today, he was far more involved and set up a couple of good chances early on.

But the reason he was more involved, was because his position was markedly infield - and that did a few things:

- Bird was poorer as he had less space as Twine was in his “area”

- Every time Pring went forward, he had no options ahead and had to check back. Playing inside meant he was playing into a conjested area, so it was back to Naismith

- Most key, it made us massively lopsided. We were playing 4-2-1-2-1 with one left side and two right. We were playing in 2/3 of the pitch and Derby saw that and compressed and attacked space accordingly.

The lopsided nature was obvious all first half, and LM even commented that we’d gone too central - but that was caused by Scott’s positioning.

So, was it Twine going off piste and moving too much infield, or was it Liam setting us up badly? Either way, the change was obvious at HT - we should have sacrificed Bird as he was less effective than Twine, and then put more natural width in.

But either way, our problems today emerged in large part exactly by the way we deployed the player. And that could - and should - have been changed a long time before he was taken off.

Pretty much said the same in match day thread. Can only assume its tactical as pretty much played with 2 x10s  which you can’t really do in the formation we started with. We could see it but believe Manning has ducked the tough decision as to who to leave out from midfield to shoe horn players into a shape that doesnt suit them or benefit us.

[GrahamC]

7 minutes ago, Shuffle said:

Pretty much said the same in match day thread. Can only assume its tactical as pretty much played with 2 x10s  which you can’t really do in the formation we started with. We could see it but believe Manning has ducked the tough decision as to who to leave out from midfield to shoe horn players into a shape that doesnt suit them or benefit us.

Thing is now, with a 2 week gap the next game is a free hit in terms of selection.

Plenty (certainly Roberts, McNally, McGuane) who haven’t featured will be wondering why they’re here if they don’t get a chance.

Be interesting to see if Hirakawa is fit enough to start too, very surprised he was involved today.

Last point, we haven’t kept a single clean sheet yet, we aren’t going to pick up many points on the road unless we start to do so, as this squad doesn’t look like it has many goals in it.

Edited August 31 by GrahamC

[petehinton]

7 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

In fairness it may have been £3.25m.

There was a report of 3.7mish but this seems to have been in Euros on Transfermarkt.

Am fairly confident it’s £3.7m sterling

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 minute ago, petehinton said:

Am fairly confident it’s £3.7m sterling

Wow really. That's...

I remember one Report said £3.25m Twine and latterly another said £1.75m McNally.

 We can add £0.45m to that then?

[PortInTheMorning]

Excellent post.

"So, was it Twine going off piste and moving too much infield, or was it Liam setting us up badly? Either way, the change was obvious at HT - we should have sacrificed Bird as he was less effective than Twine, and then put more natural width in."

Well, this is exactly what I was wondering too: it was as if Twine and Bird were competing with each other to play in the 10 - they kept getting in each other's way which resulted in turnovers. Ian Gay and others said that Manning set us up with two 10s, but I don't think this is the case as this would have made us too lopsided as you stated. In short, I think it was Twine (who admittedly did have good game - certainly more effective than Bird) who was drifting in too much to his favoured position. I suppose it's possible that Manning gave him license to do this, but serious questions need to be asked if this is the case.

I agree also that we should have added more width second half: personally, I would have played Mehmetti who I felt was decent when he came on.

Next game I think we shoul drop Bird back into a 6, put Twine in the 10 and Mehmeti on the left - Maybe Yu for Sykes too?

[1960maaan]

I think that left side role looked good last week , he did come inside but also his starting position seemed wider. 
Pring was so isolated and given no support, if he had tried to take on the FB and lost the ball, there would have been acres of grass open between Pring and Naismith. We were incredibly lop sided today , almost no point in going wide left.

[Davefevs]

19 minutes ago, Shuffle said:

Pretty much said the same in match day thread. Can only assume its tactical as pretty much played with 2 x10s  which you can’t really do in the formation we started with. We could see it but believe Manning has ducked the tough decision as to who to leave out from midfield to shoe horn players into a shape that doesnt suit them or benefit us.

For info @The Exiled Robin sent me this from today:

Posted without comment.

Last week for context:

Edited August 31 by Davefevs

[BCFCGav]

It’s been an odd experiment from the start. I took it to be LM not wanting to lose any of Williams, Knight or Bird from the midfield so finding a way to shoe-horn Twine in. Maybe someone more tactically adept than me can explain the issue with moving Knight or Williams to the bench, playing Bird deeper alongside the one that stays in the team and playing Twine in the 10. Round pegs in round holes. 

After today there will surely be tweaks, this seems an obvious one. Also allows us to start Mehmeti LW, he’s been poor off the bench. I think he’s better when able to grow into a game. 

 

[cidercity1987]

The answer to this conundrum is surely obvious

Vyner Naismith/Mcnally Roberts

Tanner Williams Knight Pring

Bird Twine

Armstrong 

Sacrificing ineffective Sykes to give more cover on the left side and strengthen the defence in the absence of Dickie 

Edited August 31 by cidercity1987

[Silvio Dante]

5 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

For info @The Exiled Robin sent me this from today:

Posted without comment.

I’m glad to see my eyes are backed up by the evidence!

The bigger question is that if I can see it, if others can see it, and the data shows it….what the bloody hell are they doing on that bench?

[Shuffle]

13 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

For info @The Exiled Robin sent me this from today:

Posted without comment.

Last week for context:

So what changed from last week tactically is the key question and why?

[Mendip City]

Too many clubs in the bag and not playing players in their correct positions to crow bar them in. Not a great place to be.
In Manning’s plan A I struggle to see how both Twine and Bird fit it, a brave decision needs to be made. 
it’s probable that they could play together but we’ve yet to see plan B or C or…. 

[Silvio Dante]

1 minute ago, Shuffle said:

So what changed from last week tactically is the key question and why?

My gut is, and it’s partially driven by Scott’s godawful attitude today, is this:

By any account he was the weakest of the midfield last week, due to not really being engaged. So he got more engaged today. And drifted away from the plan. I can’t believe that any coach would set us up that lopsided so I reckon Liam ducked the decision to change things/correct things when Scott , despite not playing to the plan and causing us issues by that, set up chances.

My gut is that Scott was the one who went off piste. And his childish attitude today does play into my thinking there. But it should have been corrected.

[W-S-M Seagull]

17 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

I’m glad to see my eyes are backed up by the evidence!

The bigger question is that if I can see it, if others can see it, and the data shows it….what the bloody hell are they doing on that bench?

Not just that but we also have analysts sat in the stand that surely can see it? 

[grifty]

3 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

My gut is that Scott was the one who went off piste. And his childish attitude today does play into my thinking there. But it should have been corrected.

It was odd, he was arguing with the ref I’m guessing he because the Derby player wasn’t booked for a tug back. He then launched the free kick into the sky and his head was gone.

[Eddie Notgetinya]

Chasing a no.10 all summer and then not playing them in that position is absolute madness.

 

[joe jordans teeth]

Sounds like another shit Netflix series 

Edited August 31 by joe jordans teeth

[Supersonic Robin]

Through pre-season, it looked as though we were planning to play a 4-2-3-1, so my assumption was that Twine would play centrally in the "3". Once we signed both Twine and Earthy, as well as looking at CBs, I started to think that Manning may be planning to return to the 3-4-2-1, using two 10's.

I never gave much consideration to the idea of Twine on the left. Equally, I didn't expect to see Bird in the 10 role. At times we seem to have moved from a 4-2-3-1 to a 3-4-2-1 when in possession, but today it just seemed to be a case of Twine coming inside without the supporting movements that would make it work.

It already feels as though we're slightly confused about how we want to go about fitting our best players into the team. That's a strange position to be in the day after a summer window in which the manager got everything he wanted!

[Lorenzos Only Goal]

1 hour ago, redkev said:

It’s worrying that fans are seeing tactical situations arising and talking about them in the stands after 5 pints and saying what he needs to do before our coach is seeing them , I keep saying it , he’s from the same camp as Southgate reactive to every situation rather than proactive , in this league your coach and his tactics are as important as the players abilities 

I suspect he's lacking in many areas, but I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt for the next 7 games.  If we don't hit a return of 15 points I'd like to see 20 as it's a soft block of 10. I think we're in for a torrid run upto Christmas if we don't start winning these sorts of games.

[Silvio Dante]

Just now, Supersonic Robin said:

Through pre-season, it looked as though we were planning to play a 4-2-3-1, so my assumption was that Twine would play centrally in the "3". Once we signed both Twine and Earthy, as well as looking at CBs, I started to think that Manning may be planning to return to the 3-4-2-1, using two 10's.

I never gave much consideration to the idea of Twine on the left. Equally, I didn't expect to see Bird in the 10 role. At times we seem to have moved from a 4-2-3-1 to a 3-4-2-1 when in possession, but today it just seemed to be a case of Twine coming inside without the supporting movements that would make it work.

It already feels as though we're slightly confused about how we want to go about fitting our best players into the team. That's a strange position to be in the day after a summer window in which the manager got everything he wanted!

The biggest truth of all is that the best eleven players don’t make the best team.

Even as a confirmed Twine doubter, I’m not myopic enough to state he’s likely to be one of our best technical footballers. But does he get in our best team? People slate Williams but we don’t have anyone else who really wins the ball and tidies up. Knights captain. Bird prior to today (and I think impacted by Twine) has been excellent. So I think our three are Williams, Knight, Bird. We know Twine isn’t a wide player, so for me, he should wait for an opportunity. 
 

He’s not good enough to build a side around. And with Bird performing well in what seems to be Twines only position that he can or wants to play, that seems the logical solution.

[Sir Geoff]

2 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

The biggest truth of all is that the best eleven players don’t make the best team.

Even as a confirmed Twine doubter, I’m not myopic enough to state he’s likely to be one of our best technical footballers. But does he get in our best team? People slate Williams but we don’t have anyone else who really wins the ball and tidies up. Knights captain. Bird prior to today (and I think impacted by Twine) has been excellent. So I think our three are Williams, Knight, Bird. We know Twine isn’t a wide player, so for me, he should wait for an opportunity. 
 

He’s not good enough to build a side around. And with Bird performing well in what seems to be Twines only position that he can or wants to play, that seems the logical solution.

Even more strange that we paid nearly £4 million for him the after signing Earthy.

[Supersonic Robin]

2 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

The biggest truth of all is that the best eleven players don’t make the best team.

Even as a confirmed Twine doubter, I’m not myopic enough to state he’s likely to be one of our best technical footballers. But does he get in our best team? People slate Williams but we don’t have anyone else who really wins the ball and tidies up. Knights captain. Bird prior to today (and I think impacted by Twine) has been excellent. So I think our three are Williams, Knight, Bird. We know Twine isn’t a wide player, so for me, he should wait for an opportunity. 
 

He’s not good enough to build a side around. And with Bird performing well in what seems to be Twines only position that he can or wants to play, that seems the logical solution.

I agree with everything you've said, but it then lends itself to the same frustration IMO:

We've made a mess of the summer recruitment if we've constructed a squad in which our best players (or at least the players we've spent the most money on) don't fit into our best team

[Dr Balls]

9 minutes ago, Supersonic Robin said:

Through pre-season, it looked as though we were planning to play a 4-2-3-1, so my assumption was that Twine would play centrally in the "3". Once we signed both Twine and Earthy, as well as looking at CBs, I started to think that Manning may be planning to return to the 3-4-2-1, using two 10's.

I never gave much consideration to the idea of Twine on the left. Equally, I didn't expect to see Bird in the 10 role. At times we seem to have moved from a 4-2-3-1 to a 3-4-2-1 when in possession, but today it just seemed to be a case of Twine coming inside without the supporting movements that would make it work.

It already feels as though we're slightly confused about how we want to go about fitting our best players into the team. That's a strange position to be in the day after a summer window in which the manager got everything he wanted!

Maybe giving Manning everything he wanted and possibly more is part of the problem. Too many options and supposedly good players who can’t all be fitted into his preferred and somewhat rigid 4-2-3-1 formation. And my worry is that in the process, the defence will deteriorate, having finally got much better last season.

[BetterRedthanBlue]

Twine has to be a number 10. Bird either plays next to Knight or Manning drops one of Knight or Williams to fit Bird.

Armstrong on the left with Yu on the right with Fally up front.

[Shauntaylor85]

1 hour ago, Eddie Notgetinya said:

Chasing a no.10 all summer and then not playing them in that position is absolute madness.

 

It is actually disgraceful. Lansdown must be wondering what on earth he opened the chequebook for! 

28 minutes ago, BetterRedthanBlue said:

Twine has to be a number 10. Bird either plays next to Knight or Manning drops one of Knight or Williams to fit Bird.

Armstrong on the left with Yu on the right with Fally up front.

Completely this. Stop being LJ! 

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, Supersonic Robin said:

Through pre-season, it looked as though we were planning to play a 4-2-3-1, so my assumption was that Twine would play centrally in the "3". Once we signed both Twine and Earthy, as well as looking at CBs, I started to think that Manning may be planning to return to the 3-4-2-1, using two 10's.

I never gave much consideration to the idea of Twine on the left. Equally, I didn't expect to see Bird in the 10 role. At times we seem to have moved from a 4-2-3-1 to a 3-4-2-1 when in possession, but today it just seemed to be a case of Twine coming inside without the supporting movements that would make it work.

It already feels as though we're slightly confused about how we want to go about fitting our best players into the team. That's a strange position to be in the day after a summer window in which the manager got everything he wanted!

Still not watched the game….the full 90 is usually up by now.  The cynic says we lost so it won’t be a priority!  So just commenting generally.

But you’ll often hear me say that the managers plans, eg best eleven, system, etc is normally thrown out the window by the end of Sept, because things / shit happens, injuries, form, signings, losing players etc.

But it does feel (not necessarily true) that the delay in signing Twine has caused an issue.  It’s meant Bird playing 10 v Hull / Millwall, doing well, having played all pre-season in CM (often with Knight).  It’s meant Williams playing with Knight, and then to play Bird, he’s shoehorned Twine in to the hybrid role.  He’s dropped Mehmeti rather than make a tougher decision on Knight or Williams…or even Bird.

He needs to use this break to get his head sorted about who plays where, and then let competition drive improvement.  He needs to think about his selection “rules” too.  Nige was too rigid in his.  I’m gonna watch the coming weeks and see who plays and who doesn’t.

FWIW, Mehmeti also inverts in the LW role, but he does give some width, and I think he’s better than Twine without the ball too.  Some might be shocked by that.

[Spike]

4 hours ago, cidercity1987 said:

The answer to this conundrum is surely obvious

Vyner Naismith/Mcnally Roberts

Tanner Williams Knight Pring

Bird Twine

Armstrong 

Sacrificing ineffective Sykes to give more cover on the left side and strengthen the defence in the absence of Dickie 

It's been proven time and time again that Vyner is a liability in a back 3 unless played in the very middle. He loses his positioning too often. In a back pairing it's a lot more straight forward as he's protected more either side and so he's better. 

I hate the idea of us going back to the back 3, we don't have a natural right sided wing back, Vyner loses track of his positioning and effective teams use those wide pockets to force us back. We also lose the ability to go through the middle as much with a back 3 as the team has to move side to side to provide cover and in possession give options. It wasn't quite so bad under Pearson because we played Counter football so it was all about getting up the pitch as fast as possible, not the passing build up we do now. 

[Silvio Dante]

4 hours ago, Spike said:

It's been proven time and time again that Vyner is a liability in a back 3 unless played in the very middle. He loses his positioning too often. In a back pairing it's a lot more straight forward as he's protected more either side and so he's better. 

I hate the idea of us going back to the back 3, we don't have a natural right sided wing back, Vyner loses track of his positioning and effective teams use those wide pockets to force us back. We also lose the ability to go through the middle as much with a back 3 as the team has to move side to side to provide cover and in possession give options. It wasn't quite so bad under Pearson because we played Counter football so it was all about getting up the pitch as fast as possible, not the passing build up we do now. 

I hate it more because if we have to change system, having worked “on the grass” all summer and had a carefully planned out schedule for pre season to ensure it was effective, we do so because we’ve signed a player who was indifferent on loan and we just feel we have to play him.

Tails. Dogs. Wagging. Etc.

[Son of Fred]

9 hours ago, GrahamC said:

haven’t kept a single clean sheet yet, we aren’t going to pick up many points on the road unless we start to do so, as this squad doesn’t look like it has many goals in it.

Just on the road???

What you've written there is the recipe for a shit pie..  

[Son of Fred]

9 hours ago, BCFCGav said:

It’s been an odd experiment from the start. I took it to be LM not wanting to lose any of Williams, Knight or Bird from the midfield so finding a way to shoe-horn Twine in. Maybe someone more tactically adept than me can explain the issue with moving Knight or Williams to the bench, playing Bird deeper alongside the one that stays in the team and playing Twine in the 10. Round pegs in round holes. 

After today there will surely be tweaks, this seems an obvious one. Also allows us to start Mehmeti LW, he’s been poor off the bench. I think he’s better when able to grow into a game. 

 

Get Knight outa there & get someone with a bit of composure/quality in..

[GrahamC]

59 minutes ago, Son of Fred said:

Just on the road???

What you've written there is the recipe for a shit pie..  

I would have thought it was self evident that you are aiming to keep clean sheets home AND away.

My real point was a successful side is one who can go away in this division & do so consistently.

Derby are a pretty basic side, but we could easily have conceded five yesterday.

That is definitely the recipe for a shit pie..

[spudski]

I can see problems that imo will affect our season. 

Dickie is the glue for our defence. We rely on him so much. His injury is a major blow. Regardless of new signings. 

Naismith is a liability in defense.

Mehmeti and Twine are LMs favourites...and imo not the answer for consistent quality and strategy.

Our two Strikers don't look like they have the quality to give us the goals needed to improve on last season. 

And LM is imo, ingrained in one pattern of play, that is easily defended against, and leaves too many opportunities for the opposition to probe down our flanks, even before yesterday. 

He's reactive rather than proactive. 

Think it'll be another season of frustration, where we will be consistently inconsistent. Giving hope, then brought back down to earth again. 

 

[Shauntaylor85]

1 hour ago, Son of Fred said:

Get Knight outa there & get someone with a bit of composure/quality in..

I don’t think he’s playing well at all and maybe the armband is impacting him. That said I also don’t think he’s as good as everyone makes out from last season either. Hard working yes but I’m disappointed with our midfielders, we lack someone who can dominate. Maybe we will see this Oxford signing start. But again it needs to be on of him, Williams or Knight with Bird. I can’t believe Max Bird who is a 6 is constantly being shoved into the 10. It makes no sense other than it was his plea to get Twine signed at Hull.

Edited September 1 by Shauntaylor85

[RedEyez]

Might be an unpopular opinion but I don’t really care… I would drop Knight for a CM pairing of Williams and Bird with Twine in the 10 and play Mehmeti LW and Yu RW.

[Jose]

18 minutes ago, RedEyez said:

Might be an unpopular opinion but I don’t really care… I would drop Knight for a CM pairing of Williams and Bird with Twine in the 10 and play Mehmeti LW and Yu RW.

I’m one of Knights biggest fans but he has been poor so far. I don’t think him and Williams work as neither have the quality on the ball needed. I’m not sure LM agrees though as they constantly are being paired and unbelievably finished the game together. I see the point about Twine coming infield yesterday getting in the way at times but in that first half he created two clear cut chances and missed two clear cut chances coming in field. His free kick nearly went in. I think there’s an argument he was our best player although looked as bad as the rest of them after half time. 
 

If Mehmeti is the answer on that left then I’m not really sure what the question is. Such a disappointment. 

[jbcfc]

i’d like to see something like this next game. 4-3-3 / 4-2-3-1 but can switch to a 3-4-1-2 in possession with armstrong making runs from the left and pring bombing on, with fally being the focal point up top that we need. bird back in central midfield where he belongs but with licence to get forward and make inverted runs for yu, and twine in the 10 rather than drifting in all the time and leaving us with no width on the left. 

Edited September 1 by jbcfc

[Son of Fred]

1 hour ago, spudski said:

consistently inconsistent. Giving hope, then brought back down to earth again. 

 

The Bristol City way??....that's how I feel.

Am I alone,,in as much as before yesterday's game I had 'that' feeling - three league games unbeaten with an international break post Derby.

It's that  horrible feeling of predictability,,knowing what's coming.

Two weeks 'on the grass' for Liam et Al to get to grips with the shambles of that second half - with players returning to availability and options,, I'll be watching with interest,but keeping hope on hold!

Edited September 1 by Son of Fred

[Silvio Dante]

13 minutes ago, jbcfc said:

i’d like to see this next game. 4-3-3 out of possession but in possession it can switch to a 3-4-1-2 with armstrong making runs from the left and pring bombing on, with fally being the focal point up top that we need. bird back in central midfield where he belongs but with licence to get forward and make inverted runs for yu, and twine in the 10 rather than drifting in all the time and leaving us with no width on the left. 

I’m not sure where people are getting the idea of Armstrong playing wider from. Per Transfermarkt (not the most reliable I know), he’s played 5 games there and only one at championship level. I’m not sure from what I’ve seen composure and awareness are as yet his strengths, which you’d need wide, and more pertinently, up top he rarely finishes a game so asking him to do the extra work rate of up and back he’d need seems ambitious.

We signed 7 players this summer to add to the already added Bird and Stokes. If we needed a wide attacker, we should have bloody bought one in that batch.

[Jose]

1 minute ago, Silvio Dante said:

I’m not sure where people are getting the idea of Armstrong playing wider from. Per Transfermarkt (not the most reliable I know), he’s played 5 games there and only one at championship level. I’m not sure from what I’ve seen composure and awareness are as yet his strengths, which you’d need wide, and more pertinently, up top he rarely finishes a game so asking him to do the extra work rate of up and back he’d need seems ambitious.

We signed 7 players this summer to add to the already added Bird and Stokes. If we needed a wide attacker, we should have bloody bought one in that batch.

Sums up my thoughts putting him wide exactly. You need some sort of composure and quality with the ball at your feet in those positions. I’m not sure he has that. I guess if he could finish we wouldn’t be able to sign him in the first place. 

[jbcfc]

2 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

I’m not sure where people are getting the idea of Armstrong playing wider from. Per Transfermarkt (not the most reliable I know), he’s played 5 games there and only one at championship level.

i take your point. i’m not saying it will work, it’s just something i’d like to see tried as he has had his good moments but i think fally has to start. i’d probably be happy with mehmeti starting out wide and armstrong being a ‘super sub’ - feels like a role he would be suited to perfectly.

[DaveInSA]

1 hour ago, spudski said:

I can see problems that imo will affect our season. 

Dickie is the glue for our defence. We rely on him so much. His injury is a major blow. Regardless of new signings. 

Naismith is a liability in defense.

Mehmeti and Twine are LMs favourites...and imo not the answer for consistent quality and strategy.

Our two Strikers don't look like they have the quality to give us the goals needed to improve on last season. 

And LM is imo, ingrained in one pattern of play, that is easily defended against, and leaves too many opportunities for the opposition to probe down our flanks, even before yesterday. 

He's reactive rather than proactive. 

Think it'll be another season of frustration, where we will be consistently inconsistent. Giving hope, then brought back down to earth again. 

 

This is totally my thinking. It’s like a Bristol City disease.

Those comments on the players are spot on too.

E.g. Armstrong is a menace, but can’t hit a barn door with a banjo. 

We don’t have the experience in the squad. James was axed, IMHO a massive mistake (assuming of course he wanted to stay). There’s literally nobody at this football club now who has ever tasted success. Nor played nor coached at the highest level.

If you’re a serious team, you can’t lose to a promoted side. End of story. It’s absolutely and completely laughable that folks on here think “well we’ve bought 8 players in - we should be promoted” You have to look at the quality of these players and where they are in the development curve. Oh and the capabilities I’m of the coaching staff to set the team up in the best way for the team.

In my mind this is a massive gamble. It might pay off. I don’t think it will THIS SEASON. 

Is it all doom and gloom? Nope. Are we good for top half? Nope. Will we go down? Nope. Does Manning have the balls to make tough decisions? Nope.

Just plain old mediocre Bristol City doing what Bristol City do best. Being mediocre.

[Davefevs]

2 hours ago, spudski said:

I can see problems that imo will affect our season. 

Dickie is the glue for our defence. We rely on him so much. His injury is a major blow. Regardless of new signings. 

Naismith is a liability in defense.

Mehmeti and Twine are LMs favourites...and imo not the answer for consistent quality and strategy.

Our two Strikers don't look like they have the quality to give us the goals needed to improve on last season. 

And LM is imo, ingrained in one pattern of play, that is easily defended against, and leaves too many opportunities for the opposition to probe down our flanks, even before yesterday. 

He's reactive rather than proactive. 

Think it'll be another season of frustration, where we will be consistently inconsistent. Giving hope, then brought back down to earth again. 

 

He gave two poor passes away yesterday, one after a little one-two with Max, where he stubbed a pass straight to the forward.  The other trying to thread a pass.  The first one was really bad, granted, almost cost us.  But…and it doesn’t absolve him of those two passes…he defended a zillion times better than Vyner yesterday, who allowed Yates to bully him.  Derby hit the full-backs aerially off of long passes and played off loose balls.  Naismith wasn’t the issue yesterday.

[2015]

12 hours ago, redkev said:

It’s worrying that fans are seeing tactical situations arising and talking about them in the stands after 5 pints and saying what he needs to do before our coach is seeing them , I keep saying it , he’s from the same camp as Southgate reactive to every situation rather than proactive , in this league your coach and his tactics are as important as the players abilities 

You HAVE to be able to adapt in the Championship. Derby had everything in their armour to make them physically tough to beat because their Manager knows they aren't good enough to have over 60% of the possession.

I honestly believe the slow passing game is no longer the progressive style anymore and something that was successful 10 years ago. Our English coaches are still obsessed by it.

We've just seen a Spain side rip that up in the Euros by playing with wingers, width and pace.

[Mr Popodopolous]

4 minutes ago, 2015 said:

You HAVE to be able to adapt in the Championship. Derby had everything in their armour to make them physically tough to beat because their Manager knows they aren't good enough to have over 60% of the possession.

I honestly believe the slow passing game is no longer the progressive style anymore and something that was successful 10 years ago. Our English coaches are still obsessed by it.

We've just seen a Spain side rip that up in the Euros by playing with wingers, width and pace.

They also dominated the ball vs us Spain, both basically.

Edited September 1 by Mr Popodopolous

[2015]

8 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

They also dominated the ball vs us Spain, both basically.

Yeah because our manager purposefully decided to cede possession to them. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 minute ago, 2015 said:

Yeah because our manager purposefully decided to cede possession to them. 

Agree in part, otoh think their midfield control etc better than ours overall.

There was a piece during the Euros that I agreed with which said we don't produce controllers in midfield in our game so much. Maybe is changing now but it's more natural to Spain. Found this too, separate piece.

https://www.uefa.com/euro2024/news/028f-1b5f837d5c3f-65487261b9af-1000--spain-2-1-england-how-la-roja-s-midfield-superiority-made/

[RedEyez]

1 hour ago, Jose said:

I’m one of Knights biggest fans but he has been poor so far. I don’t think him and Williams work as neither have the quality on the ball needed. I’m not sure LM agrees though as they constantly are being paired and unbelievably finished the game together. I see the point about Twine coming infield yesterday getting in the way at times but in that first half he created two clear cut chances and missed two clear cut chances coming in field. His free kick nearly went in. I think there’s an argument he was our best player although looked as bad as the rest of them after half time. 
 

If Mehmeti is the answer on that left then I’m not really sure what the question is. Such a disappointment. 

Well, he provides natural width, more so than Twine and his off ball game has improved quite a bit since he first joined which would help Pring out a bit more .

[spudski]

31 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

He gave two poor passes away yesterday, one after a little one-two with Max, where he stubbed a pass straight to the forward.  The other trying to thread a pass.  The first one was really bad, granted, almost cost us.  But…and it doesn’t absolve him of those two passes…he defended a zillion times better than Vyner yesterday, who allowed Yates to bully him.  Derby hit the full-backs aerially off of long passes and played off loose balls.  Naismith wasn’t the issue yesterday.

I think Vyner plays well when Dickies playing. Naismith just isn't a liability when it comes to loose balls, he's a liability that imo, other defenders around him, know this, and can't play to their full potential, as they know that they will probably have to cover.

Dickie...imo, is a massive loss.

One, he's a solid defender that can also create.

Two, he's dependable and allows others to relax and play to their strengths, without having to worry about someone else.

Same for Pring...poor sods left so isolated. 

We may have looked ok first few games.

But we look so easy to score against, and also defend against.

Our forwards, to me, are not top half quality Championship forwards that will score goals. 

[Shuffle]

50 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

He gave two poor passes away yesterday, one after a little one-two with Max, where he stubbed a pass straight to the forward.  The other trying to thread a pass.  The first one was really bad, granted, almost cost us.  But…and it doesn’t absolve him of those two passes…he defended a zillion times better than Vyner yesterday, who allowed Yates to bully him.  Derby hit the full-backs aerially off of long passes and played off loose balls.  Naismith wasn’t the issue yesterday.

He certainly isn’t the solution either.  I can accept lack of pace due to he’s an excellent technical footballer but I said watching the game his strength which to me is passing isn’t at a level where it should be especially second half. 

Totally agree re Vyner who made Yates look a £20m player as he got dominated.

[steviestevieneville]

14 hours ago, Silvio Dante said:

Well. That wasn’t a particularly enjoyable game to travel 250 miles round for today.

But, Scott Twine today. Not talking attitude in this thread (stank), but how we set him up and how it impacted on the whole.

The starting lineup, other than Naismith, was as last week - where we played very well first half but ST was very quiet. Today, he was far more involved and set up a couple of good chances early on.

But the reason he was more involved, was because his position was markedly infield - and that did a few things:

- Bird was poorer as he had less space as Twine was in his “area”

- Every time Pring went forward, he had no options ahead and had to check back. Playing inside meant he was playing into a conjested area, so it was back to Naismith

- Most key, it made us massively lopsided. We were playing 4-2-1-2-1 with one left side and two right. We were playing in 2/3 of the pitch and Derby saw that and compressed and attacked space accordingly.

The lopsided nature was obvious all first half, and LM even commented that we’d gone too central - but that was caused by Scott’s positioning.

So, was it Twine going off piste and moving too much infield, or was it Liam setting us up badly? Either way, the change was obvious at HT - we should have sacrificed Bird as he was less effective than Twine, and then put more natural width in.

But either way, our problems today emerged in large part exactly by the way we deployed the player. And that could - and should - have been changed a long time before he was taken off.

As I just put on another thread . Playing with two 10’s doesn’t work . He’s tried it with a back 3 & 4 now. He says it’s flexible/fluid but it’s not . My worry all along about twine is he’s a bottler (harsh) possibly , but when opponents get stuck into him he doesn’t like it . That’s 8 goals conceded in 4 games. It needs to change quickly 

[Midred]

Armstrong in a wide left position?

To be fair to Armstrong, because Twine kept drifting in field, he had to come out to the left to receive the ball from Pring because there was no other player on that side and he appeared to cope with that.

[Midred]

I just hope that Twine doesn't become the undroppable player who has to take all the corners and all the free kicks. 

[redkev]

42 minutes ago, Midred said:

I just hope that Twine doesn't become the undroppable player who has to take all the corners and all the free kicks. 

I use to do that at school and go and get the ball off thePE teacher so we could play  

[spudski]

Playing a game where you are reliant on a number 10 to create opportunities is great, if you have quality strikers to finish those opportunities created.

[ProfitInMyPocket]

Might get lambasted for this but to me he's a skinnier Tomlin with better set pieces (not that much better).

Weak in the challenge, falls over a lot, slow on and off the ball, doesn't run a lot.

Some clever passing and gets into good positions but doesn't take them. He needs to be better, a lot better for what we shelled out. 

If you disagree fair enough but at least Tomlin could dribble past a few people with his trickery, it feels that if Twine can't get his first time pass off he just loses it and we are on the backfoot.

[Silvio Dante]

Just as a postscript to this one.

This morning, I showed my U13s team how we played yesterday on a tactics board. They all twigged that the notional left midfielder moving infield that much would create the problems it did for the rest of the team. Thats 13 kids, all getting it straight away!

[Mr Popodopolous]

Pring being got at 2 v 1...difficult for most Full Backs tbh.

I can understand the risk with Wingbacks but it shouldn't really be happening with Full Backs.. Some cover and support is imperative.

[robin_unreliant]

16 hours ago, Mendip City said:

Too many clubs in the bag and not playing players in their correct positions to crow bar them in. Not a great place to be.
 

LJ vibes.

[Davefevs]

5 hours ago, Shuffle said:

He certainly isn’t the solution either.

You and @spudski, absolutely fair responses.

[Davefevs]

4 hours ago, ProfitInMyPocket said:

Might get lambasted for this but to me he's a skinnier Tomlin with better set pieces (not that much better).

Weak in the challenge, falls over a lot, slow on and off the ball, doesn't run a lot.

Some clever passing and gets into good positions but doesn't take them. He needs to be better, a lot better for what we shelled out. 

If you disagree fair enough but at least Tomlin could dribble past a few people with his trickery, it feels that if Twine can't get his first time pass off he just loses it and we are on the backfoot.

He ain’t a patch on Tomlin imho.

[The Coach]

2 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

He ain’t a patch on Tomlin imho.

I said at the time a few days before we signed Twine he has all feeling of another Tomlin/Palmer type of player.

[Rob k]

3 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

He ain’t a patch on Tomlin imho.

We have not had a player of Tomlins quality since he left have we. 

[Shauntaylor85]

3 hours ago, Silvio Dante said:

Just as a postscript to this one.

This morning, I showed my U13s team how we played yesterday on a tactics board. They all twigged that the notional left midfielder moving infield that much would create the problems it did for the rest of the team. Thats 13 kids, all getting it straight away!

Manning says priority is sorting the defensive side of the game. Isn’t that bizarre when it was our strength last season. It’s tactical, personally I don’t love 3 at the back as I don’t think we’ve got good enough wing backs but we may need to mix it up because our wingers are shockingly bad. 

[Davefevs]

20 minutes ago, Shauntaylor85 said:

Manning says priority is sorting the defensive side of the game. Isn’t that bizarre when it was our strength last season. It’s tactical, personally I don’t love 3 at the back as I don’t think we’ve got good enough wing backs but we may need to mix it up because our wingers are shockingly bad. 

Which isn’t necessarily about the defenders.

[Simon bristol]

1 hour ago, Rob k said:

We have not had a player of Tomlins quality since he left have we. 

Dont think we have had any with that attitude either, disgraceful footballer