Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
he

Clean sheet

Recommended Posts

All this nonsense from a poster who was wildly optimistic about the new model, then wrote it off before the recent upturn in results.

You change opinion with the results Broadstairs, like several on here. And while Parma''s posts can be difficult for some of the daytime drinkers to understand, I''d wager most people on here value his opinions way higher than yours.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I walked into the toilet at work this morning and one of my more conscientious colleagues had clearly decided to refrain from flushing the chain after what must have been a challenging bowel movement.

I valued the content of what I saw in that toilet cubicle more than I value an opinion on Broadstairs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No one knows if Burton were a pushover tuesday because we didn''t even give them a nudge.

On this occasion Parma is talking nonsense. Say it out loud and see how ridiculous it sounds.

We are not going to sacrifice our not existent defending at home and go for a win because we need to practice defending for the next away game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"Burton was the pawn sacrificed on the defensive altar of Sheffield away, the lancing of the endemic defensive boil and the mindset and resolve of the players into the future."

What rubbish.

They actually swallow this tripe to the extent that the insult merchants are out in full force. Those who peddle insults towards somebody who has a different opinion to themselves are the source of embarrassment.

Even toilet humour is now acceptable it seems.

Relax folks, it''s discussion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"You change opinion with the results Broadstairs, like several on here. And while Parma''s posts can be difficult for some of the daytime drinkers to understand, I''d wager most people on here value his opinions way higher than yours."

How thoroughly silly.

If you didn''t blush when you wrote that inaccurate nonsense then you should have done.

btw. I wasn''t aware of your very existence let alone your posting history. Your pretence of being aware of mine is nothing short of ludicrous. Us ''daytime drinkers'' have more important things on our minds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, it''s discussion. So why were you asking Parma what his credentials were?! He''s voiced an opinion on an internet message board. You don''t need any credentials, which is a shame actually, an IQ test prior to posting would probably make this a better place. We''d miss you though Broadstairs.

The point Parma made, as I interpreted it, was that Farke imposed an absolute prioritisation on defending for the Burton game, probably assuming that against such opposition the attack would take care of itself. As it transpired, the latter did not happen but the defence did achieve their goal of keeping a clean sheet, which enabled them to build up the confidence and momentum which was carried into Sheffield United and result in a much tougher clean sheet at Bramall Lane.

The flip side could have been that Farke focused less on defence in the training ground, encouraged a more cavalier approach against Birmingham and then Burton, potentially stuck a few past Burton (but maybe conceded also) only to take the defensive frailties into the Sheffield United and get a pasting.

It''s not that wild a point to make and certainly not one that should be met with a bizarre request to provide credentials for voicing an opinion on a football forum.

Does it not stand to reason that a team who has spent the last couple of weeks at the training ground focused on defensive play, set-piece marking and back line structure might lose a little bit in attack in the next couple of games? And Farke knew that it was a possibility, but chose to do so anaywaym hence the referral to Burton as the sacrificial prawn? Of course, we don''t know that is what has happened, but on the basis of the last three performances it would appear to have some merit.

Please let me know if any of the above require me supplying my credentials and I''ll see if I can get a couple of references. They''d have nothing to do with football mind you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The emphasis on being strong in defence is the single most important thing we need to do at the moment, given our history of being soft touches. The game against Burton - as well as the one against Birmingham - was setting out a new resolve, with two defensive midfielders.  To have abandoned that and just gone out to win with a more cavalier approach again  "because it''s only Burton" would have been stupid.  The new defensive resolve is not something you can change game to game.  It is a progressive thing, developing better habits and attitudes defensively as a team - and maybe as that sets in as being the norm, more fluent football and more goals will emerge in time.  I for one was delighted to see how well we defended against Sheffield - that could not have happened if it had not been practiced in anger beforehand. Hats off to the coach and the players, they''ve had a good week overall, 7 out of 9 points. The "embryonic establishment of wider, more long-term addressing of systemic defensive weaknesses" has happened, is happening and will hopefully continue to happen.  There were some instances even on Saturday where we could have been punished had Sheffield been a bit more composed, so there is still plenty to do. Work in progress and hopefully more success, home and away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 points from the last 9, baring in mind the clubs we''ve played, is the least we should expect. And lets be honest we did the absolute bare minimum to achieve those 7 points.

Lets not get carried away celebrating such achievement. Its a little tin pot. Lets get 7 from the next 3 to make up for the dreadful start pre-international break, then some level of praise is rightfully due.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"I don''t question your credentials

Can''t be arsed if you need the truth.

I do your ''geekiness'' though.

Relax fella."

I''m sure that makes sense in your head old boy. Have you progressed on to the wine yet?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Haha, this thread should be dead and buried. I cannot believe what I am reading, that posters are still drawing a connection to the Burton and Sheffield tactics and trying to justify the decisions. It is not as complicated as it is being explained. I like Farke, I''m behind him but that doesn''t mean that he doesn''t make errors in judgement. Forget anybody''s credentials. Anyone who has been involved in football will have a fair idea that this is all nonsense. That was a bad tactical decision and two points were lost.

I am not twisting what Parma said canarydan, condensing in a dismissive fashion perhaps but read what he said, that is the essence.

If we are talking twisting comments, well take a look at Lakey on this occasion. I don''t think anyone, and I definitely have not suggested abandoning a defensive tactic, or being cavalier and dismissing Burton. 5 defenders against a non attacking side should provide more than enough defensive cover, it would not count as going all out for a win, which to be honest the game was actually telling everyone that you probaby could with hardly any risk.

Of course you can change defensive tactics from game to game. It is a necessity in some games. I wasn''t there Saturday so will not pass judgement, but from the reports and highlights that I have heard and seen we defended really well, battled and determined. Great if that was the case, however, anyone who thinks that was learned by the way we played and set out against Burton is in cuckooland. Burton did not want to attack!

Surely you can''t all be getting together on a Jeremy Beadle wind up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="lincoln canary"]7 points from the last 9, baring in mind the clubs we''ve played, is the least we should expect. And lets be honest we did the absolute bare minimum to achieve those 7 points.

Lets not get carried away celebrating such achievement. Its a little tin pot. Lets get 7 from the next 3 to make up for the dreadful start pre-international break, then some level of praise is rightfully due.[/quote]
In your opinion.
In mine we made a massive step in keeping a clean sheet again Birmingham. Could have put the game to bed sooner.
Burton was a poor game but we still had two clear opportunities to win the game. Still, another clean sheet. I note that Burton beat Fulham on Saturday.
Sheffield United have been on top form this season and not lost at home since January. We upset their rhythm big time, something the likes of Sunderland, Derby, Brentford and Barnsley couldn''t do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="The gut"]Haha, this thread should be dead and buried. I cannot believe what I am reading, that posters are still drawing a connection to the Burton and Sheffield tactics and trying to justify the decisions. It is not as complicated as it is being explained. I like Farke, I''m behind him but that doesn''t mean that he doesn''t make errors in judgement. Forget anybody''s credentials. Anyone who has been involved in football will have a fair idea that this is all nonsense. That was a bad tactical decision and two points were lost.

I am not twisting what Parma said canarydan, condensing in a dismissive fashion perhaps but read what he said, that is the essence.

If we are talking twisting comments, well take a look at Lakey on this occasion. I don''t think anyone, and I definitely have not suggested abandoning a defensive tactic, or being cavalier and dismissing Burton. 5 defenders against a non attacking side should provide more than enough defensive cover, it would not count as going all out for a win, which to be honest the game was actually telling everyone that you probaby could with hardly any risk.

Of course you can change defensive tactics from game to game. It is a necessity in some games. I wasn''t there Saturday so will not pass judgement, but from the reports and highlights that I have heard and seen we defended really well, battled and determined. Great if that was the case, however, anyone who thinks that was learned by the way we played and set out against Burton is in cuckooland. Burton did not want to attack!

Surely you can''t all be getting together on a Jeremy Beadle wind up.[/quote]

I think it is you who are on a wind up. It appears to be you who can''t see the reasoning behind developing a consistent way of playing a defence to get them used to it over a period of time. The priority was to address the defence it has been addressed and will be built on - any chopping and changing tactics when new habits are being formed would be stupid.  As for Burton not attacking, well on my recollection they did attack when they could and could, maybe should, have scored in the first half.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I''m sure that makes sense in your head old boy. Have you progressed on to the wine yet?"

Do you work hard at being a dope or does it come naturally?

I am in the middle of my second pint after eighteen 8 holes of golf .., what naughty people us daytime drinkers are.t

Clearly you know more about wine than I do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fine lakey, if that''s how you see it. All be it from the comfort of your own home. Or on this occasion was it cuckooland.?

No wind up from me, I know enough to know that people are talking nonsense on this occasion.

As a matter of interest it might be worth considering that other teams do not all set out the same, attack the same, have the same attacking abilities in different areas and adjust tactics accordingly, also to opposition, injuries, home and away etc.

I think you might find that we chop and change a bit more than what you trying to paint a picture of.

As previously stated I am not interested in listening to anyone''s opinions about the Burton game if they did not attend. You needed to be there, viewing the whole pitch to understand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="The gut"]Fine lakey, if that''s how you see it. All be it from the comfort of your own home. Or on this occasion was it cuckooland.?

No wind up from me, I know enough to know that people are talking nonsense on this occasion.

As a matter of interest it might be worth considering that other teams do not all set out the same, attack the same, have the same attacking abilities in different areas and adjust tactics accordingly, also to opposition, injuries, home and away etc.

I think you might find that we chop and change a bit more than what you trying to paint a picture of.

As previously stated I am not interested in listening to anyone''s opinions about the Burton game if they did not attend. You needed to be there, viewing the whole pitch to understand.[/quote]

Whether I was at the Burton game or not is irrelevant to the argument. As far as the argument goes, the point has been about starting to play with two defensive midfielders, which we had not done with Farke up to the Birmingham game. Having recognised that we need to have those two defensive midfielders and that it is the way forwards, we needed to consolidate that by playing two DMs again in subsequent matches - not revert back to one DM again and failing to capitalise and build on the good work done against Birmingham.  You do not need to be at matches to understand that.So it didn''t work so well against Burton - but we kept a clean sheet and should have won the game with better finishing. Could we have changed the system during the match Burton? Possibly, but we were on top and as we were on top and we were still creating chances, why would you change it?  We should have won it anyway.  And please don''t give me the "Burton weren''t attacking" line again. Any team is dangerous in this division if you give them room. We didn''t give them any room and they didn''t score. End of story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="canarydan23"]I walked into the toilet at work this morning and one of my more conscientious colleagues had clearly decided to refrain from flushing the chain after what must have been a challenging bowel movement.

I valued the content of what I saw in that toilet cubicle more than I value an opinion on Broadstairs.[/quote]
Now this is where my credentials come into play Dan. It''s clear to me that the problem wasn''t your colleague refraining to flush but that his log was too big for a normal flush to take away. If after selecting the extended flush the log remains in the bowl I would suggest a 5 gallon bucket of water along with an extended flush. If this is ineffective then you may have to resort to reducing the size of the log. This is all in a days work for a bog cleaning bingo caller.
Using my credentials I''m also aware that two fat ladies can bring as much success as the residents of Downing Street. 
With these credentials my take on the most recent three games is that the manager worked with the players over the international break concentrating on defending. Over the three games we have not conceded but our attacking play in the home games has been disappointing. Especially after last season''s enjoyable goal fests.  However the bigger picture could well be a case of building from the back. Obviously I can''t use my credentials, as above, to back this up but it does make some sense to me.
I''ve met Parma many times and had very enjoyable conversations with him. English would be his first language but I would suggest that maybe his multicultural background is appealing to me because like many I have an insular background. Not saying that I have insular views but many people my age were born and bred on this island with no multicultural input. Parma''s football knowledge is way beyond mine and he immediately sees things in a player that only become obvious to me over time. Your demands for his credentials were way out of order Broady but as you set the ball rolling.... what are yours[:^)]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"Now this is where my credentials come into play Dan. It''s clear to me that the problem wasn''t your colleague refraining to flush but that his log was too big for a normal flush to take away. If after selecting the extended flush the log remains in the bowl I would suggest a 5 gallon bucket of water along with an extended flush. If this is ineffective then you may have to resort to reducing the size of the log. This is all in a days work for a bog cleaning bingo caller."

The log was floating in a sea of yellow, which to me (admittedly no expert on the floating ballc0ck) suggested that they didn''t even attempt to consign the beast to the sewer.

But then according to Broadstairs, evidently one of the most smart and enlightened contributors to this message board, I''m a dope. Though I''m not sure whether it''s relevant, but a wise man once said to me the greatest praise an idiot can give is criticism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well Broadstairs has had his fun for now and as the lunchtime drink wears off he reluctantly concedes that Parma, along with his ham, is indeed a true a footballing mentor of the highest order.

if he and his obvious wisdom were to have been City''s manager for the last three years there is no telling where our our illustrious club would be now.

Apparently I am now an idiot to one of those who considers hurling weak insults is an acceptable process in debating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Whether you were at the Burton game Lakey might be irrevelent to your argument but it is of the utmost importance to mine. I refuse to debate a game with someone who did not see it. You might not like that, but I''m entitled to not listen to whoever I choose not to listen to. I ain''t listening to anymore of this ball ox.

Now I haven''t decried Parmas credentials, I''m not even sure if he was there or not, however unless he can assure me that Farke himself told him this was his plan all along I''m not gonna give this opinion on this occasion any credence whatsoever. What''s more even if Farke told me himself that it was his plan all along I would tell him the exact same thing. It was an awful tactical decision. One of the most standout memorable poor choices I have witnessed. To choose not to take the easiest 2 points you are ever likely to see was criminal in footballing terms.

I will the Buton weren''t attacking line as often as I like. That was the whole crux of the matter. The whole reason why the tactic was so obviously wrong. I will give you any team could be dangerous if you gave them room, but going down to only 5, I repeat 5 against a non attacking team is not exactly allowing them room.

They did not score admittedly, but not because our 6 defenders were so good, the 6, yes 6 defenders had next to nothing to do. They hardly had any defending to practice. This is one of the most ridiculous football arguments this board has seen. The good thing you can take from it is clear sight of those who you wouldn''t want to be playing football with.

We were on top why would you change it you ask, seriously, seriously? We were so much on top that most managers on most occasions would give their strikers of the opportunity of getting a goal by letting one of them bloody well play around the edge of their box with a bit of help from another player.

Who''s filming? Come out Jeremy wherever you you''ve got me. These tricksters hav been laying with me long enough now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The gut wrote the following post at 18/09/2017 4:11 PM:

Whether you were at the Burton game Lakey might be irrevelent to your argument but it is of the utmost importance to mine. I refuse to debate a game with someone who did not see it. You might not like that, but I''m entitled to not listen to whoever I choose not to listen to. I ain''t listening to anymore of this ball ox.

Now I haven''t decried Parmas credentials, I''m not even sure if he was there or not, however unless he can assure me that Farke himself told him this was his plan all along I''m not gonna give this opinion on this occasion any credence whatsoever. What''s more even if Farke told me himself that it was his plan all along I would tell him the exact same thing. It was an awful tactical decision. One of the most standout memorable poor choices I have witnessed. To choose not to take the easiest 2 points you are ever likely to see was criminal in footballing terms.

I will give the Buton weren''t attacking line as often as I like. That was the whole crux of the matter. The whole reason why the tactic was so obviously wrong. I will give you any team could be dangerous if you gave them room, but going down to only 5, I repeat 5 against a non attacking team is not exactly allowing them room.

They did not score admittedly, but not because our 6 defenders were so good, the 6, yes 6 defenders had next to nothing to do. They hardly had any defending to practice. This is one of the most ridiculous football arguments this board has seen. The good thing you can take from it is that you get clear sight of those who you wouldn''t want to be playing football with.

We were on top why would you change it you ask, seriously, seriously? We were so much on top that most managers on most occasions would give their strikers of the opportunity of getting a goal by letting one of them bloody well play around the edge of their box with a bit of help from another player.

Who''s filming? Come out Jeremy wherever you are, you''ve got me. These tricksters have been playing with me long enough now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"Apparently I am now an idiot to one of those who considers hurling weak insults is an acceptable process in debating."

"dope" and "geekiness".

Audacious hypocrisy there old boy.

I''m struggling on the rules here Broadstairs. Weak insults from you are ok, but weak insults aimed at you are unacceptable? Could you enlighten me?

Funny old chap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If Burton were so bad that we were guaranteed to give them a hiding if we''d attacked more Baldy, wtf happened when they played Fulham then???Sheff Utd also sit currently in the playoff positions after an excellent run of form and having not lost at home in nearly 9 months, we beat them and suddenly they''re also being decried by others as ''tinpot'' and as though it was a totally expected away win, and all Farke had to do was turn up to get all 3 points...I''m getting pretty sick of the situation on here at the minute, it''s like supposed fans are deliberately looking for sticks to beat the manager/players/board with, regardless of recent results and the genuine upturn in form and performance, all in favour of whining about even the smallest thing possible, whilst deriding any positives in the most ridiculous way possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Indy_Bones"]If Burton were so bad that we were guaranteed to give them a hiding if we''d attacked more Baldy, wtf happened when they played Fulham then???Sheff Utd also sit currently in the playoff positions after an excellent run of form and having not lost at home in nearly 9 months, we beat them and suddenly they''re also being decried by others as ''tinpot'' and as though it was a totally expected away win, and all Farke had to do was turn up to get all 3 points...I''m getting pretty sick of the situation on here at the minute, it''s like supposed fans are deliberately looking for sticks to beat the manager/players/board with, regardless of recent results and the genuine upturn in form and performance, all in favour of whining about even the smallest thing possible, whilst deriding any positives in the most ridiculous way possible.[/quote]
What''s changed? [:D]
On a serious note, I think ''The Gut'' is getting a bit ahead of himself. Burton defended quite well and were well organised. I don''t think changing the game earlier, going more attacking or whatever would have guaranteed us a win. I agree it would have been more likely but in the same breath we could have created two more clearcut chances and our players might still have missed them or the goalkeeper saved them.
I''m not sure it was ''awful'' tactically and I understand what Parma is saying - and he''s probably right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Where is the stick to beat the club with? Speaking on a personal level I probably don''t criticise the club often enough, I am generally a happy clapper. That shouldn''t mean you can''t acknowledge when somebody got something wrong.

And come on Indy the Fulham result to Burton is the most irrelevant argument, we all know that''s not how it always works. I don''t remember hearing anyone say we were guaranteed to give them a hiding. Did Baldy say that?

Were you there? Did you see how the game was panning out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Apparently I am now an idiot to one of those who considers hurling weak insults is an acceptable process in debating."

"dope" and "geekiness".

Audacious hypocrisy there old boy.

I''m struggling on the rules here Broadstairs. Weak insults from you are ok, but weak insults aimed at you are unacceptable? Could you enlighten me?

Funny old chap.

"Dope" was meant as a compliment old chap. I''m sure you''ve been called much worse.

Btw I would bet ny millions that I am younger than you.

When I reach 50 i will send you a kiss. promise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...