|
Post by Christ in Shades (art) on Nov 22, 2014 18:59:58 GMT 1
Never really rated Smith in all honesty, don't think Dixon was as bad as everyone is making out he did make one or two errors but, for me, he gives us more going forward than Robinson and I think more often than not he is competent enough defensively.
|
|
|
Post by ritchie on Nov 22, 2014 19:01:22 GMT 1
Little ott but said in another thread i'd play holt and wells at home most majority of the time. Robins would have got murdered for leaving wells on the bench today IMO.
|
|
|
Post by ritchie on Nov 22, 2014 19:03:53 GMT 1
He was my MOM ! He only gave the ball away about twice all game, he won tackles and did everything simply and with no fuss. My only problem was he played in Coadys best position and so Coady had a poor game but thats down to the manager. Im genuinely baffled how anyone could be impressed with poyet today..........thought he slowed us down, was ponderous in possession and rarely won tackles. Did look at times like he had a touch of class and was unruffled on the ball, but was underwhelmed personally - the high tempo and quick pressing seen v forest disappeared in a flash with him replacing hogg. If i was scouting against us though, then look no further than our full backs? Never been convinced with either and against the better teams at this level, smith and dixon will be big weak links imo. Dixons second touch was often a tackle, and smith positionally is so poor at times its ridiculous......how many more crosses is he going to allow in unchallenged?! Did a couple of cracking tackles today but Dixon is a poor player. Hopefully people will stop calling for him to be in....biggest priority after holt/replacement is a good new LB
|
|
|
Post by shawsie on Nov 22, 2014 19:11:50 GMT 1
Im genuinely baffled how anyone could be impressed with poyet today..........thought he slowed us down, was ponderous in possession and rarely won tackles. Did look at times like he had a touch of class and was unruffled on the ball, but was underwhelmed personally - the high tempo and quick pressing seen v forest disappeared in a flash with him replacing hogg. If i was scouting against us though, then look no further than our full backs? Never been convinced with either and against the better teams at this level, smith and dixon will be big weak links imo. Dixons second touch was often a tackle, and smith positionally is so poor at times its ridiculous......how many more crosses is he going to allow in unchallenged?! Did a couple of cracking tackles today but Dixon is a poor player. Hopefully people will stop calling for him to be in....biggest priority after holt/replacement is a good new LB Totally disagree ritchie.....robinson is fine there for me. A new rb on the other hand is a must or at least giving the best one we have imo a chance to play a few times in that position. Granted robinson doesnt offer much going forward, but the first role of a full back is to defend and robinson does that in the main, as did pelts for both us and leicester......dixon is poor one on one as is smith .......the number of crosses we allow in and room for players to run at us means we are always going to ship goals with those two back there. On the positive side, we werent great today but still got a result........not often we have been able to say that at this level....so onwards and upwards.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2014 19:12:47 GMT 1
He was my MOM ! He only gave the ball away about twice all game, he won tackles and did everything simply and with no fuss. My only problem was he played in Coadys best position and so Coady had a poor game but thats down to the manager. If i was scouting against us though, then look no further than our full backs? Never been convinced with either and against the better teams at this level, smith and dixon will be big weak links imo. Dixons second touch was often a tackle, and smith positionally is so poor at times its ridiculous......how many more crosses is he going to allow in unchallenged?! This
|
|
|
Post by Giggity on Nov 22, 2014 19:40:44 GMT 1
Did a couple of cracking tackles today but Dixon is a poor player. Hopefully people will stop calling for him to be in....biggest priority after holt/replacement is a good new LB Totally disagree ritchie.....robinson is fine there for me. A new rb on the other hand is a must or at least giving the best one we have imo a chance to play a few times in that position. Granted robinson doesnt offer much going forward, but the first role of a full back is to defend and robinson does that in the main, as did pelts for both us and leicester......dixon is poor one on one as is smith .......the number of crosses we allow in and room for players to run at us means we are always going to ship goals with those two back there. On the positive side, we werent great today but still got a result........not often we have been able to say that at this level....so onwards and upwards. Peltier is extremely poor on the ball though. Smith has 4 assists this season. Peltier probably won't get that in the remainder of his career. You can't play 433 with a wingback that offers nothing going forwards and always looks for a backwards pass. A fullback's role in that system is to defend and attack. And as for Peltier's defensive skills, they are average at best. Leicester, Leeds and Forest were obviously unimpressed.
|
|
|
Post by upthetown on Nov 22, 2014 19:45:55 GMT 1
Get Robinson back in!
|
|
|
Post by shawsie on Nov 22, 2014 19:47:06 GMT 1
With respect, you dont play wingbacks in a 433!
|
|
|
Post by Nickhudds.UTT on Nov 22, 2014 19:55:01 GMT 1
Not much in Dixon or Robinson, Robinson was doing well though.
|
|
|
Post by Doc Halladay 32 on Nov 22, 2014 20:21:19 GMT 1
We do look poor at full back, not sure Smith is doing enough to keep his place but I'm not sure Peltief is any better. Nor am i Graham, but he surely deserves a chance there.....hes been played in every position except the one were he is most comfortable imo. Some folks have decided he is worse than smith, but i dont see it.........think smith can do a job as part of a back 3 and as stopgap fullback, but not longterm for me in what is an increasingly important role in any team. As an aside, thought both wed fullbacks were excellent today. How can that be? The all knowing Colt identified the (excellent) Palmer as their weak link in his scouting report midweek.
|
|
|
Post by 3Pipe on Nov 22, 2014 20:41:01 GMT 1
We miss the old Robinson long throw.
|
|
|
Post by terrierpark on Nov 22, 2014 21:04:18 GMT 1
I dont think that the performance warrants a pop at the manager BUT i do get the drift of why the complainers are unhappy. I have heard how Powell has previously emphasised the old 3 games in a week, hard work tiredness etc and fair enough the Forest, Derby and Fulham away was a hard run of games, but today after two weeks off i have to ask, where was the energy and commitment ? I missed some games recently due to work and a holiday but the vibe i got was that we had turned the corner, only to witness a match thrown away at Fulham in which domination counted for nothing when your only option is to go down the wing and try and cross. I saw the same again today a totally one dimensional attack plan and very little for us to get excited about. There was some positives a great debut by Murphy who earned us the point and a steady debut by Poet , but on the whole today was a winnable game that in old Bobbins style we set up not to lose rather than try and win. Of course you get dull games over the course of a season but in injury time at 0-0 with a throw in to Town no one could be arsed and we gave the ball away and they nearly scored. 2 weeks rest and we witness this in front of us in the NSL URGING THEM ON. Your right Mr Powell, when you closed your summary the other week, with the old Bobbins words "Were a work in progress". Perhaps with a bit more hard work and a more attacking formation from the off we might do better. commitment? there was no lack ofthat and when the game changed to us going 4 2 4 we were more vunerable than before. every point is a good one and typical town fans have a go at the tactics when we dont win. get real we have a battle on to keep up but powell is doing a good job so support him SEE THE BOLD TEXT MASTER YOUR EYES R GONE
|
|
|
Post by Colt Seavers on Nov 22, 2014 22:48:56 GMT 1
Nor am i Graham, but he surely deserves a chance there.....hes been played in every position except the one were he is most comfortable imo. Some folks have decided he is worse than smith, but i dont see it.........think smith can do a job as part of a back 3 and as stopgap fullback, but not longterm for me in what is an increasingly important role in any team. As an aside, thought both wed fullbacks were excellent today. How can that be? The all knowing Colt identified the (excellent) Palmer as their weak link in his scouting report midweek. And that goes to prove my point how poor we were. Palmer is a midfielder playing out of position and regularly the but of abuse and Helan also terrible. We have played the wrong game completely today. But i have broad enough shoulders to take all the know fuck alls abuse. If people can be arsed to trawl back, i was more than complimentary when we played against Forest, that was the last positive, since then back to back losses and a draw against a poor side. Blinkers Blinkers Blinkers thats all people want to wear. I take all the abuse even though at least half a dozen people also agree with me and some contradictory arseholes on here have also agreed on other threads. Its just have a go at Colt because he has the balls to speak up and not want to climb up the arse of Huddersfield Town and Chris Powell. HE GOT IT WRONG TODAY, FUCKIN FACT. Accept it and you will be better people.
|
|
|
Post by stevvy on Nov 22, 2014 23:49:16 GMT 1
The only fact is that it's your opinion.
|
|
|
Post by Christ in Shades (art) on Nov 23, 2014 0:02:37 GMT 1
The two main positives were we didn't lose and we didn't concede other than that struggling to think of any.
|
|
|
Post by John Smith on Nov 23, 2014 2:42:37 GMT 1
Poyet was awful. How the Examiner gave him an 8 I'll never know. A yard behind 'his' man (May) on two occasions where he nearly scored.
Feel bad for Hogg who had done well under Powell thus far.
A point though, in a game we could have lost. And we move on...
UTT
|
|
|
Post by ritchie on Nov 23, 2014 3:21:23 GMT 1
Did a couple of cracking tackles today but Dixon is a poor player. Hopefully people will stop calling for him to be in....biggest priority after holt/replacement is a good new LB Totally disagree ritchie.....robinson is fine there for me. A new rb on the other hand is a must or at least giving the best one we have imo a chance to play a few times in that position. Granted robinson doesnt offer much going forward, but the first role of a full back is to defend and robinson does that in the main, as did pelts for both us and leicester......dixon is poor one on one as is smith .......the number of crosses we allow in and room for players to run at us means we are always going to ship goals with those two back there. On the positive side, we werent great today but still got a result........not often we have been able to say that at this level....so onwards and upwards. Shawsie that isnt a slight on Robinson, who I rate higher than Dixon..decent defender and would pick him over dixon. He's not ours though so my point was more longterm we need to sign a decent LB. Dixon is about as good as he will ever be (which is not good enough - i would move him on) but smith is a young lad and already better than him imo - he's not perfect but is good enough and can only improve. More of a natural defender than dixon and as mentioned he gets assists...peltier I dont rate much anymore but he's better than dixon and smith is probably better (allround) than robinson, so i see LB as the weakness.
|
|
|
Post by patfield on Nov 23, 2014 7:48:10 GMT 1
My opinion:-
First half , dull bar the couple of half chances created with Scannell slotting the ball across the face of goal only for no one to be there to poke it in. Second half , i would have taken Poyet off around the 65 minute mark not due to the fact he was playing crap , i thought he did ok nothing more nothing less, pop Nahki on , have a go at them.
Negatives for me :- Dixon for Robinson, Negative formation, Poor tempo. Positives:- Clean sheet, defenders putting their bodies on the line. Murphy great game.
Am i dissappointed? a little , but will take the one point and move on.
UTT
|
|
|
Post by shawsie on Nov 23, 2014 8:57:57 GMT 1
Totally disagree ritchie.....robinson is fine there for me. A new rb on the other hand is a must or at least giving the best one we have imo a chance to play a few times in that position. Granted robinson doesnt offer much going forward, but the first role of a full back is to defend and robinson does that in the main, as did pelts for both us and leicester......dixon is poor one on one as is smith .......the number of crosses we allow in and room for players to run at us means we are always going to ship goals with those two back there. On the positive side, we werent great today but still got a result........not often we have been able to say that at this level....so onwards and upwards. Shawsie that isnt a slight on Robinson, who I rate higher than Dixon..decent defender and would pick him over dixon. He's not ours though so my point was more longterm we need to sign a decent LB. Dixon is about as good as he will ever be (which is not good enough - i would move him on) but smith is a young lad and already better than him imo - he's not perfect but is good enough and can only improve. More of a natural defender than dixon and as mentioned he gets assists...peltier I dont rate much anymore but he's better than dixon and smith is probably better (allround) than robinson, so i see LB as the weakness. I understand your point re robinson, but i fail to see how folks can bemoan peltier when he hasnt played in his best position. I think some have just decided smith is better because hes relatively young and gets forward, but for me he isnt a full back. As for smith better than robinson? Not for me.......robinson is vastly underrated on here because he doesnt bomb forward and went for 1m to qpr, but defensively he is solid at this level and first and foremost full backs have to defend.
|
|
|
Post by robhtfc on Nov 23, 2014 11:57:00 GMT 1
Mel, try quitting the sarcasm. I know Town can't do a lot wrong in your eyes but today was wrong tactics from the off against a side I know only too well was there for the taking. I got a message I am more than happy to show you from Jacobs coach saying "Wells injured" We set up to get the draw we ended up with. Not true mate, I've been very critical of the club at times when it's warranted, but that line is just typical of how you air your views on here, looking to get a reaction. We were poor today, had we started Wells, would we have won? I don't know, we looked very susceptible after the changes even though we posed more of a threat up front. What I do know is I don't need to come on here starting a thread after the game, pontificating over the team selection after the final whistle.Now where do I sign up for that Level 3 coaching badge in hindsight management. * *sarcasm intended Is that not what message boards are for? For people to give their opinions?
|
|
rocky
Andy Booth Terrier
Posts: 3,078
|
Post by rocky on Nov 23, 2014 12:05:12 GMT 1
Negative from the off. Should have been beaten. Another messer of a manager. Sorry Colt, but you just seem to think that the way to win football matches is to play with lots of attacking players. You talk as if Wednesday are a pub team. We have to take the defensive and offensive side of things into account in equal measures. That's nothing to do with 'being up the arse of HTFC', it's basic common sense. Wednesday are a strong physical team who break with tons of pace & we simply can't ignore that.
|
|
|
Post by kaykie on Nov 23, 2014 12:42:57 GMT 1
We didnt play high enough up the field,we didnt close them down quick enough,we gave them time on the ball to settle and pick a pass,all the things weve done so well as of lately.its ok sitting back and trying to counter but then when we did there wasnt enough bodies up the field.at 1 point coady pressed their defense high up the field only to turn round to no town player follow his lead and press the 2nd man/ball.Too many tactics and not enough bollocks on our part yesterday.only my opinion obviously ;-)
|
|
|
Post by OldRastrickian on Nov 23, 2014 13:13:26 GMT 1
From the not-losing run to the not-winning run, in a single step. Back to just 3 points above the relegation zone...and winter around the corner. Another long season of stress beckons.......
|
|
ram
Andy Booth Terrier
delete account
Posts: 3,486
|
Post by ram on Nov 24, 2014 11:18:29 GMT 1
Funny old game is football,and the varied opinions on these pages.We had a chance,with a win,to go above the Wendies but our formation almost guaranteed a draw. We moved up 2 places in the league,but conversely,pointwise,moved closer to the relegation zone.Funny old game football.
|
|
|
Post by terraceterrier on Nov 24, 2014 11:28:07 GMT 1
Never really rated Smith in all honesty, don't think Dixon was as bad as everyone is making out he did make one or two errors but, for me, he gives us more going forward than Robinson and I think more often than not he is competent enough defensively. Never rated Smith? The only other viable option would be Peltier ?
|
|
midlander
David Wagner Terrier
[M0:0]
Posts: 2,860
|
Post by midlander on Nov 24, 2014 12:37:35 GMT 1
Poyet was awful. How the Examiner gave him an 8 I'll never know. A yard behind 'his' man (May) on two occasions where he nearly scored.
Feel bad for Hogg who had done well under Powell thus far. A point though, in a game we could have lost. And we move on... UTT Wow - just wow! Personally thought that Poyet was fine on Saturday and used the ball intelligently. Problem was that his role pushed Coady into unfamiliar territory and he looked a little lost at times (although, if he is going to become the Premier League player that many think he can be, he'll have to learn to play away from the base of the midfield at some stage) and in the first half Butterfield was in 'Adam Clayton Mode' - the setting which means you constantly take three or four more touches than required and slow down play. We missed Hogg's energy, but Poyet looks a step up in class on the ball and didn't shirk a challenge either. To say that Poyet was awful is ridiculous - he wasn't amazing, but he wasn't at all bad. To blame him for being a yard behind 'his' man, who was their only forward on the pitch for the majority is equally bizarre. Since when is it the role of a midfielder to pick up the lone centre-forward (that's why we have centre-backs) - If Poyet had have been on the right side of 'his man' (as you call him), he'd have spent the match playing as a centre-back.
|
|
|
Post by galpharm2400 on Nov 24, 2014 13:33:09 GMT 1
we failed, by choice and tactics to support the man on the ball or the ball itself, once it crossed the halfway line. that's it..if the ball managed by chance to remain in their half then eventually we shifted up a bit.
two wide players playing on their own with a centre forward doing likewise, it didn't look good and it got what it deserved, nothing.
stating we would have been over run in midfield isn't a proper answer because wendies would have to take into consideration our two forwards and their holding player would not have been on the halfway line all match..
we can 'change' what other teams do, its not our 'responsibility' to pick a team and tactics to try and 'play them'...
|
|
|
Post by Sugy , Paignton Devon Terrier on Nov 24, 2014 15:44:35 GMT 1
Powell needs to watch the video v Forest ,as it shows exactly what his team are capable of. This team seem to start better with both Wells and Holt on the field, and cannot work out why the recent changes were made.
|
|
|
Post by Doc Halladay 32 on Nov 24, 2014 15:47:21 GMT 1
Powell needs to watch the video v Forest ,as it shows exactly what this team are capable of. This team seem to play better with both Wells and Holt on the field, and cannot work out why the recent changes were made. Conceding 5 goals in the last 2 games with the 4-4-2 formation might have something to do with it.
|
|
|
Post by goodshot (FGS) on Nov 24, 2014 15:55:16 GMT 1
Powell needs to watch the video v Forest ,as it shows exactly what his team are capable of. This team seem to start better with both Wells and Holt on the field, and cannot work out why the recent changes were made. Perhaps he had been watching the Wolves video where the 4-3-3 worked so well and the Derby video where 4-4-2 didn't? Can't see what everyone's problem with 4-3-3 is. Admittedly we didn't play it very well on Saturday. Chelsea did. The anomalous performance was Forest at home
|
|