|
Post by royrace on Dec 13, 2017 10:37:36 GMT 1
crikey and all that without Fabregas ! Spurs and Chelsea probably the best 2 teams I've ever seen town play. Although against Chelsea we showed them too much respect and in a way made it easier for them by giving them time and space. Make no mistake though they quickly stepped it up a gear without batting an eyelid. 3rd goal is testament to that Chelsea weren't a patch on Man City, nowhere near the quality, they started to look the part as the game went on when they realised how shit we were. We'd make any premier league team look the bollocks playing like we did. That's the problem with this defensive setup, if you don't give teams ANYTHING to worry about they'll destroy you with ease.
|
|
|
Post by Torquayterrier on Dec 13, 2017 10:45:27 GMT 1
Good result on Sat against a fellow promotion team (and we've already beaten the other at home)so let's not get too down on ourselves that we struggle to compete against current champions who have had years of mega millions pumped into them. Many here remember how mediocre Chelsea have been in the past in the days before Abramovich. Also, as already pointed out, if we are using Burnley as a blueprint they DIDNT come up and stay up, they have yo-yo'd until getting the momentum required to field a squad capable of survival. We still sit 5 points above relegation and have Stoke, Burnley and West Ham at home to come before end of Jan. If we are still above the bottom 3 by then we are well in with a shout of survival. If we go down then I see no reason why (assuming Wagner in charge)we could not genuinely 'do a Burnley' and bounce back. I still see the Championship highlights from time to time and with this squad (with parachute payments) we would have nothing to fear from anyone in that league, including whoever also got relegated.
|
|
|
Post by steve65 on Dec 13, 2017 11:16:28 GMT 1
It must be the instructions they receive (especially against the 'top teams', which in reality is most teams in the division!) Try to play possession football (waste time/other team can't score while we have the ball etc.)....sideways, backwards...but we inevitably lose it, backwards, sideways.....we inevitably lose it. Inviting pressure then losing it. I think its the 'losing it' which DW refers to as the individual mistakes, but very hard to accomplish when under so much pressure, when we're too deep & against top players. 2 minutes into the game (if that), I turned to my son & said...we look a bit deep already, we knew then, what sort of game we were in for. Hogg, on at least 2 occasions, received the ball midway in our half, no pressure, acres of room in front of him, turned & either passed sideways or passed backwards!...(but then again, he did have a headache)
You can't do that (against any team) for 90 mins.
Chelsea, City, Spurs, Man U, all had wide men available, all the time.....We watched Malone run us ragged out wide last season (impressed someone so much, that we bought him), VLP can run the wide right, with equal effect, but for some reason they can't/won't do it?....Yes, you need support & cover for those bombing forward but in Mooy, Hogg & Williams we should have enough ability to achieve this ? Push forward together & come back together.
I've said it previously...I'd rather lose 3 or 4 nil 'having a go' than lose 3 or 4 nil by rolling over & having our tummy's tickled by the so called 'superstars'.
I know its sounds like a rant, but its not....I just wish we'd 'mix it up a bit' (would like to see 4-4-2 now & again)....hopefully Palmer will make a difference & drive us forward more.
|
|
k1man999
Andy Booth Terrier
Posts: 3,529
|
Post by k1man999 on Dec 13, 2017 11:25:51 GMT 1
I know chelski were home and dry but you saw the panic in their defence when we hunted and pressed them late on resulting in the goal surely we have to do this more. We are expected to loose against the big teams but let's do it playing our way. If we like against Utd we then earned the right to play defensive etc high tempo from the off get them worried maybe get a goal or two then we have something to defend. BTW thought we missed Colins directness last night to drive us forward Never thought I'd say that 😉Utt
|
|
|
Post by galpharm2400 on Dec 13, 2017 11:27:27 GMT 1
chelsea fought/worked harder to get the ball back than city did.. they, even with our full assistance at times, didnt make as many chances as city but took 3..
If you cock up nearer your own goal it makes it more dangerous..just a plain and simple fact.. the longer you stay deeper the more chance there is of both these events occurring..
I have nothing against us dropping off in this division against better teams but you cant run away and stay away and you cant run away as a team and then fail to pick up opposition players as they move into the huge gaps you have surrended..
it was a painfully slow death last night.. 20 odd k can see it coming and then watch it happen..
the first goal was the catalyst and hazard should still be coming down from the foul given away 'professionally' to take one for the team...
If we are not looking to win the game it has to be a proper full on defensive plan and it has to be performed by all involved, properly..
|
|
|
Post by detox on Dec 13, 2017 12:01:09 GMT 1
Setting up as we did last night, men behind the ball, concede 70% of the pitch...as we did at West Ham 0-2, Swansea 0-2, Liverpool 0-3. Arsenal 0-5, Everton 0-2... If we're going to just concede games why not just put squad players in and rest the regulars ? I know we put a lot of energy in against brighton, and I know we have a game at Watford where we 'might' think we have a chance..so I kind of 'get' the concession to Chelsea..so just be open about it and rotate the players. We can do that in the Premier league can't we ?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 13, 2017 12:54:15 GMT 1
is it? you show your total lack of knowledge about the modern game.in jim royalS words 100% MY ARSE! Modern game? If we are supposed to be soaking it up and countering where is the countering? You cant attack for 5 minutes of the game. These tactics wont bring a single win against a top six side from now until the end of the season. your view but you have to have a balance and your comment about its the only way is a village soccer mentality that's probably the level you were at. keep supporting!
|
|
|
Post by Doc Halladay 32 on Dec 13, 2017 14:48:44 GMT 1
Setting up as we did last night, men behind the ball, concede 70% of the pitch...as we did at West Ham 0-2, Swansea 0-2, Liverpool 0-3. Arsenal 0-5, Everton 0-2... If we're going to just concede games why not just put squad players in and rest the regulars ? I know we put a lot of energy in against brighton, and I know we have a game at Watford where we 'might' think we have a chance..so I kind of 'get' the concession to Chelsea..so just be open about it and rotate the players. We can do that in the Premier league can't we ? I wouldn't include Swansea and Everton in that list of conceding 70% of the pitch. We do it against the top six and we couldn't gegenpress West Ham who lumped it forward to Carroll at every opportunity. I see folk are blaming our defeat to Spurs on individual mistakes and whilst we started brightly Spurs quickly and I mean very quickly sussed that they could control and move the ball quicker than we were able to press and their last 30 minutes of the first half against us was a masterclass. It was the manner that DW's style was picked apart that caused his change of tactics against the top sides. We don't have quaity of players to consistently worry the top six, we usually make more mistakes and when we do they will punish us for the vital first goal Smith at Liverpool, Lossl last night. Against Utd and City they made the first crucial mistake, City - we pushed them very close, United quickly followed their first mistake with another to give us a 2-0 lead and we were able to come out on top. At this level mistakes usually cost goals and ultimately games - twice this season we have been the better side and a quality goal has seen us over the line (Newcastle and WBA), mistakes by Man U and Brighton gave us the impetus and points in those games. Sometimes when the opposition don't make mistakes and we don't show enough quality to get a winner, we will draw games like Leicester and Southampton and when we make the critical errors we will lose games (see Swansea and others)
|
|
|
Post by Convictatthemac on Dec 13, 2017 14:51:26 GMT 1
Modern game? If we are supposed to be soaking it up and countering where is the countering? You cant attack for 5 minutes of the game. These tactics wont bring a single win against a top six side from now until the end of the season. your view but you have to have a balance and your comment about its the only way is a village soccer mentality that's probably the level you were at. keep supporting! Difference is there was no balance last night. It was all out defence.
|
|
|
Post by uddersfeeler on Dec 13, 2017 15:17:09 GMT 1
Did anyone else spot that the 1st goal was going wide, Lowe had no chance of realising that, bit unlucky he got to it and turned it in.
|
|
|
Post by CaptainHart on Dec 13, 2017 15:40:57 GMT 1
your view but you have to have a balance and your comment about its the only way is a village soccer mentality that's probably the level you were at. keep supporting! Difference is there was no balance last night. It was all out defence. All out defence wasn't the issue. Playing all out defence against City with two full backs and two wide men when they have Delph, Walker, Sané and Sterling makes sense, playing the same against Chelsea with only Marcos Alonso and Victor Moses doesn't.
|
|
|
Post by galpharm2400 on Dec 13, 2017 16:12:35 GMT 1
Difference is there was no balance last night. It was all out defence. All out defence wasn't the issue. Playing all out defence against City with two full backs and two wide men when they have Delph, Walker, Sané and Sterling makes sense, playing the same against Chelsea with only Marcos Alonso and Victor Moses doesn't. delph and walker did not play 90% of the game half way inside our half? the diagonals that city played had to be good ones.. last night any old player could have found them everytime.. alonso and moses in their system are not defenders?? whoever they are playing.. all out defence can work but it has to be organised to negate the actual threat the opposition has.. what next, fuck vardy, dont mark him at all just go and pick up the wide players?? when he scores a couple try and work out where you went wrong.. hazard et al were given short easy passes last night in and aroind our box simply because the two wing backs got to the attacking third far too often and far too easily.. agreed they could have done us down a packed middle but it might well have been HARDER... If you decide to defend then its to make it HARD for the opposition..?? providing any team with a simple and uncontested outball for 90 minutes is a huge fucking mistake..adding that it was virtually always half way inside our half was virtually suicidal..
|
|
|
Post by mossleyric on Dec 13, 2017 16:15:30 GMT 1
Hi all long time reader first post.
I do think we had to start the game defensively, the Spurs first half thrashing taught us that, but we had to try to unsettle them a bit early on. I thought we did this really well in the first 10 mins of the United game, I remember Smith put in a strong tackle on Martial and Schindler chopped Lingard down, it obviously rattled Martial and it made the game very scrappy early on which suited us and stopped United getting into an attacking flow. And it gave the crowd something to get behind too.
Obviously we can't continue like that all game as we'd quickly be down to 10 men, but I did think us standing off Chelsea in those first ten minutes meant they settled into their attacking routine and it became like a training match after that. We had to try to unsettle them early on - we might still have lost just as badly, but it would've tested out whether Chelsea's superstars were up for a battle.
|
|
|
Post by deightonrifle on Dec 13, 2017 16:47:28 GMT 1
Hi all long time reader first post. I do think we had to start the game defensively, the Spurs first half thrashing taught us that, but we had to try to unsettle them a bit early on. I thought we did this really well in the first 10 mins of the United game, I remember Smith put in a strong tackle on Martial and Schindler chopped Lingard down, it obviously rattled Martial and it made the game very scrappy early on which suited us and stopped United getting into an attacking flow. And it gave the crowd something to get behind too. Obviously we can't continue like that all game as we'd quickly be down to 10 men, but I did think us standing off Chelsea in those first ten minutes meant they settled into their attacking routine and it became like a training match after that. We had to try to unsettle them early on - we might still have lost just as badly, but it would've tested out whether Chelsea's superstars were up for a battle.
|
|
|
Post by deightonrifle on Dec 13, 2017 17:01:06 GMT 1
Good post.
I thought last night we had to create a real solid defensive platform as we did against Utd and City. But we also have to play with real aggression and intensity to make it work, and last night we just didn't. It meant we didn't give them enough to think about and couldn't get out at all. You can argue it was the wrong approach, we could have attacked more or launched it forward more, but I don't honestly think it would have made much difference unless we'd played with 100% full-on intensity. I'm not sure whether we were tired from saturday, afraid of picking up cards, overawed, or nonplussed by their 'false no.9' system. But we just weren't at it, and against a team as good as Chelsea that's curtains.
|
|
|
Post by CaptainHart on Dec 13, 2017 17:23:47 GMT 1
All out defence wasn't the issue. Playing all out defence against City with two full backs and two wide men when they have Delph, Walker, Sané and Sterling makes sense, playing the same against Chelsea with only Marcos Alonso and Victor Moses doesn't. delph and walker did not play 90% of the game half way inside our half? the diagonals that city played had to be good ones.. last night any old player could have found them everytime.. alonso and moses in their system are not defenders?? whoever they are playing.. all out defence can work but it has to be organised to negate the actual threat the opposition has.. what next, fuck vardy, dont mark him at all just go and pick up the wide players?? when he scores a couple try and work out where you went wrong.. hazard et al were given short easy passes last night in and aroind our box simply because the two wing backs got to the attacking third far too often and far too easily.. agreed they could have done us down a packed middle but it might well have been HARDER... If you decide to defend then its to make it HARD for the opposition..?? providing any team with a simple and uncontested outball for 90 minutes is a huge fucking mistake..adding that it was virtually always half way inside our half was virtually suicidal.. Not sure why you're disagreeing with me because I posted almost the same comment as you on the "Too Negative" thread.
|
|
|
Post by Baby Ate My Eight Ball on Dec 13, 2017 17:24:02 GMT 1
Spurs and Chelsea both played 3 at the back and their wing-backs had actes of space. Chelsea in particular kept switching it to the free man hugging the touch line, which made it really easy for them to play around us,
The two Manchester clubs both played 4 at the back and it suited us a lot more. Think we need to match up with 3-5-2 when we’re facing a team playing that formation, we didn’t get the shape right at all.
|
|
|
Post by galpharm2400 on Dec 13, 2017 17:54:06 GMT 1
delph and walker did not play 90% of the game half way inside our half? the diagonals that city played had to be good ones.. last night any old player could have found them everytime.. alonso and moses in their system are not defenders?? whoever they are playing.. all out defence can work but it has to be organised to negate the actual threat the opposition has.. what next, fuck vardy, dont mark him at all just go and pick up the wide players?? when he scores a couple try and work out where you went wrong.. hazard et al were given short easy passes last night in and aroind our box simply because the two wing backs got to the attacking third far too often and far too easily.. agreed they could have done us down a packed middle but it might well have been HARDER... If you decide to defend then its to make it HARD for the opposition..?? providing any team with a simple and uncontested outball for 90 minutes is a huge fucking mistake..adding that it was virtually always half way inside our half was virtually suicidal.. Not sure why you're disagreeing with me because I posted almost the same comment as you on the "Too Negative" thread. not disagreeing..simply cant see how allowing good attacking players the freedom of the town transpires into us being beaten by a team we could never hope to match up to, as some posters seem to 'believe'.. you dont stop hazard and his ilk by allowing them the ball easily in the attacking areas .. it was hard to watch..
|
|
|
Post by galpharm2400 on Dec 13, 2017 17:58:04 GMT 1
Spurs and Chelsea both played 3 at the back and their wing-backs had actes of space. Chelsea in particular kept switching it to the free man hugging the touch line, which made it really easy for them to play around us, The two Manchester clubs both played 4 at the back and it suited us a lot more. Think we need to match up with 3-5-2 when we’re facing a team playing that formation, we didn’t get the shape right at all. he aint a free man if your wide midfielders get nearer to him, or the full backs get further out.. having 3 men marking hazard whilst a wing back had acres of free space proved the wrong tactic.. if you are defending with 9 players, then there is no 'free man'... we managed to let them have 2 often 3 free men even though everyone bar/and someimes including mounie were in our own half??? it started pretty dull and became very dull and unsuccessful..
|
|
|
Post by yappledapple on Dec 13, 2017 21:04:04 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by sabailand on Dec 13, 2017 22:06:43 GMT 1
I`ve read various comments on the threads about last night,nomatter how much we try and make excuses and what we should or shouldnt have done we were outclassed by a far far superior team,we were chasing shadows at times,there were times when town had the ball well in their own half,and Chelsea were pressing so high up there just wern`t any options for the town player in possession,that happened often! They played as well as Tottenham and Man city for me,what is a shame was how we conceded the first, its hard enough against these without giving them an helping hand! Another lesson....hopefully it will hold us in good stead!
|
|
|
Post by lex on Dec 14, 2017 9:38:35 GMT 1
Good result on Sat against a fellow promotion team (and we've already beaten the other at home)so let's not get too down on ourselves that we struggle to compete against current champions who have had years of mega millions pumped into them. Many here remember how mediocre Chelsea have been in the past in the days before Abramovich. Also, as already pointed out, if we are using Burnley as a blueprint they DIDNT come up and stay up, they have yo-yo'd until getting the momentum required to field a squad capable of survival. We still sit 5 points above relegation and have Stoke, Burnley and West Ham at home to come before end of Jan. If we are still above the bottom 3 by then we are well in with a shout of survival. If we go down then I see no reason why (assuming Wagner in charge)we could not genuinely 'do a Burnley' and bounce back. I still see the Championship highlights from time to time and with this squad (with parachute payments) we would have nothing to fear from anyone in that league, including whoever also got relegated. Stop talking sense fella - wasted on here. If anyone thought everything was going to be plain sailing this season they were badly mistaken. Many more bumps in the road to come however we are still in there fighting with every chance of survival which has to be our only aim this season.
|
|
|
Post by steve65 on Dec 14, 2017 10:51:01 GMT 1
Good result on Sat against a fellow promotion team (and we've already beaten the other at home)so let's not get too down on ourselves that we struggle to compete against current champions who have had years of mega millions pumped into them. Many here remember how mediocre Chelsea have been in the past in the days before Abramovich. Also, as already pointed out, if we are using Burnley as a blueprint they DIDNT come up and stay up, they have yo-yo'd until getting the momentum required to field a squad capable of survival. We still sit 5 points above relegation and have Stoke, Burnley and West Ham at home to come before end of Jan. If we are still above the bottom 3 by then we are well in with a shout of survival. If we go down then I see no reason why ( assuming Wagner in charge)we could not genuinely 'do a Burnley' and bounce back. I still see the Championship highlights from time to time and with this squad (with parachute payments) we would have nothing to fear from anyone in that league, including whoever also got relegated. IMO...if we don't stay up, he won't be here. I think he'll have better offers.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2017 11:34:40 GMT 1
Good result on Sat against a fellow promotion team (and we've already beaten the other at home)so let's not get too down on ourselves that we struggle to compete against current champions who have had years of mega millions pumped into them. Many here remember how mediocre Chelsea have been in the past in the days before Abramovich. Also, as already pointed out, if we are using Burnley as a blueprint they DIDNT come up and stay up, they have yo-yo'd until getting the momentum required to field a squad capable of survival. We still sit 5 points above relegation and have Stoke, Burnley and West Ham at home to come before end of Jan. If we are still above the bottom 3 by then we are well in with a shout of survival. If we go down then I see no reason why (assuming Wagner in charge)we could not genuinely 'do a Burnley' and bounce back. I still see the Championship highlights from time to time and with this squad (with parachute payments) we would have nothing to fear from anyone in that league, including whoever also got relegated. Stop talking sense fella - wasted on here. If anyone thought everything was going to be plain sailing this season they were badly mistaken. Many more bumps in the road to come however we are still in there fighting with every chance of survival which has to be our only aim this season. Well said you have summed it up very well.
|
|