|
Post by Henry Mcgee on Nov 22, 2014 17:07:52 GMT 1
Neither Wells nor Ward were the problem today. The formation was the problem today. We did create some chances when Nahki came on but then again we looked a lot more open and they probably created more chances in that period. Give me the last 20 over the first 70 every week. I was getting the rope out after an hour.
|
|
|
Post by goodshot (FGS) on Nov 22, 2014 17:16:15 GMT 1
How did you feel when May hit the bar and post, Drenthe broke away after Lynch's mistake, stonewall pen and 3 late blocks when they should have scored from the corners at the end. All when we were playing two up front in the formation you wanted?
|
|
|
Post by Henry Mcgee on Nov 22, 2014 17:22:02 GMT 1
... it was end to end - felt great - that's what gets people through the gates - not 9 at the back for 70 minutes and see if we can nick one.
|
|
Yesss
Tom Cowan Terrier
Posts: 687
|
Post by Yesss on Nov 22, 2014 17:25:47 GMT 1
Why have a go at him? Yeah he should have passed but at least he was having a go at shooting on goal! Same couldn't be said before he came on.....
|
|
|
Post by AndySk on Nov 22, 2014 17:25:55 GMT 1
How did you feel when May hit the bar and post, Drenthe broke away after Lynch's mistake, stonewall pen and 3 late blocks when they should have scored from the corners at the end. All when we were playing two up front in the formation you wanted? Id rather we went for it at home from the off against a very beatable team even if it means more chances for opponents. Reckon we'd have won that starting wells and holt
|
|
|
Post by impact on Nov 22, 2014 17:31:53 GMT 1
How did you feel when May hit the bar and post, Drenthe broke away after Lynch's mistake, stonewall pen and 3 late blocks when they should have scored from the corners at the end. All when we were playing two up front in the formation you wanted? It was also the formation that got all of our shots on target which we should have scored from at least one of but for 2 poor finishes/good saves.
|
|
|
Post by Floyds on Nov 22, 2014 17:33:48 GMT 1
Definitely worth risking defeat to get the win, we're at home and they've hardly been ripping up any trees!
Playing for a point against those lads today, not the right approach to take.
|
|
|
Post by goodshot (FGS) on Nov 22, 2014 17:35:52 GMT 1
How did you feel when May hit the bar and post, Drenthe broke away after Lynch's mistake, stonewall pen and 3 late blocks when they should have scored from the corners at the end. All when we were playing two up front in the formation you wanted? Id rather we went for it at home from the off against a very beatable team even if it means more chances for opponents. Reckon we'd have won that starting wells and holt I think all the teams in this div are beatable. Wendies have a very decent away record. I think I agree we should have started 4-4-2 but I'm far from convinced it would have improved our chances. I don't see 4-3-3 as defensive and we created some good situations and chances in the first 60. Anyway Rhodes has equalised v Leeds and Blackpool are in front v Bolton.
|
|
|
Post by thrice on Nov 22, 2014 17:35:54 GMT 1
He was seen glancing over in the direction of the lino as he left the stadium.
|
|
htfc63
Darren Bullock Terrier
Posts: 875
|
Post by htfc63 on Nov 22, 2014 17:40:18 GMT 1
Have to say I agree with Teds summary of our players. If we have ambitions then we have to look at our full backs. Whilst Smith is young and may well develop Dixon was by far our worst player today. No doubt clubs can see our weakness and look to put pretty quick men on these two to either whip balls in or have a run on goal. With Hammil and Lolley potentially coming back soon I cannot see that Ward will be no more than a bench player at best. This is a competitive league and if we want to compete Powell knows some harsh decisions need to be made. It would be better to try to get some of our fee back for Ward in January rather than let him go on a free at the end of the season. Like many have said it would have been good to see two men up front from the start however hindsight is a wonderful thing. Today we lacked impact and intensity which allowed Sheffield to comfortably deal with most of what we tried to put together. Apart from hitting the bar/post they also had little to offer and the draw was a fair result.
|
|
|
Post by goodshot (FGS) on Nov 22, 2014 17:40:24 GMT 1
Definitely worth risking defeat to get the win, we're at home and they've hardly been ripping up any trees! Playing for a point against those lads today, not the right approach to take. I just don't understand that thinking. We risked defeat starting 4-3-3. To suggest we were playing for a point from the start is strange - never thought that at any stage of the match. I think both sides were trying to win.
|
|
nah1
Tom Cowan Terrier
[M0:0]
Posts: 673
|
Post by nah1 on Nov 22, 2014 17:43:15 GMT 1
Wells may miss chances but he's a threat and will score goals if given starts. It would have been a different game with him starting in place of Poyet. We may have conceded but likely we'd have scored. Surely the right approach to take at this stage of the season, after all, we need people in the ground and playing Holt up front on his own at home for an hour isn't the most inspiring of decisions. Maybe we'd have lost but they'd hardly scored a goal recently so worth the risk. Wells must be wondering why he isn't playing, which probably impacted him and his desire to score / prove the manager wrong when he came on. Agreed. And we didn't exactly look secure at the back either. Playing one up top took away a lot of our attacking threat, yet we still looked shaky at the other end. In that case you might as well try and score a few because we always looked like conceding today. Not sure how we didn't to be honest. As for Wells, his selfishness can be frustrating (as when he shot at the near post when he had better placed team mates in the middle), but its also a strength. Its what makes him a goal scorer. Today I was more concerned that we failed to control the game at any stage. We put some decent moves together at times, but they were sporadic as we didn't keep hold of the ball well enough. Wednesday dictated the pace of most of the game and we looked more like an away side. Before the match I would have said a point today was two lost, but having watched the game live I would definitely say it was a point gained. We didn't exactly steal a draw, but if any team deserved to sneak the points it was Wednesday IMO. Yes, I was happy with a point in the end. Wednesday had more clear cut chances than we did, and most refs would have given that pen. Powell obviously thought we'd got out of jail with that decision. Should have dominated central midfield with Butterfield, Coady and a Premier Leaguer in there. Maybe they need to gel :-)
|
|
|
Post by terrierpark on Nov 22, 2014 17:44:02 GMT 1
Why should he pass no bugger else will take a shot.
|
|
|
Post by Solid Snake on Nov 22, 2014 17:56:37 GMT 1
Thought Scannell deserved two goals today. One that was intercepted by a very good piece of defending and the other which I believe Wells should of assisted him with.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2014 18:01:26 GMT 1
Have to say I agree with Teds summary of our players. If we have ambitions then we have to look at our full backs. Whilst Smith is young and may well develop Dixon was by far our worst player today. No doubt clubs can see our weakness and look to put pretty quick men on these two to either whip balls in or have a run on goal. With Hammil and Lolley potentially coming back soon I cannot see that Ward will be no more than a bench player at best. This is a competitive league and if we want to compete Powell knows some harsh decisions need to be made. It would be better to try to get some of our fee back for Ward in January rather than let him go on a free at the end of the season. Like many have said it would have been good to see two men up front from the start however hindsight is a wonderful thing. Today we lacked impact and intensity which allowed Sheffield to comfortably deal with most of what we tried to put together. Apart from hitting the bar/post they also had little to offer and the draw was a fair result. I'll go with all that.
|
|
|
Post by mickydombat on Nov 22, 2014 18:49:40 GMT 1
htfc63 i'll go with most of that also...
|
|
|
Post by Floyds on Nov 22, 2014 19:04:03 GMT 1
Definitely worth risking defeat to get the win, we're at home and they've hardly been ripping up any trees! Playing for a point against those lads today, not the right approach to take. I just don't understand that thinking. We risked defeat starting 4-3-3. To suggest we were playing for a point from the start is strange - never thought that at any stage of the match. I think both sides were trying to win. Do you think Holt up front on his own, Wells on the bench and not a shot on target until the 65th minute (when Wells came on) was positive, at home to a side that hadn't won in 9? The last 25 minutes were far more exciting - both sides had chances and both could have won. Risk and reward, isn't it? I prefer volatile shares, for instance, that potentially yield high returns but at more risk. Some people prefer government bonds, say. It's just personal preference. At this stage of the season I'd just have gone for it more, and made the changes sooner (see my post at half time on the match thread). Doesn't really matter what I think though, in fairness.
|
|
|
Post by Christ in Shades (art) on Nov 22, 2014 19:18:26 GMT 1
Wells had 4 shooting opportunities today and scored none, herein lies the problem, he needs more than one chance to score a goal bit like Andy Cole. The best strikers will score a goal with one chance. Today thought he was trying way way too hard leading him to panic and make bad decisions at key times. The one he leathered into the keepers chest, ok he got lucky it was straight at him, but Wells needs to keep that low and hard.
|
|
|
Post by goodshot (FGS) on Nov 22, 2014 19:32:34 GMT 1
I just don't understand that thinking. We risked defeat starting 4-3-3. To suggest we were playing for a point from the start is strange - never thought that at any stage of the match. I think both sides were trying to win. Do you think Holt up front on his own, Wells on the bench and not a shot on target until the 65th minute (when Wells came on) was positive, at home to a side that hadn't won in 9? The last 25 minutes were far more exciting - both sides had chances and both could have won. Risk and reward, isn't it? I prefer volatile shares, for instance, that potentially yield high returns but at more risk. Some people prefer government bonds, say. It's just personal preference. At this stage of the season I'd just have gone for it more, and made the changes sooner (see my post at half time on the match thread). Doesn't really matter what I think though, in fairness. On balance I think this is a game we could have started 4-4-2 even against a team who had one of the best away records in the Div. The thinking I don't understand is that 4-3-3 is a less attacking formation than 4-4-2. If you play two up front you leave a weakness in midfield. At Derby we had 2 upfront but the problem was they, and the wide men couldn't get in to the game because Butterfield and Coady were too hard pressed to pass it out. The frustration of 4-3-3 is that you can dominate the ball - say as we did at Fulham - but not much have much in the box to reward the dominance. The best 4-3-3 games we have played this season have been when Bunn has got in to the box and converted some chances from build ups on the right hand side. I think the big mistake today was not so much the system but playing Poyet. He didn't play that badly as an individual but Coady has been playing so well there I couldn't see the point of changing it and disrupting the team.
|
|
|
Post by upthetown on Nov 22, 2014 19:42:14 GMT 1
Definitely worth risking defeat to get the win, we're at home and they've hardly been ripping up any trees! Playing for a point against those lads today, not the right approach to take. Do not accept that we played for a point today.
|
|
|
Post by Floyds on Nov 22, 2014 19:45:37 GMT 1
I just think we're far more threatening with Wells in the team, he's our top scorer and adds pace and goal threat when on the pitch.
Whatever the system is, I'd definitely play him at home.
Not sure we needed three holding midfielders today.
But hopefully CP learns from today and adjusts this in our next home game.
|
|
|
Post by Nickhudds.UTT on Nov 22, 2014 19:47:20 GMT 1
Wells should of finished the best chance, never mind.
|
|
|
Post by Floyds on Nov 22, 2014 19:47:56 GMT 1
Definitely worth risking defeat to get the win, we're at home and they've hardly been ripping up any trees! Playing for a point against those lads today, not the right approach to take. Do not accept that we played for a point today. Maybe not the intention, but I'd have changed system and brought Wells on at half time, no shots on target until the 65th minute isn't good enough however you look at it. Fortunate perhaps to get a point in the end but at least we gave it a go late on.
|
|
|
Post by shawsie on Nov 22, 2014 19:52:38 GMT 1
Wells had 4 shooting opportunities today and scored none, herein lies the problem, he needs more than one chance to score a goal bit like Andy Cole. The best strikers will score a goal with one chance. Today thought he was trying way way too hard leading him to panic and make bad decisions at key times. The one he leathered into the keepers chest, ok he got lucky it was straight at him, but Wells needs to keep that low and hard. Have Never ever seen a striker who doesnt miss chances......certainly not at this level anyway!
|
|
|
Post by upthetown on Nov 22, 2014 19:52:49 GMT 1
Do not accept that we played for a point today. Maybe not the intention, but I'd have changed system and brought Wells on at half time, no shots on target until the 65th minute isn't good enough however you look at it. Fortunate perhaps to get a point in the end but at least we gave it a go late on. After a slow start we were unlucky not to have a couple in the first half, despite no shots on target. Couple flashed across thier goal, Bunn nearly got on the end of one. Great last ditch tackle on Scannell to stop another too.
|
|
|
Post by Floyds on Nov 22, 2014 19:56:09 GMT 1
This is my point though - Wells may well have had a tap in a couple of times in that first half, but we had no natural goal scorer on the pitch.
All ifs, buts and maybe, though.
|
|
|
Post by Christ in Shades (art) on Nov 22, 2014 19:56:49 GMT 1
Wells had 4 shooting opportunities today and scored none, herein lies the problem, he needs more than one chance to score a goal bit like Andy Cole. The best strikers will score a goal with one chance. Today thought he was trying way way too hard leading him to panic and make bad decisions at key times. The one he leathered into the keepers chest, ok he got lucky it was straight at him, but Wells needs to keep that low and hard. Have Never ever seen a striker who doesnt miss chances......certainly not at this level anyway! Not saying they don't but he had 4 decent chances today and scored none of them. A striker should at least be notching a 50% strike rate on chances.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2014 20:26:46 GMT 1
Have Never ever seen a striker who doesnt miss chances......certainly not at this level anyway! Not saying they don't but he had 4 decent chances today and scored none of them. A striker should at least be notching a 50% strike rate on chances. Not sure where you get that 50% stat from AR, but Suarez scored 24 goals last season, and only achieved a 22% strike rate on chances.
|
|
|
Post by Christ in Shades (art) on Nov 22, 2014 20:30:14 GMT 1
Not saying they don't but he had 4 decent chances today and scored none of them. A striker should at least be notching a 50% strike rate on chances. Not sure where you get that 50% stat from AR, but Suarez scored 24 goals last season, and only achieved a 22% strike rate on chances. I'm willing to bet Suarez would have bagged 2 of Wells chances today. You'd have to agree that he should have netted one of them chances Cod mate?
|
|
|
Post by Grandfather Berty of Cleck on Nov 22, 2014 20:46:27 GMT 1
Not sure where you get that 50% stat from AR, but Suarez scored 24 goals last season, and only achieved a 22% strike rate on chances. I'm willing to bet Suarez would have bagged 2 of Wells chances today. You'd have to agree that he should have netted one of them chances Cod mate? Perhaps that's why Suarez is priced higher than £1.3m
|
|