Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Seems the pundits, even some of our own fans here have us as an irrelevant participant in this competition, already condemned to relegation, now a barometer (if you can’t beat them you do have a problem).   On the face of it that seems unfair, difficult pre-season, horrible fixtures, too many new players… but every game has to be an opportunity for points, our season doesn’t start next week, it started 4 games ago and everything has an effect.

Given how well the club is run, the improvement year on year, the financial situation, the entertainment value; on the back of such progress, being critical seems churlish.    But its our club and it's tough when we seem to be ridiculed or sidelined for the most part in the media.

We can’t keep giving ourselves excuses, making it easy for opponents… no, each game, surely we go to get points and compete but to often, we haven’t done that.  

Luck, we never get any, whether its Cantwell not interfering with McLean’s header last week or Aubameyang’s tap in.   The fact is, despite players throwing themselves in the way to block efforts, if you concede 30 opportunities in a match then sure enough, you’ll encounter a lot more misfortune than if you allow 10-15 chances.    Conversely, the more chances you create, the more luck comes your way, hence Arsenal won and Crystal Palace got the all important penalty against Spurs, pure luck but they made it happen.

So, Man City away, why try to play out from the back and keep trying and keep putting ourselves under pressure, why risk dampening confidence, suspect Giannoulis isn’t feeling too great right now!   Why play Pukki upfront when Idah can hold the ball up better and offer an option over the top to get us up the pitch?   Why have 10 players on our 6-yard line at corners (in any game) and what is the point of Gilmour and Pukki in that line?    Surely Gilmour on the edge of the box prevents a free shot at goal (Salah for Liverpool’s 3rd) and Pukki up front 1) gives us an out ball on the counter and 2) keeps one more opponent away from our goal and 3) gives us another option, makes us less predictable!   Does it make sense for Pukki to keep receiving the ball half way in our own half?   No, but perhaps it would with two up front.     These are finer details we should be addressing / questioning.

Shouldn't we start with the basics, make things difficult for opponents, get the ball further forward sooner, mix it up a little bit, opponents all know we'll pass it out and with our limited forward threat, they can confidently press to stop us.   If we're going to mix it up, were probably better off 3-5-2 or 4-4-2, especially if were to get productivity out of Teemu.   

Counters are behind our full-backs, no Skipp / no cover!   Would 3 at the back give us more coverage of the wide areas and allow full-backs some insurance to go forward, plus allow us to play 2 midfielders instead of the 3 which shows no signs it could work.    Perhaps revisit the 3 when we can keep teams away from our goal and players have settled in.  

The most obvious problem last time out was our abysmal central midfield when McLean and Tettey were the last men standing of the bad bunch.    What have we done about it since…. helped a Spurs player become the next Kante’ whilst our Lungi sits on his backside wondering if he will ever play football.   At the very least, since that relegation, priority should have been 3 holding midfielders (whether we develop our own (Lungi) or bring them in) before any other position and this will potentially cost us our status again and reinforce the whipping boy reputation from afar.   It’s definitely already cost us goal difference if not points!     In fairness, I can put up with that and justify our club’s path no problem, but I want to see us up an at em!     But we’ve failed to address this position, not sure we even have one player since Normann is untried and supposedly not a holding player… and since we look lightweight already, what happens if he gets injured.   How do we stop this class of opponent, how do we get a threat further forward when we are so easy to counter against.    Amazed Sorenson hasn't even had a look in to the extent not sure why he is still here!  

What's for certain is that this Watford game isn't the start of our season (the minus 10 goal diff. confirms that), the following week we will have another toughy!   We must cut out the mistakes, change the shape, mix up the tactics, become unpredictable and above all stop conceding chances.    Watford will press, they will smell blood like every other team.     

Couldn’t possibly pick a team from this group yet as we don’t know their abilities, level or fitness and its unfair to be critical of any player, time will tell.   Would like to see us test formations though, at least see if 3 defenders might work better, try something different.    Not sure trying something else is a risk in our situation. 

Has to be accepted that bringing a group of new players together with hardly any EPL experience and getting the team to gel in this unforgiving environment is some task.   What we're expecting Daniel Farke to achieve is probably unreasonable.     In so many respects he is fantastic but in the finer game details at this level I worry he still has a lot to learn / experience.    Really would like to know what the thinking is about 10 in our 6 yd box at corners.    That said, wouldn’t change him for anyone.        

Should we change the team to suit opponents, e.g is Pukki right for every game?   I don’t think so.  Are we naïve?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Naive - no, but sometimes not as clever and ‘cynical’ as we should be; we ought to be looking to make ourselves really difficult to play away from home.  I feel some of the transfers are with that in mind.  We don’t need to lose our footballing style in doing so, and can look to be much more expansive at home.  
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still think there is a naive element to our set up- we seem to want to play with attacking fullbacks without a proper defensive midfielder to provide cover which is often suicidal. We've added an extra body to the middle of the park but none of those players so far have shown they can offer the cover needed- if that continues we either need to reign the fullbacks in or switch to a back 3.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, king canary said:

I still think there is a naive element to our set up- we seem to want to play with attacking fullbacks without a proper defensive midfielder to provide cover which is often suicidal. We've added an extra body to the middle of the park but none of those players so far have shown they can offer the cover needed- if that continues we either need to reign the fullbacks in or switch to a back 3.

... Or play a proper CDM and ask the wide midfielders to take slightly more defensive responsibility, then play a number 10 instead of the extra CM. Normann, Gilmour and Dowell in a vertical line rather than the horizontal line of Rupp, McLean and PLM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're not naive, we are just waiting for the new players - particularly Normann and Kabak - to show that we are progressing. We have Tzolis, Rashica and Sargent to bed in too.  So now is not the time to judge us....even if pundits, the media and those who want easy targets might want to.  

Anyhow, it's about time everyone who knows the club got used to the way we play and that we aren't likely to change it.  We play out from the back to draw in the opponents.....ok we are not always great at it, so the answer is to get better at it, not change it - and we can't get better at it if we give up on it! 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

We're not naive, we are just waiting for the new players - particularly Normann and Kabak - to show that we are progressing. We have Tzolis, Rashica and Sargent to bed in too.  So now is not the time to judge us....even if pundits, the media and those who want easy targets might want to.  

Anyhow, it's about time everyone who knows the club got used to the way we play and that we aren't likely to change it.  We play out from the back to draw in the opponents.....ok we are not always great at it, so the answer is to get better at it, not change it - and we can't get better at it if we give up on it! 

I agree with this. The team chosen against Arsenal was a pragmatic one. There was a lot of rubbish about how weak Arsenal were and "there for the taking" nonsense. They started their £50m centre back, their £30m keeper and their £17m right back, not to mention their £72m winger and several others who would walk into our team. Farke has rested some important players after they played 5 games without much of a pre-season and he has a full week with all his players now. 

The comparison to Watford is much closer. Only Sarr would start for us, maybe Sissoko. We have better players than them this season. We might not win, because we'll still have to play well to do that and things are still gelling, but this will be the first game this season when we have better players on the field than the opposition.

The pundits and media don't play that game because it's not interesting - but people within the game understand what we are and what we're doing. Playing like Burnley is not in our DNA.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, lake district canary said:

We're not naive, we are just waiting for the new players - particularly Normann and Kabak - to show that we are progressing. We have Tzolis, Rashica and Sargent to bed in too.  So now is not the time to judge us....even if pundits, the media and those who want easy targets might want to.  

Anyhow, it's about time everyone who knows the club got used to the way we play and that we aren't likely to change it.  We play out from the back to draw in the opponents.....ok we are not always great at it, so the answer is to get better at it, not change it - and we can't get better at it if we give up on it! 

...get the point you make and the post definitely doesn't suggest we give up on our way of playing.... but if the only answer is to get better at it, we could be relegated before the group gel.... surely there is some pragmatism needed when we've failed to get the quality of holding midfielders necessary and in the meantime to get us through and build some confidence..... we could be waiting a long time and there is no guarantee Normann or Kabak or the others will make a difference.    Having 10 in our box at corners invites more opponents in and there is no out ball for the team.  What is the point of Pukki and Gilmour in there anyway?    Surely, mixing it up could help, make us less predictable, keep opponents guessing.   Playing out from the back constantly isn't working, this league is a different level, we have to adapt, they've got our number and we can't get enough numbers forward to pose the necessary threat.

In any event, we have tried to change formation, 4-3-3, not sure that formation will ever work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, sgncfc said:

I agree with this. The team chosen against Arsenal was a pragmatic one. There was a lot of rubbish about how weak Arsenal were and "there for the taking" nonsense. They started their £50m centre back, their £30m keeper and their £17m right back, not to mention their £72m winger and several others who would walk into our team. Farke has rested some important players after they played 5 games without much of a pre-season and he has a full week with all his players now. 

The comparison to Watford is much closer. Only Sarr would start for us, maybe Sissoko. We have better players than them this season. We might not win, because we'll still have to play well to do that and things are still gelling, but this will be the first game this season when we have better players on the field than the opposition.

The pundits and media don't play that game because it's not interesting - but people within the game understand what we are and what we're doing. Playing like Burnley is not in our DNA.

Quite often agree with your comments on here.... in this case though, I don't see how we were more pragmatic v Arsenal.    We did concede a whole host of chances and eventually ran out of luck.  We conceded numerous chances playing out with risky passes, that's not pragmatic so when we have to go long (as we do regularly once the press is on) then Pukki isn't the player to hold the ball up and so we struggle to get a foot in games.  Surely Idah offers more in that regard, he certainly did the job well for Ireland last week.  We can still play out with 3 at the back although we need players who can then receive and progress the ball in the central areas.   

The post doesn't advocate for a Burnley approach and we don't have the personnel for that, just some tweaks that might close up a few gaps whilst offering more threat going forward especially in the absence of holding midfielders.     Surely, Watford fans would all argue few of ours would get in their team and to be fair they know as much about half of our team as we do.... not much!     Excepting for a couple of managers, I don't know that many in the game fully appreciate what we are about and I am sure many do believe we are naive, especially in game management and tactics.   I'm fully on board with what our club has done / is doing and wouldn't change most things but these finer margins I think there are easy gains with a few tweaks, I just can't work out some of the dynamics I see in our game.     

What do you think of having 10 players on our 6 yd line for corners and what do Pukki and Gilmour offer in that area?   What's your thoughts on Pukki as a lone striker in this league, he's going to struggle for impact most weeks in my view? I know its early days and not time to judge, but there are points on offer each week, we need to give ourselves the best chance of getting those points,  not just sit back and await a time when we do finally gel, it could be a long wait.   Lets also face the fact that if we do 'get better at it' we are always going to be some way short of the quality most teams possess at this level.     

     

Edited by ged in the onion bag

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a club we're not naïve, far from it in fact.  We're paupers in a banquet and the club is under no delusions of grandeur in taking it's place there. The manager and board know that relegation is by far the most likely outcome, so having the belief that we can survive is not naïve in itself. 

The signings and deals in place show how we're not committing to certain players unless we achieve survival, and majority of those that have been brought in, you'd expect, would stick it out were we to go down.  Very much long-term thinking.

As LDC says we're waiting for the players to become more experienced and wise to this league.  Until that time, the team that takes the field is naïve by definition perhaps?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, sgncfc said:

The comparison to Watford is much closer. Only Sarr would start for us, maybe Sissoko.

Do you think many Watford fans would agree that only 1 or 2 players of their side would make it into a combined XI between us and them? 🤨

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Google Bot said:

As a club we're not naïve, far from it in fact.  We're paupers in a banquet and the club is under no delusions of grandeur in taking it's place there. The manager and board know that relegation is by far the most likely outcome, so having the belief that we can survive is not naïve in itself. 

The signings and deals in place show how we're not committing to certain players unless we achieve survival, and majority of those that have been brought in, you'd expect, would stick it out were we to go down.  Very much long-term thinking.

As LDC says we're waiting for the players to become more experienced and wise to this league.  Until that time, the team that takes the field is naïve by definition perhaps?

Dont disagree with this but I am really referring to what is happening on the pitch at the moment.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, ged in the onion bag said:

Dont disagree with this but I am really referring to what is happening on the pitch at the moment. 

Then yes, we're naïve on the field right now. 

Haven't a clue on our best performers across the field, the reality is that we're unprepared and inexperienced at this point. Time lost in pre-season due to covid, internationals and a wicked start has all added to that, of course.

We had the final games in the championship to review Sorensen as potential Skipp replacement.  Yet 4th game in to new season, rock bottom with 0 points and we're starting with Rupp as our defensive mid. It's like starting a race and doing your shoe laces up as the rest leave.

We're now going to have to endure many weeks of getting the best combination of players from McLean, Gilmour, Lees-Melou, Sorense, Rupp & Normann established - while trying to pick up points in critical games.  It's really quite a bad situation to be in when you add in the unknown of who's going to be scoring for us, further dilute that with questions on CB pairings - Even Aarons and Krul positions could be up for debate in the following weeks.

Goals and lack of physicality is biggest concern for me.  Yes we have 1 or 2 more physical players coming in, but the mean average is quite weak in comparison - and the physicality is most important for beating teams around us which is key to survival.

Even though my head is a realist, I'm an optimist at heart.  And I think we'll come good, We could've been sat with two draws under our belts today where it not for some bad luck - so I'm holding on to that thought as a positive.

....Which is probably quite naïve in itself, but who cares lol 🙂

Edited by Google Bot
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People seem to forget we've not really had a pre-season, we've had late arrivals in the positions where we've looked a bit suspect and we've then had an international break.

Those judging at this stage are more likely the naive one's than Farke, in my book.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, hogesar said:

People seem to forget we've not really had a pre-season, we've had late arrivals in the positions where we've looked a bit suspect and we've then had an international break.

Those judging at this stage are more likely the naive one's than Farke, in my book.

Not sure anyone is judging, rather debating if and where we could get more from the team, stop the rot of continuous defeats and reasoned suggestions is not a judgement.    Off the pitch it’s reasonable to judge that we have had time since the last relegation to solve our CDM position and if there can be one criticism it’s that we’ve failed miserably with that position…. Only Spurs fans could argue otherwise.     Norman isn’t in this argument yet as we’ve not seen him play and what if he gets injured?   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think we're naive, but we haven't got the personnel to play the way Farke wants in a successful way. It works fine in The Championship, but not in the EPL. So what should happen? 

Sticking to 'what you know' is not good enough. You become too predictable, therefore easy to play against with predicable results. 

The last manager we had in the top flight who changed the system depending on the opposition was Lambert. Some argued too much, but he did what he had to do to get results and we are in a results business. 

Farke is arguably over methodical. If we do X, then Y should happen. When that doesn't, then there doesn't seem to be much else in his locker. Oddly, Farke would be better off at a bigger club, with better players. That would only happen if he did the business here, which is why this season is so important off the pitch and on.

I'm sure Webber and Farke don't want to be known as people who can only turn things around to the point of failure. They need this season to work as much as anyone, but it isn't so far. 

Needless to say the Watford game is absolutely huge. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, ged in the onion bag said:

Not sure anyone is judging, rather debating if and where we could get more from the team, stop the rot of continuous defeats and reasoned suggestions is not a judgement.    Off the pitch it’s reasonable to judge that we have had time since the last relegation to solve our CDM position and if there can be one criticism it’s that we’ve failed miserably with that position…. Only Spurs fans could argue otherwise.     Norman isn’t in this argument yet as we’ve not seen him play and what if he gets injured?   

You'd think Sorensen was seen as the post-last-relegation solution but the fact we went and got Skipp suggests we didn't think he was ready at Championship level. So whilst a lot of us like Sorensen he may prove to not be the signing the club wanted him to be.

Obviously Normann is our attempt at solving for this season - if he gets injured i'm not too sure what your point is. If your primary CDM gets injured most teams at this level don't have an equal alternative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, hogesar said:

You'd think Sorensen was seen as the post-last-relegation solution but the fact we went and got Skipp suggests we didn't think he was ready at Championship level. So whilst a lot of us like Sorensen he may prove to not be the signing the club wanted him to be.

Obviously Normann is our attempt at solving for this season - if he gets injured i'm not too sure what your point is. If your primary CDM gets injured most teams at this level don't have an equal alternative.

My only comment on that is if that is the case, why was he awarded a new 4 year contract while others we knew weren't good enough were shipped out? He's either good enough and earned the contract, or he isn't and he should have been out the door. The fact that he was apparently kept around as 3rd choice when we're struggling in that position is a little strange.

Edited by Canary Wundaboy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, komakino said:

The last manager we had in the top flight who changed the system depending on the opposition was Lambert. Some argued too much, but he did what he had to do to get results and we are in a results business. 

Look at the physicality we had under Lambert too:-  Russ Martin, Grant Holt, Steve Morison, Brad Johnson, Crofts, Howson, Tierney etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Petriix said:

... Or play a proper CDM and ask the wide midfielders to take slightly more defensive responsibility, then play a number 10 instead of the extra CM. Normann, Gilmour and Dowell in a vertical line rather than the horizontal line of Rupp, McLean and PLM.

There is a bit of received wisdom about this need for a defensive pivot (a CDM) and an attacking pivot (a No 10). No one really explains why we need one, the other or both. The PinkUn guys keep writing that the aim is we have neither, instead going for two box to box players and a deep lying playmaker. It is a valid choice and arguably makes us more solid. Getting our two wide attackers to defend doesn't play to their strengths and playing the vertical line makes the team too narrow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, BigFish said:

There is a bit of received wisdom about this need for a defensive pivot (a CDM) and an attacking pivot (a No 10). No one really explains why we need one, the other or both. The PinkUn guys keep writing that the aim is we have neither, instead going for two box to box players and a deep lying playmaker. It is a valid choice and arguably makes us more solid. Getting our two wide attackers to defend doesn't play to their strengths and playing the vertical line makes the team too narrow.

I can tell you why we need a defensive pivot- we've got two attack minded fullbacks who like to bomb forward. This leaves just our central defenders when we lose the ball and the opposition counter attacks. What we've lacked for several years is a player who does one of two things...

1- when we're in possession they drop deeper almost like a third central defender, allowing the centre backs to 'split' wider.

or

2- play a bit further forward but with the mobility to cover the entire width of the pitch to snuff out these counter attacks.

Right now we don't have anyone to do that. Rupp, PLM and McLean all lack the discipline to sit deep and offer cover and instead like to support the attack. Gilmour sits deeper but lacks physicality and mobility to break up counter attacks- witness Leicester's second goal for example. 

We can, to an extent, get away with this in the Championship. Our attacking prowess was such that teams would be scared to commit too much on the counter attack so we don't get outnumbered in the same way we do at this level, where better defenders are less worried about our attacking options. 

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, BigFish said:

There is a bit of received wisdom about this need for a defensive pivot (a CDM) and an attacking pivot (a No 10). No one really explains why we need one, the other or both. The PinkUn guys keep writing that the aim is we have neither, instead going for two box to box players and a deep lying playmaker. It is a valid choice and arguably makes us more solid. Getting our two wide attackers to defend doesn't play to their strengths and playing the vertical line makes the team too narrow.

Think more ****-and-balls than a vertical line: sometimes the tip might be further up than others, depending on the situation and sometimes one might hang lower than the other. Maybe that's a poor metaphor...

What I'm seeing on the pitch is that none of the CMs are getting far enough forward at the crucial moment in our transition to really influence the game. Loads of our goals last season came from rapidly cutting through the opposition made possible by the dynamic movement of the 3 AMs pulling the defending team out of shape and creating space for each other and Pukki ahead of them.

With one less man, there simply isn't the same threat: Pukki is well marked and the space only opens up for the AMs in wide areas where the main option then becomes crossing the ball, which plays to our weaknesses.

And I'm seeing the CMs being bypassed by balls into the channels to exploit the space behind our high up fullbacks, then compounded by a total failure to track the central runners. A feature of the goals we are conceding is our CMs jogging back having been left for dead by whoever is bursting through. It's really not working.

What I want to see is a decent CDM who knows that it's their job to track the runs from midfield rather than the vague hope that one of the three will do so, while also hoping that one of them will get forward at the crucial moment. We're obviously missing Skipp but we need to move on. Let's play Normann as that CDM, Gilmour or PLM as the box-to-box playmaker and one of the AMs in the number 10 role.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, king canary said:

I can tell you why we need a defensive pivot- we've got two attack minded fullbacks who like to bomb forward. This leaves just our central defenders when we lose the ball and the opposition counter attacks. What we've lacked for several years is a player who does one of two things...

1- when we're in possession they drop deeper almost like a third central defender, allowing the centre backs to 'split' wider.

or

2- play a bit further forward but with the mobility to cover the entire width of the pitch to snuff out these counter attacks.

Right now we don't have anyone to do that. Rupp, PLM and McLean all lack the discipline to sit deep and offer cover and instead like to support the attack. Gilmour sits deeper but lacks physicality and mobility to break up counter attacks- witness Leicester's second goal for example. 

We can, to an extent, get away with this in the Championship. Our attacking prowess was such that teams would be scared to commit too much on the counter attack so we don't get outnumbered in the same way we do at this level, where better defenders are less worried about our attacking options. 

 

Surely Skipp played exactly that role?

I don't see why Normann couldn't be asked to do similar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What frustrates me at times is the lack of marginal gains, both from the tactics and at times the application. It makes life very hard for us. If you are a smaller team in the premier league then you need your coach to bring added value at times with tactics, you need to be able to defend set pieces well and you need to be a threat from them at the other end. You need, sometimes, to just keep it tight, play for territory and grind out a result.

in my view we generally play better (as in better technically and more pleasing on the eye) football than probably any other team in the bottom half of the league but we are the least effective and the least streetwise because of our inability to do the above things well enough.

Sometimes great football will win us games but at this level we never win games we don’t deserve to and we lose a lot of games you could argue we deserve something from.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Petriix said:

Surely Skipp played exactly that role?

I don't see why Normann couldn't be asked to do similar.

Agreed, Skipp did it perfectly and Kenny McLean wasn't too bad at dropping back when the full backs bombed forward. We had it perfectly in the Championship as evidenced by the fact that many teams sat back and tried to do us on the counter but we conceded so few goals.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re the CDM You could see it on Saturday. Farke took off one (or possibly two) of the midfielders to bring on Idah and Todd and from that moment onwards they just cut through us at will on the counter. We desperately need Normann to be a younger version of Tettey, perhaps with better passing. It’s no coincidence that if you look at many of our best premier league results and performances under Neil or Farke, Tettey was playing in them. Even when he was past his prime we still looked a far more solid outfit due to his positional awareness.

The best example was of course that Newcastle  game where Neil took him off. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, canarydan23 said:

Agreed, Skipp did it perfectly and Kenny McLean wasn't too bad at dropping back when the full backs bombed forward. We had it perfectly in the Championship as evidenced by the fact that many teams sat back and tried to do us on the counter but we conceded so few goals.

Yes Skipp did it very well. However I think Kenny is capable of doing this as part of a pair at Championship level, less so at the top.

I also think we need to review how we choose to play out from the back against higher quality teams. My view is Premier League teams will commit more players to press us higher up the pitch as they are more confident in their defences ability to deal with our attack. In the Championship teams were **** scared of an Emi/Todd/Teemu combo so kept more back out of fear of what happens if we beat their press. Premier League teams don't have that same fear so will commit numbers, make life uncomfortable for the defenders and feel that their defenders can cope with us if we beat that press. 

I'm not advocating becoming a long ball team but I think we do sometimes need to use the pace of someone like Tzolis or Rashica as an out ball to make teams back off a bit, or use Sargent's height/physicality to hold the ball up a bit. Right now teams can press us high and know if we go long it likely comes straight back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In general I don’t think we are naive, I think two things we need to work in however is

1) winning the ball higher up the pitch. For my liking we sit too deep press too deep and allow pressure to build on us

2) We do not do enough tactical fouls to stop teams breaking on us. As soon as there looks like there could be danger of a team breaking on us we should be putting a stop to it at source to allow us to get our shape and defensive structure back 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Canary Wundaboy said:

My only comment on that is if that is the case, why was he awarded a new 4 year contract while others we knew weren't good enough were shipped out? He's either good enough and earned the contract, or he isn't and he should have been out the door. The fact that he was apparently kept around as 3rd choice when we're struggling in that position is a little strange.

That's a fair comment and the only consideration I can think of is his versatility meant he was worth the contract - not being a good enough CDM starter but could be in an emergency, equally as a full-back or third CB option. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, hogesar said:
1 hour ago, Canary Wundaboy said:

My only comment on that is if that is the case, why was he awarded a new 4 year contract while others we knew weren't good enough were shipped out? He's either good enough and earned the contract, or he isn't and he should have been out the door. The fact that he was apparently kept around as 3rd choice when we're struggling in that position is a little strange.

That's a fair comment and the only consideration I can think of is his versatility meant he was worth the contract - not being a good enough CDM starter but could be in an emergency, equally as a full-back or third CB option. 

My impression of Sorensen, based on comments by Farke a couple of weeks ago, is that he is highly rated but is not considered quite sharp enough - yet.  "Yet" being the operative word.  Sorensen is still only 23 and the fact that he was given a new contract suggests they do expect him to develop more and contribute at whatever level we are at.

He has cup games to show he is ready and I love the fact that any cup team we put out looks almost as strong on paper as the first team.  So a valued squad member with something to work for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Hank shoots Skyler said:

Do you think many Watford fans would agree that only 1 or 2 players of their side would make it into a combined XI between us and them? 🤨

Given that I live near Watford and know lots of their fans, I can tell you now that they are expecting to lose on Saturday and are not impressed by what they have seen so far this season. So, maybe they would agree with me.

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

×
×
  • Create New...