Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
RvWs 4 year contract

Cannot put my finger on what is wrong.

Recommended Posts

Yes of course the simple answer is "we aren''t scoring enough goals" but it''s not just that black and white for me.We''re playing well. I went yesterday and I wouldnt say I was disappointed by our performance- disappointed by the lack of goals, yes. However I think I would be a lot more concerned if we weren''t making the chances. I know it''s an easy thing to say but that is honestly how I feel. We just need a dodgy goal to drop in off someones backside or something. Once we start scoring I think we''ll open the metaphorical floodgates. What we''re really missing is one of Benno and Pilks playing. We''re too predictable going through the centre and Snoddy as good as he is doesn''t produce good enough service regularly enough to fashion any real chances. One last thing... that ref yesterday was infuriating. Did he give us a single free kick in the first half?! [:@]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The ref didn''t help the situation and as for the penalty....................

 

But we needed some pace up front but it was left sitting on its arse on the bench!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Our set pieces are utter dog*!@# too. Back to the days of Huckerby and his ''hit the first man or sail over everyone''s heads'' corner delivery.

Sooner Fox returns, the better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I can.  We spend too much time passing the ball around in midfield, sideways rather than getting the ball to the wings or forwards quickly. When we went a goal down I was getting more and more frustrated that we seemed to show no urgency whatsoever. Slow approach play means that the defending team can get defenders and midfielders back to defend in numbers. 

We need to break more quickly and be more positive rather than thinking that possession is everything.  The goal by Ba was scored by a method in complete contrast to our slow approach play. IMO Jackson should have started this game and the likes of Elliott Bennett and Pilks should be more in the forefront of Hughton''s thinking as at least they have good pace.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The only thing that is wrong is we haven''t been taking our chances, simple as that. It surely must be a matter of time before they start hitting the net. There seems to be a view on here that under Lambert we were a much better team, It''s nonsense, under Lambert we had many below par perfomances but when the chances came they were taken. The game against Spurs was as good as any under Lambert, Yesterday we should have scored with 3 clear cut chances, QPR the same also West Ham. We are simply not scoring the goals our play deserves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can''t accept that JF. Other than Surman''s one on one I don''t remember other chances as clear cut - Wes'' header was probably at comfortable height for the keeper had it not been deflected, Morison''s header I would not describe as clear cut.

In terms of what''s different from last year - we''re clearly playing to a more defined plan (arguably, more conservative) - Lambert''s appoach of rolling the dice when things were against us is a definite contrast.

However, I honestly think we would have struggled this year even under Lambert. Cracks were appearing towards the end of last season and certainly, Holt excepted, the productivity of our goal scorers was diminishing. It was clear for all to see that we lacked pace and quality up front. This view being reinforced by a lack of goals pre-season (and since). We failed to address this and, sadly, look set to pay the price.

I thought Hoolohan played well and even after Bassong''s departure I thought Barnett coped well.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="paul moy"]

Well I can.  We spend too much time passing the ball around in midfield, sideways rather than getting the ball to the wings or forwards quickly. When we went a goal down I was getting more and more frustrated that we seemed to show no urgency whatsoever. Slow approach play means that the defending team can get defenders and midfielders back to defend in numbers. 

We need to break more quickly and be more positive rather than thinking that possession is everything.  The goal by Ba was scored by a method in complete contrast to our slow approach play. IMO Jackson should have started this game and the likes of Elliott Bennett and Pilks should be more in the forefront of Hughton''s thinking as at least they have good pace.

[/quote]

 

THIS ^^^^^[Y]

 

Also playing 1 striker means that they can easily be crowded out, knock downs, little passes, flick-ons with no other striker there all the more difficult and the effectiveness of them reduced.  Playing 1 striker makes it a lot more difficult for that strikerto be in the right place in the box, when they need to be.  If they go off, closing down, chasing loose balls who is in the box?  Nobody or perhaps a midfielder who is probably not going to be as clinical as a striker in the same situation, and may have busted a gut just to get there.

 

4-5-1 can work, but for us at home to Liverpool in my oh so humble opinion we need to play 2 strikers against Liverpool and Wes must start.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I can''t accept that JF. Other than Surman''s one on one I don''t remember other chances as clear cut"

Hoolahan''s header was from 6 yards out and unchallenged, As clear a chance as you can hope for, Snodgrass had a header from 8 yards out also completely unchallanged that was cleared of the line but should have been a goal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Wiz"]

The ref didn''t help the situation and as for the penalty....................

 

But we needed some pace up front but it was left sitting on its arse on the bench!

[/quote]agree wiz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="ting tong"]It is really easy to answer we have managed to appoint a modern day glen rodent? God help us.[/quote]1) Chris Hughton''s widely known as being one of footballs `nice guys`. Roeder does not fall into this category.2) Roeder signed 739 loan players.3) Roeder was a complete and utter Twunt, much like yourself infact.4) You can try all you like but we have no intention of taking Paul Jewell off your hands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="JF"]"I can''t accept that JF. Other than Surman''s one on one I don''t remember other chances as clear cut"

Hoolahan''s header was from 6 yards out and unchallenged, As clear a chance as you can hope for, Snodgrass had a header from 8 yards out also completely unchallanged that was cleared of the line but should have been a goal.[/quote]

 

I''d forgotten that one JF. But that''s what defenders do!! I didnt''t think at any point in the game we were likely to get three points. Best I could see was 0-0 but quality and pace undid our defence. And that''s really the point. It''s pace and and quality that wins PL matches not speculative long balls I''m afraid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="hogesar"][quote user="ting tong"]It is really easy to answer we have managed to appoint a modern day glen rodent? God help us.[/quote]

1) Chris Hughton''s widely known as being one of footballs `nice guys`. Roeder does not fall into this category.
2) Roeder signed 739 loan players.
3) Roeder was a complete and utter Twunt, much like yourself infact.
4) You can try all you like but we have no intention of taking Paul Jewell off your hands.
[/quote]

[:D]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We aren''t playing to our attacking strengths, which last year proved to be getting crosses into the box. Our strikers would either attack the cross or mop up any sloppy clearances.

Now we have both Snodgrass and (in the last couple of games anyway) Surman running the ball into the box from wider areas before trying to do something with it. Clearly not causing enough problems with this approach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="hogesar"][quote user="ting tong"]It is really easy to answer we have managed to appoint a modern day glen rodent? God help us.[/quote]1) Chris Hughton''s widely known as being one of footballs `nice guys`. Roeder does not fall into this category.2) Roeder signed 739 loan players.3) Roeder was a complete and utter Twunt, much like yourself infact.4) You can try all you like but we have no intention of taking Paul Jewell off your hands.[/quote]This this and this again Mr Hogesar. We were very unlucky to go away without a point yesterday. The introduction of Wes gives us so much more on the way forward. Yes, the strikers need to put the thing in but we should have got three against West aaam and we could have walked away with all three yesterday if the run of the ball had been different. We can use a bit of calm around the place right now.( PS Hogesar,  I presume you will be at the UEA in Nov for NFG plus Less than Jake? Can''t wait myself..)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I fail to see how one can argue we could have got all 3 points against Newcastle?

 

Newcastle scored 1, missed a penalty, had other chances and Ruddy pulled off some good saves........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"I fail to see how one can argue we could have got all 3 points against Newcastle?"

I can''t see where anyone is saying we should have got all 3 points. But on the balance of play and chances we deserved a point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Chrisr"][quote user="hogesar"][quote user="ting tong"]It is really easy to answer we have managed to appoint a modern day glen rodent? God help us.[/quote]1) Chris Hughton''s widely known as being one of footballs `nice guys`. Roeder does not fall into this category.2) Roeder signed 739 loan players.3) Roeder was a complete and utter Twunt, much like yourself infact.4) You can try all you like but we have no intention of taking Paul Jewell off your hands.[/quote]This this and this again Mr Hogesar. We were very unlucky to go away without a point yesterday. The introduction of Wes gives us so much more on the way forward. Yes, the strikers need to put the thing in but we should have got three against West aaam and we could have walked away with all three yesterday if the run of the ball had been different. We can use a bit of calm around the place right now.( PS Hogesar,  I presume you will be at the UEA in Nov for NFG plus Less than Jake? Can''t wait myself..) [/quote]Yes Chris! Wouldn''t miss it - although not much of a LTJ fan. I love the support acts though, Man Overboard and The Story So Far. See you there!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For me its crosses into the box. I''d like to see Snoddy getting the ball in earlier and Pilks on the opposite wing instead of Surs who goes too central.  Holt and Moro killed Newcastle at FCR last season and both should be playing if we are going to get the crosses in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Snodgrass needs to move when he''s not on the ball. So often him and Martin would get the ball out wide, and then just stand still and wait for Howson or Hoolahan to do the work for them.

Ruddy could chip in with the odd goal as well, what does he think he''s doing? Just standing around in our penalty area...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="JF"]"I fail to see how one can argue we could have got all 3 points against Newcastle?" I can''t see where anyone is saying we should have got all 3 points. But on the balance of play and chances we deserved a point.[/quote]

 

*I said could, not should

 

Chrisr said we could.......

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...