Fiery Zac

5 at the back without the ball reverted to 3 at the back in transition. Whilst it can be argued we erred more on the side of caution, watch the game back and we did play 5 to 3 at the back well. It is NOT a defensive formation when executed properly. What we’re seeing is the early stages of it and some good promise for games to come.

The position Normann was playing was vital for the whole balance of the team. Taking that position away in favour of Tzolis (as much as I like him) would’ve been suicidal. The game was very very even and taking off the anchor (or closest we had to that) would’ve been handing the game, or at least strong initiative, to them

Neither are Dms that will just sit in front of the back 4 and with the attributes they have, we wouldn’t want them to do that. Normann was fantastic yesterday and was everywhere (no surprise he cramped up and couldn’t last the 90). Disciplined when we were set as a 5-3-2 but also pressing them high before transition and played some lovely balls over the top to the strikers. One cross field ball to Aaron’s in the second half really was another level. Not a DM in front of a back 4. PLM, I agree had his best game and has a knack of getting his long dangly legs to the ball to knick the ball off the opposition. Made a few mistakes but was always eager to rectify and was full of running. Supported the attack well and will be useful around the penalty area. Not a DM in front of a back 4. What the 3 at the back gave was the extra cover whilst also allowing one of them to step out of defence at times knowing the other 2 are there (and also at least one of Normann/McLean/PLM). Something else that I don’t think has been mentioned enough about yesterday is how good Kabak looks with the ball and stepping out of defence. This happened on enough occasions to clearly be a coached game plan and I look forward to seeing more of it. It shows there are attacking plans and intent and that the formation is not simply about defence. Playing a back 4 caused all sorts of problems on the flanks (particularly our left side) which became all too easy for the opposition to exploit (Woeful Watford knew how to beat us). The 2 sitting wouldn’t solve that. The solution would have to be that the full backs sit deeper which in turn stifles attacks. We have found a workable solution to that problem whilst hinting at some joy in attack. I know I’m in the minority but there were a lot of positives yesterday and am happy to see the formation continue. The defence is as sorted as it can be (with more training and playing together only going to further help) so now the focus can be more on how we counter and attack to get some goals.

Credit? To Norwich? yeh I remember those days…

I criticised negativity about today’s performance, not negativity in general. That would be insane. Its a fair point about the first few games of the season and I believe Todd will have a part to play this season (if he can get fit and sort any issues he may have out to show a bit more commitment on the pitch), but at the moment I’m not sure how he fits into this system

Exactly (except the no ability bit). Has earned the right to play. Was solid in midfield to today and got forward well at times too.

Oh my god. Normanns position as a player was vital to the balance of the team and the game. He would’ve played the full 90 if at all possible. That he couldn’t does not mean just chuck another attacking player on. Had we done so we probably would’ve lost (and nearly did anyway when Rupp lost the ball). We needed that position still on the pitch. I would’ve gone with Gilmour but maybe he wasn’t as fit or ready as Rupp so it was a sensible change.

The OP is what’s boring, not the match today. Thankfully you have no say in what happens at the club or on the pitch.

Then you don’t understand football and the context of our season so far.

I fully agree. Based on his season so far, I don’t think Todd being in there would have made any difference.

Such a lazy argument. I’ve explained my reasoning. Maybe I’ve missed the pundits that have talked about the issues we’ve faced. Maybe I’m being unreasonable in expecting it. But as a fan of the club I know what we’re facing and have criticised at times and given credit when due. Why shouldn’t I expect the same from the so called experts?? I can bet now that when we get a win they’ll be positivity and praise. Well, in my opinion there has been some praise, and more importantly context due already. That we have got none and just the continued critisism is sad and just smacks of poor punditry. It’s not just us, proper analysis is hard to find and that’s why I keep away from the mainstream. It’s clickbait nonsense 90% of the time. Listen and read those that are actually doing it for the love of the sport, there’s the insight.

I agree with this. The negative I have from today is it was too defensive at times unnecessarily. We were far more often a back 5 than a 3. That balance needs addressing for us to score more goals and win games

Rubbish. I haven’t heard one pundit actually talk realistically about us and the challenge we have, the changes we’ve made, the disruption to our pre season (yet they talked about Newcastle’s/Chelsea’s) or give us any credit when due (albeit there hasn’t been much due). It’s lazy journalism where the focus is the top 6 and the surprise packages (Brentford). Everyones second team have been woeful defensively this season yet the lords of football knowledge all fall over themselves at how great they are. There are some that actually watch our games, research us and therefore talk some sense but unfortunately all of those that I’ve found are on podcasts that not widely heard.

Yes creativity is a problem, and was always going to be having lost Buendia (who didn’t light the league on fire with us two years ago, and still isn’t). So if you know of a player we could realistically have bought to solve that problem whilst not shipping goals like two seasons ago - then you should be working in football. Player turnover meaning time needed to gel and understand each other is needed has been key. If we were getting worse at both ends of the pitch then I’d be screaming for change along with everyone else. Scoring some goals but still losing (like before) would be treading water and feel pointless. That we’re addressing one problem and succeeding is a massive positive. That we’re doing so while showing some promise at the other end, whilst not perfect, is acceptable and, to me, shows signs of promise for games ahead. Sargent should have scored at least one. Pukki the same. Other breakaway chances were made and but for some indecision we would have scored goals. Pukki in particular needs a bit of time to play with a strike partner as it was obvious he wasn’t sure whether to pass or shoot at times today. Call me a happy clapper, I don’t care. There were positives today and I’m satisfied after the awful start to the season (and the dreary performances and lapses in play) that we’ve found a solid base to build on and have an identity for the first time this season.

He’s also saying we had good spells and created. You are not. So not exactly what you are at all.

Agreed. He just hadn’t been fully committed. And we cant afford to carry anyone that isn’t 100% buying into our way of playing. The 11 today all worked their socks off and never gave up. We need Todd’s creativity and goal threat but fitting him in somewhere is becoming a conundrum

I really don’t understand the negativity. Can some really not see what Farke is doing, and has been doing for the last year or so? Last season in the championship was a definite target on being better defensively. We played to our strengths with the formation and bossed the league. This season is a continuation of trying to be tough to beat. The 4-3-3 was to suit the midfielders we had (and which we quickly realised wasn’t enough/or we were just being patient and waiting for our man) and now, to stop the rot, the system has changed and we’ve stopped the sloppy goals that were all too regular in the first games. Farke can’t win - he doesn’t change it and he’s naive, he changes it and we should’ve stuck to ‘our’ formation. Today was far from perfect BUT there’s clear improvement. Chances were made, we grew in confidence and were playing some good stuff. Had Sargent scored one of his chances we’d be talking of a really good overall performance. So I’m not ecstatic but satisfied because I can see what’s being tried. We were the laughing stock of the league and sooo easy to play against. That some fans expect us to just be able to flip that on it’s head and be defensively solid and score goals, is baffling. It will take a bit of time but the goals will come. They should have today (which is a big improvement on the previous game) but that they didn’t and we didn’t lose is still a massive improvement. OTBC

In your opinion. Fair enough. I think he has. He wouldn’t have hassled and worked as hard as Sargent did today. The open goal opportunity wouldn’t even have been presented to Todd because he’s not that sort of player. Playing in the midfield 3 (as some have suggested) would have been suicidal. in my opinion

Best he earns the right to be in the squad first then.

We have a solid base to build on (Burnley are no pushovers, literally) in performance and result, so I can see the logic in starting the same 11. Undoubtedly there will be more onus on us to attack and that is what we should see but after such a robust performance, is it a surprise to anyone that we go with the same again? We’re also matching up with Brighton. Revert to 4-2-3-1 or 4-3-3 and we run the risk of being seriously overrun in midfield. We’ll see

I don’t know the reason he’s not included but Farke will not have kept him out lightly (same as last year with him and Emi). No one is more important than the club (and Todd’s been pretty awful this season when he’s played) and he has to earn the right, in more than just ability, to start any game

No it isn’t. And no it isn’t.

Nope. Long may it continue. I work with a Cambridge fan and they’ve fallen in love with Wessi as much as us. Legend.

Say what you want about us, Watford (minus Sarr) are a championship team.

Great vid of some training techniques. Love the games they play and the apparent camaraderie within the squad. Normann looks so competitive, even in a game of tic tac toe!