|
|
Post by The Sheriff Strikes Back on Dec 2, 2016 10:57:23 GMT 1
Sadly, removing Hudson wasn't the answer to our defensive problems as it showed at Cardiff and against Wigan. Wagner obviously thought recalling him would help hence his selection on Monday evening. Our defensive woes have continued since Preston and Schindler has been the only CB constant in that time, his form and confidence looks awful at the moment and after seeing his performance on Monday evening I can totally understand why he was dropped to the bench. Why Hefele was dropped completely baffles me, recalling Hudson alongside Hefele would have made more sense but DW has forgotten more than I'll ever know about this group of players, so he must have his reasons. Hudson and Schindler. Weak in the air and slow over the ground, both of them. Schindlers obviously much better with ball at feet, but they really don't make a good partnership IMO and Im amazed it took so long for other teams to target their joint weaknesses. A club like Town aren't going to attract , or afford, a centre back who covers all the bases- speed, aerial strength, good on the ball,.. so IMO the best you can do realistically is to have each of those things covered by the 2 together on the pitch. Think Wagners failed to do that with his 3 signings. He seems to have focused entirely on one thing- good on the ball when he was choosing his signings. That would be ok if the 2 already here ( Hudson and cranie) had aerial dominance and speed, but neither do. Weve ended up with a very unbalanced selection of centre backs as a result IMO. I don't understand why Hefele has been shunted right back down the pecking order either. Maybe something's gone on we don't know about? Apparently he was ill on monday |
|
|
|
Post by teddytheterrier on Dec 2, 2016 11:19:15 GMT 1
It's okay to say Hudson isn't the answer to everything but Schindler hasn't looked like a £2m record signing for the past month or so, how he played on Monday came as a massive concern to me. Stank was awful but hasn't featured much. Lowe and Schindler look completely different players to what they looked like at the start of the season.
|
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Dec 2, 2016 11:54:58 GMT 1
It's okay to say Hudson isn't the answer to everything but Schindler hasn't looked like a £2m record signing for the past month or so, how he played on Monday came as a massive concern to me. Stank was awful but hasn't featured much. Lowe and Schindler look completely different players to what they looked like at the start of the season. I agree, he certainly hasn't. Makes me wonder if all the german lads are finding the going tough in the championship. They all talk about the physicality, saying they enjoy it, but theyre hardly likely to say they don't! Its relentless in this division. The games come thick and fast and every single one has to be played at 100% for 90 minutes. We haven't had any easy games, any games where they can cruise- even for part of it. Nothing theyve had before will be anything like as intensive and wearing. Schindler, Lowe and to lesser degree Chagunga all look like theyre feeling it a bit and Stankovic just looked physically out of his depth the other day. |
|
|
|
Post by Doc Halladay 32 on Dec 2, 2016 14:41:55 GMT 1
I hope that Hefele was ill on Monday it would definitely explain his absence, but these things are normally 'reported' when the starting XI and ANY reason for Hef's absence was glaring in its omission, DW didn't address it post match to my knowledge either.
Given Stankovic's inexperience was preferred over Schlinder's poor form on Monday to play alongside Hudson, then hopefully it might prompt Chris to recapture his early season form.
We all want Schindler to recapture that form, but now in the same breath you now say apparently he has glaring weaknesses and we don't have a good partner for him and the first 11 games was all smoke and mirrors.
I think its far too easy to say that the Hudson/Schindler partnership only flourished because teams didn't exploit their weaknesses but I think you are doing them a great misservice. They both played well and bloody well at that!
Do you think Schindler just lost his form or is a poor defender that has been found out by the Championship?
Monday was by far our worst defensive display at home but it didn't follow the recent trait of being beaten by high balls into our box, we defended far too high up the pitch (I blame Galpharm lol) and were beaten by a quick ball out a number of times. Our fullbacks at home have always been high up the pitch under Wagner but our CB's seemed to follow them on Monday and there was acres of room for Wigan to exploit which they did.
We made that Dutchman Wildschut look like a seasoned, wily Championship veteran when in actual fact Schindler had made more Championship starts than him coming into Monday's fixture.
|
|
|
|
Post by goodshot (FGS) on Dec 2, 2016 14:59:59 GMT 1
I hope that Hefele was ill on Monday it would definitely explain his absence, but these things are normally 'reported' when the starting XI and ANY reason for Hef's absence was glaring in its omission, DW didn't address it post match to my knowledge either. Given Stankovic's inexperience was preferred over Schlinder's poor form on Monday to play alongside Hudson, then hopefully it might prompt Chris to recapture his early season form. We all want Schindler to recapture that form, but now in the same breath you now say apparently he has glaring weaknesses and we don't have a good partner for him and the first 11 games was all smoke and mirrors. I think its far too easy to say that the Hudson/Schindler partnership only flourished because teams didn't exploit their weaknesses but I think you are doing them a great misservice. They both played well and bloody well at that! Do you think Schindler just lost his form or is a poor defender that has been found out by the Championship? Monday was by far our worst defensive display at home but it didn't follow the recent trait of being beaten by high balls into our box, we defended far too high up the pitch (I blame Galpharm lol) and were beaten by a quick ball out a number of times. Our fullbacks at home have always been high up the pitch under Wagner but our CB's seemed to follow them on Monday and there was acres of room for Wigan to exploit which they did. We made that Dutchman Wildschut look like a seasoned, wily Championship veteran when in actual fact Schindler had made more Championship starts than him coming into Monday's fixture. Don't you think DW should take some wrap for the defending last Monday? They should have been well rehearsed for defending against breakaways with a high line. There should be no problem playing with a high back line. It's an integral part of our system that we get high up the pitch to compress the space? |
|
|
|
Post by Doc Halladay 32 on Dec 2, 2016 15:30:00 GMT 1
In the few games I've seen I have not seen us defending SO high and the attacker having a clear run from inside his own half.
Forestieri did get through for Wednesday but we were level with the back edge of the centre circle for that defensive hoof!
|
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Dec 2, 2016 15:39:37 GMT 1
I hope that Hefele was ill on Monday it would definitely explain his absence, but these things are normally 'reported' when the starting XI and ANY reason for Hef's absence was glaring in its omission, DW didn't address it post match to my knowledge either. Given Stankovic's inexperience was preferred over Schlinder's poor form on Monday to play alongside Hudson, then hopefully it might prompt Chris to recapture his early season form. We all want Schindler to recapture that form, but now in the same breath you now say apparently he has glaring weaknesses and we don't have a good partner for him and the first 11 games was all smoke and mirrors. I think its far too easy to say that the Hudson/Schindler partnership only flourished because teams didn't exploit their weaknesses but I think you are doing them a great misservice. They both played well and bloody well at that! Do you think Schindler just lost his form or is a poor defender that has been found out by the Championship?Monday was by far our worst defensive display at home but it didn't follow the recent trait of being beaten by high balls into our box, we defended far too high up the pitch (I blame Galpharm lol) and were beaten by a quick ball out a number of times. Our fullbacks at home have always been high up the pitch under Wagner but our CB's seemed to follow them on Monday and there was acres of room for Wigan to exploit which they did. We made that Dutchman Wildschut look like a seasoned, wily Championship veteran when in actual fact Schindler had made more Championship starts than him coming into Monday's fixture. I think hes an excellent player on the ball, no doubt about that. But he does have pretty glaring weaknesses IMO. Pretty slow over the ground and very weak in the air. Wouldn't be a problem if he was partnered by a centre back who was strong in those areas IMO, but Hudson has the same failings. IMO The key defensive player in our team isn't even a defender- its Hogg. Early in the season teams perhaps hadn't worked out our defensive achilles heel of defending set pieces and couldn't exploit our weakness to pace- and a massive part of that was the form of Hogg. When Hogg isn't quite on it, we look all over the place defensively. I just think we have ended up with 5 centre backs who all tick the same box ( comfort on the ball ) to varying degrees, but none of whome tick the other 2 crucial boxes ( aerial dominance and pace) |
|
|
|
Post by Doc Halladay 32 on Dec 2, 2016 15:52:10 GMT 1
I hope that Hefele was ill on Monday it would definitely explain his absence, but these things are normally 'reported' when the starting XI and ANY reason for Hef's absence was glaring in its omission, DW didn't address it post match to my knowledge either. Given Stankovic's inexperience was preferred over Schlinder's poor form on Monday to play alongside Hudson, then hopefully it might prompt Chris to recapture his early season form. We all want Schindler to recapture that form, but now in the same breath you now say apparently he has glaring weaknesses and we don't have a good partner for him and the first 11 games was all smoke and mirrors. I think its far too easy to say that the Hudson/Schindler partnership only flourished because teams didn't exploit their weaknesses but I think you are doing them a great misservice. They both played well and bloody well at that! Do you think Schindler just lost his form or is a poor defender that has been found out by the Championship?Monday was by far our worst defensive display at home but it didn't follow the recent trait of being beaten by high balls into our box, we defended far too high up the pitch (I blame Galpharm lol) and were beaten by a quick ball out a number of times. Our fullbacks at home have always been high up the pitch under Wagner but our CB's seemed to follow them on Monday and there was acres of room for Wigan to exploit which they did. We made that Dutchman Wildschut look like a seasoned, wily Championship veteran when in actual fact Schindler had made more Championship starts than him coming into Monday's fixture. I think hes an excellent player on the ball, no doubt about that. But he does have pretty glaring weaknesses IMO. Pretty slow over the ground and very weak in the air. Wouldn't be a problem if he was partnered by a centre back who was strong in those areas IMO, but Hudson has the same failings. IMO The key defensive player in our team isn't even a defender- its Hogg. Early in the season teams perhaps hadn't worked out our defensive achilles heel of defending set pieces and couldn't exploit our weakness to pace- and a massive part of that was the form of Hogg. When Hogg isn't quite on it, we look all over the place defensively. I just think we have ended up with 5 centre backs who all tick the same box ( comfort on the ball ) to varying degrees, but none of whome tick the other 2 crucial boxes ( aerial dominance and pace) I like Hogg for his defensive work and for that reason he would probably the first name on the teamsheet for an away game but at home, I think we generally have more of the ball and the onus is on us to attack I believe Billing may be the better option as Hogg's passing is usually counterproductive to our attacking play. Hogg can hardly be the key to our defence when our main fraility has been shown to be high balls delivered into our penalty area. I hope Schindler can regain his form and, with whomever as a partner, return to the unruffled composed defender he undoubtedly looked before Preston. He will probably have a chance to start that with Hefele tomorrow. |
|
|
|
Post by goodshot (FGS) on Dec 2, 2016 16:45:35 GMT 1
In the few games I've seen I have not seen us defending SO high and the attacker having a clear run from inside his own half. Forestieri did get through for Wednesday but we were level with the back edge of the centre circle for that defensive hoof! It was extreme at times v Wigan. Don't know if they were supposed to be so high but Scindler seemed to be pushing well forward even into the opposition half. He was out of position a lot for me. There didn't seem to be any understanding or link between Schindler and Stankovic or any organisation at all around defending the breakaway. |
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Dec 2, 2016 19:41:23 GMT 1
I think hes an excellent player on the ball, no doubt about that. But he does have pretty glaring weaknesses IMO. Pretty slow over the ground and very weak in the air. Wouldn't be a problem if he was partnered by a centre back who was strong in those areas IMO, but Hudson has the same failings. IMO The key defensive player in our team isn't even a defender- its Hogg. Early in the season teams perhaps hadn't worked out our defensive achilles heel of defending set pieces and couldn't exploit our weakness to pace- and a massive part of that was the form of Hogg. When Hogg isn't quite on it, we look all over the place defensively. I just think we have ended up with 5 centre backs who all tick the same box ( comfort on the ball ) to varying degrees, but none of whome tick the other 2 crucial boxes ( aerial dominance and pace) I like Hogg for his defensive work and for that reason he would probably the first name on the teamsheet for an away game but at home, I think we generally have more of the ball and the onus is on us to attack I believe Billing may be the better option as Hogg's passing is usually counterproductive to our attacking play. Hogg can hardly be the key to our defence when our main fraility has been shown to be high balls delivered into our penalty area. I hope Schindler can regain his form and, with whomever as a partner, return to the unruffled composed defender he undoubtedly looked before Preston. He will probably have a chance to start that with Hefele tomorrow. No not saying Hogg is key to defending set pieces- we don;t have anyone whos key to that. the easiest fix would be the keeper. But in general play IMO Hogg is key. The problem with leaving Hogg out at home is what happens when the more creative option lose the ball. One of the reasons we enjoy so much possession is because we have Hogg snapping around to win it back. Hogg knows his limitations and sticks to playing it simple with easy passes that don't really get you anywhere. The problem IMO is getting the better players with the ball like Mooy and palmer ( or Billing) to NOT do that as much and use the ability they have to be more creative- and to speed up their play. We can cope with Hogg playing like Hogg, but its a problem when the others play like Hogg too. |
|
|
|
Post by tockyterrier on Dec 2, 2016 22:54:32 GMT 1
In the few games I've seen I have not seen us defending SO high and the attacker having a clear run from inside his own half. Forestieri did get through for Wednesday but we were level with the back edge of the centre circle for that defensive hoof! It was extreme at times v Wigan. Don't know if they were supposed to be so high but Scindler seemed to be pushing well forward even into the opposition half. He was out of position a lot for me. There didn't seem to be any understanding or link between Schindler and Stankovic or any organisation at all around defending the breakaway. It didn't explain a lack of communication, but with schindler replacing Hudson, he was playing as the right sided CB whith an inexperienced partner. Which may have affected positioning a bit |
|
|
|
Post by goodshot (FGS) on Dec 2, 2016 23:06:53 GMT 1
It was extreme at times v Wigan. Don't know if they were supposed to be so high but Scindler seemed to be pushing well forward even into the opposition half. He was out of position a lot for me. There didn't seem to be any understanding or link between Schindler and Stankovic or any organisation at all around defending the breakaway. It didn't explain a lack of communication, but with schindler replacing Hudson, he was playing as the right sided CB whith an inexperienced partner. Which may have affected positioning a bit Why didn't he move to his normal left side and Stankovic to the right where I thought he was supposed to play? |
|
|
|
Post by morleyterrier on Dec 30, 2016 5:08:15 GMT 1
I am not a fan of squad rotation and changing a winning side. Reckon though if he is fit Hudson will start on Saturday.
|
|
|
|
Post by shawsie on Dec 30, 2016 8:25:58 GMT 1
It didn't explain a lack of communication, but with schindler replacing Hudson, he was playing as the right sided CB whith an inexperienced partner. Which may have affected positioning a bit Why didn't he move to his normal left side and Stankovic to the right where I thought he was supposed to play? I remember saying that at the time..........schindler is far far better on the left of the two. |
|
|
|
Post by morleyterrier on Jan 3, 2017 11:33:10 GMT 1
For anybody that went, how did Hudson and the different central defensive pairing do in your opinion?.
|
|
|
|
Post by terrierstalk on Jan 3, 2017 11:35:40 GMT 1
For anybody that went, how did Hudson and the different central defensive pairing do in your opinion?. I thought we defended really well yesterday, Ward had very little, if anything, to do. There were a couple of scary moments when Wigan could have been clean through if it wasn't for a very good yellow card for Holmes-Dennis and a suspect foul on Hudson after trying to let the ball run through to Ward but on the whole I never felt like Wigan were going to score. Also, if you combined Smith and Cranie you would have a shit hot right back! |
|
|
|
Post by townrwe on Jan 3, 2017 11:39:34 GMT 1
For anybody that went, how did Hudson and the different central defensive pairing do in your opinion?. Hudson, Not suited to our style anymore, he was caught under the ball alot, he was pretty solid defensively, but it was a bit like last season where you expected a mistake, mis-placed pass etc. rather than feeling comfortable. For me Schindler and Heff are a step up and are now first choice. Stankovic. played well generally, I think he had been told not to commit forward, so we didnt get done on the break like we did last time vs wigan. So the part of his game that was weakest, driving forward into the gap with the ball, was probably as a result of instructions rather than what he wanted to do. Just about 3rd choice on that showing and the fact he has potential to improve. |
|
|
|
Post by explorer on Jan 3, 2017 11:58:35 GMT 1
He did OK, as did all the back line. Crainie didn't attack a great deal, Billing played deep so we had quite a solid line most of the game. Hudson is generally OK-ish when we play this way, in fact a back four with Hogg sat tight in front would probably be the best plan when he plays.
However....we don't play that way anymore!
His biggest problems are the fact that most of the time he cannot complete a simple pass, what looks like an easy cushioned header to a team mate invariably flies into touch and he is way too ponderous.
But, he is what he is, and he ain't gonna change now!
He did manage to find time to pop in one of his trademark wrestling tackles where he gets turned and then drags the forward to the ground and falls on top of him, "three falls, two submissions or a knockout" style😊 Fortunately the ref had already blown for a foul for us.
|
|
|
|
Post by gledholt terrier on Jan 3, 2017 12:01:04 GMT 1
For anybody that went, how did Hudson and the different central defensive pairing do in your opinion?. Hudson, Not suited to our style anymore, he was caught under the ball alot, he was pretty solid defensively, but it was a bit like last season where you expected a mistake, mis-placed pass etc. rather than feeling comfortable. For me Schindler and Heff are a step up and are now first choice. Stankovic. played well generally, I think he had been told not to commit forward, so we didnt get done on the break like we did last time vs wigan. So the part of his game that was weakest, driving forward into the gap with the ball, was probably as a result of instructions rather than what he wanted to do. Just about 3rd choice on that showing and the fact he has potential to improve. Hudson was MOM. Used his experience and know how to keep a disciplined back 4 which denied space behind - if he had stayed on the pitch in the home game I think we would have won. His first half passing was severely hampered by lack of movement (like everyone else). I've no idea what "caught under the ball means" - can't think of an occasion where his presence or actual winning of the ball didn't do the job. |
|
|
|
Post by townrwe on Jan 3, 2017 13:08:36 GMT 1
Hudson, Not suited to our style anymore, he was caught under the ball alot, he was pretty solid defensively, but it was a bit like last season where you expected a mistake, mis-placed pass etc. rather than feeling comfortable. For me Schindler and Heff are a step up and are now first choice. Stankovic. played well generally, I think he had been told not to commit forward, so we didnt get done on the break like we did last time vs wigan. So the part of his game that was weakest, driving forward into the gap with the ball, was probably as a result of instructions rather than what he wanted to do. Just about 3rd choice on that showing and the fact he has potential to improve. . Used his experience and know how to keep a disciplined back 4 which denied space behind - if he had stayed on the pitch in the home game I think we would have won. His first half passing was severely hampered by lack of movement (like everyone else). I've no idea what "caught under the ball means" - can't think of an occasion where his presence or actual winning of the ball didn't do the job. Jeez..... you must have been watching your radio. I said he was solid, but he isnt the complete CB that can effectively pick a pass out from the back. A number of times he was he was "caught under the ball" resulting in poor clearing headers, not effectively clearing the ball. Defensively he used his experience and helped to keep a clean sheet, but for me.... Hes 4th choice now. Preferably 5th choice as i would like to see us bring in another as good as schindler. FWIW i thought Homes-Dennis was probably MOM. |
|
|
|
Post by gledholt terrier on Jan 3, 2017 13:44:40 GMT 1
Hudson was MOM. Used his experience and know how to keep a disciplined back 4 which denied space behind - if he had stayed on the pitch in the home game I think we would have won. His first half passing was severely hampered by lack of movement (like everyone else). I've no idea what "caught under the ball means" - can't think of an occasion where his presence or actual winning of the ball didn't do the job. Jeez..... you must have been watching your radio. I said he was solid, but he isnt the complete CB that can effectively pick a pass out from the back. A number of times he was he was "caught under the ball" resulting in poor clearing headers, not effectively clearing the ball. Defensively he used his experience and helped to keep a clean sheet, but for me.... Hes 4th choice now. Preferably 5th choice as i would like to see us bring in another as good as schindler. FWIW i thought Homes-Dennis was probably MOM. That'll be the THD who should've been booked when their winger stripped him in the first half (the little threat they had came down his side) and hesitated on the half way line which allowed Wildschut his only opportunity to get behind us before being hauled down? He was decent otherwise though. People watch Hudson with pre-conceived ideas - he has always been better away from home as well. |
|
|
|
Post by galpharm2400 on Jan 3, 2017 14:01:34 GMT 1
Jeez..... you must have been watching your radio. I said he was solid, but he isnt the complete CB that can effectively pick a pass out from the back. A number of times he was he was "caught under the ball" resulting in poor clearing headers, not effectively clearing the ball. Defensively he used his experience and helped to keep a clean sheet, but for me.... Hes 4th choice now. Preferably 5th choice as i would like to see us bring in another as good as schindler. FWIW i thought Homes-Dennis was probably MOM. That'll be the THD who should've been booked when their winger stripped him in the first half (the little threat they had came down his side) and hesitated on the half way line which allowed Wildschut his only opportunity to get behind us before being hauled down? He was decent otherwise though. People watch Hudson with pre-conceived ideas - he has always been better away from home as well. difference between home and away results against Wigan?? please see above for details..(fouls by us at crucial moments)... |
|
|
|
Post by royrace on Jan 3, 2017 14:12:13 GMT 1
Jeez..... you must have been watching your radio. I said he was solid, but he isnt the complete CB that can effectively pick a pass out from the back. A number of times he was he was "caught under the ball" resulting in poor clearing headers, not effectively clearing the ball. Defensively he used his experience and helped to keep a clean sheet, but for me.... Hes 4th choice now. Preferably 5th choice as i would like to see us bring in another as good as schindler. FWIW i thought Homes-Dennis was probably MOM. That'll be the THD who should've been booked when their winger stripped him in the first half (the little threat they had came down his side) and hesitated on the half way line which allowed Wildschut his only opportunity to get behind us before being hauled down? He was decent otherwise though. People watch Hudson with pre-conceived ideas - he has always been better away from home as well. Agree, Hudson his usual calm and assured self, had a great game especially following a long lay off. THD was OK but nowehere near MOM. His foul on Wildschut was impressively professional though I thought and it's what should have happened in the home game. He was very lucky not to get a booking for that, ref was shocking again. Booked Billing shortly afterwards for a nothing challenge on Powell who spent a ridiculous amount of time on the floor. Embarrassing performance from him and dread to think how much he is on per week. |
|
|
|
Post by hypotenuse on Jan 3, 2017 14:38:06 GMT 1
That'll be the THD who should've been booked when their winger stripped him in the first half (the little threat they had came down his side) and hesitated on the half way line which allowed Wildschut his only opportunity to get behind us before being hauled down? He was decent otherwise though. People watch Hudson with pre-conceived ideas - he has always been better away from home as well. difference between home and away results against Wigan?? please see above for details..(fouls by us at crucial moments)... Spot in Galph. We have to learn when to take a card for the team. |
|
|
|
Post by Detective Boyle on Jan 3, 2017 17:34:46 GMT 1
In the game I was frustrated, but on reflection I think we got it just about right. I was frustrated when Stankovic had 20 yards of space to run into, he would turn immediately back and pass it along the back 4. But maybe we didn't want to get isolated from the back like last time. Hudson, though, was a bit shit. Cranie is by far our strongest defender, and can't remember him losing a header.
|
|
midlander
David Wagner Terrier
[M0:0]
Posts: 2,943
|
Post by midlander on Jan 3, 2017 17:51:12 GMT 1
One thing's for sure. Forest wouldn't have scored that goal on Boxing Day had it been Hudson against Perreira on half way. Hudson would have clambered all over him and given the free kick fifty yards out because that's what Hudson does. Occasionally, we concede from the resulting free-kick, but more often than not, his tactical fouls save us being exposed.
Hudson is what he is - a good, experienced pro who hasn't got the legs anymore - but we look a lot more solid defensively with him there, although we lose out in footballing ability at bringing the ball out. He's had a very good season because we've found a system which largely stops him becoming isolated against an attacker as the last man. He can then use his intelligence and experience to help those around him. I've been impressed with him this year, but I would still be very surprised if he didn't hang his boots up after captaining our Play-Off final triumph.
|
|
buckers
Andy Booth Terrier
Posts: 3,785
|
Post by buckers on Jan 3, 2017 18:05:03 GMT 1
One thing's for sure. Forest wouldn't have scored that goal on Boxing Day had it been Hudson against Perreira on half way. Hudson would have clambered all over him and given the free kick fifty yards out because that's what Hudson does. Occasionally, we concede from the resulting free-kick, but more often than not, his tactical fouls save us being exposed. Hudson is what he is - a good, experienced pro who hasn't got the legs anymore - but we look a lot more solid defensively with him there, although we lose out in footballing ability at bringing the ball out. He's had a very good season because we've found a system which largely stops him becoming isolated against an attacker as the last man. He can then use his intelligence and experience to help those around him. I've been impressed with him this year, but I would still be very surprised if he didn't hang his boots up after captaining our Play-Off final triumph. And then been given a red card because he was the last man. Which Hefele was. |
|
|
|
Post by teddytheterrier on Jan 3, 2017 18:07:50 GMT 1
One thing's for sure. Forest wouldn't have scored that goal on Boxing Day had it been Hudson against Perreira on half way. Hudson would have clambered all over him and given the free kick fifty yards out because that's what Hudson does. Occasionally, we concede from the resulting free-kick, but more often than not, his tactical fouls save us being exposed. Hudson is what he is - a good, experienced pro who hasn't got the legs anymore - but we look a lot more solid defensively with him there, although we lose out in footballing ability at bringing the ball out. He's had a very good season because we've found a system which largely stops him becoming isolated against an attacker as the last man. He can then use his intelligence and experience to help those around him. I've been impressed with him this year, but I would still be very surprised if he didn't hang his boots up after captaining our Play-Off final triumph. Totally agree with that Schind and Stank don't seem to be able to do tactical fouls. |
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Jan 3, 2017 18:17:45 GMT 1
Hudson, Not suited to our style anymore, he was caught under the ball alot, he was pretty solid defensively, but it was a bit like last season where you expected a mistake, mis-placed pass etc. rather than feeling comfortable. For me Schindler and Heff are a step up and are now first choice. Stankovic. played well generally, I think he had been told not to commit forward, so we didnt get done on the break like we did last time vs wigan. So the part of his game that was weakest, driving forward into the gap with the ball, was probably as a result of instructions rather than what he wanted to do. Just about 3rd choice on that showing and the fact he has potential to improve. Hudson was MOM. Used his experience and know how to keep a disciplined back 4 which denied space behind - if he had stayed on the pitch in the home game I think we would have won. His first half passing was severely hampered by lack of movement (like everyone else). I've no idea what "caught under the ball means" - can't think of an occasion where his presence or actual winning of the ball didn't do the job. MOTM?? Seriously? I thought he was awful. He couldn't kick the ball anywhere near where he wanted it to go. His distribution was comical. His heading was weak. In a lousy game between 2 lousy teams on the day, he still stood out as being really poor. |
|
|
|
Post by gledholt terrier on Jan 3, 2017 18:20:25 GMT 1
Hudson was MOM. Used his experience and know how to keep a disciplined back 4 which denied space behind - if he had stayed on the pitch in the home game I think we would have won. His first half passing was severely hampered by lack of movement (like everyone else). I've no idea what "caught under the ball means" - can't think of an occasion where his presence or actual winning of the ball didn't do the job. MOTM?? Seriously? I thought he was awful. He couldn't kick the ball anywhere near where he wanted it to go. His distribution was comical. His heading was weak. In a lousy game between 2 lousy teams on the day, he still stood out as being really poor. I didn't expect you to agree with me. Seriously ;-) |
|
