*****Official Match Thread v Swansea*****

[BigGrantsTash 70]

6 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

This is a joke right? Coopers 3-5-2 more than matched our 4-5-1. Second half they sat back and let us have the ball after the second goal.

It seems to be based on a possession stat. The presumption that having more possession means you “dominated” or “outplayed” the opposition. Ignoring the fact they were 2-0 for a lot of that second half and sat deep and allowed us to pass it around the back where we couldn’t hurt them. 

[Ian 1,129]

17 minutes ago, BigGrantsTash said:

It seems to be based on a possession stat. The presumption that having more possession means you “dominated” or “outplayed” the opposition. Ignoring the fact they were 2-0 for a lot of that second half and sat deep and allowed us to pass it around the back where we couldn’t hurt them. 

Actually I think we looked much better second half than the apparent closely matched first half.

I can think of several really decent opportunities we crested, where we should at the very least made the keeper work. Idah's in particular was a pretty huge chance.

I don't dispute Swansea sat back and let us have the ball, but I don't think we passed it "round the back" as you suggest, but ultimately lacked the finishing quality our build up warranted. Indeed I remember seeing Gibson in their half driving forward several times, so I don't think it fair to imply we just passed it around our back 4 for possession's sake.

Edited February 6, 2021 by Ian

[Number9 272]

7 hours ago, keelansgrandad said:

This is a joke right? Coopers 3-5-2 more than matched our 4-5-1. Second half they sat back and let us have the ball after the second goal.

Swansea don't play every game like that. They adapt it to Plan B etc, because they believe it's more important to win games. 

Whether you think that Farkeball makes us so much better than any other team, that's your personal opinion, facts show that Swansea adapted and won the game with their Plan B.

[king canary 7,558]

8 hours ago, BigGrantsTash said:

I presume you’re the same Jim from the wotb forum who always claims we outplayed everyone and the opposition are always ****. I disagree. Though it wasn’t the most fluid game they were clearly better than us. They created marginally more chances and weren’t as wasteful as we were in possession. What you, I or anyone can’t deny is that they defended better than us and that is a big part of football whether you like it or not.

They also managed the game well.

At no point in the second half was I thinking that Swansea were about to crack or a goal from us was a matter of time. They let us have a lot of the ball in areas where it didn't matter and restricted us to snatched half chances.

[The Real Buh 3,423]

I WAS p1ssed off about the game last night but true grit is back and has posted a thread so I’m feeling good now!

[Jim Smith 2,314]

1 minute ago, king canary said:

They also managed the game well.

At no point in the second half was I thinking that Swansea were about to crack or a goal from us was a matter of time. They let us have a lot of the ball in areas where it didn't matter and restricted us to snatched half chances.

I just don’t accept they were the better side. More clinical maybe but we had more possession, more territory and at least as many decent chances, probably more but inexplicably when we have chances or get in good positions at the moment we either don’t shoot or if we do then we don’t work the keeper. I don’t know why that is, frankly it’s bizarre. I’m not having the notion that Swansea were in control of that game, we made two errors which led directly to both their goals and they took advantage.

im not saying they were bad but they certainly weren’t obviously the better side. In some ways I take confidence from that, in others it’s more frustrating as just like at Watford we basically gifted them a win and didn’t show what we can do. 

[king canary 7,558]

2 minutes ago, Jim Smith said:

I just don’t accept they were the better side. More clinical maybe but we had more possession, more territory and at least as many decent chances, probably more but inexplicably when we have chances or get in good positions at the moment we either don’t shoot or if we do then we don’t work the keeper. I don’t know why that is, frankly it’s bizarre. I’m not having the notion that Swansea were in control of that game, we made two errors which led directly to both their goals and they took advantage.

im not saying they were bad but they certainly weren’t obviously the better side. In some ways I take confidence from that, in others it’s more frustrating as just like at Watford we basically gifted them a win and didn’t show what we can do. 

I'd argue the game was pretty even in the first half. Swansea controlled it well after they got the second goal. I wouldn't rate any of the chances we created as better than ok to be honest.

[Jim Smith 2,314]

5 minutes ago, king canary said:

I'd argue the game was pretty even in the first half. Swansea controlled it well after they got the second goal. I wouldn't rate any of the chances we created as better than ok to be honest.

We see it differently then. I think they were better chances than they had but the fact we don’t get shots on target makes them look lesser chances than they actually are.

i just don’t understand how or why we are suddenly having so few shots on target as we continue to get into decent attacking positions. Part of it is Pukki bring completely out of sorts but there seems to be an endemic inability to work the goalkeeper in the rest of our side as well.

[Number9 272]

8 minutes ago, Jim Smith said:

I just don’t accept they were the better side. More clinical maybe but we had more possession, more territory and at least as many decent chances, probably more but inexplicably when we have chances or get in good positions at the moment we either don’t shoot or if we do then we don’t work the keeper. I don’t know why that is, frankly it’s bizarre. I’m not having the notion that Swansea were in control of that game, we made two errors which led directly to both their goals and they took advantage.

im not saying they were bad but they certainly weren’t obviously the better side. In some ways I take confidence from that, in others it’s more frustrating as just like at Watford we basically gifted them a win and didn’t show what we can do. 

The more you look back at Gibbo hauling down their man in our penalty area, the more you'll realise that it was the ref's incompetence which kept it from being 3-0.

We could have kept playing against Swansea til the end of lockdown without scoring and many will still say we were the better team. 

The object of the game is to score goals and the team who has scored more goals wins.

NOT the team who has more passes back to the defence and goalkeeper.

 

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

3 hours ago, Number9 said:

Swansea don't play every game like that. They adapt it to Plan B etc, because they believe it's more important to win games. 

Whether you think that Farkeball makes us so much better than any other team, that's your personal opinion, facts show that Swansea adapted and won the game with their Plan B.

Sorry?

[Monty13 2,229]

We made two howler mistakes last night ultimately that’s why we lost but Conor Hourihane was the key difference to me last night in terms of players on the pitch, looked a cut above any of our midfield who were playing, real quality.

When he was mentioned in the transfer thread was hoping we’d be in for him, I know we have an abundance of midfielders but what last night proved to me is there’s still some way to go for us to have a premiership quality midfield.

[ron obvious 1,495]

Does anybody know who was playing at no.10? Kenny certainly wasn't. 

 Max was popping up on the left wing as well. To start with I thought we were playing some genius tactical formation which surpasseth all comprehension; I thought we started really well, but the mistakes did for us.

Our football is based on paper thin margins, slide rule passing. When it works it looks fantastic, but it's just off at the moment. We don't really score goals like Swansea's first (or second, since the days of Tettey Thunderbastards), we just don't have the physicality or instinct to force the ball through when there's a ruck near the goal line.

Ah well, we go again ...

[Number9 272]

2 hours ago, keelansgrandad said:

Sorry?

Swansea won, they have a variety of styles depending upon their opponents. 

They chose to sit back and hit us on the counter, they don't always play like that. 

As I said, they won.

[sgncfc 1,221]

5 hours ago, king canary said:

I'd argue the game was pretty even in the first half. Swansea controlled it well after they got the second goal. I wouldn't rate any of the chances we created as better than ok to be honest.

Pukki's chance is the first half was the type he buried two years ago. We had several shots in the second half where we just lost our heads and smashed them too high. We are still trying to walk it in instead of shooting. For the first 40 minutes, until Krul's mistake, I thought we were controlling the game pretty well. Hanley's header could easily have gone in.

Several more errors (Gibson, McLean and Skipp) led to Hourihane having time and space to line up a shot from 25 yards - it was an OK shot, but I think Krul could and possibly should have got to it. That was the critical moment, and gave Swansea the opportunity to sit back and invite us on.

You can't really legislate for individual errors. We haven't been making them this season, apart from the odd gift of a penalty in the early games but last night there were just too many.

I'm disappointed (again) that our coaches don't target specific threats the way our opponents quite obviously do. Hourihane was so dominant in midfield because we let him have the time and space. He's not playing in the EPL because he isn't allowed it there. Skipp or Rupp should have been tasked with shutting him down. 

I'm unsure about all the praise being lavished on Skipp. He does some things very well but he does go missing in games. I suspect Sorensen would be as good in that position.

However, our players have not become bad overnight, and we are still some way ahead of my expectations at the start of the season so I'm not going to get too down on them just yet.

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

14 minutes ago, sgncfc said:

Pukki's chance is the first half was the type he buried two years ago. We had several shots in the second half where we just lost our heads and smashed them too high. We are still trying to walk it in instead of shooting. For the first 40 minutes, until Krul's mistake, I thought we were controlling the game pretty well. Hanley's header could easily have gone in.

Several more errors (Gibson, McLean and Skipp) led to Hourihane having time and space to line up a shot from 25 yards - it was an OK shot, but I think Krul could and possibly should have got to it. That was the critical moment, and gave Swansea the opportunity to sit back and invite us on.

You can't really legislate for individual errors. We haven't been making them this season, apart from the odd gift of a penalty in the early games but last night there were just too many.

I'm disappointed (again) that our coaches don't target specific threats the way our opponents quite obviously do. Hourihane was so dominant in midfield because we let him have the time and space. He's not playing in the EPL because he isn't allowed it there. Skipp or Rupp should have been tasked with shutting him down. 

I'm unsure about all the praise being lavished on Skipp. He does some things very well but he does go missing in games. I suspect Sorensen would be as good in that position.

However, our players have not become bad overnight, and we are still some way ahead of my expectations at the start of the season so I'm not going to get too down on them just yet.

I really don’t think that Pukki chance was as easy as people seem to think, it was from the edge of the box, at an acute angle in a tight spot with pressure from the defence. I didn’t immediately think he would’ve scored that two years ago, it was a decent chance but not a great chance.

Incidentally Lowe managed to get in behind moments later with a clearer chance which he fluffed. Aarons also made a heroic block moments before Krul’s howler.

The Pukki chance unfortunately was the best we could create though until Swansea got the second and handed over the initiative in the final phase of play. By then though the game was pretty much over. 

Edited February 6, 2021 by Hank shoots Skyler

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

44 minutes ago, Number9 said:

Swansea won, they have a variety of styles depending upon their opponents. 

They chose to sit back and hit us on the counter, they don't always play like that. 

As I said, they won.

I'm confused as I was saying the same thing as you in reply to a poster.

[Number9 272]

5 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

I'm confused as I was saying the same thing as you in reply to a poster.

Ah, I'm sorry it hadn't registered with me. I'm glad we're in agreement though.